Thread

Subject: Global Triumph 2last
Pages: 1

Messages / 1 to 14 of 14

1)Johnny(Overlord)
As some of you know, Too Much Stupid is something I do on the side (in addition to a full time job). So, of course, it's always a challenge to find time to work on my game ideas. I've tinkered with versions of GT2 in the past, but life tends to get in the way. And, of course, that's something that may happen again now.

Having said that, I've decided to try a different direction with GT2. Instead of building it as a native browser game, I've decided to play with building it in Unity (a game development package). One of the biggest advantages of going this route is that I can build a Web (which will require a plug-in), PC, Mac, and mobile/tablet versions very easily. And, because it will run as a native app, I can do things with the interface that should run quite a bit faster, too.

As I have time to work on it, I'll occasionally post screenshots and videos to this thread. A few notes on my plans:

- Maps won't be wrapping. Some maps in GT aren't full worlds, and I do like the idea of keeping that in place. More importantly, the implementation of attacks (especially air) on a spherical world is more than I'll have time to build. So, I'm going to shelve that for when GT2 makes millions and I can work on GT3 full-time.

- Potential new objects: rocket (to launch warship-like attacks on sectors from a short distance), spies (to infiltrate enemy bases, with various outcomes), submarines, paratroopers, ore refineries (which will increase daily income short term but sap the sectors of their materials). Each of those would include limitations or such to ensure they aren't too powerful. For example, spies/subs may be visible for a day or two after an attack, paratroopers won't be able to land on sectors with bases, etc.
2)Johnny(Overlord)
Here's a quick video showing the map UI so far:

You should have some way to allow suggestions.
4)Johnny(Overlord)
Accacc wrote on :
You should have some way to allow suggestions.
Players can always feel free to share their feedback here on the message board, or by sending me a note.
Johnny wrote on :
- Potential new objects:
Would you consider some other units such as attack helicopters with a limited range.  How about transport planes to move jeeps and transport helicopters to move infantry.  Both would have limited cargo space and limited range lets say 40 sectors and would have to land at a base and stay grounded for a day to refuel.  Just a couple thoughts.  I like your thinking with diversifying the types of units to build.  Keep heading in that direction.
Will people still be able to play v 1.0?
7)Johnny(Overlord)
Beckett75 wrote on :
Would you consider some other units such as attack helicopters with a limited range.  How about transport planes to move jeeps and transport helicopters to move infantry.
I could definitely see those. I'll keep them in mind, thanks!
8)Johnny(Overlord)
FYI666 wrote on :
Will people still be able to play v 1.0?
I'm not sure, but probably at least for a period of time.

GT2 isn't something that would be ready anytime soon, though, so not something we'll need to worry about for a while! Just something I work on when I can find time.
Johnny wrote on :
I'm not sure, but probably at least for a period of time.

GT2 isn't something that would be ready anytime soon, though, so not something we'll need to worry about for a while! Just something I work on when I can find time.
The new version looks fantastic. I definitely dig the banners for name sectors (as long as I interpreted that correctly) I can't wait to play v 2.0.  Justsoyaknow-  I only asked about the original because I love it so much. 
10)Johnny(Overlord)
FYI666 wrote on :
The new version looks fantastic. I definitely dig the banners for name sectors (as long as I interpreted that correctly) I can't wait to play v 2.0.  Justsoyaknow-  I only asked about the original because I love it so much. 
Thanks, FYI666! I really appreciate the compliment and all your enthusiasm for GT!

Sometimes it's a bit difficult to justify spending time working on GT2 to myself just because of the lack of success with the current version. I'm thinking perhaps a better interface and easier gameplay would widen its appeal, but it wouldn't be ideal to spend a bunch of time on it and not get better results. haha
Johnny the game is not flawed. How you present the game is. The flaw in the game is you only put out boards that are so big it takes some times hours to make all of your moves. I am not saying get rid of the big boards but I would try some different variations with this game. How about a board with like 2000 squares or so. How about  week end tournaments where you get to move every 10 min or so. The flaw in the game is the length of time it takes to play. I love this game but my life some times gets busy and I dont have an hour to spend playing this game every day and the weekly boards move so slow that they get boring or you just for get to make a move. Your a smart guy. You made a great game. Keep the long big boards that take a long time but to generate traffic your going to have to create a GT lite version. Where you fight right away where the game is over in like 30-50 moves.

