| Welcome to Imperialist. We hope you enjoy your visit. This is a general Discussion Forum for the Imperialism Series games created by Frog City. Unfortunately the Series has been discontinued but there is still hope. Come on in and join the fun. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Suggestion Box | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Mar 12 2010, 09:10 AM (1,660 Views) | |
| Creator | Mar 12 2010, 09:10 AM Post #1 |
![]()
|
Chuck in any suggestions for the remake here. |
| The difference between a successful person and others is not a lack of strength, not a lack of knowledge, but rather in a lack of will. | |
![]() |
|
| jessekill | Mar 25 2010, 02:09 PM Post #2 |
![]()
|
be able to have manual battles in multiplayer! /imp2 |
![]() |
|
| Creator | Mar 26 2010, 10:41 AM Post #3 |
![]()
|
suggestion noted! |
| The difference between a successful person and others is not a lack of strength, not a lack of knowledge, but rather in a lack of will. | |
![]() |
|
| pikovich | May 25 2010, 03:16 PM Post #4 |
![]()
|
Hi, i played imp1 and imp2 this week. It would be very nice if the remake has an realy improved Diplomatic system. The council every 10 Years on imp 1 is nice and gives you a chance to win a whole game without any war. So i hope youre going to implement something like that. And pls. make food buyable.... not like imp 2. I hate this..... And also in the end of the diplomatic line you should get vasal nations. Cause on imp 2 if you conquer al minor nations.... theres no one who buys youre products...... and youre getting out of money.... Just some suggestions.... i dont know how far the game is.... Hope you find time to keep on. Mfg Pikovich |
![]() |
|
| CraiginNJ | Jul 20 2010, 04:52 PM Post #5 |
![]()
|
Suggestion 1: Does a copyrights issue need to be resolved (including look & feel & gameplay)? I don't think copyrights expire just because the copyright owner has abandoned the product. Even if the copyright owner goes bankrupt, whoever acquires their assets then becomes the copyright owner. Suggestion 2: Please do keep things like "automatic" battles (rather than micromanaging battles). It'd be nice if even more repetitive drudgery could be automated, too. Suggestion 3: A mobile version would be great. (Much like there's a great multi-platform mobile clone of Risk called Conquest -- http://www.windowsgames.co.uk/conquest.html .) Suggestion 3.1: When selecting a development language, it might be wise to consider what language platform will be required for porting to other platforms. Apple licensing requires that iPhone development must be done in Objective C (or C or C++) in order to assure efficient optimization. Android development is done in Java. Microsoft platforms like C++ (or even C# for .NET). Something like the "Airplay SDK" (http://airplaysdk.com) might enable development under windows with automatic porting to several mobile and desktop platforms at once (and the iPhone subset of their SDK is free for individual), but that would require using C++. Caveat: I have no real experience with that, and don't know if it really as easy as it sounds or if the GUI would remain good when developing "once" for multi-platform mobile devices, but the concept seems appealing rather than making several ports that each require updating for little changes. |
![]() |
|
| Xebec | Jul 20 2010, 09:02 PM Post #6 |
![]()
|
1. I don't think any copyrights issue will be brought up over look, feel and/or gameplay if we do things right. So far we have been using the original graphics AND original name, which means that there could easily be copyright issues. Then again, the game is being hosted as a (semi-?)legitimate free download from several sources. Thank you for bringing copyright to discussion, I believe we definitely have to think more about this. 2. Sounds good. It can easily be made into an option. 3. We will consider the Airplay SDK, and the 'Indie' option seems nice, but a mobile version is VERY far away in the distance. |
![]() |
|
| Creator | Jul 22 2010, 05:12 AM Post #7 |
![]()
|
i agree with the simulated battle suggestion because no matter how good a battle system is it can get quite repetitive and tedious. in nearly every strategy game a simulate option has been available and it would be stupid of us to not put one in. thanks for the suggestions! ;) |
| The difference between a successful person and others is not a lack of strength, not a lack of knowledge, but rather in a lack of will. | |
![]() |
|
| cronconi | Aug 2 2010, 01:28 PM Post #8 |
![]()
|
I'm a addict of Imp I and II at least 10 years I afford some suggestion generic: 1. monthly turn 2. start in 1870 (franco-prussian war, unification of Germany) end in 1918/1920 (WWI). GP= England, france, Italy, Germany, Austrian Empire, Russia, Ottoman Empire, United States. 3. worldwide map 4. short of resources, more competition in gathering it. for the economic management: 1. if you develop one tile of grain, you automatically gain one worker (you must not build it), maybe two or three turn later. 2. not too many worker: the ingeneer builds streets to connect (without deposits, like imp II) and develops tile of all kinds, the prospector finds all materials. 3. I suggest to add the diplomat who takes in charge opening commercial trade with other countries (3 or 4 for GP at the start of game, possibility of building a restricted number). for the strategic map: 1. enhance the strategic shape of some provinces: if the province is on a river or on a mountain, then is easier to defend, bordering three or four enemy provinces. 2. several provinces in great power 3. not all provinces have a city inside. A army in a province without city is highly more expensive to maintain. for the tactical battle (I think the weakness in Imp I and II). I like the battle resolution system of Spartan or Legion games (place your troops, give your orders, and launch the battle). 1. the terrain affect the strength of each troop. 2. random events during the battle (e.g.: the general dies, troops can't move; rumors of retreat, troops can't shoot...) 3. two turn of battle. First: place your troops and give the direction of movement. At the end, point the target and shoot. Second: see random events (if there are), give the new direction of movement and shoot at the end. 4. when retreats the troop, you must retreats all togheter and they can't shoot anymore. very long recovery from damage now beat me (I'm not a programmer...) I hope this project goes on. |
![]() |
|
| LanMisa | Aug 3 2010, 09:38 PM Post #9 |
![]()
|
I'd like to see a new Diplomatic option: trade of provinces For example: If you desperately need money, you could just sell a province for which you lack the money to develop it anyway. If someone offers a province, everyone could bid money for it (after the tradings and fights, maybe) and if the offering party agrees to one bid he could sell this province. Another interesting thing could be that you trade provinces that you don't need with someone else, for example if you two destroy a nation and you get isolated provinces, you could exchange provinces with each other. Or if someone wants a peace treaty, the other party could ask for provinces in exchange. If the first party doesn't agree, there is no treaty. Or he could offer a counter-proposal. Or you could force him into an alliance. Or something else. And last but not least I would like to see hidden contracts, for example neutrality contracts. I think the reasons are obvious - it would offer a new world of diplomatic possibilitites (which have been a little poor in both games). The problem would be that the KI had to be changed drastically. So I do not really see these things coming. Oh yes, another thing: Please do not add too many resources. Keeping it simple has been a bliss in the first game. This is not "The Settlers". |
![]() |
|
| Fkscorpion | Aug 3 2010, 10:37 PM Post #10 |
![]()
|
Hey, first of all welcome on this board ;) Now to your ideas: The thing with Province trading never came to my mind, but it sounds like a really usefull and neat feature. I will take that into our roadmap and discuss it with the programmers! Thank you for that. Hidden contracts and improved Diplomacy: We allready have some plans to improve the diplomacy system. Anyway we are not sure yet how this changes will look like, but your ideas are still welcome! Not to many resources: Well it's a difficult section. Of course you are right, that this is no new "The Settlers" clone or whatever but on the other side, we would like to implement some more ressources and products to get a "deeper" economy system. Well we'll see about that. We try to not overload the game :) And to all other posters: We took a lot of ideas allready into our roadmap! Maybe i'll post it, when we are at the point of integrating those new features. But still we look forward to your ideas :) |
![]() |
|
| Farcheal | Aug 14 2010, 07:23 PM Post #11 |
|
...The Legend...
![]()
|
I myself don't like the system used in imp 2 at all, i thought the economy in imp 1 was easier to handle, but still challenging as for a suggestion, in battle mode I liked using the otto-play to get through small battles, but for bigger battles, I would like to be able to turn on and of the otto-play |
| |
![]() |
|
| Creator | Aug 15 2010, 02:21 AM Post #12 |
![]()
|
i think you mean "auto"-play |
| The difference between a successful person and others is not a lack of strength, not a lack of knowledge, but rather in a lack of will. | |
![]() |
|
| Farcheal | Aug 15 2010, 07:01 PM Post #13 |
|
...The Legend...
