Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Mephansteras]

I think your loading screens should be squads of guys fighting it out. Doesn't even have to be running the main combat engine, just do some simple calculations so the player can watch little battles go on while they wait. Assuming it's more than a few seconds load time, anyway.

[Clownmite]

I think your loading screens should be squads of guys fighting it out. Doesn't even have to be running the main combat engine, just do some simple calculations so the player can watch little battles go on while they wait. Assuming it's more than a few seconds load time, anyway.

I like that idea a lot. I might have to steal it.

Procedural load screens sound cool. Will they be things like giving abridged histories of cities/nations in the current world?

[Koliup]

As long as we have a step-by-step magic system, I'm game. I'm glad you liked that idea. Only your imagination should be the limit when it comes to spellcasting, rather than the classic "cast x to make y" kinda spells.

I agree with this. And building off of what Leatra has said, I would like to suggest a magic system that operates like building blocks(Sorry if I'm stealing your idea, Leatra.), first, you define what it does(animating a corpse/starting a fire), then you add how long/how powerful it should be(super-zombie/cigarette lighting), and then reach/blast(A whole bunch of corpses around X area Y squares away from you are animated as super-zombies/You touch the cigarette on the same square as you and light it.).
I feel it necessary to mention that the 'what it does' bit would probably look like: bolt of [insert negative energy/fire/cold/whatevermancy you do here], touch of [see before], cone of [--], etc.
Each option would add to the total 'cost' of the spell. So super-zombie radius spell would be very expensive(Potent+range+permanent), while lighting the cigarette is peanuts(miniscule+touch+instant).
Thoughts?

[Ultima Ratio Regum]

Procedurally generated loading screens. Awesome.

RE: Magic Systems

The biggest difference between a flexible Rule Magic system and Whatevermancy is how difficult it is to implement and balance. Whatevermancy is very easy- you define a spell cost, and a specific effect, and you're done. The user has extremely limited power to alter the spell- no toning down a Fireball to light a cigarette, for example. A more flexible system would involve specifying a series of individual effects and modifications a magic user can cause, and then figuring out how they all interact with one another. This obviously makes it more difficult to balance, and more difficult for the AI to use intelligently.

If this was going to be more of an RPG, I'd encourage Rule Magic since learning the ins and outs of an internally consistent magic system is always great fun. Since this is a strategy game, I'd say Whatevermancy with specific spells and effects would be the way to go.

Glad you like the idea!

Hmm, I see exactly what you mean. I do want the AI to be using everything sensibly (since I think the current version does so very nicely) and a more complex system would certainly be much more challenging. Interwoven systems also makes magic a bigger focus in the game, which it isn't. Thanks for the thoughts - those are all really good points. Hmm. /pondering

I don't know how many loading screens there are in Skyrim because CK isn't out yet but Oblivion definitely had less than 120. Procedurally generated loading screens are a good idea.

As long as we have a step-by-step magic system, I'm game. I'm glad you liked that idea. Only your imagination should be the limit when it comes to spellcasting, rather than the classic "cast x to make y" kinda spells.

Thanks - there's a huge number of preset ones, but there will also be a ton of procgen'd ones each time too. I definitely like the step-by-step, I'm just still not sure about the combination of magic schools or not. Still, it's not going to appear for ages either way; my focus for this next week is on redoing creatures and starting to store them properly in 'Armies', 'Cities' or 'Wild' groupings (these are broad; more on this later)...

I think your loading screens should be squads of guys fighting it out. Doesn't even have to be running the main combat engine, just do some simple calculations so the player can watch little battles go on while they wait. Assuming it's more than a few seconds load time, anyway.

Really nice idea - I might stick that in as a random alternative, sometimes, or maybe for shorter loading screens.

Procedural load screens sound cool. Will they be things like giving abridged histories of cities/nations in the current world?

Exactly this - it'll give you information about a city, nation, particular ruler, particular unique monster, artifact, etc , with enough variation the same wording, so "Artifact X was created in the city of Y" and "Artifact A was created in the city of B" shouldn't repeat very often. By which I mean, a variety of ways to talk about artifacts, for instance.

