• Announcements

    • khawk

      Download the Game Design and Indie Game Marketing Freebook   07/19/17

      GameDev.net and CRC Press have teamed up to bring a free ebook of content curated from top titles published by CRC Press. The freebook, Practices of Game Design & Indie Game Marketing, includes chapters from The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses, A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing, and An Architectural Approach to Level Design. The GameDev.net FreeBook is relevant to game designers, developers, and those interested in learning more about the challenges in game development. We know game development can be a tough discipline and business, so we picked several chapters from CRC Press titles that we thought would be of interest to you, the GameDev.net audience, in your journey to design, develop, and market your next game. The free ebook is available through CRC Press by clicking here. The Curated Books The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses, Second Edition, by Jesse Schell Presents 100+ sets of questions, or different lenses, for viewing a game’s design, encompassing diverse fields such as psychology, architecture, music, film, software engineering, theme park design, mathematics, anthropology, and more. Written by one of the world's top game designers, this book describes the deepest and most fundamental principles of game design, demonstrating how tactics used in board, card, and athletic games also work in video games. It provides practical instruction on creating world-class games that will be played again and again. View it here. A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing, by Joel Dreskin Marketing is an essential but too frequently overlooked or minimized component of the release plan for indie games. A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing provides you with the tools needed to build visibility and sell your indie games. With special focus on those developers with small budgets and limited staff and resources, this book is packed with tangible recommendations and techniques that you can put to use immediately. As a seasoned professional of the indie game arena, author Joel Dreskin gives you insight into practical, real-world experiences of marketing numerous successful games and also provides stories of the failures. View it here. An Architectural Approach to Level Design This is one of the first books to integrate architectural and spatial design theory with the field of level design. The book presents architectural techniques and theories for level designers to use in their own work. It connects architecture and level design in different ways that address the practical elements of how designers construct space and the experiential elements of how and why humans interact with this space. Throughout the text, readers learn skills for spatial layout, evoking emotion through gamespaces, and creating better levels through architectural theory. View it here. Learn more and download the ebook by clicking here. Did you know? GameDev.net and CRC Press also recently teamed up to bring GDNet+ Members up to a 20% discount on all CRC Press books. Learn more about this and other benefits here.


