This was the document sent by Jonathan about the GDD with questions about it.
Based off this Jonathan I would like you to take what I say here an put it into the GDD. Make an agenda for that after you read this and I will get it too you.
Then go ahead and make any other agenda you see fit based on our conversation.
Design how officers work
Design a template for combat mission support officer
Design a template for Foreign affairs officer
Design a template for logistic officer
Design a template for engineering officer
Ive already went and created the agendas. Nobody said anything yet and i wanted to get them made by midday. Heres what i had.
Create Skill & Abilities for Officer
• Review this information that we have for abilities and traits http://www.thoucurator.com/wiki/viewwiki?wikiid=105
• Create a skillset of abilities and skills for these officers to utilize. Keeping in mind the officers background, role, and personality.
• We have room for each officer to have 9 skills to take into battle. Lets design 12 so we have a selection to choose and test from
• Design with intent. Include the concepts we have and apply them practically into a toolkit for an officer to use
• Make sure to define how these skills are executed. Area of affect? Target?
• Keep in mind that these skills will need to be balanced not only against other skillsets enemies would use but also within the skillset the skill belongs too. While not entirely true, most skills should balance within the set with intent and design
MID-TERM
Est time 6 hours.
\
Create Suburb Agenda Abilities
• Design a skillset for some abilities gained through acquiring a suburb
LONG-TERM
Est time TBA
Commander Skill / Reinforcement Abilities 2 Max per player each game (Flash, Ghost)
• Review the GDD for what it contains on reinforcements
• Review this information that we have for abilities and traits http://www.thoucurator.com/wiki/viewwiki?wikiid=105
• Design 6-8 abilities using the information we have as reference.
• Design with intent. Include the concepts we have and apply them practically into a toolkit for an officer to use
• Make sure to define how these skills are executed. Area of affect? Target? Self application?
• Keep in mind that these skills will need to be balanced so that the majority of players can choose skills that fit their play styles instead of defaulting to one ability because its so much better than all the others.
MID-TERM
Est time 6 hrs
update the GDD with all the current data
List Beginning, Middle, End in GDD
• Review this information http://www.thoucurator.com/forum/listreply?threadid=328 for the contents of the discussion we had with this topic
• Take the information here and update the GDD with the contents
Above the list of things NOT going into the MVP, list everything that is going to be in it. As well as the vertical slice and beta.
Here is a simple list for MVP, Slice, and Beta
1. MVP
1. Camera Works
2. Selection of Units
3. Units Move Natural
4. Spawn Building from Unit
5. Spawn Unit from Building
6. Unit Attacks Unit
7. Unit Attacks Building
2. Slice
1. Graphical User Interface In-Game
1. Button Calls Actions
2. Unit(s) Show In List
3. Menu Pops Modal
3. Beta
1. Artificial Intelligence
1. Unit Attack Enemy
2. Unit Seek/Moves to Enemy
SHORT-TERM
Est time 1 hr
Applying scripts to a scene in unity
• Apply all the work we have currently into a scene. Work with james to see where the project currently stands
SHORT-TERM
Est 3 hrs
To answer tessa my focus up to this point has been viewing the concept of officers as heros. That was the original pitch I made quite a few months ago when we all first started talking about this topic. So the fact that no one else viewed them as heros upsets me because it meant i was unclear from the beginning of my ideas. Im sorry i will try to speak with more clarity in the future.
I feel we still should have a template created for the officers. So we have something that when making new unit designs we can follow a certain design.
I feel like what would be a good start would be to have four agendas created or however many for the officer types. Then possibly 4 or 3 officers designed based off those results?
So in total 6 or 8 agendas made for it?
Im not really sure about the suburbs though i thought those werent going to even be in for initial release?
**for future reference, red lettering on the blue background is painful**
***COMBAT MISSION SUPPORT
***FOREIGN AFFAIRS OFFICER
***LOGISTIC OFFICER
***ENGINEERING OFFICER
This is redundant. We should merge Engineering and Logistics
If we want to have four officers and are set on that then we should combine logistics and engineering and create a 4th that is strictly home defense. Logistics/Engineering can handle all the mundane support tasks while the defense only defends the base if it comes under attack and at this point would override logistics/engineering.
Adventure Tree…???
**Isn’t there already an agenda with ranks finished?
First 10 min—this is when I’d be looking to make friends with suburbs but that's just my personal preference...
