Whenever I get really, truly bored I start thinking up game ideas (yeah, I know, geeky). But I thought this one wasn't particularly terrible.
I'm playing quite a bit of King of Dragon Pass, and I think an interesting game could be made by combining elements from Crusader Kings (with shifts to the technology model, but the dynastic model would be great) maybe Baldur's Gate. Basically, it'd be an inter-generational RPG with limited, realistic tactical combat.
You would start off as the ruling clique behind a small clan of an unsettled, barbaric people from Ireland to Kazakhstan and down into Northern Spain and the Black Sea coast (where civilized powers would set up a lot more resistence to raids). So, let's say you wanted to be a Danish clan from northern Jutland; you'd have some natural ferocity, natural skills with shipbuilding and trade, and you'd be able to use some pretty good armor, axes and the ability to create great oral works. You could get bored, decide to invade Poland, set up a Kingdom there, convert to Judaism and develop skills with cavalry under Khazar influence and set up a mighty Jewish Norse-Polish kingdom that would go on to rule all of Central Europe. Or you could go the historical route; raid Northern France, ask for permission from the Frankish king to settle the area, settle, develop skills with cavalry but keep maritime skills and go on to invade England.
The combat would focus upon certain key characters (say a clan leader, a shaman/religious leader, a war leader, maybe a bard) leading very small raiding groups or, later on, slightly larger war parties. Certain legendary items would exist (say a Roman sword for a Frankish clan, or a Chinese-made sword for the Kipchaks) and raiding would be as much for gaining prestige as much as women, cattle. Prestige would also be gained by going on certain religious quests, hosting inter-tribe feasts and eventually would be used to form a tribe of many clans, and eventually a kingdom. Quite a bit of the game would be adapting the techniques/technologies of encountered people and in incorporating different elements (Norse Axemen aren't great in the vast open steppe against horse archers, for instance) and deciding on the sanest path of expansion (kill all the leaders of culturally similar tribes and move into new area, convince a few to join you in a migration, kidnap women from the surrounding settled peoples and have a baby boom, etc...).
It's probably way too ambitious, but I don't think anyone has ever tried anything like it, and I think it could take the best of CK (the dynastic, RPG element) with some fun combat and a vastly different, non-linear technological model. The migration period could be fun because there are so many insane chances to fuck with history (see above Viking Polish Jews) and there is quite a bit of room for stuff we haven't seen in a game since at least King of Dragon Pass (like religious quests, or tribe-forming) and some stuff we've never seen (like the above cultural shifts, which were part of CK but more incidentally than a major focus of gameplay).
Anyone have any input? Other ideas?
Make it as a roguelike. Go for it.
I need some game ideas for an upcoming competition. The theme will probably be "B games". This is meant to be interpreted as some combination of:
1) A game that's crappy after the fashion of a B movie;
2) A game involving B movie themes;
3) Pretty much anything.
Last year's competition (http://forums.tigsource.com/index.php?topic=523.0)
The only thought I have at the moment is to do something with druggy 70s sci-fi along the lines of dark star, about a big ship somewhere in deep, cold, trippy space with a few bearded astronauts on it, with maybe some mechanics involving rearranging fuel rods or adjusting the content of the ship's atmosphere. Perhaps you would play as the onboard AI. And that's all I've got.
Anyone?
My idea of one 'perfect game' that has been floating around in my head for ages:
The game is set in a hard fantasy world and starts with you as head of a rebel army in a kingdom- the current king is really terrible and you have a claim as grandson of a respected former king. You have to lead your army through a short campaign, this campaign I guess can be the tutorial- with it being optional to skip forward to the 'final battle' of the fall of the capital where the game proper starts.
I was thinking sort of like Suikoden only with control over actual strategic decision making.
Once you've overthrown the old king you then have to rule the country. Sort of country management strategyesque. Various events will happen as time ticks by- you aren't a supreme dictator (by default anyway) and your kingdom will react to your decisions, there are other lands around yours too so there'll be wars of various kinds, new discoveries, etc...
