Reworking our Demo Approach

[axi]

Have I been misunderstood?

Or have I misunderstood something?

Weren't we talking about the far future? Anyway, the scenario plan I've made is for when we will have the basic game functionalities available, which are military, economy, infrastucture, merchants, technology, diplomacy, government, riots and AI. I thought only diplomacy, riots and AI haven't been coded yet and that they are going to be coded (at least partly) before demo 7. If this isn't the case, well then at least the first two scenarios are possible.

I am not urging anybody to go fast. Code as much as you can, whenever you can. And of course I am not the one who will tell anybody what to do. Specially since I haven't been the most helpful of the team. There are lots of issues open for discussion lately and I admit that RL has not let me keep up with all of them, that is carefully examine other's ideas, ponder on them and post my own. I haven't even done anything worthwhile with the testbed. I'm sorry.

I feel that Clash, although it has progressed, it hasn't reached maturity yet. This is not a reason to revise our tactics. This is a reason to work to mature it. We cannot judge the game with basic stuff missing from it.

[Mark_Everson]

Re: Have I been misunderstood?

Hi Axi:

Originally posted by axi
Have I been misunderstood?
Or have I misunderstood something?

Probably some of each.

Weren't we talking about the far future?

I was talking about a set of well-defined stepping-stones from where we are now, to the moderately far future. The character that your proposal lacks IMO is that going from scenario 1 to 2 there is addition of a lot of things that either don't exist at all (AI, Ship Boarding), or are in a somewhat primitive state (Govt Model, tech...). Whereas the progression I outlined adds basically one thing at a time. By my old definitions the models you are using in scenario 2 were "good enough" to see what people thought. Well, unfortunately, nobody is giving their thoughts except you and one or two others.

Anyway, the scenario plan I've made is for when we will have the basic game functionalities available, which are military, economy, infrastucture, merchants, technology, diplomacy, government, riots and AI. I thought only diplomacy, riots and AI haven't been coded yet and that they are going to be coded (at least partly) before demo 7. If this isn't the case, well then at least the first two scenarios are possible.

Many of the things that are "coded already" are not well-refined, have no or poor gui elements etc. The use of such things, in FE the econ model, seem to be preventing us from getting useful comments on the game models from the general public, and frequently even team members. Even more important than having things coded is to have them validated as fun from more than the few of us in the "small gaming company". This lack of interest is what I took as a sign to slow down, and consider doing things a bit differently. That was the overall purpose of this thread. With you as perhaps an exception, everyone seems to agree the current plan was somewhat misguided, if not completely broken.

I feel that Clash, although it has progressed, it hasn't reached maturity yet. This is not a reason to revise our tactics. This is a reason to work to mature it. We cannot judge the game with basic stuff missing from it.

Well, all I can say is that IMO without broader feedback, we're in big potential trouble, and that's why I thought it was time to revise our tactics a bit.

Cya,

Mark

[Gary Thomas]

There is also my input, which tends to be do it small, do it right, then take the next step, rather than a whole lot of things that don't work. You eventually get there with my method, though it might take time. Going the other way, you give up in despair before you arrive.

Axi, there is certainly nothing wrong with your plan as an eventual goal, and I believe we will work towards something like it. But, realistically, and being realistic is quite painful, that is around two to three years away. And we have to keep people's interest up in the meantime. Hence the proposed mini scenarios.

Cheers

[axi]

OK then!

Let's focus on economy, population, the GUI and AI before functionally adding more models into the game. That is if I haven't misunderstood you again. There are several proposals about economy and the GUI in the D6 thread which could be worked on.

Ship boarding should be a functionality added now, at least for the player, so that we have enough time to refine it. What have we made the coasts for, if we aren't going to use ships. Boarding AI can wait.

[Gary Thomas]

Ship boarding should be a functionality added now, at least for the player, so that we have enough time to refine it. What have we made the coasts for, if we aren't going to use ships. Boarding AI can wait.

