some expansion pack ideas

General discussion about Defcon

Moderator: Defcon moderators

ninjak
level1
level1
Posts: 26
Joined: Mon Sep 25, 2006 5:00 pm

some expansion pack ideas

Postby ninjak » Mon Sep 25, 2006 7:14 pm

- Space tech like SDI and the ability to nuke from orbit

- Some kind of espionage system where you can plant spies + suicide bombers in defcon 5. Ex. plant terrorist at radar station and then in Defcon 1 when they are counting on the radar being there BOOM. Or plant an agent in airbase and when a plane takes off he'll hijack it and nuke your own silos!!

- Paratrooper special forces dropped from fighters / bombers. I understand why you don't have tanks + ground troops in the game because in reality there's no way you could deploy them in just a few hours, but a few paratroopers would be realistic. You could drop them over cities / buildings and they could cause trouble just like the spies / terrorists mentioned above. Also you could maybe give them suitcase nukes!!

- Stealth fighters / bombers that are less visible by radar.

- Some degree of people not following orders. Ex. in WarGames in the beginning of the movie they said xx% of missile commanders ignored launch orders during the test. I don't know if this would be a fun option or not, ppl might get PO'd if they click launch and nothing launches. But it would be more realistic.

- Fake empty silos / airfields / ships to draw fire away from the real ones.
estel
level4
level4
Posts: 689
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2006 11:20 pm
Location: Bristol
Contact:

Postby estel » Mon Sep 25, 2006 7:18 pm

Maybe but... I think that too many of those detract from the simple side of the game. The game is designed to be quick to learn, quick to play, simple to use - but deep strategically. I feel that adding other units will really upset the balance in the game...
ninjak
level1
level1
Posts: 26
Joined: Mon Sep 25, 2006 5:00 pm

Postby ninjak » Mon Sep 25, 2006 7:25 pm

estel wrote:Maybe but... I think that too many of those detract from the simple side of the game. The game is designed to be quick to learn, quick to play, simple to use - but deep strategically. I feel that adding other units will really upset the balance in the game...


Yeah you're right about the complexity thing, but fake buildings wouldn't add much complexity and would be great for strategy.
User avatar
xander
level5
level5
Posts: 16869
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 11:41 pm
Location: Highland, CA, USA
Contact:

Postby xander » Mon Sep 25, 2006 7:27 pm

Those all sound like good ideas. I think that they will not happen, though. There are two reasons for this. First, IV don't do sequels or expansion packs. They may patch the game to add some new features, but anything on the scale of a full-blown sequel is incredibly unlikely. IV tend to move onto other things once they finish something. Better to be original than to make sequel after sequel.

xander
estel
level4
level4
Posts: 689
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2006 11:20 pm
Location: Bristol
Contact:

Postby estel » Mon Sep 25, 2006 7:29 pm

What's the second reason? :)
Traece
level1
level1
Posts: 33
Joined: Mon Sep 25, 2006 4:16 pm

Postby Traece » Mon Sep 25, 2006 7:37 pm

Yeah, the simplicity of the game is really one of the fine points. For RTS games that have all kinds of resource gathering and force building and then deployment that all has to be done at the SAME TIME, people get really frustrated.

With Defcon things are nice and simple, lose less than everyone else. Place a few structures(pre-determined amount no doubt,) and a few units(pre-determined amount,) and then all you have to do is move and tell them what to do while making sure you don't leave yourself vulnerable.
User avatar
Rosti
level2
level2
Posts: 75
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 2:02 pm
Location: Hereford, UK

Postby Rosti » Mon Sep 25, 2006 7:37 pm

Well, everybody's favourite genius has already suggested an idea for DEFCON's sequel. The opposing sides would fight each other using sticks and stones - but I think we're better off waiting for the <next next next game> really.
User avatar
Tookie
level2
level2
Posts: 122
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2006 1:57 am

Postby Tookie » Mon Sep 25, 2006 7:45 pm

Kuth wrote:
Tookie wrote:I have a few ideas that I would like to see. Mostly for single player, but im sure that some people might like to try playing this way in multiplayer.

I would like to play a single player real world senario set in say.. 2012. All of the nations that posses nuclear weapons currently have them. (as well as a hypothetical North Korea and Iran) True a nuclear war with Russia bombing Isreal would be unfair, but it could be made to where it would just be a hypothetic scenario... and only single player. As this would be no fun in multiplayer. (Alliances would be crucial)!

I would like to include variations in the ballistic missles. Such as multiple warheads and varying degrees of explosive power.
Russia and the United States typically use 350/kt warheads with a few in the 1 to 1.5 mt range. Even a few smaller and lager types. This mode would have to be played on a modded "Big world Mode" with an even greater number of cities and the size of the bomb would determine casualty numbers. Leaving it up to the player to decide as to what type of bomb to use and on what city. points obviously being determined by surviving population.


