Forums Thread

@Jonathan I also want you to make an agenda for creating the MVP application once Anthony is done compiling the code that will be number one thing on our list for you.  The rest of the list below can be set too you or the other designer.

Also let make an agenda to update the GDD with all the data here please.

Here is a simple list for MVP, Slice, and Beta

1. MVP
   1. Camera Works
   2. Selection of Units
   3. Units Move Natural
   4. Spawn Building from Unit
   5. Spawn Unit from Building
   6. Unit Attacks Unit
   7. Unit Attacks Building
2. Slice
   1. Graphical User Interface In-Game
      1. Button Calls Actions
      2. Unit(s) Show In List
      3. Menu Pops Modal
3. Beta
   1. Artificial Intelegents
      1. Unit Attack Enemy
      2. Unit Seek/Moves to Enemy

Needed Agenda:

1. Create Skill & Abilities for Officer
2. Create Suburb Agenda Abilities
3. List Beginning, Middle, End in GDD
4. Commander Skill / Reinforcement Abilities 2 Max per player each game (Flash, Ghost)
   
   

@Jonathan Sorry I know we discuss the Moba idea but never settled on it I wanted to give it some thought and I've come to the conclusion that is not the type of game we're looking to build in this instance.

@Tessa Can you pull all the information about the officer and paste them here for us.  Wiki, Agenda, Forum discussion we've had please.

Thanks,
James Fleming 
Facebook
Discord

Jonathan sorry my bullet list was off please look at my post again for this.

List Beginning, Middle, End in GDD

1. Commander Skill / Reinforcement Abilities 2 Max per player each game (Flash, Ghost)

Thanks for clearing everything up for me i feel there was a disconnect and i started viewing things differently.  
"

1. My thoughts on this is the office will not be on the battlefield at all. They can spawn units to do their bidding as needed. In gameplay if you take out the building they would be in then they die and the player will have to hire a new one, not the same one." -james  
     
   
   This really cleared things up fro me.  
   
   List Beginning, Middle, End in GDD
   
   1. Commander Skill / Reinforcement Abilities 2 Max per player each game (Flash, Ghost)
      
      
      
   This one confuses me what is it you want me to do exactly?

To answer tessa my focus up to this point has been viewing the concept of officers as heros.  That was the original pitch I made quite a few months ago when we all first started talking about this topic.  So the fact that no one else viewed them as heros upsets me because it meant i was unclear from the beginning of my ideas.  Im sorry i will try to speak with more clarity in the future.  

I feel we still should have a template created for the officers.  So we have something that when making new unit designs we can follow a certain design.  

I feel like what would be a good start would be to have four agendas created or however many for the officer types.  Then possibly 4 or 3 officers designed based off those results?

So in total 6 or 8 agendas made for it?

Im not really sure about the suburbs though i thought those werent going to even be in for initial release?  

Make sure to use the search page to find all related content like for the officer before you create a new aganda and/or relate this agneda too it by putting links too what you find in that agenda so we're not recreating the wheel.

Needed Agenda:

1. Create Skill & Abilities for Officer
2. Create Suburb Agenda Abilities
3. List Beginning, Middle, End in GDD
4. Commander Skill / Reinforcement Abilities 2 Max per player each game (Flash, Ghost)

1. No Health Bar
2. Officer Dyes When Units Die

1. My thoughts on this is the office will not be on the battlefield at all. They can spawn units to do their bidding as needed. In gameplay if you take out the building they would be in then they die and the player will have to hire a new one, not the same one.
2. Super/Elite units will come in the form of the ranking system on units that have survived battle before which will be a rank by their health bar.
3. The focus point of the game should be on base building and unit management not one single unit in general but the entire battlefield. So you could have a full out tank war or you can have a squad of 5 special force you are controlling to obtain an objective.

1. The officer is a partner for you that is 100% AI controlled. You can use them or you can do it all your self. The core of the game is still 100% RTS. The officer help new players out by doing the work for them if need be.
2. The player at anytime can take over the AI units and do as they please. When they are done the AI pick back up after a timeout period or the task that unit was doing is done.

1. 1 ~ 750

1. In general we want to make scenario/mission/objective that require some mechanic and then take that mechanic away or make them have to earn it. This will come later after MVP and the Slice.

1. Is the unit and structure chart what you are asking for here?

**for future reference, red lettering on the blue background is painful**

2. I’m not sure how you want to apply the abilities typically found……Officers aren’t Heroes. You don’t focus on them exclusively. They will have the AI guiding them while they guide other troops….so is this referencing what options you have when you click on the Officer?
3. I can see using unit losses as a way to decrease effectiveness by a percentage by the group, but the officer should have separate stats because the (field) officer may act alone in situations like an ambush. I see no reason not to show individual HP bar for units. Units will still be able to act independently of an officer if directed by the player.
4. Automatically killing officers if a Command Center is destroyed takes away their human element. This is like taking out drones when you kill the mothership. Individual humans would continue to follow orders (or run amock) until they die. An ambassador who is visiting a foreign diplomat doesn’t automatically die if the embassy is blown up”—even if he’s in the thing when it blows). If an officer is in the process of being created when the building is destroyed then sure, dead. After creation, Officers should have HP like everyone else. I’d say the troops take the dmg first but when cannon fodder is gone officer loses HP and can die.

***COMBAT MISSION SUPPORT

4. I’d say Morale would come into play here. Also, if we are keeping an arcade type feel 50-60 units is a LOT! I’d want to limit the sides to maybe 50-60 units TOTAL or it will just become too much.
5. Officers should lose HP AFTER units are dead not while they die. Also, all units should be spawned in the base, not in the field where the officer is.
6. Officers should act as the personality attributes chosen dictate. If the player wants it to mimic then it should be set to mimic. This should all be player choice. I agree with scaling down.

***FOREIGN AFFAIRS OFFICER

1. If the officer is able to successfully interact with the suburbs and maintain a friendly relationship, it is reasonable to say that the suburb could be treated as a second base and produce (limited) units and send supplies.
2. We can make it to where there is a first come reaction. Meaning that the first officer to reach the suburbs has a high probability of achieving a friendly relationship while the second or third, etc, has to contend with the officer who came before. This could turn into a fun little mini-game in which officer v officer is decided in some way and the officer who loses becomes POW who is either killed or ransomed back. Killed should be a huge morale dropper.
3. I’d say they only control the relationship with the suburbs…..and defend against other officers that follow….units created in the suburbs will be sent where most needed per discursion of ambassador.
4. Interrogations of another ambassador would be fun…Ambassador should be the only one negotiating and should likely have a guard detail. Otherwise, units transferred to where they are needed unless the suburb is under attack and has to be defended. I agree that combat officers should have a proximity to the units they control.

***LOGISTIC OFFICER

1. This would be the priority control. What’s more important to produce? Resources, Units, Structures???
2. Gathering units and defensive structures. Humanizing the game means realizing that defensive structures would have humans inside of them who would be able to receive and respond to orders from this officer directing them to focus on a given target.
3. This officer would only control base
4. I could see killing this officer if the command center is destroyed.

***ENGINEERING OFFICER

This is redundant. We should merge Engineering and Logistics

If we want to have four officers and are set on that then we should combine logistics and engineering and create a 4^th that is strictly home defense. Logistics/Engineering can handle all the mundane support tasks while the defense only defends the base if it comes under attack and at this point would override logistics/engineering.

Adventure Tree…???

**Isn’t there already an agenda with ranks finished?

First 10 min—this is when I’d be looking to make friends with suburbs but that's just my personal preference...

How skills affect battle: This has already begun with traits—last updated in February. The following links are what I found with a search:

http://www.thoucurator.com/agenda/viewagenda?agendaid=1622

http://www.thoucurator.com/wiki/viewwiki?wikiid=105

http://www.thoucurator.com/agenda/viewagenda?agendaid=1637

http://www.thoucurator.com/forum/listreply?threadid=314

http://www.thoucurator.com/asset/viewasset?assetid=1386

Design how officers work

1. How many abilities or skills they will have? "Our GUI will support 9"  I think nine will work just fine
2. How each of those abilities or skills will act (LoL W =escape/gap closer, E=buff or enhancement ,  R = ultimate. "This is totally up too the officer that is being used.  I would think we will have a very wide range of things they do and try to make each of them unique as possible" What i mean was each officer "type"  Should have similer abilities in certain locations.  If we look at other examples in the industry most hero type games have a very vast and different toolkits unique to that heros design.  But one thing always remains the same.  The first ability that the [E] Key might be on always serves to gap close for an assasin like hero.  They might all do different things but one thing is the same, it closes the gap between you and the target.  Or maybe increases the gap so you can escape.  This is all for the sake of intuitive design so the player can take what they learned from one hero and apply those skills when learning a new one.  I think this is very important and should be weighed heavily.
3. How will the officers handle units? What happens when units die? We are going to try to make the officer act as human as possible for any situation he/she is in.  So if a unit dies create another one give the resource given too you  I thought it be a good idea to use the units as a value to determine health and other stats.  Less units makes the officer and his platoon less effective.  This would also serve as a visual indicator to the enemy maybe giving us a reason to cut out showing the HP bar to the enemy.  This will make more sense when you consider the rest of my design suggestions 
4. How can the officer be killed, and what happens when they are. At this point I would say if you kill a building like the command center you loss them and have to micro manage yourself.  Then when you are able you will hire or field commission a new officer after you build your command center.  Command center is just a sample it would be any of them like the embassy would be the foreign affairs.    Im not really sure what to say here.  This was more a question i was asking following these design principles so the answer drastically changes depending on how we move forward.

Design a template for combat mission support officer

1. What role does this officer have during the game. This officer will command the units to launch offensive and deference for your base Agreed to elaborate more this officer will be the primary means of causing damage and will be in control of units that will assist it.  
2. What kind of skills do they have and how will they affect battle? Skill set will be death to the enemy type things
   Yes i was mostly pointing out that a designer should determain what skills they have and how they will affect battle so i was planning on making an agenda for this one.  
3. What kind of units they have and how they will affect battle Anything that shoots same as above
4. What control does the officer have over these units and how do the units react to his commands? (Do they stick close to the officer, can they be separated and move away from the officer to a different location?) This comes down to game play and what the user has setup for the officer behavior along with all the other thing that effect the units.  The AI on these officer is going to be difficult for sure. 
   This is one of my concerns too.  So what i mean by this is ultimatly i imagined this paticuler officer to act and function as a much more advanced hero with minions if you look at other examples in the industry i cant think of many off the top of my head but DoTa2 has quite a few heros where the player micromanages four or five minions.  I was imagining on the scale of 50-60 units and less individual control.  Once again this more ties in with my ideas for the design
   
