[jME Game] Gameplay and design

There is a third way to build buildings without builders and even without commander.

First thing, the commander has the big money account, but every "soldier player" has his own money.

Players get money over time (for kills, building, capturing, …). With this money, the player can buy his own vehicles at the factory, or pay his equipment template(every player has 5 saved templates). After every death, he must pay his template again.

Further he can decide, whether he waits 15 seconds or make a quick comeback (extra money), or if he spawn at the factory, spawn at an outpost(little money), spawn near the squad leader(extra money).

For the case, a player has no money, he can take an official template(commander can create 3 official templates). The commander shell out for the player.

Second thing, we don't need builders! The players can do this job!

Technicians can repair vehicles, ok, but that's only one option. If technicians can build builings,

the class is much more appealing(otherwise nobody plays a technican). You make the factory or any outpost a real fortress.

You can pimp any vehicle for short time. You lay traps for your enemies. Or you help your team not to be killed by traps, hijacking enemy's vehicles, …

The commander shall command, not playing piano on his keyboard!^^

So you'd say we should add some role playing aspects? I like this idea, because it adds some personality to the game play. Imagine an online match, where the opponents don't know, which class the other has chosen. But then balancing will be an issue

You would laugh, but that's not the case.

Because nobody is bound to weapons, or classes, or perks, everyone can use everything.

When someone thinks, the weapon is strong, he takes it, but he wouldn's complain, because he has the choice to take it.

And perfect balancing is only possible after 5 months online gaming^^.

Tech Tree

A tech tree per faction

As we have two factions in the global scope (confederation/free) but in the local scope, the opponents are the same race and have similar technology. But both factions are supported by the global factions, so i would go for different technology. But only at a higher level. At the beginning, the tech tree should be pretty equal


Faction 1 tech tree:

  • handgun

        - automatic handgun

            -machine gun

                  - sniper gun

    Faction 2 tech tree:
  • handgun

        - automatic handgun

            - laser gun

                - telepathic suicide

    Each tech level is equal to a degree, and then, the levels are comparable (balanced) but completely different


    it depends. Right now i have an idea in my head: Since all factions are supplied with material by one of the global factions, the only resource necessary would be the resource they are interested in. And to get a weapon we would not build factories, but special "beaming" buildings, where resources are put in, and products come out.

    The reason for the tech tree would then be to learn how to handle the technology, not to learn how to produce things with that technology.

    The more i think about that, the more i like it. Yes, i'd go for that

I don't like how in some RTS games there are many resources. I'd like to keep the amount of resources to a minimum, i.e. gas and gold.

Maybe we could use water as fuel, and wood as currency  :smiley:

, but I agree with Zagibu … and Jedimace1 about the amount of resources.

I don't like the idea with the two factions. It's O.K to have two races, two cooperation, but two factions mean, there is a border. I see the players more as mercenaries.

A tech tree is not a bad idea, but I wouldn't involve the players. There is only one commander and anyone, who played  Battlefield 2 once, knows, commanders tend to be idiots. That's frustrating!

I think, you have to see the tech tree as "bonus tree".

The commander can produce vehicles. Let us say, one squad cares for their vehicle or they have done something good. Buy them a present! How? Easy!

Every vehicle has different upgrades. The commander clicks on the vehicle and choose an upgrade(what at his oppinion is most fitting). The upgrade cost money, but the vehicle is in good hands.

I like this idea, because players will value their vehicles. In Battlefield, a vehicle has a short life (vehicle drives against trees, is parked somewhere or the player does kamikaze).

If a Factory can upgrade Armor on a global basis, in my oppinion, that's OK, but if I have to wait hours, before I get my first sniper, I 'm really pissed. And if I get a sniper, I want a deadly one!

Of course I know other games, but do the other users know them as well?

Battlefield is popular, so I thought it would be fine to use Battlefield for comparisons.

Everything mentioned exists actually, but not in a single game. I don't play much, because after some days the game is boring for me. I'm interested more interested in the game design, than the game itself.

I don't have a clear idea of how the game should be, I only remember which things pissed me on and which things I actually liked. Maybe because I explained them more or less in detail, you think I have a concept, but that's not the case. I have experienced them.

What I remember at the moment:

Call of Duty 4 - Perks

Renegade - Droping vehicles, Destroying basement

Ufo - commanding troops

Wolfenstein, QuakeWars - Building Buildings

some mods with RTS (I think one was called Natural Selection) and lots of games, I don't know the name.

To tell the truth, at the moment nobody has mentioned something "Surprisingly Great NEW".

But that's not the point. I think, it's better to pimp existing game ideas and bring them together.

And to make things clear:

I have no clear idea of how the game should be and I don't want to have it!

Before some of you believe I do this or even think I want to take over the project, I will just shut up.

Now, something more funny^^:


I don't really think that we NEED something "Surprisingly Great NEW" (something "refreshing" would be nice), for now we need a prototype of the beginning of a RTS-game (as in very small).

It is totally not a problem to think about possible things you could add as long as you know that these are only ideas.

All of them/some/one/none could be implemented, just don't be dissapointed if that happens.

1- BattleField is fun! That's one of the only 2 games I play(BattleField and Savage 2).

Both of them are a mixed games. Savage 2 is a FPS, TPS, and RTS game(all in one!), and BattleField is an RTS/FPS game. They are both similar in that the RTS element is in the commander.

2- Battlefield is relevant, though. There is a commander which tells troops where to go, sends EMP strikes, etc., but no buildings. In Savage 2, you, as the commander, can build buildings, spawn NPCs, tell players where to go, and otherwise play an RTS game. They are both based around the fact that only 2 people are playing an RTS game, and everyone else is playing an FPS/TPS game.

Just thought I'd toss some ideas out there.  I certainly haven't played every RTS out there, quite the opposite.  I generally play more RPG games.  I've played a couple though, WCII, StarCraft, WC3, Age of Empires 3.  Maybe one or two more somewhere along the lines.

I am a very large fan of co-op campaign modes.  It's sad to see that there are so few of them in so many games.  Just having that would make them game enjoyable to me, since I like to play RTS's with my cousin.  I play defense, he does the zerg/troop management.  Works out well and is quite fun.

I honestly can't remember which game I played that did it, AoE3 I'm thinking, but they had a TON of resources… food, wood, stone, iron, gold, gas, platinum… or something… I don't remember anymore.  It was definitely annoying.  I do prefer less resources, but one game I played did have it right.  While they had a couple resources, you could also build trading posts, and at those trade one resource for another.  They trading posts even used supply/demand, the more you bought the more expensive it became.  I definitely recommend something like this though as it would be really nice to have.

Another way to help remove the 'fastest clicker wins' problem is rock solid AI that adapts.  It probably sounds silly to people who really love to manage battles and control every unit by hand, but not everyone enjoys that.  I'd much rather spend extra credits to train my troops to be smart.  Then focus on pumping out more of them and just send them in and watch the carnage.  :D      – AI should also be smart enough to perform exploring/gathering without needing you to hold their hand the whole time.  Oh look bad people… shooting me… RUN AWAY!  This of course, depends on what the game will be like.  If sending out hordes of peoons to scour the land of wood is a primary function… then it'd be awesome.  If resources are more automatically generated by town halls and such, then not so much.

I'm also a big fan of RTS/RPG mixing - except WC3… the heroes… Just level them up, and zerg = win.  I actually never got far in the game because I simply hated the hero system in it.  Sending in 3 heroes should not wipe out entire towns.  But I digress, having RPG elements could be very awesome if done right.

One final note… if there is a technician class, I so want to be able to setup a gun turret inside their flag room! >_> oh wait, wrong game.  :smiley: }:-@  (Oh the joys of people getting the flag and getting all the way back to their own base, be within a foot of the flag turn in, and being blown up by my rocket turret. <3 TFC)

zagibu said:

Ok, Vardamir, I think your post still needs some explanation. Are you saying, that we don't let the players choose from different factions, but that the tech-trees will be different because of who supports them (confederation/free)? If so, when and how is the decision about the support made during gameplay?

A few days ago, i have written a well elaborated article about the resources system. But somehow, i was so impressed about what i have created there, that i looked at the preview, and i was so proud and satisfied, that i closed the browser window. Ooops, i did not post it!  :? :x

My anger about that has vanished. No, it was replaced by the anger about the eclipse PDE build system, but that's another story...

One resource is enough. Don't know why ;), but i would call it "spice" for now...
With this spice, units, vehicles, weapons, armor and anything else our hero needs, can be bought at those beaming stations.
Remember the story: The factions are on the planet to get some resource. This is their only interest. They don't care about the inhabitants. On Hills, the Free have an extraction facility, the Confederation only plays the role of a saboteur.

Faction selection
We have two global factions: Confederation and Free
On the planet Hills, there is one race, split up in several rivaling tribes. The player starts with a selection screen, where he can choose, which of the global factions he likes to work for. Automatically he will then be assigned to the biggest tribe on the planet, that supports the chosen faction.

Technological level
It is comparable to the technological level, we earthlings used to have in the beginning of the 20th century. Good enough to fight real big wars (and we did, as you might remember), but not yet good enough, to escape the planet.

Tech tree
The two factions are at a very high technological level. Both are comparable to a degree. By choosing the faction, the tech tree is the technology of the faction, because they buy equipment from them, using the beaming facilities, spent by their supporters.
The time, that is needed to get a new technology, is the time needed, to train the people to use this technology, not the time to invent that.

The two factions have different goals:
Free: Protect the extraction facility by all means
Confederation: Destroy the extraction facility

Both of those factions don't want to get in direct conflict, so they try to let others fight on their behalf.

Tribe of the Free: Protect the region, so that no one can find god
Tribe of the Confederation: Explore the region, to find riches and answers to old questions

The extraction facilities are the big buildings of the global factions. They are out of scope for the local tribes.

Instead they are using some small extraction vehicles. Oh, yet another reference to Dune  :-o

I'm currently working on the story, and so, things are clearer to me, i'm sorry for that. The reason why the local tribes are technologically backward, is because they are forced to be so by the global factions (in the case of Hills, its the confederation that keeps them at that level)

On the other hand, they will be supplied with some modern technology, as the war evolves. So, at the beginning, they only have their local technology, then they will gain access to this "replicators from outer space" (spent by the global faction). With that, they can buy modern technology from the global faction.

The missions of the game might look like that:

  1. Defend you hometown
  2. Conquer region 1
  3. Conquer region 2

  4. (depending on the faction)

    10a) Destroy the extraction facility of the Free

    10b) Destroy the hometown of the tribe supported by the Confederation

    After that, the hero knows about the global factions and can leave his home planet. He will become the president of the planet and will be part of the interplanetary community.

    That's where Proxy Wars 2 will begin…:wink:

I'm not a weapon fanatic, but something I can tell you for sure.

20-century technology will be 21-century technology, because our nowadays weapons are "effective".

I know laser is cooler than bullets, but why try to create a laser weapon, that has only disadvantages (fog and smoke kills every laser weapon), when bullets have the same result.

The only thing that will change is speed and size.

If you want to see an example, look for tank weapons! They created so much explosive and technical bullets (any kind of system inside the bullet), but now the have returned to the beginning of David and Goliath. These darts work at the same principal but pierce any armor or better say anything! Why develop weaker weapons if you have a stronger and cheaper one?

Where you need technical knowhow is armor, because against the most weapons only "don't let you hit!" works!

So be ashore 20-century technology will be 21-century technology.

I don't think we should let us guide by how weapons are here (now/future), we are on Hills, not on earth. So, laser-weapons or other stuff that doesn't exist (teleport anyone?) shoul be used in my opinion.

That's a good idea. I'd also say, lets do some prototyping. Some playground programming. What about a simple map, with some trees, maybe some buildings and our hero running around (in 3rd person)?

I just wanted to pop in and say that this project certainly sounds interesting. In order to get this off the ground though I'd really recommend picking a couple of core mechanics and prototyping as opposed to trying to build this large fantastic design right off the bat. If a playable prototype isn't up and running relatively quickly it will cause twindling interest relatively quickly. Someone earlier mentioned the Agile/Scrum approach and that is definitely my recommendation as well.

Oh, and in regards to Tom Sloper's website (sloperama.com) I'd highly recommend everyone who is interested in design to give it a read. He has been making games for a very long time and there is a lot of good information on his site.

Maybe it's a good idea to ask this specifically in the googlepages to get someone to work.

Is it perhaps possible to use parts of jME-demos for terrain or models?

I think it is ok. Just put everything you like to the exp directory. Take any demo you like and add some things to it. When we have some sample code, we can disucss that, and it helps others to improve their own work. Also, i'd like to see some sample models. Now that we have an overview over the story (where all the things happen, why they are happening and so on), we can start creating some inspiring model, that might influence the story and give some good ideas for the design process.

We are still in some brainstorming phase, so every input given is good!

Vardamir, would you prefer to create a thread here for discussing the Prototype 1 build or on the google project? Opening up a discussion to set a clear definition with associated tasks and resources will make it easier for team members to be able to check things off, so to speak. Establishing a clear game plan for each milestone in a single spot will makes things a lot clearer than a Sm