Its pretty open ended, you've already 'won' at the start of the game so the key is more just not to lose. Perhaps it can go generational too.
Well beyond modern technology to do right I'd think.
How about a tetris like game influenced by the surprise hit "STALKER". You could call it Blocker or maybe something like Stacker.
I feel like we went through this exercise about 4-5 months ago and the thread ended with the OP storming off of Languish angrily... :huh:
fahdiz still is missing. . . :(
Quote from: Caliga on June 26, 2009, 09:04:51 PM
I feel like we went through this exercise about 4-5 months ago and the thread ended with the OP storming off of Languish angrily... :huh:
good times :)
Quote from: Caliga on June 26, 2009, 09:04:51 PM
I feel like we went through this exercise about 4-5 months ago and the thread ended with the OP storming off of Languish angrily... :huh:
I can't remember that :Lol:
What happened there? :S
Quote from: Caliga on June 26, 2009, 09:04:51 PM
I feel like we went through this exercise about 4-5 months ago and the thread ended with the OP storming off of Languish angrily... :huh:
Ahh, Ryoken. We didn't understand his agony.
I couldn't remember that guy's name. Senility strikes again. :(
Quote from: Caliga on June 27, 2009, 09:12:48 AM
I couldn't remember that guy's name. Senility strikes again. :(
Nothing wrong with not remembering mediocre people.
He was a very angry young man. Wonder where he went off to. Ah well, maybe he's dead. :)
Quote from: Caliga on June 27, 2009, 09:31:26 AM
He was a very angry young man. Wonder where he went off to. Ah well, maybe he's dead. :)
Angry? I'm angry. He was just another little emo punk.
The last few weeks I have thnking of a cards game on the Battle of Britain. Originality would reside in showing how Herman won IRL.
No, I'm not mad and Hans hasn't hacked my account; the Germans lost but Herman won. He kept his position, as did Sperrle and Kesselring, while Dowding and Park lost theirs to a nasty internecine intrigue led by Leigh Mallory and Bader.
The B game competition isn't happening. Instead there is a choice of themes: adult or eductational.
Quote from: Alatriste on June 27, 2009, 11:49:03 AM
The last few weeks I have thnking of a cards game on the Battle of Britain. Originality would reside in showing how Herman won IRL.
No, I'm not mad and Hans hasn't hacked my account; the Germans lost but Herman won. He kept his position, as did Sperrle and Kesselring, while Dowding and Park lost theirs to a nasty internecine intrigue led by Leigh Mallory and Bader.
That's intriguing; how do you see it working?
You would need a good feudal simulation of lords and loyalties to accurately portray the Nazi leadership.
Quote from: PDH on June 27, 2009, 07:06:37 PM
You would need a good feudal simulation of lords and loyalties to accurately portray the Nazi leadership.
Or drop some acid.
I want a game that lets one cockpunch Tim in the nuts through the internet.
Quote from: Pishtaco on June 27, 2009, 04:16:10 PM
The B game competition isn't happening. Instead there is a choice of themes: adult or eductational.
Quote from: Alatriste on June 27, 2009, 11:49:03 AM
The last few weeks I have thnking of a cards game on the Battle of Britain. Originality would reside in showing how Herman won IRL.
No, I'm not mad and Hans hasn't hacked my account; the Germans lost but Herman won. He kept his position, as did Sperrle and Kesselring, while Dowding and Park lost theirs to a nasty internecine intrigue led by Leigh Mallory and Bader.
That's intriguing; how do you see it working?
That's the difficult part... I would want to keep things as simple as possible, and further I don't like games that make you wear too many hats: Goering and Dowding didn't decide the actions of each squadron each day!
Some things are quite obvious.
1. Dowding's cool and aloof personality was his weak spot, for example. And his position was being unfaitly eroded by some things that were beyond anyone's ability to stop. Night bombing being an obvious example.
