Textbased game? Lesser game mechanics

Mon, 04/13/2026 - 16:04

#1

larienna

Offline

Joined: 07/28/2008

Look at W1815. I own the

Look at W1815. I own the game. The CRT encapsulate the resolution and the targetting in the combat. Its a game without movement.

So yes, you could make a command line game with W1815 because the decisions involved is basically choosing which unit will act, and then roll a die to see the results. That is the game.

I added a few twist like the same unit cannot be selected twice to avoid some dominant strategies. There is even an AI script to play solo. My only complain is that the end of the game is decided on a morale roll.

Mon, 04/13/2026 - 16:06

#2

larienna

Offline

Joined: 07/28/2008

In fact, if my game was not

In fact, if my game was not boxed, we could have played by email or forum as long as you trust me with the dice rolls. Else playable on BGG, they have dice rolls in their forums.

Mon, 04/13/2026 - 17:26

#3

X3M

Offline

Joined: 10/28/2013

This one?

https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/2522553/trying-to-adapt-the-w1815-comba...

Not sure how it would help with designing a text based game that includes attack range and movement speed.

But I spot different terrain types on the tiles that you show in that one picture. The one where you have room for 3 pieces per hexagon.

We would like to make something similar to Ogame. But instead of planets, we got tiles. And the tiles will have properties that modify the ammount of different resources. As well as how well certain units can move through.

That's a thing too. Perhaps I should have the attack range and movement speed. Not only be as some sort of combat modifier. These modifiers themselves should be modified by the terrain properties.

Mon, 04/13/2026 - 17:32

#4

X3M

Offline

Joined: 10/28/2013

Water --> Naval has 100%

Water --> Naval has 100% movement.
Coastline --> Naval has 50% movement, ground has 50% movement.
Ground --> Ground has 100% movement.

If a ground unit has a movement of 3 tiles per day. It can move 1 tile every 8 hours. But if it moves through the coastline. It can move 1.5 tiles per day. And needs 16 hours for 1 tile.

Not only that, but if it battles in a certain area. It should have a modifier to the movement speed in regards of combat.

The whole point of this topic is to find something that can be used that way. Thus, we want attack range and movement speed in a textbased game without an actual 2D map when we do combat.

As for ranged combat. Perhaps a Forest could allow for only an attack range of 50%. While all units suffer from this on both sides. It is the player with the melee units that suffers the least.

Mon, 04/13/2026 - 17:59

#5

questccg

Offline

Joined: 04/16/2011

Hmm... If you are not using PHYSICAL components...

I would recommend making the "Virtual" Area of Play made up of SQUARES. Why? Because it's HARD to visualize "Virtual" Hexes. Squares are much easier to keep track of as there are 4 Sides and connect ELEGANTLY in one's mind.

But in a TEXTBASED game where the area is "Virtual" ... Squares IMHO will be much easier to understand relative positions and cut down from 6 Sides in a HEX to only 4 sides in a SQUARE.

This is not an absolute option... I'm just saying I can think up connectivity with 4 Sides better than 6 Sides and then there is less room for confusion TBH.

Again this is a matter of OPINION... But I do think this is something that can make a serious difference... Keep it in mind when you too think about the "Virtual" Area of Play.

Best!

Note #1: It's also SIMPLER to refer to a SQUARE "Virtual" Map with a Column and Row identification. HEXES are hard to easily Identify with some kind of logic... Trust me when I say "SQUARES" and COLUMN/ROW is WAY easier to virtualize than HEXES... Think about and you will see...

Mon, 04/13/2026 - 23:02

#6

X3M

Offline

Joined: 10/28/2013

Dude

Let me tell you that the idea of using square tiles for this game is already 20 years old.

Since it is not a boardgame...

Also, it didn't address the issue with having 1 tiled combat.

Tue, 04/14/2026 - 00:33

#7

questccg

Offline

Joined: 04/16/2011

I'm just saying because all of your other efforts were HEXES...

It may be 20+ Years old to use Square Tile. I'm just saying you have had several other projects in which you were leaning towards HEXES or FLOWER MATS or INVADER MATS, etc. etc. And all of those are HEX-Based.

I was maybe pointing out the OBVIOUS... But it's never the less a REALITY that you never covered. At least not in this THREAD. I cannot read minds... I can only go over the information that you've shared on the other projects and point out to you what you already know.

But I can't say that I KNOW what you mean... Unless you TELL me this project is different than the others. Which you using SQUARE tiles may be obvious to YOU but it's not to anyone reading this thread. Because you had not brought up the issue. Or your own vision on this matter.

