Squad Level Tactial Games - Ideas/Criticisms

[pleb]

Hi everyone,

I’m part of a small design team and we’ve been discussing the idea of a squad level tactical game. We wanted to come to players like yourselves, who have a ton of experience in the genre and learn from you. To that end, we came up with a few questions. It would be great to hear your thoughts on these questions:

What was your favorite tactical squad game and why?

What were the features of your favorite game that you would most want to see in any future tactical game - e.g. the setting, level of role playing, research tree, combat mechanics, graphics (although less likely nowadays)

What were the features of successor games to your favorite game that you didn’t like or other reasons why you don’t believe that successor games have matched your favorite game to date?

What are additional features that you would like to see in future squad level tactical games? Or what features would you love to borrow from existing squad level tactical games that you believe would make your favorite game even better?

Could you recommend any games besides the Silent Storm, X-Com and Jagged Alliance series that you think we should try and get our hands on and play through.

Do you know of any examples of modern games that just get this genre ‘right’? If not, where did they go wrong?

We look forward to reading your responses. Also, if you prefer, feel free to get in touch with us via PM.

 

[Martimus]

Syndicate was probably my favorite squad tactical game. It allowed you to complete your objective pretty much anyway you could think of, and it was fun to go back through missions and try different things. I loved finding ways of killing an assasination target without ever being seen.

 

[bockie]

Syndicate was probably my favorite squad tactical game. It allowed you to complete your objective pretty much anyway you could think of, and it was fun to go back through missions and try different things. I loved finding ways of killing an assasination target without ever being seen.

I replayed that game more often than any other game in my library. A part of me died in the "remake" of it.

 

[BrightCandle]

Syndicate was probably my favorite squad tactical game. It allowed you to complete your objective pretty much anyway you could think of, and it was fun to go back through missions and try different things. I loved finding ways of killing an assasination target without ever being seen.

I third that, I think it was the best of the genre and died alas with an awesome games company.

I would invest in a business that made a spiritual successor with update graphics, level design and physics. Nothing says awesome squad combat like a team of remote controlled terminators with big ass guns. If you added modern cover mechanics like Company of heroes you may find it takes on a whole new dynamic.

I loved that game, and the modern remake nearly brought tears to my eyes for how far it could miss the point of the original games.

 

[SunnyD]

Free iPod first, info later.

 

[pleb]

Syndicate was probably my favorite squad tactical game. It allowed you to complete your objective pretty much anyway you could think of, and it was fun to go back through missions and try different things. I loved finding ways of killing an assasination target without ever being seen.

Thanks for the responses all of you. I was a huge Syndicate fan growing up. I'd roam around with Persuadatrons (or whatever allowed you to 'convert' people to your side) and then have all four agents stacked with miniguns and go at it. I think the only remotely annoying part was trying to get into a car and getting run over by mistake. We'll definitely take a look at that game for ideas.

Reading all the responses, I think we needed to be clearer in our original post about what we definitely knew we wanted the game to be like:

Squad level - i.e. the player controls 1 to 12 individual troops against an unspecified number of enemies.
Turn-based - one side goes, than the other side goes (or potentially a Frozen Synapse system where turns are resolved simultaneously, but these favors multiplayer play, which we do not believe we will be including in our game)
Isometric view - just because we like it, and for good old times. Plus our current project is full isometric hex based TBS, so our artists and programmer have enough experience with it.
Single player.

With those specifications in mind, does anyone have any additional feedback?

 

[ColtMaverick]

My experience has been from Jagged Alliance series (including 7.62 and Hired Guns) along with original Fallout games. The biggest feature I appreciated was the real time - pausable action used in 7.62 and Jagged Alliance:BIA. It feels turn based when you are executing, but when you hit the play button, it jumps to rts feel which really pumps up the atmosphere when everyone is shooting at the same time.

For a game concept, I was always hoping someone would try to make a good bank robber game. You would start with a low level crew and build them into an assault force (HEAT style) or go high tech/stealth. Money would be spent buying new crew, weapons, tech for the next job.

 

[DaveSimmons]

JA 2 got tun-based tactical closer to perfection than anyone, with interrupts, fatigue / knockouts, grenades, etc.

Fallout Tactics was also a lot of fun, but I prefer the JA2 mechanics.

