As I go form one game to the next looking for my fix, I came to a game known as Hearts of Iron 2 and thought my needs completed. But I digress, and I realise that I liked it a lot, but it still didn't quench my needs for a "true" and epic RTS. And so I walk down the cold lonely corridors of my mind searching for what has to be the perfect concept. After much introspective thinking, I have come about and came up with a general idea of what I want, but I need all of you in our darkest hour to complete the concept.
The concept is this: imagine a space empire game, say Galactic civilisations and other similar civ based space empire building games, and now sweep the 2D aspect away and imagine it as 3D. Where you have a massive galaxy of planets, stars, nebulae, neutron stars, asteroid belts, comets and all kinds of other cosmic phenomena. All 3D where you can zoom and adjust you view in any of 360 possible degrees, and zoom out so that the whole galaxy is viewed in the screen, also, you can zoom in so far that you can view a single planet and the surrounding shipyards.
The concept is not only a completely 3D and manipulate able universe, but I also want to combine the best of other games in the making of a moving and compelling game where everyone who plays will have a complete and moving experience.
I hope that if I ever get around to making it as my masterpiece, these would be the features I'd like to include into it:
- A domestic policy slider, which determines your "government". But not with only one slider, each one would determine different things, ranging from your governments leanings towards left/right to interventionism/ isolationism, so that you could have, in theory, a democratic government, a communist government, a totalitarian government, etc. The policy that determines this, and many other ones, should be implemented. i.e. Hearts of Iron.
-A detailed diplomatic aspect to allow the negotiation of almost anything. i.e. To allow middle grounds, concessions, etc.
Now a question: should resources be limited or unlimited? The difference is mostly how fast humans and AI spread out.
The greatest emphasis will be, in my humble opinion, ship combat. I really hope that such types of combat were done in the SAME VIEW as your galaxy view. It should contain: - The ability to zoom in or out of that fleet. - The ability to take either personal command of it or leave it to the AI to handle, with an emphasis on tactics and strategy where situations cant just be solved by group X with many more ships at point B to win. - The ability to affect training, discipline, ship designs, and to use your surroundings effetely should all have major impacts on how to win a battle. (Homeworld and Hegemonia are good example of this)
I would want to minimise micro management to as little as possible and have many different capable AI scripts to run the Empire as you want it as you focus on war. i.e. diplomacy, exploration etc. Too many times I've seen a certain reluctance to play certain games because of all the micro management involved. Reducing this while increasing the effectiveness of your Empire should be attempted, games would then live longer. A wide and diverse tech tree should be implemented that can allow thousands of possible combinations, each giving everyone who plays a unique feel to his or her own empire + ships. (From Eve online)
Now next comes a concept which I found enthralling in Spore; the ability to upload your own game content. Too many times I felt disappointed for being unable, in MOO3 (Master of Orion 3), to fiddle with the humans in order to create the United Federation of Planets. Also, to be able to create your own ship skins building skins, unit skins, etc. Skins should be a PRIORITY in this game and made into a simple modding tool to allow a unique experience for all, so that the fans of Babylon 5 and starcraft could, for instance, fight it out with Battlecruisers and Star Furies. However, the basic ship structures would probably be the same (Scout class, frigate class, destroyer class, light cruiser class, heavy cruiser class, dreadnought class, etc. Also, what these ships look like and what weapons they use should be different)
One thing I would like discussed is actually is how ship combat and evolution should be demonstrated? I would prefer to leave ANY kind of ship open and allow the universe of players to play and figure out which ones are ultimately more effective and the ones that grasp which ones are will be the ones who are victorious. Also, id this a good idea having it when you research a new class of ship and you customise it you should automatically get a prototype ship that you can set as your flag ship?
Also, the game will be random and unknown, each player will start out in a random point on the map and only the starts will be visible and only certain technology will allow him the ability to scan distant stars for planetary objects. Everyone starts out with "Warp drive" so exploration is a must, now what I would like is the ability to gain control of that ship. Explore uncharted space for the first time and BE THERE as you explore strange new worlds, and new civilisation and go where no one has gone before. You can your ship could skim nebula's and scan their properties manually and do everything that ship would've down automatically but YOU and YOUR ship this way is what's exploring this virtual universe charting what could one day become part of your Star Empire. (Star Trek bestowed onto me this idea)
PS: also would like to add some actual astrophysics to the game where actual space things happen like a start going nova. Also if one goes nova a certain amount of time passes by before you realise that that star went missing maybe you'll get a pop up saying so, good idea neh?
Now we come to the final question. Should the game when its developed be a MMORPG? (Massively Multiplayer Role-Playing Game) or single player with the ability to have limited multiplayer ability? If single player we can have a universe that is completely random each time you play and that no two games would ever play twice.
If multiplayer the universe would be persistent but man imagine it! thousands of empires fighting with every tool at their disposal for control of the galaxy imagine the story and the drama that will occur, screw the needs for a background story the PLAYERS would create there own over time as each war has it's hero's, villains, demagogues, and of course left wing intellectuals . With the ability to control your own ships as if you were on the bridge (and rename the ships to your liking) we could have players who sign up only to control the ships themselves and becoming intimately involved with the battles and with how the game works on that level, "these are the voyages...".
As we see I find the possibilities for such a game, a combination of Spore, Galactic civilisations, Star trek Birth of the Federation, Civilisation, Star Trek Armada II, Star Trek Fleet Command and my own imagination and vision. Also the addition of feed back from all of you Hatrackers and sci-fi lovers as being Endless. This game I want to be more then just a game, I want it to be the experience of a lifetime. Also for a side note, I think it’s a good idea to have it to scale say... 1 out of 55,000 planets. Wait... that would leave millions still. blah. With thousands of players with minimal micro management it could be doable. Please post and give me feed back and also email me at blayne.bradley@gmail.com or my hot mail address sid_meier@hotmail.com if you wish to email me.
EDIT:: Spelling and grammar
[ May 13, 2005, 11:57 AM: Message edited by: Sid Meier ]
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
And while you're at it, I want a pony.
Posted by Sid Meier (Member # 6965) on :
*sigh* as you wish. I'm certain adding it as a tradable commodity shouldn't be hard.
Posted by Architraz Warden (Member # 4285) on :
Out of curiosity, ever played Hegemonia or Imperium Galactica?
IG is far from a new game, but had some of those elements before they were the norm in some games. Hegemonia (aka Haegemonia) had some flaws, but began to explore the concept of a 3D, real time, multiple solar system strategy game. I had a blast playing it. I'll add to the general wish list sometime as well I suppose...
Feyd Baron, DoC
Posted by Sid Meier (Member # 6965) on :
I played Hegemonia and I'm sure I mentioned it, Imperium Galactica I've only heard the name and never played but will as soon as I get the money for it and exams end for me.
Posted by Sid Meier (Member # 6965) on :
ya when I was talking about ship combat.
Posted by James Tiberius Kirk (Member # 2832) on :
You should look at Nexus, too-- and Time of Defiance ToD, in particular, is an MMORTS that allows diplomacy and long games (each "game" is 28 days long in a large universe similar to what you describe).
--j_k
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
Ho teh hum. Not to be a downer, or anything, but in another thread you mentioned you were on your 'last assignment' for a C++ class, and were looking for tutorials. Can I suggest a simple Tetris clone before you try anything, um, ambitious?
At least you didn't suggest a MMORPG...
If you're serious about this, take a look at this site. Note in particular the 'For Beginners' forum. Also try not to come across like Timmy here, and especially not like comrade Vipejc, the man with 15000 ideas. Pay particular attention to the last page of that thread, it is a true classic of its kind.
To look a bit at your actual idea, have you considered how many stars there are in a galaxy? Say it's 10^10, as a nice round complete underestimate. Assume you need about 20 bytes to represent a star, that is its mass, position, velocity, and number of planets, say - in other words, the utter basics. Poof, you need 20GB RAM for your galaxy. Comets? Well, just forget about it, ok?
Now, certainly you can drop the large number of un-interesting stars. Let's say you decide to make a galaxy containing 1000 stars - picking out the ones with inhabitable planets - as a rather nicer number to work with. (Already, of course, you have completely abandoned realistic astrophysics. Don't feel bad; there's a reason astrophysicists compete with economists for computing resources.) So you're going to need 1000 planets, something like 10000 asteroids, however many comets you feel like, and of course nations / corporations / whatever to inhabit these. How are you going to be initialising all this? Text files, Paradox-style? Be prepared for a bit of work, writing up 1000 planets. Random generation? If your planets are at all detailed, look forward to a couple of months of coding - and then another two of checking that you aren't generating anything utterly ridiculous. That 'utterly ridiculous', you understand. If you want 'makes sense as a world to play in', well, be prepared for a full year of developing just this, with no graphics, networking code, or anything.
As for your idea of AI scripts to run the empire, you did play MOO3, right? If not, I suggest you buy it just to observe what horrors people with bright ideas about AI can commit to an excellent game genre. And then play MOO2 for a while, just because it's still the best 4X game out there. There's a reason AI is still an unsolved problem in general, you know?
*On rereading the post*
Oh, ye gods, I take it back. You did want a MMORPG. *Visibly gives up* I hereby abandon you to your fate. Well-deserved fate.
No, seriously. Tetris clone. Pong clone. Guess-the-number clone. Anything but this! Trust me, you cannot do this. I am prepared to lay some money you cannot even implement two-player Asteroids clone within a year of this writing. Massively multiplayer strategy / ship-combat / exploration? In a word, no. Not going to happen.
Posted by Boris (Member # 6935) on :
It's been done before. The game's still around, actually. Mankind is probably as close to your desire as is available right now. I tried playing it a while back and got utterly confused by the interface and didn't have the time to invest in learning it. It's made by an overseas developer, and hasn't received much press in North America yet.
edit: I don't know the exact status of the game right now.
2nd edit after actually reading the majority of the first post...games don't have all of those capabilities because they take TIME and MONEY to implement. Each one of your specifications could take months (or even a year) to develop even with a 5 man team on each one. I have my own ideas for the "Perfect game," but most of the time, the more features and complexity you add to a game, the more likely it is to be bugged as heck. Which is part of what is occuring with Mankind right now.
Posted by Sid Meier (Member # 6965) on :
lol, you though I'ld do this on my own and now? I am not crazy enough to attempt this yet, when I start working in the industry and gain experiance and the money+support then I'll work on this. but for now its just the concept I want.
Posted by Sid Meier (Member # 6965) on :
Also, I don't intend anything with regards go to it being a single player or MMORPG, I haven't decided yet, just that the idea of having thousands of player controlled empires is somewhat appealing.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
"but for now its just the concept I want."