I was making sure you would not do something WEIRD and go with Hexes with some kind of archaic or complicate format for the Area of Play (which could be more Virtual than real).

At least I'm glad you agree SQUARE is the way to go and HEXES are only good for games that have PHYSICAL layouts.

Cheers @X3M ... No worries. Just making a small point.

Tue, 04/14/2026 - 13:55

#8

questccg

Offline

Joined: 04/16/2011

I agree with YOU!

X3M wrote:

Also, it didn't address the issue with having 1 tiled combat.

It's HARDER to handle. But if you have TANKS or ARTILLARY ... Attacking from 1 or 2 squares (Tiles) could be interesting.

Same with having TERRAIN: is it a Hill or a Forest or a Mountain?

So a Hill allows the player to have a larger range but the Forest protects the Units inside. While Mountains for players to go AROUND them... etc. etc.

I personally DON'T like the 1-Tiled Combat. It's boring. Too easy and familiar. This is not some game of D&D. I think you should be able to specify TERRAIN and ranged weapons. Like Riflemen on a Hill shooting down at troops crossing a river in their present tile. Tough situation but realistic.

IDK I think I'm in your camp and I would LIKE to have RANGED attacks with some kind of bonus or penalty (or BOTH) when it comes to attacks from a distance.

So that's my opinion TBH...

Tue, 04/14/2026 - 14:37

#9

questccg

Offline

Joined: 04/16/2011

Note it doesn't need to be too complicated

Like I said invoke EASY RULES like:

questccg wrote:

• Forests give +50% defensive bonus when being attack.
• Hills give +50% attacking bonus when attacking.
• Rivers give a -50% defensive bonus when crossing.
• Mountains are impenetrable and require going around.

Something SIMPLE like that. Of course the HARD PART is determining the damage dealt by RANGED units given those bonuses. They are NOT absolute; just ideas. You can come up with your OWN "Bonuses" and "Penalties" and make for a more interesting game TBH.

Just saying...

Tue, 04/14/2026 - 17:33

#10

X3M

Offline

Joined: 10/28/2013

The AI said the following

Tactical Distance (TD)

When 2 forces meet in the same tile. TD starts at the maximum (edge of the tile).
Each timebatch, TD reduces, depending on the invading force movement speed.
TD goes all the way down to 0.
Once a force retreats. TD starts to climb again, depending on the retreating force speed.

If the defending force also starts moving. Towards a tile where the invading force doesn't come from (there are 3). TD will remain the same from that point onward. Or change slightly depending on the movement speeds.

If the defending force moves towards the invading force. The TD decreases much faster due to 2 movement speeds added up.

Once it reaches 0 or a negative number, the game knows that DT increases again (DT is taken absolute).

If the invading force reaches the tile "centre". It can:
A. Get a new order. Perhaps chase after the defending force that is still fleeing.
B. Simply harass the retreating fleeing force. Where DT increases again.

DT is tracked as long as the 2 forces overlap with their corresponding tiles. Thus each start and end tile location.

***

In a sense, this is similar to what I was vouching for. But then not visualized and merely textbased.

***

What I self came up with was some sort of RPS again.

Movement speed and projectile speed could serve the same idea.
Where slow moving projectiles deal a lot of damage to structures. And fast moving projectiles are excellent for taking care of fast moving targets.

I might still push this concept forward in combination with the tile stuff. Since units would have some personal benefit from their "agility" if you will. And are not depending on the entire force.

As for attack range, I am uncertain if I can have any other effect. I think I will compromise with what the AI suggested. It is very similar to my other concept that I had in mind but wasn't text based.

Movement speed and Attack range can be modified by the terrain. And TD might start high, but some weapons simply start later and the force might slow down as well. Thus TD starts high and it takes a long time till it reaches the attack range.

Alright, the RPS effects with the projectiles and target movement speed? Well, they provide me with one thing. No need for structure/unit attributes? And what about ground and air?
The cost factor is only for the body, based on the RPS effects. I need to think on how the movement speed should actually be treated for the "RTS" effects. If I pick linear, it is probably a different factor. With a H/D ratio of 10 timebatches. Well....new, but not a problem.