5. What happens to the units if they enter combat, take damage, die. Taps is played and you spawn another if needed morale lost I was thinking also with this paticuler officer his units would be dead as well, given my suggestion to loose hp when its units die.  
6. What happens to the officer when the units enter combat, take damage, die. The officer will give out order silently as you play unless you tell it not too.  So it will conduct itself as if it was you playing as best as we can get the AI to do so.   I think if we scale pretty much everything down fromm 1000+ units per battle to maybe 100+ per battle we could pull this off and maybe just let the officer command the units but you could override it if you are a skilled player.  

Design a template for Foreign affairs officer

1. What role does this officer have during the game. This officer will interact with the suburb to gain advantages  I think this officer would need to have a much more drastic role in the game than just that.  Each officer should be equally important in a game like each role in a moba is important.  In a moba you have tanks and supports.  I think this hero could help sway the battle in really unique ways and we have an opportunity to explore those options. 
2. What kind of skills do they have and how will they affect battle? Basically you want the suburbs on your side as they give intel and units at times with other abilitys like say IED  What about being able to disable enemy combat officers and their troops?  Or having an ability which makes that enemy combat officer loose explosive ammo because that hero has connection with the world wide trade union or something silly like that.  I like the suburbs idea but we should have more so that way maybe the player might chose to send this officer to help support his combat officer?  
3. What kind of units they have and how they will affect battle An ambassador An ambassador has allot of power.  They can influence people and im no study and ill have to look into what exactly they can or cant control before i can argue much of a point but i like the idea of this officer being in control of far fewer than the combat official and this ones units being much more niche and with purpose other than guns and blow stuff up
4. What control does the officer have over these units and how do the units react to his commands? (Do they stick close to the officer, can they be separated and move away from the officer to a different location?) To negotiate, interrogate, or ignore  Yes and possibly much more?  Especially once we start pumping out different officer designs and units as well.  In regards to can they be seperated?  I think where the combat officer i believe should have all the units relatively close and in his control maybe like a swarm of bees as an analogy i think this one should be able to send one unit off to "negotiate"  Or something like that
5. What happens to the units if they enter combat, take damage, die. they die morale lost
6. What happens to the officer when the units enter combat, take damage, die. Spawn another

Design a template for logistic officer

1. What role does this officer have during the game. To manage resource allocation and gathering  To be honest this officer honestly could "act" and "function" like a "structure"  Who sends units out much like the trade district in rise of nations i believe.  This officer could be stationary sending out "orders" that you give it so if you want more gold being generated for your labor then you tell him and he "gives the order"  And the units he controls change the way they do their labor?
2. What kind of skills do they have and how will they affect battle? Purging resource as needed with ability for getting it quickly but at a higher cost  See above i agree with this 
3. What kind of units they have and how they will affect battle Gathering units no combat 
4. What control does the officer have over these units and how do the units react to his commands? (Do they stick close to the officer, can they be separated and move away from the officer to a different location?) These units only purpose in life is to find resource and take or steal it  Yes and they could move on a "route"  That you have in place based on where you have buildings or things of that nature
5. What happens to the units if they enter combat, take damage, die. die  I dont think the logistics officer should take damage unless He is the one under fire Much like a "structure"  But if he loses units he could "hire" more for a cost 
6. What happens to the officer when the units enter combat, take damage, die. Spawn another

Design a template for engineering officer

1. What role does this officer have during the game. Building I think that if we were to take a normal rts game and merge the commands and functions of the command center and the builder units then gave those commands to a "officer" model that would remain stationary and "act" like a "structure" much like i suggested with logistics then i think that would be a FANTASTIC design for this officer
2. What kind of skills do they have and how will they affect battle? building and fortifying 
3. What kind of units they have and how they will affect battle Backhoe 
4. What control does the officer have over these units and how do the units react to his commands? (Do they stick close to the officer, can they be separated and move away from the officer to a different location?) Building structures per the strategy  The player actually controls the backhoe.  But the player has to click on and give commands to the officer and then the backhoe will function.  So its an illusion of AI.
5. What happens to the units if they enter combat, take damage, die. die
6. What happens to the officer when the units enter combat, take damage, die. spawn another

1. What kind of task will they give out Kill order, Capture, Communication, destroy target, etc
2. How will these task be incentive? xp & money
3. Design the progression through these ranks Yes
4. What happens when the player has progressed to the end? How will end game be played. I think this depends on the choice they make during the game.  What mission they did what random acts took place etc.  We will end up with more then on ending to the campaign mode.

How will these contacts differ from factions? How are they similar?  Contact give you side mission to complete for whatever reason that give bonus depending on the contact resources

How will we ensure that a player whos been playing for less time can still go against a player whose gathered all the upgrades? We are simply going to have to put a player evener option in the game menu system.  So taht they know they are being limited etc if they want to play with others.

