New great idea concerning the metagame

[eduh]

Hey everybody, I know this game from some months ago and I've been amazed of the amount of effort put on it.

And I would not want to not fully benefit from all the talent and effort put on this game

Because, this game is, I must say and I don't lie, a very very good game but it is just an another RTS game, if you know what I'm saying.

In the game, you play on a map where you finish having one big base against other opponents

What if we implement:

-Maps, I don't know, 10 or 20 times larger without so much graphic detail

-An as much as permitted realistic altitude of the terrain and the mountains, with a simple and beautiful valley and forests sistem

-An invisible matrix that tells us where terrain is more fertile and we make that: We make farms, and we choose to how much money to spend in how many villagers we want to make live there. Crops grow alone in an organic, realistic and not square order.

-Areas of influence in buildings, so that we, being the maps so large, makes us need to construct villages, forts and cities far away from our capital. To achieve this, not only maps would be more large, but buildings would be dwarfed. Many houses would be automatically constructed when constructed other buildings to create a city atmosphere

-The possibility to build roads

I'll add a poor drawing explaining what I want to say

Edited May 20, 2012 by eduh

[Sef]

I can picture it in my head: A huge city with caravans going to local villages on the road that you built collecting metal from you metal mning village, a warband of your men marching through your city to check if the enemy is near your neighbouring villages, making my farms as big as i want them, villagers acting independently. ye it would be awesome but 0ad is meant to be a AOE inspired game and i remember reading the developers don't want a city builder.

[Spahbod]

-Maps, I don't know, 10 or 20 times larger without so much graphic detail

The current problem with large maps is that larger maps take more cpu process for pathfinding and ai. Graphic details are not a real issue as we only render the part of the game that is in the player field of view. Fortunately both ai and pathfinding are being optimized so that you can play larger maps without lag.

-An as much as permitted realistic altitude of the terrain and the mountains, with a simple and beautiful valley and forests sistem

This falls to the are of map makers. But we want the map to be "playable" first and then "beautiful". Perhaps you can make some maps and help us in this field?

-Areas of influence in buildings, so that we, being the maps so large, makes us need to construct villages, forts and cities far away from our capital. To achieve this, not only maps would be more large, but buildings would be dwarfed. Many houses would be automatically constructed when constructed other buildings to create a city atmosphere

-The possibility to build roads

While your ideas are not bad, they don't fit with the concept of our game. This is a real-time strategy game. We don't want to add much concepts of city building to it.

[The Crooked Philosopher]

I am a RTS fan, so i would agree that it should have the elements of RTS instead of city building element in the game.

[Mythos_Ruler]

The current idea for single-player campaign is to have a high-level "Strategic" meta game where you're moving armies and characters around on a large map, founding cities and attacking each other, then when you attack each other you have the option of zooming down to the low-level "tactical" level where you do all of the normal RTS-stuff.

Something like this:

[Potter]

@Mythos

WOW! That looks exactly like how I had longed for the game to be !

I really love that concept

Is that just a mockup you have now, or is something in the works

And, Just curious to know how the resource collection will be handled at a high-level strategic level?

[Sef]

Wow. Looks like campaign will be really fun and strategic when your finished with it. A hint of Civilization and Total war i see there. Nice.

[Mythos_Ruler]

Right, basically a simplified version of Rome:Total War, but in real-time and with our own brand of gameplay. The GUI in that shot is purely mockup. However, you can play around with the map a little and dream of what could be--it's in the "Demo" maps under "Strategic Campaign Proof of Concept." Those with Alpha 10 and the SVN version have it.

[Alpha of the Eagles]

That campaign mode gameplay, would it be implented as a sort of multiplayer too? Where you can seamlessly zoom between battlefields and give orders and then go back to the main screen and give other orders? 'Cause that would've been so badass and a completely new way of playing grand-scope RTS multiplayer (in addition to the AoE style, pitched-sandbox-games).

[Mythos_Ruler]

That campaign mode gameplay, would it be implented as a sort of multiplayer too? Where you can seamlessly zoom between battlefields and give orders and then go back to the main screen and give other orders? 'Cause that would've been so badass and a completely new way of playing grand-scope RTS multiplayer (in addition to the AoE style, pitched-sandbox-games).

We're not sure how we're going to do it yet. I would like to be able to click back and forth between levels at-will and seamlessly (both levels are running simultaneously), but who knows what's feasible until we start implementing things. We can come up with a reasonable design though and work from there. We had some internal discussions last month about it.

[eduh]

These are the maps I made to explain what I mean

Edited May 22, 2012 by eduh

[Mythos_Ruler]

What do the various squares and stuff represent?

[Sef]

Too me it looks like the squares represent buildings on the first one and maybe concentrations of buildings on the second one. i may be wrong though.

[eduh]

Lion Kanzen exactly.

The first map (inspired on Cantabrian highlands) is small, mountains are small, uniformed and random, just as lakes. Each civ has one base

The second map is much bigger, it has various mountains ranges to make it look more real and fun, the not-so-much-painted squares are crops and each civ has a couple of cities, towns and fortresses

[quantumstate]

It looks like an interesting idea. It would slow the game down quite a bit so I'm not sure I would want this as a standard map. Is the current Giant map size not large enough? Also a while ago on irc the idea of allowing the terrain height range to expand was talked about a bit. It should happen at some point, we can easily get 10 times the current size without worrying about resolution, then you can have really big mountains.

[eduh]

Will be this idea taken into serious consideration?

[Flamelasher]

This would kill lots of people's performance.

[majapahit]

Don't forget tech tree

And victory for the first one reach alpha centaury

Seriously, I extremely like that screenshot. I just love a game that I can play while enjoying my meal.

[Almin]

Lol that Screenshot is amazing! Strange that I needed that long to read the topic...however:

Seriously, did you copy that idea from R.U.S.E, the commercial rts-game? To have like a command-table and if you zoom in you can see everything from near.

A video of the game on Youtube to show how it works there (He's talking unimportant stuff on german, that you can ignore, you can directly go to minute 2:45):

Edited June 14, 2012 by Almin

[Lion.Kanzen]

I want rebirth this post with new users, heat you think about this concept, today I was talking about Paradox game the TBS argued with RTS fans about, what is real strategy game. They say games like

AOE and Starcraft are only action, without serious diplomatic system.

[Unarmed]

I don't think I like the idea. (the OP idea)

And Lion Kanzen what does this have to do with diplomatic? (I will make a thread about diplomacy today, by the way)

I was going to do a search how campaign would be implemented. I heard of a map. And here it is confirmed. I would do it like this:

You pick a civ, let's say Athens. You start in Athens of course. You click on something to attack you go into the regular game (build base, make army etc.), but:

-Most of the first games are scenarios, civ specific

-When you go in places your civ would not historically be or simply there would not be a interesting scenario to make for the area, you play on a specific random biome map.

I think the developers should make the large map, and put in some scenarios that are already there and the random maps. My idea is that people contribute with new scenarios and these might be implemented in the large map.

What Mythos says seems a bit too ambitious or I understood it wrong.

The only thing I haven't thought about it how you would be able to play with several factions; 2v2 or 3v1.

I would take a look at War of the Ring mode, but make it simpler.

A Risk type of thing, where you can decide to play in real time (regular match on scenario or random map) or let the computer decide.

Edited July 5, 2013 by Unarmed

[Lion.Kanzen]

Well, first the diplomacy is very funny in multiplayer, the Campaing the feeling of Campaing mode is diplomacy, create alliances, betray some factions, kill enemy kings in a mission. Can have client kingdoms, remover when I bored with Rts mode in total war, I was play only camping mode. the best RTS have advances multiplayer, Total War series, Rise of Nations, Empire Earth 2. And the camping mode attracts to TBS may be Europe Universalis (Paradox) series with Civilization. Even Few players from my fan site wre asking about Campaing map. And the best possibilities can make in that mode, I mean all features may be we seen in campaing mode.

Even can have elements from boarding games, like card gaming, like dices, like experience from RPG aoE 3 other of few things good that game have. Because the experience system reward the player when win. If you play a wildcard you can play mode regicide in order to kill enemy game, can be like magic the gathering with wildcards. The possibilities can be like all boarding game you like. Wildcards like extra bonus, mercenaries, etc.

I enjoy playing UNO and Magic the Gathering in my ipad. When players are 4 is best, free for all, thinking in campaing mode with 4 players, limited from 5 maps per play in a little map, is like a tournament, that other I love in games, sport games and fighting games.

Yeah I sounds like a dreamer. But this projects start with something simple to finish it with awesome, and Mythos is like we, but the difference is he, is the leader. And yeah is a lot of work, but you know what? Is funny. Even thinking is funny, yesterday a read in forum about gaming about 0 A.D is best so far compared to Triple A games. In this time nobody, do goods RTS. I know this is too topic off and all can thinkis, this guys talk too much crap. If you read the forum, the players still playing Aok, play old RTS.

And yeah if is possibly play risk in multiplayer is possibly adapt campaing for only experience. Is only investigate how. May be de level can do the best and player elimination is vital, or limited time or score wining, I don't know, and we have time to thinking.

be too ambitious is quality to be Excellent, to be the best. This is about thinking in Future.

[Unarmed]

, first the diplomacy is very funny

No need for a campaign map to have diplomacy! Look at Seven Kingdoms.

That game was all about making alliances, breaking them, betraying them, letting other factions kill eachother etc.

[Lion.Kanzen]

But is more complex than a match gameplay. That because the micromanagement. And I suggest play a Paradox game. Is very complex and difficult. I try to play that Seven Kingdoms but , can I play that game run in Win XP or 7?

[Lion.Kanzen]

Civilization is a good example of a BTS and visually the GUI is very beautiful, when Age of empires was released, all people thinks was mix between Civilization and Warcraft , when RON released all people thinks has a mix between Civilization and AoE. XD

I don't play this Civ V. But looks interesting.

They best games was made it with love,no for money. Hahaha XD.

Edited July 5, 2013 by Lion.Kanzen