Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

We need 7 developers from Canada and 18 more from Australia. to help us complete a research survey. We need your help! Support our site by taking a quick sponsored survey and win a chance at a $50 Amazon gift card. Click here to get started!


powerneg

Member Since 29 Dec 2012
Offline Last Active Today, 02:02 PM

#5249133 How to avoid "stacks of doom" in 4X? (Part 2)

Posted by powerneg on 27 August 2015 - 03:17 AM

Make smaller stacks capable of conquering/destroying a planet.




#5246671 Laws/edicts system for 4X

Posted by powerneg on 15 August 2015 - 06:12 AM

I don't understand why you won't just let the player set which group a planet belongs to;

it would only need "micromanagement" when setting the group(generally when the colony has just been established)

 

If you don't want some kind of connection to the map(border-colonies in the military group) i recommend to see the planets as "economic potential"

for example:
edict: research agriculture

total progression-cost : 5.000 RP

turn cost: 100 RP

bonus: +5% for every swamp-colony

So with 10 swamp colonies  the player would pay 100 RP / turn and receive 150 RP towards the competion of this edict

 

Other edict: Allow commercial traders more freedom

effects: +5% taxes for rocky planets, -10% tax-income for low-developed colonies, +5% tax-income for high-developed colonies.




#5243296 To use mana or not? (that is the question)

Posted by powerneg on 28 July 2015 - 06:01 PM

Powerneg why so patronising?

As you see in the long thread its not THAT simple of a question and the point of the thread is to clearify pros and cons with different systems.

 

Yes the way im aiming to pace my game needs persisting effects to be limited, mainly to avoid players stalling for time i easy fights to spam heals (as you could do in "darkest dungeon"). Such a system works of course, but its not very fun to play (and in very hard games you are almost forced to use exploits like that).

 

Well, it seemed like you were making up arguments along the way, showing your preferences,

Having preferences is off course good as you're the one who 's actually going to make the game, but it doesn't help the discussion,

because most issues can be solved using proper finetuning/balancing.

Instead, you could list your preferences, like: do you want each spell to be "mandatory" used?

do you want healing to be nerfed/weak? How many spells/abilities are you aiming for ?

 

 

Yes the way im aiming to pace my game needs persisting effects to be limited, mainly to avoid players stalling for time i easy fights to spam heals (as you could do in "darkest dungeon"). Such a system works of course, but its not very fun to play (and in very hard games you are almost forced to use exploits like that).

 

 

How about full health-regeneration between combats ?

It gives you the opportunity to realy restrict the use of healing-spells without the player needing to go back to town every three battles.

It also makes battles seperate from each other, instead of one big battle(with some choice of opponents i suppose)

 

One thing to keep in mind, btw, it may sound fun for you from a design-perspective that the player needs to use every spell,

but from the player's perspective, someone will have made some(all?) of the choices for him.

 

 

Yes. If a single skill is always the best option, then players aren't really making a choice. They're simply selecting the obvious option from the list every time over and over again until they get victory. That's not much of a game.

 

Make an improved heal-spell with 50% more healing and 100% more mana-cost.

Add the cost-less basic attack.

Now it's situational which spell is best.




#5243148 To use mana or not? (that is the question)

Posted by powerneg on 28 July 2015 - 05:45 AM


The problem with mana only is that it might end up using some classes just for one thing, for example if a cleric can heal and do some damage skills (which both cost mana) you might end up ONLY using the heal and not wanting to "waste" mana on a more diverse set of skills.

 

So you're going to introduce a character who is specialized in healing, make his healing skills way more powerfull then his other abilities,

then complain that players use his best skill instead of randomly choosing a skill ...

 

This is mainly a problem with skills that grants persisting effects (such as healing):

 

Because you allow them to stack infinitely ??

 

As a designer you can use any system you like, all you gotta do is balance it out,

and if you realy wanna go with limited-use-skills, just do so.

Just keep in mind that now YOU will be determining which spells the player uses, not the player ...




#5242746 To use mana or not? (that is the question)

Posted by powerneg on 26 July 2015 - 06:58 AM


1. All skills (including basic attacks) are "equally good" and you can choose anyone each combat round (used in darkest dungeon)

 

It's hard to balance them that way, and on top of it, the player may get bored.

 


4. Use both CD and energy (like most MMORPGs, like wow)

 

With those two included, balancing becomes much better.

As you're not making an AAA-titles, you may want to focus on mana, and only use CD for some special spells or something like that.

 


5. No mana is used. Skills are limited use. So you can only use ice bolt 2 times and healing wave 1 time. Resets in town.

 

It sounds like a hard game to play.

It also sounds hard to design, since you gotta keep a trip interesting(with 3 spells) and make sure a trip isn't just a repetition of a previous trip.

I think some games use this mechanic through one-time-use scrolls, usually having something to do with the story/progression(or a "transport-back-to-town-scroll")

 

6.

This is partially stolen from Golden Sun(GBA iirc):

Each character can bring with him one djinn, this djinn passively boosts the character, some stats-increase and maybe slow health-regeneration.

Each djinn can also be activated for his skill, this skill is strong enough to change the course of a battle,

but the djinn is exhausted and loses his passive(and active) until a town is visited.




#5240165 Managing a relationship network

Posted by powerneg on 13 July 2015 - 06:54 PM

If combat doesn't occur on a real map it would replace the formation/position entirely with jobs (guard the group/ be leader / guard person X / seek out enemies / supply the others with potions etc).

Expanding on the idea, maybe the player could send out multiple parties at a time, some for an important mission, others more to gain experience/bonding.




#5236964 Fantasy RTS: magic or honour resource?

Posted by powerneg on 26 June 2015 - 01:01 PM

If there are different factions, they might use/need different resources; aka they would all use gold + a secondary resource,

and they could have slightly different ways of gathering and using their secondary resource.

 


I feel honour work better in a empire building scenario, but if missions are shorter this will be repetative since you "research" again and again. (I dont want upgrades to be persistant). The magic option is more conventional but gives greater freedom for gameplay options for me as a designer.

 

I never enjoyed campaigns, since they're usually nothing more but a pretty tutorial.

Empire-games especially, since either the normal PvP-experience becomes too short, or the campaign becomes too long.

(i suspect most empire games use "some kind of" persistance upgrades, for example by making the (re-)research-costs lower.)




#5235653 Co-Op Roguelike?

Posted by powerneg on 19 June 2015 - 04:08 AM

You can add +50% amount of enemies and give them all +25% hp, this way your dungeon won't become too crowded. Balancing between 1 and 2 player mode should mainly be done during playtesting though. Btw could a single player control both characters/avatars?


#5235191 Laws/edicts system for 4X

Posted by powerneg on 16 June 2015 - 03:38 PM

Well, you could just let the player give subsidy/settings to the groups of specialized planets.


#5235090 What should I do now that I implemented a game mechanic that is not popular a...

Posted by powerneg on 16 June 2015 - 05:48 AM

If you want the two groups of players to keep playing together, you could just restrict FF to some weapons.(note: this would probably cause the need to rebalance all weapons.)


#5233863 Robotic race

Posted by powerneg on 09 June 2015 - 12:47 PM

Expanding on braindigitalis' idea: let the 'AI' be the only one who can upgrade a robotic colony, let it move around, and when the player attacks the colony the AI is on they will offer the planet in exchange for a safe retreat. Let the robots also evacuate some defenses(infantry,drones, ...) making them harder to conquer when they have fewer planets.


#5233824 How long should a mobile PvP game last?

Posted by powerneg on 09 June 2015 - 09:53 AM

How about making each round last between 1 and 3 minutes, and then letting players play as many rounds they like? (i am assuming that by "round" you didn't mean "turn")


#5230832 Equipment/modules for ships

Posted by powerneg on 25 May 2015 - 07:32 AM

With "per fleet" you mean that vague fleet mechanic you have? I never realy got what it's purpose was, but it makes sense to tie upgrades to fleets if you have fleets, especially if seperate fleets guard borders with seperate neighbours.


#5230260 Equipment/modules for ships

Posted by powerneg on 21 May 2015 - 09:33 AM

Sure, or going for defensive instead if the player tries to go stay on friendly terms with his neighbours. As for keeping track of each upgrade for a ship, it's a lot of effort for little effect if the player doesn't get involved, i suggest adding a small (resource)cost to upgrades and then letting the player decide how many upgradelevels a ship should miss before being upgraded.(add different upgrades together or have the player decide this for specific categories/systems like weaponsystem when it's behind 2 levels but computersystem when it's behind 1 level since it's so cheap to upgrade.


#5229319 Planetary development levels

Posted by powerneg on 16 May 2015 - 10:36 AM

Give planets a general development-level which dictates how much of the planet's potential living space is available for immigration and how much of the planet's potential industrial output gets used? possibly make a defensive level as well that gets "fed"by the general development level, and give a player 2 or 3 options of how much this defensive level should be focused on.




PARTNERS