I think I have Derek Smart's phone number around here somewhere... Posted by Wowbagger the Infinitely Prolonged (Member # 7476) on :
I'm not sure this idea would work as a MMORPG. The problem is since everybody will have to log off sometime there is no way to make sure your empire will be there when you log back on. I'd imagine a group of people who would only attack empires that were AI controlled. Think of the horror of building an empire for months, only to have it taken over while you were sleeping.
Posted by Bokonon (Member # 480) on :
No Tom, NO!!!
Remember, The "Doctor"'s name is akin to the eponymous ghoul in the movie Beetlejuice.
-Bok
EDIT: Except there's more litigation involved.
Posted by Sid Meier (Member # 6965) on :
Good, good we have some feed back here of potentiial problems.
quote: I'm not sure this idea would work as a MMORPG. The problem is since everybody will have to log off sometime there is no way to make sure your empire will be there when you log back on. I'd imagine a group of people who would only attack empires that were AI controlled. Think of the horror of building an empire for months, only to have it taken over while you were sleeping.
This is a good question, my suggestion is to say have more then one person running an Empire as possibility number 1, poss no 2 would be I think would be for you to have "preplanned" defences that kick in when your attacked and not around and leave tasks that will continue even when your not logged in.
Theres an additional possibility of have an "inactive status" that leaves your empire doing only basic functions while your away and other players can't attack you. Anyone have any possible solutions? This should be a discussion on how to mold the concept.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote: poss no 2 would be I think would be for you to have "preplanned" defences that kick in when your attacked and not around and leave tasks that will continue even when your not logged in.
This solution goes back to the old TradeWars days, and even then it was inadequate. Real-life players will always be able to game the system.
Personally, I'd address this by making planetary shields remarkably cheap and indestructible as long as the planet doesn't fire. That way, someone attacking a system whose owner is on vacation or whatever could at worst blockade the system and destroy any ship traffic, but could not attack the planet until the owner returned and, say, started using his planetary batteries to repel the invaders.
On the downside, this means that active players would a) still dominate the game, regardless of skill, since 4X games depend a lot on expansion and b) wind up hanging around a lot, besieging planets with huge chunks of their navy until the owner got around to logging back on.
Posted by Sid Meier (Member # 6965) on :
EDITED I edited the original post for spelling + grammar
But yeah, of course active people will always dominate the game, its inevitable. However but yeah indestructable shields sounds like a good idea but also neutral trade traffic could possible be untouched since it might make you go on unhappy terms with a nearby empire.
Posted by Sid Meier (Member # 6965) on :
Also, an inactive status where you can't be dowed excpet for the very basic diplomatic agreemnts (like trade which could be left to the AI controlled trade advisor if we decide to implement it) while trade could still possible be attack if its outside your border because of pirates, caught in the corss fire etc. Wars this way is possible to be left completely up active players and active players + AI buffer zones.
Would this be a good idea?
edit: Also the inactive status could be an automatic thing to prevent abuse, where you only go inactive when you log off and vice versa. Also aside from a special vacation mode empires that are inactive too long could be transfered to the computer and made "active" to prevent abuse.
Posted by Sid Meier (Member # 6965) on :
and whoes derek smart?
Posted by A Rat Named Dog (Member # 699) on :
A notoriously jerky developer who likes to smart off in online forums and blame the rest of the world for his failures.
By the way, though the scope of this game idea is unmanageably huge, there are some small bits of it that I would like to see. A game that is heavily focused on designing your own ships and taking them into battle, for instance, would be really fascinating. Especially if it were made to be pseudo-realistic and fully 3D, in a Homeworld-type way ...
Posted by Wowbagger the Infinitely Prolonged (Member # 7476) on :
Will there even be a Homeworld 3? Relic made the game but now THQ owns them. Sierra own the rights to the game. And nowthat Sega owns Creative Assembly I hope I'll somehow see more Total War games...
Posted by ricree101 (Member # 7749) on :
I'd love to just see a galactic civilizations like game with the RTS system from Homeworld. They'd be integrated with each other in the same way that the battle system in Total War games work. Fortunately, with the recent commercial success of RTS/Turn Based hybrids, I think that it is inevitable that someone will make a gmae like this. And then a few years after that, someone might actually make a good game like this.
Posted by Wowbagger the Infinitely Prolonged (Member # 7476) on :
Yeah, Homeworld: Total War would be an awesome game.
Posted by Sid Meier (Member # 6965) on :
unmanageably huge... hmm... by the time I actually get the resources to begin work on this game (say tens years at the most) wouldn't computers have advanced ot the point that the gane wouldn't be so unmanageable?
However scaleing down the game due to "technical issues" would be no problem theotetically, would a sclaed down version with say only 12 players with ~100 star systems (to examine the exploration aspect) be manageable in either the online or one player format?
Posted by Sid Meier (Member # 6965) on :
*bump*
Posted by lem (Member # 6914) on :
The two newest excitements in my life (with regards to computer entertainment) are Celestia and The Foundation Game.
If you could take the Celstia model, add ongoing time to it, put resources on each planet (you may need to make up a few planets), and have earth as the computer controlled main world, you could create quite a nice trading sim and action MMORPG combined.
When I read your post I envisioned a 3D foundation type game set in the celestia universe with more emphasis/detail on trading, government, and battles.
I like your idea. It sounds great!
You may want to check out the Foundation, as it has a lot of the ideas behind your dream. It is just a web browser game, but it incorporates some new ideas in gaming.
One word of caution, for your game to be what you u want it to be, it needs hundreds (if not thousands) of players online at the same time. I set up two accounts with Foundation. The game is designed to have more then 10,000 players play it. In one account, the sector has a lot of newbies and a few high level gamers. It is INTENSE and fun. On my other account, the sector is dead. I occasionally talk to someone, but I am taking my sweet time developing political skills because there is no one I am afraid of assassinating me.
Altho my character is much more powerful in the second sector, it is a little boring. Keep your game scaled small so it is filled up with players. As the demand warrants, you could always open up new sectors. Or maybe you could make sure new players are always created in clusters.
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
I stand by my suggestion of a Tetris clone, with the graphics in OpenGL or DirectX. You'll learn a lot, in particular you'll learn about what can and cannot be done with computers. Put this project on the shelf for a while; it's a fine one, but you are not ready even for the design stage. Make a Tetris clone, then a Space Invaders clone, then a boardgame port - Settlers of Catan, say, or Junta if you feel ambitious. The latter two will teach you a lot about AI.
Posted by Primal Curve (Member # 3587) on :
Derek Smart! Derek Smart! Derek Smart!
Posted by Bokonon (Member # 480) on :
Crap, PC unleashed the power of He-Who-Should-Not-Be-Named. Hatrack will be litigated out of existing any minute now...
-Bok
Posted by Bob the Lawyer (Member # 3278) on :
Isn't this MOO repackaged?
So, saying Derek Smart is like saying Candyman? If I shut off all my lights and look deep in my monitor he'll appear behind me and give me a wedgie? What happens if I say John Romero, John Romero, John Romero? He'll give me a really wussy wedgie 5 years from now?
Posted by Wowbagger the Infinitely Prolonged (Member # 7476) on :
Posted by Sid Meier (Member # 6965) on :
Yes, I know as I said before I'm not making it NOW when I'm experianced and know what I'm doing I'll work on it.
But its more then a matter of opening up extra sectors for exploitation I want the whole galaxy alrdy opened up and the point would be to explore until you find someone else, and being able to go into the perspective of the ships you send out so that you can kick back in your plush leather chair and watch as you skim over a nebula.
And yes, the idea is that with a interface to what Spore uses I hope that players will be able to deseign their own unique ships and it adds to the fun as you run into a fleet of ships that could be in theory unless you study them veeeeeery closely any class of ship so adds to the spice of first contact.
Posted by Sid Meier (Member # 6965) on :
wait.... is this based on the asimov books?
it is nice one
Posted by James Tiberius Kirk (Member # 2832) on :
quote:Will there even be a Homeworld 3? Relic made the game but now THQ owns them. Sierra own the rights to the game. And nowthat Sega owns Creative Assembly I hope I'll somehow see more Total War games...
My computer asplodes.
Posted by Wowbagger the Infinitely Prolonged (Member # 7476) on :
It's looks great....Still want Homeworld 3...
Posted by Sid Meier (Member # 6965) on :
Part of the thing with ship customization isn't just colour, but also the ability to adjust where the hard points are located, and adjust according toy uor technology what the new ship class is equipped with in terms of weapons and equipment.
Posted by Sid Meier (Member # 6965) on :
*bump*
Posted by Sid Meier (Member # 6965) on :
*double bump*
Any one else have any feed back?
Posted by Derek Smart (Member # 8029) on :
You rang?
Sorry I'm late, I adding more detail to how you clean up the toilets on your Battlecruiser. I added rust rings to the mix. To get them out you have to kill a certain bug on a planet that I won't give away. The blood is acidic and very good at getting those stubborn rust rings out of porcelain.
Posted by lem (Member # 6914) on :
quote:wait.... is this based on the asimov books?
Yes it is. Have you tried out the game yet? I am ready to make a major military move and advance in ranks to a Merchant. I love this game!
Posted by James Tiberius Kirk (Member # 2832) on :
Mmm-- Company of Heroes looks like its going to be a very good game (as all of Relic's stuff seems to be...)
Too bad we don't have a computer here to run it.
--j_k
Posted by Sid Meier (Member # 6965) on :
I talked with a friend he calls it a "combination of eve online and Galactic Emperialim II"
While AI scripts for planetary government if done well for civilian/military/research build qeues is a good idea according to a friend of mine, but what do y'all think about the possibility of a Paradox style empire economic screen? Where your entire empire's national economic/research policy/goals can be set from a single screen? This would essentially eliminate all micromanagement from the game and make it infinitly easier to play however the option to micromanage should I think (partially by request) should remain for those that like to twiddle with their planets.
Any feed back?
Posted by James Tiberius Kirk (Member # 2832) on :
[edit] All of the below is just me rambling, so it's very disorganized, but I'm just throwing out ideas: [/edit]
Micromanagement can be fun, but one of my biggest complaints about the original Empire Earth was that there were often times too many units on the screen at the same time. EE2 fixes this by allowing you to divide up your armies and giving you a citizen manager, as well as an automatic diplomacy screen. In turn, it also gives you a lot of different options two work with, so every variable in the game can be changed. Sometimes, this can be daunting, especially to a new player. (In short, micromanagement can be fun, but too much of it usually turns players away.)
I've never seen Paradox's screen, so I'm not sure how it would look, but after playing HW and EE a little too much I had an idea for a system that have a chart for each planet, much like what you describe. The chart would tell how much water/metal/energy/food/money was produced and consumed by a planet and whether there's a surplus or a deficit. From there, trade contracts could be established within your empire (Export/Import <x> shipments of <resource> to/from <planet>) or to external planets, where trade might cost a certain amount of money, and the contract would be cancelled in times of war.
