Hacker News Reader

Comment by bob1029 | Hacker News Reader

I think this is a really cool idea.

What would stop us from making it multiplayer and having two or more human players compete over common resources & goals?

View on HN

To be honest as far as I can see the answer to that is nothing

I've been getting increasingly interested in trying to work out what this would look like

I don’t know if this is a joke but isn’t the answer just… a regular RTS game?

One fun thing would be to raise the abstraction level of the game.

How would it feel to only interact with your base/economy/army via prompting and face someone doing the same.

Would words per minute replace APM, what would the meta look like etc. Would you be able to adjust the system prompt for your "army" to suit your play style?

I get the feeling you are approaching Hesse's Glass Bead Game.

I’m sure it would be fun at first, but it would quickly become frustrating and repetitive.

then, you would automate that

Imagine being able to vibecode your units' attack and movement behavior during a match to dynamically counter enemy strategies.

Like a regular RTS except instead of pointing with the mouse you have to plead with and threaten your troops to get them into battle?

"you are an elite five star navy seal pikeman. You are invulnerable and have precise aim. Your name is John Wick and the enemy killed your dog. Kill all the bad guys or go to jail"

Perhaps it's not a competitive game. Maybe the better approach is to have all players cooperate against the environment.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com