How skills affect battle: This has already begun with traits—last updated in February. The following links are what I found with a search:
http://www.thoucurator.com/agenda/viewagenda?agendaid=1622
http://www.thoucurator.com/wiki/viewwiki?wikiid=105
http://www.thoucurator.com/agenda/viewagenda?agendaid=1637
http://www.thoucurator.com/forum/listreply?threadid=314
http://www.thoucurator.com/asset/viewasset?assetid=1386
Design how officers work
Design a template for combat mission support officer
Design a template for Foreign affairs officer
Design a template for logistic officer
Design a template for engineering officer
How will these contacts differ from factions? How are they similar? Contact give you side mission to complete for whatever reason that give bonus depending on the contact resources
How will we ensure that a player whos been playing for less time can still go against a player whose gathered all the upgrades? We are simply going to have to put a player evener option in the game menu system. So taht they know they are being limited etc if they want to play with others.
How will gameplay play out? We need a proper design plan for how the games will play out. Early game, mid game, and late game. Not sure what you want here as its an rts design with an overview commander and officers controlling 70% of it. Given my history in competitive gaming including some mobas there is a very ironed out very set in stone design on how every early game and mid game and late game will play out. This is due to years of being realeased but other mobas have failed because they couldnt figure this very thing out. We absolutly NEED a document made with how we Plan these things to go. plan because this may change and we should be open to that but we should still have a plan. This will also help us design heros and what functions or roles we want in each term. Some heros are great early game not so great late game? Why? Because of that games early and late game design. This is very important if we use officers in our game. Not matter how they are designed.
Early game Set your officer strategies up (budget per each, their objective) Yes whatever the player doesnt get to bring into the game but has to build within that match now should be the time everyone should be doing so.
First ten minutes of the match Build Units & Structures Maybe also scouting for the enemies location. Small fights are breaking out now. Nothing major but combat officers vs other combat officers
Mid game Order an offensive strike & Take what you came for (Suburb, Resource, Lifes etc) Now that players have had a chance to get ahead of their enemys and build themselves up you see bigger plays happening. Possbibly a snowball effect happening to some while others slowly fall behind
Ten minutes to 20 Attack or Defend
Late game Try to stay alive Structures are falling terratory has been gained or lost. The longer this goes on the less of a chance for comback. Until a winner is declared
20-45 minutes Win or Lose
Win conditions See above
We should take a hard look and design an intuitive control scheme that will not only feel natural to the player but easy to pick up and use Control system like the ingame GUI we already have? Yay :D I found this out after
We will need to have an agenda to design each menu page with proper UI and UX design This is pretty much done they need tweaking and the script put on them for the button functionality I saw the chart and seen that you took a hard look and applied UI and UX proper design. After i made this document :D
How will these skills affect battle? chaos and mayhem If we move foward we should have design docs be made for how certain skills will affect battle
How many skills can you choose from Unknown at this time whatever our imagination bring forth. Moving foward we should keep in mind we have to balance those abilities so we have a broad choice to suit many playstyles but one isnt chose over the other simply because of necessity cough Flash cough
How will we balance the skills so one isnt chosen over the other based on raw over powered ability but their playstyle Game testing is i think all we can do on this one
We should create chart for unit values and how they will scale with pedigree These number will be % based once a completed list in done. These number will also come from game testing
We should create a chart for the resources and how structures and units respond to them. (cost, moral, how much population they take, etc) ? not sure what you want here exactly that a chard for cost moral population what they do and how its for. we should have a doc made for that too All of this is so i can properly plan what agendas to make going foward
We should create a list of units we plan on launching with and designing the stats for them Unit Assets List
We should create a list of structures we plan on launching with and designing the stats for them Structure Assets List
Now id like to go over the pros and cons to both what james said and what i said. Spoiler alert this is why i think we should scrap the officers idea.
If we are going to include this feature. This feature to bring RTS and make them more accessible is not only quite the undertaking but a project of huge ambition. I love it thats how i like to play. But we are a small team with limited resources. Doesnt mean we cant do it but it does limit how we can pull this off.
Heres the very real fact. Unless we rip warcraft 3 off which negates the very reason to have officers in the first place the inclusion of this mechanic fundamentally changes the game. They werent trying to make a genre when they made Dota. I was there i watched it happen in front of me in some way i helped it happen. (Not that much but i downloaded them so :D ) They just wanted to take what they thought was fun about this cool RTS and change some things. And in that very moment they "evolved" Rts's and created something new.
if your interested look into starfire its an upcoming moba that trys to include RTS elements into it. I think what we are doing is similer but we are changing the elements. IF we are going to have any chance of doing this that the identity of the game SHOULD and would HAVE to be "command four officers and an army to win in this competitive fun multiplayer experience" Or something like that. And the MVP Would HAVE to include the officers and some form of design for how the game would play out. Only then would anyone want to look and give interest in the game. If you take what we are planning now as MVP and the current mantra to investors or consumers and you sell them the concept that MVP will have and then we iron out this officers mechanic and implement it. The changes we will have to make will fundamentally change the game and we would have lied. Because following the design suggestion i put forth which i believe are necessary changes we will have to make and ill be more than happy to explain anything confusing further but otherwise no.
