# Mercury Gate

Member

10

1 Neutral

• Rank
Member

• Interests
Programming

## Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

1. ## Game Combat Mechanic Examples

Wow, I just found this thread and I would like to say I like what I see. good job on your game design. One example of combat that was used in pan and paper times that you could use is this. Attacker rolls a 1d20 to get a random number between 1 and 20. If the defender has a defense rating of 15, then the attacker will "hit" on a die roll of 15 or more. (Basically a 25% hit rate). If the attacker rolled a number less that 15, the attack is a miss and combat is over for this round for the attacker. If the attacker rolls 15 or more, then the attacker hit the defender. The attacker rolls again for damage. The die the attacker rolls for damage will be based on the equipped weapon. A dagger is generally 1d4 or a sword is 1d6. If the attacker has two weapons equipped, the off-hand weapon is generally half of the primary weapon, so a second dagger would be a 1d2 and a second sword would be a 1d6. So for my example, let us say the attacker rolled a 18. It is a hit. He then rolls his 1d6 and scores a 4. The defender will take 4 points of damage. This is an example of a simple combat system. If you want to go further, you can assign a number to become a critical hit on the initial attack roll, generally a roll of 20 is counted as a critical hit and the damage from the damage roll is increased (sometimes doubled). A critical miss, a die roll of 1, could result in the attacker hurting them self or taking increased damage from the defenders attack. Other things you can do is make your weapons stronger. Say for example, if the attacker is using the Great Ax of Power, he can score a critical hit on an initial die of of 19 or 20. In other words, has a critical chance of 10% instead of the 5% from the previous example. Wooden Sword of Destruction +1 ..., is the name of a weapon that you can add +1 to the initial die roll and the damage roll.
2. ## To use or not use RNG in combat?

Thanks for your feedback. Randomness in the damage results can lead to players being happy when the RNG is in their favor, and unhappy when it is not. If I know that 100 solders does 100 damage, I can plan my attack according to that and will know the result, but if I am depending on RNG to swing in my direction, my soldiers could do 95 damage and I loose the skirmish. I guess I am looking at it more like chess. Each piece has a set movement and attack direction and leave it up to the player to decide the best course of action based on that. I could be wrong in my thinking and still would like to hear what others have to say on the topic. you may be right. But if feel it can depend on the context of how weighted the combat is to the over all idea of the game. If the game has a combat focus whereas the combat is the "be all" and it end up boring, the game will be looked at as a boring game, but I think if the combat is just a small portion of the game, the lack of details from the combat system could be a blessing allowing the player to focus on the game play aspect they like the most.
3. ## how much art,coding, music goes for?

If you only want to make a prototype of your game, then browse the Unity store. They have so many assets you can use for a low price or even free. After the prototype, the investors will give you the needed cash to by new artwork.
4. ## NPC in the rankings

Players in the game I was thinking about are rank based on a player stat like "strength". As you develop your character, it gains strength. The player who has 5000 strength will out rank the player with 4500 strength. I was thinking that the computer could control an account and play the game itself without interfering with the humans, If the computer player out grows the human player, their rank will be higher. If the human player does not like that, he can attack the computer player and beat them back down to a lower rank because when you lose in combat you will lose strength. Another example could be that my army has 5000 soldiers, so it has a strength of 5000. The computer has less soldiers and therefore has less strength. After combat I may have 4500 strength, but the computer could have less than 3000 strength (depending on losses). At this point I may have lost 2 or three rank positions, but the computer could lose 10 ranks. A smaller human player could fight that same computer opponent and beat them down even more. I doubt the computer players would hold any top ranks unless they were left alone for a long time. But say for ranks 20 and below, players could see their ranking among humans and computers alike. ...or should I leave the computer players out of the rankings and only show players?
5. ## To use or not use RNG in combat?

There are other factors that will be involved in the actual resolution of combat, like weather and terrain. I guess I should have explained that a little in the original post. I guess I am looking for baseline stats. What happens on a sunny day, flat land, and everyone in good moral. I would think all things being equal and no combat modifiers, I was thinking that a soldier would do 1 point of damage. The group would do 100 points of damage, that then could be modified by outside factors. Just need to get a base line established. I like the random range idea of making the group of 100 soldiers deal damage of 80 to 120 points of damage, but feel that may be too big of a swing before other modifiers.
6. ## Good title for a medieval city builder?

I understand this post is a bit old, but I wanted to offer my two cents. My suggestion would be to use a one word game name. Some suggestions could be: Psicite Astron Selenus Terrogen Vanadon Beresil Phagon As for the reason to pick any one name, could be that the title is the name of your world, it could be the name of an object you need to retrieve, it be be the name of a castle that you need to conquer.
7. ## To use or not use RNG in combat?

Here is the scenario I have pertaining to a combat system I am jotting down on paper. The attacker has 100 soldiers each with 1 attack point and 3 health points. The defender has the same. All the player has to do is press a button and combat is all computed then the player is just shown the results. From my current example, I would have the attacker's soldiers do 100 points of damage to the defender resulting in 33 defenders being killed. The same happens to the attacker's soldiers. This continues until both sides defeat each other at the same time and it ends in a draw. I feel if I introduce a random factor, the battle could get lop-sided and the smaller side could not recover So I thought I would ask the community for their opinions of the very simple combat scenario. The game concept I am designing deals with combat from outside the actual conflict. Sort of like a coach and a sports team. You give orders and watch as your units perform them. The game does start small, with 100 to 200 soldiers (all the same) and could grow to larger numbers as well. I was just wanting to get a system in place for small conflict that could scale into larger ones. Each side has a unit type (soldier) a unit quantity (100). The player give the order, and the computer does the rest. After both players give their orders, the results are computed instantly. Keeping all things equal, Attack power, defensive power, etc. (I need a baseline) What would be the best way to determine damage? Static numbers, or RNG numbers? To use or not use RNG in combat?
8. ## Lore in a game. Why are we fighting?

I have an idea about a modern-day war game, where players build up their base and attack other players. What I was unsure of was if a game like that needs a back story, a reason why everyone is fighting each other. So what do you think? Should a game with base building and PVP need a backstory? If so, what are some appealing ideas? Why is the world at world? How do new players coming into the game change the story at hand? If at all? Will there ever be a single victor? If so, what happens then? Let us have a discussion...
9. ## NPC in the rankings

How do you feel about having computer controlled players holding a place in the top 100 list? In a competitive game I am thinking about, players can combat each other to grow their character as well as fight computer controlled characters. But when the players look at the rankings, should they NPC accounts be included. Without the NPC in the rankings, you could see that you are ranked #19, the player in #18 place is stronger than you by 5 levels, but when you go to fight the other characters that are your level, you cannot see #18 because he is too strong, so all you fight are the NPC and players weaker than you but with in your attack range. This could be misleading to the player as they feel they are stronger than they really are. And with NPC accounts in the rankings, player can really see how they rank up to other accounts that are as strong as them. They can see how many accounts stand between them and the next rank. On a side note, some NPC accounts are marked as NPC while others are not.
10. ## Game I'm making is not fun

One idea is change the enemy from Zombies to something else. Zombies are over used, but squirrels are not. Give the player a goal that the enemy is trying to stop the player from doing. Imagine the player as a forest ranger with a bag full of acorns. Their jobs is to plant trees in the forest and the enemies (i.e. Squirrels) are attacking him to try and stop the player. If you make it level based, the player could have more fun achieving the next level. On level 1, plant 30 trees. Level 2 requires 50 trees. While the player attempts to plant the acorns, he has to shoot the unlimited onslaught of squirrels that want to take away the acorns and kill the player.