Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10 11

Author Topic: Aqizzar's Automatic Annihilation Ængine  (Read 11773 times)

Duke 2.0

  • Bay Watcher
  • [CONQUISTADOR:BIRD]
    • View Profile
Re: Aqizzar's Automatic Annihilation Ængine
« Reply #120 on: August 01, 2009, 01:02:22 am »

 If the game is going to be like BrikWars in the ways I imagine, one would have to either be very general(Immune to flying metals) or very specific(Resistant to Fire on fields terrain during a Full Moon). Either way, it would be a bastard to work through. That is, unless there is a generalized Melee and Ranged resistances.
Logged
Buck up friendo, we're all on the level here.
I would bet money Andrew has edited things retroactively, except I can't prove anything because it was edited retroactively.
MIERDO MILLAS DE VIBORAS FURIOSAS PARA ESTRANGULARTE MUERTO

Aqizzar

  • Bay Watcher
  • There is no 'U'.
    • View Profile
Re: Aqizzar's Automatic Annihilation Ængine
« Reply #121 on: August 01, 2009, 01:35:35 am »

Oh yes, I've been thinking about it a lot.  I'll post something bigger later, but as for weapons and resistances, it's an open question, which I'll need a lot of help with just to think of stuff and interactions.

I have some screwy philosophies about game design.  On some level, I consider complexity to be vulgar, and that the mark of an elegant system is simplicity.  Likewise, especially after perusing games like FATAL and Synnibarr (for God's sake, don't look them up), imagery-dependent mechanics strike me as... juvenile would be the best word.

This is a bad approach.  On my first attempt to design differences between attack and defense types, I filed it down to less than a half-dozen total, which were so universal that I had to explain them to myself.  I was in danger of simplifying and generalizing the system out of existence.  So I'm taking a different tack.

If people are going to design their own armies, they're going to want the rules to reflect their creative vision.  Short of letting players design their own rules (dark can of worms if there ever was one), I'm thinking there will be maybe a dozen or two types of attacks and defenses, representing some universal distinctions like "Hard" armor or "Skin" armor, and "Fire" or "Bullet" attacks.  Somewhere in the thread, I said that comparing attacks and defenses work by adding different sizes of bonus dice to the models' base stats (or the weapon's base for guns and such).  Comparing the types on a table (think Pokemon), will make the dice of one or the other larger or smaller.
Logged
And here is where my beef pops up like a looming awkward boner.
Please amplify your relaxed states.
Quote from: PTTG??
The ancients built these quote pyramids to forever store vast quantities of rage.

Aqizzar

  • Bay Watcher
  • There is no 'U'.
    • View Profile
Re: Aqizzar's Automatic Annihilation Ængine
« Reply #122 on: August 15, 2009, 08:26:08 am »

Two weeks, and not even a bump from Org.  Well, I'm finally on vacation, and I'm going to get this stupid project into a playable state if it kills me.  Or not, but whatever, I've got it on my mind.  Making progress...


Among other things, I've changed up the rolling system.  A while back, I posted a big list of check numbers for morale tests and charges.  It now strikes me as kind of silly for there to be concrete numbers for such things.

There are two kinds of die rolls.  "Contest" rolls are what normal attacks consist of - two units adding their base stats and bonus dice, with victory to the highest.  "Check" rolls are anything that involves just one unit - called shots, initiating charges, break tests, poisons, difficult terrain, whatever.  For these, a die (determined by type, with more tables) has to be rolled under the unit's base stat.

Modifiers like type advantages and leadership bonuses adjust the size of the die rolled "up" or "down" depending on the type of test - sizes being 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12.

I'll get to the types and advantage tables and such probably later today.  First, Army Catalog design, soon.
Logged
And here is where my beef pops up like a looming awkward boner.
Please amplify your relaxed states.
Quote from: PTTG??
The ancients built these quote pyramids to forever store vast quantities of rage.

bjlong

  • Bay Watcher
  • [INVISIBLE]
    • View Profile
Re: Aqizzar's Automatic Annihilation Ængine
« Reply #123 on: August 15, 2009, 02:52:34 pm »

Hoo buddy. While I agree with your decision to make contest and check rolls seperate, that'll cause issues with test units. Specifically, that'll be a lot of work for the makers.

