Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

Orgogok

Member Since 30 Mar 2013
Offline Last Active Oct 17 2013 09:30 AM

Posts I've Made

In Topic: Cover or not (squad tactical game)

17 August 2013 - 04:55 PM

If your setting allows it you can make the range of weapons an issue.
That would decrease the necessity of cover depending on the enemies setup.
It also provides more variety to play styles as players can go high risk high reward or play it safe from far away.

 

A unit can have its own cover (to a specific direction), for example a tank or riot shield guy.

Players would need to take into account facing direction and action cost for maneuvers.
Expanding from that idea you can have certain units which provide cover or defensive bonuses to teammates.
This would be for example some kind of energy shield in various shapes and colours.

It would also increase the synergy between the team members.

 

The alternative to cover would be having some kind of unit who just can take a lot of damage.

If your units are puny humans that probably is scifi/fantasy material, though.


In Topic: Turn Based Action Economy

06 April 2013 - 09:05 AM

great point!

Then lets not say "unit types for certain tasks". Its more of unit types with simple but unique abilities (the puzzle pieces). But i find it important to not make them only here a little faster and there a little heavier hitting.


In Topic: Turn Based Action Economy

06 April 2013 - 04:44 AM

Your concept seems to add up nicely. When doing micro management in small steps, you need to remember that this way you cannot let a player control many units at the same time.

What sunandshadow suggested was a 1:1 relation of movement squares and action points. Units have each a different amount of action points, which represents their agility. Attacks all differ in cost. (PoxNora)

You dont need to have multiple actions for multiple attacks, btw. In Battle for Wesnoth a unit hits several times in one attack, (rolling for each attack separately).

 

 

Also, i want to point out that combat roles imho are..  a lot of fun. It is important that you have unit types specialized for certain tasks (classes), which the players can easily identify from the visuals. It adds flavor and tactical depth. Id research a little in that area.

 

 

PS: i hope i do not appear to be mansplaining, im actually an amateur, too smile.png


In Topic: Fire Magic

30 March 2013 - 11:23 AM

  • warmth - Mana regen bonus (Diablo 2)
  • Fire = Speed: Movement speed bonus with fire trail
  • ghost fire!
  • combine a fiery inferno suicide with a phoenix-like resurrection ability

Fire has probably a lot of different meanings in other cultures which might inspire you to some cool non-destructive abilities.


In Topic: Turn Based Action Economy

30 March 2013 - 10:28 AM

I just think I need more options for Defensive actions.  So far I only have Dodge and Tumble.    Actions like parry, disarm,  or block are provided per weapon.    If you have a shield you can block or shield bash with it.   If you have two weapons you can make a parry with one and disarm with the other, or even make a parry with each weapon.   The reason for this design is that I have weapons and shields that provide different bonuses to parry and block attempts.   
 
I just need to find a system that fits elegantly with my design and doesn't over complicate things.   So far the added touch of realism is making this game a little more complex than I had anticipated.  

 


Hey,

Can you clarify how the combat/turns works?
As you have a "defensive" move, does your game resolve the turns of each player at the same time?? (frozen synapse)
Then your resource currency is time (ms?), which works not very differently to sunandshadows suggestion.

I also work on a concept for a turn-based MP and i came to the conclusion to use two fixed actions
per turn, too. Managing multiple units as a team should be as intuitive as possible without the player having
to calculate much.
It also depends on the scale of possibilities for the player. Having only a party of 4 can have a more detailed,
complicated system while if the player has a lot of other stuff to do you should dumb it down a little.

BTW: the new XCOM works great with only 1 or 2 actions per unit. It is a shooter, though, and you seem to focus on melee.
 


PARTNERS