You could even include corporate empires with their own fleets and stations, which can buy resources and produce other things (like ships) for a lower price than you could. All of this could be done from one screen.
Somewhere, I typed all of this up and saved it on this computer...
--j_k
Posted by Sid Meier (Member # 6965) on :
Corporate nations sounds like a pretty good idea, gives you a different option rather then to go the imperial route. What you said wasnt confusing but I'll explain it Paradox is a company that makes some encredible strategy games like Hearts of Iron 2 and Europa Universalis II, but I only played the former so far.
But this is the screen you have four tabs to click on and each gives you a different menu of option. the first one was technology where you could hire a tech team to begin reasearch of a particular technology from one of several fields and depending on which tech team it was and what its best at determines the daily speed of research.
The second screen was production where you could assign your nation to produce certain things in parallel or in series (series was 1 thing but done linearally where when one is doen the next is begins production but a bit faster otherwise known as "gearing"), your convoys could also be managed from this screen as well as the Industrial Capacity sliders.
You see your nation would have about X amount of IC to be divided among producing consumer goods to keep your people happy and make money (to pay your tech trees and commence diplomatic actions), to your production (since each thing you produce needs a set amount of IC to build and will take X amount of time), then you have the amount of IC to go into reinforcements and producing supplies and how much you determine goes into upgrading your army(s).
I'm thinking that an adapted version of this would be the recommended tool for determining the economic policy of your empire especially when you start to grow too big and become a little unwieldy with micromanagement alone.
Posted by Lee (Member # 8054) on :
(from long-time reader, short-time poster)
One of the best space strategy games I ever played is an old cult-classic called Stars! by Empire Interactive, which has to be at least a decade old now. It's a 4X game in nature, so similar to MOO in a bunch of ways, but I've always found it superior in every regard. It's very utilitarian in its graphics and interface, but the amount of options you have are staggering. It also supported a ridiculous size of galaxies from tiny to huge, with (I believe) thousands of stars at the biggest settings. It also supported PBEM, with either 16 or 32 people. Can't remember which. I got so many people hooked on it.
Of course, that's not an MMO, but it's still an awesome game. The guys who did it were working on a sequel for the longest time, but I don't think they could ever find a publisher.
Posted by Sid Meier (Member # 6965) on :
Can you give me a link to a website that hosts it? A game that old is usually supplied for free usually and legally sasme thing with GTA.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
I'm not sure Stars! is a decade old now -- if it is, I'm showing my age -- but I feel compelled to point out that by no means are most games over ten years old available legally for free.
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
Well, there's "legal" and there's "won't actively prosecute". Try googling "Home of the Underdogs".
Posted by Lee (Member # 8054) on :
http://www.starsfaq.com/rgcsfaq.htm "Stars! is an Advanced Interstellar Strategy Game and a member of 4x genre (eXplore, eXpand, eXploit, eXterminate) of PC games. It was written by Jeff Johnson and Jeff McBride with help from Jeffrey Krauss (collectively known as the Jeffs). It was originally written in 1995 and is still as fun to play now as it ever was."
I know most people didn't discover it until the late '90s, though, when the 2.0 versions started coming out.
And regarding info to play it, you should be able to find a demo of the game easily that will support play for a certain number of turns. I think serial numbers are available for a small nominal fee, check that FAQ I linked to.
I still play it from time to time- the urges come in waves every year or so. PBEM games can take a loooong time to play out though.
Posted by Sid Meier (Member # 6965) on :
Another thing I would like in the game are real convoys.
Think about it in most games the whole trading system is kinda invisible with in some games a limited ability to interfear with it. What I suggest in my game is to have the actual ships moving around transfering the goods thus anyone can within their line of sight see the ships and interact with it. From commiting acts of piracy of making first contact if you've met this empir eonly for the first time.
Posted by James Tiberius Kirk (Member # 2832) on :
Indeed-- one of the things I liked about RoN was that the caravans were actually visbile, and could be attacked for profit. In this case, I suppose you'd be able to salvage whatever you wanted from the cargo (as well as the ship itself).
If you have physical convoys, obviously you'll also need trade routes: say, you don't want to fly directly between two worlds, because Emperor Whatshisface of Wherever controls it, or pirates will almost certainly attack (sorta like the Kadeshi in Homeworld, heh). You'd have to plot courses through other people's territory and perhaps pay whatever taxes they desire. Trying to find the safest, fastest trade route could add another level of micromanagement however; maybe a lot of it could be automatic.
--j_k
Posted by Sid Meier (Member # 6965) on :
Excellent! Though piracy is something that I want to happen (AI at first but gradually replaced by Human pirates) The convoy system I'm thinking of is to have ship A leave New Boston shipyards, travels across 2 star systems to Neo Hiroshima Shipyards (I'm thinking of some kind of random name generator to name your shipyards (as well as the option to just name them yourself) based somewhat on your empire + planetary names) Ship A enters shipyard unloads cargo loads new cargo generates X% "profit" in IGC (INter Galactic Currency or blah blah blah) then travels back to your shipyard and does this in a loop. the actual docking/undocking should be visible as well.
Now currency... *evil laugh* I want each user to name THEIR OWN currency or use an already availiable one (still thinking about this) which will have a default value that could fluctulate based on your economy in relative to other players. For example your currnecy could become worthless say you were mauled in some major war since the economic intecaters would reveal this. (war loans unpayed, inflation, demobilized unemployed soldiers, GW Bush mentioned "economy" and "ethics" in the same sentence etc etc.)