Some examples, still concepts:
0 km/h: Cost=100%: Structures
3 km/h: Cost=200%: Slow infantry
5.25 km/h: Cost=250%: Normal moving infantry
8 km/h: Cost=300%: Fast moving infantry
80 km/h: Cost=900%: Attack bike
399 km/h: Cost=2000%: Helicopter
624 km/h: Cost=2500%: Bomber
899 km/h: cost=3000%: FighterJet

If a rifleman wants to shoot a fighterjet. The projectile speed is most optimal to hit fast moving infantry. The factor is only 1/12628 on hitting. Although the FighterJet has relatively only 1/10th health compared to that of a fast moving infantry. So, 1263 riflemen are able to hit a fighterjet. Deal 1 damage. And the fighterjet continues with 9 health.

This will also give a relative feeling to the size of tiles. And the differences are big enough for the player to specialize forces into certain unit categories. Not based on only armor and damage types. But now also on movement speed and projectile types.

Tue, 04/14/2026 - 17:41

#11

X3M

Offline

Joined: 10/28/2013

Perhaps only the RPS on movement speed?

I just realized. If the RPS is that strong with the projectile speeds and the target speeds. I might not even need my basic RPS. It would make bullets effective against slow moving tanks though. So perhaps somewhat is needed?

As for projectile propulsion. A rocket is slow, but can hunt a fighterjet if it is a heatseeking missile.
If it is supposed to be effective against slow moving targets and fast targets. I should supply both version to the unit. And the unit picks the most optimal one. We get the 50% rule again on top of the effects.

Tue, 04/14/2026 - 17:51

#12

X3M

Offline

Joined: 10/28/2013

Final note for today

Perhaps have the movement speed put the units in certain classes. And thus making things simpler for the player to understand.

Structure, superslow, slow, normal, fast, superfast.
Not only is this better to comprehend. A big tank that moves faster than a small infantry, shows a relative same movement speed for the projectiles to hit. It makes more sense that a bigger object that moves faster, is hit the same as a smaller slower moving object.

And the same classifications can be used for the projectile speeds. This will reduce the levels of RPS. And I could make it less punishing and less complex.

With Structure still being 100%. Slow can be something like 140%. Taking only 50% damage from certain melee weapons.
Normal is 160% and will take only roughly 40% from those same certain melee weapons.

As for the movement speeds relation to TD. I simply can use numbers here. But simpler numbers so players have less problems understanding them. Still, a RL analog would be nice to have. And the body weight will also include this.

I need to think some more on this.

Well, GN :)

Tue, 04/14/2026 - 22:08

#13

questccg

Offline

Joined: 04/16/2011

How does your TD concept work in this case...

Let's say Player 1 is attacking from the TOP AND LEFT sides of a given Tile. Player 2 is attacking from the BOTTOM side of that SAME Tile. How do you compute these 3 VECTORS knowing that the LEFT VECTOR would be more of a DIAGONAL and the TOP & BOTTOM STRAIGHT lines?!

Are you just going to ASSUME that everyone is MOVING towards the CENTER of the Same Tile??? I guess that could be one approximation... But it's a bit DIRTY in truth because the LEFT would want to cut Player 2 before they even reach the CENTER of the SAME Tile...

Just saying. Something seems broken.

Tue, 04/14/2026 - 23:18

#14

X3M

Offline

Joined: 10/28/2013

Yes, we thought of that

Perhaps we start the TD at "14" for diagonal approaches and only "10" for a straight approach.

And if 2 forces approach from different angles. The TD needs to be "added up", depending on the angle of course.

1 Comming from the left and 1 from the right. Have a TD together, starting at 20.

1 from top and 1 from bottom as well starting at 20.

Then again, we could calculate a TD for each combination of the 2 starting locations. As long as they move towards the same end location.

After all, I said if the start or end overlap. We start observing.
2 parralel moving forces will not have an overlap. And thus we do not observe.

I could make a list for easy reference, so the game doesn't have to calculate everything. It only needs to track start, end and the TD for each force. As well as if there is an overlap. And treat the overlap as the centre tile.

With a centre in mind. We got the following approaches. North, West, East, South. NW has the following 7:
NW+N, NW+W
NW+NE, NW+SW
NW+E, NW+S
NW+SE

Wed, 04/15/2026 - 02:42

#15

X3M

Offline

Joined: 10/28/2013

Not even that

Apperently we are not even going to do directions.
If 2 players move, they do not fight.
If 1 player moves (into). Both players fight.

You don't have to tell me its wrong. I know that. But i am not the one programming it.

Wed, 04/15/2026 - 03:02

#16

X3M

Offline

Joined: 10/28/2013

Tile awaits, this is the plan for the program so far...