I agree with this. And building off of what Leatra has said, I would like to suggest a magic system that operates like building blocks(Sorry if I'm stealing your idea, Leatra.), first, you define what it does(animating a corpse/starting a fire), then you add how long/how powerful it should be(super-zombie/cigarette lighting), and then reach/blast(A whole bunch of corpses around X area Y squares away from you are animated as super-zombies/You touch the cigarette on the same square as you and light it.).
I feel it necessary to mention that the 'what it does' bit would probably look like: bolt of [insert negative energy/fire/cold/whatevermancy you do here], touch of [see before], cone of [--], etc.
Each option would add to the total 'cost' of the spell. So super-zombie radius spell would be very expensive(Potent+range+permanent), while lighting the cigarette is peanuts(miniscule+touch+instant).
Thoughts?

I do like this idea. It also gives room for the AI to make judgments about how much time they have to spend casting a more powerful spell, and lets the AI assign protection to mages according to how powerful they are, and therefore how much time they need to cast their spells. How 'cost' factors in is going to be an interesting one, additionally because I'm vaguely considering tying magic to the deity system, but that's a far future idea.

In the mean time, I should have some more info up in the near future about the work I'm doing on creatures at the moment (devblog on Monday), and maybe soon some improved screenshots of the view-creature screen...

[Ivefan]

Glad you like the idea!

Hmm, I see exactly what you mean. I do want the AI to be using everything sensibly (since I think the current version does so very nicely) and a more complex system would certainly be much more challenging. Interwoven systems also makes magic a bigger focus in the game, which it isn't. Thanks for the thoughts - those are all really good points. Hmm. /pondering

-cut-

I do like this idea. It also gives room for the AI to make judgments about how much time they have to spend casting a more powerful spell, and lets the AI assign protection to mages according to how powerful they are, and therefore how much time they need to cast their spells. How 'cost' factors in is going to be an interesting one, additionally because I'm vaguely considering tying magic to the deity system, but that's a far future idea.

The flexible or an extensive magic system is awesome ... If you make a game about mages which you've said ain't your focus.
Tying magic to deities would basically turn mages into priests and mana into divine favor, unless mages gain their power by intruding upon the gods.
Or that gods become gods by claiming a realm for them self.
Let me describe the system in Malazan book of the fallen.
We have the mundane world and then we have Warrens. The Warrens each have an affinity such as light, dark, shadow, fire and a bunch that has less clearly defined affinities. A warren can be associated to a god but a god does not necessarily belong to a warren.
Mages usually draw from one warren and his craft is defined by it, but there is exceptions.
Priests is granted power from their god but is usually a mage too.
I should point out that mortals can ascend and become power onto themselves or even gain a throne of a warren and thus become a god.
This is mostly a simple summary because there's exceptions, Elder gods and a lot of other shit going on that to understand you'll actually need to read all 10 books

[Ultima Ratio Regum]

The flexible or an extensive magic system is awesome ... If you make a game about mages which you've said ain't your focus.
Tying magic to deities would basically turn mages into priests and mana into divine favor, unless mages gain their power by intruding upon the gods.
Or that gods become gods by claiming a realm for them self.
Let me describe the system in Malazan book of the fallen.
We have the mundane world and then we have Warrens. The Warrens each have an affinity such as light, dark, shadow, fire and a bunch that has less clearly defined affinities. A warren can be associated to a god but a god does not necessarily belong to a warren.
Mages usually draw from one warren and his craft is defined by it, but there is exceptions.
Priests is granted power from their god but is usually a mage too.
I should point out that mortals can ascend and become power onto themselves or even gain a throne of a warren and thus become a god.
This is mostly a simple summary because there's exceptions, Elder gods and a lot of other shit going on that to understand you'll actually need to read all 10 books

Interesting! You've actually touched upon one of my ideas for mages/gods - either it can be gained by favour, or it can be gained by doing something against a particular god and intruding on their domain. I'm still not sure whether I'm going to take that direction, but I think it could offer a logical point to add deities (procedurally-generated ones to some extent, of course!) into the game.

In the mean time, today's devblog entry! I talk a bit about falling down stairs and killing yourself and a bit about climate, but mostly about resistances. I'd really like to get people's views on the fact I've decided to put only two resistances in the game, and how this might work out. http://www.ultimaratioregum.co.uk/game/2012/01/30/building-a-creature-part-2/

[BishopX]

In the context your using the term resistances, I really don't like that term. I think that susceptibility to heat/cold and tolerance for toxins are important things to track, but once you move away from nethack style boolean resistances to some sort of continuum, they should just be considered another stat. I think this is especially true when you talk about poison resistance. While it's cool that hydra's are hard to poison and have a toxic bite, in a strategy roguelike centered out medieval warfare, the most important test of poison resistance is probably how it handles water. Water near armies has a tendency to be vile. Either it's a mile down stream from another unit and filled with waste, or it's a mile down stream from some dead bodies, or it's been poisoned by some dastardly guerrilla warrior. Unlike hydra's, which are dealt with by heroes and monstrous soldiers and the cream of the crop, everyone has to drink.


In terms of heat resistance, I think a hot/cold continuum would work best, since things like frostbite and hypothermia from fording an icy stream are fun too. What this would mean is that things that deal well with cold (e.g. yetis) probably wouldn't do well in the heat and things that dealt with heat (e.g. cyclops) would have exceptionally poorly in the cold. A complete resistance to fire (e.g. demons) would just be an extreme version the ability to tolerate heat. Clothing and armor should probably also alter this stat.

With regards to resistances you missed, I think disease resistance and some form of psychic resistance are the only two that come to mind (acid resistance being stupid, and lightning resistance being too boolean due to the amounts of current a medieval warrior is likely to encounter).Disease resistance is important enough to separate from constitution and poison resistance because a)it allows soldiers raised in cities to be hardy in a different way than the barbarian from the frozen north and b) big strong hearty hydras get sick too. Much like poison, disease plays a big part in medieval warfare (arguably a bigger role than battles), and while tracking the number of your soldiers who have the the sniffles might be a little boring, things like cholera, bubonic plague, severe flu, scarlet fever, polio, whooping cough, smallpox, malaria, legionaries disease, leprosy and whatever fantastic maladies you dream up would be fun to track.

[Ivefan]

In terms of heat resistance, I think a hot/cold continuum would work best, since things like frostbite and hypothermia from fording an icy stream are fun too. What this would mean is that things that deal well with cold (e.g. yetis) probably wouldn't do well in the heat and things that dealt with heat (e.g. cyclops) would have exceptionally poorly in the cold. A complete resistance to fire (e.g. demons) would just be an extreme version the ability to tolerate heat. Clothing and armor should probably also alter this stat.

(acid resistance being stupid, and lightning resistance being too boolean due to the amounts of current a medieval warrior is likely to encounter)

Problem is that there can exist creatures that is very resistant to anything.
Say a stone golem(UUR include that in geomancy or not) would probably not take damage from fire, cold or lightning, unless its hot enough to melt stone, cold enough to freeze it in place.
If you want DF level of complexity you can add resistances to fire and ice as a temperature that needs to be overcome, but then you'll need to define the temperature of everything. electricity resistance is a bit more complicated due to messing with nerves of organics and giving heat.

[BishopX]

In terms of heat resistance, I think a hot/cold continuum would work best, since things like frostbite and hypothermia from fording an icy stream are fun too. What this would mean is that things that deal well with cold (e.g. yetis) probably wouldn't do well in the heat and things that dealt with heat (e.g. cyclops) would have exceptionally poorly in the cold. A complete resistance to fire (e.g. demons) would just be an extreme version the ability to tolerate heat. Clothing and armor should probably also alter this stat.

