April 20th-23rd 2012 :: 10 Year Anniversary! :: Theme: Tiny World

Back to Browse Entries

Tiny Civ

by Impossible - 48 Hour Compo Entry

This is a local multiplayer game. Supposed to be a quick play 4X multiplayer game, Civilization meets joust. In practice its not so grandiose and apparently horribly confusing :).

Player 1 uses WASD (S is attack\build, W is jump, AD are left and right movement)

Player 2 uses arrows (down is attack\build, UP is jump, right and left move right and left)


Building more cities will level up your character. Cities can also be used as cover for bullets. Leveling first improves your jump height. When you first start you are only able to jump to the first 3 islands. This is not a bug, it is by design. The final and third level will give you the ability to fire bullets.

The goal of the game is to make the opposing player's lives zero. Player 1 is on the right, player 2 is on the left. In order to achieve this you need to make them fall off islands.

Downloads and Links




thatshelby says ...
Apr 23, 2012 @ 8:33pm

Interesting. I liked the building/civilization part of it. It feels incomplete though. Some in-game instructions, a title screen would help. Graphics were nice.

DSidhion says ...
Apr 23, 2012 @ 8:37pm

This game was very fun! The idea was interesting, but it was too short :)

DSidhion says ...
Apr 23, 2012 @ 8:37pm

This game was very fun! The idea is very interesting, but it was too short :)

DSidhion says ...
Apr 23, 2012 @ 8:38pm

Oops sorry for the double post. First time I thought I hadn't submitted.

dacap says ...
Apr 24, 2012 @ 2:30am

Really good idea, with AI it would be great to play

robcozzens says ...
Apr 25, 2012 @ 5:00am

Not quite sure what was going on... plus, there's only one of me... makes a multi-player game tough.
It looks like it has a lot of potential though.

Nocturne says ...
Apr 25, 2012 @ 6:35pm

I haven't rated I'm afraid as I have no-one to play with (sob!) so it wouldn't be fair... what I can say however is that the idea is cool, but the presentation was lacking (no title screen, no instructions etc...).

sudorossy says ...
Apr 25, 2012 @ 9:52pm

I totally misunderstood the point of this game, and kept losing.

Impossible says ...
Apr 25, 2012 @ 10:41pm

Hah, the amount of confusion over a relative simple game is slightly baffling to me. I guess I can update this page with more detailed rules\instructions, but it seems pretty clear that the game needs some serious reworking in order to be playable.

davidllanos22 says ...
Apr 26, 2012 @ 3:01am

wow, I find this very interesting! With a little more of development this could go far! Well done!

mattchu says ...
Apr 26, 2012 @ 3:33am

This is definitely an interesting idea. I didn't think it was too confusing.

Here are my criticisms:

1. You upgrade way too early. Especially the final upgrade. That's a HUGE leap in tech and you only need 3 (4?) cities even though there's the potential for warfare to get there at a much higher number, making it really feel like an achievement to have it.

2. If you stand on cities the right way and both players have the soldier, you could fire back and forth endlessly and get nowhere.

3. The players seemed to be on the opposite sides that their bars at the top were.

4. I didn't understand exactly what the bar was telling me.

5. Knockbacks seemed too underwhelming to really make it dramatic. It seemed like someone could easily recover and recover and recover without any effort.

6. Because of #1, having the other stages felt a little bit useless.

mattchu says ...
Apr 26, 2012 @ 3:33am

Oh and I responded in length to your critique of my game, mostly agreeing. :)

Impossible says ...
Apr 26, 2012 @ 3:43am

Thanks for the feedback. Agree strongly with all of it (especially the knockbacks).

Zillix says ...
Apr 26, 2012 @ 4:30am

Cute art, and a really neat idea!

Kassoon says ...
Apr 26, 2012 @ 4:33am

Cool idea! I think it would be less confusing if you emphasised the civ part of it. Make it so players can't reach each other right away and need to tech up, otherwise you tend to just gun for each other. I like it though, more games need to combo genres.

Shigor says ...
Apr 26, 2012 @ 11:55am

Bit too hard to judge when playing my left hand against my hard hand, but this really seems like a great idea :)
I could go on, but Mattchu said all of I would :)

Rex Peppers says ...
Apr 27, 2012 @ 8:39pm

Nice job! Was fun...

Apr 29, 2012 @ 12:21am

Very fun and a really good idea. Played it some times with some friends. Simple yet fun and a bit addictive.

DDRKirby(ISQ) says ...
Apr 29, 2012 @ 8:31am

Neat how you represented a 4X game as a platformer! Extra points for 2player!

tfendall says ...
May 2, 2012 @ 1:04am

Awesome concept. It's pretty easy to fall off, so I found that I died more from that than the other player, but I liked the leveling up aspect. It's like an evolved version of that versus mode in the original mario.

zazery says ...
May 9, 2012 @ 9:26pm

Played it by myself. I really like the building mechanic. I think the end condition should be tied to building things. Like once a player builds somewhere, there's a period where another player can destroy it until it becomes permanent. Whoever has the most buildings win. Buildings could have upgrades too. So much potential!

uberneen says ...
May 12, 2012 @ 8:04pm

Really good work. It could probably use greater depth, maybe with the buildings being more relevant as previously suggested. Some AI would be nice too.

ilo says ...
May 13, 2012 @ 9:26pm

I really like the melding of different styles here, and the possibility of evolving gameplay.

Perhaps it would work better with more varied level design (larger platforms, ramps, etc.), rather than tiny floating islands? Then players could run and jump around, attack and defend each other's towns, while maybe fighting for resources and with neutral enemies on the map? It might add more flow to the gameplay. Admittedly, the Joust element might be diminished with less places to fall off the map, but you could always make up for that with JETPACKS.

You must sign in to comment.

[cache: storing page]