How will gameplay play out? We need a proper design plan for how the games will play out. Early game, mid game, and late game. Not sure what you want here as its an rts design with an overview commander and officers controlling 70% of it. Given my history in competitive gaming including some mobas there is a very ironed out very set in stone design on how every early game and mid game and late game will play out.  This is due to years of being realeased but other mobas have failed because they couldnt figure this very thing out.  We absolutly NEED a document made with how we Plan these things to go.  plan because this may change and we should be open to that but we should still have a plan.  This will also help us design heros and what functions or roles we want in each term.  Some heros are great early game not so great late game?  Why?  Because of that games early and late game design.  This is very important if we use officers in our game.  Not matter how they are designed.  
Early game Set your officer strategies up (budget per each, their objective)  Yes whatever the player doesnt get to bring into the game but has to build within that match now should be the time everyone should be doing so.
First ten minutes of the match Build Units & Structures Maybe also scouting for the enemies location.  Small fights are breaking out now.  Nothing major but combat officers vs other combat officers
Mid game  Order an offensive strike & Take what you came for (Suburb, Resource, Lifes etc) Now that players have had a chance to get ahead of their enemys and build themselves up you see bigger plays happening.  Possbibly a snowball effect happening to some while others slowly fall behind
Ten minutes to 20 Attack or Defend
Late game Try to stay alive Structures are falling terratory has been gained or lost.  The longer this goes on the less of a chance for comback.  Until a winner is declared
20-45 minutes Win or Lose

Win conditions See above

We should take a hard look and design an intuitive control scheme that will not only feel natural to the player but easy to pick up and use Control system like the ingame GUI we already have? Yay :D  I found this out after 

We will need to have an agenda to design each menu page with proper UI and UX  design This is pretty much done they need tweaking and the script put on them for the button functionality I saw the chart and seen that you took a hard look and applied UI and UX proper design.  After i made this document :D  

How will these skills affect battle? chaos and mayhem If we move foward we should have design docs be made for how certain skills will affect battle 
 
How many skills can you choose from Unknown at this time whatever our imagination bring forth. Moving foward we should keep in mind we have to balance those abilities so we have a broad choice to suit many playstyles but one isnt chose over the other simply because of necessity cough Flash cough  

How will we balance the skills so one isnt chosen over the other based on raw over powered ability but their playstyle Game testing is i think all we can do on this one

We should create chart for unit values and how they will scale with pedigree These number will be % based once a completed list in done.  These number will also come from game testing

We should create a chart for the resources and how structures and units respond to them. (cost, moral, how much population they take, etc) ? not sure what you want here exactly that a chard for cost moral population what they do and how its for.  we should have a doc made for that too  All of this is so i can properly plan what agendas to make going foward

We should create a list of units we plan on launching with and designing the stats for them Unit Assets List

We should create a list of structures we plan on launching with and designing the stats for them Structure Assets List

Now id like to go over the pros and cons to both what james said and what i said.  Spoiler alert this is why i think we should scrap the officers idea.

If we are going to include this feature.  This feature to bring RTS and make them more accessible is not only quite the undertaking but a project of huge ambition.  I love it thats how i like to play.  But we are a small team with limited resources.   Doesnt mean we cant do it but it does limit how we can pull this off.

Heres the very real fact.  Unless we rip warcraft 3 off which negates the very reason to have officers in the first place the inclusion of this mechanic fundamentally changes the game.  They werent trying to make a genre when they made Dota.  I was there i watched it happen in front of me in some way i helped it happen.  (Not that much but i downloaded them so :D  )  They just wanted to take what they thought was fun about this cool RTS and change some things.  And in that very moment they "evolved" Rts's and created something new.

if your interested look into starfire its an upcoming moba that trys to include RTS elements into it.  I think what we are doing is similer but we are changing the elements.   IF we are going to have any chance of doing this that the identity of the game SHOULD and would HAVE to be "command four officers and an army to win in this competitive fun   multiplayer experience"  Or something like that.  And the MVP Would HAVE to include the officers and some form of design for how the game would play out.  Only then would anyone want to look and give interest in the game.  If you take what we are planning now as MVP and the current mantra to investors or consumers and you sell them the concept that MVP will have and then we iron out this officers mechanic and implement it.  The changes we will have to make will fundamentally change the game and we would have lied.  Because following the design suggestion i put forth which i believe are necessary changes we will have to make and ill be more than happy to explain anything confusing further but otherwise no.  

No we should not include the officer design.  Because that is a mechanic we were going to add to support the game not a mechanic we were going to add to BE the game.  We will have to design much more elements of the game around this officer mechanic and that will not create a game thats an RTS.

Now if anyone wants this thats okay!  I want it for sure im so interested in exploring this mechanic and idea i have spent much time and effort working out certain details.  And I see that I am on a much different page than everyone else.  That might be because ive been away for a bit or maybe its my backround in mobas.  Im aware of many RTS games and have played them.  But i have thoughtfully Studied certain mobas and have played on the competitive level in my state.  Ive also studied other games who have taken elements from mobas and mashed them with others.  And played competitively in my state.  So i love the idea of taking elements from the RTS and mashing them right back into mobas. 

Which would i believe be the correct way to do this.  But I think right now....we are making an RTS.  Not a moba or a moba/rts hybrid and the simple inclusion of this mechanic will either take away from the games identity or BECOME the games identity.  And i think we should decide if we are okay or even want either of those outcomes. My primary fear is that this mechanic is by definition "scope creep"  And even the mightiest of studios have fell from it.  

Holy mother of text Id like to thank everyone for their time and attention if you got through all that.  Please if anything is confusing allow me to clear things up before passing judgement im interested in what you all have to say 

Design how officers work

1. How many abilities or skills they will have? "Our GUI will support 9"  I think nine will work just fine
2. How each of those abilities or skills will act (LoL W =escape/gap closer, E=buff or enhancement ,  R = ultimate. "This is totally up too the officer that is being used.  I would think we will have a very wide range of things they do and try to make each of them unique as possible" What i mean was each officer "type"  Should have similer abilities in certain locations.  If we look at other examples in the industry most hero type games have a very vast and different toolkits unique to that heros design.  But one thing always remains the same.  The first ability that the [E] Key might be on always serves to gap close for an assasin like hero.  They might all do different things but one thing is the same, it closes the gap between you and the target.  Or maybe increases the gap so you can escape.  This is all for the sake of intuitive design so the player can take what they learned from one hero and apply those skills when learning a new one.  I think this is very important and should be weighed heavily.
3. How will the officers handle units? What happens when units die? We are going to try to make the officer act as human as possible for any situation he/she is in.  So if a unit dies create another one give the resource given too you  I thought it be a good idea to use the units as a value to determine health and other stats.  Less units makes the officer and his platoon less effective.  This would also serve as a visual indicator to the enemy maybe giving us a reason to cut out showing the HP bar to the enemy.  This will make more sense when you consider the rest of my design suggestions 
4. How can the officer be killed, and what happens when they are. At this point I would say if you kill a building like the command center you loss them and have to micro manage yourself.  Then when you are able you will hire or field commission a new officer after you build your command center.  Command center is just a sample it would be any of them like the embassy would be the foreign affairs.    Im not really sure what to say here.  This was more a question i was asking following these design principles so the answer drastically changes depending on how we move forward.

Design a template for combat mission support officer

1. What role does this officer have during the game. This officer will command the units to launch offensive and deference for your base Agreed to elaborate more this officer will be the primary means of causing damage and will be in control of units that will assist it.  
2. What kind of skills do they have and how will they affect battle? Skill set will be death to the enemy type things
   Yes i was mostly pointing out that a designer should determain what skills they have and how they will affect battle so i was planning on making an agenda for this one.  
3. What kind of units they have and how they will affect battle Anything that shoots same as above
4. What control does the officer have over these units and how do the units react to his commands? (Do they stick close to the officer, can they be separated and move away from the officer to a different location?) This comes down to game play and what the user has setup for the officer behavior along with all the other thing that effect the units.  The AI on these officer is going to be difficult for sure. 
   This is one of my concerns too.  So what i mean by this is ultimatly i imagined this paticuler officer to act and function as a much more advanced hero with minions if you look at other examples in the industry i cant think of many off the top of my head but DoTa2 has quite a few heros where the player micromanages four or five minions.  I was imagining on the scale of 50-60 units and less individual control.  Once again this more ties in with my ideas for the design
   
5. What happens to the units if they enter combat, take damage, die. Taps is played and you spawn another if needed morale lost I was thinking also with this paticuler officer his units would be dead as well, given my suggestion to loose hp when its units die.  
6. What happens to the officer when the units enter combat, take damage, die. The officer will give out order silently as you play unless you tell it not too.  So it will conduct itself as if it was you playing as best as we can get the AI to do so.   I think if we scale pretty much everything down fromm 1000+ units per battle to maybe 100+ per battle we could pull this off and maybe just let the officer command the units but you could override it if you are a skilled player.  

Design a template for Foreign affairs officer

1. What role does this officer have during the game. This officer will interact with the suburb to gain advantages  I think this officer would need to have a much more drastic role in the game than just that.  Each officer should be equally important in a game like each role in a moba is important.  In a moba you have tanks and supports.  I think this hero could help sway the battle in really unique ways and we have an opportunity to explore those options. 
2. What kind of skills do they have and how will they affect battle? Basically you want the suburbs on your side as they give intel and units at times with other abilitys like say IED  What about being able to disable enemy combat officers and their troops?  Or having an ability which makes that enemy combat officer loose explosive ammo because that hero has connection with the world wide trade union or something silly like that.  I like the suburbs idea but we should have more so that way maybe the player might chose to send this officer to help support his combat officer?  
3. What kind of units they have and how they will affect battle An ambassador An ambassador has allot of power.  They can influence people and im no study and ill have to look into what exactly they can or cant control before i can argue much of a point but i like the idea of this officer being in control of far fewer than the combat official and this ones units being much more niche and with purpose other than guns and blow stuff up
4. What control does the officer have over these units and how do the units react to his commands? (Do they stick close to the officer, can they be separated and move away from the officer to a different location?) To negotiate, interrogate, or ignore  Yes and possibly much more?  Especially once we start pumping out different officer designs and units as well.  In regards to can they be seperated?  I think where the combat officer i believe should have all the units relatively close and in his control maybe like a swarm of bees as an analogy i think this one should be able to send one unit off to "negotiate"  Or something like that
5. What happens to the units if they enter combat, take damage, die. they die morale lost
6. What happens to the officer when the units enter combat, take damage, die. Spawn another

