Mercenary Commander Online

Would you play it?

  • I'd drive 400 miles to get this game in my pajamas.

    Votes: 3 21.4%
  • I'd look for a game like this after it hit the bargin bin.

    Votes: 4 28.6%
  • This doesn't sound like something I'd play unless the trailer really moved me.

    Votes: 3 21.4%
  • I'd drive 400 miles to stop a friend from buying a game this unimaginative.

    Votes: 4 28.6%

  • Total voters
    14

Users who are viewing this thread

The grass sways gently before it is crushed under the heavy boots of the loyal (AI) soldiers of your unit and of the units of other (human) commanders spread in an impressive line to your right and left. The crest of the rolling hill approaches and gives way to a scenic view of the shades of green and brown stretching out along the hills and fields before the sturdy army you march with (and by which you have been paid well). The scout cavalry has reported (in your chat window) the enemy main army is below the crest of the next hill just out of sight. The command comes down the line from your (human) General and you shout it to the 25 AI armored sergeants you command... Charge!...

The above is my summary vision for a prospective Multiplayer first-person-shooter(stabber)/tactical battle simulator with RPG elements I’ll dub Mercenary Commander Online (working title).  If that teaser peaks your interest, read on and drop your thoughts as to whether you’d play a game like this.  (Intellectual property (such as it is) retained by me)

---------
Mercenary Commander Online puts you, the player, in command of 25 of the finest (that you can afford) AI soldiers for whichever human general has paid for their loyalty.  The player controls a customized commander avatar while issuing orders to his AI unit on the battlefield.  Spend the hard-earned gold/valor points you earn each battle (with bonuses for teamplay and completing your general's orders) to upgrade your loyal soldiers' equipment and attributes along the tech-tree in which you specialize. Infantry, archer, calvary, scout, or mighty siege engineer, you earn your pay on the battlefield carrying out the orders of the general who pays your tab against the equally ambitious human commanders who have chosen (or been chosen by) the opposing flag.  Realistic equipment and movement modeling promote strategy and teamwork over headlong charges.

Any player can “propose” an attack anywhere along the “front line” between the territories controlled by each of the three factions on the persistent region map.  A battle icon will then spawn allowing players to offer their unit for hire in the battle based on their evaluation of the general’s past successes of failures.  Gold and valor point incentives will allow newer generals to get their chance.  A set “purse” of gold is determined for each battle and split evenly for each general (attacker and defender) to use to hire mercenary commander units.  (For the sake of keeping this a long rather than epic post, I won’t go into the faction “regulars” system whereby commanders can join a specific faction for bonuses at the expense of higher gold payouts to mercenary commanders.)  Better equipped and more experienced units cost more than green units in a quantity vs quality trade-off.  Green “recruit” units need not fear never getting chosen as purse allocations will promote “fitting in” cheaper units when not enough remains for expensive ones.  Multiple battles will be available at any given time allowing for units to find battles without significant delay and will play into generals' strategies as units become available (or not) at the time of each “attack”, promoting diverse battles.

A complex first-person melee fighting system lets you personally jump into the battle with your commander avatar to turn the tide of engagements as you assist your (AI) men in battles against rival commanders' (AI) men or even the rival commander himself (human player)! But beware. A fall to a mortal wound (healed after the battle, of course) by your commander will cause your men to flee, resulting in a loss of valor points and bonus gold. 

One player takes the role of General for each side, placing the units on his side into a battle formation and issuing orders that are displayed to respective commanders as indicators visible only to those for whom they are relevant.  For example, “order” your light cavalry to flank to the hilltop to the west – a green “move to” arrow appears to the selected units’ commanders.  Order an infantry charge – blue “charge” icons appear for every infantry commander.  An easy General interface allows multiple unit selection for group orders and an overlay brought up on command to shows all currently issued orders with “footprint” indicators of where each unit has been ordered to move or hold. 

In return for carrying out the General’s orders, bonuses are earned by commanders in gold and valor points.  In addition, bonuses are earned on each side for feats such as “holding the line”, “break-through”, “head hunter” (most kills), ect. as well as a bonus to each of the victorious side’s commanders. 

AI unit soldiers and commanders’ own personal avatars earn experience and gold to be spent on RPG-style upgrades such as improvements to armor/weapons, additional equipment (thrown weapons or larger shields for infantry, faster or sturdier horses for calvary, anti-calvary stakes planted before archers, deadly new siege engines such as ballistae and trebuchets, ect), movements speed, discipline (less likely to flee, less time to react to commander orders), damage dealt or defense ability.  Veteran soldiers fight more effectively and earn more from hiring generals.

