Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

suliman

Member Since 19 May 2004
Offline Last Active Jul 21 2016 06:01 PM

#5300847 Slavery, Include Or Not?

Posted by suliman on 15 July 2016 - 01:24 AM

Interesting discussion. But i do find it strange that some suggest:

  • Include it, but let "others" deal with it, not the player. This would be dishonest. Slavery wasnt done by only "evil men", it was done by almost anyone and every nation.
  • Include it, but dont make it profitable. Why? It was VERY profitable, this is why it was so widespread. The economic system encouraged it and plantations wouldnt exist in the way it did if not for slaves.
  • Include it, but make the player "the good guy" by intercepting slave ships and freeing slaves. Really? This NEVER happended and would make a very strange trading game.

Im slightly dishearted now. The easiest seems to do just like everyone else who makes a game in this setting and pretend slavery didnt happen:(

This game will not be marketed or sold so maybe it matters less than implied by this thread, but should that really matter for the actual issue?

 

To clearify:

The portayal (if included) will be rather abstracted. You play on a map of carribia with Europe and (maybe) Africa as off-map locations where goods can be sold and bought by your ship markers. Slaves will be a cargo marker just as sugar or cotton will be. Events like epidemics on a ship carrying slaves may be included but no individual crewmen or slaves will exists with picture, name or background (regardless of white or black skin).




#5300714 Slavery, Include Or Not?

Posted by suliman on 14 July 2016 - 07:56 AM

Well that game is in quite bad taste! My game is a financial / business game. Nothing will be "extra fun" with slaves as a commodity in the boardgame. It would be a commodity like sugar or cotton. There could even be event cards like epedemic on a slave ships, or slave rebellions. That revenue of income could when slavery becomes outlawed close to the end (around year 1800).

 

But me I always thought it was strange that there WASNT a discussion when games like "sid meiers pirates" or "colonization" or "port royale" completely skips the whole slave issue.

Games such as rome total war includes genocides / population extermination / prisoner massacres. That seems to be ok:) Becouse that is also historically correct.

 

Im not sure myself what style im going for. Im just saying that including nasty stuff that acually happened isnt immoral in itself. This is what baffels me with "moral outcry". If anything it seems immoral to perpetuate the myth that europeans amassed all that wealth simply from entrepreneurship or "hard work".

 

And then you get a pat on the back when making a story where everyone is friends and nice to eachother. That borders falsification of history (if you use a historical setting i mean :)




#5300669 Slavery, Include Or Not?

Posted by suliman on 14 July 2016 - 02:22 AM

Hi

Im doing a (as a hobby) boardgame about trading and shipping in the carribean around the year 1650. You run ships with sugar, tobacco etc between the Americas and Europe, invest in infrastructure, market prices fluctuate etc.

 

Historically, these plantations was largely powered by african slaves (part of the triangle trade). Im not sure if I want to include that or not. It goes two ways:

 

1. Including slavery and slaves as a commodity will definitly make the game more somber. After all its entertainment and meant to be fun to play with friends. Do you want to be reminded?

2. There is some gameplay benefits to include it (slaves and weapons as "goods". Another continent makes travelling more complex etc). Also, it seems almost LESS respectful to the suffering to simply pretend slavery didnt happen (and especially in this setting, where it was a HUGE component).

 

What are your thoughts?

Erik




#5298522 Space Simulation Game Design (Finding The Fun)

Posted by suliman on 29 June 2016 - 07:39 AM

You will not tell the player the controls or shortcuts?

And not introduce the actual stuff the player can do? So the player is supposed to randomly punch the keyboard?

Seems like a terrible design choice. I would not play that game, and many players will quit playing since it will SEEM you cannot do anything in your game.




#5294481 c++: sprintf but return chars. Possible?

Posted by suliman on 01 June 2016 - 09:57 AM

Well a temp buffer is ok for me, I only use this in specific situations. Not pretty i know but it works:)

 

Thanks for your input.

char * getStr(const char* fmt, ...) {	
	static char txt[1000];
	va_list va;
	va_start( va, fmt );
	vsprintf( txt, fmt, va );
	va_end( va );
	return txt;
}



#5293033 c++: sprintf but return chars. Possible?

Posted by suliman on 23 May 2016 - 05:50 AM

What do you mean "if it fails"?

 

What i do now with sprintf could then also potentially fail no? I just want to compress the code i need to write. I end up in many such situations (must create a temporary char array that i inject floats and other stuff with %.2f etc and then pass it to a function that takes a "char *" parameter).




#5291378 Gas and energy (abstract) for a strategy game

Posted by suliman on 13 May 2016 - 01:35 AM

1. What is weak with the gas mechanics? Its not clear. You could skip gas altogether and just have energy. Both planets (depending on how much tech/industry there is there) and your fleet may drain energy. (gas-powered spaceships seem a little low-tech, especially if you have normal "gas" that is also used in planet industry).

 

2. Do you need powerplants IF you have gas? What do they add to the gameplay? It seems a bit too low-level for your abstraction level. Also fusion is already nuclear. (call them fission and fusion instead for a better scifi feeling).




#5287433 Beyond Warlords 2-type of "quest"

Posted by suliman on 18 April 2016 - 04:50 AM

Why does the no of players have to outnumber the ruins? Typically you have no more than 8 players in a multiplayer strategy game and you can have at least 20 ruins on a moderately sized map.

 

The quests/ruins doesnt have to be a minigame. It depends on how much other stuff player have to do in the game. It can just be a bonus such as finding some gold or item to buff the army. I didnt like that in Warlords 2:

 

You enter a ruin

1. Most often: You kill a monster. Get a bonus which is helpful

2. Sometimes: You just die. Your hero is slain which is a disaster, at least in the beginning.

3. I cannot affect or predict the outcome.

 

Loosing a quest could instead damage the hero (requiring rest to come back to action) and the risk/outcome should be monitorable.




#5287416 Abstracted battles/units (mego-lo-mania style)

Posted by suliman on 18 April 2016 - 01:32 AM

Noone? Is the question to vague?




#5284200 Obstacles in a dungeon?

Posted by suliman on 30 March 2016 - 02:55 AM

Hi

Im doing a fantasy tactical rogue-like dungeon crawler (player controls up to 6 heroes in a group).

 

What are good obstacles to block the corridors?

Obstacles are "solved" by picking a hero to deal with it, the hero uses a attribute tied to the obstacle; this calculates a %-chance to succeed and a cost in energy to solve the obstacle. Heroes specializes in one of 3 attributes (strength, agility, intelligence)

 

Obstacles:

1. Strength - debris, cave in

2. Agility - what here? (i already have lockpicking and traps as separate gameplay elements, some puzzle maybe?)

3. Intelligence - force field, ancient riddle on door (like gate to Moria maybe? Mellon!)

 

What is your ideas?

Thanks, Erik




#5279538 Weapon and damage vs enemies (RPG)?

Posted by suliman on 04 March 2016 - 03:10 PM

Hi

Im doing a rogue-like dungeon game with the player managing a squad of heroes (similar to Darkest dungeon or Legend of grimrock).

The setting is classic medieval-fantasy.

 

How can I differentiate damage and weapons to make it more tactical? I got some basic ideas already:

 

clubs/maces - lower damage but high bonus vs undead

spears/arrows - higher bleed but much lower dmg vs undead

dmg is either physical or magical - some monsters have resistance to either

weapons good against slow/fast enemies?

maybe spear and bows bonus vs beasts?

weapons that are harder to block with shield?

anti-armour dmg - ignore "armoured" trait that some monsters have (which weapons would this be except maybe crossbow? 

 

This is not much as you see. Need more ideas! (and criticism for the ones listed!)

I want to encourage the player to balance the group of heroes and/or plan for known missions ahead (e.g. if next "map" is a crypt-style dungeon equip heroes accordingly with anti-undead stuff).

 

Thank you!




#5277562 Combat and units in modern empire builder

Posted by suliman on 23 February 2016 - 02:29 AM

Cool. But i will simplify i think:

 

Patrolcrafts - core, light, early unit (sea version of  light armor)

Destroyer - core, general anti-ship

Missile frigate/artillery ship - anti-city (needs backup of core units like land artillery. Cruiser seems to robust? Want these to be frigile. Or just make them really expensive but super strong vs cities and only ok vs ships. But cruisers are going out of style right?).

AA - anti-air (AA frigate? Are corvettes really AA ships?)

 

I will most likely skip both submarines and carriers. I know they are important to modern warfare but it doesnt play well with how armies work right now. But maybe i can make it work:)




#5277294 Combat and units in modern empire builder

Posted by suliman on 21 February 2016 - 09:27 AM

Ah no I dont mean mechs like robots:) 

The "light mech" represents mechanized infantry or AFVs (armoured fighting vehicles).

Wheeled or tracked vehicles, typically with less armour and firepower than tanks.

 

I might include futuristic units later, im not sure yet.




#5277253 Combat and units in modern empire builder

Posted by suliman on 21 February 2016 - 03:18 AM

Yeah that makes sence Andy, I will. There is already cost for everything but didnt want to clutter the post.

I prefer to have even (rounded off) costs (like 10, 15 or 20), but maybe that limits balancing? Do you find it strange/ugly if game units would cost 11 or 17 resources? The economy is tied to other gameplay elements so I cannot just rescale costs. 

 

Anyone up for commenting on how the acutal military would look in such a scenario? (i renamed light mech and tanks as simply light armour and heavy armour, seemed to fit better with the abstraction in general).




#5275107 Level Design in 3D Space Shooter

Posted by suliman on 10 February 2016 - 04:17 AM

I had the same problem when designing my spacecraft game.

I just switched to a near surface setting. Maybe a huge sea with scattered islands (then you can have both aircrafts/spacecrafts and land/sea units/buildings/features)

 

Its not technically space anymore, but you got a VASTLY bigger palette to draw from when it comes to designing missions/maps. And many of the fun things (scifi-esque flying vehicles, mining, dogfighting, exploring etc) are still there. Plus weapons can now be anti-air AND anti-ground.

 

Just a thought... :)
Erik






PARTNERS