Rise of Nations -- Time for your ideas!

[Blue Moose]

Supply and other things

Are supply wagons going to move? I envision that ideally you'd "make" an army by assigning troops to it. You could then assign supply wagons to the army as well. Supply wagons would hold a fixed amount of resources, and when those resources were used up, they'd head back home to refill themselves. That way if you surrounded an enemy army, eventually they'd run out of supply (I am not sure how the system works currently, hopefully it is like this). Naturally, the supply wagons should be smart enough not to go off and get killed if the army is surrounded, or at least you should have an order available so that they won't leave the army to be refilled. This would make it important to guard your supply lines, while not adding that much work and basically not micromanagement (you just remember to add supply wagons to your army). Also, supply boats for land units should be possible (if they stay near or return periodically to the cost). Persia used this system when invading Greece. Also, supply boats should be able to fill up supply carts. Lastly, when you get decent aircraft, supply planes should make an appearence.

I think some people's conceptions of army/societal leaders is a bit flawed. Some have said that they should provide random bonuses, or even have a ruler at any time that might be good or bad (totally randomly). The problem with this, is that it would make for some awful games. You don't want a run of bad luck ruining things for your civ. Random factors should be there, but should, overall, have a small influence. The game is about people as a civilization competing, hence it is called "Rise of Nations," as opposed to "The Whimsy of Chaos." Just my two cents. (not that there shouldn't be leaders, rather any random effects should be minimal).

As for nukes, every civilization should have an equal chance with them. A game like civilization or Rise of Nations *should not* be trying to duplicate the current world, rather it should be about how things might have gone if the world had been a bit different. Any superpower in the modern era would have had a lot of nukes, and even more nukes if there was a major threat that had them. That's just how it is. Also, will be a mutually assured destruction system? That is, can you assign potential targets for your nuclear silos (say multiple groups of potential targets, so in scenerio A group 1 targets would be attacked, while in B group 2 targets would be hit). Either that, or allow some sort of AI retaliation system, where all you have to do is "give the word" and your nukes will be launched at the civilization that attacked you (with perhaps an option as to wether you'd want civilian targets the focus, military, or you didn't care). Perhaps this would also include any nuclear bombers you had as well.

Also, aircraft need some intelligence system, since the rally-point idea in EE is nice, but can lead to problems of stupidity where they'll keep flying to their deaths over and over, and even if you change the waypoint all the ones in the will still keep going to their deaths...a bit messy). Perhaps at least some automap functions so that your air units/ground units/buildings/etc are easily distinguishable, so at least you could manually see your air units and redirect them.

As for sea battles, EE's system could use some work. Ships were too big and bulky and made moving those units around a pain. Boats should be much smaller relatively, and subs should be on a different 'plane' than other ships, so that they can occupy space underneath a surface ship, and don't need to worry about bumping into surface vessels. Naturally, there should be some sort of supply system for sea vessels, but in the modern era it should be slightly demphasized (compared to land units), since a Aircraft carrier is almost a city unto itself.

As for taking over enemy cities...even after they have converted, there should still be possible some resistance. An "underground" if you will. This could just be added by having a great supply problem inside an conquered town (or something similar that deals some damage to your troops, but rarely if ever kills any). This could be based on how strong politically and culturally that civ was compared to yours.

The last thing I can think about is this. New cities should require a fair amount of resources to make, and trying to make a city far, far away from any of your current ones should be strongly discouraged (via the supply system). This will prevent the unrealistic strategies of building cities as close to other player's starting locations as you can, and later backfilling...historically this simply didn't happen at all.

[admiralk]

Ok, here's some of my ideas Brian:

1. Garrison units shoot out of Buildings. One thing I like about AOK and Starcraft was that you can garrison units in buildings and they'll fire out of it. That was interesting and realistic. I think that'll be cool for RON.

2. Taunts. Taunts are soooo fun online. Many people have good times taunting away. I think it'll be cool if u have national only taunts.

3. USA. Ok, ok i know its been mentioned a million times but thousands of people want to see USA in this game. I don't want to cough up another 30 dollars for and xpack with USA in it when it could've been in the full. I doubt you'll listen to this one but i still wanna mention it.

Thats all I can think of now I'll say more later.

[admiralk]

I know many ppl understand why USA isn't in or why it should be in. I can accept it but it still needs mentioning. Forget it don't worry about it, I shouldn't have mentioned it.

Another thing that would be cool though is Regulars for the ages that involve 1700-1800. Regulars were mainstay army at that time those troopers with the funny hats like in Patriot. Ahh I hear some people call them Fuseliers. They were mainstay army grenadiers were elite.

[Bmtmich]

I think that for nukes there should be proportional damage realated to how close to where the nuke landed. So right where the nuke hit would be ground zero and anything there would be destroyed, but the farther away from where the bomb hit the less damage you take, so near the edge you will only take one or two pts damage. This makes bigger and more powerful nukes possible, but then at the same time wouldnt be like in EE, where you can take out all of a force with one well placed bomb

And I think there shouldnt be walls, but instead once your city gets to a certin size, walls will be constructed around it automatically. That would make the player focus more on building up each of their cities.

[Starspangled]

One thing I didn't like in SWGB is that you couldn't make alliances with computer players they had to ask you to become partners

You shoud have a button to make alliances.

[Starspangled]

You should have a way to cunduct seiges. In other games like SWGB & AOK you can't because they already have every thing they need within their walls (either you can't or it takes increadibly long to do it).

[admiralk]

Ya i think it'll be cool if you can talk to the AI computer players and be friends with them. Or mess up and they'll hate you.

[Starspangled]

Also, do any of the African civs have elephants?
Because the Cathagenians used them aganst Rome and they are african.

[Starspangled]

You should be able to lend or barrow units with your friends (human & computer)

[Strategy Master]

Satalites
When you reach the modern day ages, a building should be requried (call it NASA) and satalites can be built. They would be expensive and be able to uncover parts of the map as your satalite moves in orbit.

This means that satalites won't uncover the whole map unless you have about 6. You won't be able to see the actual satallite. It will move very slowly at first and only reveal small circles of area. The more you build, the more of the map you can see and technologies can be discovered to make them move faster.

Circular map
You could have an option button that allows the map to be round. e.g when you walk a man off the right side of the screen then he appears on the other side. No more staying in the corner and having only one side of a base to defend. You would need defences nearly all the way around your base. The enemy could attack from anywhere.

Special Technologies
At some points in the game certain actions (You gain a high culture or something) could cause a special bonus to be given to a civ. e.g You learn the ability to make your units protect themselves in a turtle formation (shields covering your whole army) so arrows would be useless. This was used by the romans but any civ should be able to get a special technology.

Revolts
A counter should be created which is how likeable you are. If you give your villagers rewards the counter increases. If you neglect them or build millitary, the counter decreases. When this reaches a low number, villagers may start to revolt slowly and cause destruction as well as economic problems. If you kill villagers with millitary then the revolts stop as counter increases. If the revolts destroy a certain number of buildings then the counter also increases stopping revolts. This stops revolts from destroying your whole race.

[Mahdimael]

Some suggestions:

1. Artillery/siege weapons. Infantry losses to these weapons should be relatively slight. Even in WWI, when thousands of artillery pieces were massed, they did not have the effect of killing as many infantrymen as was expected. Perhaps artillery should only damage troops to a certain degree, but never kill them.

2. As I mentioned before- I like the idea of researching different tactics for different time periods. For instance, the invention of the machine gun allows research of trench warfare, and the invention of the tank allows squad-based warfare. Using obsolete tactics should be as deadly as using obsolete weapons (see Maginot line). Another example would be the innovation of a main body and flanks, as opposed to a single line.

3. Similarly, I think walls should have various levels of technology. Pre-gunpowder walls would be more effective against catapaults, while post-gunpowder walls/fortifications would be more effective against cannons.

4. I like the idea of more in-depth diplomacy, rather than just "neutral","war", "peace". Not Civ3 in-depth, but the ability to exchange technology and resources would be cool.

5. I don't think this should be a problem, given the way cities and borders work, but I would hate for the game to come down to a race for technology or units (a la Warcraft 3) followed by a single massed battle. Perhaps there should be some kind of resources or something that give a bonus/ allow production of something scattered around the map. Battles could be fought over these resources. For instance, a mountain with iron in it would allow the player to build swordsmen (or whatever) at an increased rate.

6. Finally, in the same spirit as the latter, don't make key resources available in specific locations (i.e. Gold Mines in WC3). I don't like having predetermined locations where I need to build to win

Ok, all done!

[DarkSide of Day]

The Role "Government Types" could play in RoN.

I think the type of Government chosen could add an interesting element to how the strategy in RoN will play. The types of government a nation choose to follow defiantly played a role in its fate. I think it would be a great addition that should be included in the game. However it sounds like BHG is having a little trouble finding a way to introduce it to RoN & RTS and have it meaningful and not tedious.

As you can read below. A part of an Article from GameSpy. Tim Train wrote....

We originally had governments almost as a technology upgrade, where different Age or Civics advancements allowed you to move from Theocracy to Monarchy and so on. However, in practice that just meant that you always had to remember to press a particular button after getting the appropriate upgrade, and if you forgot to press the button then blood shot out of your eye because you had lost valuable time to your opponent who may have remembered the magic button. In short, it wasn't an interesting choice.

Thus, we then tried to jazz it up by making "separate but equal" choices for governments that might be chosen in different circumstances -- Communism for a strong military strategy or Democracy for a booming economy, for example. However, these ideas proved very abstract and difficult to grasp in the context of a real-time game, and seemed to detract from the fun for most people. Although we still have fond dreams of eventually working governments into a real-time game system, for now we've had to table the idea.

Well I have a few ideas......

I don't think "type of government" should simply be a tech in the Nations Tree. It should be a strategic part of the game that can effect the outcome of the game.

When you look back at the history of many of the nations of the world that influenced mankind you can find points in their history were they made conscious decisions as to what style of government that nation would have. Examples of this would be Russia in the early 1900's or France in the 1700's as well as the USA. Some were drastic changes that happen very fast as in Russia going from a Monarchy to communism, and then to democracy, or in Iran switching to a religious style of government from a Monarchy. While other nations changed the style of they’re governments more slowly as in England going from a Monarchy to a democracy. Each of these changes in government had a profound impact on each nations
future. Some good, some bad.

With that in mind there a several ways that " Government Types " could be introduced into this RTS.

Progressing to the next Age.

This is where and when Types of Governments can be chosen. Take a page out AOM's manual. When you progress to the next age you decide what demi-god you will follow. In RoN you could decide what government type your nation will follow. ( with a twist that I will get to later )

If Starting the game in the "Ancient Age" when your nation has no real government to speak of other then one person in charge (you). And your countries have little contact with other nations and combat really does not play a huge role in most RTS's, and even if it did, it wouldn't matter as most techs would not have been researched yet. ......There would be no " Type of Government ".

If starting in later Ages you would chose your style of Government at the start of the game. ie: you chose England as an Monarchy., etc.

Progressing to the "Classical Age"

This is were Government Types could be chosen for the first time. The Type of Government chosen here could and should have benefits and drawbacks depending on the Nation you have chosen and the strategy you will be using in the game.

Progressing to the "Medieval Age"

Here is where the Twist comes in!

You can decide if you want to change Government Types, or keep it the same when advancing Ages.

If you decide to switch the type of government your nation is using the time it takes will be longer to progress to the next age. If you decide to keep the same type of government the progression to the next age would be quicker (for now). Everytime a nation changes it's government type there is a period of unrest ( as used in the Civ series of games ) and that would delay the progression to the next age. During this unrest all resource gathering would come to a halt, your military would become weaker either through moral or reduced hitpoints and attack. In addition it should also be expensive to change governments. But there should also be big future benefits when changing to a more advanced form of government. hehe, you should even be able to revert back to older forms of government if you want. Why you would want to revert back to an older form of government is hard to say; maybe monarchies will give you greater control of your army or your nation and reap short-term advantages.

A Nation would be faced with this decision every time it was about to advance!

This could add an interesting element to the game that you could consider a "double edged sword"

You have a real choices to make, when should you progress to the next Age, and at what age should you change government types?

Change Governments at an early age:

.....and if too quickly or when your nation is at war, or if your nations defences are not adequate and you could leave yourself open to an invasion by another nation.

Change government types too late:

.....and risk falling behind in advancement in tech's and gathering improvements, military upgrades, etc. Eventually sticking with an outdated form of government for too many ages will even slow the progression time to future ages.

Certain government types could have advantages in different ages.

Monarchies worked well in the Medieval Age but not so good in the Industrial Age. Old and outdated forms of government would slow down that nations advancement in other ages.

This could be done in many different ways. Perhaps older forms of governments would slow down and add to the times that it took research techs, some of these techs being requirements to advance to further ages. Perhaps these nations vills would gather resources slower, hence taking more time to gather the resources needed to buy the techs, and improvements, etc.

Government Types and their Advantages and Drawbacks.

Certain government types would benefit trade and commerce; others would benefit their military, etc. Each form of government would also have its drawbacks that could be introduced.

I know that BHG want to introduce "Government Types" to RoN and perhaps the above ideas might provide them with a way that would still make it simple and not complicated, but also have government types play a real role in the game and help impact the outcome of games played. It could really add some depth to the game not seen in RTS games before!


Just food for thought.....

[DarkSide of Day]

Conceding Territory:

Conceding Territory:

As part of the diplomacy function RoN should allow one player to hand over territory to another player for certain concessions? ie: not to attack them, to attack someone else or to ally with, for resources, etc, ( like Napoleon sold the mid west to the US after defeating Spain )

[Mahdimael]

On Governments:

I like the idea. Maybe have each country have 3 or 4 choices through the course of the game. Each country's choices would be individualized. So Russia in the Industrial Age could choose between Communism and Monarchy, but Germany would choose between Republic and Fascism.

Another way to do it would be to have a small dialog onscreen that would allow you to choose quickly between a few different types of government, each with generalized bonuses and penalties. You could switch between governments at a click. Some switches would be painless (i.e. Despotism to Monarchy), while others might cause temporary problems or revolution (Communism to Fascism). There would be some kind of time limit between governmental changes (10 minutes or something) so people couldn't constantly be changing. Maybe there could even be a wonder to eliminate the time limit or penalties when switching.

[Strategy Master]

Blacksmiths
When upgrade units they always have weapons which have not yet been researched. You should have to research the weapon at the blacksmith first.

e.g I upgrade an old clubman thing to a legion or something. Thing is that the legion will look like the clubman still. You have to research new armor and weapons before the legion looks like a proper legion, not a clubman.

I would think this would be great if implemented into the game.