While I do not disagree with this, it does mean that computer directed civilizations cannot use boats. The scenario should be designed around this.

One of the things that is presently available, though not used in the existing scenarios, is the possibility of restricting the player to a subset of the civilizations in the game. There is a flag called "selectable" when it asks the player to select a civilization. So we could very easily set up unsymmetric scenarios (as in the tutorials for Age Of Empires, where you can only have one of the civilizations).

Cheers

[Mark_Everson]

Hi Gents:

The restricting civs the player can take idea certainly sounds good to me. Being able to have any number of capabilities that the AI doesn't support yet will be a big enabler for testing things as early as possible.

[Gary Thomas]

The xml file that defines the scenario just needs (in the &ltcivilization&gt section) a specification:

&ltselectable&gtfalse&lt/selectable&gt

Cheers

[Mark_Everson]

Seemed like a good time to bump this up, since we're trying to close in on D7!

[Dale]

Can I just make a suggestion? (BTW, thanks Mark for pointing out a "scenario" opportunity going )

To suck people into playing the scenarios through to learn the game so the full-on game is not so hard, a few rules need to be kept in perspective.

1. If it's boring, I'll EXIT.
2. If it assumes I'm stupid, I'll EXIT.
3. If it's too hard straight off, I'll EXIT.
4. If I have to make 30 clicks to finish a tute and start the next one, I'll EXIT.
5. If I just sit there, read and click once or twice a turn, I'll EXIT.
6. If I can't experiment in the tutes to see how things work, I'll EXIT.

Here's my suggestions:
1. Rise Of Rome is always the perfect tute choice as it provides depth, everyone knows briefly the history, it's easy to introduce it (1st battle, is with a particularly accepting region in Italy, proceeding through regions till you hit the Greeks, Carthages, Egyptians, Brits, etc).
2. I want to explore the game. Let me play with the economics (with limited help since I haven't been introduced to economics yet in the campaign) and starve my nation to death.
3. I want some decision in which direction I take (assumes I'm smart ). In battle one, you could either choose diplomatic takeover or conquest for example.
4. I won't learn if I don't lose. But I won't play if I get tromped!
5. I want my advisor feedback, even if he's telling me "I told you so!" when I starved everyone to death by stuffing around with in-depth economics in the first tute.

BTW, if you want some help writing scenarios/tutes let me know.

Dale

[Mark_Everson]

Hey Dale, thanks for the coments. We can clearly use 'em as things get further along. I'm not sure they apply to what we're doing right now completely though. What you're talking about are demos for finished games. FE we may violate your #5 especially in the Dawn scenario tutorial which is designed to be a slower-paced intro to the game as it exists now.

Right now I am the default guy to write the tutorial. If you'd like to take a shot at it, I'd be overjoyed. If so let me know. After you're familiar with D6 (means reading the dreaded manual ) we can set you up with a preview version of D7, and after you've kicked it around a bit, you could write up the tutorial. Scenarios are probably best left till D7 is further along, or maybe after D7. FE there is no map editor right now, and probably you'd want that going first.

[Dale]

Mark:

I've got a few ideas of a good tutorial campaign in mind (was going to use it for HOE actually).

Setting:
Ancient Egypt. At the time of the Sirian wars.

This can all be done on the one map, the one game.

Mission 1:
"Pharoh is marching through the Sinai at present and requires you to clear a critical pass of Sirians. You have 10 turns."
Objectives:
1. Move units to head of pass. (Introduce unit movement)
2. Explore the pass to find the two entrenched Sirian defenders. (Introduce exploring/scouting)
3. Kill the two entrenched Sirian defenders. (Introduce simple combat)

End mission 1: Pharoh appears with a number of units. Well done!

