A friend of mine tried (with my help) to create something like (only similar... not exact) what you want. It went OKAY, but definitely had a lot of room for improvement. You could take a look at that map for inspiration, if you wanted. It's in the arcade under 'War of Duality'.
Interesting.
Got hooked when you mentioned natural selection, had played with the thought of doing something similar for some years now. But never came around to it. I have thought alot about its design though, but the actual making... im studying so dont have much time anymore.
Made a bunch of maps though.
Let me give you some tips though:
I assume you want two race sides, like zerg and terran?(or protoss aswell)
Throw the hero idea out the window. Scrap it. Its an outdated model and thought process that is still stuck in your head. You said you thought about making them start with the basic unit again when they died, then what sense would a hero make?None. People want to dominate someone else, sc2 doesn't ahve heroes, and people play it. Spells, economy etc. is okay though. Maybe make heroes, but only if that is were the game is going, dont force the game into a hero game from the start.
Take blizzard for example, they're making their new moba, and don't have any gold farming. You can argue all day why blizzard is so dumb lately, but they're on to something, you can't copy to get to the top. You need to find a new niche. Add heroes and you will always be in the shadow of others.
Keep it pure. What is the pure core of this idea? Take natural selection again. A platform, maybe a ship, two sides gaining ground on each other, a fight between economy for later strength and here and now power, but later weakness, and the winner is decided on skillshots and multitasking.
Thats it. Thats the core. Go from there, not kerrigan, not heroes, you work your way up, from the roots, not the leafs.
If you dont, it will come across as cheesy, as clunky, unfinished, as if its lacking something, it maybe even look incredible good, but after 2-3 games people will just not want to play another round. And they don't know why. To avoid that you have to find the interesting core first, instead of the superficial.
Thats my experience through the years.
Well I would be interested in working with you, but honestly terrain and game design is the only things that interest me, and which I have time for.
Like Lamrq just said it, you should start from a basic point of view. What are you trying to achieve ? What are the different role of the players ?
I really love Natural Selection but I am pretty sure things should been made different to be fun for every players.
Here is how I see it:
- The maps are Starcraft 2 like. Only things to keeps in mind is to have it more choky and not too much wide like in a moba. Lot of bases, maybe with only a few minerals to force regular move and spreading. Neutral units defend some of the places to slow the begining of the game. Heroes units should be needed to clean these places (Neutral too strong or/and giving a lot of experiences).
- I think the experience would be better with Battlefield victory mechanics. 3 or 5 victory spot that need to be
controlled. The team with less spot controlled slowly loose point. Killed heroes respawn instantly but use one point. First team with no points loose the game. The starting pool point is also a good way to balance the game pace.
- The commander role is to:
a) Build up and expand Economy. Take new bases and build workers.
b) Expand technology.
c) Expand production facilites and build up defenses on key location.
d) Choose wich units are beeing made by "factories" and increase their production. I think the macro side should be softer than in Starcraft 2. A bit like Warcraft 3 on attention-demanding side, but it should lead to a lot of Units like in Starcraft 2. So maybe you choose a unit and the "factories" just build it like infinitly. To accelerate production you build more factories or you can drop-pod on it like in Starbow. Also mean that Commander have an easier time with building generic units, but need to pay attention for Special ones so he does not build too much of them. Generic units could also spawn in squad.
e) Coordinate Hero players (Hero)
f) Control Units (Units)
- Hero role are to:
a) Level up to increase the strenght of their team. I think the Blizzard-MOBA idea to share experience is a good one in that kind of game as an harassing hero or hero-killer can be out of combat for a while to achieve his goal and help the team.
b) Free places on the map from neutral or enemy Units for the Commander to take new base and acquiring new techs.
c) Control Units. They need to control them too for the moment where they are hanging out not that far but cannot engage. It also mean the commander can build special Unit for the Heroes but he dont have to babysit them (ex: a dropship, a medic, etc...)
Here is how I see the hero type differ from each others. I would class them in a two row table.
First row: Unit captain (need to hang out with unit to achieve full potential), Hero (useful on his own, the more typical hero), Harasser (better at killing enemy's economy/workers and neutral units), Defender (better at zoning an area, with or without Units help, with or without beeing there).
Second row: Tank, Support, Splash damage dealer, Single target damage dealer.
Heroes have to be micro demanding. Perfect use of them is to have most of their skills on cooldown and use
them all the times. Plus they use their own type of armor and attack like in Warcraft 3 so units can differs from each other but Hero still have the same useness agaisnt all of them.
I am not sure it is needed to use object to improve heroes over time as specific unit can achieve the same role (new skills, heal, shield, etc...).
I am again working on this project but the core has changed drastically.
I want two players to play a 1vs1 melee. Each side has 3 additional players assisting those melee players with heros. No points or artificial winning conditions. The side who has no buildings left loses (heros cannot build any buildings).
The heros will be MOBA-styled, but their abilities will be more focused on SC2 combat (meaning a higher focus on control, less on damage, more AoE, less single-target).
Questions I am working on involve - how do heros gain strength. I want to use XP and resources, but I am unsure where they should get them. Especially XP seems rather problematic to me because if kills give XP then utility heros will be underleveled and noone will play them.
Just a quick note: this type of game has been done before Natural Selection - google Savage and Savage 2, you may find some inspiration. If you really want to walk the DOTA-route, check out Smite.
I worked out most things about the game. Right now it can be summarized pretty quickly by saying:
It's a 1vs1 melee matchup with each side having 3 heros, controlled by seperate players. The melee gameplay is not altered.
I worked out a lot of questions I had - for example how the heros get their resources. Now it's time I get the map working, because I also need it for an application. In other words, I wouldn't mind 1-2 helping hands. Mostly it would be great to have someone to do stuff that takes a lot of time - meaning actors for example (sounds and visuals).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
A friend of mine tried (with my help) to create something like (only similar... not exact) what you want. It went OKAY, but definitely had a lot of room for improvement. You could take a look at that map for inspiration, if you wanted. It's in the arcade under 'War of Duality'.
Might do.
As for recruitment, will make a new topic.
Interesting. Got hooked when you mentioned natural selection, had played with the thought of doing something similar for some years now. But never came around to it. I have thought alot about its design though, but the actual making... im studying so dont have much time anymore. Made a bunch of maps though.
Let me give you some tips though: I assume you want two race sides, like zerg and terran?(or protoss aswell) Throw the hero idea out the window. Scrap it. Its an outdated model and thought process that is still stuck in your head. You said you thought about making them start with the basic unit again when they died, then what sense would a hero make?None. People want to dominate someone else, sc2 doesn't ahve heroes, and people play it. Spells, economy etc. is okay though. Maybe make heroes, but only if that is were the game is going, dont force the game into a hero game from the start.
Take blizzard for example, they're making their new moba, and don't have any gold farming. You can argue all day why blizzard is so dumb lately, but they're on to something, you can't copy to get to the top. You need to find a new niche. Add heroes and you will always be in the shadow of others.
Keep it pure. What is the pure core of this idea? Take natural selection again. A platform, maybe a ship, two sides gaining ground on each other, a fight between economy for later strength and here and now power, but later weakness, and the winner is decided on skillshots and multitasking. Thats it. Thats the core. Go from there, not kerrigan, not heroes, you work your way up, from the roots, not the leafs. If you dont, it will come across as cheesy, as clunky, unfinished, as if its lacking something, it maybe even look incredible good, but after 2-3 games people will just not want to play another round. And they don't know why. To avoid that you have to find the interesting core first, instead of the superficial. Thats my experience through the years.
Well I would be interested in working with you, but honestly terrain and game design is the only things that interest me, and which I have time for.
Argh I remember a metric ton of this type of game type in SC1 but I can't remember the names. I think at least one was a star wars version.
Anywho, this game type has also been made for the arcade a few times, but they all died out fast. Take that however you want.
Like Lamrq just said it, you should start from a basic point of view. What are you trying to achieve ? What are the different role of the players ? I really love Natural Selection but I am pretty sure things should been made different to be fun for every players.
Here is how I see it:
- The maps are Starcraft 2 like. Only things to keeps in mind is to have it more choky and not too much wide like in a moba. Lot of bases, maybe with only a few minerals to force regular move and spreading. Neutral units defend some of the places to slow the begining of the game. Heroes units should be needed to clean these places (Neutral too strong or/and giving a lot of experiences).
- I think the experience would be better with Battlefield victory mechanics. 3 or 5 victory spot that need to be controlled. The team with less spot controlled slowly loose point. Killed heroes respawn instantly but use one point. First team with no points loose the game. The starting pool point is also a good way to balance the game pace.
- The commander role is to:
a) Build up and expand Economy. Take new bases and build workers.
b) Expand technology.
c) Expand production facilites and build up defenses on key location.
d) Choose wich units are beeing made by "factories" and increase their production. I think the macro side should be softer than in Starcraft 2. A bit like Warcraft 3 on attention-demanding side, but it should lead to a lot of Units like in Starcraft 2. So maybe you choose a unit and the "factories" just build it like infinitly. To accelerate production you build more factories or you can drop-pod on it like in Starbow. Also mean that Commander have an easier time with building generic units, but need to pay attention for Special ones so he does not build too much of them. Generic units could also spawn in squad.
e) Coordinate Hero players (Hero)
f) Control Units (Units)
- Hero role are to:
a) Level up to increase the strenght of their team. I think the Blizzard-MOBA idea to share experience is a good one in that kind of game as an harassing hero or hero-killer can be out of combat for a while to achieve his goal and help the team.
b) Free places on the map from neutral or enemy Units for the Commander to take new base and acquiring new techs.
c) Control Units. They need to control them too for the moment where they are hanging out not that far but cannot engage. It also mean the commander can build special Unit for the Heroes but he dont have to babysit them (ex: a dropship, a medic, etc...)
Here is how I see the hero type differ from each others. I would class them in a two row table.
First row: Unit captain (need to hang out with unit to achieve full potential), Hero (useful on his own, the more typical hero), Harasser (better at killing enemy's economy/workers and neutral units), Defender (better at zoning an area, with or without Units help, with or without beeing there).
Second row: Tank, Support, Splash damage dealer, Single target damage dealer.
Heroes have to be micro demanding. Perfect use of them is to have most of their skills on cooldown and use them all the times. Plus they use their own type of armor and attack like in Warcraft 3 so units can differs from each other but Hero still have the same useness agaisnt all of them.
I am not sure it is needed to use object to improve heroes over time as specific unit can achieve the same role (new skills, heal, shield, etc...).
Let me see what you think of these ideas :)
I am again working on this project but the core has changed drastically.
I want two players to play a 1vs1 melee. Each side has 3 additional players assisting those melee players with heros. No points or artificial winning conditions. The side who has no buildings left loses (heros cannot build any buildings).
The heros will be MOBA-styled, but their abilities will be more focused on SC2 combat (meaning a higher focus on control, less on damage, more AoE, less single-target).
Questions I am working on involve - how do heros gain strength. I want to use XP and resources, but I am unsure where they should get them. Especially XP seems rather problematic to me because if kills give XP then utility heros will be underleveled and noone will play them.
Just a quick note: this type of game has been done before Natural Selection - google Savage and Savage 2, you may find some inspiration. If you really want to walk the DOTA-route, check out Smite.
@Mozared: Go
Wow, I completely forgot about Savage. I remember being completly overwhelmed by that game, something that modern games cannot achieve anymore.
Will do. And like I said in my last post, the core changed drastically. It bears very little reference to NS2 anymore.
I worked out most things about the game. Right now it can be summarized pretty quickly by saying:
It's a 1vs1 melee matchup with each side having 3 heros, controlled by seperate players. The melee gameplay is not altered.
I worked out a lot of questions I had - for example how the heros get their resources. Now it's time I get the map working, because I also need it for an application. In other words, I wouldn't mind 1-2 helping hands. Mostly it would be great to have someone to do stuff that takes a lot of time - meaning actors for example (sounds and visuals).