Design a template for logistic officer

1. What role does this officer have during the game. To manage resource allocation and gathering  To be honest this officer honestly could "act" and "function" like a "structure"  Who sends units out much like the trade district in rise of nations i believe.  This officer could be stationary sending out "orders" that you give it so if you want more gold being generated for your labor then you tell him and he "gives the order"  And the units he controls change the way they do their labor?
2. What kind of skills do they have and how will they affect battle? Purging resource as needed with ability for getting it quickly but at a higher cost  See above i agree with this 
3. What kind of units they have and how they will affect battle Gathering units no combat 
4. What control does the officer have over these units and how do the units react to his commands? (Do they stick close to the officer, can they be separated and move away from the officer to a different location?) These units only purpose in life is to find resource and take or steal it  Yes and they could move on a "route"  That you have in place based on where you have buildings or things of that nature
5. What happens to the units if they enter combat, take damage, die. die  I dont think the logistics officer should take damage unless He is the one under fire Much like a "structure"  But if he loses units he could "hire" more for a cost 
6. What happens to the officer when the units enter combat, take damage, die. Spawn another

Design a template for engineering officer

1. What role does this officer have during the game. Building I think that if we were to take a normal rts game and merge the commands and functions of the command center and the builder units then gave those commands to a "officer" model that would remain stationary and "act" like a "structure" much like i suggested with logistics then i think that would be a FANTASTIC design for this officer
2. What kind of skills do they have and how will they affect battle? building and fortifying 
3. What kind of units they have and how they will affect battle Backhoe 
4. What control does the officer have over these units and how do the units react to his commands? (Do they stick close to the officer, can they be separated and move away from the officer to a different location?) Building structures per the strategy  The player actually controls the backhoe.  But the player has to click on and give commands to the officer and then the backhoe will function.  So its an illusion of AI.
5. What happens to the units if they enter combat, take damage, die. die
6. What happens to the officer when the units enter combat, take damage, die. spawn another

1. What kind of task will they give out Kill order, Capture, Communication, destroy target, etc
2. How will these task be incentive? xp & money
3. Design the progression through these ranks Yes
4. What happens when the player has progressed to the end? How will end game be played. I think this depends on the choice they make during the game.  What mission they did what random acts took place etc.  We will end up with more then on ending to the campaign mode.

How will these contacts differ from factions? How are they similar?  Contact give you side mission to complete for whatever reason that give bonus depending on the contact resources

How will we ensure that a player whos been playing for less time can still go against a player whose gathered all the upgrades? We are simply going to have to put a player evener option in the game menu system.  So taht they know they are being limited etc if they want to play with others.

How will gameplay play out? We need a proper design plan for how the games will play out. Early game, mid game, and late game. Not sure what you want here as its an rts design with an overview commander and officers controlling 70% of it. Given my history in competitive gaming including some mobas there is a very ironed out very set in stone design on how every early game and mid game and late game will play out.  This is due to years of being realeased but other mobas have failed because they couldnt figure this very thing out.  We absolutly NEED a document made with how we Plan these things to go.  plan because this may change and we should be open to that but we should still have a plan.  This will also help us design heros and what functions or roles we want in each term.  Some heros are great early game not so great late game?  Why?  Because of that games early and late game design.  This is very important if we use officers in our game.  Not matter how they are designed.  
Early game Set your officer strategies up (budget per each, their objective)  Yes whatever the player doesnt get to bring into the game but has to build within that match now should be the time everyone should be doing so.
First ten minutes of the match Build Units & Structures Maybe also scouting for the enemies location.  Small fights are breaking out now.  Nothing major but combat officers vs other combat officers
Mid game  Order an offensive strike & Take what you came for (Suburb, Resource, Lifes etc) Now that players have had a chance to get ahead of their enemys and build themselves up you see bigger plays happening.  Possbibly a snowball effect happening to some while others slowly fall behind
Ten minutes to 20 Attack or Defend
Late game Try to stay alive Structures are falling terratory has been gained or lost.  The longer this goes on the less of a chance for comback.  Until a winner is declared
20-45 minutes Win or Lose

Win conditions See above

We should take a hard look and design an intuitive control scheme that will not only feel natural to the player but easy to pick up and use Control system like the ingame GUI we already have? Yay :D  I found this out after 

We will need to have an agenda to design each menu page with proper UI and UX  design This is pretty much done they need tweaking and the script put on them for the button functionality I saw the chart and seen that you took a hard look and applied UI and UX proper design.  After i made this document :D  

How will these skills affect battle? chaos and mayhem If we move foward we should have design docs be made for how certain skills will affect battle 
 
How many skills can you choose from Unknown at this time whatever our imagination bring forth. Moving foward we should keep in mind we have to balance those abilities so we have a broad choice to suit many playstyles but one isnt chose over the other simply because of necessity cough Flash cough  

How will we balance the skills so one isnt chosen over the other based on raw over powered ability but their playstyle Game testing is i think all we can do on this one

We should create chart for unit values and how they will scale with pedigree These number will be % based once a completed list in done.  These number will also come from game testing

We should create a chart for the resources and how structures and units respond to them. (cost, moral, how much population they take, etc) ? not sure what you want here exactly that a chard for cost moral population what they do and how its for.  we should have a doc made for that too  All of this is so i can properly plan what agendas to make going foward

We should create a list of units we plan on launching with and designing the stats for them Unit Assets List

We should create a list of structures we plan on launching with and designing the stats for them Structure Assets List

Now id like to go over the pros and cons to both what james said and what i said.  Spoiler alert this is why i think we should scrap the officers idea.

If we are going to include this feature.  This feature to bring RTS and make them more accessible is not only quite the undertaking but a project of huge ambition.  I love it thats how i like to play.  But we are a small team with limited resources.   Doesnt mean we cant do it but it does limit how we can pull this off.

Heres the very real fact.  Unless we rip warcraft 3 off which negates the very reason to have officers in the first place the inclusion of this mechanic fundamentally changes the game.  They werent trying to make a genre when they made Dota.  I was there i watched it happen in front of me in some way i helped it happen.  (Not that much but i downloaded them so :D  )  They just wanted to take what they thought was fun about this cool RTS and change some things.  And in that very moment they "evolved" Rts's and created something new.

if your interested look into starfire its an upcoming moba that trys to include RTS elements into it.  I think what we are doing is similer but we are changing the elements.   IF we are going to have any chance of doing this that the identity of the game SHOULD and would HAVE to be "command four officers and an army to win in this competitive fun   multiplayer experience"  Or something like that.  And the MVP Would HAVE to include the officers and some form of design for how the game would play out.  Only then would anyone want to look and give interest in the game.  If you take what we are planning now as MVP and the current mantra to investors or consumers and you sell them the concept that MVP will have and then we iron out this officers mechanic and implement it.  The changes we will have to make will fundamentally change the game and we would have lied.  Because following the design suggestion i put forth which i believe are necessary changes we will have to make and ill be more than happy to explain anything confusing further but otherwise no.  

No we should not include the officer design.  Because that is a mechanic we were going to add to support the game not a mechanic we were going to add to BE the game.  We will have to design much more elements of the game around this officer mechanic and that will not create a game thats an RTS.

Now if anyone wants this thats okay!  I want it for sure im so interested in exploring this mechanic and idea i have spent much time and effort working out certain details.  And I see that I am on a much different page than everyone else.  That might be because ive been away for a bit or maybe its my backround in mobas.  Im aware of many RTS games and have played them.  But i have thoughtfully Studied certain mobas and have played on the competitive level in my state.  Ive also studied other games who have taken elements from mobas and mashed them with others.  And played competitively in my state.  So i love the idea of taking elements from the RTS and mashing them right back into mobas. 

Which would i believe be the correct way to do this.  But I think right now....we are making an RTS.  Not a moba or a moba/rts hybrid and the simple inclusion of this mechanic will either take away from the games identity or BECOME the games identity.  And i think we should decide if we are okay or even want either of those outcomes. My primary fear is that this mechanic is by definition "scope creep"  And even the mightiest of studios have fell from it.  

Holy mother of text Id like to thank everyone for their time and attention if you got through all that.  Please if anything is confusing allow me to clear things up before passing judgement im interested in what you all have to say 

@Jonathan

Let me start out by saying that I'm a little behind because I've been working on another project. I'm aware of the GDD conversation from yesterday and I have printed off your notes but I've not had a chance to read them.  With that in mind, it sounds like you're concerned that the AI will be making too many decisions with the design of the officers.  Am I understand this right?

If that is your concern, I'd say remember the behavior options that will be in the player's control. Also, if it is decided that there is still too much resting on the AI, we can attach a series of behavior commands to the officers from which the player can choose.  This way the officer carries out a specific set of instructions and is not "in control". However, I think that this takes away from the realistic element. I reality, if you are in charge of a group of people (doing ANYTHING), they do random odd things that are not what you intended.

Tessa Toney
Facebook

I wanted to speak my mind before delving into the work to give you a clear understanding of what i mean.  Give me an hour or so and i will post my results here

Jonathan Where is the idea you have?

Thanks,
James Fleming 
Facebook
Discord

Im a little concerned and nervous looking at the officers.  Im struggling to find out how we truly can integrate this concept into Our RTS and I dont think we can.

Now i dont mean that in that weird totalitarian point of view.  But in the fact that the simple inclusion of them and their design will fundamentally change the game and how it works.   I have a solution.  I can explain in great detail how some of my ideas on how we could create this game but it would be a game based around this concept and not a part of the games core mantra.  

"A real time strategy (RTS) game similar to Rise Of Nation that is semi realistic / arcadish but has a cartoonist low poly look and we are trying to gear this towards causal and hardcore player by using ranked vs normal area divided.  This game will be a continuous content feature driven game that we will continue to support going forward." 

I love this idea.  It was born as a solution to a problem we were trying to fix.  And its a great idea and one I would love to see come into fruition.  But implementing this concept has consequences.  And we have to decide if the consequences are worth it or if they are even what we want?  

Right now after reading what @james has said and the many conversations we all have held, i dont think we are making a game about officers and this cool concept.  Which we shouldnt be because armament was never trying to do that.  Thus what that makes our solution and cool concept is by definition "scope creep"  Or thats my fear.

So My question for everyone is....  Other than what are your thoughts and opinions,  Does anyone believe in this concept as the right direction to take the project?  Or should we refocus back to the original design and cut out this project before to much work is spent on it? 

The reason i ask is because I really do like this idea and i have plans and ideas we could do to make it work, but it would drasticly change the project.  Something im not really sure would be a good idea either.  Just wanted to know what everyones thoughts were before i proceed 

@Jonathan
Please look at the links I listed before creating agendas. The basic template has already been created. Officers are given personalities just like player characters.

Tessa Toney
Facebook

Yes i saw those i knew about them.  Not quite what i meant but its invalid now.  Thank you so much though i wasnt aware of how much work went into these since the last time i saw them.  Ill look into them much more tonight :D

I have been following the conversation on this topic channel and I thought I would jump in with some related ideas. I know I am new and I am still piecing together the whole vision from all the content I have reviewed. Forgive me if this is not relevant.

One way to strengthen the relationship(interaction) between the officer's concept and the player would be to provide the player with more AI options from successful officers that would assumably gain experience. If the different officers started with one type of AI control/focus (ie. Aggressive frontal assault AI) specific to them and then offered the player two, three AI options from the same character based on growth/success/advancement. 

This would be a simple interaction for the player to take a character (ie. click one of three bubble icons above the building or character and choose something like a passive, defensive, aggressive tactic, etc...from that officers AI actions) 

This would help the player to critique the officer's AI actions and their results on the battlefield driving them to work for more options and discovery of those characters and what they offer. The player would of course also have the option to change the current focus to another mid-battle. Losing a high ranking officer would then drive the player to strive to gain back a similar arrangement that is automated for their skill level and benefit. 

@david are you suggestion that an officer would "learn"  More tactics as they live through more battles?  

@David
The setup for the officers would only be changeable out-of-game during the initial setup process where the player chooses from their available options. The officers would gain rank as the player character gains rank and thereby offer better bonuses and more options to bonuses that can be chosen before the start of the game.

Tessa Toney
Facebook

@Jonathan Yes, as a possible option to consider as a way to create a stronger attachment to the officer concept. @Tessa That makes more sense having the choices available out-of-game setup. 

@David Thank you for jumping in the more thoughts and creativeness we've on the team the better.

@Team Ok are we all on the same page now? I would like to get us moving forward and open up the agenda today now that the code compiling was finished by Anthony last night.

Thanks,
James Fleming 
Facebook
Discord

Yes I am in the process of creating a document with some details and characteristics of the agendas being made i thought might be helpful to post here before i create them?

@Jonathan Yes please do so let review our objective going forward so they are clear.

Thanks,
James Fleming 
Facebook
Discord

Ive already went and created the agendas.  Nobody said anything yet and i wanted to get them made by midday.  Heres what i had.

Create Skill & Abilities for Officer
• Review this information that we have for abilities and traits http://www.thoucurator.com/wiki/viewwiki?wikiid=105
• Create a skillset of abilities and skills for these officers to utilize. Keeping in mind the officers background, role, and personality.
• We have room for each officer to have 9 skills to take into battle. Lets design 12 so we have a selection to choose and test from
• Design with intent. Include the concepts we have and apply them practically into a toolkit for an officer to use
• Make sure to define how these skills are executed. Area of affect? Target?
• Keep in mind that these skills will need to be balanced not only against other skillsets enemies would use but also within the skillset the skill belongs too. While not entirely true, most skills should balance within the set with intent and design







MID-TERM
Est time 6 hours.

\
Create Suburb Agenda Abilities
• Design a skillset for some abilities gained through acquiring a suburb









LONG-TERM
Est time TBA

Commander Skill / Reinforcement Abilities 2 Max per player each game (Flash, Ghost)
• Review the GDD for what it contains on reinforcements
• Review this information that we have for abilities and traits http://www.thoucurator.com/wiki/viewwiki?wikiid=105
• Design 6-8 abilities using the information we have as reference.
• Design with intent. Include the concepts we have and apply them practically into a toolkit for an officer to use
• Make sure to define how these skills are executed. Area of affect? Target? Self application?
• Keep in mind that these skills will need to be balanced so that the majority of players can choose skills that fit their play styles instead of defaulting to one ability because its so much better than all the others.




MID-TERM
Est time 6 hrs


update the GDD with all the current data

List Beginning, Middle, End in GDD
• Review this information http://www.thoucurator.com/forum/listreply?threadid=328 for the contents of the discussion we had with this topic
• Take the information here and update the GDD with the contents

Above the list of things NOT going into the MVP, list everything that is going to be in it. As well as the vertical slice and beta.
Here is a simple list for MVP, Slice, and Beta

1. MVP
1. Camera Works
2. Selection of Units
3. Units Move Natural
4. Spawn Building from Unit
5. Spawn Unit from Building
6. Unit Attacks Unit
7. Unit Attacks Building
2. Slice
1. Graphical User Interface In-Game
1. Button Calls Actions
2. Unit(s) Show In List
3. Menu Pops Modal
3. Beta
1. Artificial Intelligence
1. Unit Attack Enemy
2. Unit Seek/Moves to Enemy
SHORT-TERM
Est time 1 hr

Applying scripts to a scene in unity
• Apply all the work we have currently into a scene. Work with james to see where the project currently stands






SHORT-TERM
Est 3 hrs

Excellent we're moving forward!  Thank you guys/gals for your input.

Thanks,
James Fleming 
Facebook
Discord