![]()
|
in game its lists itself as otto-play [with the icon of the military advisar] im aware that it should be auto play, so I listed the ingame name |
| |
![]() |
|
| Xebec | Aug 17 2010, 05:56 PM Post #14 |
![]()
|
I don't think "otto-play" is a mistake at all. It's a joke, playing off of Otto von Bismark. At the moment, we've only added in a few resources. Really, what we're doing is just combining all of the resources from Imp I with all the resources in Imp II. There's plenty of room for changing this later. In fact, if you look carefully at the project, you'll notice that none of the resource information is hard-coded at all. It's a simple matter of editing some text files to add or remove a resource. Even players can decide which resources they want to play with. At this stage of development, there's a big focus on flexibility. About the province trading: At the end of a person's turn, they can start bidding just like normal resources? The owner of the province can check what bids have been placed |
![]() |
|
| AJoNee | Sep 16 2010, 08:33 PM Post #15 |
![]()
|
For me the most important thing is to keep the simultanius rounds. So you can play it with 8 people without waiting too long. Maybee it is possible to send only two messeges per round per direction. One message and answer after the tactical round and the same after the traiding and fighting. If you do like this, I would recommend, to use tcp for the protocoll. Maybe it is possible to divide the whole game in a client part (user interaction) and a server part (AI, calculating Engine). This communication could also go over tcp. The tactical fight (like in original game) could be in a third part, that gets all information from the server and gives the result back. In my opinion, making it like this it is more work at the beginning, but afterwards it is more easy to reprogramm some parts like the battle. |
| I'm from Germany, sorry for my English. | |
![]() |
|
| TheDS | Jan 4 2011, 02:28 PM Post #16 |
![]()
|
Hi everyone! I've only ever played Imp1, and I'm reasonably good against the computer; never played multiplayer. My suggestion is fairly simple: remember what game this is. This isn't Risk. This isn't Civilization. This isn't Red Alert. This is Imperialism. I would hope that the programmers were doing their best to keep the game as close to the original as possible. The main priority I see would be to enhance the user experience than to worry about changing the game into another game. * Allow the use of larger resolution screens * Get rid of bugs, crashes, and exploits * Simplify or streamline a few interface problems (frex map scrolling speed, using cursor keys (or dual-scroll mouse wheel) to scroll, finding units, finding places for units to move to, finding imminent threats easier, etc) * Give users more game options (frex turning Otto on for just a round, displaying tile yields, showing terrain dots in combat (normal, 2-MP, no-entry), etc) * Better statistics (charts that track your stats throughout the game) * Hover-over help, or right-click help These items are all about enhancing the user experience. They don't change the game at all, they just make it flow more smoothly and more enjoyably. They take the burdens and drudgery away. If you insist on making "improvements" to the game, sure, I could make a few suggestions, most of which are very minor ways to give the player more control or more information abotu what's going on, but the one I'll stick with is to allow us the option to play a "vanilla" game if we want to. ----- I wouldn't worry so much about the copyright issue. There are plenty of clones out there for games which are still actively being sold. For a game that isn't being sold, and for which there is no support, and for which there are still so many crash bugs, and for a game with so few players, I think it's safe to say that as long as you don't sell the work, the copyright owners won't care. In fact, chances are pretty good that, if your remake catches on, they'll offer to buy you out. It might not be for a lot, but you weren't making money off this anyway, and now you've got a game credit! Good luck! |
![]() |
|
| Mole-eyes | Dec 20 2011, 04:47 PM Post #17 |
![]()
|
I had a minor idea whilst playing Imp I - extend the years it can take place into more modern era. So more raw materials are discovered as time goes on. which mean the production tree widens. I like oil being found in Imp I and steel comes into play in Imp 2 so perhaps things like rubber plantation, Silicon deposits to mine. Then as times goes on the countries can perhaps develop a automobile/vehicle industry to sell on the market. Then with silicon an electronics/computer industry which is sold on the market. With obvious paralell military uses/unit recruitment relating to these technologies. Whether these supercede the 'tools' or not would be up for debate. To get around the no cash flow if every thing is conquered - I think a 'happiness' element should come into play with remote provinces. So they can revolt and new nations (or original ones - major and minor) come back into play!? The happiness should be governed by the goods provided (sold so some trade money) and taxation (so again money without trade with another external nation) Technology should be more like Imp 2 than imp 1 I think - keeping the historic elements just poured my head out there |
![]() |
|
| Sekundus | Dec 21 2011, 09:31 AM Post #18 |
![]()
|
I'd suggest to start with minor changings. Those would be to... a) change unit sprites and flags: different uniforms for units of different nations (Austria would have to have those black-yellow 'kaiserliche Farben' in their flag for example) b) toy around with the ressources (all great powers would have to have at least some silver and various other stuff like that) c) tweak values of every sort for the sake of balancing I'd have a lot of additional - quite doable - ideas, but those can be done after we have at least some finished progress to get started To get it running, I will sign up for the development team later on. MfG |
| Academic balance of terror:"I will quote you, sir!" "I will quote you too!" | |
![]() |
|
| Archduke Francis | Mar 10 2012, 01:21 PM Post #19 |
![]()
|
I think that units like assasins and scientists should be trainable, and stuff like racial influence could be introduced. By the way, Archduke Francis was assasinated by a Serbian nationalist... |
![]() |
|
| Archduke Francis | Mar 10 2012, 01:44 PM Post #20 |
![]()
|
I suggested scientists because without scientists: 1)Can you expect a blacksmith to be able to handle uranium without killing himself? 2)How are you able to stop the Pope from interfereing with your decisions without the evolution theory? 3)No scientists, no inventors, no new technologies, no improvement. Just to give a suggestion, to stick as close to history as possible, maybe a whole set of new civilian units will be needed. A whole new set of scenarios will arise. For example, you can keep the secret of powered flight to your own nation, or chose to announce it to the world.Chosing either would bring about a new set of problems... |
![]() |
|
| Archduke Francis | Mar 13 2012, 01:51 PM Post #21 |
![]()
|
Just to give another suggestion, I think that the material:product=2:1 age should end because it never appeared in history. Also, the "one building=one industry" ought end too, or Alsace-Lorraine and the Saarlands will not have that much importance. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · Project I: Imperialism Remake · Next Topic » |









7:34 PM Jul 11