MMORTS

Well, I figure this is why you need to look beyond the simple 'war of annihilation', 'start with nothing' type game, and look at why the nations of the world today are the way they are. You could look at history and into how Britain, France, etc became super powers of their era, why they didn't capture / control larger areas, and so on.

But, I suppose, the best example of this would be Eve Online, and frankly that game sucks up sooo much time and only the top people really get to enjoy the 'RTS' part of it. And it's a really good illustration of why only top people CAN play a 'real' RTS, where communication, logistics, alliances, and split second decisions all combine to make epic battles.

At the end of the day, an RTS in the traditional sense just doesn't cut it as a format for a MMORTS. Either it's an equal match (like we are all used to) or it becomes so much more that it's no longer an RTS.

As far as wargames go, reality is pretty boring. Nowhere near the kind of excitement a good RTS game brings. Lots of diplomacy, times of no conflict, building up forces, and most battles are simply affairs where one side is way bigger than the other.

As Sun Tzu says, succesful is he who wins first and then goes to war.

Seriously, play some of these browserbased MMORTS games. Travian used to be a really good example of this. I haven't played it in a few years, but I don't think much has changed.

I wouldn't call Travian an RTS. Let me clarify: i am not talking about an Browsergame or browsergamelike game. I am talking about a RTS where you lock in. Spawn, build ur base for maybe 10 15 20 minutes, build your army then go out there and wipe some a**. I imagine a planetside2 for RTS. And this includes that every units moves and fires and maybe gets hit or maybe not, all should be calculated. There shall be clans and factions and Confederations.
Maybe for the ambitiouse People you could count something like Whipeouts per life, similar to KpD.

But most important it should be fun. It shall not be about building up stuff for years, lose all in an Instant, and get the biggest rage ever.

Edit: the above timeline doesnt mean u are unable to build buildings after the said 10 15 20 minutes...

You seem to be imagining something that isn't exactly playable until you leave the imagining phase and move on to the "practical problem solving" phase. I don't think you've really thought this through.

And i think that you are in no way able to tell how much i may or may not have thought about this.

There is a market for such games. However you will be selling these kind of games at a loss at least at first.

The only two MMO RTS games that I know of that I want to support are End of Nations and Iron Fell

I am personally taking allot of notes from Iron fell as well as supporting them.

I dont want to sell such a game. I want to play it. The reason why i put the fee in is because of the need of at least some servers and servers are not free.

Maybe market was the wrong word. I want to know if enough people would play it.

You in no way give the idea you've put in more thought than most people I hear about new revolutionary concepts for games. The very least you'd have to put forward is a document of a few pages outlining the basic problems this kind of game runs into and how you'd plan to fix those, before I'd consider you'd really thought this through.

Thinking about this game is easy. Now show me you've thought it through. That's something else entirely.

Used to play MMO's when I had the luxury of spending many hours grinding. Now I dont enjoy that anymore but I still do spend quite a few hours gaming ^_^

@pluisjen
The actual game design isn't that important to me. Mostly as it takes impact on the computing system behind. Also this system may have some demands to the game design. Those i mentioned in op.
And after all i wont show my technical notes in public.

I just like the gamedesign of SCFA the most in terms of RTS.

Also the suggested assimilation mode for FFA could develop in an endless battle. But i want it bigger not 40 peps but 4000 or even more.

I'll have to go with "No", then.

I've read this thread over, and I still have no idea what it's trying to say.

Doesn't a "free join" game basically work like this?

You mean of PA?
Yes basically. Except for the maximum number of players, planets and units that are possible to be in the game.

How so? It seems that scaling is the ultimate goal of PA. How does tacking an "MMO" change things?

Frankly, an MMORTS won't look anything like "classic" RTSs, the fact is that unlike FPS where it's easy to scale up(Planetside 1/2) to include hundreds to thousands of players, doing that in an RTS is just crazy when each player is in control on so many units.

Also Extra Credits did a show on MMORTSs, with some good points brought up.

Mike