what type of game are we creating...

For what's not in 'Top Priority Game Design'. Post your ideas, visions, suggestions for the game, rules, modifications, etc.

Moderator: Oberlus

Post Reply
Message
Author
PowerCrazy
Creative Contributor
Posts: 383
Joined: Fri Jun 27, 2003 2:35 am
Location: Texas

what type of game are we creating...

#1 Post by PowerCrazy »

What I mean is, obviously this will be a 4X game. But what aspects of 4X are we wanting to focus on. We can't focus on all aspects, but we want to have the most important/fun to be included and ignore the numerous miscelaneous "It would be cool if we did X" Too many chefs ruin the pot. We want to "focus" on a few, (perhaps several, maybe even lots) aspects, but we CANNOT focus on ALL aspects.

If you have never played Heroes of Might and Magic then skip this paragraph. In Homm3 there are only 3 aspects to focus on.

1. Resource gathering. You must find resources, exploit them, fight for them etc.
2. City Building. You must build your city the most efficently and quickly as your resources allow.
3. Combat/Hero Building. You must learn the subtleties of combat and hero leveling.

That is all there is to it. You don't need to worry about the logistics of making sure certain resources get from here to there, or various intangible aspects of warring in the country or technology per se. Its a very simple game to understand, and it takes awhile to master, yet its replayability and fun factor stay high.

Now I'm not saying that we should have FO focus on those three things, BUT we need to avoid the MoO3 phenomenon of trying to include everything plus the kitchen sink. So I say we use this thread to brainstorm and unofficially vote on how many things we need to focus on and more importantly what those things should be.

My Vote (in no particular order)

1. Planet Building
2. Fleet Developing
3. Technology
i. Spying
ii. The "X's"
4. Diplomacy

These are overly broad. But there would be subcategories under each one and the more removed each category was, would be reflective of the importance to the player.

The reason I say this is because while some things would be cool i.e. Resource Managment, I think it would add more of a level of frustration rather than fun. Anyway, I'm sure you can think of more examples. Discuss.
Aquitaine is my Hero.... ;)

Xardas
Space Kraken
Posts: 114
Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2003 8:49 pm
Location: Germany, Saxony

#2 Post by Xardas »

I totally agree with you.
But it is difficult to focus on a few aspects, because everybody have another opinion what is worthy to include.

My suggestion for diplomacy is to make it complex.
I would like to have an galaxy council, many different treatys and agreement and the chance to work togehter with the ki against a specific enemy. That makes the game replayable
Therefore i would keep the spy part relatviely simple.

luckless666
Pupating Mass
Posts: 90
Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2003 3:16 am
Location: West Sussex, United Kingdom

#3 Post by luckless666 »

I would say that you that concentrating on Diplomacy, Fleet Development and Spying, as this will give the user a rich and varied game experience, allowing different and varied ways to deal with contact with other races (have a seemingly nice diplomatic feel, while you sabotage there production efforts and build a fleet to crush them). It also caters for (almost) everybody, as ome people prefer a diplomatic win, others prefer spying and so on.

However, has anyone played galatic civilisations? this can provide good insight and had a lot of focuses (except for combat and fleet development).

Personally, this is my preferences (In no particular order):
1. Resource Management (Logistics)
2. Fleet Development
3. Diplomacy
4. Spying
5. Combat (this is my last choice, but lets face it, if you spend all that time building up your fleet and then combat occurs automatically it be pretty lame, don't you think)

I'd just like to say though that with turn based games (like 4X's) you can pretty much put in as much detail as you like (within reason) before it gets to much, because of it nature. Well, whats other peoples opinions?
Chris Walker
| c.walker (at) mgt.hull.ac.uk |

WorldForge.org

User avatar
Krikkitone
Creative Contributor
Posts: 1540
Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2003 6:52 pm

#4 Post by Krikkitone »

I'd Say again in no particular order

1. Empire Economic Building (sort of planet building+Logistics ie rather than this is how I build a planet, figuring out what planet types I need and then getting them by giving up some other 'planet types')

2. Internal Political Strategy (something with more choice than a race pick at the beginning of the game, but not So much choice that its switch governments as you get the tech)


3. Diplomacy (always good for provide a game balance mechanism, and in which I would include spying to some degree)


4. Fleet Strategy (where to put fleets, how to equip them)


Things I would have as lower priority

1. Technology (Make sure there is more choice than MOO3's how much tech do you want... there should be actual tech choices like some of the other MOO's and Civ's, but I don't see the need to go far beyond that besides getting them balanced)


2. Combat (I would almost be ok with automated combat, but primarily because it is often a chance for Massive human v. AI advantage... otherwise I'd stick with simplifying it so that you can have massive fleet clashes...ie the reason you don't automate combat is to allow for good eye candy and the feeling of some control over your massive fleets)



Also in terms of detail you can put into a 4X TB game, I'd say anything than can be safely automated/macromanged, but still provide a good strategy+immersion option can be put in... that is actually very hard to do.

