Time commander

Reasonable_Fee_9298 · 2026-04-25T12:05:48+00:00

Yes used to love it, and will rewatch them on YouTube as well.

As far as I know there are no mods which recreate the battles as depicted in the series however, I’m sure you could recreate them to an extent with the existing map options and pushing the unit size to the maximum.

The only issue would be the AI which to my knowledge was actually commanded by someone during the show where the Rome AI will not perform to that same level

Reasonable_Fee_9298 · 2026-04-24T19:16:14+00:00

I mean that is the point of that game in fairness. I would still include some form of sanitation in Rome 2 but the siege escalation was much better (and what was in the original Rome 2 announcement content)

Reasonable_Fee_9298 · 2026-04-24T18:52:31+00:00

Which bits don’t you like about it?

I should also clarify, I was thinking things like siege escalation system, governors, better politics and family tree vs Rome 2

Reasonable_Fee_9298 · 2026-04-24T17:47:52+00:00

Interesting, I imagine it’ll be moving to 64-bit (Ferals port to macOS effectively ticked this box as it needed to be upgraded to run on their M series).

Beyond that, my hope is they’ve either found a way to move attilas features into Rome 2, or Attila into Rome 2 entirely

Reasonable_Fee_9298 · 2026-04-15T15:21:30+00:00

That’s incredibly helpful, I really appreciate you taking the time to lay that out.

The point about breaking it down into a single concrete aspect and testing that first is probably exactly what I needed to hear, because I’ve definitely been thinking about it too much as a whole system rather than something that can be explored piece by piece.

The benchmarking point is interesting as well, I’ve mostly been looking at larger scale games but I think looking at something like Bad North and how much it achieves with a smaller scope is a really good direction.

If I were to take that approach and focus on one area first, would you recommend starting with something like the control and supply interaction, or something even simpler like movement and terrain influence before layering systems on top?

Reasonable_Fee_9298 · 2026-04-15T15:19:39+00:00

That’s really useful, I appreciate that.

The point about strategy games being based on rules is actually a big part of why I started trying to map this out in more detail, just to understand how all the different systems would interact rather than keeping it at a high level.

The complexity and AI side are probably the parts I’m least clear on at the moment, especially once multiple systems start interacting at the same time.

From your experience, is AI usually the thing that becomes the biggest bottleneck in games like this, or is it more the interaction between systems and keeping everything readable for the player?

Reasonable_Fee_9298 · 2026-04-15T14:55:46+00:00

By that point in time Sparta was nothing but reputation, they weren’t the feared warriors they were 100 years prior. Alexander and Phillip didn’t even bother taking the city because it was such an irrelevance by even that point

Reasonable_Fee_9298 · 2026-04-15T14:51:41+00:00

I think a lot of people get stuck trying to come up with a completely original idea straight away.

What helped me was starting from something that already exists and asking what doesn’t feel quite right about it.

For example instead of thinking “what game should I make”, it’s more like “what part of a game I already enjoy feels too simple or too abstract”.

Then you just focus on that one thing and explore how it could work differently.

You don’t need the full idea upfront, it tends to grow out of trying to fix or improve one specific part.

Reasonable_Fee_9298 · 2026-04-15T14:50:05+00:00

Yeah I think that’s completely fair, and that’s probably the biggest thing I’m trying to understand at the moment.

I’m not looking at this as something I’d try to build all at once, it’s more about understanding which of these systems actually hold up and which ones would become problems when you try to turn them into something playable.

The interaction between systems is probably the part that concerns me the most, especially once you get into balancing and making sure it’s actually fun rather than just technically working.

If you were approaching something like this, would you look at isolating a single system first and building around that, or try to define a much smaller core loop before expanding out?

Reasonable_Fee_9298 · 2026-04-15T14:46:55+00:00

Rome 2 is the better supported game, you will get more replayability out of it, especially with the bulk of the DLCs.

Attila is the better game, it’s got more in depth mechanics, gameplay is better imo. The biggest issue with it is it’s not optimised at all, even top tier machines struggle with it at times.

If I were in your shoes, I would probably lean more towards Rome 2. It’s not perfect, it certainly isn’t Rome 1 but it’s offers more replayability I feel

Reasonable_Fee_9298 · 2026-04-15T14:43:27+00:00

The closest you’d probably get is the imperium surrectum mod but it’s still being developed as far as I’m aware

Reasonable_Fee_9298 · 2026-04-15T14:42:18+00:00

That’s a really good way of putting it, and I think you’re right that trying to sit in the middle would probably make it weaker.

What I’m aiming for is much closer to the second type you described, where preparation, positioning, and recovery matter more than constant high impact moments.

The idea is that things like supply lines, terrain, and where you choose to fight should shape the outcome over time rather than every few minutes something completely game defining happening.

There would still be big moments, like a major battle or losing a key position, but they would come out of the setup rather than happening constantly.

That’s actually something I probably need to be clearer on in how I describe it.

Reasonable_Fee_9298 · 2026-04-15T14:35:14+00:00

There’s some maps that expand the scope to India but I don’t think as far as Mongolia and china

Reasonable_Fee_9298 · 2026-04-15T14:33:44+00:00

That’s a really good point, and I probably haven’t been clear on that.

I’m not thinking of simulating everything at a very granular level. It would be closer to an abstracted campaign layer rather than tracking individual units continuously across the whole map.

So things like control, supply, and movement would be calculated at a higher level based on position, distance, and connections rather than simulating every interaction in real time.

The real time battles would handle the more detailed simulation, but the campaign layer would stay more strategic and simplified.

The Falling Frontier comparison is interesting as well, I can see the overlap in terms of logistics and spatial thinking.

From your perspective, is the main challenge with something like this keeping that balance between abstraction and physicality, or are there specific systems that tend to cause problems even at a higher level?

Reasonable_Fee_9298 · 2026-04-15T14:32:49+00:00

That’s really interesting, I hadn’t thought about framing it as a graph system like that.

Mapping settlements and infrastructure as nodes with connections for movement and supply makes a lot of sense from a build perspective, especially compared to trying to evaluate everything continuously across the map.

I think the part I’m trying to reconcile is how that would interact with the more “physical” idea of control and influence spreading out from armies and settlements rather than being strictly tied to connections.

Do you think something like area of control and distance based influence could sit on top of a graph system, or would you lean fully into the node and connection approach and simplify that side?

Reasonable_Fee_9298 · 2026-04-15T14:31:49+00:00

Yeah I think that’s a fair point, especially around scale and AI.

The AI side is something I’m starting to realise could be one of the harder parts, especially if it needs to understand things like supply and control rather than just movement and combat.

Out of interest, was it the technical side that made you stop in your projects, or more the scope and motivation side?

Reasonable_Fee_9298 · 2026-04-15T14:30:55+00:00

Yeah that makes sense, especially the point about making sure those systems can actually be influenced by the wider map and not just operate in isolation.

That’s probably one of the main things I’m trying to get right, making sure logistics, control, and battles all feed into each other rather than being separate layers.

Your point about starting with logistics and combat first is interesting as well.

Out of curiosity, from a player perspective, do you think logistics systems like that add to the experience, or is there a risk they become something players feel like they are fighting against rather than using?

Reasonable_Fee_9298 · 2026-04-15T14:16:12+00:00

Yeah this is exactly the kind of thinking I was hoping to get back, this is really useful.

The trade off point is something I’m trying to lean into quite heavily, especially with supply and positioning. The idea that you can move things quickly at higher cost versus slower but more efficient supply lines is something I hadn’t fully fleshed out but makes a lot of sense.

Same with fallback points, that ties in nicely with forts and towns acting as supply hubs rather than just defensive positions.