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

294 Neutral

About LordVTP

  • Rank
  1.           [media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g8e2uTqFdg8[/media]         Combat Sandbox Demo      http://www.mediafire.com/download/d55xypaklxl04hh/Modulus+Combat+Demo.zip     This video is a tad out of date but does show the basic usage of the ship editor.   [center][media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wBUqyGEeF6c[/media][/center]                Background:   Concept:   When I started this project I imagined a world where I could build my own armada of ships from the ground up, not just by choosing what ships would be in my fleets but by building each and every ship from the ground up, hull piece by hull piece, weapons by weapon. hard point by hard point.   So I created a modular ship section concept and an easy to use ship editor with which I can create my own ships, in the shape that I like, with the radars that I want, with the attack systems and defence systems that I want!!!   With a large variety of ship parts,  weapons, engines, defense platforms and other modular components to suit most any personal taste I can basically build any ship I want and mirror the ships from my favorite sci-fi space series such as "Star Wars" "Star Trek" Babylon 5" "Battlestar Galactica" "Space Battleship Yamato" and others.     Images: Enough talk. here are some pretty pictures Hit by heavy mass drivers, ship is ripped in half, destroying it     VLS interceptor missile launches!center]There is more to see     YouTube channel:    https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCTMmhT5m9RHSPWdKrdEwgTw/videos     Engine Features: Aegis like Combat system making for very efficient target designation   Modular destruction system. As you build your ships with modules... they can crumble in the same way, a ship can be cut in half, if you're lucky it can still run around in battle and possibly be as efficient as a chicken with it's head cut off... nonetheless if it survives the battle it's a good day!!   Easy Command  and control system which was a challenge with the limitations of android touch devices   AIs can react differently depending on the Mode they are in and their weapons capabilities   Aggressive, defensive, passive, escort modes selection     The weapons, there are a ton, hard shells turrets, lasers, missile launchers, plasma beams, defense hardpoint, mines, nuclear devices, beams that can cut a ship in half.... all that to make an amazing fireworks display!!     Editor Features: Modular Building of Ships Wide selection of hull pieces Wide selection of attack weapons to choose from Wide selection of defence systems Wide selection of radars Wide selection of lasers Selection of engine       Game: The game is currently a sandbox, player vs AIs, but I am adding features to have clans and civilians and various outposts/stations to build and protect. Working on resource management system to limit what you can build in the editor based on the resources you gather and tech you find.   At this point in time the game could go in any direction, but I am getting close to formulate and test a few ideas.   Platforms: PC, Android, IOS   Development Platform: Game Maker Studio     Twitter: https://twitter.com/TMC_LordVTP   Affiliates: http://www.themojocollective.com/ https://www.facebook.com/TheMojoCollective      
  2. Funny finding this article (as I polish up on after effects and do storyboards). I've been preparing to attempt a proper trailer for my game, and working out were to focus the voiceover time? Thematic story setup or gameplay focused? How much material can you reasonably cover in one trailer? So many things to consider...
  3. Except for a missile warhead that that interupts all C&C functions,  I haven't put any ECM system in.    What I have considered is allowing you to turn the radars one and off, with the radars vastly increasing the chance of detection when active.    It would be possible to to create a jamming effect though (Radar code works by applying energy, energy bleed-off rate could be increased).  All this could mean allot more though if one idea I had came to fruition.  A proper battlegroup/fleet cooperative engagement system.  This way a flag or C&C ship could coordinate defenses without fires overlapping.  That and one ship could have its radars's radiating(and this taking a massive detection penalty) while the others remain on standby but able to fire on that ships contacts..     
  4. Thanks you replying!   I was starting to think my fixation on defensive sensors and systems was out of place heh.   Since I made the previous post I have re-coded my radar system and now support a much more realistic model,  as well as supporting  3 distant types of radar,  navigational(longer wave)  rotating mast type,  directional (90 degree arcs) specialized defense system radars modeled on phased array panel types, and a mixed mode type that gives both types of functionality but at much degraded performance at cost equivalence to the other two.  I also made a separate class of "combat computer" s  that add to the total defensive tracks a ship can support.     https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=graSYir9umc&list=UUTMmhT5m9RHSPWdKrdEwgTw  < Simple visualization of radar coverage.     Things in the video happen very fast due to the enemy ships being legacy and being generally unable to survive under the heavy fire of the ships I built. Screen obscuring effects don't make too much sense beyond the mothership(as that is supposedly your point of command).  There is another view you can switch too that pauses the action, but I was thinking of doing another more indepth and informative version.  
  5. Greetings!     I haven't posted in a great while, but when i have I have gotten valuable responses and insight.  So I'm back again- My game has advanced much(thanks to said feedback)  but now I have a wild hair about redesigning the ship defensive weapons... As the current setup may be too simplified to make missile defense classed ship significantly different from other classes.     (shameless plug, playlist of videos of game so you can see what i have been up too and spare me from explaining everything)    https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL5VSPxg5ImI_H9hmMp5Fruk5iaozVQaif   Currently you can place as many radar units on a ship as you like, but only the strongest one counts. Radar performance is based on a range factor, pulse rate, and number of intercept tracks the system can handle.  So right now you can just throw on a class 5 radar and  forget about it.    What I have a wild hair about is  separating those factors into different units,   Namely "area" radar (for finding large objects/ship at range) akin to navigational rotating mast type,  target designation radars (tracking missiles/fighters, ect)  and combat control modules that would additive boost the number of hostile tracks the total system could engage.  I could further  complement this by having the designation type have directional arcs of cover ala fixed AESA panels.  The fun part about doing all this would be the potential of having much finer ability to impair said systems when modules are disabled/destroyed.         The cons that comes to mind with this setup is that the minimum number of modules needed for a viable air defense system goes up quite a bit. The added complexity of the system might throw new players off some as well. The pros that come to mind are I could have a much wider variety of real unit builds between classes (especially between Command & Control  class and AA Defense class)  Where basic enemy detection and strong intercept capability could be wildly different builds.  I could mix and match the capabilities of the modules between super specialized and generally poor all round performers.      The minimum modules a single ship would need to be viable would jump from 5 to 10 or so though...              ^ Circus comes to town! Missile design with a dozen plus VLS packs ^   
