No, this isn't going to be anything particularly spectacular. This is where I will write about . . . gaming.
Putting on the "game developer" hat
Published on April 21, 2009 By Animesh Karna In PC Gaming

A little bit ago, I stumbled across a "game" called The Linear RPG.  I thought this was hilarious: it had the essense of the gameplay for most J-RPG's in the form of guiding a stick-figure person on a line.  I started thinking: how could other game genres be simplified to this form.  The other day, I was chatting with a friend about my thoughts of RTS's.  Here is what I came up with:

First, here is my definition of the "Starcraft Model": the game gets super-popular and people spend so much time playing that they come up with an optimal build order that soon everyone is using.  Following this model, we would say that pretty much everyone knows the optimal way to generate resources, so they'll be generating resources at the same rate.

So, what is the purpose of resource generation?  It's to limit production of units, because units have a cost.  What is the purpose of research?  It's to slow down generation of super-powerful units.  So, let's have resources coming in at the same rate for each player.  We can have it displayed at the top of the screen.  Research can be one way to spend the resources (we can have a "do research" button that is grayed out if you don't have enough resources).

The core of the game, then, is units attacking other units.  So, we can have a line.  My units go from left to right, my opponent goes from right to left.  They hit in the middle.  In that case, who wins?  Well, we have three basic unit types: rock, paper, and scissors.  Take a wild guess how victory conditions are figured out there.  For tie situations, that's where research comes in to play.  If I've researched to level 2 and you've researched to level "1", all things considered equal my "rock" will beat your "rock".  Creating units involves having three buttons, one for each unit type.  The buttons are grayed out if there are not enough resources.  As you research to higher levels, units take more resources to build.  Whoo hoo, as you can guess this game will be a graphical powerhouse! 

Now comes that "Rush beats boom, boom beats turtle, turtle beats rush" bit.  How do I create rushing, turtling, and booming?  Booming, if I understand correctly, would be clicking on the "research" button.  Rushing would be clicking on the unit buttons.  But what about turtling?  There would need to be a fourth unit type, a "defense".  It costs a bit, but it strengthens your base for when your enemy's troops reach your end of the line.

I'm thinking I will go ahead and write this, mainly as a joke.  Graphics will be very simple, there's not a whole lot of artwork, and the AI can be very simple.  But, for those of you that enjoy RTS games: did I miss anything important in this?

 


Comments
on Apr 21, 2009

The problem with this is that there is a key difference between RPG and RTS: cause and effect.  In a RPG, the player is the sole source of causes (maybe something pre-scripted happens after a certain amount of time, but I've found the genre has unfortunately been moving away from time sensativity altogether), and if you have a strategy guide on your lap you know the end effect.  This is why they can be simplified so much.  User action A causes game response B. This happens all the time, every time.

While sometimes players can be predictable (cookie cutters), and a lot of the time AI's can be predictable, such direct cause and effect cannot be counted upon in RTS games.  An enemy player can - and will, if he's any good - attempt to disrupt your plan.  Because every player is a source of causes, predicting the end effect of your actions is not possible without knowing what your enemy will do.  To say "everyone knows how to get the most income" is an oversimplification, because some people also know how to disrupt their enemy's income.

In a good RTS game, you should not feel like you are in control.  Everything you do is subject to the whims of the other players, and victory and defeat hinges on how you manipulate the situation.  If you're in a position where you control the end result like in a RPG (that linear cause->effect) you've already won the game.

on Apr 22, 2009

There is a 1 button RTS out there.  look it up

on Apr 23, 2009

In essence no, you've pretty much got the genre down.

Turtling is just putting resources in to defensive structures.  ie walls, webifiers, arrow shooting towers, guass platforms and so on.  Depending on the style of game, defense structures can be cheaper and more powerful than troops.  The idea being they are more static, and can't help assault.  Other games treat them very differently.

One thing I'd focus a little more on is resources, it isn't just to limit production, it about controlling the speed of production.  ie if I have twice the resources of another player throughout the game, I can produce 2 units for each one of his. That's an over simplification - but that resource ownership factor I kinda think you missed - just wanted to add it.  This stratagy can be pursed by research as well.