This creating an indie game by oneself has been an interesting experience. I can’t help but come at it from the perspective of my career choice as a social scientist – I’ve noticed all the things I’ve done, the interactions I’ve had with people, the ways I’ve reached decisions about mechanics and gameplay ideas… this is not to descend into constant reflexivity and meta- discussions, but it’s been interesting. I’ve also reflected on my own thought processes a lot, a topic I’d like to cover in more detail with some really in-depth game mechanic blog entries in the future. Now that I’ve uploaded half of the skill trees, once that’s done I’m going to focus entries some more on specific mechanics and gameplay objectives for a little while during the push over the next month or two towards 0.2.0.
In the mean time, one thing I’ve noticed is a change in setting. First, I started as traditional high-fantasy fare; dungeons, monsters, etc. We had nagas, titans, orcs, dungeons, a magic system (back in the day!) and all kinds of other traditional fare. I moved away from this both because it wasn’t exactly original, and because I therefore felt every interesting mechanic or concept had been done to death. Then, I shifted onto a medieval setting but without the fantasy. Then, recently, there was another shift towards three different eras, the latter two of which I didn’t originally announce. This was because there were mechanics and ideas I didn’t feel I could fit into a single era. The “oldest” was still going to be medieval, but there were going to be two more. However, through all of these iterations, although I could see what the finished game would look like, I never felt 100% comfortable with any of these options. I guess in a way this is what comes with being a one-person development team; whilst I do have everyone here to bounce ideas off and my close friends, being the only one who decides on the final form of the game, and has access to the code, means the viability (or stupidity) of ideas sometimes takes a while to think through in detail.
The three eras were meant to be medieval, the Age of Discovery/Gunpowder, and a contemporary setting. This is no longer the case. From here on out, Ultima Ratio Regum has one setting and one setting only, which is going to be an amalgam of the first two. The setting will be an amalgam of the dawn of gunpowder, and the movement towards what we would now recognize as the scientific revolution. Think 15th/16th/17th century, though naturally not all civilizations will have an equal technological level. There is a slight conflation of our historical events here, but if studying science and technology has taught me one thing, it’s that history doesn’t work out along deterministic lines - when the game stops generating a world’s history, there could be any number of technological and societal permutatinos. Everything I have mentioned about the medieval setting will remain, but with the addition of very early gunpowder technologies, and a few interesting game mechanics I’d thought up for the middle era. The contemporary era was too far removed from the others, and had some pretty crippling gameplay questions (I want you to be able to explore the *entire* world map, every square of it, but who wants to explore modern suburbs?!). So, siege weapons, swords, and the rest of it will still exist, but you’ll have some very early gunpowder weapons in among the mix. This gives me the best of the mechanics I’d thought up from both eras, and makes the game – let’s be honest, going to take maybe a decade – a more reasonable development goal. It also means there are going to be four more skill trees, for Gunpowder Weapons, Riding (i.e. mounted/cavalry), Navigation (ships etc), Subversion (social/political movements, uprisings, sabotage, etc). These will be in 0.2.0, but as with others, will not yet be fully implemented until I program in their appropriate mechanics. Effectively, the new setting is 90% what it was, with the choice ideas of the Discovery era taken back in time a little bit towards their origins. There are no mechanics I feel I now “cannot” put into a single, complete, whole.
I hope nobody feels like I keep changing things just for a whim, as that isn’t the case. I want to make absolutely sure the game can involve everything I want, whilst still being a coherent whole – the second point in particular was threatened by the three-eras ideas. Ultimately, this is the first, and almost certainly the last, video game I will ever make. I want to get it right.
Next week: Gunpowder, Riding, Navigation and Subversion trees!
Hey,
I love the sound of the new setting. One thing I’m wondering; considering the time period and availability of gunpowder weapons, might there be the possibility for structured line battles? Because that would be so many kinds of awesome oh man you don’t even know.
Thanks!
Thanks for the feedback, glad to hear it : ). Yes, definitely! I agree, that would be very neat indeed. History generation – which will determine who has gunpowder access – is coming in 1.0.0 next year, but I’m currently estimating that once one civilization has gunpowder, history generation proceeds for another 50 years, and then stops. Some civs will therefore have history with it and that kind of tactic, and some will only just be getting gunpowder, whilst others will have never touched the stuff. HOWEVER, to stop gunpowder-weapon-civs being the only ones players want to play, gunpowder weapons are obviously going to have some hefty disadvantages vs the other ranged handheld weapons, ie bows and crossbows. The specific mechanics are still being worked out, but reload speed and the cost/time/expertise needed to produce the “new” gunpowder weapons are likely factors.
Hmm sounds good, but maybe a fourth if it isn’t asking to much. A stone, bronze ageish thing before major technological advances, but still basic weaponry. Think Egyptian age combat and the like.
Really love the fantasy/steam(steam?)punk worlds like the one that was implemented in Arcanum. I would like to see a battle like the dragon vs troll vs musketeers squad.
P.S. By the way, will there be steam engines? Sorry, if this was discussed before.
I don’t think people will be too bothered about a change of setting; whilst having an original setting is a bonus, if the game is fun to play it doesn’t matter. A good game can have a bad setting (see WoW) and still be good, but a bad game could have a highly original setting and still be bad. So I would say don’t worry too much about it, focus on your feature set and gameplay and stuff that will matter to your players.
@ Elfeater – that kind of period will be generated in the history, but I’m only having a single gameplay era now!
@ Mihail – I’m not at all going for a steampunk concept; I’m basically trying to stick to total realism, and to… well, maybe not total “historical accuracy”, but certainly what’s within “historical possibility”. And all the fantasy elements are long-gone, I’m afraid, though they will crop up in generated myths, which are going to be a surprisingly significant part of the game, I think…
@ Bors – thanks, and I think you’re right. I just wanted to find an era that would allow me to put in all the gameplay elements I envisioned, and be original. I can’t think of any roguelikes set in that era (or, indeed, any really without fantasy elements) and most strategy games tend to skip the period between medieval and modern. But it strikes me as a fascinating era, and one that could both provide new combat and gameplay, and also play into a lot of the political/social ideas I want to explore…
A question regarding those nations that wouldn’t touch gun-powder, not even after the world has generated. Will this mean that said nation will forever be unable to use them, or as age progresses, maybe through your influence(buying gunpowder from other countries and selling to those who haven’t even seen it yet) will make them be able to use such items?
This question gave me the idea of gunpowder being governed by the politics of country in question. I have 0 knowledge about Japan, but from what anime I’ve seen, in the early stages of gunpowder, most forces still used their own weapons. What I’m driving at here is, can even politics have a hand in a country’s use of gunpowder? With prosecutions to those that choose to use it, in case it’s banned, such as imprisonment, or similar to how the witches were burned in the dark ages. Sounds like a good idea to me.
I think I’m okay with the new setting. I always liked the settings taking place around or just before the industrial revolution. Will there be civilizations that will still use weapons like bows and arrows and civilizations that will use gunpowder in the same year? For example, a samurai fightining against a rifleman.
Regarding guns vs bows, one good mechanic to employ is that skilled archers can arc their shots over obstacles, while it requires specialized equipment and crew (probably beyond URR’s tech level) to do this effectively with guns.
Will Navigation include ship-to-ship combat, pirates, boarding, hiding treasure on deserted islands, and so on? How hard will it be to generate a civ that relies entirely on piracy for survival?
Hmm, are you sure you want to remove ALL, fantasy elements? this seems to invalidate several very cool concepts of the combat system you had originally designed.
Would be neat to at least keep “Legendary” creatures around, mixed in with the just-stories legends as a very rare occurrence in a world. (Just to keep people on their toes even in the late game)
@ Reyn – civilizations lacking gunpowder will, I think, lack it either because they have a political objection to it (e.g. a culture that values stability over change, or cares little for military matters) or they lack the expertise and material requirements. I think you should definitely be able to “open them up” to using gunpowder, and NPCs might do the same too. Similarly, if you control a civ with bonuses to close combat, you’d want to avoid gunpowder. Japan is definitely the example; I think it would be a great idea if gunpowder weaponry became a source of contention in some civilizations, and one seen as a “break” or discontinuity from traditional combat/war and all the cultures that go with it.
@ Leatra – splendid – yes, indeed, there will. Even civilizations with gunpowder won’t have a lot of it, and won’t have much expertise with it, when the game starts. There may be cannons, there will be trebuchets; there will be gunpowder, but there will be a lot of bows and crossbows too.
@ Anonymous – that’s an excellent idea for an advantage bows/crossbows keep over gunpowder. I have a short list of potential balance mechanics, but that’s a good one to add. Yes, I’d love navigation to include all of that! At some point one major game update is just going to be six months or so working on nothing but ships. I’ve always thought it strange in games when civs don’t adapt to the conditions they find themselves in – as well as trying to get civs to react more to their material surroundings, I’d like to generate “types” of civ, and a pirate civilization (e.g. Barbary Corsairs) should definitely be one, but I’ll have to make sure they appear in “logical” places only.
@ Jason – I know what you mean, and it does, definitely, but at the same time I feel much more strongly that this is the direction I want to take (the decision to purge fantasy elements was taken a while ago, actually!). HOWEVER… maybe there will one day be a Kraken or two about the place in a small percentage of world generations.
Maybe.
…
i like the “new” time setting.
just absolutelly make sure to balance gunpowder weapons and the other whithout underpowering them…
an exaple of bad power balance would be “mount and blade: with fire and sword”
while guns are armor piercing and very damaging a bow does much greater damage over time and have recoverable ammo.
what i mean is, the setting is good but if not woked right people may ignore either bows or gunpowder completely.
also for reference early guns lacked accuracy when compared to bows and crossbows so while a bullet or cannon ball does heavy damage it may be harder to hit with or without training.
not so sure i like the idea of powder weaponry myself, i think it would be alot more enjoyable to keep it medieval, but hey, its your choice
i just dont want it to end up like M&B powder weapons completely ruined that series.
@ k : That’s exactly the question. I’ve been considering a lot of possible ways to balance the two – I’m currently leaning towards basing balance on accuracy, reload speed, availability (i.e. not everyone/every civ will have the knowledge and materials to manufacture gunpowder & gunpowder weapons). As you mentioned, I’d like to have a difference in the damage effects of the projectiles; maybe something like longer-but-greater damage for bows could be a good option. I want bows/crossbows to be just as viable as gunpowder, and since gunpowder will be rarer, I think I’m going to make gunpowder the most specialized of the two. Re: accuracy, true – I might make gunpowder weapons much less accurate, but that strikes me as a gameplay mechanic players would have very little “control” over, so whilst it would be slightly unrealistic, I may give them/bows/crossbows the same level of default accuracy, and focus on other areas to balance the two instead.
@ Gauge : did they really? Interesting. I promise that won’t happen – I just had to move to a setting where I could do everything I wanted, and where I could explore an era so few games (and no roguelikes?) have ever done before!
The issue with guns in M&B was that they basically obsoleted bows and crossbows in the long range game, because they did MUCH more damage, held more ammo in their pouch, and were basically only penalized with a minor accuracy penalty and a long reload speed.
@ Jason: Interesting; I will make sure that doesn’t happen. As I say, I don’t think I’m going to implement an accuracy difference, but hopefully they can be balanced in other ways as well as reload. I’m leaning towards balancing according to damage type – bows/crossbows will do damage over a longer period, perhaps, and will do more damage if you have to pull them out. I also think some of the balancing will be on the strategic level in terms of civs that can/can’t produce them, and the training required to use them.
you never fail to impress
Much obliged : ).