 

[blastingcap]

Syndicate was probably my favorite squad tactical game. It allowed you to complete your objective pretty much anyway you could think of, and it was fun to go back through missions and try different things. I loved finding ways of killing an assasination target without ever being seen.

Real-time I liked Syndicate most.

If it's turn based then X-Com.

Destructible environment is a must.

Oh and as for assassination missions, I preferred calling Airstrikes with the Syndicate: American Revolt expansion haha. For one "protect" mission in AR, I literally stepped in front of my protectee's car so it couldn't move, then called airstrikes all over the map before letting him drive. Cheap but man, those AR missions were so hard to complete without pulling all the stops.

 

[power_hour]

My biggest issue with squad based tactical games has always been AI. Give me a game that your units can adapt and play smart, then you got my $50. Might be a tall order but its primarily the reason I tend to avoid them.

 

[pleb]

Thanks again for the responses everyone!

Since our game is single player, how important is a linear storyline vs. a branching plot vs. just doing random mission after random mission (with some reward at the end that lets you buy more kit for your team and the eventual goal just being to amass more kit/reputation).

We think story is important. It gives context to the player's actions. Part of what made UFO:EU so cool was that even though you were running these "random" missions, you could then unravel the mystery of why you were being attacked and eventually use that to attack Cydonia. We're also toying with the idea of a Wing Commander Privateer based setup, where missions are offered to freelancers to take on, and we would then take on the missions. The story would come in the form of the context of the worlds in which those missions take place. Maybe there's an ongoing rebellion, and you're assisting either side - maybe there's a massive colonizing spree in one sector and you help to "sterilize" certain sectors by removing the native species.

What we're struggling with is how we can use the WCP type missions, but still give the player a reason to continue taking on missions. On a simple level, it's that you get credits for completing a mission, which can be used to hire new soldiers, or conduct research, or buy new weaponry. But what's the point in continuing on a more abstract scale? To be the biggest merc leader of all? To have the game end by X date and you're judged based on your score up to that point?

Would love to hear your opinions.

 

[pleb]

For a game concept, I was always hoping someone would try to make a good bank robber game. You would start with a low level crew and build them into an assault force (HEAT style) or go high tech/stealth. Money would be spent buying new crew, weapons, tech for the next job.

This is a GREAT concept. What a neat idea. It would take some research on bank security, etc. rather than just improvising a sci-fi type scene - unless it was bank robbing in a sci-fi world *mind blown*

 

[pleb]

My biggest issue with squad based tactical games has always been AI. Give me a game that your units can adapt and play smart, then you got my $50. Might be a tall order but its primarily the reason I tend to avoid them.

I hear you! Can you give us examples of games you thought where the AI was good. Or where it was particularly stupid?

Are there scenarios where you can reduce your dependence on excellent AI? Maybe positioning the units early on in the game to set the required traps. I suppose that reduces replayability as well as making the game too 'static'

 

[pleb]

JA 2 got tun-based tactical closer to perfection than anyone, with interrupts, fatigue / knockouts, grenades, etc.

Fallout Tactics was also a lot of fun, but I prefer the JA2 mechanics.

Is there anything in Fallout Tactics mechanics-wise that you wish had been incorporated into JA2 - or was it basically perfect (as you mentioned)?

 

[Martimus]

I like the mission idea. I have never played Privateer, but a system like Mechwarrior 2: Mercenaries would be nice. You do missions to make money, and use that to get better equipment / more mercs; yet the main plot unravels as you play and missions become more personal by the end.

 

[ColtMaverick]

Something that you may want to think about is having boss battles come to you. Suppose the JA2 travel map. Remember the army attacking periodically? Suppose you hit a trigger, this will cause a boss w/ army to pursue you at your location. This would encourage you to hole up in a safe location for better defense. If you get caught out in open ground, it would be a really difficult fight.

I definitely encourage sandbox design on this style game because of how much I appreciate the build up phase. It's very similar to what makes Movie #1 of a series so good, i.e. Batman Begins, Matrix 1, Spiderman. I think a linear game has you too focused on the story and doesn't encourage you to "need" that few more xp points or "one more" assault rifle.

In regards to AI, I think the best resource would not be tactical games, but perhaps review squad AI from RTS such as Company of Heroes. Tactical games too often give the feel that you are fighting independent troops even though they are together. What if they were combined into small groups where a command to approach cover would have all of them move at the same time? Aren't units trained in real life to focus fire on one target a time? Group dynamics may really spice things up if done correctly.