StarDestroyer.Net BBS

If you could help design a RTS game, what would you do. I know there are many out there, and some are good, while some are shitty. Would you ever want to make an amalgmation of the best of them if you could. Why?

It would be like Warcraft 3 with out the emphesis on hero's, larger food count , and takes place in a science fiction setting.


Basicly it's Starcraft 2.

Combat Mission: Krasiny Grom!

Battle across Germany from 1970-1991! in 3D real time turn based
strategy!

With Add-on Pack

ARCTIC THUNDER, where you add a whole new theatre Norway, as
brave Norwegians fight VDV ski-troops!

Red Alert 2 only with RA1 ungodly numbers of units. And some of the Generals features.

Do you mean actual strategy? Or wannabe-strategy? (ala C&C and clones)

And shep, why did you recommend a turn-based game for an ultimate real-time game? :p

'Cause Shep isn't exactly the sharpest pencil in the box, if you haven't noticed.

And I'd make something along the lines of Total Annihilation, but with a few of its annoyances cleared up. Stuff wouldn't disappear from the map when no unts are in visual range (it would just stop being updated), better AI, etc.

Still, there wouldn't be all that much that I'd change, since TA is already damn close to the ideal RTS, imho.

Space:
Homeworld-like, but with no unit production (really RTT). Longer weapon ranges, larger maps, more realistic weaponry.

Ground:

Everything to scale, including air units, no map exploring (that's what satellite mapping is for), UAVs, satellite snapshots,

Something like Total Annihilation, only with refinements to the interface and unit AI, as well as the ability to play with premade scenarios; i.e. both sides start out already having a fully-equipped base and army.

Also a more epic scope... I want to be able to command up to a thousand mobile units.

Star Wars Battlegrounds with more units per side, and a few more civilizations

It would be a Mechcommander RTS. You mine resources and use those resources would be used to build Mechs, veichles, turrets and buildings. Mechswarriors would gain in experience as they achieve new kills.

It would be something based very closely on Total Annihilation.

Revamp the GUI to use modern GUI elements and more importantly, to have the GUI run at higher resolutions. The actual game interface would be improved by a number of minor improvements which you can do if you improve th basic biulding blocks used to construct the GUI.

Fix pathfinding to work with large number of units and have it scale down based on computer's ability to handle the load, not the total number of units.

Improve unit AI, I hate stupid units.

Improved firecontrol. I want my units to intelligently pick targets.

Better teamplay GUI improvments. The whiteboard feature is a godsend. Lets add more stuff like that.

Uraniun235 wrote: Also a more epic scope... I want to be able to command up to a thousand mobile units.

Oops, forgot about that. Would be awesome with to-scale units. Lots and lots of infantry running around (grouped by default for easy management).

Good AI, automated medics (micromanagement sucks). Tactical nukes on some maps. Ability for units to automatically summon support. (arty, reinforcements). Scriptable unit AI.

Well, the "medics" in TA could be partially automated, in that if you set it to guard a particular unit it would heal that unit whenever it was damaged, and if you set it to patrol an area it would heal all friendly units that came within range.

Still, it would be nice to be able to assign a construction kbot to follow a group of units around and heal whoever needed healing.

Total Annihilation with refinements to interface and AI as the others have said, but also with complete 3D graphics and dynamic lighting. Also with the option to have the traditional camera view or a perspective view.

I would probably want something with some unique units and abilities like Starcraft, but mostly generic units and interfact like EE. I thought EE was really good, but Navies seem to always suck in strategy games. I don't know why.

HOpefully they will put good navies with (clipping (or no clip) ) in EE 2. It was really annoying to have bumpy boats.

Balance is pretty good too. Both in micro/macro management. A good single player is pretty good too. And for god sakes, make the AI not cheat.


I found out, taht in EE, the AI has a 1/3 rule that is absorbing game resource.

Drooling Iguana wrote:'Cause Shep isn't exactly the sharpest pencil in the box, if you haven't noticed.

Sir, fuck you if you have not been exposed to the hybrid real-time
turn based goodness of COMBAT MISSION

MKSheppard wrote:

Drooling Iguana wrote:'Cause Shep isn't exactly the sharpest pencil in the box, if you haven't noticed.

Sir, fuck you if you have not been exposed to the hybrid real-time
turn based goodness of COMBAT MISSION

Lol, turn based with real-time action between turns is still turn based

1) Units to-scale in a TA-style game

2) Maps to-scale in a TA-style game (Hard to do units to scale otherwise, specially naval units)

3) Carriers that...are carriers, and not floating repair pads.

4) Aircraft that need carriers/airstrips to base from, largely to make carriers necessary.

5) Naval unit pathfinding. Not 'better' naval unit pathfinding. because TA simply didn't have it. What kind of a half-assed fleet commander gets his ships all arrayed in a task force formation, then just says 'All ships, move into a single-file line and charge at maximum speed!'

6) Ability to fire artillery in high-arc mode to stop hitting bloody hills.

7) Ability to set artillery to fire in counterbattery mode automatically.

Ditto for MLRS trucks

9) Ditto for air-attack squadrons

10) Ability to tell an infantry unit to clear a selected area of cover. They've got energy cannons, flamethrowers, and plasma-artillery, sounds like a great unit to assign to get those damn trees out of the way of my tanks.

11) Air unit pathing that doesn't take the easy-out of allowing air units to occupy the same space.

12) There is no twelve

13) Thirteen shall be the number of thy counting

14) Sight-range that's to-scale with reality. None of this forty-feet-away-on-a-flat-plain crap.

15) No, you don't need to build a massively expensive facility for a SAM station to go 'radar contact moving this way....not ours...KILL IT'

16) Air-search radar does not detect infantry, or tanks

17) Plus, of course, a lot of the stuff other people have mentioned

Good lord, I just kept going there. Well, any thoughts?

White Haven wrote:1) Units to-scale in a TA-style game

2) Maps to-scale in a TA-style game (Hard to do units to scale otherwise, specially naval units)

3) Carriers that...are carriers, and not floating repair pads.

4) Aircraft that need carriers/airstrips to base from, largely to make carriers necessary.

5) Naval unit pathfinding. Not 'better' naval unit pathfinding. because TA simply didn't have it. What kind of a half-assed fleet commander gets his ships all arrayed in a task force formation, then just says 'All ships, move into a single-file line and charge at maximum speed!'

6) Ability to fire artillery in high-arc mode to stop hitting bloody hills.

7) Ability to set artillery to fire in counterbattery mode automatically.

Ditto for MLRS trucks

9) Ditto for air-attack squadrons

10) Ability to tell an infantry unit to clear a selected area of cover. They've got energy cannons, flamethrowers, and plasma-artillery, sounds like a great unit to assign to get those damn trees out of the way of my tanks.

11) Air unit pathing that doesn't take the easy-out of allowing air units to occupy the same space.

12) There is no twelve

13) Thirteen shall be the number of thy counting

14) Sight-range that's to-scale with reality. None of this forty-feet-away-on-a-flat-plain crap.

15) No, you don't need to build a massively expensive facility for a SAM station to go 'radar contact moving this way....not ours...KILL IT'

16) Air-search radar does not detect infantry, or tanks

17) Plus, of course, a lot of the stuff other people have mentioned

Good lord, I just kept going there. Well, any thoughts?

Basically outlined what I said in greater detail and more, minus scripting. I would like to add scripting of unit AI, being able to control depth and altitude of submarines (should be normally automatically managed though), Turn based strategy like Total War would be nice. Fuel limits to air units also, and AWACs, as well as UAVs and satellites. If actual strategy is added, then add ASATs as well.

However, I'm mostly partial to Homeworld style RTS, minus production and more reasonable weapons range and ship performance (no speed limits, just acceleration).

You ever have a look at Nexus? AKA Galaxy Andromeda, AKA Imperium Galactica 3? It doesn't have the realistic physics you're after, but it does have the gameplay style you're talking about. Check out www.nexusthegame.com if you want some more information, there's an old tech demo for IG3 floating about too, quite well playable, and another demo slated over the next month or two, of Nexus.

Hard science... You must research ground breaking tech etc.

SHips use reaistic physics in a 3d space environment, and are not ony to scale, but have reallistic weapons ranges, and must actually hunt for each other running silent and using passive and active sensors.

Actual point defense weapons. Basically, what real space combat would be.

Alyrium Denryle wrote:Hard science... You must research ground breaking tech etc.

SHips use reaistic physics in a 3d space environment, and are not ony to scale, but have reallistic weapons ranges, and must actually hunt for each other running silent and using passive and active sensors.

Actual point defense weapons. Basically, what real space combat would be.

I'm getting skeptical about space combatants actually running silent. It would probably be more likely for everyone to just go active from the start, since the first side to go active, since going active nullifies any advantage for the side going passive (aside from having to distinguish clutter). It will also be difficult to hide the gas trail (coasting along helps, but leaves a manuvering disadvantage, and one can easily predict the course of the target after the engines are shut off. Heat is also a problem in space, and must be released and radiated (though this can be done away from the enemy). Combatants will probably leave active radar on when patrolling to avoid surprises. Another thing is that you can have radar that is difficult to detect- see F-22. Basically ignore the idea of running quiet, and just have normal stealth and RAM, and minimize heat emissions by dumping heat in reaction mass, and attempt to coast most of the time.

Also, combat is unlikely to occur in deep space (difficult to defend, since one can simply go around), and is more likely to occur in system, where there is going to be a star illuminating the ship, making the whole idea of stealth moot when you can observe the enemy with a telescope. Have a computer scan space for enemies. The best you can do is paint the ship black (not good- may cook inside of ship) or give it a shiny finish and orient the ship to reflect light away (bad since shiny finish will be destroyed by micrometeorites, unless you have shields).

Super-Starfleet Command. Meets Homeworld. Meets Starshatter.

Alyrium Denryle wrote:Hard science... You must research ground breaking tech etc.

SHips use reaistic physics in a 3d space environment, and are not ony to scale, but have reallistic weapons ranges, and must actually hunt for each other running silent and using passive and active sensors.

Actual point defense weapons. Basically, what real space combat would be.

Hmmm missile boat warfare in space. I like it. It is like space combat in my story Battlefield Sol.