Game design Issue : Training units

[pavansss91]

Hi,

I am pavan. I have been hanging in the IRC for 3 days and love to contribute to this project.

I have seen a small flaw in the game design.

According to this http://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/List%3A...r%3A_Structures

The civil center will be able to train 3 military units and 1 Support unit.

But the civil center will be existent at the start of the game, which make training of military units possible immediately after start of game. I think this is a serious flaw.

I suggest that we remove the training of military units from civil center

And also we don't have any stuctures like stable and workshops which will make not so good game design.

We introduce 2 new structures:

Stable, training cavalry and Workshop training seiges

-pavan

[feneur]

Hello Pavan, thanks for your interest in 0 A.D.

To address the first issue of military units being available from the start I quote from the Design Document:

Citizen Soldiers - There will be no standard villager unit. Instead, regular infantry and cavalry have not only military capabilities, but also economic, making them substantially more versatile than in typical RTS games.

So yeah, military units will be available from the start, but while you are free to think what you want about that it would be more interesting if you would provide a reason for why you think that's a bad decision than just to say that it's a flaw. I'll provide some reasons why I think it's a good idea, and then you are free to provide some reasons why it's not, I doubt we're going to change one of the most fundamental ideas of our design, but you are free to try and convince us why we should

To me it seems like it's less likely to encourage too much rushing, the enemy will after all have units who are capable of fighting back, so you'll probably want to wait until you either have more units/better units. If you are good enough you'll probably still be able to rush, it's just that you have to be more careful about how you do it.

Another reason why I think the concept of having Citizen Soldiers rather than just either villagers or soldiers (though there are more advanced military units who will be available later in the game which haven't got any economical capabilities) is a good idea is that it allows for the units to be useful even when they're not used to fight.

Can you please explain why you think not having a specific Stable/Siege Workshop is a design flaw?

[pavansss91]

So yeah, military units will be available from the start, but while you are free to think what you want about that it would be more interesting if you would provide a reason for why you think that's a bad decision than just to say that it's a flaw.

Sorry about it. I am not a native english speaker. So bear with my grammar and temrinology

I'll provide some reasons why I think it's a good idea, and then you are free to provide some reasons why it's not, I doubt we're going to change one of the most fundamental ideas of our design, but you are free to try and convince us why we should

Ok.

To me it seems like it's less likely to encourage too much rushing, the enemy will after all have units who are capable of fighting back, so you'll probably want to wait until you either have more units/better units. If you are good enough you'll probably still be able to rush, it's just that you have to be more careful about how you do it.

But it can also lead to more rushing. We have 1000 of each resorces initially at the start of the game right ?

What if we keep on building military units and send them onto the opponent while he is playing economically.

Another reason why I think the concept of having Citizen Soldiers rather than just either villagers or soldiers (though there are more advanced military units who will be available later in the game which haven't got any economical capabilities) is a good idea is that it allows for the units to be useful even when they're not used to fight.

Yeah. It is right but the fact is they are military units and can lead to rushing.

Can you please explain why you think not having a specific Stable/Siege Workshop is a design flaw?

I am not a game designer but I have played a lot of strategy games in different aspects. Every games contains a stable and seige structure. I would like you to consider why they are doing so ?

[Garick]

Hy, let me talk about what i think ^^

Can you please explain why you think not having a specific Stable/Siege Workshop is a design flaw?

i guess it's not a flaw, it looks like a flaw because it goes against the "recipe" of the regular RTS, but can be a good idea.

About Militia-Citizens:

I think it's cool, and reflects the true meaning of a worker in that days, men at least are suposed to be strong and able to bear arms to defend theyr homeland, so, economic units, with battle prowess is really a good thougt, but not strongmilitary unis with economic prowess (i say this not only for gameplay balance, because the kick-@#$% soldiers were not real crafters, they were professional soldiers).

Of course, besides pointing flaws i have to suggest best ways to solve it.

- why it could be a problem? If all the military units have economic capabilyties, sieges and raising new sttlements would be extremely easy, i only should raid, destroy and them ocupy with all my kick-@#$% soldiers, that are by instance excelent masons and woodworkers (not sarcasm, don't take me wrong).

How It could be solved, providing rush possibilityes but allowing you to have soldiers that can work?

Insted of this, create an upgrade that provide "light military units" to have economic prowess or an upgrade that gives villagers military training, giving them more armor, attack and so. and of course, the possibility to make them defensive (will run if attacked by enemy units) or agressive (will retaliate enemy units attack if possible).

It will balance more the gameplay, giving you chance to focus in militarey or economic if you so desire.

