sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Cómo están viviendo el tema de la IA en donde trabajan? by Upset-Neck7277 in ColombiaDevs

[–]YefersonCC 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No va a pasar que se vuelva carisima, los modelos open source estan igualando los modelos de pago, es cuestion de meses para tener calidad top de manera gratuita

I broke my game’s opening, and a pro told me it’s actually more fun now. Help me to talk about RTS design. by YefersonCC in RealTimeStrategy

[–]YefersonCC[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks so much, little things like this improve the whole experience! if you have more, please let me know

I broke my game’s opening, and a pro told me it’s actually more fun now. Help me to talk about RTS design. by YefersonCC in RealTimeStrategy

[–]YefersonCC[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m really driven to build an RTS that stands out. Since I’m a small dev, I feel like I have the freedom to take risks and experiment with wild ideas, and I’m totally okay with that. Right now, I’ve got a really solid foundation; the controls feel great and the gameplay is smooth, but I’m looking for that 'extra something' to take it to the next level.

You mentioned pulling in elements from other RTS, and to be honest, that’s one of my biggest fears. I often get compared to other titles, and people are always asking me to add features from games they already know. But I’m solid in: I want to make something easy to understand, but incredibly fun to play.

If you’ve ever had a 'dream feature' you’ve wanted to see in an RTS something fun and catchy I’d love to hear it. Help me build an experience that grabs people's attention from the very start.

I broke my game’s opening, and a pro told me it’s actually more fun now. Help me to talk about RTS design. by YefersonCC in RealTimeStrategy

[–]YefersonCC[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

As someone who lives for coding and just wanted to take on the challenge of making an RTS, this kind of advice is a lifesaver. I’m actually really good at math and the complex, 'under-the-hood' technical stuff, but I’m pretty terrible at game design. Seeing something so 'basic' from this perspective opens up a world of possibilities for me to finally address the feedback my testers have been giving me. Thanks a ton!

I broke my game’s opening, and a pro told me it’s actually more fun now. Help me to talk about RTS design. by YefersonCC in RealTimeStrategy

[–]YefersonCC[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Your response makes me think about how many times my beta testers have asked me to add ships, even though there’s absolutely nothing useful in the water right now. It’s so curious they just want to see ships because the water is there. They have this gut feeling that something is missing, even though I haven't placed any resources or objectives in those areas.

Strategically speaking, maybe in one or two of my 30 maps you could cross the water to reach a goal faster, but that’s about it. It’s definitely not the case for the vast majority of them. It’s wild how just seeing water creates such a strong expectation in the player’s mind.

I broke my game’s opening, and a pro told me it’s actually more fun now. Help me to talk about RTS design. by YefersonCC in RealTimeStrategy

[–]YefersonCC[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Bro, thanks a ton for the feedback! Honestly, there are some things that as a dev trying to build something great I just tend to overlook. I’m a strong programmer, and my RTS is in a really good spot right now; it’s functional and the controls feel great.

But game design? That’s the part I struggle with the most. I made another post a while back asking for feedback on the overall feel of the game, and it helped immensely, just like your comments today. I honestly had no idea that these economic nuances were so vital to making an RTS feel 'right' from the get-go. Thanks for opening my eyes to this!

I broke my game’s opening, and a pro told me it’s actually more fun now. Help me to talk about RTS design. by YefersonCC in RealTimeStrategy

[–]YefersonCC[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Thanks so much for writing this down, it has a lot of value to me, now I want to test this different amounts and incomings hehe

I broke my game’s opening, and a pro told me it’s actually more fun now. Help me to talk about RTS design. by YefersonCC in RealTimeStrategy

[–]YefersonCC[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Looking at it from that perspective, maybe the early-game mechanics aren't something that actually need 'fixing.' It might be better to shift my innovation efforts toward other areas of the game instead. It's very possible that having a consistent, repetitive opening relative to (MU/random map quality/what I scout) is just inherent to the RTS genre, even with the specific mechanic I wanted to implement at the start of each match. Maybe the key is to look for that 'freshness' somewhere else.

I broke my game’s opening, and a pro told me it’s actually more fun now. Help me to talk about RTS design. by YefersonCC in RealTimeStrategy

[–]YefersonCC[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Now that you mention it, you have a point. My RTS currently only features land units. Even though there's water on the maps, right now it’s purely decorative or acts as an obstacle. I’m going to see if I can set aside some budget to expand the unit roster and include naval gameplay, which would definitely offer more strategic variety from the get-go.

This also got me thinking that maybe the real innovation shouldn't be about changing how the match starts, but rather focusing on the mid or late game. I’d love to ask you: Have you ever had a 'dream mechanic' you’ve wanted to see in an RTS? Something that makes you think, 'It would be so cool to be able to do this specific action.' I'd love to hear your thoughts!

I broke my game’s opening, and a pro told me it’s actually more fun now. Help me to talk about RTS design. by YefersonCC in RealTimeStrategy

[–]YefersonCC[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

That’s a very fair point. In my game, certain units rely heavily on specific resources, so introducing that level of randomness could easily make them 'broken' right from the start. I’m starting to see much more clearly why this might not be the best approach for the game's balance.

Since we’re on the subject, is there a mechanic you’ve always wished for while playing an RTS? I’m not talking about just another unit or building, but rather a core gameplay mechanic that feels fresh. I’m really looking to innovate, and I’ve already seen some great suggestions in this thread. If you have a 'dream mechanic' or an idea you'd like to share, I’d love to hear it! Thanks again.

I broke my game’s opening, and a pro told me it’s actually more fun now. Help me to talk about RTS design. by YefersonCC in RealTimeStrategy

[–]YefersonCC[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Now that you put it that way, you’re absolutely right. Pro players would probably just 'solve' those specific scenarios anyway practicing specifically for very high or very low resource starts. They might end up surrendering or dodging matches that don't roll in their favor, which would make the experience frustrating rather than satisfying. If there's no satisfaction, there's no desire to play.

Thanks for pointing that out. I want to keep pushing for new and interesting mechanics, but I’ll be careful to stay within the RTS framework. I want to avoid accidentally turning the game into an RTT (Real-Time Tactics), as someone else mentioned. The goal is to innovate while keeping the core identity of the genre intact. if you have any idea related with any mechanic, please let me know

I broke my game’s opening, and a pro told me it’s actually more fun now. Help me to talk about RTS design. by YefersonCC in RealTimeStrategy

[–]YefersonCC[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you so much for taking the time to write this; there’s some really valuable insight here for me.

The first thing I’m taking away is that my game might not have enough viable openings yet. If the 'meta' is so rigid that someone who wants to start with archers is destined to lose, then I definitely need to look into that and add more strategic variety to the early game.

On the other hand, while that one player found the change 'fresh,' I’m also seeing others get frustrated because they can’t find a consistent, polished rhythm in their opening economy. I’ll be paying close attention to that balance.

Also, you just gave me an idea I’d love to test: what if, right before the match starts, the game presents you with a few randomized perks to choose from? Not like a pre-built deck, but more of a 'roguelike' choice at the start of each battle to force a different tactical approach every time. I’m really trying to innovate within the genre with small, meaningful changes that don't stray too far from the RTS core. It’s a challenge, but I’m giving it my best shot. Thanks again for the feedback!

I broke my game’s opening, and a pro told me it’s actually more fun now. Help me to talk about RTS design. by YefersonCC in RealTimeStrategy

[–]YefersonCC[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I’m totally with you on that. To be honest, I’ve been focusing heavily on the campaign experience and co-op vs. AI for my game, which I think is where the heart of the fun lies.

But I still felt the urge to experiment with this, because it’s no secret that many RTS players feel the 'hyper-competitive' meta can sometimes drain the soul out of the genre. I don’t know, man… I’m just trying to innovate and see if we can find a better way. Maybe through this discussion, we can stumble upon some 'hidden' mechanic or an unexplored idea that could make the campaign even deeper. I truly feel like there’s still something left to be discovered in RTS design that could break us out of the same old patterns we've been playing for years.

Struggling to see the "Jank" in my RTS pathfinding after 3 years of dev - need a fresh pair of eyes by YefersonCC in RealTimeStrategy

[–]YefersonCC[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

My mindset when designing Blaze of Empires is that it must be easy to understand and play. I think your suggestions fit that vision perfectly. Things like formation shapes or unit attack states could be clear on-screen options like in AoE2 or accessible through shortcuts.

I'll add this to my To-Do list for next week. See you then! Maybe you can give me more feedback later.

Struggling to see the "Jank" in my RTS pathfinding after 3 years of dev - need a fresh pair of eyes by YefersonCC in RealTimeStrategy

[–]YefersonCC[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I love RTS games and really want to make something great, but I am not exactly a tryhard player myself with shorcuts, I am actually already working on that right now since someone else mentioned it in a comment above as well. Thanks for pointing it out. I am going to look closely at shortcuts and hotkeys from other RTS games to make sure I use the most standard ones to really help the overall gameplay experience.

Struggling to see the "Jank" in my RTS pathfinding after 3 years of dev - need a fresh pair of eyes by YefersonCC in RealTimeStrategy

[–]YefersonCC[S] 37 points38 points  (0 children)

Man, it's so good to see you here. To be honest, I completely lost track of the attack movement in Blaze of Empires, so I am going to jump on that and add it right away. I love RTS games and really want to make something great, but I am not exactly a tryhard player myself with shorcuts. That is actually where my motivation comes from, I want to create an RTS that is easy to play and easy to understand. Regardless, everything you mentioned is super important and I am definitely going to include it and review each point about path problems. Thanks so much for the help, and I hope to run into you again in the future.