Mission 2:
"Pharoh's scouts have located a poorly defended frontier Sirian town to the east. He requires you to take this town so that a forward base of operations and supply can be setup. You have 5 turns."
Objectives:
1. Move units to the east. (Only needs to be a couple of squares)
2. Attack the town and capture it. (Introduce simple town warfare, no walls, one defender)

End mission 2: Pharoh appears again with his army and takes over the town.

Mission 3:
"Pharoh has given you some of his elite chariot units to use as scouts. He has heard rumours of rich gold/gem mines to the south. He wants you to find and secure them. You have 20 turns."
Objectives:
1. Move chariots (fast scouts basically) south to find the mountain range there. (Introduce advanced exploring)
2. Move your army (from missions 1 & 2 after being replenshed by Pharoh) south to secure the mountain range. (Introduce combined military actions)
3. Kill all the Sirian units in the mountain range. (Introduce ranged attacks with arrows and flanker chariots since the chariots are war chariots and archers)
4. Capture the mountain city from the Sirians. (Introduce sieges cuz this town has a wall!)

End mission: Pharoh congratulates you and sets you up as Governor of the city.

Mission 4:
"Pharoh has ordered you to begin supplying a stream of gold/gems to fund his new Pyramid. You must setup an economy based on moving 5 gold/gems per turn to Egypt. You have 40 turns. Pharoh's military advisor has warned you that the Sirians may counter-attack."
Objectives:
1. Setup an economy that isn't going backwards.
2. Setup mines for the gold/gems.
3. Setup a trade route back to Egypt for 5 gold/gems per turn.
4. Defend against the Sirian counter-attack.

End mission: Pharoh has ordered that you be known as a cousin to him. You have been promoted.

Mission 5:
"Pharoh has ordered you to capture 5 more Sirian cities in the region. You have 50 turns."
Objectives:
1. Produce a military unit.
2. Produce a barracks.
3. Explore further.
4. Produce an army.
5. Conquor 5 cities.

End mission: Pharoh loves you blah blah blah.

Mission 6:
"Pharoh has ordered you to conduct diplomacy with the Sirians and obtain their technology of metallurgy. You have 20 turns."
1. Conduct diplomacy with Sirians. Sue for peace.
2. Advisor tells you that the Sirians will not give metallurgy, but believes our technology of "whatever" will sway them. However we must finish researching it first.
3. Begin research of "whatever".
4. Sirians conduct diplomacy asking for trade route of ivory.
5. Pharoh wants silk from the Sirians. You conduct diplomacy with them.
6. Finish research of "whatever" and conduct diplomacy for tech trade.

End mission: Pharoh congratulates you and orders you home for a banquet in your honour. Campaign completed.

What do you think? Of course that's quick thinking and may have ideas not in Clash yet. But it's something.

[Mark_Everson]

Hey Dale:

I think its reasonably compelling! I don't think we should tear up the D7 plans, but something of this sort could probably be done for D8. That is aside from the things we don't have implemented yet, or where ya' guessed wrong on how it works in Clash

Lets see what the others think!

[Dale]

Mark:

Yeah I know. I'm gunna fiddle with demo 6 this afternoon. I'll find out where I went wrong eh? But if enough people like that sort of tutorial flow it's at least a base to work from.

[Mark_Everson]

Hey Dale:

"Went wrong"? Had you tried it before and couldn't get it to work? I couldn't remember... Anyway it will be good to get some comments on it!

[LDiCesare]

What I think is missing in the demo for such a tutorial:
Maybe some events checking (turns/"victory" condition/fate if failed to accomplish it)
City walls and siege.
Diplomacy.
Tech trading.
The warfare/building/trading part can probably be done right away. I could start thinking about/coding sieges or diplomacy, whichever people out here prefer (my current efforts at getting a war declaration when getting into neutral territory only resulted in frustration and unusable/boring/useless user interface so I might as well do something else).
Dale, if you can try to see if archers make any difference to you in D6 (D7 will have more feedback for them), I'd like to hear: Currently, combined arms exist in the code but may not be balanced and the feedback is rather poor :/