Reverie World Studios Forums

Reverie World Studios Forums (http://www.reverieworld.com/forums/index.php)
-   Public Suggestions and Proposals (http://www.reverieworld.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=6)
-   -   Concern List (http://www.reverieworld.com/forums/showthread.php?t=11)

Silent_Lamb 05-09-2007 08:15 PM

Concern List
 
First off I'd like to say, loving the new theme :D. It really goes well with the music from the main site.

Anyways I came up with a list of general concerns that I would have for the game, and this is before playing it. I also have one quick question.

From the rumor mill I hear that you have the game completed but there was some serious bug issues that needed to be fixed before you could move on. Is that true?

Anyways, off to the concerns.

1. From what I've read a player will have a castle/town and be able to stage attacks from there. My number one worry about this is that, what is the motivation for keeping your troops behind and not just draining all of your troops to attack. I know the obvious answer would be "You don't want to leave it un-defended" but if you send your troops out first then naturally if you win you'll be able to destroy the enemy before he can attack your un-guarded castle.

2. Stealth units. I haven't read anywhere that you plan to include these types of units but it's still a major concern. Stealth units seem to be more pesky than they can be fun. Of course that doesn't mean throw away stealth units, some games have managed to do a good job at balancing stealth units and tweaking certain things to make it work right. For example, Starcraft's ghost. Although invisible the only major concern it had was that it could lock down your technical units. And even then you could easily counter it with a science vessel.

3. Rushes in general. It might be considered the plague to some RTS gamers, and to other it might be considered a fair tactic. Whatever your stance is on it, I'm wondering what your approach is to thwarting, encouraging, or balancing rushes.

4. Cheaters. This is a pretty obvious concern. What I worry about though is that on Xbox Live people who use cheats or even use the games very own glitches never get enough attention to the point where action is taken. This is most likely due to the fact that so many people are sending messages. Does Reverie have a plan or an approach for this?

Thanks.

Doug Bonds 05-09-2007 09:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silent_Lamb (Post 74)
From the rumor mill I hear that you have the game completed but there was some serious bug issues that needed to be fixed before you could move on. Is that true?

COOL!!! We have rumors. That means there is a buzz.:D However, I can assure you that this rumor has no basis in fact. ;)

Quote:

I know the obvious answer would be "You don't want to leave it un-defended" but if you send your troops out first then naturally if you win you'll be able to destroy the enemy before he can attack your un-guarded castle.
But is the enemy you are attacking your only enemy? *uses famous tactic of answering a question with a question*

Silent_Lamb 05-09-2007 10:19 PM

Haha yes over at the pure pwnage forums there was a decent amount of discussion over this game.

Hmm. Yes? :D, let's just say for the plausibility of this question that it's a 1v1.

Konstantin Fomenko 05-09-2007 10:35 PM

Quote:

"You don't want to leave it un-defended"
Quote:

But is the enemy you are attacking your only enemy?
Looks like I can`t get away without giving away some further details about our MMORTS model:

As I mentioned before we are sacrificing world geometry for the sake of gameplay - which mostly shows in time it takes to travel in our gameworld from point A to point B. Couple of arguments in defense of our approach:
-Time is really relative in RTS: it takes longer for units to walk across town as it does to construct a town wall.
-These days instant teleporting around the gameworld becomes key feature - Oblivion for example.

Now to get back to gameplay and your question,

If,

-there is a way to easily switch game view between location - like your town, or enemy town in real-time, without even 1 second delay. Think about the way you use mini-map to jump from one location to another in typical RTS. It`s completely intuitive.
-there is a way to move units in real-time (with a 30-60 second delay) from your town to enemy town

Then,

The ‘victim’ whose castle you plan to besiege, can attack you right back. And to lead on to what Doug hinted on, don’t forget your allies, and your enemies allies.

Darvin 05-10-2007 12:23 AM

I think the first issue you point out with regards to the "all out attack" isn't so much a problem. Historically, castles could be left with very small garrisons while the main army was out controlling the battlefield. Their defences were strong enough that in the event of attack, the main army could return before they fell. In this way, holding a castle allowed you to control the surrounding area because you could launch any attack decisively.

I feel this should be the benefit of having strong defences; you can use your army with impunity in full scale assaults. Conversely, someone who invests in little defences will see his settlements razed or at least heavily damaged before he gets back. I think this is a rather fair setup if it's done right.


As far as rushes go, I think the real solution to them is simply to incorperate it into the game. Early battles should happen, but they should only decide the game if someone is seriously outmatched. I don't think it's fun for either player when there is a severe skill difference, and the "rush game" should be designed to end such a lopsided match quickly. If the skill levels are more in line with each other, I think rushes should still happen, but their focus should be less on winning than gaining a strategic advantage that carries into the midgame.

I personally believe that a game that ended on the rush and a game that had no rush are both disappointing. If it ended on the rush, it never went anywhere to begin with (mind you, if it saved two players some headache with regards to a lopsided matchup, it's the lesser of two evils). If it never had a rush at all, then a very interesting portion of the game that can lay the groundwork for the coming conflicts has been lost.


As for cheaters, they'll always exist. The idea that Reverie (or anyone) could come up with a foolproof way to deal with them is laughable; there will always be people coming up with a new way to break the rules and get away with it. I think the best they can do is approach the issue with good faith and do their best to close exploits promptly, and punish cheaters.

I do personally like the idea of a permeanent "cheater" blackmark attached to your CD-key. Any time you log on you'll have the "cheater" mark next to your name, regardless of your account. The key to this setup is then to offer an appeal process for "good behavior" (not cheating for a long time). I find traditional banning just encourages cheaters to go to even less savoury depths (stealing CD-keys, for example), but such a method as described above encourages reformation.

Silent_Lamb 05-10-2007 12:24 AM

Thank your for the quick reply, and yes that answered my question :).

A semi suggestion is that of quick wall movement. From someone who played Rome Total War I always found it annoying when someone attacked you that you had to go through each unit individually to place them on a different wall. Maybe there could be some sort of feature that would allow you to select a wall and all of your units would move to defend that side. Just a thought.

I'm a little worried about giving suggestions due to how far along the game seems.

Edit for Darvin:

I agree with you on the cheaters part and never really looked at rushes in that light.

What about torrents though. I mean, torrent sites aren't illegal and nor is sharing files but putting up a full game like that must be illegal? Games are very clearly labeled and available for download. It seems like game companies don't even try, and obviously there would be a way around the actions taken but still it seems game torrents go unopposed.

Darvin 05-10-2007 12:30 AM

Quote:

I'm a little worried about giving suggestions due to how far along the game seems.
Doesn't mean you shouldn't try. You never know when something small you mentioned at one point may be put to good use by the devs. For my part, I love brainstorming ideas; the process is its own reward.

Silent_Lamb 05-10-2007 12:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darvin (Post 82)
Doesn't mean you shouldn't try. You never know when something small you mentioned at one point may be put to good use by the devs. For my part, I love brainstorming ideas; the process is its own reward.

I agree with you, I've been running through very rough scenarios in my head every now and then to see if I can't come up with something.

Doug Bonds 05-10-2007 01:13 AM

Quote:

I'm a little worried about giving suggestions due to how far along the game seems.
By all means, keep the suggestions coming. We wouldn't have a "Suggestion" forum if we didn't want to hear what the potential fans would like to see in DoF.

After all, you guys are what will hopefully make the game a success!!

Konstantin Fomenko 05-10-2007 08:53 AM

*Seconds Doug*

Quote:

As far as rushes go, I think the real solution to them is simply to incorperate it into the game.
That`s the problem - we are talking about MMORTS here. So in most cases player would attack a fully-blown base. So conventional rushing with lethal result just won`t work. However, we did decide to include some 'original' ways player can rush another instead - after all what is rushing? Just an attack very early in the game, using very limited resources, fighting against time, and a lot of micromanagement.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:36 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2001-2011 Reverie World Studios INC. All Rights Reserved.