No we should not include the officer design. Because that is a mechanic we were going to add to support the game not a mechanic we were going to add to BE the game. We will have to design much more elements of the game around this officer mechanic and that will not create a game thats an RTS.
Now if anyone wants this thats okay! I want it for sure im so interested in exploring this mechanic and idea i have spent much time and effort working out certain details. And I see that I am on a much different page than everyone else. That might be because ive been away for a bit or maybe its my backround in mobas. Im aware of many RTS games and have played them. But i have thoughtfully Studied certain mobas and have played on the competitive level in my state. Ive also studied other games who have taken elements from mobas and mashed them with others. And played competitively in my state. So i love the idea of taking elements from the RTS and mashing them right back into mobas.
Which would i believe be the correct way to do this. But I think right now....we are making an RTS. Not a moba or a moba/rts hybrid and the simple inclusion of this mechanic will either take away from the games identity or BECOME the games identity. And i think we should decide if we are okay or even want either of those outcomes. My primary fear is that this mechanic is by definition "scope creep" And even the mightiest of studios have fell from it.
Holy mother of text Id like to thank everyone for their time and attention if you got through all that. Please if anything is confusing allow me to clear things up before passing judgement im interested in what you all have to say
Design how officers work
Design a template for combat mission support officer
Design a template for Foreign affairs officer
Design a template for logistic officer
Design a template for engineering officer
How will these contacts differ from factions? How are they similar? Contact give you side mission to complete for whatever reason that give bonus depending on the contact resources
How will we ensure that a player whos been playing for less time can still go against a player whose gathered all the upgrades? We are simply going to have to put a player evener option in the game menu system. So taht they know they are being limited etc if they want to play with others.
How will gameplay play out? We need a proper design plan for how the games will play out. Early game, mid game, and late game. Not sure what you want here as its an rts design with an overview commander and officers controlling 70% of it. Given my history in competitive gaming including some mobas there is a very ironed out very set in stone design on how every early game and mid game and late game will play out. This is due to years of being realeased but other mobas have failed because they couldnt figure this very thing out. We absolutly NEED a document made with how we Plan these things to go. plan because this may change and we should be open to that but we should still have a plan. This will also help us design heros and what functions or roles we want in each term. Some heros are great early game not so great late game? Why? Because of that games early and late game design. This is very important if we use officers in our game. Not matter how they are designed.
Early game Set your officer strategies up (budget per each, their objective) Yes whatever the player doesnt get to bring into the game but has to build within that match now should be the time everyone should be doing so.
First ten minutes of the match Build Units & Structures Maybe also scouting for the enemies location. Small fights are breaking out now. Nothing major but combat officers vs other combat officers
Mid game Order an offensive strike & Take what you came for (Suburb, Resource, Lifes etc) Now that players have had a chance to get ahead of their enemys and build themselves up you see bigger plays happening. Possbibly a snowball effect happening to some while others slowly fall behind
Ten minutes to 20 Attack or Defend
Late game Try to stay alive Structures are falling terratory has been gained or lost. The longer this goes on the less of a chance for comback. Until a winner is declared
20-45 minutes Win or Lose
Win conditions See above
We should take a hard look and design an intuitive control scheme that will not only feel natural to the player but easy to pick up and use Control system like the ingame GUI we already have? Yay :D I found this out after
We will need to have an agenda to design each menu page with proper UI and UX design This is pretty much done they need tweaking and the script put on them for the button functionality I saw the chart and seen that you took a hard look and applied UI and UX proper design. After i made this document :D
How will these skills affect battle? chaos and mayhem If we move foward we should have design docs be made for how certain skills will affect battle
How many skills can you choose from Unknown at this time whatever our imagination bring forth. Moving foward we should keep in mind we have to balance those abilities so we have a broad choice to suit many playstyles but one isnt chose over the other simply because of necessity cough Flash cough
How will we balance the skills so one isnt chosen over the other based on raw over powered ability but their playstyle Game testing is i think all we can do on this one
We should create chart for unit values and how they will scale with pedigree These number will be % based once a completed list in done. These number will also come from game testing
We should create a chart for the resources and how structures and units respond to them. (cost, moral, how much population they take, etc) ? not sure what you want here exactly that a chard for cost moral population what they do and how its for. we should have a doc made for that too All of this is so i can properly plan what agendas to make going foward
We should create a list of units we plan on launching with and designing the stats for them Unit Assets List
We should create a list of structures we plan on launching with and designing the stats for them Structure Assets List
Now id like to go over the pros and cons to both what james said and what i said. Spoiler alert this is why i think we should scrap the officers idea.
