Page 791 of 796 FirstFirst ... 291691741781787788789790791792793794795 ... LastLast
Results 19,751 to 19,775 of 19886

Thread: ~OTCD vFinal - Postgame Edition~

  1. #19751
    We're all lurkers here SSBBrawler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Thursday, Mar 4 2010
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    0

    Re: ~OTCD vFinal - Postgame Edition~

    Quote Originally Posted by Eltrotraw View Post
    All you did was post a link to a Git repository. That's not exactly gaming, but it's critical for quite a lot of gaming environments (if you're not working off of shared server files). I sure hope you've been doing more than just figuring out how a repository works.
    I had meant to say game development and software development as well. My apologies. Both are enjoyable for me. The project I linked to is being used by the company we worked with, and it was fun to work to with, since it was my experience with making an application that served a real-life purpose, rather than teaching course material through an assignment.

    Quote Originally Posted by Eltrotraw View Post
    Depends on how you view it.

    For instance, I'm spending around half my earnings on rent right now but I like where I live. I have the other half leftover to spend on whatever I'd like.

    You have to take care of other things like bills(water, utilities, rent, debt, car, insurance), food, among other things.
    Honestly, the part that makes me the most nervous is getting into it. The initial finding of a job, as well a place to live. I have options that I can explore to negotiate for a job and, while I'm relatively confident in my ability to develop games/software, it's quite possible that more experienced workers will get the job over me. I feel that, once I get into the workplace, it won't be as bad as I imagine it being, but first I have to get there.

  2. #19752
    We're all lurkers here SSBBrawler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Thursday, Mar 4 2010
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    0

    Re: ~OTCD vFinal - Postgame Edition~

    Woops, double post. Forgive my transgressions.

    That aside, Iwata's passing has made me feel particularly motivated to make a game that is both fun and unique, as Nintendo has always been known for their uniqueness. Here is my current idea:

    A turn-based strategy game similar to the Advance Wars and Fire Emblem series. The catch is that it takes place on the interior of a polygon (for this post, we're going to say it's a cube). The surfaces of the cube will have obstacles spanning their way around the interior of the cube, providing cover for the players' units. In order to navigate around the obstacles and find a line of fire, the units are able to walk up the walls of the cube, and onto the obstacles themselves.

    Different types of units will have different types of mobility, as well as different types of lines of sight. For example, a tank would have an arcing shot, and a sniper would have a straight line. The strategy comes from deciding where to place what types of units in order to defend yourself and attack the opponent's units.

    Any constructive thoughts are appreciated.

  3. #19753
    Tornado Remix Lightningdork
    Forum Moderator
    Lightningboalt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Monday, Mar 1 2010
    Location
    The Restaurant at the End of the Universe
    Posts
    0

    Re: ~OTCD vFinal - Postgame Edition~

    Quote Originally Posted by SSBBrawler View Post
    I'm still a bit nervous about graduating. Is real life scary?
    Well, I graduated almost two months ago... real life is more depressing than scary. Except for loan debt, that's the worst. Finding jobs is horrible, I've been waiting to just hear back from places, even just being told that I'm rejected would be great. It's really just finding a job that's scary, other things can be a struggle but so long as you have some work you can scrape things together.

    I mean, fortunately I live at home right now, but I want to move out and be independent. It sucks not being able to do that.
    Official BitForums Patron Deity
    Skiploom Adventures is still a thing! Click here to read it!

    If there's anything more important than my ego around, I want it caught and shot now
    Playstation 4: Making you feel emotions that you have never felt in real life.

  4. #19754
    Phonetics do wonders. Forum Moderator Eltrotraw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Monday, Mar 1 2010
    Location
    Long Beach, California
    Posts
    0

    Re: ~OTCD vFinal - Postgame Edition~

    Quote Originally Posted by SSBBrawler View Post
    I had meant to say game development and software development as well. My apologies. Both are enjoyable for me. The project I linked to is being used by the company we worked with, and it was fun to work to with, since it was my experience with making an application that served a real-life purpose, rather than teaching course material through an assignment.
    Hands on work is often better in my experience.

    Now you probably understand why I've been so hard on people before for "i wanna maek a game" so often.

    Quote Originally Posted by SSBBrawler View Post
    Honestly, the part that makes me the most nervous is getting into it. The initial finding of a job, as well a place to live. I have options that I can explore to negotiate for a job and, while I'm relatively confident in my ability to develop games/software, it's quite possible that more experienced workers will get the job over me. I feel that, once I get into the workplace, it won't be as bad as I imagine it being, but first I have to get there.
    Getting known is the hardest part. Networking is easily the biggest thing you must take away from college or you'll have a hard time in the job market.

    Quote Originally Posted by SSBBrawler View Post
    A turn-based strategy game similar to the Advance Wars and Fire Emblem series. The catch is that it takes place on the interior of a polygon (for this post, we're going to say it's a cube). The surfaces of the cube will have obstacles spanning their way around the interior of the cube, providing cover for the players' units. In order to navigate around the obstacles and find a line of fire, the units are able to walk up the walls of the cube, and onto the obstacles themselves.
    You're already treading dangerous ground as is. Including a third dimension makes the "strategy" part of a strategy game a lot more difficult (even something like Homeworld is a lot more complex when you consider you're not confined to a 2d plane).