Apperently, we move into another tile.
Once we reach the centre, the game waits till the next timebatch.
Then TD starts at the highest attack range in the game.
Every step is damage.
All steps combined are one timebatch.
TD reduces by the 2 forces in regards of minimum movement speeds added up.

Order to not approach is possible.
Both forces with this order is peacefull.
Order to keep a distance is possible.
If another force doesn't approach, outranging is possible.

Retreat takes a timebatch as well. But TD increases.

Retreating into another occupied tile will not trigger 2 enemy forces, only the one you retreat from.
If it follows, it will start a new combat in the next timebatch. But with TD starting at a maximum again.

Wed, 04/15/2026 - 09:20

#17

larienna

Offline

Joined: 07/28/2008

I am not sure exactly what

I am not sure exactly what you mean by text based war game, but In any case, I am sure that simplifying the geography is mandatory. Therefore little or no attack and movement ranges should make it to the game. In fact, if the players can remember the entire geography in their head, it would be better.

It could be graph based geography with combat like axis and allies.

It could be like W1815, where there is simply no geography.

A 3 flank system, you assign units on flank A, B, or C.

Wed, 04/15/2026 - 12:55

#18

X3M

Offline

Joined: 10/28/2013

larienna wrote:I am not sure

larienna wrote:

I am not sure exactly what you mean by text based war game

Here 2 examples, that I played:

Ogame

PlayTeq

Each tile would represent some sort of terrain. And it would have a modifier for attack range and movement speed.
But I think he completely lost that.

By thinking he makes it easy, he is overcomplicating things.

I suggested a subcoördinates system to track. Where a force would move in from one of the eight directions.
And from that, TD could be calculated. And that same would also allow players to apply some sort of strategy.

As well as 2 forces, both moving. However, it seems he wants only combat if a force arrives in the centre. Then it checks if there is a force present. And only then combat starts. Pretending the long ranged units are far away and shoot first.

It seems he also wants the entire combat sequence to play out in one go. But doesn't realize that this way, most forces are mostly dead after 1 timebatch.

Ogame doesn't have attack range. And movement speed is only your force moving from "tile to tile". And it takes half an hour in general. There are only a dozen ships. But combat is randomized and takes 3 (or 6?) subturns. The combat is "instant". And only combat is tracked on moving forces that reach their target.

PlayTeq doesn't even have movement speed. It is simply attacking. 1 attack plays out, probably pitches the root of your army against the root of another army and counts victims. You can plan over 100 attacks in a minute in this game is what I remember. I think, there are only 4 different units in this game. Combat is "instant". And only combat is tracked on the order to attack.

I say, no attack range, no movement speed. If there is no 2D combat.
And 2D combat can be textbased. As long as you apply the correct calculations.
I don't think he knows what he wants. As long as he can build the game with AI.
The check for combat is probably gona be along the lines of, if 2 forces are in the same tile.

But it needs to track if one of them was invading prior.
I need a good chat with him first before I continue making plans for the calculator.
Honestly, my idea is to have the possibility to calculate combat in Excel.

Wed, 04/15/2026 - 17:27

#19

X3M

Offline

Joined: 10/28/2013

(his) Main concern was...

Artillery
In a sense, if a player wants to attack another player from distance. They need to come from even further. It got worse if there are water tiles in between and no way for the defending player to cross the river.

Completely understandable.
Hence...

The decision to have a 1 tile combat remains.
The trigger for combat is being in the same tile AND having the order set to attack/defend. Of course the origin will also be stored in case of retreat. However, default order is to move to a TD=0. From that point onwards, the force needs to get an move order and it can be in any direction.

Tactical Distance
Is now between 2 opposing forces. That means that if both players have 3 forces each, there are 9 calculations.

The weight of all forces are combined. But depending on the individual weight of a force. It receives a fraction.
Example of a situation: 3 forces are defending. 1 is a base and cannot move.
1 is a fast force that is designed to deal with artillery. And 1 force is normal.

With 3 forces, and 3 TD. The TD shows how much of a force can fight. If an attacker comes in with melee units for the base. They will only be able to fight when TD reaches 0.
Against the base, TD=0 can be reached.
The total attack power is NOT divided by 3. But multiplied by how much base there is. Thus, the remaining melee force will be "fighting" the other 2 forces.

If the base contains 20% of all forces. The attack power to the base is only 20% once the melee forces reach it.
If the base contains 80% of all forces. The attack power will be 80%. So, a 1 unit defence in one force will NOT cut the attack power by 2.

