peacebreaker vin
Approved user
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2015
- Messages
- 28
pitch (mechanics): new single player campaigns with extremely challenging battles to engage enlightenment and industrial age players.
rewards would primarily be resources (food, gold, oil) but could also be in-game "monuments" which would display similarly to blessings to show that a player had completely a campaign.
additional details:
some ideas off the top of my head would be:
+ hugely fortified bases with the objective of breaching a central keep that is surrounded by heavy defensive structures and a naturally defensive landscape (cliffs, rivers, etc.).
+ defensive battles: players arrange their current buildings on a special defensive map and defend vs. waves of attackers.
+ recreations of semi-historically-accurate battles (would be in-line with the already great job the game developers do of incorporating historical information into the game).
pitch (gameplay):
more content = more engaging gameplay. there are likely a large number of players who would enjoy a more challenging single player option for earning resources without having to break a peace treaty.
pitch (balance):
balance isn't of primary concern since this wouldn't involve player vs. player battles. these battles would intentionally be very, very difficult. similar to world war battles they would require careful strategy, thoughtful army composition, tactic selection/execution, etc.
pitch (investor):
since these new single player campaigns are extremely difficult there is a new incentive for players to purchase crowns for upgrading their troops, finish buildings and speed up the retraining of their army, generals & tactics.
additional thoughts:
although this would be much more work to implement: with the world war infrastructure created there would also be the opportunity to make "single player wars" for multiple players within an alliance to cooperate in a campaign &/or battle.
thanks for reading and please share your comments, concerns and suggested changes!
rewards would primarily be resources (food, gold, oil) but could also be in-game "monuments" which would display similarly to blessings to show that a player had completely a campaign.
additional details:
some ideas off the top of my head would be:
+ hugely fortified bases with the objective of breaching a central keep that is surrounded by heavy defensive structures and a naturally defensive landscape (cliffs, rivers, etc.).
+ defensive battles: players arrange their current buildings on a special defensive map and defend vs. waves of attackers.
+ recreations of semi-historically-accurate battles (would be in-line with the already great job the game developers do of incorporating historical information into the game).
pitch (gameplay):
more content = more engaging gameplay. there are likely a large number of players who would enjoy a more challenging single player option for earning resources without having to break a peace treaty.
pitch (balance):
balance isn't of primary concern since this wouldn't involve player vs. player battles. these battles would intentionally be very, very difficult. similar to world war battles they would require careful strategy, thoughtful army composition, tactic selection/execution, etc.
pitch (investor):
since these new single player campaigns are extremely difficult there is a new incentive for players to purchase crowns for upgrading their troops, finish buildings and speed up the retraining of their army, generals & tactics.
additional thoughts:
although this would be much more work to implement: with the world war infrastructure created there would also be the opportunity to make "single player wars" for multiple players within an alliance to cooperate in a campaign &/or battle.
thanks for reading and please share your comments, concerns and suggested changes!
