ID:152521
 
I was thinking about starting a project in which players play against each other or ai in a game very similar to warhammer. I have two ideas on how the lobby before games would go.

I could create a sort of server system which shows all rooms in a list which also shows the players that are in there and what type of game. Or i could make a graphical lobby. Any suggestions on which would be better?

Another thing is how I should let the players get more units. Should i make a cash system for wen you win and such? Or maybe every so often a tournament begins and whoever places gets money to buy new units. I want to make the game have a purpose or goal if you will.

Any more ideas would be appreciated.
:D Warhammer 40k in a medeival period :P
http://us.games-workshop.com/games/warhammer/default.htm


But yeah I'd like to see that Idea :)

I think players should win a small sum from winning games, and then you should also have tournaments. This is the style I prefer, and the player can buy better units even if he couldn't make it to the tournies.
In response to Worldweaver
Well one way i was thinking is to only win money from tournaments. I do not want someone to just lose to someone to gain money for the specific person. Tournaments go be hosted every half hour or hour and feature different options. Say like 2 on 2 or 3 on 3. I also thought about making sort of a story or campaign mode to also make money where you fight ai.


One other thing I need is how i should do the units. Because there could be like 25 units per squad and that takes up alot of room. I want the whole map to be displayed on screen, not just part of it. I could put 9 units per square and just link them like that.
In response to Tazor07
It's also called Warcraft ;-P

I think adopting the number of troops per block is largely irrelevant. You could just say 1 block of troops varies by type. So maybe 1 block has 4 standard human troops, 2 elite, and maybe 8 goblins :-). Some troop types may take multiple blocks (ie monsters).

In terms of mechanics, I would allow troop blocks of the same type to lock with other blocks into formations. Perhaps you can only activate say 3 blocks per turn (perhaps "leader" units add an activation). However, every block locked into formation counts as only 1 block, no matter how many are joined. So if all your infantry is lined up, it would only take 1 activation to advance them all. Of course, formations would have downsides. Anything that slows any of the blocks would slow the whole formation. Anything that panics one block would panic the whole formation. In essence, they act as 1 unit while in formation.

I would also recommend penalizing units engaged on the flank or rear, as block troop formations are generally only effective to the front. Also, I would avoid relying soley on killing enemies. Combat results should allow a unit to drive another back, demoralize and possibly route them (causing them to begin fleeing), or possibly wipe the unit out entirely.

Of course, you may instead opt to have units "damage" each other, resulting in casualties and decreased effectiveness. IE a unit a 4 swordsmen squares off against a unit of 8 goblins (each is 1 block). The goblins have a numbers advantage, but the swordsmen are of superior skill. Let's say the swordsmen do well and see off 3 goblins. The goblins take down 1 swordsmen. Next turn, the remaining 5 see 3 more die but don't finish off another swordsmen, thanks to the reduced numbers (goblins are pretty terrible in combat- but dirt cheap and much more effective in large numbers). Down to 2, assuming they don't panic and flee, they will certainly be slaughtered next turn.

Additions to units could improve the unit at a cost. Like champions(replaces 1 troop but increases combat ability), banners (increases morale), better armor (decreases casualties), or better weapons (increases enemy casualties).

For balance, I recommend rating players ala Champions of Vargacet and basing rewards on relative standing. IE pounding a lesser player should net little if anything and likely weaken your forces with potential casualties. "Gold" could be used to recruit new units, replace casualties, purchase upgrades, etc. There should be a cap on maximum army size, though.
I had this idea also.
You could win money from winning battles, and use that money to purchase more troops.
Different troops costing different amount and so on.
I think it'd be cool to get cash from every unit you kill, so say you kill something, and its worth 200 gold, you get a certain amount of gold depending on how powerful your army is, so if your army is only worth about 650 gold then:
200 -= 65
you get (deh deh deh deh deEH!) 135 gold.
but if you army is 2100 gold, you get NO GOLD! OH NOES!

this would also make players with more money not exactly the best, because the idea to make cash would be to find a way to defeat an army with a cheaper one. So players would have to focus on honing their skills rather than simply overpowering an enemy.
In response to Jmurph
Good ideas there.

One thing is I do not want a player to log in as a dummy so the player can just kill him and take the gold. Also, what would happen if a player loses all their gold and cannot replace their army?
In response to Tazor07

One thing is I do not want a player to log in as a dummy so the player can just kill him and take the gold.

Well, you can check IPs to limit multiplaying. Also, players should not take defeated player's gold. Maybe earn some gold based on difficulty of the battle, but definitely not an outright transfer. Even the losing player should earn some gold so he can replenish loses, reconfigure his forces, etc.

Also, what would happen if a player loses all their gold and cannot replace their army?

A player should always have the same resources he starts with, otherwise he will just delete and recreate, play a different key, etc.

So maybe players start with say 1000 "gold" to spend. They should always have that much availible, minus any current troops, equipment, etc. So if the player spends, say 900 on troops, and 100 on gear and upgrades but loses 250 worth of troops and gear in battle, he should earn at least 250 for the battle, so he breaks even. Preferably, most losses are temporary (troops recover, rejoin units after battle). I would also recommend making it more expensive to replenish experienced units, if they are improving in power/abilities.

You could even apply the Warhammer points approach where you always have a fixed number of points in your army and never take permanent losses. I think this might not be what you are going for, though.