Aspects of a Medieval War Game

[CygnusX]

I'm building a medieval style war game and wanted ideas on elements that could be contained within the game.  So far, I have:

Races - different playable races by the player, each with a unique advantage
Warriors - a variety of warriors unique to each race
Buildings - a large number of buildings that each contribute to your kingdom in a unique way
Castle - unique from buildings as it can only be upgraded under certain conditions and provides a major buff
Technologies - items that can be researched that provide enhancements to grain output, gold income, etc.
Mercenaries - fighting units that can be hired by any race (tech required)
Summoned Creatures - fighting units that are summoned through magic (tech required)
Military / Espionage / Magic - 3 unique styles of "combat" (military take violently, spies steal, mages buff/debuff)
Social Advantages - Factions, trade allies, gifts, etc.  Having friends in-game will be beneficial.
Common Strongholds - Structures that can be augmented by all faction members through investing resources
Generals / Emissaries / Sages - Leaders for each type of warfare, can be upgraded (trained) to give combat buffs
Weapons - better weapons can be found through research, but cost significantly more
Artifacts - possessed by a faction (not individual), these give a bonus to all faction members
NPC boss creatures - guard artifacts


I've considered adding units such as Royalty (king, queen, prince, princess), but have no idea what purpose they'd serve.  Any core aspects of the medieval time frame that I've missed?

[Chris]

Espionage is not very medieval...

Magic/races/artifacts are fantasy not medieval. Are you making medieval game or fantasy-medievalish game? If fantasy add dragons and wizards.

[CygnusX]

Its fantasy-medievalish.  Elves, dragons, wizards, dwarfs, trolls, etc all fall into units that can be recruited by each race.

I did come up with the idea of heroes since starting this thread.  I'm not 100% sure how they'd work yet, but each hero can be resurrected to fight for a Kingdom and provide a buff based on the hero type.

[Nox]

Espionage is not very medieval...

Depends on the style ... you might have focus on thieves, guilds, aristocracy, alchemists, merchants ... espionage would fit there. It's the other side of styling opposite to heroes, knights, dragons, wizards (partly) etc.

Royalty - depends on other game mechanics which may use them, but if everything fails, there's still ego

Anyway it seems you have a lot of aspects already, my advice would be to find some focus/your specific style and those relevant hightlight, those similar adjust and non-relevant either give lower importance of don't keep

[CygnusX]

I was hoping as part of the whole player experience to just impress through sheer depth of content.  I realize how difficult this makes programming, but with some simple design solutions, it should still be manageable. 

@Nox. Nobility is the stat I'm using in lieu Royalty : P  Thanks for the idea though.

I'm thinking I might also add minor items.  Simple things that can be found while exploring for land that buff some aspect of the users Kingdom.  I'll have to put some thought into this.  Maybe something like lost scrolls that give +10 research points.  Or a mystic orb that can be broken to temporarily increase mana income. 

[Chris]

I was hoping as part of the whole player experience to just impress through sheer depth of content.  I realize how difficult this makes programming, but with some simple design solutions, it should still be manageable. 

You mean impress by the sheer amount of disconnected, incompatible and unpolished ideas? Take only 2-3 that perfectly fit together and polish them until they shine and are the best ever seen (besides, in your huge content list I still do not see half naked elvish girls, so you miss the critical feature - you won't make some people content no matter how many features you include, you will still be missing the feature they strive for the most).


Simplicty and compatibility is better.
You have normal units (warriors) and elite units (knights and wizards). Each day you get X normal and Y elite units (you choose which one). Warriors fight decently, knights fight very good and are immune to magic, wizards do not fight but eliminate large quantities of warriors before battle (fireball!). If you have more wizards than enemy there is a chance that their fireball gets countered. Each day you get bricks and you can use them to build forts in provinces (defence bonus) or magic tower in your capital (magic points). Wizards provide magic points. You can spend magic points on upgrades. Each day you can spend 100 magic points and 2000 gold to buy exactly 1 dragon egg. By spending magic points in consecutive days you can hatch a dragon, which is immune to magic and is the best fighting unit ever. By spending 5 magic points you can upgrade knight to dragon slayer, it is slightly weaker than knight but can make 1 enemy dragon 50% less effective (dragon can not land on the ground in fear of slayers and have to attack only from air). If you bought Necromancy by 500 magic points there is a chance that your fallen warriors become undead, which are weak units, if you did so you can not recruit paladins ever. If you build monstyr by 150 bricks you can upgrade knights to paladins which can obliterate undeads.
And so on so on...

[CygnusX]

: P

All very good concepts.  I like the idea of a dragon egg, though I'm not sure I'd use it in the same way you do.  I also thought about leprechauns, crown jewles and unicorns... though I'm not sure what function these would play. 

I'm not really looking for play-style suggestions, just elements form a medieval - fantasy setting you'd think were critical to that style game.

[Nox]

I was recently reading that many websites and companies (in our country) are negligent to overall style and presentation. It's all the same.

And reminded me of a famous kid story about a dog and cat baking a cake, putting everything they like into it, ultimately turning it into something uneatable and stomach-aching. Of course that's serious overstatment given what you wrote, no harm meant

If you take a look at famous books/movies/games, they most often have some unique style which guides other aspects. As I said, quantity is needed in some measure, but it should be guided by some "branding style guide" (in quotes, but no reason not to write it down). Do not mistake it with making "as simple as possible"


This is actually a first thing when developing a game I trying to make clear:

((theme and focuses -> webdesign in mind -> basic story): this I repeat until it's cooked enough

then proceeding to
\
 -> game design, webdesign) -> implementation)

of course I don't perfectly hold to this layout, but it's some guideline I use


reading your last line - I still don't know what "style" - medieval is too broad, it's just a timeframe

We're not really making you happy, are we

[CygnusX]

Those comments are fair enough.  I understand that some ingredients will mix well together while others will not.  My goal is not necessarily to include every single element from a medieval-fantasy setting.

My problem stems from trying to obtain depth of game play.  Too many bbg's require way too much grinding.  I figured if I could have numerous elements, and force a delay in discovery between those elements, it would feel more like exploration instead of task repetition. 

[Nox]

(in the following text I have to assume you don't know about stuff, but it's likely you do, don't take it personally)

Nice, I like your aiming and yes, I dislike grinding too and giving this a great importance and thought

Imho wonderful beyond recognition is a link posted afaik by Chris - http://www.thegamesjournal.com/articles/WhatMakesaGame.shtml
The only thing I can think of now that I disagree is MtG (mentioned in the very end).

So - basicly grinding is repetition and more basicly it's similarity, lack of change and surprise etc. which is bad.
Therefore how I try to eliminate is

1) Differences, mechanics - or maybe "spicing up." If I borrow MtG - having e.g. various units 1/2, 3/3, 2/2 tends to be boring, but give a creature some nice, named ability like "shroud" and it becomes suddenly more interesting. Another thing - we have tons of creatures with the same mechanics, but then they introduced Planeswalkers - cards with totally new mechanic making it more enjoyable. Diablo 2, especially expansion is a nice example too. Ok, it's grinding game, but... things introduced in Exp: druid class - only one that can transform (wolf/bear - cool!), on top of that party summoner and sorcerrer; Assassin with also new mechanic of charge-ups/finishers, shadows, traps; circlets - items that could roll unique bonuses; runes - special little desks insertable to items to add bonuses BUT being able to form a runeword, basicly certain precise named order of specific runes grant great bonuses (e.g. AmnRalMalIstOhm forms Call to Arms runeword); class-specific items - again something unusuall, nonstandard. Everything they added was in some way different from the standard things that were in the game.
So for example your splitting of items to major and minor would fit into this cathegory.
Also unique mechanics never seen anywhere or fraction/class-specific mechanics has their place here.

This is why I hated GURPS and loved DD+ (something like DnD probably) - GURPS is too systematic, everything is the same, for me it's sterile and boring, at least mechanics-wise. I just played both only a few times, but enjoyed reading books of the latter.

2) Focus, style. This is a great thing about Mtg too. Every color has some focus, some philosofy and approach, on top of that every set/expansion adjusts it/improves it a bit. This philosophy affects the strategy and abilities and attributes of units. Which is similar what I talked about, but this time in smaller scale. Given MtG incorporated pretty much every approach among their colors, they can embrace many different audiences (theme/approach-wise), but still remain specific for them.

3) Different goals, different layers of goals. I aim to have a various levels of goals - minor ones, just for additional enjoyment; medium - for example unlocking important tiers; large - goal of the game for player AND/or goal for the side/fraction. The goals might also vary among rounds (also see (1) ), maybe based on previous rounds (for reset games I mean).

4) Community. People can always spice things up, are more unpredictable, challengable etc. which is good for use here, what we aim for. Not much to write here, you wrote it's important for you in the other thread yourself.

5) Gamespace - by gamespace I mean all options availible to player. This has to be balanced with point (1), since it's tends to be additive, not multiplicative. I mean... different unrelated mechanics just *add* options to you, but when you can combine those new options with old ones, they *multiplicate* - making players happy and you not as much 'cause it's harder to balance


Plus I would strongly recommend reading these: http://www.sirlin.net/article-archive/ , optionally http://www.sirlin.net/ptw/

This is what I can think of now, 'll post later if I remember more

[CygnusX]

I have conceded that I will learn something new every day    The article was very good.  There were several points that the author drove home for me.

To be frank though, I'm not sure how my quest to obtain ideas on elements that are seen as vital in medieval-fantasy has changed into a discussion on my ideas at game design.     I'm obviously still going through the design process... so I can't offer too many details right now on what all it will include.  The intent, however, is to make it a Kingdom building game with typical land-grab elements and a ton of depth that only gets revealed as your Kingdom grows.  If I can start players off with the ability to recruit 1 type of unit, the choice to build 1 of 6 type buildings, and 5 different technologies to choose from.... and by the end of the game (nearly a year later), they've built a castle, can build any of 20 different type buildings, have 12 recruit options as per their race, 100 technologies, 50 spells, 5 artifacts, a faction, a unicorn, a hero, etc, etc, etc.... I will be satisfied.  Again, the idea is to start a player with the basics, let them work, and let the fruits of that hard labor result in a magnificent kingdom.

[Chris]

I'm not sure how my quest to obtain ideas on elements that are seen as vital in medieval-fantasy has changed into a discussion on my ideas at game design. 
 

It's because you used some phrases that triggered the "noob alert" Also you write much much more reasonable than a noob so some people (read Nox and me) thought not everything is lost and that explaining what is so wrong in your question might be not a futile effort
Compare this list with the list on Pirates tread. At the first glance these are very similar but the pirates tread go no responses like that. It's because it was about "best" ideas or "compatible" ideas and there was very quickly a mutually exclusive question which feature to eliminate. In your topic it was about "accumulation", about "all" ideas, you try to add and add more and more ideas to the same game. It won't work, it never works, it was proven it won't work ages ago before we all were born.

If I can start players off with the ability to recruit 1 type of unit, the choice to build 1 of 6 type buildings, and 5 different technologies to choose from.... and by the end of the game (nearly a year later), they've built a castle, can build any of 20 different type buildings, have 12 recruit options as per their race, 100 technologies, 50 spells, 5 artifacts, a faction, a unicorn, a hero, etc, etc, etc.... I will be satisfied.  Again, the idea is to start a player with the basics, let them work, and let the fruits of that hard labor result in a magnificent kingdom.

Now you are talking like a sane person again
So the game is based on buildings and units with techs+spells+artifacts as various bonuses and customization. How about resources? These are very important and might trigger some interesting features/mechanics.

You might try nobility like in Children of Nile. You have 2 barons, they do nothing and eat resources and avoid taxes only; but each baron allows control over 5 knights and 20 peasants. Your task would be to make a beautiful city to attract more barons and to train some clerks that would check if they do not cheat on taxes too much.

As for unicorn, dragon, hydra, I would make them "fantasy creatures", recruited from another pool (elite units). You can have only 2 kinds of these at any time. Each have different combat purposes (dragon is flying, hydra has multiattack, unicorn is immune to magic).

[CygnusX]

It's because you used some phrases that triggered the "noob alert"

I c.  My apologies.

In that case, I will start in generics, the land of creation for all game ideas.

I would like each player to feel as if they were the supreme ruler of a Kingdom in a land filled with competition and evil.  They start with nothing more than a small picture of a camp fire, and by the end of the game (ie, before the reset), they'll have the opportunity to control a massive empire.  My vision is something similar to the picture below:



Again, the player starts with the minimum.  Perhaps the ability to build some houses, some farms, and barracks for soldiers.  There will also be 1 unit the player is able to recruit for combat and maybe 5 basic technologies to upgrade to (crop rotation for higher grain output, etc).

By the middle of the game, the player should have access to start/join a faction along with access to most buildings.  Buildings such as roads will be essential to keeping the number of turns you receive per hour up (without roads in a large city, logistics would be a nightmare).  Resources such as mana, iron and gems will now be available.  Mana will be used to cast spells (which was not previously an option) whereas iron and gems can be used to build weapons (which were also not previously available).  Weapons techs will allow new, more powerful, but more costly weapons to be made.  Technologies such as modern warfare will allow you to have a general that can be trained to provide a major military combat bonus.  But espionage technologies from enemy teams expose you to the risk that your general can be assassinated.  Magical spells will start simply by allowing you to boost the output of your farms, but quickly turn into casting horrific spells on enemies.

By end game, you'll have started/joined a faction for sure, have all sorts of items that took months to obtain, and yet the surprises will still keep coming.  The forces you use to explore for land may encounter something new and never before seen.  Whereas you will be use to seeing your force discover new plots of land or the occasional buried treasure, suddenly you will find yourself staring at a mighty beast:



(sorry for the size of the photo).  Oh God, what have they found.  Do you now send your forces to attack such a beast?  What sort of treasure does it guard?  Do you alert your faction to the discovery of this creature, or do you keep it a secret?  And once you obtain the tomb of demons that it guards, do you dare cast the spell that is written on the pages inside?

My philosophy is that the mechanics of grinding occur in all games.  But with changes in the types of advancement that are made, the feeling of grinding will go away, and the feeling of conquest will take root. 

Hopefully this gives some clarification as to what I'm making.  if there are any elements you see lacking, please feel free to tell me.  If not, perhaps I'll just need to make the first mock-up before taking more comments.

[Chris]

What's the purpose of combat (reward type)? Whom you are allowed to attack? What limits your attacks? Ultimately all other components of kingdom building will be for the purpose of buffing your combat capabilities.

What is the goal of the game? What will determine success at the end of the round?