But the adding of a siege workshop would be a good stuff, because you know, if you are aiming for historical accuracy, producing refined siege engine weapons was not a Barraks assignment, but a professional job, that required a special workshop (a siege workshop).

But training all the military organic units at the Baracks makes a lot of sense to me. and would be owesome if the Baracks could be used as a refugee, (like AOK Castles) for units to rest and heal and for archers attack.

Bonus suggestion/Question: Is that possible make "mixed Units"? A good Example would be an infantry, armed with short Spears for fighting cavalry, capability to trow (once) the spear at a short distance and use short swords to hand-to-hand combat?

[pavansss91]

So, I think Garick has given good reasons to both my points.

It's up to you to decide what to do :-)

[Mythos_Ruler]

How about we wait until we have a well-working game before we pronounce this or that feature a "flaw" and come up with all kinds of overpowered or unbalanced strategies that we think will make the game flawed. None of us knows how the game will play once all the features are in place.

[feneur]

Hmm, seems like I'll have to explain the design a bit. Only the Citizen Soldiers have economic abilities as well, each civilization also has what we've chosen to call "Super Units" who are meant to represent the professional soldiers. They're better than the Citizen Soldiers at fighting, but cannot be built until later in the game and don't have any economic abilities, and of course cost more.

Also the Citizen Soldiers upgrade (Basic-->Advanced-->Elite), which means that the more they fight the better they get at fighting - but also less and less good at economic tasks.

Speaking a bit more about Rushing:

At the start each player will have a few units + a small amount of resources, if one really wants to one can of course take those first units + the few one can build using the resources one gets at the start of the game to go attack the enemy at the start. But unless on a very small map I'd guess the enemy would have time to gather enough resources in the amount of time it takes to travel to the enemy to have a larger army than the attacker. And even if not, the enemy is still likely to have the same amount of units as they have the same starting amount of resources/units and he/she doesn't have to choose between military civilian units so it should be a fair fight.

That said, it can still be a valid strategy to try and rush, for example your enemy might spread out his units too far so you might take them out one by one or something. But that could happen regardless of whether you get units which can fight at the start of the game or later.

Finally I'd like to say that before we make a final release we want to take a lot of time to playtest the game to make sure it's as balanced as we can make it. In other words, if we find that it's too easy to rush we might lower the amount of resources a player get at the start of the game or if we find that a unit is too overpowered we'll lower its attack or whichever is making it overpowered and what else might be necessary.

EDIT: Seems like Michael had something wiser to say while I wrote the long post above I still think some of it might be valid, but yeah, the game is still a work in progress, and if we find that things don't work then we'll have to change them.

[Garick]

How about we wait until we have a well-working game before we pronounce this or that feature a "flaw" and come up with all kinds of overpowered or unbalanced strategies that we think will make the game flawed. None of us knows how the game will play once all the features are in place.

Agreed =)

Hmm, seems like I'll have to explain the design a bit. Only the Citizen Soldiers have economic abilities as well, each civilization also has what we've chosen to call "Super Units" who are meant to represent the professional soldiers. They're better than the Citizen Soldiers at fighting, but cannot be built until later in the game and don't have any economic abilities, and of course cost more.

Ok, so basicaly i think that what happened was a missunderstanding of me =)

But thanks for the clarification.

BTW: it kicks-@#$% =D

[Mythos_Ruler]

Right, here is the basic game structure:

Support Units -- strictly economic units (female citizens, merchants) or healers (priests).

Citizen-Soldiers -- econ units that also fight. They "level-up" over time, making them better at fighting and less good at gathering and building.

Super Units -- strictly military. These guys are the "professional" soldiers of your faction, like Spartans, Immortals, etc. They don't need to level-up, since they are awesome fighters already.

Heroes -- only available in the late-game, and only one at a time, they are usually very good fighters and have special abilities and functions.

Citizen-soldiers and support units will be available from the beginning of the game. Super Units and Heroes will only be available once you phase-up to City Phase and build a Fortress (or in the case of the Greeks, a Gymnasion and Tholos).

Edited April 20, 2010 by Mythos_Ruler

[feneur]

Michael, are you sure about that for the Hellenes? Because in that case the DD could use an update

[Mythos_Ruler]

Well, I forgot to update their Faction Profile.

Edited April 20, 2010 by Mythos_Ruler

[feneur]

Well, I forgot to update their Faction Profile.

Ok, as long as it is updated it's fine with me

[Mythos_Ruler]

:)

Edited April 20, 2010 by Mythos_Ruler

[feneur]

(And just to make sure I'm not misunderstood I meant "is" in the future tense not the present, though I hope it gets present not too far into the future )