This is just my 2 cents but the common theme to players leaving this game is they get burned out and once you leave you almost feel like you got your life back.

General Lee
Robert_E_Lee wrote on :
Johnny the game is not flawed. How you present the game is. The flaw in the game is you only put out boards that are so big it takes some times hours to make all of your moves. I am not saying get rid of the big boards but I would try some different variations with this game. How about a board with like 2000 squares or so. How about  week end tournaments where you get to move every 10 min or so. The flaw in the game is the length of time it takes to play. I love this game but my life some times gets busy and I dont have an hour to spend playing this game every day and the weekly boards move so slow that they get boring or you just for get to make a move. Your a smart guy. You made a great game. Keep the long big boards that take a long time but to generate traffic your going to have to create a GT lite version. Where you fight right away where the game is over in like 30-50 moves.
Well maybe a map that changes its size based on the number of players but small with high value sectors, you'd have to join early to have an advantage.

That's my two cents to yours
Rooster,


P.S. GT2 looks awesome Johnny
13)Johnny(Overlord)
Robert_E_Lee wrote on :
This is just my 2 cents but the common theme to players leaving this game is they get burned out and once you leave you almost feel like you got your life back.
Thank you, Robert_E_Lee! I think I had a bit of tunnel vision and your post snapped me out of it.

The very first version of GT is something I created about 15 years ago. It was definitely much clunkier and had differences, but similar in concept. At that time, the map was 80x60 sectors.

When I moved from that early prototype to the GT you guys know, I really liked the idea of making large scale. I guess Iíve mostly been stuck on that concept since.

I was thinking that Iíd create a user map system in GT2 where the worlds would be limited to smaller worlds. Rather than waiting, though, Iíve decided to take a completely different course of action.

Iím going to create a GT 1.5 that works almost entirely using the existing infrastructure. The game itself will operate the same, but the world management is going to change.

- There will be two categories of worlds: official and user. Theyíll probably be broken down into two separate tabs on the GT site.

- Official maps will be the ones I add to the game and will still be large-scale (anywhere from 512x256 to 8192x4096). Official maps will end automatically based on victory conditions.

- User maps will be limited in size, probably having options for 64x32, 128x64, and 256x128. Users will be able to choose any of the usual game settings (start date, alliances, treaties, income, starting cash, lottery, country funding, etc.). Theyíll also be able to set player limits, world passwords (so your world can be available only to friends, for example), run times, and victory conditions.

- The map itself will be created via an image upload, where the user uploads a graphic for the map and another for the raw materials. The script will treat any pixel under 50% brightness as water, and any pixel at or above 50% as land. The raw materials level will be based on pixel brightness.

- Run times will be up to every half hour. I could set it up so times can be completely customizable, but Iím not sure if that would get confusing to users. If anyone has thoughts on picking completely custom times versus just having frequency options (every half hour, hour, two hours, four hours, 24 hours, etc.), please let me know!

- Victory conditions will always be based on sector ownership. Either the map will automatically end when a player/alliance controls a certain percent of the map, or it will end on specific date and the largest player/alliance wins.

I currently do some custom work on each world, which includes the custom trophy graphic. In order to migrate all of it to one uniform system (official worlds will essentially be the same as user worlds, except that I create them and can flag them as official), Iím going to change all of that to something automated. The profile may just have a graphic of the map rather than an actual trophy. Profile stats will also record official and user world wins separately.

GT itself could certainly use a refresh (new interface, tablet support, etc.), so Iíll still have GT 2 in mind for the future. In the meantime, though, itíll be good to see if smaller user worlds help expand the gameís reach and participation. If it works out well, all the more justification for an updated version.
14)Johnny(Overlord)
R005T3R_D wrote on :
Well maybe a map that changes its size based on the number of players
...
P.S. GT2 looks awesome Johnny
Thanks, R005T3R_D!

It's definitely an interesting idea, but I think changing maps dynamically could lead to some complications. If you mean changing it before the game starts, players joining later could end up making the change a mistake. It could also change who wants to play that map, if a player joined because they wanted to play it on its original size. If you mean after, it could break the strategy of the game. For example, if a country has a line of 10 tanks and the world size is halved, five of those tanks would have no place to go. Or, if a country has a defense line of turrets and it's doubled, that would open up gaps in the line.

Like I said, certainly an interesting idea, though!
Page of 1
«Previous Page|Next Page»

Message Board

Categories

Search