2. Both sides were very badly informed about the other. Numbers, tactics, reserves... they were almost blind at the start.
3. The effects of the Battle of France. Both RAF and Luftwaffe were very badly hit in May and June... actually Luftwaffe was losing so many planes over France as over Britain (but not the same, France was easier than Britain for fighters, harder for bombers)
4. Pretty much every book will tell you Fighter Command had more planes at the end than at the start of the battle. But not every one will tell you that was because of Hurricanes, while Spitfires had a very hard time fighting attrition.
On 1 August Fighter Command had 245 Spitfires and 341 Hurricanes.
On 1 September, 208 Spitfires, 405 Hurricanes
On 15 September, 189 Spitfires, 389 Hurricanes
On 30 September, 218 Spitfires, 403 Hurricanes...
5. I have a lot of information regarding new hardware (new radios, new radars, radar jammers, navigaion aids... )
In short I have a lot of raw data, now I would need to analyze them and decide which ones are essential.
Quote
You would need a good feudal simulation of lords and loyalties to accurately portray the Nazi leadership.
Long term, yes, but the Battle of Britain was quite brief and further it came just after the huge success in France. The key aspect in this timeframe would be IMHO that most generals and admirals knew Sealion would in all probability be a disaster. Heer, Kriegsmarine and many voices in the Luftwaffe were mainly interested in blaming the other branches. For example, the British player could actually play cards titled 'Hitler approves Army plans for Sealion' or 'Kriegsmarine landing exercise deemed successful' to make Goering lose face and exert pression on him.
The German player, on the other hand, could play 'Ace pilot defends Big Wing tactics', 'Coventry blitzed' or 'No Nazis shot down tonight... again!' to make Dowding position increasingly unstable.
Quote from: Alatriste on June 28, 2009, 05:06:35 AM
Long term, yes, but the Battle of Britain was quite brief and further it came just after the huge success in France. The key aspect in this timeframe would be IMHO that most generals and admirals knew Sealion would in all probability be a disaster. Heer, Kriegsmarine and many voices in the Luftwaffe were mainly interested in blaming the other branches. For example, the British player could actually play cards titled 'Hitler approves Army plans for Sealion' or 'Kriegsmarine landing exercise deemed successful' to make Goering lose face and exert pression on him.
The German player, on the other hand, could play 'Ace pilot defends Big Wing tactics', 'Coventry blitzed' or 'No Nazis shot down tonight... again!' to make Dowding position increasingly unstable.
:lol:
Cool. What a weird slant on a battle of britain game that would be.
Something that's a cross between King of Dragon Pass, Mount & Blade, The Guild, and The Sims. In short a simulation of medieval life where you can engage in whatever profession you choose.
Alariste, I like these ideas a lot.
They sound like my proto-game, The Five-Sided Playpen about the Pentagon process. My idea was that players play the chiefs of staff of the services and the joint staff, and get programs funded through the budget process. The more useless the program, the more glory for getting it funded.
Quote from: grumbler on June 28, 2009, 10:11:42 PM
Alariste, I like these ideas a lot.
They sound like my proto-game, The Five-Sided Playpen about the Pentagon process. My idea was that players play the chiefs of staff of the services and the joint staff, and get programs funded through the budget process. The more useless the program, the more glory for getting it funded.
Actually I was considering a purely German alternative, a game with four players: Hitler/OKW, Luftwaffe, Heer, Kriegsmarine.
Hitler is mainly interested in Barbarossa, Sealion is secundary. In consequence he won't support high risk / high yield bets on Britain. Barbarossa doesn't really need a navy, and only a very limited number of divisions would be risked in Sealion, but the Luftwaffe... Barbarossa will need a powerful Luftwaffe. If losses become high poor Herman is going to be in the receiving end of some Fuhrer's tantrums (a card, of course)
Goering is interested in power and prestige (and loot, and priceless art, "degenerate" or not) and has got a lot since September 39. He probably doesn't truely believe that England can be invaded successfully in 1940, Sealion is a joke, but when Heer and Kriegsmarine finally admit it can't be done, the 'Iron Man' will gain still more points. He delivers, not like the others. And who knows? Perhaps the Luftwaffe can defeat England alone after all... or at least get all the merit if the British recover the good sense and strike a deal!
