Gauging interest in a Grand Strategy Game Project

[algeriangeneral]

Well, first of all the map is way bigger
We'll have a more user friendly modding system (in game editor)
Less childish game by adding more in depth stuff (more detailed tech tree, customisable units... Etc)
Bigger diplomacy...

I might make a documentation and post it here for you guys

Cheers

 

[algeriangeneral]

So guys, if you want to support our game then you might want to answer us for some questions

How do you see the religions in our game, I was thinking that in real life religions were not "managed" by the state, so how can we do this!??

For combat we are aiming for something in between CIv v and iv, the possibility to create armies in stacks but with a limited number taken km consideration, stacks are vulnerable to ranged units so all units will take the damage, if an army is attacked it will deploy it's units. So what do you think guys? Do you have other perspectives about combat? Let us hear them

 

[Kid R]

How do you see the religions in our game, I was thinking that in real life religions were not "managed" by the state, so how can we do this!??

For most of history religious power-structures were more powerful, and much longer lasting, than any nation-state or other secular organsational idea. So if your game is starting from "the dawn of history" why not switch it round so that the teams would actually be religions, not nation states, and the states would come and go through the game instead of religions doing that.

Much more realistic, and also if you have aspirations of the game actually being successful when it's finished, this would be an eye-catching angle to generate interest.

 

[Fullerene]

I've been thinking about civ-like game on global sphere map. However I wouldn't use tiles or hexagons, but the unit movement would be distance based and coordinate system would be spherical (longitude-latitude).

For the economy I think there needs to be some kind of substitute for tiles/hexes. I've planned to create areas that would be like provinces on the map. Each province would have values for what it can produce and how much. So essentially provinces would be like tiles, but non equal area.

As I said units wouldn't move from province to province but certain distance at time. Units or may I call them armies would have certain operational range (most likely circle area on surface of the sphere). If unit's operational range collides with enemy unit's range, a battle would occur. Player with most military power in the province would control its resources. Or the resources would be divided.

Game would be strictly turn based, but movement would happen simultaneously. That means unit moves are executed at end of turn and all players manage their empires same time.( I've been developing game like that previously but at the moment the project is frozen state, so I'd like to move the work done from that project to this new one, which I think is better idea.)

Also I'd like to see game that focus more to development of the society and economy on macro level rather than micromanagement of tiles(provinces)

I'm more gearing towards rather simplistic game than grand strategy though. But just wanted to share this vision.

I've been creating early steps of prototype with Unity (game engine) and I just thought if somebody is interested to give some ideas or comments.

Have to mention that I haven't 'officially' started development, just 'fooling around' with some code. The whole idea is still very vague.

 

[DaviddesJ]

I'd like to play a Grand Strategy game that covers the entire sweep of human civilization, from domestication to modern day, with high emphasis on historical accuracy and realism, and a great strategic depth.

I think if you drop the idea of "historical accuracy and realism" you'll be much better off.
If you're controlling a single faction from domestication to modern day, that's inherently unrealistic. Ancient civilizations weren't calculating how to minimize their time to Space Flight.

You also have to face the reality that to make a high quality game these days costs many millions of dollars, and so your game has to have enough appeal that you can somehow create a player base that can support it. That means the game has to be accessible to more casual players as well as more serious players (the Civ series has been good at this, if nothing else).

The Paradox games like Europa Universalis are the closest I can think of to what you seem to be describing. Your best chance would be if they decide to make something similar but covering a longer span of history.

 

[Fullerene]

However I wouldn't use tiles or hexagons

I take my words back. I managed to apply this solution to my Unity project:

Spoiler :

It is asking for hex movement instead of distance based, I think.

I'd really like to develop Civ-like game based on this grid, but I'm bit unsure what to do. Lately I've been enjoying Freeciv but creating Freeciv Client for Unity might possibly be actually more difficult than creating whole new game.

If I was to make new game I'd like it to be more than just casual civ game on spherical map. Maybe different movement system or more grand strategy themed like the title of this topic suggests.

Or maybe I could create the basic civ game engine (unit movement, city management, battles etc) and make it open source?

 

[Fullerene]

Bit offtopic but I need to share this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zsqEmewXHbE

I don't if sphere map alone does give anything much new to gameplay but it does feel good to rotate and zoom the map.

I have some ideas for civ-like game, but if there are other people out there interested to create indie civ game, then we can discuss. I'd really like to build full civ game based on this demo.