Not that the current Defcon is going to be inadequate in the single player department, but I feel that a few "Just for $hits and giggles" scenarios would be refreshing when not playing the vannilla single player or multiplayer games.


(Just for everyones' reference Hiroshima was 15/kt and Nagasaki was 20/kt) Nuclear war today would truly be nuclear holocaust.

It would be interesting (and scary) to see warheads bus. When were MIRVs first concepted? If Defcon is to take place in the 70s-80s-late 90s, then shouldn't MIRVs be integral in just about every nuclear powered arsenal? This brings up the question of defense though, since MIRVs are supposedly harder to defend against.

And Tookie- if you're adding in MIRVs by 2012, woudln't we have some plane-based lasers and defense sattelites by then?

Redstar- would TEL icons be one-launch deals or would they go back to cities to 'reload' like bombers?



Sure there could be some kind of new defenses to counter MIRVs, but both MIRVs and defenses against them would have to be limited so as to create an even more indepth strategy. Letting you decide where to deploy defenses and when to strike with MIRVs. (This would help to create some sort of BALANCE to the new units) "I think we are onto something here" want to make a mod?

Also the limitation of sizes of Mega-tonage and limitation on number of missiles of varying mega-tonage/Kili-tonage would help to create an even more indepth strategic game. Because by 2012 The United States and Russia are supposed to have limited their Nuclear Arsenals. So this "Senario" would create an excellent game play experience by allowing players to make more elaborate choices on how to deploy Defenses and Offenses.

sound cool or what? :twisted:
"Trust is a tough thing to come by"
- R.J. Macready
User avatar
KudrigY
level2
level2
Posts: 96
Joined: Mon Sep 25, 2006 7:47 pm
Location: Warsaw, Poland, Europe, Earth

Postby KudrigY » Mon Sep 25, 2006 7:52 pm

when You fire nukes (air, land or sea borne, no matter) I could use a small timer next to targetting cursor to show me ETA of missiles to current target. I think it shouldnt be hard to implement, and imagine new possibilities when u can amass 10+ nukes to impact in few seconds time - no AA system would deal with it...



DELETED - some stupid stuff done after 12h of work...
Last edited by KudrigY on Mon Sep 25, 2006 11:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Jetpac
level2
level2
Posts: 119
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 8:02 pm

Postby Jetpac » Mon Sep 25, 2006 7:54 pm

KudrigY wrote:when You fire nukes (air, land or sea borne, no matter) I could use a small timer next to targetting cursor to show me ETA of missiles to current target. I think it shouldnt be hard to implement, and imagine new possibilities when u can amass 10+ nukes to impact in few seconds time - no AA system would deal with it...



And yes, i played leaked version (like 20 games or so) and... I preordered original. This game rocks and as such is well worth buying.


Naughty naughty.

but still an eta timer i agree would be awesome.
User avatar
xander
level5
level5
Posts: 16869
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 11:41 pm
Location: Highland, CA, USA
Contact:

Postby xander » Mon Sep 25, 2006 8:53 pm

estel wrote:What's the second reason? :)

Shhh... It's a secret!
[size=0]Either that, or I forgot what I was going to say while typing :oops:[/size]

xander
WNivek
level2
level2
Posts: 102
Joined: Fri May 19, 2006 10:01 pm
Location: New Jersey, USA From liquid death to cinnamon toast!
Contact:

Postby WNivek » Mon Sep 25, 2006 9:39 pm

xander wrote:
estel wrote:What's the second reason? :)
Shhh... It's a secret!
Updefwinia. :D

... shit, said too much! :shock:
User avatar
xander
level5
level5
Posts: 16869
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 11:41 pm
Location: Highland, CA, USA
Contact:

Postby xander » Mon Sep 25, 2006 9:41 pm

WNivek wrote:
xander wrote:
estel wrote:What's the second reason? :)
Shhh... It's a secret!
Updefwinia. :D

... shit, said too much! :shock:

How do you know about that!? I mean, uh... no. It has nothing to do with the non-existant Updefwinia project...

xander
User avatar
Kuth
level4
level4
Posts: 709
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 5:55 am
Location: Keele Imperium
Contact:

Postby Kuth » Tue Sep 26, 2006 3:25 am

Tookie wrote:
Kuth wrote:
Tookie wrote:I have a few ideas that I would like to see. Mostly for single player, but im sure that some people might like to try playing this way in multiplayer.

I would like to play a single player real world senario set in say.. 2012. All of the nations that posses nuclear weapons currently have them. (as well as a hypothetical North Korea and Iran) True a nuclear war with Russia bombing Isreal would be unfair, but it could be made to where it would just be a hypothetic scenario... and only single player. As this would be no fun in multiplayer. (Alliances would be crucial)!