Raeder is in a very difficult position. For the Kriegsmarine Barbarossa means utter insignificance while Sealion would in theory be a gift form Heaven, but the fleet is in shambles after the Norwegian campaign (and a very badly conceived foray in June, designed exclusively to get a few prestige points for the big ships before peace came that ended with Scharnhost and Gneisenau seriously damaged) and even in top shape would have been no match or the British Home Fleet. Sealion is a nightmare, it would be a complete disaster, but blame must somehow be deflected. And meanwhile the Navy must seem to be preparing seriously for the landings.
Heer's position is far easier apparently. If the Kriegsmarine and the Luftwaffe manage to land X divisions on England the invincible German army will conquer the country, period... if they can't the blame will fall on Raeder and Goering. But what if they manage to land some troops, dispersed, seasick and without heavy weapons or supplies and the British force them to surrender? Now that would be a disaster... and in consequence the army must press for a good landing, massive in numbers, massive in extension, massively protected by warships and airplanes, or none at all. If you are asking for an impossible, so much the better...
Quote from: Solmyr on June 28, 2009, 05:43:06 PM
Something that's a cross between King of Dragon Pass, Mount & Blade, The Guild, and The Sims. In short a simulation of medieval life where you can engage in whatever profession you choose.
I'm sure I've played that one before....
Quote from: Alatriste on June 29, 2009, 03:37:03 AM
Quote from: grumbler on June 28, 2009, 10:11:42 PM
Alariste, I like these ideas a lot.
They sound like my proto-game, The Five-Sided Playpen about the Pentagon process. My idea was that players play the chiefs of staff of the services and the joint staff, and get programs funded through the budget process. The more useless the program, the more glory for getting it funded.
Actually I was considering a purely German alternative, a game with four players: Hitler/OKW, Luftwaffe, Heer, Kriegsmarine.
Hitler is mainly interested in Barbarossa, Sealion is secundary. In consequence he won't support high risk / high yield bets on Britain. Barbarossa doesn't really need a navy, and only a very limited number of divisions would be risked in Sealion, but the Luftwaffe... Barbarossa will need a powerful Luftwaffe. If losses become high poor Herman is going to be in the receiving end of some Fuhrer's tantrums (a card, of course)
Goering is interested in power and prestige (and loot, and priceless art, "degenerate" or not) and has got a lot since September 39. He probably doesn't truely believe that England can be invaded successfully in 1940, Sealion is a joke, but when Heer and Kriegsmarine finally admit it can't be done, the 'Iron Man' will gain still more points. He delivers, not like the others. And who knows? Perhaps the Luftwaffe can defeat England alone after all... or at least get all the merit if the British recover the good sense and strike a deal!
Raeder is in a very difficult position. For the Kriegsmarine Barbarossa means utter insignificance while Sealion would in theory be a gift form Heaven, but the fleet is in shambles after the Norwegian campaign (and a very badly conceived foray in June, designed exclusively to get a few prestige points for the big ships before peace came that ended with Scharnhost and Gneisenau seriously damaged) and even in top shape would have been no match or the British Home Fleet. Sealion is a nightmare, it would be a complete disaster, but blame must somehow be deflected. And meanwhile the Navy must seem to be preparing seriously for the landings.
Heer's position is far easier apparently. If the Kriegsmarine and the Luftwaffe manage to land X divisions on England the invincible German army will conquer the country, period... if they can't the blame will fall on Raeder and Goering. But what if they manage to land some troops, dispersed, seasick and without heavy weapons or supplies and the British force them to surrender? Now that would be a disaster... and in consequence the army must press for a good landing, massive in numbers, massive in extension, massively protected by warships and airplanes, or none at all. If you are asking for an impossible, so much the better...
that would be a pretty good game tbh
All the backstabbing of diplomacy and all the comedy of Springtime for Hitler.
