>WW1 shooter >Play as German soldier >get all hyped for war at start >Fend off the Russians at Tannenberg >Switch over to Western Front, experience horrors of war >get gassed >get shot at >get shelled >fight in the mines >have all your friends tell you you're a shit artist >shit ton of character development to make player super sympathetic for their character >final level >gas attack >player incapacitated >fade to black >wake up in hospital bed >character struggles out of bed >goes over to sink >looks in mirror >ragged beard >picks up razor, starts to shave >slowly starts to shave away everything but a thin toothbrush moustache
I've been tinkering with a board game about the Byzantine empire, although not in any particular period.
7 players, ideally, 1 Byzantine and 6 Barbarians at the frontiers. You have differing victory conditions, and it's possible for multiple players to win. Byzantines win if at the end of the game, they have a set number of areas under their control. Barbarians win if at the end of the game, they have a certain amount of gold in their strongholds.
Gold is produced at the start of every turn based on which areas you control, but the Byzantines produce way, way more in a given province than the barbarians do if they hold the same province. If all 6 barbarians dogpile the Byzantines, they're done for; but if they do so, none of them are going to grab enough gold to win themselves.
The main idea is that the Byzantines can offer to send money to try to get the barbarians to fight each other, hopefully preserving themselves: and the Barbarians hope to win by getting more gold as mercenaries than as looters.
As it stands though, it doesn't quite work mechanically. I've been having trouble coming up with incentives for the Byzantines to keep shifting alliances, as it stands, we usually see that they buy a barbarian or two, form a lock and either stand or fall militarily; this is really supposed to be an intrigue game, not a wargame.
I've always been partial to the idea of a three tiered WWII game. Over world is grand strategy a la Hearts of Iron. When a battle is initiated game switches down to regional map and becomes tactical simulator, picking plans of attack/defense specific to each situation, utilizing the divisions you created in the over world tactically. Third tier is an FPS where you play as a sergeant or leader of a brigade of your choosing down on the battlefield, micromanaging your troops and fighting the enemy, taking minor objectives etc. The game would have the option to switch between tactical view and FPS until the battle is over, with the option of speeding up/simulating the battle with your own tactics and ignoring FPS altogether. This game would be impossible to make, but fuck the idea makes me jizz in my pants
Privateering/pirating simulator game where I can wander around the ship and conduct boarding actions in first person, I envisage it as kind of like Black Flag, but more historically accurate. You'd start off with a tiny brig and be able to work your way up to better ships, and customise the interior.
Key crew members (e.g. the First Mate) would have character traits - sort of like characters in Crusader Kings. They might be very skilled, but also more likely to try and lead a mutiny against you for it. Crew would have a mutiny level affecting this, affected by things like your food stores, how long you've been at sea, your success in actions, and so on.
A turn-based map-painting game where you play as a religion and have to compete with other religions. You can either choose a real religion or make one up. 'Faith' acts as a kind of currency, which you gain by inspiring your followers. You can inspire your followers by encouraging mass/ritual attendance and pilgrimages, or when your converts accomplish some great deed like a conquest or the building of a wonder. Faith can be used in different ways to either spread or develop your religion; for example, you could use it to inspire a crusade and spread your religion militarily, send missionaries to far off lands and spread peacefully, or petition a ruler to build a great temple (you can design the temples yourself Sims-style, using the architectural resources available to you and your ruler) to further inspire you converts and strengthen your position in that region.
You can also use faith to develop your religion's characteristics. Characteristics can include things like 'militaristic', 'proselytic', 'populist', 'conservative', 'syncretic', 'tolerant', etc, and each one will have certain advantages and disadvantages. For example, if you make your religion 'conservative' you will strengthen your position against rival faiths, but will be somewhat harder to spread yourself and you might run the risk of causing your followers to become closed-minded and fall behind the converts of other religions in terms of technology. On the other hand, if you chose 'tolerant' your religion will lack a competitive edge, but it will be much more fluid, spread more easily, and will be less likely to come into conflict with other faiths (unless those faiths attack you). There would also be more minor characteristics like the importance of ritualism, what kind of afterlife do you believe in, do you venerate saints, do you have certain taboos, and so on, which might subtly effect your fortunes.
Challenges will include competition with other religions and dealing with secular powers. Other religions will often try to displace yours, through military force or through the conversion of your followers, but you will also have to be able to cooperate with them if you want your followers to survive (for example, if your followers rely on trade with Muslims you will have to tolerate them while also being careful not to let them proselytize). Secular powers will act independently, but if converted can be influenced (by spending faith) to act in your favour. You will need to ensure that your religion appeals to them and try to get them on your side, though if your religion has enough power over their subjects they may be forced to comply with you, and you could even end up with a theocracy (though absolute control over politics will never be possible).