If we are going to include this feature. This feature to bring RTS and make them more accessible is not only quite the undertaking but a project of huge ambition. I love it thats how i like to play. But we are a small team with limited resources. Doesnt mean we cant do it but it does limit how we can pull this off.
Heres the very real fact. Unless we rip warcraft 3 off which negates the very reason to have officers in the first place the inclusion of this mechanic fundamentally changes the game. They werent trying to make a genre when they made Dota. I was there i watched it happen in front of me in some way i helped it happen. (Not that much but i downloaded them so :D ) They just wanted to take what they thought was fun about this cool RTS and change some things. And in that very moment they "evolved" Rts's and created something new.
if your interested look into starfire its an upcoming moba that trys to include RTS elements into it. I think what we are doing is similer but we are changing the elements. IF we are going to have any chance of doing this that the identity of the game SHOULD and would HAVE to be "command four officers and an army to win in this competitive fun multiplayer experience" Or something like that. And the MVP Would HAVE to include the officers and some form of design for how the game would play out. Only then would anyone want to look and give interest in the game. If you take what we are planning now as MVP and the current mantra to investors or consumers and you sell them the concept that MVP will have and then we iron out this officers mechanic and implement it. The changes we will have to make will fundamentally change the game and we would have lied. Because following the design suggestion i put forth which i believe are necessary changes we will have to make and ill be more than happy to explain anything confusing further but otherwise no.
No we should not include the officer design. Because that is a mechanic we were going to add to support the game not a mechanic we were going to add to BE the game. We will have to design much more elements of the game around this officer mechanic and that will not create a game thats an RTS.
Now if anyone wants this thats okay! I want it for sure im so interested in exploring this mechanic and idea i have spent much time and effort working out certain details. And I see that I am on a much different page than everyone else. That might be because ive been away for a bit or maybe its my backround in mobas. Im aware of many RTS games and have played them. But i have thoughtfully Studied certain mobas and have played on the competitive level in my state. Ive also studied other games who have taken elements from mobas and mashed them with others. And played competitively in my state. So i love the idea of taking elements from the RTS and mashing them right back into mobas.
Which would i believe be the correct way to do this. But I think right now....we are making an RTS. Not a moba or a moba/rts hybrid and the simple inclusion of this mechanic will either take away from the games identity or BECOME the games identity. And i think we should decide if we are okay or even want either of those outcomes. My primary fear is that this mechanic is by definition "scope creep" And even the mightiest of studios have fell from it.
Holy mother of text Id like to thank everyone for their time and attention if you got through all that. Please if anything is confusing allow me to clear things up before passing judgement im interested in what you all have to say
Im a little concerned and nervous looking at the officers. Im struggling to find out how we truly can integrate this concept into Our RTS and I dont think we can.
Now i dont mean that in that weird totalitarian point of view. But in the fact that the simple inclusion of them and their design will fundamentally change the game and how it works. I have a solution. I can explain in great detail how some of my ideas on how we could create this game but it would be a game based around this concept and not a part of the games core mantra.
"A real time strategy (RTS) game similar to Rise Of Nation that is semi realistic / arcadish but has a cartoonist low poly look and we are trying to gear this towards causal and hardcore player by using ranked vs normal area divided. This game will be a continuous content feature driven game that we will continue to support going forward."
I love this idea. It was born as a solution to a problem we were trying to fix. And its a great idea and one I would love to see come into fruition. But implementing this concept has consequences. And we have to decide if the consequences are worth it or if they are even what we want?
Right now after reading what @james has said and the many conversations we all have held, i dont think we are making a game about officers and this cool concept. Which we shouldnt be because armament was never trying to do that. Thus what that makes our solution and cool concept is by definition "scope creep" Or thats my fear.
So My question for everyone is.... Other than what are your thoughts and opinions, Does anyone believe in this concept as the right direction to take the project? Or should we refocus back to the original design and cut out this project before to much work is spent on it?
The reason i ask is because I really do like this idea and i have plans and ideas we could do to make it work, but it would drasticly change the project. Something im not really sure would be a good idea either. Just wanted to know what everyones thoughts were before i proceed