Are you ready for command?

-----------

I’m no game developer (I already have a job), but I think this prospectus has potential.  Game development studios don’t accept unsolicited proposals of ideas, so I figured I’d just throw it out here to see what the community thought.  My feelings won’t be hurt.  If you have any thoughts, drop them here.

Happy gaming.
 
It's not really piquing my interest.

Unless it has droids, or some sort of hover-vehicle, or dragons.

If there was a trailer or a demo or even some concept pics it might get me interested a little, but all together it sounds like a patchwork quilt of the elements of several different games crammed into one.
 
Archonsod said:
As soon as the words "rock, paper & scissors" appeared I lost interest.

It is merely a simplistic description to describe a balanced approach as opposed to "uber" units that are end-all-be-all.  Each unit would have a counter - strengths and weaknesses.  That was not meant to describe a lack of complexity reduced to a child's game.
 
12oz Jesus said:
Archonsod said:
As soon as the words "rock, paper & scissors" appeared I lost interest.

It is merely a simplistic description to describe a balanced approach as opposed to "uber" units that are end-all-be-all.  Each unit would have a counter - strengths and weaknesses.  That was not meant to describe a lack of complexity reduced to a child's game.

No balancing, make it realistic. Then we're talking.
 
12oz Jesus said:
Archonsod said:
As soon as the words "rock, paper & scissors" appeared I lost interest.

It is merely a simplistic description to describe a balanced approach as opposed to "uber" units that are end-all-be-all.  Each unit would have a counter - strengths and weaknesses.  That was not meant to describe a lack of complexity reduced to a child's game.

I"m pretty sure Arch knows what developers mean by "rock paper scissors". and that's what turned him off.
 
12oz Jesus said:
A paper-rock-scissors (on steroids) system balances units such that each unit plays a role on the field. Spearmen counter cavalry charges, skirmishers run down archers, crossbowman inflict misery upon heavy infantry as they push back spearmen.

That has been done to death since the advent of Dune.
 
No balancing, make it realistic. Then we're talking.
on the other hand when this "balance" is not maintained a lot of squealing may be heard from almost every gamer. just watch people here whine that rhodoks suck, blunt weapons are sub-par and infantry is totally pwnd by cavalry.
 
Weaver said:
No balancing, make it realistic. Then we're talking.
on the other hand when this "balance" is not maintained a lot of squealing may be heard from almost every gamer. just watch people here whine that rhodoks suck, blunt weapons are sub-par and infantry is totally pwnd by cavalry.

That's mainly due to faulty fighting mechanics towards spears and AI rather then realism, don't you think?
 
Didn't read most of it, but sounds meh. Actually, from the summery, I thought you were talking about some moder/futuristic game. From reading the posts I found this to be untrue. It sounded better when I thought it was futuristic...  :sad:
 
Swadius said:
Weaver said:
No balancing, make it realistic. Then we're talking.
on the other hand when this "balance" is not maintained a lot of squealing may be heard from almost every gamer. just watch people here whine that rhodoks suck, blunt weapons are sub-par and infantry is totally pwnd by cavalry.


That's mainly due to faulty fighting mechanics towards spears and AI rather then realism, don't you think?
i thought that realism in games is all about mechanics.
 
All realism is(are?) attributed to mechanics?

The combat model in M&B is one of the best, but it is still restrictive in terms of spear use and among other weapons. I'm sure you've come across threads that complain about actual spear usage and the like (most notably Vili's).
 
Actually M&B is quite balanced in the infantry vs cavalry regard. You have to use the cavalry right in order for them to be effective, otherwise they're just bogged down.
 
Weaver said:
that's what i'm talking about. people like realism only until realistic restrictions start popping up.

But limited spear use isn't a realistic restriction. As the people who've seem to be of a respectable background pointed out, spears were much more versatile then what the game makes of them. Realistic restrictions, actual restrictions are intentional, they are added in and not a result of a flaws or limitations in the system. M&B combat has it's limitations in its combat system regarding spears and hit vectors.
 
gamerwiz09 said:
Didn't read most of it, but sounds meh. Actually, from the summery, I thought you were talking about some moder/futuristic game. From reading the posts I found this to be untrue. It sounded better when I thought it was futuristic...  :sad:
For some reason when I read the title I thought it would be about an online game set in Africa where players take charge of private companies and work for the highest paying local warlord and got hyped only to find out it's medieval times. :sad:
 
Back
Top Bottom