Designing the army?
The design of the units will grow slowly.
Thus the formula's. But also the maximum attack range.
Hence, the TD will increase over time in the calculator.
We decided on 1.4 times the maximum attack range possible for horizontal/vertical approach. And a factor of 2 for diagonal approaches.

If the maximum attack range is 7. Then the "fight" starts at TD=10 or TD=14. It will give defending players ample time to react, even if the enemy is WITHIN their territory.

One important note:
If you go from one tile to another, this takes time. However, TD=max for the tile you move into while TD=0 for the tile you come from. If you retreat and someone follows you. Your force is at TD=0. And thuse TD=max is applied for the interaction again.

Peace or War?
If there is no attack AND defend order issued. TD will also start at the highest number once one of the sides decides to go to war. Resetting the TD is only possible if both players agree to stop the war. If one starts, the other one will automatically return fire. Return fire is a possible default state to start with. But from that point onwards, the other side is not considered neutral, but an enemy instead.

In order to reset the TD, both players have to agree to have one timebatch to be peacefull. I could ask mr.Programmer to actually have the TD increase slowly. And only have the ceasefire count till TD is maximum again. From that point onwards, the players are at peace again, even if they are in the same tile.

I still need to do this in my excel
So far, I have the impression that units can move AND attack. Since ignoring can be a factor. I still need to double check this. Probably start from scratch and go from 0 to 10 this time. With only the possible combat calculations. I am happy to announce that some board game rules can be scrapped and the calculation will be simpler.

Time batches
We are probably going to settle for a 100 second interval per timebatch. With a H/D ratio of 10 timebatches. The fastest combat will take no more than 1000 seconds, or 16 minutes.
Each timebatch, combat will commence and only those that have R≥TD, will fire.

It is this time x2 (or x2.8) that is also needed to cross a tile in the slowest manner. Half an hour per tile. If the distance is 15 tiles between 2 players. We are dealing with 7.5 hours for one to approach another. We have been talking about enemies having 300 tiles.

Fastest speed is probably going to be 10. Then we get only 45 minutes there for the 15 tiles. And that would be 15 hours at top speed.

Weight factors for S and R
Not sure yet about the weight factors for movement and attack range. But we will settle for a 2:3 ratio between movement and attack range in terms of weight factor.
If we apply 10% for movement, then it is 15% for attack range.
An attack range of 10 will allow only 40% damage at most.
If we apply other attributes, the damage will go down. But at least they will be able to fire when others cannot. "Seekers".

For the playerwiki
TD will change, based on movement speed, which is based on tile properties.
TD will be compared to attack range, which is based on tile properties.
TD will start at ## when comming from straight directions and 1.4x ## when comming from a diagonal direction.
In case of retreat, you go back to your origin with TD building up. You go into the other tile once TD has reached a maximum.

Forces can have orders for more tactical play.
Orders will change upkeep. But that is a different subject.

Sat, 04/18/2026 - 17:01

#20

questccg

Offline

Joined: 04/16/2011

New Ogame Server

X3M wrote:

Here 2 examples, that I played: Ogame ...

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/BDigixsdZoU

A NEW Ogame server has just been created! It's an AD for Ogame... I don't know what is the FORMAT, but it seems to be some kind of World Simulation or Planet Conquering... Not quite sure.

Anyhow if ANYONE is interested, you can dig into this and follow the LINK to the website for the Game...

Cheers!

Sat, 04/18/2026 - 20:46

#21

X3M

Offline

Joined: 10/28/2013

Oh.... The scam bait

Oh....
The scam bait commercial.

Don't register through there.

Sat, 04/18/2026 - 20:48

#22

X3M

Offline

Joined: 10/28/2013

As for other game mechanics

Seems he is set on going 100% AI on this one. Asked me for an opinion. But most often, I got asked for a Moot point.

Even resource management seems to be set in stone before I even had anything useful to say.

I guess I focus on the combat mechanics. But if even that one is ignore. So be it.

Sat, 04/18/2026 - 22:36

#23

questccg

Offline

Joined: 04/16/2011

Maybe this LINK is more official???

https://lobby.ogame.gameforge.com/en_GB/

Searched for it... Since the other AD seemed to be a SCAM (As per yourself)! But it's funny you've been talking about OGame and all of a SUDDEN I get an AD for the game in my FEED. I may have Googled the game before (when you mentioned it ...) So maybe that's why that SCAM AD popped into my feed.

Maybe that Game Forge Link/URL is more official...

Let me know!

Sat, 04/18/2026 - 22:42

#24

questccg

Offline

Joined: 04/16/2011

Never too late to discuss and share your opinion!

