I am a monkey, who is oblivious to the function of the keyboard; I am beating it randomly, because why the heck not.
Hopefully my ravaging spawns something comprehensible.
I am creating this post since all of this seems blatantly obvious to me, but I can't expect others to read mind so I will share what I have come up to. Also, the rumor that PD may possibly be developing a space strategy game worries me, since there is tendency to make every space game into a clone of MoO2, I am fearing that is hypotetical space empire game is just going to be a boring clone of MoO2.
The strategy game genre has been rather bland lately. Most strategy games function mostly the same, when the thematic skin is stripped. For example the fundamental principles of RTSs are essentially the same. Someone could just make one RTS engine and all RTS games could run off it. All that one would need to do to make a new game, is to modify the models and skins and attach abilities and stats to them.
Turn based games that function like Civ. They are all the same, just with different skins and flavor features.
Space 4X games are also the same. They are all like clones of MoO 2, without a fault.
Paradox games also seem to be relatively the same. Sure, they have some flavor mechanics that set different games apart from each other, but all of them still share fundamental features(provinces, polities, battles).
--------------
Okay, my palms are hurting now, I'd better go and find something else to ravage.
Hopefully my ravaging spawns something comprehensible.
I am creating this post since all of this seems blatantly obvious to me, but I can't expect others to read mind so I will share what I have come up to. Also, the rumor that PD may possibly be developing a space strategy game worries me, since there is tendency to make every space game into a clone of MoO2, I am fearing that is hypotetical space empire game is just going to be a boring clone of MoO2.
The strategy game genre has been rather bland lately. Most strategy games function mostly the same, when the thematic skin is stripped. For example the fundamental principles of RTSs are essentially the same. Someone could just make one RTS engine and all RTS games could run off it. All that one would need to do to make a new game, is to modify the models and skins and attach abilities and stats to them.
Turn based games that function like Civ. They are all the same, just with different skins and flavor features.
Space 4X games are also the same. They are all like clones of MoO 2, without a fault.
Paradox games also seem to be relatively the same. Sure, they have some flavor mechanics that set different games apart from each other, but all of them still share fundamental features(provinces, polities, battles).
--------------
- Don't simply make a rehash of something that has been done to the death already. If I wanted a game that plays like civilization, I would play Civilization or its clones.
- Less is more. When doing 4X space strategy, focus on one of the X'es, build your mechanics around that X. Implement that X as well as possible. Also, "implementing well" does not mean adding lots of things concerning that X. A well implemented X is an X that is as simplistic as possible and still provides hours of gameplay alone. The rest of the game then is built around that simplistic engine with a proper skin and flavor mechanics that are based off of that core gameplay.
For example, if the core gameplay of the game is diplomacy, warfare gameplay should be not exist. Since waging war is a diplomatic action it should be in there, but not in the way that we have been conditioned to expect. In the scale of diplomacy, warfare can be reduced down to a statistic that can be adjusted with sliders. There should be no little units that you command, just a slider "Resources allocated to military" and a sub slider "Military Resources allocated towards Offensive at County X"
- Mind the scale
When thinking of features to add into the game, keep in mind the scale of the game. If the game is about managing empires that span hundreds of stars, one should not add planets into the game. Somehow the MoO2 like games think that planets are relevant to such a scale. They are not. Some scales:
Solar-system - Smallest province or county should be an area that is as big as one USA state. Uncolonized areas should have slightly larger provinces. All things would take place only within the solar system. A faction can control units individually. The leader can control a tech tree. This is the only scale where the Civ and MoO2 model fit.
2-5 Local-star-system - provinces on the planets should be much bigger. One should not be able to control all the units. Smaller ships would now be just statistics that accompany the bigger ship classes. You would be effectively commanding fleets. This would also outlaw any reason to be able to design ships aside from the main ships. This would be the stage where choosing to research individual techs should be a rarity. This stage should be a mixture of individual techs and general modifiers.
10-40 Local-systems - planets themselves would be the smallest territories. At this stage one unit would consist of numerous fleets with various functions. A unit could contain, bomber fleets, anti-spacecraft fleets, ground-assault fleets, mainteneance fleets, etc. At this point you would only be able to customize what fleets does your unit contain. Tech tree would have no individual technologies. Tech would only be about increasing modifiers. Like "Ground bombing - increases the effectiveness Ground bomber units", "Armor - increases the HP of offencive fleets by 3p, utility fleets by 2p and civil fleets by 1p."
Hundreds of stars - smallest territory is a star. Smallest Individual unit is division, which has only numbers that show its capabilities in various actions. To specialize a division, one would just have to increase one number - a single point of the offencive modifier could mean hundreds of fleets of one type, so assiging fleets would be way out of place here. Tech tree would be very similar to the previous one.
Galaxy - smallest territory is a province - an area that contains quite a lot of stars. The rest would be quite the same like the previous entry.
This scale system works for most settings if some stuff is modyfied.
But the hardest part is figuring out, how to make the player stay within the scale without hardcaps. A player on the scale of a solar system, should not be sporting hundreds of ships. The impossibility of such a thing should emerge from the gameplay.
- If one develops a single player game thou shalt develop AI at the same time as the mechanics. If a gameplay element gets added, AI should be immediately taught to utilise that feature.
- Get your priorities straight. Are you doing a good multiplayer game or a good singleplayer game? You can't do both well. If the goal is to make a multiplayer game, don't even think about single player. Don't even add such an option into the game. Then have the game focus on player interactions. This means that no hard caps like not being able to conquer allies stuff. Have the treaties be like in reality - mouth to mouth. Observe the game called Neptunes Pride which did just that.
If doing a singleplayer game, forget the multiplayer. Also, developing a closed simulation should be the way to create such a game. Create a gameworld that can function without having a player at all. If AI can use one action well enough, only then make that option available to the player.
Okay, my palms are hurting now, I'd better go and find something else to ravage.