(acid resistance being stupid, and lightning resistance being too boolean due to the amounts of current a medieval warrior is likely to encounter)

Problem is that there can exist creatures that is very resistant to anything.
Say a stone golem(UUR include that in geomancy or not) would probably not take damage from fire, cold or lightning, unless its hot enough to melt stone, cold enough to freeze it in place.
If you want DF level of complexity you can add resistances to fire and ice as a temperature that needs to be overcome, but then you'll need to define the temperature of everything. electricity resistance is a bit more complicated due to messing with nerves of organics and giving heat.

Well, the first question is whether or not there are golems, the second question is how "hitpoints" are going to be handled versus a DF style psysics system and the third question is there going to be any kind of electrical damage short of a lightning bolt? With something like a golem I see no reason just giving a massive tolerance for damage wouldn't work, that should solve the "resistant to everything" bit. The reason we tend to think that golems have "resistances" is that D&D separates physical and energy damage. Everything else follows from there. I see no reason to continue that separation in URR, beyond separating hot and cold from physical damage.

In terms of temperature, while it's possible to convert the temperature in damage via some sort of physics engine, I think it is completely unnecessary in URR. All I'm saying is that resistance to fire and ice based damage should be tied to a creatures ability to withstand hot and cold temperature, stat wise. URR mentioned in his blog post that he wanted a mechanic which would limit the range of certain creatures. I thought it would be handy if he rolled one of his two resistances into that mechanic, just to keep things simpler.

In terms of electricity, I'm not foreseeing any situation where electricity will come into play aside from lightning bolts. Not much is resistant to lightning bolts. I see know reason to muck around with lower level of electric power and how much they'll make a given creature twitch when applied to them. Obviously this is a design decision up to URR, but I don't think we need to worry about it all that much.

[Ivefan]

The reason we tend to think that golems have "resistances" is that D&D separates physical and energy damage. Everything else follows from there. I see no reason to continue that separation in URR, beyond separating hot and cold from physical damage.

Or, by not even mixing in D&D into it, just applying logic to it. Burning a rock does not do much, unless you rapidly cool it afterwards. A golem of stone would be the same but with the addition of joints and source of animation as weak points.
The question of resistances mostly only concern magical or supernatural creatures, and who is to say that a creature isn't simply immune to external temperature influences?
The fire/cold scale could be defined as normal temperature and thresholds of what a creature can withstand.

[Ultima Ratio Regum]

In the context your using the term resistances, I really don't like that term. I think that susceptibility to heat/cold and tolerance for toxins are important things to track, but once you move away from nethack style boolean resistances to some sort of continuum, they should just be considered another stat. I think this is especially true when you talk about poison resistance. While it's cool that hydra's are hard to poison and have a toxic bite, in a strategy roguelike centered out medieval warfare, the most important test of poison resistance is probably how it handles water. Water near armies has a tendency to be vile. Either it's a mile down stream from another unit and filled with waste, or it's a mile down stream from some dead bodies, or it's been poisoned by some dastardly guerrilla warrior. Unlike hydra's, which are dealt with by heroes and monstrous soldiers and the cream of the crop, everyone has to drink.


In terms of heat resistance, I think a hot/cold continuum would work best, since things like frostbite and hypothermia from fording an icy stream are fun too. What this would mean is that things that deal well with cold (e.g. yetis) probably wouldn't do well in the heat and things that dealt with heat (e.g. cyclops) would have exceptionally poorly in the cold. A complete resistance to fire (e.g. demons) would just be an extreme version the ability to tolerate heat. Clothing and armor should probably also alter this stat.

With regards to resistances you missed, I think disease resistance and some form of psychic resistance are the only two that come to mind (acid resistance being stupid, and lightning resistance being too boolean due to the amounts of current a medieval warrior is likely to encounter).Disease resistance is important enough to separate from constitution and poison resistance because a)it allows soldiers raised in cities to be hardy in a different way than the barbarian from the frozen north and b) big strong hearty hydras get sick too. Much like poison, disease plays a big part in medieval warfare (arguably a bigger role than battles), and while tracking the number of your soldiers who have the the sniffles might be a little boring, things like cholera, bubonic plague, severe flu, scarlet fever, polio, whooping cough, smallpox, malaria, legionaries disease, leprosy and whatever fantastic maladies you dream up would be fun to track.

