Skeleton Lords

Foreword
Skeleton Lords is a game which I wanted to do a few years back. It's based on Warlords for the Amiga, and it's an army/empire building TBS. There are no scenarios, instead the entire campaign is just one big map with all of the factions duking out. I like uninterrupted gameplay like that, because your actions and progress carry over from place to place. With scenarios, you often build a huge army only to start on the next map with very little. IIRC, Homeworld didn't do this though.

Updates
2010 Jan. 28: Wrote something about Troops and Generals and elaborated on Resources around the cities and castles 2010 Jan. 26: Renamed from Skeleton Wars to Skeleton Lords. Indicated Minor/Major factions in color. Minor text rewrites. Badgers (meme) replaced by Ogres. Added underwater continental plates to map. 2010 Jan. 25: I wrote a bit a bout hexagons and how to make the map tiles. 2010 Jan. 22: This page formed. The thumbnails are still old. 2008: I cleaned up some of the old thumbnails, but many of them are still in a rough 'idea fart' stage. 2006: I drew a bunch of very rough thumbnails. Many years ago. I played Warlords and a bunch of similar games. Got excited.

Index
T op Foreword Updates Index World map List of factions Story Setting up a game Ally traits - match making Troops and Generals Map Cells Resources around the cities and castles Fun with hexagons Art process

World map
The world map continent layout is a paraphrase of ours. Some thought have been put into the placement and adjacency of the factions. Exactly what the thoughts were, I have forgot. After a while I decided to expand the map from a square to a larger rectangle, so it could be wrapped around an entire globe. I don't mind dead areas (like desers). Even distribution makes things unbelievable and boring.
converted by Web2PDFConvert.com

As for the gameplay, I was thinking of... using some kind of resource or city nodes. Not terribly innovative, but a proven concept. The map is hexagonal and upgraded cities will expand outwards concentrically, making use of the resource types of nearby cells. This makes each city unique in terms of production, as the surrounding terrain varies. Also, the different factions are 'fueled' by different things, so they might be at a disadvantage in certain regions. Since I have over 40 factions, I can afford making some unbalanced (weaker) ones, and factions with very odd behavior, such as weak humans who turn into powerful werewolves cyclically. Some units prefer to fight in certain terrain, and are handicapped elsewhere. A long pike or lance is probably less useful in a dense jungle, for example. There will also be temples, sacred sites and ruins which yield artifacts and bonus army units.

Factions
I went nuts and drew up some 40 factions which inhabit a large (perhaps hexagonal) world map. I tried to include all of the most common fantasy species (which I like). Blue text color indicates a major faction, and yellow a minor one. Humans Longswords Pikemen Desert talons Asai Black knights Elemental mages Barbarians Northmen Humans lose a lot of resources and time on bureaucracy, religious paranoia and such things. However, they are highly adaptive. This is reflected in their troops as well as in their ability to terraform
converted by Web2PDFConvert.com

(ruthlessly exploiting natural resources). The Longswords are typical white knights who oppress the peasants. Their armies are a mix of elite knights and weak peasants. The Barbarians are tall and muscular. Skilled in hand to hand combat, but lacks a sense of tactics. Does not know how to sack cities, only plunder. They are kind of haphazard, lacking organization, so they can not control what units they build.

converted by Web2PDFConvert.com

Valkyries Egean Valkyries Snow Valkyries Black Valkyries Yaksi Valkyries The Valkyries are all female humanoids. The Yaksi uses a gray clay bodycream to give them a statuelike appearance.

converted by Web2PDFConvert.com

Undead Skeletons Ghosts Nosferatu Mummies Summoners The Summoners have 4 or so unique summoner characters which they are reliant upon. Once those are dead all demons become wild and its practically over for the summoner player.

converted by Web2PDFConvert.com

Elves Forest Elves Silver Elves Death Elves Yeah, there's some paraphrasing going on here.

converted by Web2PDFConvert.com

Dwarfs Grey Dwarfs Black Dwarfs Gnomes/Wardens The Gnomes sometimes just slack. In fact, theyre not terribly interested in war. They have random periods (turns) when they get inspired to build stuff.