This should add an extra economic stimuls making the game far more "complex" per say and in deph not just making it another game of global (or in this case galactic) domination but adding far more feel and colour to it then to any other previous game of the RTS Space empire strategy genre.
Anyone have any comments of feed back?
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
Sid, I think your currency idea is seriously, seriously flawed; it adds complexity without adding fun. If you have the value of goods fluctuate according to supply and demand, and require that some of those goods actually be used to maintain a planet and/or a military infrastructure, you'll have as much economy as you need -- and already a more detailed economy than almost any other space combat game out there.
Posted by Wowbagger the Infinitely Prolonged (Member # 7476) on :
Sid, a dynamic economy based on supply and demand is a far better idea. Think of the fun that can be had for all when some ulta rare resource is discovered and the race to control it. Plus I'd have a barter system. Say 560 X for 306 Y.
Posted by Sid Meier (Member # 6965) on :
*sigh* okay, but I so wanted a currency system. Thanks for the imput, but ya more about economy...
How many reosurces SHOULD there be? The usual like..:
Gold Deuterium Steel Plastic Food etc etc
Or should there be every element on the periodic table?
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
"Or should there be every element on the periodic table?"
*whispers* Sid. Game.
In an ideal game economy, you would have only those resources that could be combined to make useful things for planetary and/or military development. This way, resources would be in actual demand and could therefore command actual prices.
I'd go with: Food - Needed to maintain population levels Water - Needed to maintain population levels Metal - Needed for production Minerals - Needed for production Fuel - Needed for production Luxuries - Increase population loyalty, reproductive rate
You could also have planetary installations -- perhaps as part of a research tree -- which convert these back and forth. Water and fuel, for example, could produce food at a hydroponic facility. A solar panel (produced with minerals and metals) could produce fuel. A hydroelectric plant could turn water into fuel.
And if you want more granularity, you could introduce refined goods -- i.e. goods produced at planetary factories made out of combinations of these basic resources, which are themselves used to produce things. Examples might include robotics (2 metal, 1 mineral, 1 fuel), medicine (2 mineral, 1 food, 1 water), starship shield generators (1 metal, 3 fuel), soma (2 water, 3 luxuries), and so forth. Obviously, when building a ship, you would be required to use up shield generators if you wanted your ship to have them.
If you wanted to incorporate a fully-functional economy AND flexible ship design, you could permit the development of improved goods -- like, say, a Shield Generator Mark III, which requires 3 metal and 9 fuel and takes more time to make. Each ship design would then have to take into account the entire supply chain.
And if you REALLY want to make it complex, put an upper limit on the number of production facilities any planet can have based on its population. (I would suggest, if you do this, that Robots -- produced using robotics goods -- count towards population totals, as they'd be able to join the labor force.)
Posted by Sid Meier (Member # 6965) on :
Now I wonder if I should keep on throwing ideas or if I should keep trying to prod you into giving ideas cause this is pretty good.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
Now, here's a major issue with what we've come up with so far:
In a game that's driven so strongly by mathematics, there will always be an "optimal" configuration. And players will figure out that configuration very quickly, if the Player's Guide doesn't just give it away in the first place. (In other words, players will discover that a cheap frigate with four powerful lasers can be built from 4 Starship Parts and 8 Combat Lasers, and will quickly come up with patterns to crank those ships out in numbers.)
If you don't want this sort of thing happening -- and fairness compels me to point out that if you try to prevent this sort of thing, this game will be remarkably unpopular in Korea, where that kind of "strategy" is considered gaming -- you're going to need to find ways to limit material production AND set up realistic economic scarcity. One of the best ways to do this is to have only a few sources of each type of supply available in the early game. But if you do this, the game also becomes susceptible to rush and/or disruption tactics, which kind of defeats the point of all this deep strategic stuff.
It's because I haven't found an answer to this problem that I haven't tried to design this game myself.
The issue is this: the more complex you make the economy, the less strategic the battles will be. It's the single biggest flaw of a RTS. It's actually the reason people keep coming up with MMORTS ideas in which a commander runs the economy while grunts handle the battles.
Posted by Sid Meier (Member # 6965) on :
Which somewhat what I'm aiming for, but only in terms of being an options say:
There are 2 version of the game availiable, the first is the Empire building and Ship combat thing in one where you can manage your empire but can also just forgoe it and concentrate on commanding ships for other people. And a second much cheap version for people who just want to blow up ships.
Now I have a question whats keep nations in REAL life from building say 300 heavy cruisers?
Posted by Primal Curve (Member # 3587) on :
Sid, managing an economy is a game in and of itself. There's a reason that bureaucracy exists in the real world: one person cannot effectively and efficiently control every element of government. If you want space piracy, create a game where you plunder ships. You could even have boardings and stuff where you do a little FPS action, but a game where you commit piracy AND micromanage the economy of an entire planet (or group of planets) is incredibly rediculous- not to mention all of the other crap that you want to toss in there. I'm totally with KoM on this- start small.
Posted by Sid Meier (Member # 6965) on :
investopedia?
Posted by Primal Curve (Member # 3587) on :
Not quite an economy, but it is a program that lets you play the stock market with pretend money. It's a good thing for people who want to try a self-directed brokerage account out for a spin without actually losing any money in the process. It's also a game for a lot of people in the investment industry. It's kind of fun to try and play with options and short selling and all that kind of cowboy market trick stuff.
