Jump to content
  • Advertisement

suliman

Member
  • Content count

    1503
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1662 Excellent

2 Followers

About suliman

  • Rank
    Contributor

Personal Information

  • Role
    Game Designer
  • Interests
    Art
    Design
    Programming

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. suliman

    ARPG Weapon Types Feedback

    So weapons have both a unique chance to crit but also unique crit damage modifier? Is this easy to communicate to the player and/or really needed? And what is the logic behind this? Is crit a specific thing (like headshot) or simply that the weapon just deals more damage with some shots? Borderlands had a nice idea here where crits would only be awarded when hitting exposed/vulnerable parts of the enemy. Problably hard to do in an ARPG though. Personally i feel crits doesnt really add much in hectic games as it just affects the dps over time. And if you separate crit chance and crit modifier (and weapons already have different damage per shot) you risk making it even more just muddled for the player to figure out the dps (which is what it only comes down to anyway). In a tactical game with few, important hits crits do makes sense since that can change the outcome, but in a diablo-esque game with a stream of hits (sometimes several per second) i dont see the point to be honest
  2. suliman

    ARPG Weapon Types Feedback

    Why do you need duel wield for pistol? It's not something used in the real world. I guess it depends on what feel you want the game to have. It's like shooting several arrows from a bow at the same time; if that would work people would do it. They don't. Many games that add dual-wielding pistols are balanced so that just using "one pistol" is very weak compared to other weapon choices, which means that is not an option. How are rifles and assault rifles different? Rate of fire, crit and damage all forms DPS which is normally all that matters in an ARPG. Range or different armour penetration might make a more important differance. Or maybe they use different ammo (if you use ammo). Try to avoid adding "everything" to the game, if many things are the same mechanics-wise anyway.
  3. suliman

    Action points or not?

    Again it depends on what kind of game you want to make. Complicated/many stats = Slower. Feels more like a simulation. The player needs to calculate more. More streamlined = Feels more like a tactical game, like chess. I would prefer to easily understand what each stats do, than a system that might seem more "realistic" on paper. These often do not work out so well in games. I want my choices when choosing or developing my characters to be distinct and have a ingame effect.
  4. In the vain of Sid Meiers Pirates! here is my sweet first alpha. You can plunder ships, run missions and rank up, buy new ships, upgrades, specialists, find hidden cities and cutthroat hideouts. Oh and get your own estates once you hit the noble ranks! Not all ships and stuff are in the game yet but you can buy up to frigates. Plz download and comment. Are the fights fun? Is the map confusing? Find all the controls (customizable) and "how to play" that explains all the basics from the ESC-menu ingame. Download (60 MB, works on windows only) Plunder Horizon, Alpha 1 Unfold the spoiler below to see more ingame screenshots. More pics:
  5. The armies would work exactly like in modern total war games moving on the map, but there wouldn't be any cities on the map. Instead the region you end your turn in determines if you fight that region (actually fight all enemy armies positioned in that region). Having "free movement" (a tilebased grid, instead of region-based movement) might make it easier for me to handle land vs sea. Land-armies would turn into "transported" armies if you move into a sea tile, and turn back into their normal state if moved back. Navies ("armies" composed of ship units) would only be allowed to move on sea tiles. But the region-based movement would simplify for the player I think. And be more in line with what the player would expect from such a game-map. Im still not decided Changing it into region-movement isn't trivial with my setup so that is also a factor.
  6. Lorenzo: You are not being very helpful (or didnt read). I already explained twice that there are NOT loads of armies, just a few. So there are no "hundreds of armies". The MAP is risk-like, that's all. The "armies" work very differently as I explained. Placement within the territory would not matter for deciding what armies fight what other armies (if several armies in a region you attack, you will fight them all, one by one). Exact location would only matter when moving over several regions as the distance of a large region might mean you will not get so very far in the next region (or ocean).
  7. Why massive micromanagement? I never said it's exactly like risk, just that it map works the same way. You will move armies but each army will have up to 20 units (like total war) so "one army" is often enough to conquer a region. Or did I missunderstand you?
  8. This is "hobby projects classified" so no there is no pay. The project is just for fun and learning. As I said it's pure topdown so no character profiles are needed, just topdown "sprites" (as you can see in my screenshots) but animated. Both concepts and actually making them and animating them. I can make use of sprite sheets or export sprites myself from 3d studio max or similar.
  9. Hi Im doing a turnbased strategy game like (the management part of) total war. It's near sci-fi post apoc, you control an empire in ww3. The map is risk-like (each managemable "city" is a region of land such as "Iberian peninsula" or "west coast US"). There is 4 turns to a year (but i might change that to 2) so each turn is 3 months. Realistic army movement in the modern age wouold mean you can pretty much go anywhere on the globe in 3 months. I dont want that. I want it to take time (turns) to manouver to the other side of your empire, and have fronts and guarded territory behind the front. But how breaking to immersion is it to have armies move only let's say a third of the US width per turn (which would be the typical distance of a single region)? Or any other comment on this issue?
  10. Well those are armies so they would be comprised of alot of units. Im thinking base speed would be similar to the distance of a standard region or more. Yeah i have to test it more of course. Still not sure it's the best solution (to mix free move and regions) but might be interesting
  11. Hi Im doing a turnbased strategy game like (the management part of) total war. It's near sci-fi post apoc, you control an empire in ww3. The map is risk-like (each managemable "city" is a region of land such as "western europe" or "west coast US"). Im thinking about leaving army/navy movement "free", meaning they move on a high-resolution grid instead of jumping between the actual regions (which is normally what these games do). See pic below for an example. You move both your armies (blue rectangles. The rightmost army will move along the lines into the western region) into the western region and press end turn. Both these armies will then fight in that region and try to conquer it. Is this too wierd? It gives distance a better feel than single-jump between regions, but might become unclear to the player. (basically an army/navy is always in a single region (the region "under" the current tile), it just uses the real distance when moving around).
  12. Yeah there must be something like that going on. I started picking apart this very old project but it become to big of an effort so i just declared them in global scope. Not so pretty but it works well. I will certainly avoid this in new projects I start:) Thanks!
  13. But as far as I understand I dont. Did you look at the files?
  14. Thank you all for helping out! I still dont get it to work. In unit.h I have no reference to stuff from world.h so i dont understand how it can be circular. Below are the full files (they are somewhat long but most of it is very simple members so quick to scroll through). world.h unit.h
  15. That is not the case, i misspoke (they do not include each other in that way) I could rearrange some stuff and can now remove "include world.h" from unit.h BUT cRegion still complains that army is an undefined class even though the file (world.h) includes unit.h. How can I find where the error lies now?
  • Advertisement
×

Important Information

By using GameDev.net, you agree to our community Guidelines, Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy.

Participate in the game development conversation and more when you create an account on GameDev.net!

Sign me up!