X3M wrote:

Seems he is set on going 100% AI on this one. Asked me for an opinion. But most often, I got asked for a Moot point.

What does that mean 100% AI??? The Developer is following the RULES that AI defines?! Or does this mean something completely different...?

X3M wrote:

Even resource management seems to be set in stone before I even had anything useful to say.

You can share your opinion. It could affect the results. Maybe Yes and maybe no... You can TRY to discuss and see the reaction.

X3M wrote:

I guess I focus on the combat mechanics. But if even that one is ignore. So be it.

Well if you're not the one coding... It would seem like the people who are coding have all the say. Anyhow. I know how you feel... IGNORED is not great...!

But like I said... Nothing is set in stone until it is CODED... Best to talk about things BEFORE it is too late.

I'm just saying IF you want some kind of voice, it's best to discuss early before the developer(s) start coding the game.

Best of luck(!) with this "game".

Sun, 04/19/2026 - 12:43

#25

X3M

Offline

Joined: 10/28/2013

Some agreements we made

Resources
Not going into detail. But we have 3 levels. Raw, refined and advanced. All in total, 9. This is to provide a techtree based on resources. Not a simple techtree with some dependencies.

Resources can be traded.

There will be no replacement production. Meaning, that units that cost steel, will not cost carbon and iron.

Players will specialize in refining resources.
This depends on the tiles they hold.

Trading
We await what the AI will provide.

My idea was to have a public, clan and black market.
Where players trade with the help of credits instead of pure trading.

As for trading with resource gatherers. We both think this is a nessesary concept. Since it would cause intercepting trading players. And you can then steal the resources.

He is against the markets?

Forces
We allow a maximum size to each force.
The size of a force is upgradable.
The number of forces is upgradable.

A tile can hold up to an X ammount of material per player.
If multiple players are in the same tile. The movement speed is reduced tremendiously by the sum Y. Probably by a factor of:
1 / (X/Y)²

So, 2 forces would mean that the invading force will move with only 25%. The defending force will not have that penalty on their units in case they want to have agile defenders. However, once a tactical distance reaches 0. Both sides suffer from 1 / (X/Y)

We think we let the players start with each force being 10% that of the tiles.

Not sure yet how we will calculate the size of a force, for comparing it with a tile. We will get different types of propulsions and also different types of transport.

Mon, 04/20/2026 - 00:05

#26

questccg

Offline

Joined: 04/16/2011

Something to consider

X3M wrote:

Resources
Not going into detail. But we have 3 levels. Raw, refined and advanced. All in total, 9. This is to provide a techtree based on resources. Not a simple techtree with some dependencies.

Okay that sounds cool. Can you be blocked in the techtree if you don't have a specific KIND of "resource"??? That's something in my "Mystery Card Game" that I am working on had something SIMILAR (in principle):

questccg wrote:

A Base must be "Scouted" but there are five (5) different "Scouting" Methods. Each Method is applied to a SPECIFIC "Scout requirement" and then the is the GENERIC "Scout" option.

What this means is that there are three (3) Scouting GOALS you must achieve to be capable to SCOUT as "Base". But the GENERIC "SCOUT" option can be used in place of the other Scouting Methods.

You may want to consider certain options for your techtree to be like: Either "X" of this Resource or "Y" of this Resource. And this allows more flexibility and doesn't lead to BLOCKING since you can always have TWO (2) or more alternatives when it comes to what Resources are required in the techtree.

X3M wrote:

Trading
We await what the AI will provide.

What do you mean by what "AI will provide"??? Are you asking for advice from AI or are you designing based on what AI thinks is the best method??? Not sure I understand what AI has to do with anything. And BTW AI is very poor at making games. I've used it before and unless you are a "Game Designer" you will probably not notice that the AI designs things that are "IMPOSSIBLE". Fair warning...

***

Anyhow ... Let us know on the decisions being made and what is happening with this design. It MAY be a "Video Game" but it never-the-less REQUIRES Game Design SKILLS and is very much a DESIGN EFFORT. Good to keep communications open and discuss matters with the parties involved in coding the game.

Again... Feel free to share when you have news, updates or questions that you may have.

Cheers!