    The claim to fame with Fire Emblem and Advance Wars is how easy it is to read all the information. There's no blatant RNG nonsense like there is in, say, OgreBattle or Final Fantasy Tactics, and the numbers are accurate for the most part, so you don't often have to account for stupid randomness. An easy example would be to see how Florina can hit the Mercenary twice for 7 damage with a 93% hit chance. That's cool. That's easy to read.
    (crit chances, growth rates, and such don't count. Aside from growths, you can see everything before you make the decision)

    So, how would you design the UI? This is already a design nightmare because you don't want to overload your UI with a bunch of crap to scare away users, but you also want to input enough information to make them able to process and apply the correct decision to progress. The fact that...

    Quote Originally Posted by SSBBrawler View Post
    Different types of units will have different types of mobility, as well as different types of lines of sight. For example, a tank would have an arcing shot, and a sniper would have a straight line. The strategy comes from deciding where to place what types of units in order to defend yourself and attack the opponent's units.
    ...you include this also becomes more of a nightmare. Would we be dealing with a grid? A grid with arcing shots seems like a bit of a stretch especially when gravity is forced on the surface normal you're on. How would that work if you're firing to a perpendicular plane? How would the players be able to plan defenses against enemies? How would players be able to see their current firing range(s) or better yet, their enemy's?

    Let's up the ante.

    What makes me want to play a strategy game taking place inside a polygon? How large would these polygon battlefields be? How long would a simple map take to complete? How far would these units move to compensate for map size? Why are we limiting ourselves to simple polygons? What if I want to hop from one normal to the next via reversed gravity? What if there are other shapes inside the polygon to travel to?

    You are presenting too little information for this to not be a designer's nightmare.

    ALL SIGS MUST CONTAIN RAINBOW PUKE
    "Works" Thread || Youtube
    Check out FIREWORKS!, SKIPLOOM ADVENTURES, and CARTER'S MISADVENTURES, three webgames I've made through the Unity Game Engine.

  5. #19755
    We're all lurkers here SSBBrawler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Thursday, Mar 4 2010
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    0

    Re: ~OTCD vFinal - Postgame Edition~

    Quote Originally Posted by Eltrotraw View Post
    Hands on work is often better in my experience.

    Now you probably understand why I've been so hard on people before for "i wanna maek a game" so often.
    I don't blame you. Making games takes a lot of work, especially if you're by yourself and you're not good at a particular aspect of it (in my case, making game models).

    Quote Originally Posted by Eltrotraw View Post
    Getting known is the hardest part. Networking is easily the biggest thing you must take away from college or you'll have a hard time in the job market.
    I have some connections built with some employees in local businesses, both for game development and software development. I'm still sending a lot of job applications out to different companies, so that I can have a safety net of options when I graduate.

    Quote Originally Posted by Eltrotraw View Post
    The claim to fame with Fire Emblem and Advance Wars is how easy it is to read all the information. There's no blatant RNG nonsense like there is in, say, OgreBattle or Final Fantasy Tactics, and the numbers are accurate for the most part, so you don't often have to account for stupid randomness. An easy example would be to see how Florina can hit the Mercenary twice for 7 damage with a 93% hit chance. That's cool. That's easy to read.
    (crit chances, growth rates, and such don't count. Aside from growths, you can see everything before you make the decision)

    So, how would you design the UI? This is already a design nightmare because you don't want to overload your UI with a bunch of crap to scare away users, but you also want to input enough information to make them able to process and apply the correct decision to progress. The fact that...
    The UI and battle mechanics are going to be based on Fire Emblem's and Advanced Wars, with a clear display of damage that will be dealt. Because there is already strong elements of defense in the 3D world (i.e. hiding behind obstacles), I'm not going to be including miss chances, making a reliance on the structure of the map more important.

    The one UI element that I'm adding that is not in FE or AW is a trajectory line. That way, the player will clearly see the path the shot will take to the location they currently have designated. The trajectory will gray out if the particular location is not possible to hit.

    Quote Originally Posted by Eltrotraw View Post
    ...you include this also becomes more of a nightmare. Would we be dealing with a grid? A grid with arcing shots seems like a bit of a stretch especially when gravity is forced on the surface normal you're on. How would that work if you're firing to a perpendicular plane? How would the players be able to plan defenses against enemies? How would players be able to see their current firing range(s) or better yet, their enemy's?
    The units will be moving on a grid, yes. The shots can only travel through a certain amount of spaces (including air spaces) before exploding. This way, aiming higher reduces the number of horizontal spaces, and aiming further reduces vertical distance. Bringing up the trajectory UI element again, it will create a path from the unit location to the desired target location, so the exact trajectory of the shot won't need to be chosen by the player.

    Quote Originally Posted by Eltrotraw View Post
    What makes me want to play a strategy game taking place inside a polygon?
    The draw of the game comes from a higher level of strategy coming from the placement of your units than in FE or AW. Placement of units is important in those games, where you have to avoid letting your enemies attack you from fortresses/forests/houses/etc., but this game has a clear requirement to be able to use the map to your advantage.

    Quote Originally Posted by Eltrotraw View Post
    How large would these polygon battlefields be? How long would a simple map take to complete? How far would these units move to compensate for map size?
    Currently, the maps are going to be relatively small, with the units having less movement. This requires more strategic thinking of where you should move to get a good defensive position, while also moving to a position that is offensive as well.

    Quote Originally Posted by Eltrotraw View Post
    Why are we limiting ourselves to simple polygons? What if I want to hop from one normal to the next via reversed gravity? What if there are other shapes inside the polygon to travel to?
    Units will be able to move around on the obstacles that are spread on the inside of the polygon.

    I have been bouncing back and forth on the idea of adding flying units. However, my issue with the flying units is that the UI to have the flying units move around would be awkward when trying to select spaces that aren't the maximum move distance (e.g., if I tried to move one space in one direction, it would be hard to select under the layers of larger ranges of movement).

    Quote Originally Posted by Eltrotraw View Post
    You are presenting too little information for this to not be a designer's nightmare.
    I apologize that the initial post didn't have much information along the lines of exact gameplay and mechanics. I was trying to keep it brief, along the lines of an elevator pitch, and, if it caught anyone's interest, they could ask further questions.

  6. #19756
    Phonetics do wonders. Forum Moderator Eltrotraw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Monday, Mar 1 2010
    Location
    Long Beach, California
    Posts
    0

    Re: ~OTCD vFinal - Postgame Edition~

    Quote Originally Posted by SSBBrawler View Post
    The UI and battle mechanics are going to be based on Fire Emblem's and Advanced Wars, with a clear display of damage that will be dealt. Because there is already strong elements of defense in the 3D world (i.e. hiding behind obstacles), I'm not going to be including miss chances, making a reliance on the structure of the map more important.

    The one UI element that I'm adding that is not in FE or AW is a trajectory line. That way, the player will clearly see the path the shot will take to the location they currently have designated. The trajectory will gray out if the particular location is not possible to hit.
    I don't think you understand.

    I don't care about the battle mechanics. I care about the UI.

    There is a very specific reason I bolded the term, "easy". This isn't easy. You're adding complicated mechanics that makes having to calculate these things much more difficult. Again, adding a third dimension adds more complication, thus making it less easy to figure out what you're able to do from a glance.

    That's not even getting into the fact that navigating a 3d grid will be a nightmare in itself. You need to have a separate control to check the Y or Z axis, depending on how you feel about it, since most sticks only operate off of two axis, rather than three. You want an intuitive and easy to grasp control scheme for your game or it will chase off your players, and the fact of the matter is that this concept is trying to introduce complication for... some reason, which is also another factor that can chase away potential players.

    Quote Originally Posted by SSBBrawler View Post
    The units will be moving on a grid, yes. The shots can only travel through a certain amount of spaces (including air spaces) before exploding. This way, aiming higher reduces the number of horizontal spaces, and aiming further reduces vertical distance. Bringing up the trajectory UI element again, it will create a path from the unit location to the desired target location, so the exact trajectory of the shot won't need to be chosen by the player.
    Let's bring up the "ease of use" thing even more since you're insistent on wanting to overcomplicate a simple system.

    So you have a 3d grid. How is this going to be displayed for shot range?

    This is already an extra barrier to entry for many, you realize, correct?

    I don't care if the shot's going to be "automatically calculated". I, however, care if I can't see the potential fire range of how far units can reach.

    You want examples of what I mean? Okay, sure, let's go:

    Fire Emblem, Bolting Tome.

    The tome has 3-10 range, and is placed on a unit with a move range. The orange squares equate to damage areas, so how would you plan on acquainting the player with all potential angles of attack or danger here from the enemy? How would you plan on showing how far the player themselves can move before attacking? I highly doubt you're going to plan on doing an arrow indicating all potential avenues of attack - this is not only stupid, it clutters up the screen and eats up a godforsaken amount of resources (plus you should have already learned by now that putting in a bunch of objects in a game is a bad bad bad bad bad idea unless there's good reason to).

    Okay, but let's be a little more fair. The sage can still move and attack, so let's bring up Advance Wars.


    Attack range of a Battleship (Max's Battleship, so range -1).

    Notice all the red squares. This is easy to read, because this just shows "red square" = "bad". What you're suggesting is potential to not only clutter up the game field, but also make it much more unreadable at a glance, which fights against the notion that the game is meant to be easy to read.

    Don't want to deal with indirect combat right now? How about direct combat?


    Let's check out the move range of an Anti-Air.

    Because it's a direct attacker, any space it can land on threatens any adjacent space - notice that the water space below the artillery is not threatened, because it can't intersect the artillery. How are you planning to show something like this with your game efficiently?

    Cluttering your UI with this concept is inevitable unless you have a cleaner way to show this. I highly doubt you do if you're going on with these explanations that essentially have a lot of fluff but avoid the actual base of the question I'm presenting here.

    The only way I can see this is to be possible is to recreate the Advance Wars system, but again we're introduced with the problem of the third dimension - how can you see through the 3d grid effectively if there's a ton of red to sift through to check your ranges?

    Tons of transparent objects stacked on top of each other is not exactly the cleanest-looking thing out there. I'll show you an example in Unity to show you how cluttered this nonsense can look.


    (if you can construct a dynamic object to mold perfectly based on threat range rather than using several, then you are wiser than I, but unless you can demonstrate this I remain adamantly against this idea)

    Based entirely off of what I just covered above, how much range does this dummy unit have? How long does it take for you to figure that out? These are using cubes with 0.5 transparency (assuming 1.0 is completely opaque). Any less and you risk having the threat range be hard to see, but any more and you have even more issues with visibility here.

    How much more confusing will it be if I, say, add terrain? Add more obstacles to hinder the shots?

    Quote Originally Posted by SSBBrawler View Post
    The draw of the game comes from a higher level of strategy coming from the placement of your units than in FE or AW. Placement of units is important in those games, where you have to avoid letting your enemies attack you from fortresses/forests/houses/etc., but this game has a clear requirement to be able to use the map to your advantage.
    Why does this need the third dimension to accomplish this?

    Think about this carefully.

    Quote Originally Posted by SSBBrawler View Post
    Currently, the maps are going to be relatively small, with the units having less movement. This requires more strategic thinking of where you should move to get a good defensive position, while also moving to a position that is offensive as well.
    Which makes my above example all the more relevant, because each space becomes that much more valuable.

    Quote Originally Posted by SSBBrawler View Post
    Units will be able to move around on the obstacles that are spread on the inside of the polygon.
    That doesn't answer my question. You're confining yourself to moving around inside the polygon, but there's a bunch of dead space inbetween as a result of that. This can easily be bad.

    Quote Originally Posted by SSBBrawler View Post
    I have been bouncing back and forth on the idea of adding flying units. However, my issue with the flying units is that the UI to have the flying units move around would be awkward when trying to select spaces that aren't the maximum move distance (e.g., if I tried to move one space in one direction, it would be hard to select under the layers of larger ranges of movement).
    This brings up the question of how to navigate the 3d grid to begin with once more. If you're having issues with this, I highly recommend you rethink this idea. Carefully.



    Quote Originally Posted by SSBBrawler View Post
    I apologize that the initial post didn't have much information along the lines of exact gameplay and mechanics. I was trying to keep it brief, along the lines of an elevator pitch, and, if it caught anyone's interest, they could ask further questions.
    Unfortunately, if your elevator pitch introduces more suspicion or hesitation than interest, you've already failed.

    Do not confuse "adding depth" with "overcomplicating simplicity" because that's what it sounds like you're doing here. You've failed to present a plausible reason why the jump to 3d is necessary, and what it accomplishes - your explanation can easily be applied to any of the 2d strategy games (and even then things like FFT and XCOM are still restricted to 2d without having to rely on some sort of wallhugging mechanic).
    Last edited by Eltrotraw; July 30th, 2015 at 07:27 AM.

    ALL SIGS MUST CONTAIN RAINBOW PUKE
    "Works" Thread || Youtube
    Check out FIREWORKS!, SKIPLOOM ADVENTURES, and CARTER'S MISADVENTURES, three webgames I've made through the Unity Game Engine.

  7. #19757
    To vex the world rather than divert it. Villerar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Thursday, Mar 4 2010
    Location
    To your left
    Posts
    0

    Re: ~OTCD vFinal - Postgame Edition~

    Eltro, if he doesn't add (high-reaching) flying units and if I get his intentions right on other aspects, he doesn't need any 3-dimensional objects to indicate trajectories. If all units are confined to planes, only the range enemies have on the planar surfaces matters (that is: only the intersections of the planes and the 3-dimensional objects are relevant, which are by necessity all part of the planar surface - through implementing it in that complicated way, as an actual calculated intersection, would of course be silly). He could then just stick to planar hit ranges.

    I get the idea that you think he wants the UI to show all the exact trajectories an enemy unit can use, but simple impact zones as in Advance Wars could already suffice. (Forsooth, if he wants to discriminate some more he could use a few set colours from bright red to f.i. purple to indicate some useful probability ranges for the most probable hits - that's complicating matters but his shot.) I think he only wants to show trajectories for a player's own forces.

    So he could just sidestep the transparent 3d mountains in the UI entirely.

  8. #19758
    We're all lurkers here SSBBrawler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Thursday, Mar 4 2010
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    0

    Re: ~OTCD vFinal - Postgame Edition~

    Quote Originally Posted by Eltrotraw View Post
    There is a very specific reason I bolded the term, "easy". This isn't easy. You're adding complicated mechanics that makes having to calculate these things much more difficult. Again, adding a third dimension adds more complication, thus making it less easy to figure out what you're able to do from a glance.

    So you have a 3d grid. How is this going to be displayed for shot range?

    I don't care if the shot's going to be "automatically calculated". I, however, care if I can't see the potential fire range of how far units can reach.
    Ok, I see what you're saying. My initial thought was that players would be able to figure out the range of fire for each unit based off of where they can and cannot fire, but you are correct in that it is a pretty hard thing to approach. With that in mind, since I know the maximum number of spaces that a shot will be able to fire, we know the radius of the sphere of fire. The range of fire can be represented by a single, transparent sphere. The larger the sphere means the more range of fire. The amount a unit can move can also be accounted for when determining the size of the sphere.

    Quote Originally Posted by Eltrotraw View Post
    That's not even getting into the fact that navigating a 3d grid will be a nightmare in itself. You need to have a separate control to check the Y or Z axis, depending on how you feel about it, since most sticks only operate off of two axis, rather than three. You want an intuitive and easy to grasp control scheme for your game or it will chase off your players, and the fact of the matter is that this concept is trying to introduce complication for... some reason, which is also another factor that can chase away potential players.
    This is why I'm hesitant on adding flying units, especially when taking into account the UI issues you have already addressed. The land units will be moving along the insides of the polygon's walls, without vertical movement. Because of this, we know the units are only capable of moving on the grid, and only need to highlight the grid spaces on the faces of the plane. This simplifies the system, especially when choosing which side of the polygon you are on. If you had a single cube to select, there wouldn't be a real way to say which normal you want the unit to be on. With the 2D representation of where the units can move, you know exactly which normal the player chose.



    The first one is the 2D method, where you can clearly select which space you would be moving to on which surface. The second one uses cubes to highlight the possible moving squares, which creates the issues of selecting the cube you want, as well as the face of the polygon you want to be on.

    Quote Originally Posted by Eltrotraw View Post
    Based entirely off of what I just covered above, how much range does this dummy unit have? How long does it take for you to figure that out?
    The general range of the units will be fairly long, compared to the map I have for debugging, which is an 8x8x8. This is to make up for their low mobility and still provide firing options.

    Quote Originally Posted by Eltrotraw View Post
    How much more confusing will it be if I, say, add terrain? Add more obstacles to hinder the shots?
    I think terrain wouldn't be too confusing, but I'm still averse to adding terrain, to keep the strategic focus on navigating around the obstacles of the map.
    Adding more obstacles could be problematic, as a level that is completely filled with obstacles would result in trouble hitting the opponent's units.

    Quote Originally Posted by Eltrotraw View Post
    Why does this need the third dimension to accomplish this?
    What gave me the idea to make the game on the interior of the 3D polygon was Final Fantasy Tactics (in particular, Advance). Projectiles in FFTA respond to obstacles on the map as they fly up and down. Even though the player might have the tile range to take a shot, it's possible the arrow hits part of the map before reaching the intended destination. This was an interesting mechanic to me, and I thought, "What would it be like if that was the core strategy, with a higher focus on how the map affects your offensive and defensive abilities." Yes, unit positioning and tile height are important to keep track of in FFT, but I want to take it further than that.

    Quote Originally Posted by Eltrotraw View Post
    Which makes my above example all the more relevant, because each space becomes that much more valuable.
    That is what I'm going for. The positioning of your units is the strategic element of the game that I want to be the most important. I believe that there is a lot of cool game mechanics that can be done based around the idea of positioning units, which is why the 3D aspect, with the obstacles on the map and moving around the different sides of the polygon.

    Quote Originally Posted by Eltrotraw View Post
    That doesn't answer my question. You're confining yourself to moving around inside the polygon, but there's a bunch of dead space inbetween as a result of that. This can easily be bad.
    Yes, it can be bad if there's too much empty space or not enough empty space. There's a balance that needs to be struck. I cannot guarantee that the first iteration of the game will have that balance, but I'm not just going to release the first version and go "I'm done with the game." I plan to work on this game in my free time, which includes getting player feedback.

    With all that said, I really do appreciate this feedback. You bring up a lot of fair points, including ones that I honestly didn't given enough thought.

  9. #19759
    Phonetics do wonders. Forum Moderator Eltrotraw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Monday, Mar 1 2010
    Location
    Long Beach, California
    Posts
    0

    Re: ~OTCD vFinal - Postgame Edition~

    Quote Originally Posted by Villerar View Post
    Eltro, if he doesn't add (high-reaching) flying units and if I get his intentions right on other aspects, he doesn't need any 3-dimensional objects to indicate trajectories. If all units are confined to planes, only the range enemies have on the planar surfaces matters (that is: only the intersections of the planes and the 3-dimensional objects are relevant, which are by necessity all part of the planar surface - through implementing it in that complicated way, as an actual calculated intersection, would of course be silly). He could then just stick to planar hit ranges.

    I get the idea that you think he wants the UI to show all the exact trajectories an enemy unit can use, but simple impact zones as in Advance Wars could already suffice. (Forsooth, if he wants to discriminate some more he could use a few set colours from bright red to f.i. purple to indicate some useful probability ranges for the most probable hits - that's complicating matters but his shot.) I think he only wants to show trajectories for a player's own forces.

    So he could just sidestep the transparent 3d mountains in the UI entirely.
    So you're suggesting that if we're limiting ourselves to ground units (on purely flat planes nonetheless), then there's no point to suggest the higher firing ranges despite every unit following some sort of differing firing trajectory?

    Then why is the jump to 3d necessary? This again doesn't account for terrain, and if you're not going to include any sort of terrain, I struggle to think of any plausible reason why this jump to 3d is even needed since you're not even adding much that's interesting.

    I am accounting for gravity and hitting units hanging out on a wall as well with the increased firing range.

    Quote Originally Posted by SSBBrawler View Post
    Ok, I see what you're saying. My initial thought was that players would be able to figure out the range of fire for each unit based off of where they can and cannot fire, but you are correct in that it is a pretty hard thing to approach. With that in mind, since I know the maximum number of spaces that a shot will be able to fire, we know the radius of the sphere of fire. The range of fire can be represented by a single, transparent sphere. The larger the sphere means the more range of fire. The amount a unit can move can also be accounted for when determining the size of the sphere.
    What you originally thought is exactly what the original Famicom/Fire Emblem games did. This was extremely user hostile.

    If you're confining units to a grid then using a sphere risks unreadability (mainly regarding the diagonals) but you are severely underestimating the potential problems here if you think you can account for movement with this sphere as well. I point to you the Anti-Air screenshot for an easy case of how this becomes more complicated right away.

    Quote Originally Posted by SSBBrawler View Post
    This is why I'm hesitant on adding flying units, especially when taking into account the UI issues you have already addressed. The land units will be moving along the insides of the polygon's walls, without vertical movement. Because of this, we know the units are only capable of moving on the grid, and only need to highlight the grid spaces on the faces of the plane. This simplifies the system, especially when choosing which side of the polygon you are on. If you had a single cube to select, there wouldn't be a real way to say which normal you want the unit to be on. With the 2D representation of where the units can move, you know exactly which normal the player chose.
    Except you haven't answered how the UI and controls will adjust regarding:
    • How am I going to rotate the camera?
    • How do the controls change when I highlight a space on the wall?
    • Will the camera shift automatically if my cursor moves onto a wall?
    • How about the ceiling?


    You're not exactly simplifying it if these questions are remaining unanswered.

    Quote Originally Posted by SSBBrawler View Post


    The first one is the 2D method, where you can clearly select which space you would be moving to on which surface. The second one uses cubes to highlight the possible moving squares, which creates the issues of selecting the cube you want, as well as the face of the polygon you want to be on.
    Ignoring the fact that this isn't a sphere (and just highlights the potential problem I mentioned earlier anyway), there's one more problem that gets introduced with this screenshot.

    Let's say there are units on the opposite surface normal that we're looking into. In other words, there are units hanging out in the "invisible walls" that make up this cube. How will I know they're there?

    There's ONE MORE problem that gets introduced - what if my unit's hugging a wall at the corner you highlighted here, but I just want to bring him down to the floor?

    Quote Originally Posted by SSBBrawler View Post
    The general range of the units will be fairly long, compared to the map I have for debugging, which is an 8x8x8. This is to make up for their low mobility and still provide firing options.
    That doesn't exactly help the issue here. With the lack of terrain and low mobility of these units, how are you expected to have a high life expectancy for your units?

    This draws back into the question about why this jump to 3d is even necessary because you're not adding anything revolutionary here. You're just adding more complication for the sake of having complication and I haven't seen anything from you that refutes this thought.

    Quote Originally Posted by SSBBrawler View Post
    I think terrain wouldn't be too confusing, but I'm still averse to adding terrain, to keep the strategic focus on navigating around the obstacles of the map.
    Adding more obstacles could be problematic, as a level that is completely filled with obstacles would result in trouble hitting the opponent's units.
    So let me get this right.

    You expect the player to implement strategy to keep their units alive.

    However, you've also mentioned:
    • Maps are small (8x8x8 is less surface area than quite a few advance wars maps)
    • Units are not very mobile (I assume we're capping ourselves to 3 move for most units)
    • Units have long firing ranges (I assume 5+ range on average)


    So the obvious answer is to use terrain to help your units live longer, but you're against that? Exactly why would you want to use obstacles (whatever they may be) but not terrain?

    Quote Originally Posted by SSBBrawler View Post
    What gave me the idea to make the game on the interior of the 3D polygon was Final Fantasy Tactics (in particular, Advance). Projectiles in FFTA respond to obstacles on the map as they fly up and down. Even though the player might have the tile range to take a shot, it's possible the arrow hits part of the map before reaching the intended destination. This was an interesting mechanic to me, and I thought, "What would it be like if that was the core strategy, with a higher focus on how the map affects your offensive and defensive abilities." Yes, unit positioning and tile height are important to keep track of in FFT, but I want to take it further than that.
    Yet you're adverse to using terrain?

    I would think that you'd be into the idea of using it if this was inspired by FFT's archers.

    Your idea isn't exactly taking it further than that, by the way, hence my question once again: Why is this jump to 3D necessary? You aren't adding anything new or interesting regarding it aside from hugging walls, and even then that comes with more complications than benefits if you're already neutering the potential of this (like no flying units).

    You continue to argue that this adds "a new layer of depth" and "requires the player to think" but have you really thought about this? These two aspects are already overly present in these games you're trying to "enhance" from(i.e. FFT, Advance Wars), so why would I care about this new layer of depth if the core gameplay is overtly similar (yet neutered, considering terrain) to begin with?

    Quote Originally Posted by SSBBrawler View Post
    That is what I'm going for. The positioning of your units is the strategic element of the game that I want to be the most important. I believe that there is a lot of cool game mechanics that can be done based around the idea of positioning units, which is why the 3D aspect, with the obstacles on the map and moving around the different sides of the polygon.
    So tell me more about these obstacles if you're adverse to terrain. You're giving me fluff again, which tells me absolutely nothing.

    Quote Originally Posted by SSBBrawler View Post
    Yes, it can be bad if there's too much empty space or not enough empty space. There's a balance that needs to be struck. I cannot guarantee that the first iteration of the game will have that balance, but I'm not just going to release the first version and go "I'm done with the game." I plan to work on this game in my free time, which includes getting player feedback.
    Obviously there has to be a balance, but if the core gameplay suffers or feels dead even in the first iteration, then there's a serious problem.

    I highly recommend you look at XCOM and play that through to get a better idea of what you want out of this game. It's easily the most comparable game out there to what you want.
    Last edited by Eltrotraw; July 30th, 2015 at 05:49 PM.

    ALL SIGS MUST CONTAIN RAINBOW PUKE
    "Works" Thread || Youtube
    Check out FIREWORKS!, SKIPLOOM ADVENTURES, and CARTER'S MISADVENTURES, three webgames I've made through the Unity Game Engine.

  10. #19760
    PK FIRE PK FIRE PK FIRE PowerMiner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Thursday, Dec 6 2012
    Posts
    0

    Re: ~OTCD vFinal - Postgame Edition~

    it's all so... quiet around here
    Smash WiiU Challenges: 139/140 JUST 40 SOMETHING CUSTOM MOVES LEFT
    Smash 3DS Challenges: 133/135

  11. #19761
    I want that forum to DIE. Just make that happen. Keeby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Monday, Nov 5 2012
    Location
    Over the garden wall
    Posts
    0

    Re: ~OTCD vFinal - Postgame Edition~


  12. #19762
    Wakka-wakka-wakka YamiGekusu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Thursday, Mar 4 2010
    Location
    The Mitten
    Posts
    471

    Re: ~OTCD vFinal - Postgame Edition~

    My birthday was on Wednesday and things have been...interesting since then...

    On Wednesday,I got to hang out with my boyfriend and watched Big Hero 6. We had Iron Man feels. The movie was awesome.

    On Thursday,I got to eat at Big Boy for lunch, and boy was it delicious.

    On Friday, I was dragged to a trip to the casino outside my town by my mom, and I hated it. I hate casinos, and I wish I had a choice in where to go (add this was supposed to be a late birthday thing for me)...

    And today, I had a good game haul (Lego Batman 3 and The Lego Movie videogame!!), and now I'm sitting here watching my Busou Renkin DVDs... relax time
    Monster Hunter Generations | Name: Yami G | HR: ???

    "Welcome to the only thing scarier than IRS headquarters" ~Gex
    Xbox: YamiGekusu | PSN: YamiGekusu | Nintendo Network: YamiGekusu

  13. #19763
    yeh Coffee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Thursday, Mar 4 2010
    Posts
    0

    Re: ~OTCD vFinal - Postgame Edition~

    Hello everyone. Just popping in for nostalgia's sake. Man does this place take me back...

    I'm... rather ashamed of how I acted waaay back when on this forum... But that was... quite a long time ago. I was new to the internet and Basic Human Interactions. But this forum was my first forum experience and it taught me some general manners, so I'm grateful for that.

    You're all spectacular people and I Kinda wish I wasn't such a little buttcheek back during the forum's heyday...

    I wish you all luck and good times.

    Quote Originally Posted by YamiGekusu View Post
    My birthday was on Wednesday and things have been...interesting since then...
    Happy belated birthday, btw.
    Guess what?

    You're great.

  14. #19764
    Wakka-wakka-wakka YamiGekusu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Thursday, Mar 4 2010
    Location
    The Mitten
    Posts
    471

    Re: ~OTCD vFinal - Postgame Edition~

    Man, twenty-five feels so weird so far. Part of me still feels young, and the other part feels like a bit of a failure since I still don't know how to drive (hell, I still don't have a job)...

    Anyway, earlier, my boyfriend and I got to go out and eat dinner at a local restaurant (all you can eat fish!). Food was excellent
    Monster Hunter Generations | Name: Yami G | HR: ???

    "Welcome to the only thing scarier than IRS headquarters" ~Gex
    Xbox: YamiGekusu | PSN: YamiGekusu | Nintendo Network: YamiGekusu

  15. #19765
    The Bakis are back. In fact, they were always here. Planetbox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sunday, Nov 3 2013
    Location
    The Last Place You Look
    Posts
    0

    Re: ~OTCD vFinal - Postgame Edition~

    Has anyone else noticed that this forum's glitches appear to be fixed?

    (Also, this is literally the first time I've posted in this thread. That seems kind of strange.)
    OH MY GOODNESS!

    Isn't this the BEST signature you've ever SEEN!


    Spoiler: Random Quotes out of Context 

  16. #19766
    Sock SockOutTheWindow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Saturday, Jan 29 2011
    Location
    Where you live
    Posts
    0

    Re: ~OTCD vFinal - Postgame Edition~

    Quote Originally Posted by Planetbox View Post
    Has anyone else noticed that this forum's glitches appear to be fixed?

    (Also, this is literally the first time I've posted in this thread. That seems kind of strange.)
    Huh, you're right! Everything looks non-broken all of a sudden. Wonder if that will last?
    Don't worry!
    Batman can breathe in space! Unfortunately, none of us are Batman.
    Worry!

  17. #19767
    Shout out to the Wayback machine Ruane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Thursday, Mar 4 2010
    Location
    SR388
    Posts
    1

    Re: ~OTCD vFinal - Postgame Edition~

    Quote Originally Posted by jryanm View Post
    Might as well post what's up here so everyone's in the know:

    Turns out our version of vBulletin (4.2.2) and Keenspot's new version of php (5.5) aren't compatible with each other at all, which is causing the error messages and the post box... weirdness. Unfortunately the fixes seem to be hidden behind a paywall on the vBulletin site and the account used to buy the license doesn't seem to exist anymore, so there's not much help there. So the non-paywall fixes seem to be either to have Keenspot break the rest of their site and backdate php again for us (not really reasonable) or to buy an updated vBulletin license for a forum whose parent webcomic is no longer running.

    So expect quirkiness for a while, but hopefully things should be sorted out before too long.
    Check out the bottom of the forum page. It says BitF is powered by vBulletin (4.2.3) instead of vBulletin (4.2.2). I'm guessing jryanm or someone else was able to finally get us that update/backdate php/license we needed for compatibility.

    Thank you, whoever you are.
    Quote Originally Posted by AuraKnight View Post
    Rune's whole thing is shovels. So yeah, he'd be able to find a way.
    This sig has been brought to you by PokeMarioGuy.

  18. #19768
    Wakka-wakka-wakka YamiGekusu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Thursday, Mar 4 2010
    Location
    The Mitten
    Posts
    471

    Re: ~OTCD vFinal - Postgame Edition~

    Oh man, I feel like a freaking zombie right now. I was out in the early hours of today, helping my boyfriend deliver papers. Got home, fell asleep, and woke up a few hours later. And later the morning, I bought about nine dollars worth of pop and energy drinks to get me through the week
    Monster Hunter Generations | Name: Yami G | HR: ???

    "Welcome to the only thing scarier than IRS headquarters" ~Gex
    Xbox: YamiGekusu | PSN: YamiGekusu | Nintendo Network: YamiGekusu

  19. #19769
    Shout out to the Wayback machine Ruane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Thursday, Mar 4 2010
    Location
    SR388
    Posts
    1

    Re: ~OTCD vFinal - Postgame Edition~


    Congratulations everyone who still frequents the forum. You are one of less than 100 active members. This really is the forum's postgame.
    Quote Originally Posted by AuraKnight View Post
    Rune's whole thing is shovels. So yeah, he'd be able to find a way.
    This sig has been brought to you by PokeMarioGuy.

  20. #19770
    When someone says, "What's up," don't tell 'em about your butt. Forum Veteran MooseFondue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Thursday, Mar 4 2010
    Location
    Shrug
    Posts
    0

    Re: ~OTCD vFinal - Postgame Edition~

    Quote Originally Posted by Ruane View Post
    Congratulations everyone who still frequents the forum. You are one of less than 100 active members. This really is the forum's postgame.
    I'm gonna win.

  21. #19771
    Sock SockOutTheWindow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Saturday, Jan 29 2011
    Location
    Where you live
    Posts
    0

    Re: ~OTCD vFinal - Postgame Edition~

    Quote Originally Posted by MooseFondue View Post
    I'm gonna win.
    I'm gonna find the Infinity+1 Sword first.
    Don't worry!
    Batman can breathe in space! Unfortunately, none of us are Batman.
    Worry!

  22. #19772
    Sekai wa mawaru to iu kedo EmpoleTRON's Avatar
    Join Date
    Thursday, Jun 17 2010
    Posts
    0

    Re: ~OTCD vFinal - Postgame Edition~

    Forum activity sure seems to be picking up quite a bit
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Mouser
    All users go. I may soon disappear. There is no need to dawdle on in the past. Let my words enlighten anyone who reads them.

  23. #19773
    Sock SockOutTheWindow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Saturday, Jan 29 2011
    Location
    Where you live
    Posts
    0

    Re: ~OTCD vFinal - Postgame Edition~

    Quote Originally Posted by EmpoleTRON View Post
    Forum activity sure seems to be picking up quite a bit
    11 of those 14 look like spambots. The mods aren't really active anymore, so the bots tend to hang around for a while.
    Don't worry!
    Batman can breathe in space! Unfortunately, none of us are Batman.
    Worry!

  24. #19774
    Laughs at his own jokes--HAHAHAHAohwait OshaliteX2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sunday, Jan 19 2014
    Location
    Mossdeep City. Where else? Pallet Town?! HA!!
    Posts
    0

    Re: ~OTCD vFinal - Postgame Edition~

    I have renewed affinity for chocolate chip cookies.
    That's my life's recent happenings.
    Feed me lemons or feed me life!
    Spoiler: Badges and stuff you should click! 
    Oh yeah, I also have a CYOA.

  25. #19775
    Wakka-wakka-wakka YamiGekusu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Thursday, Mar 4 2010
    Location
    The Mitten
    Posts
    471

    Re: ~OTCD vFinal - Postgame Edition~

    I've been helping my boyfriend with his paper route for a couple of weeks now. And one of my goals is nearly achieved... I'm buying myself an Xbox 360! I already bought three games for it (and I don't even have it yet!) to prepare. Maybe I'll have time to play them fancy vidjyagaems...
    Monster Hunter Generations | Name: Yami G | HR: ???

    "Welcome to the only thing scarier than IRS headquarters" ~Gex
    Xbox: YamiGekusu | PSN: YamiGekusu | Nintendo Network: YamiGekusu

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 10 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 10 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •