Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Ok, Recently I have been looking at games like Tom Clancy's End War, Brink, Company of Heroes, Etc.

Even Modifications Such as the Empires mod for half life 2. (RTS + FPS)

And asking myself why has no one made a game where you have 2 battlefields at once? As well as companies that are "cookie cutting" games out left and right. (A prime example of this is First Person Shooters)

But any way -

I recently got an idea for a "video game" that would be both strategic and Action Oriented. (I am thinking about starting a company just to make this game)

It is basically Vertical game play through the atmosphere and back again.
Epic Armageddon Sized Planetary Assaults and Epic Battlefleet Gothic sized fleet Engagements. (Note i am just using these as a example for size. The art style will be completely Different)

Ok, the game takes place on two fronts - Space side and Planet side (Basically a combined arms Game)

If ones side secures one front it could be game over if it is not Contested again and Quickly by the opposing team.

The Space side Front -

Capital Ships (All have Specific Roles and are extremely Tough)
Fighters (Anti-Fighter/Bomber Role)
Bombers (Anti Ship/ Anti-Bunker Role)

Now the Troops go down in Drop pods and Transport craft. Transport Craft are more vulnerable to AA fire but can act as a mobile spawn point when they land.

Drop Pods are More over a Fast way to get small teams of Spec Ops into enemy territory Planet side when you need to have something destroyed captured quickly or a group of troops need support.

If a Capital ship is destroyed/Knocked out it will not be available the rest of the battle.

The Planet side Front

The Planet side front is interesting not only does it have the ability to interact with the Space side front but Orbital Bombardment will hit their marks (or the general area of their marks)

Like I said before Troops deploy from transports when they land. But what about the defending Forces of the planet?

They will deploy from fortified Barracks and Bunkers.

What defenses will the defending forces have?

(Anti - Orbital / Anti Air Weapons)
Gauss Cannons (Capable of Knocking out a Armored Battleship if it comes into range)
Rail Cannons (A Suite of AA Guns that spew lead at a rapid rate)
SAMs (Surface to air Missiles)

Anti Personnel Weapons

Mounted Machine Guns
Mine Fields
Artillery

Anti Vehicle Weapons

AT Batteries
Artillerty
etc.

I can not really go in depth on the Ground combat other than saying it will be like a City of death times 10

There are a few other aspects of the game that I will talk about at a later date...

But untill then Please vote and be heard

I would definately buy it.

I actually had a storyline thought up for something like this, too. My brother and I were talking about how space movies are all the same, Earth fighting for their lives against some Alien race with better technology, what if it was the other way around, with Earth being the aggressors?

Basically, Earth has established several colonies throughout the galaxy, but they have some sort of crisis planetside, but when they send to their colonies for help, some sort of interferance crops up (we called it a Warp Storm ) and the colonies don't come help. After a few years of isolation and turmoil, Earth comes out swinging at the colonies who have "forgotten who the top dog is", and starts trying to take over the planets again. The story would've followed Jayden as he was drafted into his planets army to hold back Earth, since we were going to make it a FPS.

Sorry I didn't really give very much feedback.

Slarg232 wrote:I would definately buy it.

I actually had a storyline thought up for something like this, too. My brother and I were talking about how space movies are all the same, Earth fighting for their lives against some Alien race with better technology, what if it was the other way around, with Earth being the aggressors?

Basically, Earth has established several colonies throughout the galaxy, but they have some sort of crisis planetside, but when they send to their colonies for help, some sort of interferance crops up (we called it a Warp Storm ) and the colonies don't come help. After a few years of isolation and turmoil, Earth comes out swinging at the colonies who have "forgotten who the top dog is", and starts trying to take over the planets again. The story would've followed Jayden as he was drafted into his planets army to hold back Earth, since we were going to make it a FPS.

Sorry I didn't really give very much feedback.

It is fine

I have some what of a storyline Written up. Heck Even contacted emergent (The Owners of Game Bryo) to get this on the ball and rolling.

My Idea for the story line would be similar to star wars battlefront 2 just expanded and Moral choices to make. (Do we shell the Planet even though it is a resort world or give the fire support to our men)
This can result in alternate mission endings and even the pop up of side missions on board the ships.

Battle front 2 Followed the 501st legion clone troopers (aka Vader's Fist)

I wanted to do something similar but also kind of what call of duty did story wise Following multiple soldiers / Fleet Command Staff / Airmen and telling their stories of the war.

I want to have a online component to this game but I still need to flesh that out more...

Okay as I understand it, you want to design a game where you fight an action-rts type battle on the ground and in space simultaneously. I wouldn't say this is a new concept for a game (others(including myself) have certainly tossed around the same/similar ideas in the past. The question I have is feasibility. Humans are kind of limited in how much sensory input they can handle simultaneously. While it would be cool, having such in depth combat in two areas at once and having to switch back and forth simultaneously will overwhelm a lot of people.

Slarg232 wrote:
I actually had a storyline thought up for something like this, too. My brother and I were talking about how space movies are all the same, Earth fighting for their lives against some Alien race with better technology, what if it was the other way around, with Earth being the aggressors?

Sooo... Starship Troopers and Avatar?

I second chaos0xomega. Lord (Of Hats) knows that there's some people out there who can handle managing so much, but most people won't. The casuals are what you need as a game developer if you actually want to stay in business. Making a game that completely alienates them is doomed to failure or trapped as a niche game, and we all know how fickle niche markets are.

I'll also point out that I agree this isn't even really a game concept. All you have is an idea that could become a concept. What's the story? Is there an over world? Is it real time or turn based? How are economics managed in game? How are units produced/repaired/upgraded? Is it just annihilation or are there objectives in battle?

What if it was team based and one person focused on the planetside battle and the other focuses on the space battle. They could both control all the units on their side, but they each had roles. Or what if you played this on two screens at once. One was dedicated to each battle front?

LordofHats wrote:I second chaos0xomega. Lord (Of Hats) knows that there's some people out there who can handle managing so much, but most people won't. The casuals are what you need as a game developer if you actually want to stay in business. Making a game that completely alienates them is doomed to failure or trapped as a niche game, and we all know how fickle niche markets are.

I'll also point out that I agree this isn't even really a game concept. All you have is an idea that could become a concept. What's the story? Is there an over world? Is it real time or turn based? How are economics managed in game? How are units produced/repaired/upgraded? Is it just annihilation or are there objectives in battle?

First off, It is not a Action RTS more over a Tactical FPS (Think Red orchestra)

Ok, I would have to agree that people having to manage allot on screen is a problem. However there are ways to combat the problem.

1. Giving a minimalistic HUD (Heads up Display) where only your objectives that you have selected for the time being are displayed. (Think Quake Wars)

2. Divide up objectives between Squads/Squadrons/Ships (Example: A Cloak Ship may have an objective to Destroy a Sensor Outpost. While a squad on the ground may have the objective to Destroy a Communication Dish. etc)

How Units are Produced -

Respawn after X amount of seconds after Y Object/Player Dies.

Where do they Re spawn? Depending on what ship the player chose on the start of the game the player may spawn on the ground in a Transport or Spawn in a carrier undergoing critical Repairs.

Repairing Ships takes time (Like in real life) but field Repairs are more over temporary than anything. Lets say an engine gets damaged the "Technicians" who are basically the Handymen on the ships go to work on getting fuel back into the engine and making the engine operational.

DarkAngelHopeful wrote:What if it was team based and one person focused on the planetside battle and the other focuses on the space battle. They could both control all the units on their side, but they each had roles. Or what if you played this on two screens at once. One was dedicated to each battle front?

It is team based but not in that sense.

Two Commanders working together would be interesting though.

Wait Wait Wait... how the hell do you put a battlefleet gothic scale space battle in FPS?

And the biggest problem, if you were able to pull that off, is getting a smooth transition from the space part to dirtside. The types of combat would be so distinctly different that it would most likely turn into a big mess really fast. Also, if you would put the ground combat in FP view, most of the tactical aspects will be almost completely lost.

Your best bet for this type of game would be multiplayer, try taking a look at planetside. Old MMO FPS.

If you do somehow pull it off though, You'd have a winner on your hands.

Benjamin385 wrote:Ok, I would have to agree that people having to manage allot on screen is a problem. However there are ways to combat the problem.

It may really be too much to curtail. You'd have to really cut back on micromanagement to make the game manageable which will leave the overall game bland and simple. If you're not going to use economics, if you want to maintain some gameplay depth, you need to put more focus into combat. A cover system for infantry, abilities for units to use, maybe even applying flanking to space combat. This increases micromanagement and makes it harder to manage to different fronts in two different types of combat very complicated.

I honestly don't think current technology makes this sort of idea feasible. A battle in space and on ground with two different combat systems to manage both in real time? It's too much as awesome as it sounds.

1. Giving a minimalistic HUD (Heads up Display) where only your objectives that you have selected for the time being are displayed. (Think Quake Wars)

That won't make management easier, and might actually make it harder! You have two fronts to manage. You'll want a system that allows players a map for both so they can observe as well as groups that make quickly examining your units simpler. It's contradictory to use the system as you describe it with a minimal hud if you want to make things easier for the player.

2. Divide up objectives between Squads/Squadrons/Ships (Example: A Cloak Ship may have an objective to Destroy a Sensor Outpost. While a squad on the ground may have the objective to Destroy a Communication Dish. etc)

And when something goes wrong? What if you're cloaked ship gets detected and you have to manage it, while managing a ground assault and a space battle? You could find yourself needing to micromanage as many as four or five events all at the same time. It's simply not possible to do for anyone who isn't a korean star craft master. It's like asking someone to play two games at the same time. They might be able to do it somewhat but they're not going to get far and doubt it would be very enjoyable.

I honestly think the game would be far more functional and effective if we cut the process down into a series. Build army -> engage orbital battle -> engage ground assault. Asking someone too do all three at once is just too much unless you plan to make mechanics very simple, and then the game just becomes horde smash game #infinity.

Repairing Ships takes time (Like in real life) but field Repairs are more over temporary than anything. Lets say an engine gets damaged the "Technicians" who are basically the Handymen on the ships go to work on getting fuel back into the engine and making the engine operational.

This would be a bit interesting as a mechanic.

Seems collio. Making a company is big work! Good luck

You can check out World of Warcraft's newer battle ground.
They combined PVP with giant airships and seiges and stuff