Mon, 04/20/2026 - 04:49

#27

X3M

Offline

Joined: 10/28/2013

questccg wrote: Okay that

questccg wrote:

Okay that sounds cool. Can you be blocked in the techtree if you don't have a specific KIND of "resource"??? That's something in my "Mystery Card Game" that I am working on had something SIMILAR (in principle):

Yes and No.
1. I do have a solution of having raw materials being costly for the more advanced units. In a sense that their cost requires refined resources. But if you don't have them. You spend 50% to 100% more. Or something like that. But we are not in agreement with that. And await to see the intelligence level of our players.
2. We want to stimulate markets. And thus, we should force techtree through resources. In fact, it is the only techtree I want to be in the game. Want a specific unit? Get the right resources.
3. Markets. We were working on that yesterday. But what it will be is not set in stone yet. We kinda got tired due to RL shenanigans interupting us. We want our own version, fitting our world. So we will not accept any suggestions in that regard. We will not discuss either, with third parties.

questccg wrote:

A Base must be "Scouted" but there are five (5) different "Scouting" Methods. Each Method is applied to a SPECIFIC "Scout requirement" and then the is the GENERIC "Scout" option.

We didn't look at this because....scouting will be based on sacrifices.
"just have a spy plane fly over" If it survives a timebatch, it scouts.

Obviously, we will have neutral parties being hidden from each other. And allies will be able to toggle the information button or not. We need a short talk on this.

X3M wrote:

Trading
We await what the AI will provide.

No doubt the AI will make mistakes.

We kinda put in several idea's. And the AI's, yes 's, puts them to a test. Sometimes the AI agrees with my cousin, sometimes with me. And sometimes we get a new idea from it.

Thu, 04/23/2026 - 07:07

#28

X3M

Offline

Joined: 10/28/2013

Propulsion and Projectiles

Are set to go. And their weight factors are determined. I had a bit of ocd going on there. But that is ok.

Before I could set their weight factors, I had to determine how the game would be using biomes and terrain types. Had a bit of a miscommunication there at first. But we managed.

Each biome has a number of terrain types generated. Each terrain type has resources generated in a certain way.

Each terrain type will also influence the attack range and movement speed of the units. To be more precise, the movement speed per propulsion system is different. And while most units have a basic projectile, there is plenty of room for different kind of projectiles.

***

As for the cost calculations. For now, I am calculating all in credits. I will prepare a dozen units+structures. Seeing how the calculator helps me.

I need a clear distinction between combat, resource managment, storage, restoration and of course production.

Vacation soon, in which....I cannot work on anything.
So, after that, I hope to get a clear view on what type of units need which type of resources.

Chances are...I do this manually, without rules. Just a bit of pointers. And perhaps a bit of, what do we need in what area's? Lets make sure the resources are present.

I see ya all in 2.5 weeks.

Thu, 05/07/2026 - 18:55

#29

X3M

Offline

Joined: 10/28/2013

Vacation is...over (awwww, shoot)

I got informed we got like 3 weeks left for me to get some numbers down. Stats and stuff.

AND

Inform him in how the combat mechanic should work.

***

I should make sure I got a proper list to start with. Not too much, nor too little. Let's see if the following list is noteworthy to people here. Especially the wargamers.

Let's start with:
The player just landed on this new planet. And the forces have specialized tools in order to perform certain duties. Like for example, making more people out of resources...by hand.

Engineer
Infantry Unit/Soft
- Slow
- Melee
- Helps in constructing buildings
- Can help repair buildings and to some extend vehicles
- Helps in upgrading

Barracks
"Organic" Structure/Medium
- "Production Facility" of Infantry Units (subclass of Organic Units)

Mechanic
Infantry Unit/Soft
- Slow
- Melee
- Helps in producing vehicles
- Can help repair vehicles and to some extend structures

Medic
Infantry Unit/Soft
- Slow
- Melee
- Can help heal Infantry Units

Specialized Medic; Field Hospital (mobile)
Infantry Unit/Soft
- Slow
- Melee
- Can help heal Infantry Units
- Can deploy into the Field Hospital

Field Hospital (deployed)
"Organic" Structure/Soft
- Melee
- Can help heal Infantry Units
- Can "repack" back into the Specialized Medic
Trivia: Once deployed, the Field Hospital is more durable than a Medic. But can also heal much better.