Trolls Cave Trolls Forest Trolls

converted by Web2PDFConvert.com

John Bauer is a big inspiration here. The trolls are ancient creatures possessing the wisdoms of the old world. They're also jaded and unwilling to keep up with the new world. Because of this they are close to extinction. Many troll have already left the world by turning themselves into stone. A form of transcendence or mass suicide? Who knows? The remaining ones might have other plans.

Orkoids Green Orks Black Orks Imps Orks fight among themselves and dont follow orders too well. Sometimes they wander off to wage their own personal war. It's difficult to control the Orks, but they make up for it in numbers.

Beastly humanoids Wolf men (Periodically turns into 'werewolves') Ape men (From a lost world) Ogres Cthulhoids Snake men Beast men/Minotaurs

converted by Web2PDFConvert.com

Other Blobs (The blobs claim to have come with an enormous sky mountain which crashed into the world as it formed. This makes them the oldest species in the world. They are however also, despite insisting otherwise, the least evolved. They spent almost an eternity trapped in an underground cave, where they devolved from whatever their original form had been. However, their sense of supremacy and vivid imagination did not. They didn't see the light of day until recently when a mining tunnel intersected their cave.)
converted by Web2PDFConvert.com

Insectoids (Any Insectoid born has the potential to evolve into a warrior or even queen. Most do not.) Octis (The Octis are ardent miners who are digging towards the center of the world. They believe this is where the world squid sits and controls the destiny of all.) Lantians (Colorful creatures who crawled up onto land after the end of the old world.) Ancient robots (These robots come in a very limited supply, as they were once constructed by the ancient Helurians, the inhabitants of the legendary sunken continent.) Dogs of War (A very young race of intelligent dogs. They are aggressive in nature, but often bite off more than they can chew.) Wartort (A patient species of highly intelligent militant turtles.) Nagas (Due to their malicious nature and meddling with the unnatural, these dragonites have gained and lost great power many times over. According to legend, they were responsible for the destruction of the old world, and the sinking of Heluria.)

Ducks Black Ducks White Ducks Giants

converted by Web2PDFConvert.com

Desert Giants Frost Giants Cyclopians/Cyclopes

Wildlife, Beasts and Guardians Stalaknight (mountain - cave exploration) Fury Red Dragon, Green, Black Sphinx Beholder

Story
The story (and possibly gameplay) needs to explain how the many factions could have coexisted for a long time without annihilating each other. Maybe an Age of Plenty begins, suddenly giving the factions resources to expand. Maybe a powerful artefact appears, forcing the factions to crawl out from under their rocks.

Setting up a game
T o what extent should the player be restricted in changing the design of the game universe? I don't know really. Allowing the player to play on random maps with arbitrary faction selections and starting conditions could make the universe feel less solid. It could also be fun and increase replay value.
converted by Web2PDFConvert.com

conditions could make the universe feel less solid. It could also be fun and increase replay value. However, I'd like to think that I've designed such a large world that there's enough variation as it is. I want to create immersion, and allow the player to explore the same game from different perspectives (factions). One solution could be to use text files to set up the game rather than a very convenient ingame setup menu. Editing a text file make you feel more like you're changing the game than using an ingame setup menu. Game difficulty / AI settings should be in an ingame setup menu though.

