In the end different "modes" would be the best idea, but also harder to implement, balance and would consume more time.
RTS direction
Re: RTS direction
I like the RTS direction much more than the RPG direction, but in the end should the game be what it is now: a construction game. A small part of RPG and a slightly bigger part of RTS ("commando chair") would make the game more interesting, but not too much - you would loose some of the "original players" which have contributed to the campaign.
In the end different "modes" would be the best idea, but also harder to implement, balance and would consume more time.
In the end different "modes" would be the best idea, but also harder to implement, balance and would consume more time.
Re: RTS direction
I never understood the "command chair" concept. These two posts make good arguments against it.mycale wrote:This. My oppinion exactly. I think the Focus should rest on factory construction / Automation and not on traditional RTS Features. This is what makes factorio Special in the first place.Shaska wrote:Sounds nifty, but while the game is all about automating stuff, if you start to make basic things such as factory construction automated, the game will start going from constructing factories to waiting for the game to construct factories for you.
I think it would work better as just a command chair for your defences, especially if you plan on making enemies more advanced.
I'd love to be able to set up complex factories to churn out an army, then jumping into a chair and commanding it around, but if everything can just be done from a chair defended by 8 automatic turrets, it'd lose a lot of its charm I think
But by "RTS direction" I do like the idea of enemy bases that get more complex over time, enemy resource collection and enemy upgrades as their base gets upgraded. In Factorio the main player is the focus, it's what the story is about. If you take Focus away from the game mechanics of Factorio (a lone engineer building factories to survive) then you loose the unique appeal of the game. I'd like to see the enemy to become more complicated and multiplayer, but I wouldn't want the game to transition into a Command and Conquer style game. Factorio is a better concept than a vanilla RTS.
This is a survival game about building factories.
Re: RTS direction
Really don't think a full blown RTS would be the way to go... this seems more like the sort of Sim City or some Tycoon than StarCraft. I'd suggest following those types of games. Doesn't mean there can't be a war component in it, I just think it shouldn't be the main one...
Re: RTS direction
@orbito: The two post are about a command chair used to build factories, not about controlling some attack / defense units with this chair. I don't really like the idea of fully automated robots, too, but a way of controlling some units as a kind of attack/defense would be nice. It should not be the only way of fighting an enemy in the late game, but a possibility.
Re: RTS direction
it might work with a "patrol Station" building, you place the building and then in the command chair you set the command system for that post, and have slow, tanklike robots assigned to protect each post.....Nova wrote:@orbito: The two post are about a command chair used to build factories, not about controlling some attack / defense units with this chair. I don't really like the idea of fully automated robots, too, but a way of controlling some units as a kind of attack/defense would be nice. It should not be the only way of fighting an enemy in the late game, but a possibility.
(my hamster is sleepy)
Re: RTS direction
The idea is not bad Dekkanor, but i don't know if it could be considered in one of the next updated. There are so much good ideas, the to-do list of the Developer would use a mega byte of memory. ^^
I don't know about which hamster you talk, but if it is sleepy you could build him a small bed out of an oversized matchbox! :3
I don't know about which hamster you talk, but if it is sleepy you could build him a small bed out of an oversized matchbox! :3
Re: RTS direction
hamster = brainNova wrote:I don't know about which hamster you talk, but if it is sleepy you could build him a small bed out of an oversized matchbox! :3
my friends joke that when im thinking you can see the hamster running on its wheel behind my eyes.
and its the hamsters fault that he's sleepy, stayed up too late with an early morning approaching.
Re: RTS direction
Fighting machines:
I think we should only be able to give general orders like "patrol", "defend" or "attack". It should be an automatic process, under penalty of letting the factory design become secondary to basic RTS gaming. Advanced circuitry could be used for more advanced AI that would, for instance, tell the machine to find the nearest repair bay at 25%HP or replenish ammo at the nearest storage chest. I am fully convinced the team could design something along this concept that would provide us with full control over our war machine without attaching the game to warfare micromanagement.
Alternative energies:
Would be cool and I agree with the tier system for them. Oil refineries near water sources could muck up the water and reduce efficiency of steam engines drawing the water from that lake.
Throne/command room:
Cool concept would allow the player to focus more on building and less on not wandering too far from the cursor.
Builder robots:
Along with the throne/command room, and because they would significantly increase building and designing speed, should only be available after some research.
I think we should only be able to give general orders like "patrol", "defend" or "attack". It should be an automatic process, under penalty of letting the factory design become secondary to basic RTS gaming. Advanced circuitry could be used for more advanced AI that would, for instance, tell the machine to find the nearest repair bay at 25%HP or replenish ammo at the nearest storage chest. I am fully convinced the team could design something along this concept that would provide us with full control over our war machine without attaching the game to warfare micromanagement.
Alternative energies:
Would be cool and I agree with the tier system for them. Oil refineries near water sources could muck up the water and reduce efficiency of steam engines drawing the water from that lake.
Throne/command room:
Cool concept would allow the player to focus more on building and less on not wandering too far from the cursor.
Builder robots:
Along with the throne/command room, and because they would significantly increase building and designing speed, should only be available after some research.
-
ImmortalArcher
- Manual Inserter
- Posts: 1
- Joined: Sat Mar 09, 2013 4:24 am
- Contact:
Re: RTS direction
I dont really like this idea. I bought the game because i enjoy building factories if we get robots to do everything and make it into a RTS it pretty much becomes a different game and i dont see it competing with starcraft unless theres something that can really make it stand out.
Re: RTS direction
The core concepts of the game would still be the same, just the way of building stuff would change.ImmortalArcher wrote:I dont really like this idea. I bought the game because i enjoy building factories if we get robots to do everything and make it into a RTS it pretty much becomes a different game and i dont see it competing with starcraft unless theres something that can really make it stand out.
You would still have to build transport belts/trains/inserters assembling machines etc, you would just don't have to run there personally to build that.
Re: RTS direction
Having an avatar you control directly makes the game a touch more "personal" for me. Running here and there to do your stuff is what makes part of the charm of Factorio. I'd rather see the games "building factories" part beeing fleshed out completely before adding the strategy layer.kovarex wrote:The core concepts of the game would still be the same, just the way of building stuff would change.ImmortalArcher wrote:I dont really like this idea. I bought the game because i enjoy building factories if we get robots to do everything and make it into a RTS it pretty much becomes a different game and i dont see it competing with starcraft unless theres something that can really make it stand out.
You would still have to build transport belts/trains/inserters assembling machines etc, you would just don't have to run there personally to build that.
Re: RTS direction
And no fighting creepers D:
nonono D:! I dun like it I want my character running :S
nonono D:! I dun like it I want my character running :S
Re: RTS direction
I tend to agree. To me the core of the game is a survival story where the main character creates factories to help him craft faster and automate resource collection and defense. But when you remove the survival aspect altogether and take the "human" out of the picture, you loose something important. What I'd suggest instead would be to control one robot Avatar at a time. The human character would sit in a virtual reality chair and a factory would produce a "copy" of the player character. If that "copy" dies, you'll wake up in a virtual reality chair (sort of like having an extra life). But I don't like the idea of the game eventually becoming a full RTS.mycale wrote:Having an avatar you control directly makes the game a touch more "personal" for me. Running here and there to do your stuff is what makes part of the charm of Factorio. I'd rather see the games "building factories" part beeing fleshed out completely before adding the strategy layer.kovarex wrote:The core concepts of the game would still be the same, just the way of building stuff would change.ImmortalArcher wrote:I dont really like this idea. I bought the game because i enjoy building factories if we get robots to do everything and make it into a RTS it pretty much becomes a different game and i dont see it competing with starcraft unless theres something that can really make it stand out.
You would still have to build transport belts/trains/inserters assembling machines etc, you would just don't have to run there personally to build that.
Developers, don't loose the charm of a single player to control, even if you add in friendly AI units.
-
MatLaPatate
- Long Handed Inserter
- Posts: 83
- Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2013 5:25 pm
- Contact:
Re: RTS direction
Why are you all saying "I don't want this part of the game, just keep that one". I think one of the main cool point with Factorio is that it can be BOTH RTS-like and survival. And for people who don't like some RTS or survival features, it could just be switched on/off with modes. So you could have RTS mode, Survival Mode, Tower Defense mode or whatever you want ...
Re: RTS direction
Game changing gamemode games have a big problemMatLaPatate wrote:Why are you all saying "I don't want this part of the game, just keep that one". I think one of the main cool point with Factorio is that it can be BOTH RTS-like and survival. And for people who don't like some RTS or survival features, it could just be switched on/off with modes. So you could have RTS mode, Survival Mode, Tower Defense mode or whatever you want ...
Slooow developement, since the devs need to develope all the game modes at the same time, I think it should be keept at it is
Re: RTS direction
Really like the "Robot Avatar" concept. With more war robots implemented, this could be an especially strong unit, kind of like a hero, but without the dreaded perma-death consequences of having your character duking it out with enemy hordes.
Still think there can (and probably should) be an RTS element in the gameplay, with war machines (I keep imagining mechwarrior-like robots for some reason). However, like quite a few people pointed out, managing those fighting units shouldn't be the main focus. If they are more automated, having limited comands like "patrol-defend", "patrol-attack", "stationary", "agressive", etc. (there could be research available that enabled progressively more useful commands), the player can focus more on building its factory, getting a healthy supply of, let's say, ammunition, spare parts for the repair bays, labs and science pack production lines to research robot upgrades and new builds, all this while having its fighting units protecting the factory automatically. Eventually, some sort of "search & destroy" command could become available for research. Now we have a full-blown battlefield, metal slaughter everywhere, but our main focus will still be the production lines' efficiency, so that we guarantee our robot army doesn't become outdated or that its ammo supply doesn't run out!
This being said, none of it invalidates more economics-oriented campaigns or multiplayer matches, like the ones I stand up for in the "Any economy geeks out there" thread
Still think there can (and probably should) be an RTS element in the gameplay, with war machines (I keep imagining mechwarrior-like robots for some reason). However, like quite a few people pointed out, managing those fighting units shouldn't be the main focus. If they are more automated, having limited comands like "patrol-defend", "patrol-attack", "stationary", "agressive", etc. (there could be research available that enabled progressively more useful commands), the player can focus more on building its factory, getting a healthy supply of, let's say, ammunition, spare parts for the repair bays, labs and science pack production lines to research robot upgrades and new builds, all this while having its fighting units protecting the factory automatically. Eventually, some sort of "search & destroy" command could become available for research. Now we have a full-blown battlefield, metal slaughter everywhere, but our main focus will still be the production lines' efficiency, so that we guarantee our robot army doesn't become outdated or that its ammo supply doesn't run out!
This being said, none of it invalidates more economics-oriented campaigns or multiplayer matches, like the ones I stand up for in the "Any economy geeks out there" thread
Re: RTS direction
Hi,
I think I'm late to the party here. But here are my views.
Personally I play freeplay without aliens interfering in my stuff, but I could envision a sort of Herzog Zwei style combat system: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herzog_Zwei since it would provide some middle ground.
You build units (either by crafting them or through some special robotics plant or whatever), and assign orders to them which they then start to do until you reassing orders, or they die.You remain in full control of the main character (no throne room). Examples of orders you could give are: attack the enemy (specify direction), patrol the base, follow the player. You could create groups (color coded) of units that share orders, these would be like armies.
Unit management would be kind of prone to micro management in this style (not sure if this is an advantage or disadvantage):
*You'd have to physically visit your armies to see how they're doing, unless you have some sort of radio on you that would provide status updates (current orders, current activity (moving, fighting), number of units, health, ammo).
*You'd have to visit the troops to give new orders, unless some sensor building is introduced. This would allow you to find and interact with your units through a minimap
*They would need to be refuelled and rearmed by you until you've got automated units that refuel and rearm units in their army.
*Since you yourself are the most powerful unit in the game, you want to be present at major engagements. You might want to have a helicopter that moves you across the battlefield quickly. Of course, if you die it's game over.
Micromanaging battles would be impossible, since the orders are vague. So in the end, it's the guy who created the best army (by having the best factory) who wins.
I think I'm late to the party here. But here are my views.
Personally I play freeplay without aliens interfering in my stuff, but I could envision a sort of Herzog Zwei style combat system: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herzog_Zwei since it would provide some middle ground.
You build units (either by crafting them or through some special robotics plant or whatever), and assign orders to them which they then start to do until you reassing orders, or they die.You remain in full control of the main character (no throne room). Examples of orders you could give are: attack the enemy (specify direction), patrol the base, follow the player. You could create groups (color coded) of units that share orders, these would be like armies.
Unit management would be kind of prone to micro management in this style (not sure if this is an advantage or disadvantage):
*You'd have to physically visit your armies to see how they're doing, unless you have some sort of radio on you that would provide status updates (current orders, current activity (moving, fighting), number of units, health, ammo).
*You'd have to visit the troops to give new orders, unless some sensor building is introduced. This would allow you to find and interact with your units through a minimap
*They would need to be refuelled and rearmed by you until you've got automated units that refuel and rearm units in their army.
*Since you yourself are the most powerful unit in the game, you want to be present at major engagements. You might want to have a helicopter that moves you across the battlefield quickly. Of course, if you die it's game over.
Micromanaging battles would be impossible, since the orders are vague. So in the end, it's the guy who created the best army (by having the best factory) who wins.
Re: RTS direction
I like especially the Helicopter-idea. That enables you also to plan big railroads,
Factorio could be a real-time strategy-game but I mean some essential stuff is missing to make the game faster, bring more order into the game, not doing routine-jobs not over and over.
From older ideas which are going into this direction:
- Robot station https://forums.factorio.com/forum/vie ... ?f=6&t=964
Prinziple of "you cannot control the details, you can only set some parameters".
- Factories https://forums.factorio.com/forum/vie ... f=5&t=1016
I think a game which needs > 2 hours to come to a stage, where you can start to think about attacking will be played together only by very, very hard fans.
Factories or similar things to speed the game up are for me no question, only how and when they may be implemented.
Factorio could be a real-time strategy-game but I mean some essential stuff is missing to make the game faster, bring more order into the game, not doing routine-jobs not over and over.
From older ideas which are going into this direction:
- Robot station https://forums.factorio.com/forum/vie ... ?f=6&t=964
Prinziple of "you cannot control the details, you can only set some parameters".
- Factories https://forums.factorio.com/forum/vie ... f=5&t=1016
I think a game which needs > 2 hours to come to a stage, where you can start to think about attacking will be played together only by very, very hard fans.
Factories or similar things to speed the game up are for me no question, only how and when they may be implemented. Cool suggestion: Eatable MOUSE-pointers.
Have you used the Advanced Search today?
Need help, question? FAQ - Wiki - Forum help
I still like small signatures...
Have you used the Advanced Search today?
Need help, question? FAQ - Wiki - Forum help
I still like small signatures...
Re: RTS direction
And possibly implement some kind of fog-of-war-type system, where you can't build x-distance away from the nearest lamp or something like that. (Think Warhammer 40k)kovarex wrote:The core concepts of the game would still be the same, just the way of building stuff would change.ImmortalArcher wrote:I dont really like this idea. I bought the game because i enjoy building factories if we get robots to do everything and make it into a RTS it pretty much becomes a different game and i dont see it competing with starcraft unless theres something that can really make it stand out.
You would still have to build transport belts/trains/inserters assembling machines etc, you would just don't have to run there personally to build that.
"F**k thy hater"
-George Watsky
Feel free to contact me!
Skype: Zer0t3ch
Razer Comms: Zer0t3ch
Email: zer0t3ch@live.com
-George Watsky
Feel free to contact me!
Skype: Zer0t3ch
Razer Comms: Zer0t3ch
Email: zer0t3ch@live.com
Re: RTS direction
I really think that the orientation to a little more RTS game-play is a very good decision.
The game at beginning feels small, you got your stone ovens and steam engines but in the mid game you got like 20 ovens and many many miles of conveyor belts and then you enhance the factory and run around just thinking in tracks and inserters and how you can place everything the most efficient way.
I really dig into this kind of mid game, so real that i mostly forget about my player character and i try to place something on the screen border and it don't works and after clicking and short-therm-raging i realize "oh wait i must move my camera thing placeholder to get there". So i mean some people like this kind of attachment to the Character, well i like it too and the argument to identify with this guy has really a point but i think the coolest way to develop the game-play is to go larger and bigger.
So the Throne/Control Room idea is a good step to bringing the late game to Factorio and the more "larger and bigger thing".
It brings the game-play to a whole new level that you have now the big over view of your factory and you can plan and design much easier and it gives me a very sublimely feeling that i started this facility with just some stone ovens and now a army of building bots just waits to do my bidding and build up a whole new production line for armor piercing bullets.
The army part seems a bit more difficult. You have to think "do we really want the standard RTS select and click movement?" I think Factorio should stay with the passive control term (logistic bots). So i can think of some methods how this could work efficient and cool.
Building the units should really only be possible in a defined facility. I think about something like a modern car factory( http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... 82XBQhJ2Gc ). It would be so cool to build robots or tanks on a conveyor belt and one inserter puts the part on and one special welding inserter welds it to the chassi.
After they assembled the unit it walks of the belt and its ready to fight.
So now to the unit handling sure it cant be like "oke unit ready next stop alien base" it would end in a flash game situation where you just put down the facility and it spawns x units in x time so they can zerg-rusch the next base. It would work like that but it would be like i said "like a flash game" not the way the direction i would bring my game in.
So we need a more complex mechanic. The idea with flags or patrolling posts is nice and sure it would be useful anyways but i think you started with the colored networks why stop now?
Every unit gets a colored wire build in (i implicate that you plan to add more than two colors) and over this colored code you control your army's.
I'm not quit sure what the best way to control them is yet, maybe like place markers in the color of the army you want to move/attack or just make it work with the standard RS mechanic "select and order".
Maybe a system with radars that you give orders out of special Radar posts that control one army. the army only receive orders within the radar radius but it can leave the radius and finish the order even without a signal. So you build the red control post and order your red army to attack the next alien base. How the "give orders GUI" works must be consider then to. I saw that you work with coordinates maybe use them. Yeah it wouldn't be so intuitive and easy as "select and order" but it had a unique touche. And also it would provide some handwork(with your character), you could build a leaser and when you point on the ground and shoot it gives you the coordinates that you than can type into the red control station. After that the red army would leave with move/attack/roam/defend/explore orders.
So i hope i could make my ideas here a little accessible and didn't wrote a total mess, i await your constructive responses.
(maybe i add a little more thoughts later on)
The game at beginning feels small, you got your stone ovens and steam engines but in the mid game you got like 20 ovens and many many miles of conveyor belts and then you enhance the factory and run around just thinking in tracks and inserters and how you can place everything the most efficient way.
I really dig into this kind of mid game, so real that i mostly forget about my player character and i try to place something on the screen border and it don't works and after clicking and short-therm-raging i realize "oh wait i must move my camera thing placeholder to get there". So i mean some people like this kind of attachment to the Character, well i like it too and the argument to identify with this guy has really a point but i think the coolest way to develop the game-play is to go larger and bigger.
So the Throne/Control Room idea is a good step to bringing the late game to Factorio and the more "larger and bigger thing".
It brings the game-play to a whole new level that you have now the big over view of your factory and you can plan and design much easier and it gives me a very sublimely feeling that i started this facility with just some stone ovens and now a army of building bots just waits to do my bidding and build up a whole new production line for armor piercing bullets.
The army part seems a bit more difficult. You have to think "do we really want the standard RTS select and click movement?" I think Factorio should stay with the passive control term (logistic bots). So i can think of some methods how this could work efficient and cool.
Building the units should really only be possible in a defined facility. I think about something like a modern car factory( http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... 82XBQhJ2Gc ). It would be so cool to build robots or tanks on a conveyor belt and one inserter puts the part on and one special welding inserter welds it to the chassi.
After they assembled the unit it walks of the belt and its ready to fight.
So now to the unit handling sure it cant be like "oke unit ready next stop alien base" it would end in a flash game situation where you just put down the facility and it spawns x units in x time so they can zerg-rusch the next base. It would work like that but it would be like i said "like a flash game" not the way the direction i would bring my game in.
So we need a more complex mechanic. The idea with flags or patrolling posts is nice and sure it would be useful anyways but i think you started with the colored networks why stop now?
Every unit gets a colored wire build in (i implicate that you plan to add more than two colors) and over this colored code you control your army's.
I'm not quit sure what the best way to control them is yet, maybe like place markers in the color of the army you want to move/attack or just make it work with the standard RS mechanic "select and order".
Maybe a system with radars that you give orders out of special Radar posts that control one army. the army only receive orders within the radar radius but it can leave the radius and finish the order even without a signal. So you build the red control post and order your red army to attack the next alien base. How the "give orders GUI" works must be consider then to. I saw that you work with coordinates maybe use them. Yeah it wouldn't be so intuitive and easy as "select and order" but it had a unique touche. And also it would provide some handwork(with your character), you could build a leaser and when you point on the ground and shoot it gives you the coordinates that you than can type into the red control station. After that the red army would leave with move/attack/roam/defend/explore orders.
So i hope i could make my ideas here a little accessible and didn't wrote a total mess, i await your constructive responses.
(maybe i add a little more thoughts later on)