Vakasa — Today at 7:55 AM
Ok, base building in the RTS. What if it was almost like a small scale 4x game? You have a base you’re working out of for each Act? You go and do either a big event (the missions I laid out) or some smaller procedural mission (fight an enemy force in x system, escort a merchant flotilla, defend a station, etc).While you’re doing that, time is passing at your base, letting construction or research tasks complete, and allowing resources to accumulate?
Morgul — Today at 9:17 AM
So, if you haven't played Empire at War, then I recommend it. But the concept in my head was definitely 4x like: you manage your planets, build/move fleets around, and we only drop into the real time space combat when two opposing fleets enter the same star system. (or some in-game event happens).You idea, though, scopes it down. Even if there are 'allied' planets, you don't have control over those. You're an admiral, sure, but you probably only control one base and a fleet; realistically, it's not a full blown empire-sim. (I'd love a free play mode that was.) Instead, working out of a single 'primary' base (with potential outposts, depending on the progressions/plot)
Hmm. I'm finding the limited scope kinda appealing.
Let me think his through...Things you'd likely be able to do:
- build/upgrade/commission/decommission ships.
- limited in terms of hull size; rando admirals can't just pump out dreadnaughts
- also limited by resources/time
- maybe also have a mechanism where you can build/transfer ships in exchange for other resources? Or maybe horse-trade 4 cruisers for a battlecruiser, or something.
- upgrade base
- Add defense platforms
- Add facilities like a spacedock/research dept/long-range sensors
- some missions/progression might be blocked by requiring these upgrades?
- Needs to feel like a real progression
Morgul — Today at 9:24 AM
Things you likely would not be able to do:
- build more bases
- build top-tier ships
- build more than a reasonable number of ships
Vakasa — Today at 9:33 AM
That’s all exactly what I was thinking!Morgul — Today at 9:35 AM
Things I'm not sure on:
- mining/resource gathering
- mainstay of 4x/rts, but would the League/Terrans really make rando admirals worry about mining raw materials?
- What if, instead, you got materials through either that horse-trading idea I had (think inter-fleet bartering) where you take something you produce for free over time, and trade for building materials?
- Other idea: what if Terrans/League's resource gathering was basically building 'supply convoys' or 'trading hubs'; mechanically they generate X resource per minute, but lore wise you're getting shipments of supplies from deeper in League space. Confed could have traditional mining, or at least buildable 'mining' stations that generate resources per minute
- Maybe a blockade / attack supply ships mechanic? how would that work?
- Tech Tree
- I, personally, love tech trees.
- Feels like, lore-wise, League/Terrans should be more of a global progression/unlock; you can contribute, but they just unlock tech kinda on autopilot (maybe you can request them to focus research in some areas which will speed up that one)
- Confeds should work more like normal.
Vakasa — Today at 9:37 AM
My one additional thought on the horse trading (which is an idea I love) is that it could benefit from something like a reputation system between “Admirals” so one Admiral likes you taking a hard line on slavers, but another would prefer you to try to disable their ships and make them face justice (no idea how possible this would be, but just as an example). So you go on a mission to deal with a slaver station and you straight blow it up because fuck slavers. The first Admiral likes you more and would be more willing to give you a better deal, but the second admiral likes you less and would give you a worse deal. The problem is, I need a Battlecruiser for a mission and only admiral 2 has one to lend me and they don’t like me as much so I might have to make a bad deal to succeed at a mission.Vakasa — Today at 9:39 AM
I like the supply train/trade hub idea a lot! And that makes perfect sense in universe. A stable system is more likely to be used by indie traders. Plus, we could the. Have a reason to include ship models like the Hazard Hawk lineMorgul — Today at 9:40 AM
Ok, I fucking LOVE this idea. But also I just had the thought, "what if you could give them gifts? Or do mini-missions for them, like making their ex late for a diplomatic meeting, or something."Morgul — Today at 9:42 AM
Fair enough. I was thinking one way to do this would be to 'spawn' these supply ships, and have them fly to your base. You damn well had better secured those supply routes. (Second thought, what if you could pick the supply routes? By default, it's least number of planets/fastest, but if you're being a squirrly SOB, you might want to fly them slower through more secure/out of the way locations.)Vakasa — Today at 9:42 AM
Oh absolutely! That makes perfect sense to me. It could also open up an option for random trade goods showing up in your trade hub. I want to get in good with the New Corinth Admiral, and her wife loves Gaelian whisky, so suddenly a crate of it shows in my trade hub. I horse trade some resources and secure the crate and then send one of my LCSs to New Corinth with it as a gift. I’ll gain favor with that Admiral, but I’ll be down an LCS for the next three missions or soMorgul — Today at 9:44 AM
One comment on this: I'd like it to be possible to play and ignore this mechanic. So, sure, Mission 11 might be WAY easier with a Battlecruiser, but you can build 4 cruisers on your own and still win. Just takes more time/resources.
Morgul — Today at 9:44 AM
I love this. This is something I haven't really seen in an RTS before.Vakasa — Today at 9:44 AM
Oh yeah. I just think that if there’s that additional depth, we’ll hook some more people
It feels like something that would happen in a Crusader Kings kinda gameMorgul — Today at 9:46 AM
You're not wrong. They might even have something like this, I haven't ever played, just watched Spiffing Brit break the ever-loving shit out of that game with his weird exploits.Vakasa — Today at 9:46 AM
God those videos are goodMorgul — Today at 9:51 AM
So, other random thought. There's a war on. Your primary opponent as the League should be the Terrans. But also, while we want to tell a story, there should be the war as a constant drain on your resources/time. So imagine this: there's some planets on the map that we have as intentionally conquerable by either side. (Sure, every planet should be conquerable, these are just more blank slates with little to no defenses by default.) Those are the 'Front Line' systems. Well, as you play, the Terrans are constantly trying to take those. Taking them gets you boons/resources/other shit, so you have a solid reason to want to defend them... also, if you don't, well, then the Terrans are knocking on your door with an AI generated fleet that just rofl-stomps you, eventually.So, you burn through the first few missions in the quest line, meanwhile, Terrans have taken a couple of planets. Then you have to stop, switch focus south, retake a couple of planets, build a couple of defense platforms, then get back to it. Something like that.
I feel like those more organic battles are the filler between the story missions. Don't let the player conquer Earth or anything, but with-in the sphere of their influence they have some latitute in how they fight their chunk of the war. (Also, this could tie into the reputation system. Which I'm already thinking might tie into the tech-tree as well. Experimental shit might be reputation locked.)Vakasa — Today at 10:01 AM
That sounds both a good way to space out the event missions and differentiate this game from others
Having a “living galaxy” that reacts somewhat to your choicesMorgul — Today at 10:02 AM
Yup. And it's not like it'd be that hard to have it influence missions; if the Terrans are kicking your ass their fleets are bigger/better upgraded. If you're winning, then you just keep winning.
An important thing in game design a lot of games seem to ignore is death spirals. I'm a big believer in them. If you're losing, lose faster, so shit doesn't drag on, and the player can go back and regroup. If you're winning, win faster so that the player can get through this sections quicker. (Plus you feel like a greek god.)
It should be pretty clear to players if they're winning or losing, and in the latter, it should be easy to reset/regroup in a meaningful way, just by losing something. (After all, the whole point is they win in the end, but it's nice to feel you earned it. So it could be as smiple as a good auto-save, or some sort of 'give up X and we'll send a taskforce to come kick the Terran's ass for you', or something. We'll need to think about mechanics.)Morgul — Today at 10:09 AM
One more side though: If there's save data for a League Campaign, give the player the option to continue when they start as the Terrans; which will set the galaxy up to mirror their choices as the League. Not sure how it make it work, exactly, but thinking along the lines of you're fighting a ghost version of yourself, or are cursing 5 hour ago you for building so many goddamn defenses as the League, or something.