Ally traits - match making

I'm not sure if factions can ally, but it would be possible to device a system where each faction has a number of traits which are used in match making: Race (humans, elves, etc) goodness (evil, good, bit of each) Openness (open - selfish) Goal & Interest (find grail, perfection, fight, explore, academic) Grudge against (another faction or entire race) Like (another faction)

Troops and generals

I haven't settled on anything regarding heroes, generals and troop construction, or even if you should see stacks of troop or just generals on the map. Thinking about the different possibilities, this one seems the most appealing atm.: There's only a few movement classes per race, such as foot soldier, riders, flying. While this puts limits on variation, it's quite possible that you actually need to be simple and clear with movement, and that finer differences between units are of needlessly fine resolution and even confusing. Units of the same movement type can still get different terrain bonuses in terms of combat, like pike-men having troubles in forests or rocky terrain. So, all variants of cave troll foot soldiers would march slowly at the same pace and with the same terrain penalties for movement (e.g. mountains and rocky terrain doesn't slow them down). All foot soldiers can be grouped up with each under under a general, and you can't mix riders with foot soldiers. On the map you'd see a general, carrying a banner indicating, say a medium sized group of foot soldiers. The exact composition of the force could actually be invisible, for better or worse. A form of fog of war. Maybe scout units could allow you to click on nearby enemy stacks and see the exact composition. Upkeep? I don't know. Perhaps some troops, like the barbarians, could live off the land, whilst other troops like knights require upkeep. As for balance, I'll just wing it. Master of Orion 1 is 'unbalanced' racially, with the Psilons being a huge threat and Mrrshans who are much less of a threat. I think it's more interesting with unbalanced games. I will try to balance the few major factions against each other though, so either of them can win.

Map cells
Hexagonal maps can be made by displacing every second row of a 2D array. Every T emple has no exploitable neighbor cells but can build special units. Every T ower has no exploitable neighbor cells but acts as a defence. Every city is surrounded by 6 exploitable cells. Every castle is surrounded by 6+(3*4) exploitable cells. The different factions all start with a city of some sort, but the major factions might start with a castle and at a more favorable position. The minor factions might start at a poor place with a
converted by Web2PDFConvert.com

small city. The player could be allowed to tweak starting conditions. Also, instead of a having hard mode, the player could simply chose to play a minor faction. Exploitable cells can be sacked (plundered). Castles and towers can attack surrounding cells from a distance. Any building offers some kind of 'rest and replenish' effect, useful for some armies after long marches. Maybe some races are less exhausted by marching than others.
+ + + + * * + + * o * + + * * + + + +

I can think of a few cell properties / flags which would be useful when it comes to unit combat/movement advantages/penalties and such. Snow bunnies tolerate cold, whilst desert people have adapted to hotter climates. A pike man will prefer open terrain. Some units may hide in chaotic terrain, etc. Mountain trolls may have adapted to mountains and rocky terrain. Most tiles could be made in 3 variants and there could be 3 superficial styles as well, to make certain regions distinct. For example, a region could have a certain geology which makes the mountain look a certain way. Another example is forests, which, while in the same temperate region, could be dominated by different types of trees. The style of the cities and castles vary by faction. The style of ruins and temples vary by region (pyramids in the desert, stonehenge up north, etc). The roads and agricultural areas are artificial. Both offer a movement bonus for most factions/units. None can exist in the icy areas (you don't grow crops or build roads on top of an ice sheet with constant snow fall on it).
. -10 +4 +20 +40 DEAD Ice field Blacklands Wasteland Desert PLAINS None T undra Grasslands Savannah WETLANDS None Swam p Swam p Swam p FOREST None Mostly pine trees Mostly leaf trees Palmtrees, Rain forest Glacial erratic Flattened by inland ice Som etim es snow tipped ROCKY MOUNT AINS

Resources around the cities and castles

Each terrain cell has a few resource values which a nearby city or castle can exploit. Forests Elves might be skilled hunters and get more resources from adjacent forest tiles. Humans would prefer plains and agriculture. Maybe my Asai (Asians) are skilled fishermen. Races used to hot or cold climates may be somewhat restricted because they have troubles adapting to the opposite climate. Some resource types requires an initial investment of time and funds before they can be exploited. I liked the system used in Colonial Conquest, where you could put little men into the surrounding terrain, and they'd grab resources every turn. Then you could build, say, a mining machine or a green house on a map cell, and the men working there would be much more effective.

converted by Web2PDFConvert.com

Construction of units
I haven't elaborated much on this yet. Batch production could be faster and/or cheaper. The drawback is that more resources has to be tied up. Some special units can be found in the wild or at certain sites.