  6. The concept is not score, but progression.   The player will start with a fairly restrictive deploy-able tonnage and ship count(level one hull sections are rated at one ton, level five at 32 tons, this is directly proportional to their hit points).   Combined with spending tech points to unlock stuff  these limits will force players to build ships for specific usage and tactics. The reason for the ship repository is for players to build a ship, send it to repository and remove it from the field so it doesn't count against the limit.    Currently the plan is to have a boss ship in each solar system and destroying that will increase the tonnage/ship count limit a bit each time.    'Instant' is probably the wrong way to describe it.  The ships have  'jump power' value that grows a a speed relative to the ships engine power/mass ratio.   At max power the ship can perform 2 jumps in succession, but there is a several seconds gap between triggering the jump and it actually taking place.  This typically takes some time though...'tactical jumping'  is meant to be a key element of the gameplay...   The problem i'm having is finding a relevant reason to make the normal concepts of territory control work here.  One thing i'm starting to think is I've made the planets too plentiful to have any real value.   I am also thinking i need something other then planets to occupy some of that space....but what?   Stations don't really count,  I have asteroid maps but that's not really the same thing. 
  7. Nomadic concept Is something I been playing at.   The fundamental issue is what justification  enemy strong-points/defends an area beyond it's simply a base location(kinda circular reasoning there) .  With instant travel one patch of space is as valuable as the next(or planet for that matter)  I had been keeping the resource/economy  aspect to a min as long term settlement/control of area outside the immediate solar system would require more planning(systems) and system resources(CPU/RAM) then any tablet will have anytime soon.        Battles on planets/inside atmospheres  is not gona happen in this game,  perhaps  bombardment ala Sins of a Solar Empire(seriously, if you own the space above the planet, the ones below are helpless).   All this adds up to toying with the idea of dumping 'stations' as a whole, but moving to re-purposed and scavenged civilian craft that act as temporary bases while a planet is mined/food grown or whatever-.   Perhaps a ship would redeploy, and reconfigure itself into a base/construction yard ect...    Just had a thought though.....  Perhaps ships can only be built in area designated  lagrange points?  These could be rare enough to make them strategics locations away from planets themselves.       More footage BTW- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Usp24ohj_6Y   What might not have been apparent int he other video was the player created nature of the ships themselves, and the 'solar region' setup.  Right now it's not live but the idea is that the battle space you currently occupy is one of nine  in each solar system,  but the other regions will continue to operate in a reduces simulation mode alongside the current area.   
  8. Hello, posting again after a long time working on things!   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UrbJk7OPBYU      < New combat footage   My game has advanced nicely,   but now I come to a quandary (after almost 3 years of engine building)-     Currently the game is played(or will play, as the mission player is still WIP) on a procedurally generated galaxy with 81 playable solar systems with story missions distributed amongst them(ala Space Pirates and Zombies).   The player is primarily concerned with his mothership,  which has the ability to store ships in a pocket dimension after construction in order to carry them into other regions (the built ships do not have independent interstellar jump capability).       My problem is this.... other then  holding a construction base or resource base....  What should I do in order to make planets truly valuable?   This isn't an empire building game-   The plot actually has you as the last human alive!  So the fundamental issue of territory control  arises(since ships can jump anywhere on  a map)...And with the ship repository the player does not need a forward base within a region to actually assault it (he can build up a fleet and take it with him)  I've been beating myself over the head with this dilemma for several months now and it keeps me up at night.   In order to make territory valuable,   and give the player something to lose when he ignores his holdings, there must be something more.
  9. Congrats man! All the best to your endeavors :-)
  10. I hope to officially announce my game 'Modulus' in the coming weeks as placeholder assets get replaced and last major systems are brought online. It's a single player space RTS that's tablet oriented based around dynamic ship design/construction and destruction with a procedurally generated galaxy with campaign missions mixed in (ala Space Pirates and Zombies). Been cranking away on it for well over 2 years now.
  11. Some small notes -     Fusing -  Ranging skill would be major factor for manual timed flack rounds.  Parts and sensitivity for radio proximity type....   The Japanese navel AA gunners took to using color coded smoke in their rounds in order to tell which battery fired which round and thus improve their deflection...Not that this seemed to matter to much but would make for a great visual flair game wise! 