A lemmings-style game where you try and get as many kids out of Jacko's Neverland ranch.
Quote from: Palisadoes on June 29, 2009, 05:48:38 PM
A lemmings-style game where you try and get as many kids out of undead Jacko's Neverland ranch.
Gotta have the zombie aspect.
Quote from: grumbler on June 29, 2009, 06:03:23 PM
Quote from: Palisadoes on June 29, 2009, 05:48:38 PM
A lemmings-style game where you try and get as many kids out of undead Jacko's Neverland ranch.
Gotta have the zombie aspect.
:lol:
A BoB game like that would be a pretty neat educational game for the competition, although I guess it would be awkward to squeeze it into a solitaire game that would work on a computer.
My ideas so far:
-Some kind of X-comish strategy game based on the travels and letters of St Paul;
-A physics puzzler about kneading and baking bread.
"Our bloody ships" - Dreadnoughts of the Royal Navy, 1906-1918.
A shoot-em-up, where in the shooting part you control a dreadnought (or a small squadron of them), with the rest of the fleet action dealt with in some abstract way. The ship's armour and systems are configurable, and in action you have to deal with damage-control as well as fighting.
There's a strategic layer where you can spend votes on new ships and improved equipment. There's a map of the world featuring a small number of oceans, naval bases, and rival powers. You can decide fleet dispositions and perhaps make some choices in events, with some effect on diplomacy and on the number of votes.
Each year is one turn. You do some strategic stuff and then an action mission. If at peace, this is an exercise; perhaps you can choose which combination of powers to fight, and earn some doctrines that can be used in later missions. If at war, it's the real thing and is generated by your dispositions, scouting abilities, etc.
The game should give some feeling of the naval race and the build-up of tensions going into the first world war. It should also be fun to design your battleships, blow bits off the AI's, and keep yours going under fire.
Quote from: Pishtaco on July 08, 2009, 07:26:27 AM
"Our bloody ships" - Dreadnoughts of the Royal Navy, 1906-1918.
A shoot-em-up, where in the shooting part you control a dreadnought (or a small squadron of them), with the rest of the fleet action dealt with in some abstract way. The ship's armour and systems are configurable, and in action you have to deal with damage-control as well as fighting.
There's a strategic layer where you can spend votes on new ships and improved equipment. There's a map of the world featuring a small number of oceans, naval bases, and rival powers. You can decide fleet dispositions and perhaps make some choices in events, with some effect on diplomacy and on the number of votes.
Each year is one turn. You do some strategic stuff and then an action mission. If at peace, this is an exercise; perhaps you can choose which combination of powers to fight, and earn some doctrines that can be used in later missions. If at war, it's the real thing and is generated by your dispositions, scouting abilities, etc.
The game should give some feeling of the naval race and the build-up of tensions going into the first world war. It should also be fun to design your battleships, blow bits off the AI's, and keep yours going under fire.
Neil and I vote for this one. :lol:
Sadly every warship controlling game I've ever played sucked.
My faith that it can be done right is low.
Quote from: Crazy_Ivan80 on June 29, 2009, 04:28:48 PM
that would be a pretty good game tbh
All the backstabbing of diplomacy and all the comedy of Springtime for Hitler.
I remember
Plot to Assassinate Hitler, weird game. In retrospect, it may have worked better if it was card based.
Quote from: saskganesh on July 17, 2009, 10:03:16 AM
Quote from: Crazy_Ivan80 on June 29, 2009, 04:28:48 PM
that would be a pretty good game tbh
All the backstabbing of diplomacy and all the comedy of Springtime for Hitler.
I remember Plot to Assassinate Hitler, weird game. In retrospect, it may have worked better if it was card based.
I'll be Otto Remer.