Ever since I first played Majesty and Emperor: Rise of the Middle Kingdom I have been dreaming of a day when AI could do basic tasks and thus remove the incessant clickfest of modern RTS games like Starcraft 2. Instead of selecting my units each time and targeting another unit to make them focus fire, or microing each one individually in the case of overkill, or personally determining which enemy unit was a threat, I want AI to do that for me. Taking an idea from Dominions 3 as an alternative to DoW style squads of units, I want to assign a group of units to a leader, and then from the leader's interface do things like request focus fire for archers, but spreading out for melee. And from then on the AI handles making my archers focus on a single target. I want units to determine on their own based on their unit type, who they should attack. Units could check the default stats of the enemy unit types to determine who they can hurt the most and which enemy unit can deal the most damage to the squad and attack based on that. For instance if they deal fire damage, find the unit with the lowest hp and the least fire resistance with weights for enemy damage output and distance, since you don't want melee to run super far through ranged fire to attack a target, and attack them. Ranged fire damage? Target plant and ice units in range first. Why waste fire damage on metal or stone units that it can't harm? Many people would ask, why would I take the micro and tactical out of an RTS? Well technically you aren't, you are still giving directives on behavior. But even if you were, it allows more focus on strategy, and also other spheres. If I don't have to manage moment to moment unit actions I can spend more time on over all strategy like where to send troops. I can manage larger groups of units too. And suppose I have mages in a fantasy game. I can let mages be microed, since AI can't possibly handle complex magic or science skill systems. So all my regular units can do their thing and I can support with summons and damage spells and casting army buffs. I can also focus on non combat areas. I can play games with more complex economies. Managing a city builder system like Emperor has is impossible in starcraft, you need to focus on the microed combat. But with AI control of simple repetitive tasks you can add other aspects to the game. You could not only add resource generation but you could add logistics. Local resource storage, supplies of food and weapons, moving around building materials, providing food and clothes and turn based and city sim leisure resources to citizens. You could have large maps where you need to decide where to send new troops to defend. You could build walls stronghold style. You would even have more planning time. If you have a lot more units, and more magic, you would still have time to decide, should I start building this unit to add to my armies to counter my enemy's new strategy. You could plan out your advancement up the research system. You could have Warlords BattleCry 3 style hero units, and you could deal with the RPG aspect without crashing your actions per minute for combat. Majesty was popular because you felt more like you were ruling a kingdom as opposed to being a colonel or captain in a small skirmish. But it was a little too random, and it actually lacked a really deep economic system. You basically built a trio of markets and spammed guilds and won. If you could reduce the time intensity of combat with good AI, you could add features so that you actually felt like a king of legends. Training and deploying mages, managing cities, advancing your culture and science, and still being in control of combat, this is what Majesty had a bit of a problem with, it was good to remove some micro, but just not so much that you had to rely on luck as to whether units would eventually maybe at some point if they weren't busy chilling in a gazebo actually complete your tasks. Kinda got off topic, but I have been dreaming of such a game for so long.
Yes, better AI would allow for much deeper and more accessible "epic" RTS games, that play a bit like TBS.
Well, a lot of TBS games have terrible AI and intense micro, but you can ignore it since you get forever to take a turn. But TBS games are definitely more epic scale wise. Of course moving around 10000 units gets pretty tedious after a while, especially with the low quality AI of indie TBS games.
I have always wanted to experience TBS scale in RTS games. Would be a lot of fun. Total War games have at least the epicness of warfare of a TBS moved to real time, but stunted econ and upgrades and also no fun magic or science powers.
In an RTS where you have individual units, I prefer to micro them. Its not even so much as not trusting the AI to do it for me, but the fact that I like having control and making good formations.
However, I have been thinking about a game where you play as the king or general of a nation. You do not have direct control over any units, but rather you assign officers to control each of the various armies and send them around the strategic map. You give them orders and you have to rely on scouting information to get back to you.
It would be a really slow RTS, so slow that it feels like a TBS. You will issue orders but it will take several minutes for them to execute. I decided it would be cool if all the battles took place on the strategic map, but you can zoom into any battle and see all the little guys fighting as if it were a tactical battle.So it would be a game thats more focused on scouting, economy, logistics, and positioning you units. You would have to decide where to put your best officers, since their AI would be much better than that of weaker officers for directing your units in battle. If an officer gets taken out, then all the remaining troops have their AI weakened to compensate.
I think this kind of war simulation game would be very interesting, though it is dramatically differen't from most of the stuff we have seen so far. Yes, it would probably require much better AI than we have today to make it interesting to watch the battles, but since its always AI vs AI its not a huge balance issue.
If you look at gratuitous space battles, I don't enjoy watching the battles unfold because they AI is stupid and you don't have enough controls. I guess a customization system where you could give your officers some detailed orders on how to proceed in various battle conditions might help out, it might also over-complicate the system.
The bottom line is I think the game needs to be designed from the ground up with autonomous units in mind and you can't really tack it on to assist people who don't like to micro.
I think GSB has terrible AI, because it was made by one dude, although I still had fun. I imagine it way more hands on than GSB. GSB is really small scale, and you lose control once the fight actually starts. In my vision you can change orders if you don't like how things are going and move orders work just like normal RTS move orders. Attack orders are probably a little different.
There is a difference between increased low level automation and having a computer player AI take over your job. The first one can add new systems and strategies and the second one is stupid.
I expect my units to figure it out by themselves. I just tell them where to go and they need to go there and kill anything in the way. This has not gone well for most units.
Increasing AI support/automation of player side units has more benefits than just combat. UI wise, with recruiting units and such there could be a lot of improvement.
Being able to have WBC3 style keep producing toggles and also possibly a set of units to produce would be so much easier upkeep wise. And even more, what is with the restriction on 1 unit per training structure. I suppose you could argue for good gameplay, but realistically a barracks could train far more persons.
Also I don't like having to build new structures that take up map space and are also unrealistic. It would be far better to be able to upgrade a building, or hire a new trainer, depending on your flavor needs, and have one building produce more units at a time. Even better if they automatically increased training speed or unit quality if you had extra trainers.
Think of the superior education in academic institutions with higher teacher to student ratios.
The RTS genre just has so much unexplored possibility space mechanics wise. Its depressing to see it so stilted and stuck in a rut and in the past.
WBC stands for World Boardgaming Championships to me. What did you mean for it to mean?
Yay, acronym confusion. Fun times. Warlords Battlecry 3.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account