  12. This may seem to be the case,  but as the scale of play approaches my desired heights(small SINS scale, dozen planets+,200+ ships)  it's simply the level of abstraction necessary to enable workable play.  One of the things I always disliked about the C&C series was the units were not capable of acting on their own in any reasonable fashion...you could drive an army into an enemy base and they would just sit there after clearing the offensive units...ugh.    Compare this to Total Annihilation -  where you can ignore entire non critical battlefields after issuing your overarching commands.    Setting simple behavior tags such as  "Fire at will/Hold Fire/Return Fire"  and   "Hold Position/Maneuver/Roam"  create surprisingly complex results.   That said, and to the question of the user being a mere spectator,   Any user commands (to include setting target, where to move) override the behaviors system until that command is completed.  If the user tell a ship to target a particular enemy,  they will do so until they or their target is destroyed...same for movement.   For super heavy weapons this is critical.... you shouldn't waste nukes/blackholes/asteroids /mirv weapons  on small fry(the cycle-time/cooldown is too long) .      As for the AI changing targets mid way,  a weakened/crippled ship's  attack value is higher then a fresh one...they make a tasty target!   Ships that would not normally risk engaging them may take the opportunity it get some shots in.     There is no friendly fire at this time because it's simpler to handle the collisions...If I have to start checking the fire lines of each weapon all the time that's allot of checks-  On pc not an issue....on a single core android tablet...   That's said the decision AI does not run 1 to 1 with the stepping,  in fact its semi random within a given range  but typically it takes several seconds between a single ship  target preference check.    When there is not a preference or the preference has been destroyed or lost contact with they revert to targets of opportunity.      Those tracking missiles actually are targeting on individual parts of a ship, so if the part is separated from their parent the missile will continue to track it.  If the part completely vanished before the missile impacts they go dumb until they time out, there is no redesignation.  I like things to be able to miss!   Mines exist currently but do not actually have a AI deployment method....still working on that one.  I hadn't considered chaff/decoy's  which is an oversight on my part, I'll add those ASAP.  There is a EMP missile that has the ability to interrupt a ships offensive/defensive targeting ability BTW (and another that cripples engines)... Also on the weirder end of the defensive spectrum there is a "return to sender"   beam that reprograms enemy missiles and fighter drones sending them back where they came from...thinking of doing a special shield with similar reflection properties that acts on a pulsing  behavior(I mean, if it was always effective they'd be invincible.)   EDIT - Chaff launcher in!  Clouds break track lock of enemy missiles and some direction change, making then likely to miss. Good call on that one!
  13. Actually, I feel I should explain the root of the behavior system as it is now-   As I said before, I use the concepts used in AI War as seen here   http://christophermpark.blogspot.com/2009/06/designing-emergent-ai-part-1.html http://christophermpark.blogspot.com/2009/06/designing-emergent-ai-part-2-queries.html     When I set out to do this though I found I had a unique problem....Classic comparison does not work (or work simply) when all the ships are dynamic in nature....so i needed the ships to be able to self classify-   Each ship when spawned goes down a list and inventory before deciding on 4 major behavior modifiers-       Class  -  "Corvette" "Frigate" "Destroyer"; "Cruiser" "Battlecruiser" "Dreadnought" "Battleship"- Weight Class - "Light"  "Battle" "Medium" "Large" "Armored" "Heavy"-   Type -  "Gun-Boat" "Anti-Ship Missile" "Missile Defence" "Command & Control" "Carrier Wing" Speed class - "Medium Speed" "Quick" "Fast" "Fast Attack"-     Optimal-Range is then determined based on the min/max values of the decided primary role weapons systems(each weapons, defense system has a value attributed to it) . During combat each ship will of course fire on targets of opportunity,  but each ship will try to find the most appropriate available target to engage.   During the threat level check  each ship within action range  is compared based on all values  to include ship health  and type,   IE a  command and control ship will not prefer to go toe to toe with  heavy battleship.       This is where I want my fleet layer to come into play....  I plan to auto sort each fleet and group the ships into formation based  on all these factors, with the primary capital ships at the heart,  ships designated as escort to the edges  ( or other choose able profiles).    By being able to select standoff profile,  the ships in the fleet will maintain formation  and attack from maximum range.   Escorts could be set to break formation and engage when the enemy breaks into a certain radius( or not).  Defensive ships would set their inbound  engagement  radius several time over to shield the most value ships.    
  14. Before we get too far into the simulated personality in charge type setup here let me say I had no such intention.  I find the setting commanders and governors type gameplay be rather annoying...the user is either in command or not. Furthermore the flow of battle is far too fast to enable meaningful 'personality' behavior modifiers.  Setting fleet behaviors does essentially the same thing while not tacking a face to it or forcing you into a particular  option set.    Having to set and use avatars and sub commanders in that fashion makes sense in Total War historical type simulation or pure a pure simulation, but is cumbersome unless your going to limit yourself to a semi turn based play style.       In fact most of the limitations in scope mentioned so far in the discussion seem  designed specifically to eliminate or substantially diminish such play style.     -However ...although I do not approve of this play for the user I do believe in behavior modifiers for the opposing agents.   By adjusting the fudge-factors in the weighted random states of the sub-commanders would create stronger groups of behavior.   This would allow stronger campaign setups as the user finds himself going against multiple personality command styles.   
  15. Well, I'm not sure how appropriate it is for me to start multiple threads on my first week here.  Yes things have quickly gotten a bit off topic, but the UI and the scope of the game are inexorably linked.    If I want access to each layer at any point in play  they have to be.   If you only ever have ten or less ships in play...fleet control is redundant. If you have 50 or so entries in each weapon/hull section category...how you present the (useful)information is paramount.     One UI solution I've been pondering is to have a series of tabs on the 4 sides the display that when activated pull out to reveal the control set for a particular use(Or for that matter, from the corners).   Individual ship settings(Escort mode, move to contact, standoff attack, missile defense envelope size, ect),  fleet mode, economic mode, builder mode...and anything else I can think off as being useful.