Another challenge would be maintaining religious unity while still remaining dynamic. The characteristics of your religion will vary somewhat from region to region, and if you let this get out of hand different parts of your religion may split into sects, which could ultimately lead to a schism. If this happens, a huge chunk of your followers basically become a separate religion that will compete against you just like the others (if your religion splits in two, you remain in control of the bigger half). You have to prevent this by maintaining a sense of religious unity. Keep every part of your religion in contact with each other, try to ensure your followers can get along with each other and are culturally similar, be tolerant enough that minor disagreements won't split your entire faith in half, and don't spread so fast that you can't maintain unity. If you spread to two regions with very different cultures, your religion might split quickly, so you need to be careful about where you spread and how you go about it.
The ultimate goal of the game would be to convert the entire world.
>>561745 Add a mechanic where the gold has to move to a barbarian capital in order for it to work. Have it be a game piece the byzzies control. If a barbaroI intercepts it they gain control.
This allows barbaroI to screw over their rivals and for the emperor to change his mind as to his alliance. Make it about trust.
Then add a mechanic where barbaroI have a pagan religion and the emperor the Orthodox religion and then make it so barbaroI can win by taking holy sites, each tribe would have one at start and Byzantium having one not in the territory they need. The barbaroi needs all but one of these sites to win. And the byzzies lose if this happens However the tribes don't get as much Gold from the cart (half) of they aren't orthodox. They can become Orthodox by asking the emperor permission. If he accepts they are orthodox and cannot change back. So it provides incentive for both parties to dick eachother and for barbaroi to pick sides.
Last thing you need to do is provide incentive for barbarians to duck over the emperor. Such as if a barbarian sacks Constantinople they get tons of gold but it can only be sacked once. (Sacking being moving a troop into Constantinople when the emperor has no troops their or something I don't know how your shit works exactly)
And if you want to take it further you can add a mechanic that allows Orthodox barbarians to also get more gold income by taking holy sites away from barbarians.
Another way to encourage dicking people over is to have all players store their gold on land they control and other players can steal it and redistribute it to lands they control
This means that their is way more incentive to try dick everyone over since theirs so many opportunities to use alliances for gain and break them and reforge new ones for even more gain.
>>561504 >all that time spent reloading a musket >running around in multiplayer with gaudy as fuck uniforms >bayonet charging across a German wheat field >cavalry
>>561537 Would be cool, but you'd be looking at a few missions/maps only
Camels would be cool, and the weapons were modern enough
>>561630 SOMUCHYES >play as a child soldier >many rape >drugs >chopping niggas up innabush with your machete >militias all dressed in soccer unis Any post-colonial Sub-Saharan clusterfuck would be awesome
>>561881 Of course we need to take some artistic liberties to make people enjoy it.
But ideally it'd be a really long game (at least a day of solid gameplay) dropping very subtle hints the entire time. You get the player super invested in their character, only to finally reveal that they've been sympathizing for Hitler the entire time.
Like the Sims Medieval but instead of medieval classes like king and catholic priest or knight or merchant or bard you have Ancient Greek classes like demagogue or oracle Hoplite or uh.. Merchant and Bard.
A massive multiplayer game like elite dangerous, but in the golden age of piracy. You could be a privateer, merchant, pirate, explorer etc. You would start out just as some nobody with a ship, but work your way up until you have a fleet and can just chill in your cabin getting fat.
Why are there no historical MMORPG games? Instead of different landscapes you literary travel trough time, from scrapping shit up in the stone-age to modern times.
In each time you're playing not the same character but as different generations of whatever tribe or clan you're from.
Imagine this, you're playing as some sort of shaman who knows what herbs and shit. As you level up and are allowed into more modern eras. And because you were some kind of "knowing man" you can pick between a religious priest or healer, since both are derived from the shaman in ancient times. If you picked a warrior, you could pick between a legionary or bandit. I dunno.
PvP would be locked between ages so the Roman ages would have a more streamlined gameplay than WW1, with other skills and the like.
>>564682 Total War arena is kind of like that, except it's total war light with only 3 units per commander (thought 10v10), and you've only 3 Romans, 4 Greeks, and 1 Barbarian commander currently. >>561464 I've been thinking about a WC3 map regarding colonialization. So, 5 different epochs: Exploration (late Medieval/Renaissance), Colonialism (Pike and Shotte), Enlightenment (Line infantry), Imperialism (Napoleonic), and then Industrialism (post-Napoloen, but not WW1). Combat's mostly rock-paper scissors: you've got common infantry that are good against buildings, anti-cav infantry, heavy infantry good against common and anti-cav, ranged that are good against heavy infantry and ranged cav, then cav which is good against ranged and artillery, while ranged cav is good agaisnt cav. Two artillery types: anti-infantry and anti-building. This is then transfered into a different system with the Enlightenment, as most melee units are phased out, and it's then musketeers which fend off cav, skirmishers who take out grenadiers, grenadiers who take out buildings, cav who take out artillery and skirmishers, and ranged cav to still deal with cav, I suppose. Arty still functions the same. My idea is that there are several points around the map you can build cities in, and then, from there, there are number of set locations around the city that you can build "districts" on, which provide a different benefit (troop, arty, cav barracks, military or science research, resource generation, shipbuilding, etc), with each district being produced by a mana summoned self-sacrificing builder by the town center, to limit expansion by a time factor. Additionally, building certain districts will decrease mana regeneration, to provide a cost for expanding up instead of out. I've currently really thought about European Powers, but I intend to have Central, Northeast, Northwest, Southern, and Caribbean Americans, India, Africa, and Asia. It's probably just going to remain an idea, tho.
the game actually was shat on unfairly the PC version still holds the best graphics of any game you can possibly play on any platform
and yes, from the outside the gameplay is shallow, but that does no way exclude it from being fun. its definitely more funner than god of war, which is similar to it. all the 'ryse: son of rome' hate really came from neogaf and sony internet marketing, and it actually was successful. again, nobody shits on god of war being shallow, you can make all the same comparisons to GoW and Ryse, they are not totally the same game but very similar in terms of basic gameplay. But Ryse actually is a better game, but nobody does this comparison because its literally only OK when sony does it. Which again is from chink neogaf marketing still using a decades old market hold the japanese used to have on video games before becoming completely obscure. Literally sony magic.
But im not worried because it only makes the game that much more of a hidden gem, especially as time passes on.
I want to make a grand strategy game desu Paradox is horrid
Anyways what I was thinking of doing was making a game from the very start of Rome to modern day covering the entire world.
Basically it has three groups, Indian group where you can mass migrate as your only form of getting from one place to another, and based off evidence of mass migrations it could lead to all history situatons in which ameans originally north American tribe could end up in Iceland or africa. The second group being indo-European which is standard grand strategy game play with no migration mechanic.
The third group is asiatics and Africans which have a combo of both society wise where they can just up and take land and titles or mass migrate like the Hungarians did.
These would evolve into more complex political systems as time goes on. It would be represented by efficiency of resources. As such say a plot of land can produce food and iron. But because it's the early Republic of Rome their governmental form can only use those resources the land could provide at 15%. By the time mousselini would come to power that same plot could be harvested for 80-90%. The same efficiencies would be imposed for feedING and commanding armies So an army has a % chance to follow orders based off the efficiency of your ability to communicate orders as well as if your ruler is in the army. An army with the ruler in it will always have a 100% to follow orders whigh goes down from distance to the ruler and to the nearest administrative building.
So I'm trying to make a game focused around diplomacy, migration, and administration rather than just war. Sound niche enough or is it too niche?
I posted this 1000000 times and i will post it again.(1) World war 1 rts built on the Battle for Middle Earth engine. (2) Isometric rpg set at the end of the 19th century.Open world as much as it can be.
>>565016 Playing it right now, man; Saga taking over Kyushu out of Nagasaki with American warships bombarding eveything, and Ikko-ikki agents just making rebellions in all enemy territories. 3 units of rank 7 parrot guns are op as fun
A gladiator fighting game, 3d like soul calibur, where you have to entertain the crowd as well as fight, so going for a quick kill will make you unpopular with the crowd and on your next fights they throw garbage at you and stuff.
I downloaded so many steam workshop units that a bunch of them conflicted. Alas, I could no longer play the game unless I spent 30 hours deleting every single workshop download. The new units were worth it though, since I invaded two clans simultaneously thanks to cheap peasant rifleman.
There should be some kind of Empire building game, for the late 18th and 19th century, scrambling for concessions in places like Africa and South America.
Ideally, it would be a bit like Brass with guns: A lot of the colonies either don't make much money or lose you money, but they still score you points, encouraging a kind of continual race; you don't want the loss provinces early, since you'll have to support them longer, but you will want them, eventually, to score the points.
A Grand-Strategy game with the engine of Europa Universalis and Victoria but Ancient Times, with all the greek city-states, the city of Rome, Carthage, Egypt, the barbarians. and so on. You could play as the tiny Republic of Rome and eventually become an Empire, or you could conquer Persia as Alexander, and even restore the ancient glory of the Egyptian Empie. Or you could pley in a scenario where you must save Rome from destruction, dealing with religion issues, economic problems, the barbarian invasions... And it could go as far as the start of the Middle Ages, and that's where you could link the game with Crusader Kings, like it's possible to do in other Paradox games (for exemple, you can play as the Byzantine Empire in Europa Universalis, survive until the end of the game, and continue playing as Byzantium in Victoria, and from Victoria to Hearts of Iron, and so on). I truly can't understand why this game doesn't exist yet.
I really just wanted massive online multiplayer player games. Can you even imagine ww1 game with like one thousand people playing it. One thousand in one battle. Battles would last for days. Ye, but the lag and everything. I'll keep dreaming.
The trenches are full of people and bodies. Its late at night and the battle has stoped for a moment. You and your buddy try to take a nap but moments later ... Gas attack.
>open world WRPG/sandbox based in the entirety of Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome and surrounding lands >you are anybody you want to be >game takes place through multiple generations and in order to live into multiple generations your expected you produce children >game starts off historically accurate but player intervention like killing off ____ or attacking ___ or doing ___ can change history and cause a butterfly effect.
>>568698 >check >you're right Jesus fuck can those niggers really not come up with any content on their own? That wasn't even all that great, and I'm surprised it was even received all that well here. I've pitched it tons of times on /k/ in the past.
An in-depth dynasty simulator where you play as the Ottoman dynasty. Like Crusader Kings II, but with the map warfare replaced with the ability to play with characters a la the Sims.
The game would stretch from 1299 to (ahistorical) 1999, where the characters have to stave of the implosion of the House of Osman. Changes in court politics, structure, and dynamics that occurred historically would tend to occur, but characters with good traits and better luck could manage to stave off some of the worst. Post-1908, the game kicks into difficult territories, and the player will have to find a way to modernise the Empire without destroying it.
>RTS/Grand strategy mix like >you play as a muslim refugee trying to get into germany >once in germany you rape as many women as posible in order to get them pregnant and kill as many christians as posible >Game ends up when Europe is finally a caliphate
>FPS/Grand strategy like >you play as a U.S. Task force soldier and try to overthrow every single muslim government in order to install christian theocracies all over NA and middle east
Fallout: New Europe >Europe is a wasteland, divided between Russia++China controlling eastern europe and the balkans, and The Caliphate controlling western and northern europe >You're born in an atheist bunker and you're forced to go out once you're an adult to restore common sense to the world
GOTTA KNAPP A CAP IN YOUR UNWASHED ASSHOLE, SWEAR TO GOD I WILL INVENT FIRE JUST TO ROAST YOUR SHIT. I WILL GO BACK IN TIME AND INVENT A NEW RELIGION CENTERED AROUND ME, FUCK YAHWEH IT'S MAHWAY. THROW A STONE AT YOUR BRAIN BEST BELIEVE I WILL KILL YOU. KILLSTREAK 1: HAVE A THROW KILLSTREAK 2: GET THE BOW. TECH UPGRADES NOT NEEDED TO WRECK YOUR NAPPY ASS. BLACK SEA FLOOD WORST DAY OF MY LIFE
>>562628 >king of dragon pass... only in actual history sooo. basically anything Viking Related maybe? Maybe using the Danelaw as a setting? Or maybe just someplace in the baltics or scandinavia itself That would be cool, but a large part of that game was myth and magic related, including all those quests in the realm of the gods.
>>572999 the gaming mechanics for the myths and magic could be translated to real life phenomena i think like, i dont know, audiences, diplomacy, managing your household, constructing/designing/building things instead of "magicking" things, you get the idea
>use your funds as one of the wealthy patriarchs of Rome to finance games and entertainment in the Coliseum >balance the conflicting wishes of the emperor, the plebs, and the various cults >flood the coliseum to stage water battles >haggle with lion dealers >deal with the emperor using your building to quell riots >stage political coups for paying senators >upgrade the pits to include ever-more ingenious labyrinths beneath the sands >gore janitors must be well-paid, or they will strike >hire graffiti artists to bring the plebs in >prostitutes - sell them at the concession or in the stands?
desu I'd play the shit outta that game. the only two problems I think would be the issue of finding a leader for some religions which don't have one to my knowledge, like Confucianism, and the controversy around it
1700s caribbean sandboxy colony manager where you control a character who can become anything (merchant/official/soldier/pirate/etc) solid story following confrontations between France Spain and England
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at email@example.com with the post's information.