Well, there’s a lot of variants of RTS game styles you can go with.
- Mechanics - Is it tile based, or open world with freely navigable units and structures?
These are just two examples, but I figure it might give some ideas;
Tile based (similar to Hearts of Iron 4) has the benefits of having clearer objectives, a more structured, organized (and some cases balanced) gameplay experience, and can be less script-intensive both in writing and performance. This comes at the cost of immersion, freedom of unit movements and being able to accurately use a terrain’s unique environment (forests, mountains, etc.).
This might be obvious, but gameplay objectives and other unique features could also make it stand out (more in final thoughts).
An open-world style (Similar to Ubisoft’s R.U.S.E) would allow you to simulate terrain and environments to a player’s benefit or detriment, a more dynamic (or even immersive) gameplay from a lack of predictability (getting ambushed in a city, for example). This of course would be a LOT more complex+demanding performance and gameplay wise.
Is the game based on a continental scale (like mainland Europe or Asia), or smaller regions that have seen combat (the Ardennes forest, Great Wall of China, Philippine islands, etc.). Something that people can easily recognize, and understand what battlefield they are playing in.
If islands are included, do they travel freely via naval units that need to be built, or by a fixed sea lane passage? Does pre-existing infrastructure affect how your units can move, or can you develop/scorch infrastructure yourself? (A bit amphibious, but it’s a common trend not just in games, but real-life history too)
Is the game based on simple numbers (populations of occupied territories), or in-depth resource and economic management (resources from natural deposits/sources such as food, metals, armaments, manpower, fuel, etc.)
Do the units remain fully stocked at all times, or must they deal with the insufferable reality of dealing with rearmaments from a complex system of logistics that depending on how thoroughly developed can mean the difference between victory or defeat? >insert “soldiers win battles, logisticians win wars” phrase here
There are lots of resources you can use to help your development. Scour the web, watch medias of relevant subjects that is targeted to your aimed audience, stay organized with apps (write down notes) and other tools (such as AI, the impact on creativity and brainstorming can be immeasurable).
All and all, pre-game development isn’t something to look over when making a complex project. Try to look what RTS games already exists on Roblox, and how they are popular with their current userbase. Try to identify a gap within the litany of those games that a large demographic of players (and NOT just you, I cannot stress this enough) would find appealing not just to try, but to keep playing your game.
Then, you plan and define how you will develop your game, separate your tasks from easiest to most complex, and avoid trapping yourself in a development bottleneck. If something is too difficult, taking too long, or way outside your comfort/skill zone, put it aside and do something else you can do in a realistic timeframe instead. Motivation death spirals is a real thing, you end up focusing on smaller aspects and away from the whole scope of the project, in turn making it more of a chore than a hobby.
Remember, the goal shouldn’t just be a finished or profitable product, but learning to become a better developer (organizational skills, computer+app proficiency, resourcefulness, prioritizing, learning, etc.) and most importantly, having fun.
I hope this is (somewhat) helpful, and I’m open to scrutiny. (I have been away from Roblox for years after all).
If you have more questions, I’d be happy to answer!