Any (RTS) Real Time Strategy Developers, Projects out there?
by NoobGank · in General Discussion · 11/04/2004 (10:03 am) · 12 replies
Hi,
With the impending release of the (Real Time Strategy) RTS Starter Kit I thought I'd do a quick poll to find out who in the Torque community (Developers, Producers, Artists) is a fan of the RTS genre and to find out what projects and ideas are going on in this space. With so much focus on FPS ithought it would be good to get some thing down in one place - so reply with your information here.
Looking forward to hearing from you,
KC
With the impending release of the (Real Time Strategy) RTS Starter Kit I thought I'd do a quick poll to find out who in the Torque community (Developers, Producers, Artists) is a fan of the RTS genre and to find out what projects and ideas are going on in this space. With so much focus on FPS ithought it would be good to get some thing down in one place - so reply with your information here.
Looking forward to hearing from you,
KC
#3
One of the game concepts I have on file has some RTS elements to it, so I watching the RTS starter kit release with a lot of interest.
11/04/2004 (11:31 am)
I'm a big fan of RTS games, though I haven't found much new and exciting since Warcraft III came out (though I cooled on that one pretty quickly, too). In a lot of ways, it was Starcraft that showed me what an RTS can be, and I think it lifted my expectations to unreasonable levels. :-)One of the game concepts I have on file has some RTS elements to it, so I watching the RTS starter kit release with a lot of interest.
#4
I was involved in a project named StarCraft 3D, 3 years ago.. was really looking forward to seeing it's release, which came pretty close until Blizzard sent us the famous email.
Now 3 years later, I don't like thinking of StarCraft in a 3D perspective, I think it would had destroyed some of the feel. Sorry for going OT btw.
11/04/2004 (11:48 am)
Russel, StarCraft was my favourite game EVER. :) The balance and the arcadish style really caught me, just to name two 'features' that I liked.I was involved in a project named StarCraft 3D, 3 years ago.. was really looking forward to seeing it's release, which came pretty close until Blizzard sent us the famous email.
Now 3 years later, I don't like thinking of StarCraft in a 3D perspective, I think it would had destroyed some of the feel. Sorry for going OT btw.
#5
Unlike many, however, I absolutely loathe the genre of Warcraft/Starcraft clones and their ilk.
I'm a far bigger fan of RTS games that don't have as much as a reliance on economics/resources so that the gameplay isn't driven so much by having to have an accountant's eye for what to build when and how much of whatever can be gathered in a certain timeframe. It tends to lead to far more emphasis on overwhelming your opponent by building more/faster than they do.
Well done games that imho were true strategy/tactical games were Myth I & II, Sacrifice, and the online/combat modes of Shogun/Medieval/Rome Total War...in which there was either no resource management at all (you start with a certain # of units, and that's it folks!) or a novel approach to problem (Sacrifice had mana and souls, both of which there was a limited or set supply of...but both could be recycled in a sense)
And I am at the moment, slowly but surely, working on a goofy lil RTS that will hopefully combine some of the best elements of these titles.
11/04/2004 (12:07 pm)
I'm a big fan of RTS games and even turn-based strat games....and will leap at the RTS starter kit ;)Unlike many, however, I absolutely loathe the genre of Warcraft/Starcraft clones and their ilk.
I'm a far bigger fan of RTS games that don't have as much as a reliance on economics/resources so that the gameplay isn't driven so much by having to have an accountant's eye for what to build when and how much of whatever can be gathered in a certain timeframe. It tends to lead to far more emphasis on overwhelming your opponent by building more/faster than they do.
Well done games that imho were true strategy/tactical games were Myth I & II, Sacrifice, and the online/combat modes of Shogun/Medieval/Rome Total War...in which there was either no resource management at all (you start with a certain # of units, and that's it folks!) or a novel approach to problem (Sacrifice had mana and souls, both of which there was a limited or set supply of...but both could be recycled in a sense)
And I am at the moment, slowly but surely, working on a goofy lil RTS that will hopefully combine some of the best elements of these titles.
#6
11/04/2004 (12:52 pm)
I hope to get time to make an RTS. :) I've always wanted to make a strategy game, more so than any other kind. My game would not qualify exactly as an "RTS", but it would use lots of the stuff we did for the RTS Starter Kit.
#7
Maybe its the setting, or the atmosphere or something but they had me hooked.
I was just amazed at the sensor arrays and total 3dness of it all :)
11/04/2004 (2:54 pm)
Homeworld 1 and 2 are the only 2 rts games i actually enjoy.Maybe its the setting, or the atmosphere or something but they had me hooked.
I was just amazed at the sensor arrays and total 3dness of it all :)
#8
The game I'm thinking of is I guess more tactical than it is strategic. James I'm inclined to agree with you - the resource management aspect of games can become a real chore and bore. I used to be a big fan of the Close Combat series of games.
The game I'm thinking about would have each player controlling a small squad of 4 or 5 soldiers. Its a space that I don't think has been explored much Usually its either one on one or RTS style armies per player. The game will draw on an old internet game called Chain of Command. Don't let the flaky graphics fool you. This was actually a rather well designed and balanced game.
Josh, what was the game you were thinking of?
11/04/2004 (11:59 pm)
Thanks guys, good to know there are some RTS fans out there.The game I'm thinking of is I guess more tactical than it is strategic. James I'm inclined to agree with you - the resource management aspect of games can become a real chore and bore. I used to be a big fan of the Close Combat series of games.
The game I'm thinking about would have each player controlling a small squad of 4 or 5 soldiers. Its a space that I don't think has been explored much Usually its either one on one or RTS style armies per player. The game will draw on an old internet game called Chain of Command. Don't let the flaky graphics fool you. This was actually a rather well designed and balanced game.
Josh, what was the game you were thinking of?
#9
I'd be interested in working on some maps for such a game, that is, if you'd be interested in taking me on :P Send me a shout at wezoin@rogers.com (or if you use AIM: DJ Wezoin, or MSN: Sam@tronicle.com)
Thanks,
Sam.
11/05/2004 (2:45 am)
Hey KC,I'd be interested in working on some maps for such a game, that is, if you'd be interested in taking me on :P Send me a shout at wezoin@rogers.com (or if you use AIM: DJ Wezoin, or MSN: Sam@tronicle.com)
Thanks,
Sam.
#10
I've been playing around with a similar concept, but at a level one up from what you are describing: you (as a commander) have a unit of 20-30 soldiers (former USSR "Spetznaz") - this is regiment level, or 100-150 soldiers - division level, that you can mix into multiple mission units to accomplish tactical assignments at the corresponding levels. The overall game concept is based on real data about former SU military strategy, and Spetznaz in particular, that has been pubublished through the western military sources (organizational structure, equipment, tactical and strategic guidilens for its use, methodology of deployment, etc). If interested in bouncing off some ideas, email me:chugunok@yahoo.com
11/05/2004 (6:27 am)
@K C MechCommander 2 was/is probably one of the best tactical warfare RTS games IMHO. Though an old game, it still has a strong following (just as other MechWarrior titles), and has the feel of both games you've mentioned. I've been playing around with a similar concept, but at a level one up from what you are describing: you (as a commander) have a unit of 20-30 soldiers (former USSR "Spetznaz") - this is regiment level, or 100-150 soldiers - division level, that you can mix into multiple mission units to accomplish tactical assignments at the corresponding levels. The overall game concept is based on real data about former SU military strategy, and Spetznaz in particular, that has been pubublished through the western military sources (organizational structure, equipment, tactical and strategic guidilens for its use, methodology of deployment, etc). If interested in bouncing off some ideas, email me:chugunok@yahoo.com
#11
Start the game a chief of a small village, europe or somewhere, grow the world as players join.
Limit the maximum number of units you can command until your city grows and you control more territory. Not sure on exact numbers, but maybe in the 50 or so warrior range. As you grow and become a warlord you can command 100 units, and say one chief. not sure of all the details, since many aspects would have to evaluated first.
This would hopefully promote some form of teamwork, sine in reality no one person commands an entire army. Side with a more powerful lord, and command your regiment into battle.
I could envision huge battles against cities, where several players control the invading army, and the same for defenders, coordination would be key.
Some hybrid of RTS and large scale civ builder. Only initial flaw seems to be if no one is playing?
01/26/2005 (1:55 pm)
I woul dlike to begin an RTS also, similar to Paul, but I was think a Medaevil twist. Originally concived as an multiplay online game. Just a quick run through.Start the game a chief of a small village, europe or somewhere, grow the world as players join.
Limit the maximum number of units you can command until your city grows and you control more territory. Not sure on exact numbers, but maybe in the 50 or so warrior range. As you grow and become a warlord you can command 100 units, and say one chief. not sure of all the details, since many aspects would have to evaluated first.
This would hopefully promote some form of teamwork, sine in reality no one person commands an entire army. Side with a more powerful lord, and command your regiment into battle.
I could envision huge battles against cities, where several players control the invading army, and the same for defenders, coordination would be key.
Some hybrid of RTS and large scale civ builder. Only initial flaw seems to be if no one is playing?
#12
01/26/2005 (2:09 pm)
I was glad to hear that there was a RTS pack available for Torque. My project isnt strictly a RTS, but rather a simulation/FPS and RTS hybrid. That is, you start out playing in simulation mode but as you gain rank and status you increasingly use the RTS interface to issue commands to other players/units. Of course if youre so inclined you can still switch to simulation mode to fight when youre not giving orders via the RTS interface. 
Torque 3D Owner Stephen Zepp