Posted by Sid Meier (Member # 6965) on :
Interesting. But I think with the proper amount of experiance, money, and determination a game of the scope I'm thinking of is possible esp with computers advancing as they are. I dont plan on making NOW but later on, I'm hoping to get the concept done however and essentially recruiting Hatrack to bounce my ideas off of.
The grpahics I intead to be moderate most likely Homeworld style, the game will be single server so like Eve you could theotecally travel from point A to point B without having to load a new zone. A tough challenge considering the massivness I want to have, I forsee possibly dozens of bugs and technical problems but I hope that they'll be solvable by the time I get to it.
Now back ot the economy, I'm bouncing ideas off of a close friend of mine about how to manage this, essentially whats forming in my dark and twisted mind is that no workers or stuff just build the nessasary structures on a planet that automaticcaly harvets it according to how much man power you have on that planet and etc.
Now back to the who fleet strat thing, I'm making it a goal now to ensure that no body will figure some uber combination that trumps all others. Like each ship class should have its own IMHO certain advantages and disadvantages attaached to it defualtly that makes sure that there isn't some uber combination that ruins your evening.
So, until I get more ideas for the economy lets go back to ships. I'll come around with a basic overview soon.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
"But I think with the proper amount of experiance, money, and determination a game of the scope I'm thinking of is possible esp with computers advancing as they are."
The problem isn't the computer, Sid. The problem is the human brain.
Posted by James Tiberius Kirk (Member # 2832) on :
Have you considered a, uh, "price-flucuation-system-thingie" similar to the one used in RoN? Maybe the "standard" cost of certain goods would vary inversely wouth the amount available (supply and demand, as Wowbagger suggested).
quote:Now I have a question whats keep nations in REAL life from building say 300 heavy cruisers?
Resources, and population limits. Remember that every ship must be crewed, have fuel, and food (Hopefully, you won't have to manage such things in this game; a "ship cap" that increases with population should suffice). Maybe a player could get around that by "hiring" mercenary fleets to do his dirty work.
quote:Now back to the who fleet strat thing, I'm making it a goal now to ensure that no body will figure some uber combination that trumps all others. Like each ship class should have its own IMHO certain advantages and disadvantages attaached to it defualtly that makes sure that there isn't some uber combination that ruins your evening.
And for ship strategy: my rule is Rock, Paper, Scissors. Don't have super-ships, and give everything a weakness. Homeworld is a good example; to simplify: strikcraft (fighters, bombers, and corvettes) were killed easily by frigates, frigates could be destroyed by capital ships, but capital ships didn't have a lot of small weapons so were susceptible to attack by strikecraft. Players should be forced to use many different types of units (variation is the key to survival). But remember, the goal is to keep it simple.
To add another dimension of gameplay, players could customize their fleets. Many civ-building games have system where you are given a set number of points so that you can improve certain classes of units. For instance, a person who likes using fighters could give all his fighters have a 20% speed bonus.
--j_k
[ May 25, 2005, 11:38 PM: Message edited by: James Tiberius Kirk ]
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
Dozens of bugs? Dozens? Sid, trust me on this, it is not possible to make a Tetris clone without getting hundreds of bugs. In fact, from what you are saying, you probably couldn't make Hello World without several dozen bugs. In short, you have no idea what you're talking about. Moreover, as long as you don't, you won't get the programmers or artists you need to work with you on this. Go program Tetris, or Pong, or something reasonable like that - with extra bells and whistles, if you like. Then come back and prune down your ideas a bit, once you have a better understanding of what a computer can and cannot do.
Take a look at the link I gave you, and take especial note of what happens to newbies with Grand Ideas : They not only get flamed, they get zero help, because - guess what - people with experience have Big Ideas too, and why should they work on your dream when they can work on their own? To make this work, you need experience, and that means drudgery to get it. I am not being sarcastic when I suggest you clone Tetris; I mean that as helpful advice. Learn Python, learn C++, learn Java, but don't post any more on this until you have moved electrons about in a pattern that makes a game. Dream big dreams, by all means, but take practical steps to support them. Ideas are nothing; coding is everything.
You must crawl before you can walk; and you do not dream of walking, but of flying with eagles.
Posted by Sid Meier (Member # 6965) on :
ARGH! I know I know, I'ld be optimistic that I can make this within 10 years. As for ship classes I'm thinking osmewhat Hoemworldish. Fighter craft, corvettes, frigates, destoryers, cruiusers, battleships, carriers.
I've been thinking specifically what there advantages disadvantages are, but if anyuone have any ideas I'ld be grateful. I can't say how thankful I am for all the feedback ESPECIALLY from KoM
Btw whats RoN?
Posted by Sid Meier (Member # 6965) on :
Also, I am in COmputer Science so I am learning the above programming languages mentioned.
Posted by Wowbagger the Infinitely Prolonged (Member # 7476) on :
RoN is Rise of Nations
Posted by Sid Meier (Member # 6965) on :
OOOOOOOOOOH! I have it.
Posted by Sid Meier (Member # 6965) on :
Know I understand.
Posted by Sid Meier (Member # 6965) on :
Possiblre Ship Classes:
Carriers:
Carries a large assortment of fighter class ships essentially small light fast attack ships meant to attack larger slower moving ships. Carriers can travel FTL* with other capitol ships armed with light weaponry to defend itself somewhat against enemy fighters. Carriers are large vessels that can carry troops and supplies as well as fighters.
Battleships:
Slow moving, have long range and are good versus other capitol ships and stationary targets but also rather slow to aim (depending on thje weapon system). Battleships while well armoured are nevertheless vulnerable to the fast moving Corvettes and Fighters.
Cruisers: While faster moving then the battleship is still rather slow moving but is more of a smaller version of the battleship but better armed then the destoryer serves an escort as well as independant attack and defence roles. Good aginst destroyers but also have a disadvantage against fighters though they are better equipped then the battleship to deal with them.
Destoryers: Cheap to make, but weak in most combat situations good for Anti Fighter and pretty much all escort roles, good against Corvettes, and most small craft excellent for piracy and fast strike roles especially if supported by Cruisers equipped for fast attacks.
Corvettes: Small fast ships designed for many varied roles not meant for line battles but rather for scouting and support missions such as mine laying, scouting, patrolling, anti fighter, and others.
Fighters: Think Star Furies, ships of either Scout, Torpeedo Bomber and Interceptor roles. The bombers are to attack slow moving ships and fighters to escort them. The scouts would be fighters equipped for long range deep probing missions for intelligence gathering.
Essentially in Rock-Paper-Scissorz mode. (-> means good vs) CC->BB BB->CA/DD CA->DD DD->VET/FIGHTER VET->FIGHTER FIGHT->BB/CA
Course remember that these arent just ships that can be built willy nilly, how you customize your ships is up to you but of course there would be certain limitation like # of hard poitns soft points, power core, certain things like hull might be constant.
Posted by Sid Meier (Member # 6965) on :
The thing about the carrier is that this was a choice on my part to simulate the most realistic ship combat theotetically possible by leaving the game open in my opinion leaves the best possibility to the players coming up wiht strategies and solutions that Admirals in real life never came up with. Such as the ability for a player to forgoe alot of stuff in order to have room on a battle ship to possess and launch fighters. Just a thought...
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
And yet somehow I predict your space combat will be largely two dimensional . . .
Posted by Sid Meier (Member # 6965) on :
huh? Its going to be 3D, like in Homeworld. Or is the comment sarcastic in nature?
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
fugu is saying that your space combat will be 3D right up to the point where you figure out that this doesn't actually add anything to the game, while making interface and AI much more difficult.
Posted by Primal Curve (Member # 3587) on :
Sarcastic? No, I think he's telling the truth. Was the comment opaque to you? Absolutely.
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
To make it more clear:
Making space combat even vaguely realistic in anything beyond some sort of spacefighter pilot sim would be as technically difficult as it was impossible to play.
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
Oh, and it would likely be mind-numbingly boring on a similar scale.
Posted by Sid Meier (Member # 6965) on :
Okay, I'll put more though into it. Though I am hoping that being in a 3D space I am hoping that depth can be added to the game wihtout having to become generic.
Posted by Danomite (Member # 8161) on :
... Well Sid, I have finally got around to reading what you have posted here...
Now just a few thoughts...
Ships. You want them customizable yet you’re limiting them to rock/paper/scissor thing. I say ships should be much more like they are in EVE-Online, where one can fit various things on to the ships. Such as taking a battleship hull, and instead of putting heavy weapons on it put a bunch of smaller, faster tracking guns to deal with fighters. Same for the ECM, and ECCM. Make a model that does all those but at greatly reduced efficiency Granted with customizable ships you might not have a ships that truly fit into the destroy / cruiser / battleship roles. For example, take a BS hull that you have designed using you current tech level (higher level tech should allow for more customization in your ship build) and put several small and medium guns on it a fill the rest with hangers and you got your self a carrier. So Instead of just being limited to carriers must be like this... u can do what u want. Using the same thing u could make some hit and run carriers. Small ships might not be able to jump, so they would depend on frigate sized carrier which could hold lets say 3-4 fighters. (ok sizes maybe off but you know what I am getting at.) Then just make a bunch of small task forces of these and go raiding. Using a single large carrier though nice, would be expensive and high priority target. Using a bunch of these small carriers thou, consume more resources would be more effective. Also I noticed you saying BS would be slow. Why? It is space. Things work a bit differently up there. A bigger engine means you would be moving faster. Big ships most likely have bigger engines... more maneuverable small ships most likely but not faster... but then again this is one rule I could careless about. I am just saying that you should keep your ideas open, and not think in naval terms. Space would be a cross between naval and air combat... but with its own twist. Economy. I really like a vast, player driven market economy. Take the economy in EVE (a space mmorpg) it had a GREAT player driven market economy that works really well. If something similar was implemented, it would be great. Thou a tad bit more complex would be nice. Some things were over simplified... Anyhow I just rambling here.... anyhow enough for now...
Posted by Sid Meier (Member # 6965) on :
*bump*
Posted by Sid Meier (Member # 6965) on :
BTW I'm currently working on a website + forum so that eventually when I have a bunch of peopel coming up with concept drawings and what not we can have a single place to talk about it rathern then a single thread.
Posted by Bob the Lawyer (Member # 3278) on :
Somewhere along the line, Sid, you're going to have to figure out that people play games to have fun and realism is not necessarily enjoyable.
Posted by Sid Meier (Member # 6965) on :
*sigh* I'm on this planet to learn aren't i?
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
Indeed. One of the things you might want to learn is that, if your thread has you has the only poster four times in a row, and you have eighteen out of thirty-nine posts on the last page, people have lost interest and it's time to let that thread die.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Angst]](graemlins/angst.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)