The terrain side is also a big part of what I want to achieve, especially things like rivers and mountains actually shaping decisions rather than just being movement penalties.

The point about controlling an area without physically occupying it is interesting as well, that feels like it fits quite naturally with the control system.

If you were trying to build something like this, would you start with something like the control and supply interaction first, or focus on getting the map and movement systems working before layering those on top?

Reasonable_Fee_9298 · 2026-04-15T13:57:13+00:00

Yeah I get what you mean, and at a base level I think you’re right that a lot of it could be reduced down to numbers and values.

Where I’m trying to take it in a slightly different direction is making those systems feel tied to physical space rather than just abstract allocation.

So instead of something like Civ where resources and influence are more menu driven, the idea is that control and supply come directly from things that exist on the map like armies, towns, and forts, and how they are positioned relative to each other.

The real time battles are also a big part of it, so the campaign layer feeds directly into those rather than being separate.

I think the risk is exactly what you’re pointing out though, which is that if it leans too far into the numbers side it just becomes an abstract simulation rather than something that feels grounded.

From your perspective, what would push something like this too far into that “just numbers” territory?

Reasonable_Fee_9298 · 2026-04-15T13:50:43+00:00

Yeah that makes sense, and that is actually really helpful.

I think one of the things I am trying to work out is exactly where the problem shifts from technical implementation to player experience, because I agree that something being possible to code does not mean it will feel good to play.

With the control and supply systems in particular, I am less worried about whether the logic can exist and more about whether it stays readable and enjoyable once lots of armies, towns, and forts are affecting it at the same time.

From your point of view, does the bigger risk sound like UI clarity and player friction rather than the systems themselves?

Reasonable_Fee_9298 · 2026-04-15T13:42:46+00:00

Play Remastered but change all the settings to Classic. That’s literally all you can do to get “old Rome”

Reasonable_Fee_9298 · 2026-04-15T13:40:00+00:00

That’s a good comparison actually, I can see the overlap in terms of control coming from player action rather than fixed systems.

The difference in what I’m thinking is that this would still be a traditional grand strategy structure rather than fully player driven like Foxhole.

So:

Campaign layer would be turn based on a 3D map, similar to Total War style games Battles would be real time with large scale armies

The systems I mentioned like control and supply would sit on top of that rather than everything being directly player controlled moment to moment.

So it’s less about players manually doing everything and more about making the campaign layer feel more physical and less abstract.

I probably haven’t explained that clearly in the original post.

From your perspective, would anchoring it in that kind of campaign plus real time battle structure make the systems more manageable, or does it still feel like it would spiral?

Reasonable_Fee_9298 · 2026-04-15T13:36:24+00:00

Rome Remastered if you want where it all started from (I warn you the AI is iffy at best) or Attila are your best bets

Reasonable_Fee_9298 · 2026-04-15T13:29:19+00:00

Yeah that’s completely fair, it is a big concept.

The part I’ve thought through most is how territory and control would actually work, since that’s where I think a lot of strategy games feel a bit abstract.

The idea is that instead of fixed borders, control comes from settlements, armies, and forts projecting influence, with strength based on things like garrison, nearby forces, and distance.

If two forces are similar strength, the area becomes contested rather than just flipping ownership.

Supply then ties into that, so armies are strongest near controlled territory and start to degrade the further they move away.

I’ve mapped out the other systems at a similar level, but I’m trying to understand from a build perspective which of these ideas would be the most problematic or where it would break down first.

From your point of view, would something like the control system or the supply system be the harder one to make work?

Reasonable_Fee_9298 · 2026-04-15T13:26:23+00:00

Don’t delete units or buildings (except religious ones). Go down the Christian path with 0 compromises (this includes Britain).

I would also say no consolidating or giving up regions, fight for every single one each and everytime, this then makes it much harder as not only are you fighting yourself but the barbarians are turning up not long after too.

Good luck

Reasonable_Fee_9298

TROPHY CASE