85 % City Builder, 15 % battles ? Be Unique! Be More than that!

[Garrett]

This is just my personal opinion BUT.....

I think what makes this game stand out is that it's a clearly a very good city builder - with battles.

The addition of battles really changes things.

It's really what make this game different and unique. It's a BIG part of what makes everyone interested in this title.

Greg, this game is clearly already a bit special, thanks to your vision and hard work over many years, but if you want to truly take it to the next level, then I think you need to focus on the parts of the game that make it stand out from all the other MANY city builders out there.

So Greg, you might not agree ... but this means:

1) More combat or deeper combat (so that it's maybe 70 % city builder and 30 % combat)

2) Deeper diplomacy

3) Add more features that make it a bit more RPG like. ( Not a LOT ... but a bit).


This might take it in a different direction from your intention (slightly) BUT - this is what would make this game unique for decades and decades into the future.

If you want to keep it just as 85% city builder, it will still be a good game. But it would honestly be a waste.

You have the chance to do something AMAZING with this game.

Focus on the aspects that make it MORE than just another city builder.

Greg, my friend, you have the chance to go down in video game history.

Dooooooo IT ! :) (Arnold Schwarzenegger voice)

( I know that was a little bit over-the-top and passionate, but I honestly think it's correct ).

[datCookie]

Combat will be expanded upon as time goes on. Slavic wants castles and fortifications, which means sieges to go with. He's also interested in naval battles as well.

RPG mechanics aren't going to be a thing, though. Walking around with your AI lord is purely for looking at and enjoying your town from ground level. It won't have any further depth to it

[Garrett]

Originally posted by datCookie:

Combat will be expanded upon as time goes on. Slavic wants castles and fortifications, which means sieges to go with. He's also interested in naval battles as well.

Castles and fortifications would be amazing. Glad to hear he's positive about that...

[taomastercu]

I guess my question is if you've played many other city builders?

Because many of them have gone way farther although often trading off some good chain depth to get there.

Hinterland/Majesty/Driftland for RPG stuff, Stronghold and a few other games for sieges for instance.

Impressions games often had fun combat, but not complex total war style battles I guess.

Clockwork Empires had some great ideas and unique stuff. Sadly they didn't finish. If only they had been in dev stil when Hooded Horse came around.

[Garrett]

Originally posted by taomastercu:

I guess my question is if you've played many other city builders?

Because many of them have gone way farther although often trading off some good chain depth to get there.

Hinterland/Majesty/Driftland for RPG stuff, Stronghold and a few other games for sieges for instance.

Impressions games often had fun combat, but not complex total war style battles I guess.

Clockwork Empires had some great ideas and unique stuff. Sadly they didn't finish. If only they had been in dev stil when Hooded Horse came around.

Hi there.

I started out with the first Sim City back in the mid 90s - more recently , I've just finished playing Farthest Frontier - which had some good concepts but I got bored to be honest. Had a friend who absolutely loved Banished... and tried to get me into it.... But that seems really pretty similar to Farthest Frontier.

Anno 1800 seems a bit different... but mostly due to the RPG and story elements.

[Karsh]

lol i don't mind the combat sticking to 15 % tbh , once in a while combat sure.

but for me the main selling point is the city building

[The Former]

I don't think we need more combat, personally. Deeper combat? More units, sieges, that sort of thing? Sure. And from what I understand it's planned. But I don't need it to have too much bigger focus. The combat is a means to city build, and that's how it should stay. We're manor lords after all. When it comes to personal conflicts, the type we see unfolding in this game, most landed lords didn't see a ton of them.

[Gromran]

Combat can be completely gone

[Tolodociro]

Originally posted by datCookie:

Combat will be expanded upon as time goes on. Slavic wants castles and fortifications, which means sieges to go with. He's also interested in naval battles as well.

This game will finally catapult me into the present, because im still playing skyrim and fallout 4.

Originally posted by datCookie:

RPG mechanics aren't going to be a thing, though. Walking around with your AI lord is purely for looking at and enjoying your town from ground level. It won't have any further depth to it

Thats the part modders will fix... It is a tough job but give them some years and the turbo succes of this beauty, and it can be done.

[baburr93]

I am against the game being at least 0000.1% similar to an RPG, the game will be terrible! NO RPGs!

It will be a great strategy and that's it!

No RPGs!

[Agony_Aunt]

Originally posted by Garrett:

I think what makes this game stand out is that it's a clearly a very good city builder - with battles.

The addition of battles changes things.

It's really what make this game different. Unique. It's a BIG part of what makes everyone interested in this title.

Huh? Nearly every city builder game out there has a large focus on battles. Making it more like those games will make it less unique than it is right now.

Don't get me wrong, i'm happy to see an expansion of the combat stuff, and the dev has stated he is planning on doing this, but for once can we have a city builder game where the focus is very much on city building and not combat?

That is, the combat is there to support the city building, not the city building is there to support the combat.

[OneNineDeepSilence]

God, you people and the feature creep... It's okay to submit ideas, but don't expect endless features from a single dev game. All those take time to add.

[Garrett]

Originally posted by Ärlig, Häckriddare:

I don't think we need more combat, personally. Deeper combat? More units, sieges, that sort of thing? Sure. And from what I understand it's planned. But I don't need it to have too much bigger focus. The combat is a means to city build, and that's how it should stay. We're manor lords after all. When it comes to personal conflicts, the type we see unfolding in this game, most landed lords didn't see a ton of them.

I agree partially... deeper combat would be great. I'd also love to see things like the ability to send spies to work for other lords. And , as I said in the OP, deeper diplomacy options.

[Garrett]

Originally posted by baburr93:

I am against the game being at least 0000.1% similar to an RPG, the game will be terrible! NO RPGs!

It will be a great strategy and that's it!

No RPGs!

Thanks for your opinion... but why would 0.0000001 % RPG be bad?

I mean, you select you character avatar at the start anyway, so really, it already has some RPG elements doesn't it?

Also you give NO reason at all for your opinion. lol

It's like me shouting" ALL CATS MUST BE PAINTED WITH YOGURT!!!! "

Umm.... okay, dude.... so umm... why?

WHY would some more RPG elements be terrible?

[PaganGamer2025]

Originally posted by Garrett:

Originally posted by taomastercu:

I guess my question is if you've played many other city builders?

Because many of them have gone way farther although often trading off some good chain depth to get there.

Hinterland/Majesty/Driftland for RPG stuff, Stronghold and a few other games for sieges for instance.

Impressions games often had fun combat, but not complex total war style battles I guess.

Clockwork Empires had some great ideas and unique stuff. Sadly they didn't finish. If only they had been in dev stil when Hooded Horse came around.

Hi there.

I started out with the first Sim City back in the mid 90s - more recently , I've just finished playing Farthest Frontier - which had some good concepts but I got bored to be honest. Had a friend who absolutely loved Banished... and tried to get me into it.... But that seems really pretty similar to Farthest Frontier.

Anno 1800 seems a bit different... but mostly due to the RPG and story elements.

Been playing the hell out of FF to tide me over until ML. Compared to FF, Banished is rather boring, IMO

So much more to do in FF than Banished. I'm hoping this also proves true with ML

[PotatoBoi]

Originally posted by datCookie:

Combat will be expanded upon as time goes on. Slavic wants castles and fortifications, which means sieges to go with. He's also interested in naval battles as well.

RPG mechanics aren't going to be a thing, though. Walking around with your AI lord is purely for looking at and enjoying your town from ground level. It won't have any further depth to it

Naval? I don't remember seeing him mention naval..?