So it has to be Able to be automated reasonably, but there also has to be good reason Not to automate it totally (so that it is 'out of the game' like managing resource shipments in HOMM)

luckless666
Pupating Mass
Posts: 90
Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2003 3:16 am
Location: West Sussex, United Kingdom

#5 Post by luckless666 »

Oh, I'd like to add to this, as Krikkitone has jogged my memory by bringing up internal politics. Are we going to have governors and ship commanders like in MoO2? If so, first off we should make the ship commanders in charge of fleets, not just ships. (I read this on another post somewhere in this forum) they should have a loyality rating to you (emperor, president, etc. etc.). If it drops below a certain level (and you dont improve it, sack them, eliminate them...) then the planet or fleet goes independant and immediately hostile to you (maybe join an empire your at war with, if they feel they are stronger.) If a fleet goes hostile, any other fleets with no admiral joins them. If a governor goes hostile, any fleets (as long as there is no admiral present) in the system join the hostiles. This has a negative effect per hostile governor/admiral on the loyality of the remaining loyal ones until they have been eliminated. Might start a new thread on this if i cant find the other one...
Chris Walker
| c.walker (at) mgt.hull.ac.uk |

WorldForge.org

krum
Creative Contributor
Posts: 244
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 12:58 pm
Location: Bulgaria

#6 Post by krum »

Here's my priorities, again in no specific order:

1. Fleet Strategy and Logistics
- I'd like to see technology focusing more on military equipment. It always seems to be the most interesting part of the tech tree, at least for me.
2. Diplomacy and Internal Politics
- If we can make for interesting internal politics, it would really be great. MoO3's original ethos idea was one of the biggest losses. Even a third of it would be great. I also started a thread about leaders some time ago... But it's too early for that now.
3. Economy Development and Colonisation
4. Combat

PowerCrazy
Creative Contributor
Posts: 383
Joined: Fri Jun 27, 2003 2:35 am
Location: Texas

#7 Post by PowerCrazy »

We are starting to reach a concensus. People want Tech to manage. But they don't want to ahve to "micro" it. Just set some overall parameters, i.e. 20% Weapons 25% Fleet 30% Colony 15% Spying 10% Economic... Or whatever.

Diplomacy most people like the idea of an immersive Diplo Model.

Fleet Building/Combat. I think these should be VERY important. Maybe not THE focus of the game but a Major focus of the game.

And then of course Infrastructure. Not in so far as we have to tell every planet to build X everyturn. But make it where you must think logically about what you are going to build, or the build polocies etc, in order to maximize production.

Of course everyone is going to vary differently in how much each should be focused, BUT if we can get an idea for what the people involved in the project want we can make a game that at the VERY least WE can all enjoy.

Wonder what Aquitaine and Tyreth thinks....
Aquitaine is my Hero.... ;)

Xardas
Space Kraken
Posts: 114
Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2003 8:49 pm
Location: Germany, Saxony

#8 Post by Xardas »

For building orders and so on i would appreciate an easy and system to managed the ressources of buildung.

buildings should be build automatically on each planet, but you can set prioritys on militäry, civil, agrciulture, industrial buildings and so on.

Concerning ships.
Why do not integrate a system wide build row, where you can define what is to build.

Each Planet in the system give its ressource and manpower to the project, but no one build a fleet alone.

It is frustratin to go through the building row of each planet having dozens of system with 100 or more planets .

noelte
Juggernaut
Posts: 872
Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2003 12:42 pm
Location: Germany, Berlin

#9 Post by noelte »

Xardas wrote:buildings should be build automatically on each planet, but you can set prioritys on militäry, civil, agrciulture, industrial buildings and so on.
At the early game i would like to decide which building should be build on which planet. As buildings require maintance (to pay for) i think on some planets there could be a cost/value drawback. At mid/late game i would like having a build list (maybe for each focus).

There should also be an automate builds button.

Ronald.

luckless666
Pupating Mass
Posts: 90
Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2003 3:16 am
Location: West Sussex, United Kingdom

#10 Post by luckless666 »

Xardas wrote:Concerning ships.
Why do not integrate a system wide build row, where you can define what is to build.

Each Planet in the system give its ressource and manpower to the project, but no one build a fleet alone.
This has brought up an idea i had on shipyards. If anyone is interested i'll gather my thoughts and think about it, and post the idea in here, or a new thread if it seems important enough!
Chris Walker
| c.walker (at) mgt.hull.ac.uk |

WorldForge.org

iamrobk
Space Dragon
Posts: 289
Joined: Sun Sep 07, 2003 12:27 pm

#11 Post by iamrobk »

I think that the more important aspects should be diplomacy, fleet building/managing/attacking (etc.), and just being able to expand and build new structures and such.

ikael
Space Krill
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2004 1:29 am
Location: Spain

#12 Post by ikael »

My priorities in the game (with no preference):
Planet buidling. I want to build galactic civilizations that I could be proud of.
Diplomacy. Backstabbing is the very essence of politics
Combat. How could be an strategy game without it?
Adventure. Antarans, legendary planets, heroes... these are the kind of things that differenciates MOO from its competitors.

User avatar
skdiw
Creative Contributor
Posts: 643
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2003 2:17 am

#13 Post by skdiw »

I posted a similar thread on "winning FO," and the impression I got was people seemed to want military and economic focused game. Diplomacy, spying, research, and any other are secondary objectives.
:mrgreen:

Xardas
Space Kraken
Posts: 114
Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2003 8:49 pm
Location: Germany, Saxony

#14 Post by Xardas »

Depends on what you define under secondary objectives.
In fact as a strategy game freeorion shouldnot put stress on military action, but military strategy.
Therefore I would not missed Diplomacy, it is so essential.
What I want to say is that with economic and military focus nearlay all other areas are included.

Military without research and produce the best weapons first, is no longer strategic.
For tactical military strategies you need also diplomatic and spying.

iamrobk
Space Dragon
Posts: 289
Joined: Sun Sep 07, 2003 12:27 pm

#15 Post by iamrobk »

IMO diplomacy should be a MAJOR part of the game.

Post Reply