Heroes
I haven't thought much about heroes or special characters. I'd like to use Generals who gives units under their command certain light bonuses. I don't like heroes much because... I'd rather use troops than a single pimped out ubermench. Still, it's fun to have a special character who can run around and have... some watery tart threw a sword at them.

Fun with hexagons

Warlords is a TBS with a square grid, I think. I'm thinking of using a hexagonal solution, since: Having six clean movement directions seems interesting. I'm doing land masses, not square rooms. I wanted to try it. Also, structures (buildings, trees) often look better at an angle. I know you can cheat a bit with perspective and do side view and top view at the same time, but I want to try and go for a more accurate perspective (no diminishing point though). Ideally the view angle should not be too top down (can't show height) or too side view (hard to estimate distances) After much experimenting, I came up with this practical solution:

converted by Web2PDFConvert.com

I found the polygon/hex tool in PS, and made a big hexagon. Hexagons, if rotated right, have 2 straight sides and 4 angled sides. Most games do the angled sides as 2:1 slopes because it looks good. While clean, these 2:1 slopes are not true to the actual angles of hexagons. But this doesn't matter as much to me since I won't be using a top down view. I can choose slope by squeezing the hexagon together using the transformation / scaling tool. I turned the grid on in Photoshop and came up with a few variants which have clean slopes. (There might be errors here. I get confused and make faulty assumptions a lot.) What's left after this step, is drawing a polygon at a much smaller scale with clean edges which meet up when tiled. I turned out that some sizes were impossible to make, using the edge matchup I had preferred. I ended up with a 44w * 29h tile. It's close enough to the 6w * 4h proportion of my big one. It's viewed at 35.1 degrees, and reasonably equilateral (well, it's in perspective, but you know what I mean). So, why bother with all this? It's good to be informed. Y ou have to know the rules to break them, etc. Now if I break something I can know which direction I'm breaking it in. Also, chances are that since I know the view angle, I can draw buildings and stuff which doesn't feel disjointed with the perspective of the ground. If I feel the need to, I can use a 3D program to help me make complex stuff like castles or skyscrapers. Completely 'equilateral' hexagons ensures... that all directions are fair... I mean, look fair. The graphics are just a representation of some array of course. It always bothered me that the (text) 'tiles' in roguelikes are tall, because it makes it difficult to judge distance. My hexagons are wide of course, but we're used to seeing compressed perspective along the ground plane like that. If the perspective and proportions are proper, then it's easier for the brain to... read what's going on, I'd say. The clean slope is mostly important because it's... clean. The tiling feels clean and edge lines (and maybe selections) will look nice and straight. It also makes the masking job structured and easy.

The art process

I've previously done a few isometrical graphics sets, and developed a few techniques which were useful for this project. Y ou may download the PSDs (right click save): T errain source art: hex_paint2.psd Tile graphics: hex_paint2_small.psd Painting
converted by Web2PDFConvert.com

First I paint at five times the size of the actual graphics. Meaning, I paint/draw at 100% and scale down to 20%. Actually, I have made a macro which scales down the image, sharpens, and fades that sharpen about 50-70%, I don't remember the exact value. I fade the sharpen a bit because the full effect gives a gritty result. Also, I could downscale the terrain art to an even smaller size if I need to do several zoom levels I just eyeball the tilt/perpective of the tower and trees here. If I need to, I could consult a box model, because I've calculated the angle of view. Here's a breakdown of the layers which I often use: Hexagon reference (background): I make a fill pattern from an upscaled version of my tile. I fill a layer with this. It's good to switch on and off as reference. Line art (multiply): I draw the line art in black, and don't worry about some light grays, white or whatever getting in there. It doesn't have to be clean. When I feel done I use 'levels' to blacken the black-ish and lighten any light gray to white. I also use the slider which turns the black into gray, because pure black is too extreme. With gray lines in multiply mode, the lines take in some of the color from the color layer, and this makes them look a bit less dull. Y ou can also colorize the lines for special effects / extra richness. T oo much labor for me in this case though. Anyways, see this example and look for the three little triangle arrows which I've moved. Another thing. I generally use the magical wand at a tolerance of 50-100 to select the figure which I'd like to color inside for the next step, but in the case of this terrain, I don't really have a figure to color inside. Color (multiply): I use a pixel brush, some 25-70 pixels in side (size set to vary with pen pressure). Because the pixel brush doesn't antialias (blur), I can paint bucket or replace the colors very easily with no cleanup. Shade (multiply): I generally pick a cold color for the shadow. Sometimes if I do gem stones or slime, I pick a stronger color for the shade, and in some cases I might even colorize the line art a little for an 'ectoplasma' feel. Render (normal): If I decide to paint, airbrush or whatever, I just do this in a layer above all others. Usually I make the line art a bit lighter in this case, because they need to be more subtle. Strong line art is more effective with flat colors (no rendering) and I don't like having to do the labor of painting over the line art. It's better to make it fainter in the first place. Also, before rendering, I like to go into the shade layer and add some gradients with an airbrush. It's easier to do some types of gradients monochromatically this way. Then I can concentrate on adding special effects in the rendering layer, like saturated edges, sky reflections, darker areas, speculars, etc. The drawback with this method is that it's cumbersome to make a global change affecting all layers. Right now I use Edit / Transformation / Again if I need to scale a head or so move stuff around. My fill patterns for this little experiment. I made them pale so the line art on top will show clearly.

The mask and edge layers I make two layers, on for the mask and one for the edges. This way I can tweak my large scale image, the terrain art, whenever I need to. Then I can pop the down scaled version in underneath those layers, so I don't have to re-mask everything. The mask is made by filling an empty layer with my hexagon pattern. I make it transparent so I can see my terrain underneath. Then I paint bucket the
converted by Web2PDFConvert.com

empty hexagons with the mask color. The only thing left after that is setting a small pixel brush to 'clear' and erase the mask where there's terrain overlapping, e.g. a tree or mountain sticking up. Pixel art? I do no pixel level optimization other than perhaps tidying up some odd pixel here and there. I put these in the mask layer, so I can paste in a new version of my terrain art underneath. Again, the idea is that this way I won't have to redo any work if I need to edit the terrain art. Edges I feel that a strategy game which relies on grid based movement and abstracted strategy elements should be clear about tile borders. This is why I decided to not do stuff like half-forests or gradients of desert and grass on the same tile. A tile should not be ambiguous about it's strategically relevant content. Anyways, the edges are just a 1px white edge going around the inside of the hexagon edge. The tile edge graphic could probably be made into a convenient fill pattern, but move-duplicating it works too. I erase the edges where there was stuff sticking up (trees and mountains). I'm thinking that perhaps the edges could be separate graphical objects. This way it could be used for tile highlighting and such.

Beaches and roads

I really don't wanna draw 2^6 edges for beaches, rivers and roads. Thinking about a pie-slice system, an on the fly visual effect (based on adjacency) rather than an actual tile in the array. An overlapping system could also work.

converted by Web2PDFConvert.com

Like stated elsewhere, I don't think the tiles need to blur into each other. I think it's possible to design the map so you minimize clashing. For example, you could place mountains between the desert and grasslands so they serve as a separator. Just putting desert in the middle of the grasslands might look odd of course. So, it comes down to map design. The reason I bother with the beaches is because it looks nice and I'll have lots of sea-land adjacency. Beach tiles are not something that you'll stand on a lot, and most of them will clearly look wet anyways. They'll basically be 'shallow water' and the exact configuration of the beach doesn't affect that.

Rough ideas

Concept art by Arne Niklas Jansson, 2006-2010.

converted by Web2PDFConvert.com