For clarification, what are the general types of modifiers? Leaders and leadership, obviously, but are we including terrain? Backup? armaments?

And when you say Army Catalog, do you mean the weakness/strength chart, or test units?

Also, can I have a pony?
Logged
I hesitate to click the last spoiler tag because I expect there to be Elder Gods in it or something.

Aqizzar

  • Bay Watcher
  • There is no 'U'.
    • View Profile
Re: Aqizzar's Automatic Annihilation Ængine
« Reply #124 on: August 15, 2009, 03:29:11 pm »

Big Post Ahoy!  Answers some questions.  I've been writing this on-and-off all day, so it might meander a little...



Preliminary Army Design and Components

Spoiler: Models (click to show/hide)

Spoiler: Attacks (click to show/hide)

Spoiler: Defenses (click to show/hide)

Spoiler: Special (click to show/hide)

Spoiler: Elaborations (click to show/hide)

These four elements (Models, Attacks, Defenses, Specials) constitute the Army Catalog, and the building blocks of units.  Units are made up of at least one Model, one basic Defense, and one close combat Attack.  That's just to avoid any weird situations like a model that can't fight - while perfectly applicable to vehicles and the like, that sort of thing is Way In The Future, behind making sure the damn game works at all.  The actual Unit creation rules will be a full chapter in themselves, and not really necessary until after I test things out with my example armies.  The Army List is all the completed Units, and any special non-unit-dependent army-wide rules, but I haven't decided if I want that, and it's WITF anyway.  Then of course the Army is whatever the player decides to field from the list.



That's where I stand.  Now I need some tables of Attack and Model/Defense Natures, more tables for Bravery and Logic rolls, decide what to do with Extra Level Defenses, make Range Indexes, some simple terrain rules...  Then just throw some placeholder numbers into my experimental example armies, and a playable V0.01 will be go.  Not playable in any meaningful sense, but enough to make sure the combat system actually works.
« Last Edit: August 15, 2009, 03:31:32 pm by Aqizzar »
Logged
And here is where my beef pops up like a looming awkward boner.
Please amplify your relaxed states.
Quote from: PTTG??
The ancients built these quote pyramids to forever store vast quantities of rage.

bjlong

  • Bay Watcher
  • [INVISIBLE]
    • View Profile
Re: Aqizzar's Automatic Annihilation Ængine
« Reply #125 on: August 16, 2009, 07:59:43 am »

Just a note: You've neglected to mention any drawbacks to being a solid-type character. It seems to me that there should be some--pain exists for a reason. Perhaps a general penalty in defensive rolls?

Let me try to sum up: when we design a unit, we will have to choose:

  • The stats previously covered (#MFRZWSATIBL), some of which are co-dependant (though which ones are somewhat up in the air.)
  • The model type.
  • The model nature
  • The basic level defense (which is different from previously-mentioned stats), which will have T and A bonuses built in
  • The defensive nature
  • The Base Use type
  • The Target Effect
  • The Damage Nature
  • Some Bonus attack die to be determined later

I think I like this system, but would it not be easier for the attack to follow an "inventory" type selection? We could design units with an innate attack, and then have them use equipment to change their attacks. That way, we could use a set of weapons to make sure the units are balanced. Of course, designing one's own weapons works, too. It would also bring in symmetry: you'd have a basic level defense and a basic level attack. This might make it a little DnD-ish, but we could make it so that looting corpses takes 2 turns, and you've got a penalty in defense during the period, so only the most desperate scavengers will chance it. (Edit: If you decide to allow looting at all.)

Also, can you explain the Base Strength and bonus die section a little more? I don't know what you're trying to get across there.
« Last Edit: August 16, 2009, 02:16:50 pm by bjlong »
Logged
I hesitate to click the last spoiler tag because I expect there to be Elder Gods in it or something.

Boksi

  • Bay Watcher
  • Everyone's dumb in their own special way
    • View Profile
Re: Aqizzar's Automatic Annihilation Ængine
« Reply #126 on: August 16, 2009, 08:20:04 am »

Perhaps you could give us a few simple examples of units, weapons, etc.? I believe those would be a great help to everybody interested, since we get to see what you're imagining it as.
Logged
[BODY_DETAIL:NAIL:NAIL:NAIL]
[HAMMER:HAMMER:HAMMER]

[TSU_NOUN:nose]
[SUN_TSU_NOUN:art:war]

Aqizzar

  • Bay Watcher
  • There is no 'U'.
    • View Profile
Re: Aqizzar's Automatic Annihilation Ængine
« Reply #127 on: August 16, 2009, 04:04:01 pm »

It's obvious the time has come to stop kicking around theoretically and make some working examples.  I already sketched out some example armies, designed to use a lot of different mechanics, and I've so far been building ideas around what I think I need to make the examples work.  Then I just turn that around into a more general system.  However, I haven't assigned any hard numbers to things yet, so I'm making this up as I type it.


Holy crap.  Well, I hope that at least starts to clear up how I'm approaching this.  And the last (first) question-
Just a note: You've neglected to mention any drawbacks to being a solid-type character. It seems to me that there should be some--pain exists for a reason. Perhaps a general penalty in defensive rolls?

The drawback is that Solid models cost more, because they're harder to kill.  Point Value is where everything will eventually have to balance out, but the only way to really gauge that is to throw some example armies at each other, and doling out approximate values after I see what works and what doesn't.
« Last Edit: August 16, 2009, 04:08:03 pm by Aqizzar »
Logged
And here is where my beef pops up like a looming awkward boner.
Please amplify your relaxed states.
Quote from: PTTG??
The ancients built these quote pyramids to forever store vast quantities of rage.

Boksi

  • Bay Watcher
  • Everyone's dumb in their own special way
    • View Profile
Re: Aqizzar's Automatic Annihilation Ængine
« Reply #128 on: August 16, 2009, 04:10:10 pm »

Thanks. That wall of text is very useful. I didn't realize you wanted it to be possible to have multiple natures, for example, and it'll be useful to standardize army lists.
Logged
[BODY_DETAIL:NAIL:NAIL:NAIL]
[HAMMER:HAMMER:HAMMER]

[TSU_NOUN:nose]
[SUN_TSU_NOUN:art:war]

Aqizzar

  • Bay Watcher
  • There is no 'U'.
    • View Profile
Re: Aqizzar's Automatic Annihilation Ængine
« Reply #129 on: August 16, 2009, 04:35:35 pm »

I should throw in something about Natures.  Models and Defenses use one list of Natures, representing what they're made of or effected by.  Attacks have their own list, representing how they do damage.  In my examples, "Flesh" would be more effected by Fire, "Piercing" would work better on Hard stuff, etc.  Obviously, a lot of Natures for Models and Defenses will represent more what they're vulnerable to, with no concurrent advantage.  The incentive is they become a lot cheaper.

If no relevant Nature is listed for the situation, the Attacks and Defenses just work as listed.  However, I plan to arrange them all in a spreadsheet, so there's really no limit to how many modifiers can be attached to each Nature.  Allowing multiple natures is necessary for full representation - It shouldn't fuck anything up with double-bonuses, because the Defense's Nature alters the Attack's die while the Model's Nature alters the Toughness die.

All of these different tags are of course placeholders for now.  Nothing is set in stone, and that's probably what I should work on next.  It's not actually critical for testing the system's basic function, but I've made a big deal of it.
Logged
And here is where my beef pops up like a looming awkward boner.
Please amplify your relaxed states.
Quote from: PTTG??
The ancients built these quote pyramids to forever store vast quantities of rage.

bjlong

  • Bay Watcher
  • [INVISIBLE]
    • View Profile
Re: Aqizzar's Automatic Annihilation Ængine
« Reply #130 on: August 16, 2009, 04:55:44 pm »

Very nice!

I only have one suggestion: scale the points up a bit more, so that we're able to fine-tune the costs without resorting to decimals or fractions. It seems to me that the difference between 10 and 11 might be very large, and scaling down is usually easier than scaling up, IMO, once there's a system going.
Logged
I hesitate to click the last spoiler tag because I expect there to be Elder Gods in it or something.

Aqizzar

  • Bay Watcher
  • There is no 'U'.
    • View Profile
Re: Aqizzar's Automatic Annihilation Ængine
« Reply #131 on: August 16, 2009, 05:01:29 pm »

What did I say about pulling the point values out of my ass?  I have no idea what those are supposed to represent.  Likewise, I don't have a clue where to start, except the foolhardy guess-and-test plan I laid out.

Ideally, I'll write up some stupidly complex algorithms to calculate values, handled by a downloadable program.
Logged
And here is where my beef pops up like a looming awkward boner.
Please amplify your relaxed states.
Quote from: PTTG??
The ancients built these quote pyramids to forever store vast quantities of rage.

bjlong

  • Bay Watcher
  • [INVISIBLE]
    • View Profile
Re: Aqizzar's Automatic Annihilation Ængine
« Reply #132 on: August 16, 2009, 05:17:17 pm »

Speaking of, do you want the crap-tacular excel work I did with the stats? If not, that's OK, but I'd figure I'd ask.
Logged
I hesitate to click the last spoiler tag because I expect there to be Elder Gods in it or something.

Aqizzar

  • Bay Watcher
  • There is no 'U'.
    • View Profile
Re: Aqizzar's Automatic Annihilation Ængine
« Reply #133 on: August 16, 2009, 05:19:30 pm »

Sure, but what is it?  An Excel calc-sheet?  Because I'm notoriously bad with using them, but I'll take a look.
Logged
And here is where my beef pops up like a looming awkward boner.
Please amplify your relaxed states.
Quote from: PTTG??
The ancients built these quote pyramids to forever store vast quantities of rage.

bjlong

  • Bay Watcher
  • [INVISIBLE]
    • View Profile
Re: Aqizzar's Automatic Annihilation Ængine
« Reply #134 on: August 17, 2009, 01:13:01 am »

Yes, it's an excel calc-sheet. The formulae are all simple mathematical operations, logical functions, and the EXP function.

To design a unit:
  • Go down to the "Generally" cell (A31). The titles are mostly self explanatory on what each cell is.
  • Fill in the Max cell under the Left cell. This sets the maximum amount of moneys you're willing to spend on stats alone. Not necessary for the rest of the process, but damned helpful when designing with a budget.
  • Fill in the M, Z, #, and L stats
  • Fill in either the S or T stat next. Note that the min/max functions will immediately drop to 0 for that stat--that's fine, it's normal.
  • Fill in the other S or T stat. From here on out, don't change the S or T stat w/o deleting both stats first. I ran into troubles trying to get a workaround for this.
  • Fill in the A stat. This stat has the most leeway, by far, among the constrained stats.
  • Fill in I
  • Fill in F, R next.
  • Fill in B. At this point, you're done! If you go back to tinker, remember that you might have to tinker more than you want, if you go back several steps.

As you can see, there are some issues to be worked out. For example, the recursive problems. Buuut the system works alright. You can fudge the stats +/- 1 for the recursive stuff, and it's generally in the OK. The costs are about 215 for the base unit you put out, and you can see the results.

The link: http://rapidshare.com/files/268253149/Units.xls.html

(Edit: fixed the instructions.)
« Last Edit: August 17, 2009, 08:45:01 am by bjlong »
Logged
I hesitate to click the last spoiler tag because I expect there to be Elder Gods in it or something.
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10 11