Re: True online warfare

**Gambit7** · 11-04-2007, 04:32 PM

Why a developer doesnt get smart and build the world's first persistent MMO-RTS is beyond me. Yet another reason why I've been wanting to make my own dang games lately.
You see HINTS of it with games like Gods and Heroes (cancelled) and the proposed expansion for Tabula Rasa, but beyond that.... nothing. I'm talking squad-sized RTS stuff here though, nothing big like SupCom. Actually, something WiC sized would work pretty well I think.

You can get it in spades in WWIIO though if you become an AHC or GHC officer. Basically, all the smaller gaming elements (other players) are your sandbox to control. I've been privy to sampling that system for a small amount of time and talking to others about it. All of them have said it's the most intense and time-intensive gaming element they've ever done. Imagine having to organize an entire war basically. Planetside had similar elements at the higher levels (commanders).

Another interesting game idea is making a turn-based (tabletop-style) MMO, set on a global timer. The timer is basically your game-loop, similar to a MUD but done graphically and with longer moves. You either make moves within the timer or you dont. Either way, the world advances a frame with or without you. This adds deeper strategy and the ability to control more units at once.

I'd once thought of making a "Warmachine/Hordes" strategic-MMO. No-brainer there. Instant success. Alas, it's an IP like Warhammer.

**Tarenth** · 11-06-2007, 05:59 PM

You, sir, are insane. A persistant Massively Multiplayer Online Real Time Strategy game would be nuts. You'd suffer from having to constantly manage the game to the point of not having a life or else be caught with your pants down while away. If you're talking about turn based gameplay then an MMO that makes you wait to move and act would also suffer from the 'fail'.

If you're talking about Turn based multiplayer strategy games then you would have to look at games like Reincarnation (formerly known as Archmage), Utopia (or any other swirve.com game), and Pox Nora which I have never played but heard about before.

**Gambit7** · 11-06-2007, 06:21 PM

Originally Posted by Tarenth

You, sir, are insane. A persistant Massively Multiplayer Online Real Time Strategy game would be nuts. You'd suffer from having to constantly manage the game to the point of not having a life or else be caught with your pants down while away. If you're talking about turn based gameplay then an MMO that makes you wait to move and act would also suffer from the 'fail'.

If you're talking about Turn based multiplayer strategy games then you would have to look at games like Reincarnation (formerly known as Archmage), Utopia (or any other swirve.com game), and Pox Nora which I have never played but heard about before.

I've played PoxNora, fun game... but not very grand as far as multiplayer strategy goes. At its root, it's a CCG on steroids combined with chess and barely multiplayer. Reincarnation seems more like what I'm talking about, I'm gonna look into it. Utopia is a web-game, so it inherently cant be an RTS nor can it be as quick as a MUD or even a turn-based game on a quick timer. But, it's close (gotta look into it more)

As far as me being nuts... I've been told that before.

Regardless, you're seeing many MMO-devs going that direction. Slowly but surely they're giving you more than 1 avatar to control. This puts the game moreso in the MMO-RTS genre. Like I said... what do you think Gods and Heroes was??

More Sandbox oriented games go that route as well, on higher levels. WWIIO would FAIL if the upper-echelon playerbase didnt treat it as an MMO-RTS. The HQs are constantly planning, shifting resources, and giving orders 24-7. Those that are on top of things win. Those that let things go uncontrolled, lose. They even have HQ for peak-time and off-peak, so the Euros and Aussies cant just push the map at will.

High level Planetside, again... pure MMO-RTS. As a commander, you're rarely even fighting.

AoC will have RTS elements with their Clan-siege engine (im assuming). And if Mythic is smart they'll give RTS type control with their planned RvR system.

I agree with you though, it's tough to have a life in such games like WW2O and Planetside. Commaders typically are ardent gamers with much time on their hands. Many times are disabled Vets on disabilty or retired Military.

But hey, you wanted true online warfare... that's it.

I still think WiC Online would be teh sick.

**aculle01** · 11-07-2007, 04:12 PM

Tom Clancy's EndWar seems to be headed towards a persistent MMO RTS campaign.

**Gambit7** · 11-08-2007, 05:19 AM

Originally Posted by aculle01

Tom Clancy's EndWar seems to be headed towards a persistent MMO RTS campaign.

I just wet myself :O
http://endwargame.us.ubi.com/index.php

This game is EXACTLY what I'm talking about. It's a strategic dream. RTS w/Voice rec. in a persistent battlespace. And with a MODERN WWIII (ala fallout... WiC) style. Absolutely perfect.

**Mavrok** · 11-08-2007, 11:59 PM

if anyone wants to try and make their own mod, im at school for cgi.... i would be more than willing to help!

**Tarenth** · 11-09-2007, 05:14 PM

Looks very cool. I'm leery about voice controls with a PC even if it makes a RTS game playable with a console. So many attempts at voice recognition suffers from utter failure depending on how people speak. Hell, walk into any hospital that uses the VOCERA system of communications and you'll see nurses and doctors yelling at themselves because the voice recognition keeps thinking "Call ED Reception" stands for "Call Radiology Department".

I don't think it'll go towards an MMO format either because that would require FAR too much overhead for MP to a game developer and game fanchise that has been primarily SP (yes, MP is good too, but SP has generally been the focus of Ubisoft and Tom Clancy with their games). They just might steal a book from one of the Mechwarrior games that claimed to have a persistant campaign. However that campaign just used a Win:Loss ratio over time to determine if a side has won or loss a battle before moving the campaign maps to a different area. Example: Side A vs Side B on planet X. If Side A wins than Side A advances to planet Y where Side A is on the offensive and Side B has better defensive positions, but if Side B wins the server maps are changed to planet Z where Side B is on the offensive and Side A has better defensive positions. If a side wipes the campaign clean a congrats is sent out and the server starts over again from the neutral maps.

Thread Tools

Display