Rifle Infantry
Infantry Unit/Soft
- Slow
- Targets: Soft

Grenadier
Infantry Unit/Soft
- Slow
- Targets: Medium

Wooden Fence
"Organic" Structure/Soft

Flamethrower
Infantry Unit/Soft
- Slow
- Melee
- Targets: Soft/Medium
- Bonus to: "Organics"

Allround Worker
Infantry Unit/Soft
- Slow
- Melee
- Gathers any of the raw resources
- Specializes into either solids or liquids at a time
- Can operate 1 ATV-Pallet Truck worth of resources
- Can steal any of the raw, refined or advanced resources

ATV-Forklift
Vehicle Unit/Hard
- Medium speed
- Melee
- Gathers any of the raw resources
- Specializes into either solids or liquids at a time
- Can operate 2 ATV-Pallet Truck worth of resources
- Can steal any of the raw, refined or advanced resources
Trivia: Since it can operate 2 ATV-Pallet Truck worth of resources, it is worth mentioning that this unit can handle solids AND liquids at the same time.

Scientist
Infantry Unit/Soft
- Very Slow
- Helps in doing research
- Helps in upgrading
- Helps in refining raw resources
- Helps in creating advanced resources

Laboratory
"Organic" Structure/Medium
- Helps in doing research
- Helps in upgrading
- Helps in refining raw resources

Research Centre
Structure/Hard
- Helps in doing research
- Helps in upgrading
- Helps in creating advanced resources

Scout Buggy
Vehicle Unit/Medium
- Very Fast
- Targets: Soft

Drill Instructor
Infantry Unit/Soft
- Medium speed
- "Production Facility" of Infantry Units (subclass of Organic Units)
Trivia: Doing this in the field is possible. However, the player needs to take along resources, which can only be carried by specific units.

Hummer
Vehicle Unit/Medium
- Fast
- Medium Range
- Targets: Soft/Medium

Grenade Launcher
Infantry Unit/Soft
- Slow
- Medium Range
- Targets: Medium

Mortar Infantry
Infantry Unit/Soft
[Mobile]
- Slow
[Deployed]
- Medium Range
- Targets: Soft/Medium

***

As you can see, I got many variants of the same "utilities". In infantry form as well as a structure and/or vehicle.
I did not mention Hard objects yet. Except for 1 structure.

I also did not define the refineries etc.
I shortly described 20 objects here.

A lot of logical options are missing. Ambulance, Hospital, Mortar Pit, Guard Tower, SandBags, Concrete Wall, Tanks, Air units, Ships (we actually need them for larger water area's), etc.

As for the mobile/deployed objects.
One design can function as 2 separate entities. The player can make a choice, and both choices are still usefull to some extend.
The other design cannot function by itself in certain situations. And requires more control of the player.

As for Soft/Medium/Hard targets? Not sure, but I think I will keep at 3 tiers. 1, 3 and perhaps 9?
I think....not sure yet.
We also got the Unit/Structure and Organic/Mechanical attributes.
These attributes can go for body and weapon as well.
So, with 3 tiers and 2x2 attributes. We got 12 different bodies. Again with 3 tiers, but this time allowing combinations of the tiers AND/OR attributes. We get 7x"16"=112 different weapons.

Deployment, movement speed, attack range, projectiles, are all stats that can add more different designs to the game. And of course, we can always change the initial health factor per design.

Not sure, but I think that my cousin needs to inform me in what he actually would like to have at least.
"Keep it simple" can be approached in 2 ways:
1. I design from a build up perspective, like the list above.
2. I design by excluding certain options for the time being. Like giving weapon attributes etc.

Fri, 05/08/2026 - 09:41

#30

questccg

Offline

Joined: 04/16/2011

Well the Unit Breakdown sounds pretty decent...

At least you have defined a subset of the Units you plan to have in the game. I must admit this is one good reference list. And that you have only included one HARD unit which I believe was a "Structure" is a good start for that too! I for one think this is AMAZING progress and a real Break-Thru in terms of the Units that you have planned for your "Text-based Wargame".

Anyhow keep up the good work. It all seems reasonable and with the extra HARD units which you can also define... Gives you a REAL list of Units for your Game.

Cheers!

Note #1: I especially LIKE the "Medic" and how that unit can be deployed as a "Field Hospital". That's pretty neat idea. Very original from what I have seen in other Video Games (RTS).

User login

Navigation

May 21 2026

May 18 2026

May 15 2026

May 12 2026

May 6 2026

Apr 29 2026

Apr 20 2026

Apr 16 2026

Apr 12 2026

Apr 9 2026

Mar 31 2026

Mar 27 2026

Mar 16 2026

Mar 5 2026

Feb 27 2026

Feb 19 2026

Feb 15 2026

Feb 3 2026

Feb 2 2026

Jan 30 2026

	Pinnacle - New Playtest Rules (63) by questccg
	Vampire Survivors - Android Game (10) by larienna
	XKCD: Types of board games (4) by larienna