I would like to include variations in the ballistic missles. Such as multiple warheads and varying degrees of explosive power.
Russia and the United States typically use 350/kt warheads with a few in the 1 to 1.5 mt range. Even a few smaller and lager types. This mode would have to be played on a modded "Big world Mode" with an even greater number of cities and the size of the bomb would determine casualty numbers. Leaving it up to the player to decide as to what type of bomb to use and on what city. points obviously being determined by surviving population.


Not that the current Defcon is going to be inadequate in the single player department, but I feel that a few "Just for $hits and giggles" scenarios would be refreshing when not playing the vannilla single player or multiplayer games.


(Just for everyones' reference Hiroshima was 15/kt and Nagasaki was 20/kt) Nuclear war today would truly be nuclear holocaust.

It would be interesting (and scary) to see warheads bus. When were MIRVs first concepted? If Defcon is to take place in the 70s-80s-late 90s, then shouldn't MIRVs be integral in just about every nuclear powered arsenal? This brings up the question of defense though, since MIRVs are supposedly harder to defend against.

And Tookie- if you're adding in MIRVs by 2012, woudln't we have some plane-based lasers and defense sattelites by then?

Redstar- would TEL icons be one-launch deals or would they go back to cities to 'reload' like bombers?



Sure there could be some kind of new defenses to counter MIRVs, but both MIRVs and defenses against them would have to be limited so as to create an even more indepth strategy. Letting you decide where to deploy defenses and when to strike with MIRVs. (This would help to create some sort of BALANCE to the new units) "I think we are onto something here" want to make a mod?

Also the limitation of sizes of Mega-tonage and limitation on number of missiles of varying mega-tonage/Kili-tonage would help to create an even more indepth strategic game. Because by 2012 The United States and Russia are supposed to have limited their Nuclear Arsenals. So this "Senario" would create an excellent game play experience by allowing players to make more elaborate choices on how to deploy Defenses and Offenses.

sound cool or what? :twisted:


I have no programming skills whatsoever, and the only modding I've done is texture work and model replacement (as well as string adjustments) for Starfleet command.

That aside, there are some neat ideas to use Defcon as a base to turn it into a "warboard" strategy game encompassing more than just the nuclear aspect. Defense sattelites, Armed ground forces, ABC support, long-range air bombers, and perhaps active intelligence (along with jammers and orbital warfare) would be interesting topics to include in a 2012 version of Defcon.

Also, by limiting the nuclear arsenals of the respective countries, it opens up other alternatives for 'mass destruction' that a nation needs to exercise in order to get points. This means BC weapons, or massed conventional bombs.

And I wonder, could it be possible to 'capture' cities and gain the points of the civilians there, rather than obliterating them? Yet another thing army units can do when running rampant in an enemy country.

(And of course, if this was set in 2062 instead, we could add the Dimensional Oscillation Bomb to the list of WMDs.
http://orguss.freeservers.com/stbomb.html
ABCD)
User avatar
xander
level5
level5
Posts: 16869
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 11:41 pm
Location: Highland, CA, USA
Contact:

Postby xander » Tue Sep 26, 2006 3:29 am

Kuth wrote:I have no programming skills whatsoever, and the only modding I've done is texture work and model replacement (as well as string adjustments) for Starfleet command.

That aside, there are some neat ideas to use Defcon as a base to turn it into a "warboard" strategy game encompassing more than just the nuclear aspect. Defense sattelites, Armed ground forces, ABC support, long-range air bombers, and perhaps active intelligence (along with jammers and orbital warfare) would be interesting topics to include in a 2012 version of Defcon.

Also, by limiting the nuclear arsenals of the respective countries, it opens up other alternatives for 'mass destruction' that a nation needs to exercise in order to get points. This means BC weapons, or massed conventional bombs.

And I wonder, could it be possible to 'capture' cities and gain the points of the civilians there, rather than obliterating them? Yet another thing army units can do when running rampant in an enemy country.

(And of course, if this was set in 2062 instead, we could add the Dimensional Oscillation Bomb to the list of WMDs.
http://orguss.freeservers.com/stbomb.html
ABCD)

My guess is that what you are talking about is basically impossible without having access to the Defcon source code. You would probably be better off writing a new game from scratch. Defcon is about simplicity -- there are only 9 unit types, for crying out loud. Defcon is the distilled essence of a game. What you suggest would no longer be Defcon, in any sense of the word. I could take the pieces of a Stratego set, put them on a larger, hex-based board, and change all of their movement rules, and I might have a good game, but it would no longer be Stratego.

xander

Return to “General”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests