Username:    Password:    Remember Me?         

A persistent world for MMO mode. - Reverie World Studios Forums

Go Back   Reverie World Studios Forums > Dawn of Fantasy > Public Suggestions and Proposals
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 07-12-2009, 07:52 PM
Josh Warner's Avatar
Josh Warner Josh Warner is offline
Reverie World Studios - Scenario Scripter
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Maine
Posts: 809
Josh Warner is just really niceJosh Warner is just really niceJosh Warner is just really nice
Default A persistent world for MMO mode.

This will be a lengthy post that will only get longer as I add to it over time, and don't bother posting if you can't take the time to read it. This is not not something I expect to happen, only that I would love to see it, and I'm just so bored I feel like being somewhat constructive.

A persistent world made up of player made factions and territories represented on a map hosted by Reverie. Each territory would have it's own level and specific bonuses that increase in power based on level, these bonuses would only work within x number of jumps from it, so a bonus from one side of the world won't do anything for a battle on the other side of it.

Each MMO mode worldmap skirmish would give worldmap resources that can be used to capture uncontested territories and upgrade territories your kingdom owns, worldmap resources would be accumulated for a kingdom from regular matches based on resources left/length of game/win or lose. If the winner and loser both have the same amount of resources, the winner gets aprox. 4x the amount of worldmap resources.

A skirmish is a fight between two kingdoms that does not involve territories OR you could make it a lesser version of attack where if you win as an attacker you take a certain amount of level(s) off the territory you're attacking and if you lose they gain a level or maybe just resources. As with territory wars attacking without an adjacent territory costs significantly more.

For territory wars a leader of the kingdom would select a territory to attack from or to chose to attack without an adjacent territory which costs significantly more and within x hours the challenged team would select the settings ie; 1v1 2v2 3v3 etc. and when the fight will take place within a given window from when the attack was launched. Both sides can choose which players will be at the battle, to balance numbers a kingdom's defenders can defend unlimited amounts of battles, attackers can only attack once in a certain period and after they've attacked they cannot defend and vice versa. This gives numbers an advantage, but not an insurmountable one.

In order for an attack to be launched the attacker must pay a large amount of resources, for each level of the defending territory they pay more. After the minimum is reached any more spent on the attack will give bonus troops/resources. The defenders can choose to spend worldmap resources as well to gain an advantage, they also get a bonus to their army/resources based upon their territory level. Capping this or not is up to the devs, I would say no and just balance income and the return on the investment. If the defenders are successful they retain control of their territory and gain a full territory level. If the attackers are successful they gain control of the territory and the territory loses half of it's levels unless you pay several times the cost of each level. Short of successful defenses territories can only go up a level once a day, say 30~50 levels max, or no max at all and make the increases very small. Thus fortifying a small area and letting it build up to high levels is possible and has it's benefits.

In order to balance expansion each new territory beyond the first would cost more to upgrade, and after a certain percentage of the map is under your control you would start to suffer from such expansion and depending on how far over this soft cap you go your territory levels will go down anywhere from once every few weeks to once a day preventing any growth once you reach an extreme level of control.

Independent players are their own 'kingdom' on the map until they join another player or group of players.

Another idea is to simply create a dumbed down version where two sides go at it in an event thing for bragging rights instead of actual territory control, instead of something this elaborate two groups of players can declare 'war' on one another and they each start with x amount of territories on a mirrored world map and fight using a slightly modified ruleset from above. Significantly easier to add, could probably even be done by modders with enough time on their hands, a lot less depth though.

Any thoughts or opinions? I'll add more as time goes on and refine the ruleset etc.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 07-12-2009, 08:00 PM
Aametherar Aametherar is offline
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 631
Aametherar is someone to look uptoAametherar is someone to look upto
Default

Seems like a Shattered Galaxy clone to me, which isn't a bad idea SG is a great game and great idea that i'm surprised noone else has marketed on, it's a prety open market, but I don't see it happening here unless its a major expansion.
__________________


Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 07-12-2009, 08:12 PM
Josh Warner's Avatar
Josh Warner Josh Warner is offline
Reverie World Studios - Scenario Scripter
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Maine
Posts: 809
Josh Warner is just really niceJosh Warner is just really niceJosh Warner is just really nice
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aametherar View Post
Seems like a Shattered Galaxy clone to me, which isn't a bad idea SG is a great game and great idea that i'm surprised noone else has marketed on, it's a prety open market, but I don't see it happening here unless its a major expansion.
Sort of, except the actual gameplay will be fun >_> I just don't enjoy the actual RTS portion for various reasons. The whole thing about it really is that it adds an optional depth for people that want it. An MMORTS has it's advantages and disadvantages, primarily the advantages of an MMO are persistence ie: Depth. I doubt this becomes a starcraft in terms of competitive ladder play, it's diehards are going to be the MMORTS players who enjoy RTSes but want more depth, want their army and city to grow. And this just adds something else to 'grow' as well.

Last edited by Josh Warner : 07-12-2009 at 08:24 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 07-12-2009, 08:23 PM
Aametherar Aametherar is offline
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 631
Aametherar is someone to look uptoAametherar is someone to look upto
Default

Some of the earlier versions were amazing. I think the main problem with that game was developer/publisher conflict, instead of growing it kept changing and pointing down different paths rather than growing, and sometimes in fact degrading. It would appear that in the end the publishers had it, fired the devs and sold the game to another company who has no idea how to make any changes to the game, which is a shame since it had so much potential, and since it ended up on a version far inferior to some of the previous ones, as well as leaving a lot of elements of the game inactive that were previously active. It's a testament that even though that it's player base has remained as active as it has. Like I said i'm surprised no other companies have taken off that formula since it's so simple yet effective. This would be a bit different as it's an RTS but the concepts the same. I think Red Alert has also used something similar (but very lame) in the past, nothing more than a pretty map to look at before skirmishes really lol.
__________________



Last edited by Aametherar : 07-12-2009 at 08:30 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 07-12-2009, 08:37 PM
Josh Warner's Avatar
Josh Warner Josh Warner is offline
Reverie World Studios - Scenario Scripter
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Maine
Posts: 809
Josh Warner is just really niceJosh Warner is just really niceJosh Warner is just really nice
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aametherar View Post
Some of the earlier versions were amazing. I think the main problem with that game was developer/publisher conflict, instead of growing it kept changing and pointing down different paths rather than growing, and sometimes in fact degrading. It would appear that in the end the publishers had it, fired the devs and sold the game to another company who has no idea how to make any changes to the game, which is a shame since it had so much potential, and since it ended up on a version far inferior to some of the previous ones, as well as leaving a lot of elements of the game inactive that were previously active. It's a testament that even though that it's player base has remained as active as it has. Like I said i'm surprised no other companies have taken off that formula since it's so simple yet effective. This would be a bit different as it's an RTS but the concepts the same. I think Red Alert has also used something similar (but very lame) in the past, nothing more than a pretty map to look at before skirmishes really lol.
Well, the extent of such meta strategy games is... turn based games and pseudo real-time browser games. Very simply for other people, to explain what I want - think Total War where the campaign is massively multiplayer. Sort of.

The stigma I think is that it's literally never been tried for a pay to play game. Micro transaction browser games are about the only games to try for such a grand scale. Nobody wants to stick their neck out on the chopping block and hope it translates well and pays off it's initial investment with a good return.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 07-12-2009, 10:43 PM
Esculas the Mighty Esculas the Mighty is offline
Elite Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: States :D
Posts: 505
Esculas the Mighty is someone to look uptoEsculas the Mighty is someone to look upto
Default

Kinda sounds like Rise of Nations CTW ( Conquer The World)

KINDA
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 07-12-2009, 11:02 PM
Aametherar Aametherar is offline
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 631
Aametherar is someone to look uptoAametherar is someone to look upto
Default

Kinda is, except multiplayer style with factions tweaks perks and progression. I could see it being a major expansion adding a game mode, but only if there's a large enough player base to safely add a new mode without splitting the player base up too much killing the game.
__________________


Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 07-13-2009, 05:13 AM
Josh Warner's Avatar
Josh Warner Josh Warner is offline
Reverie World Studios - Scenario Scripter
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Maine
Posts: 809
Josh Warner is just really niceJosh Warner is just really niceJosh Warner is just really nice
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aametherar View Post
Kinda is, except multiplayer style with factions tweaks perks and progression. I could see it being a major expansion adding a game mode, but only if there's a large enough player base to safely add a new mode without splitting the player base up too much killing the game.
Again, I doubt traditional ladder will attract many people compared to MMORTS mode, and the number of territories can just be changed to represent the interest. Since persistence is already present this is actually really simple to add and balance, and not terribly difficult to code either.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 07-13-2009, 06:56 AM
Esculas the Mighty Esculas the Mighty is offline
Elite Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: States :D
Posts: 505
Esculas the Mighty is someone to look uptoEsculas the Mighty is someone to look upto
Default

sorry to go a bit off topic

but my dream is a mmorts in a fulling seemless world

where u draw ur own territories based on diplomacy

but it would also have a extremely complex economy
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 07-13-2009, 09:02 AM
Darathor Darathor is offline
Elven Sect:
Treant
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 856
Darathor is someone to look uptoDarathor is someone to look upto
Default

Would there be a finite amount of territories? If there are, then where would new players go if all the territories are occupied?
Seems like a cool concept but I would prefer instead of paying resources to attack/defend and then attacking/defending I would want to just attack and not pay all these resources. But that's just me.
__________________

Picture made by Aametherar the orc (Elves are the best!)
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:52 AM.

ESRB Rated T
US/CANADA
PEGI 16
EUROPE
USK 16
GERMANY

privacy policy   |   Copyright © Reverie World Studios INC.

Dawn of Fantasy and Reverie World Studios are trademarks of Reverie World Studios, Inc. Developed by Reverie World Studios, inc. All Rights Reserved. All other trademarks are property of their respective owners.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.