I totally agree. It's been changed to heat resistance and cold resistance as of now . Additionally, clothing and armor will indeed affect that stat; also, I've made a note that the more a creature is wearing, the sooner it'll become exhausted from heat in battle, too.

Disease resistance is in, for the reasons you said. I like it, and especially the list of assorted dreadful conditions - I'm sure I'll be able to come up with a few fictional horrific ones, too!

Problem is that there can exist creatures that is very resistant to anything.
Say a stone golem(UUR include that in geomancy or not) would probably not take damage from fire, cold or lightning, unless its hot enough to melt stone, cold enough to freeze it in place.
If you want DF level of complexity you can add resistances to fire and ice as a temperature that needs to be overcome, but then you'll need to define the temperature of everything. electricity resistance is a bit more complicated due to messing with nerves of organics and giving heat.

Well, this kind of resistance comes from materials that creatures might be made from - eg flesh, bone, thick flesh, hide, scales, stone, iron, whatever. I have actually added a temperature function to metals and some other materials, but I intend to expand it to all of them. That's not so much 'resistances' as materials, but I guess having changed hot/cold to a continuum, there's very little difference now.

Well, the first question is whether or not there are golems, the second question is how "hitpoints" are going to be handled versus a DF style psysics system and the third question is there going to be any kind of electrical damage short of a lightning bolt? With something like a golem I see no reason just giving a massive tolerance for damage wouldn't work, that should solve the "resistant to everything" bit. The reason we tend to think that golems have "resistances" is that D&D separates physical and energy damage. Everything else follows from there. I see no reason to continue that separation in URR, beyond separating hot and cold from physical damage.

In terms of temperature, while it's possible to convert the temperature in damage via some sort of physics engine, I think it is completely unnecessary in URR. All I'm saying is that resistance to fire and ice based damage should be tied to a creatures ability to withstand hot and cold temperature, stat wise. URR mentioned in his blog post that he wanted a mechanic which would limit the range of certain creatures. I thought it would be handy if he rolled one of his two resistances into that mechanic, just to keep things simpler.

In terms of electricity, I'm not foreseeing any situation where electricity will come into play aside from lightning bolts. Not much is resistant to lightning bolts. I see know reason to muck around with lower level of electric power and how much they'll make a given creature twitch when applied to them. Obviously this is a design decision up to URR, but I don't think we need to worry about it all that much.

Hitpoints don't exist, but rather limbs and body parts, etc. There are tentatively golems, though they don't exist yet. Lightning/shock/electricity isn't going to play a role at all; I've never been a huge fan of it in fantasy contexts, actually, and I've decided not to include it. Agreed re: hot/cold being related to climate; I've made a note to get a specific formula for that, but I think it'll actually be unique to each creature with a general trend based on climate too.

Or, by not even mixing in D&D into it, just applying logic to it. Burning a rock does not do much, unless you rapidly cool it afterwards. A golem of stone would be the same but with the addition of joints and source of animation as weak points.
The question of resistances mostly only concern magical or supernatural creatures, and who is to say that a creature isn't simply immune to external temperature influences?
The fire/cold scale could be defined as normal temperature and thresholds of what a creature can withstand.

I intend to define them each as exactly that - what they like, and what ranges in each direction they can handle. The further into that region they get, the weaker and less willing to fight creatures will become, though if they're particularly loyal and willing to die from you before, things won't be changed too much if they just get a bit too warm .

[Leatra]

Got an idea about when you are going to release the Alpha? I don't mean to push you but I'm just excited for the game

Poison/disease resistance could be important if there is a plague in the city you are in. Chance of becoming ill, chance of dying from the disease, etc.

Will the player be able to have a home? I understand what this game is about (epic warfare!) but it would be nice to have a house for safety, storage and sleeping if you are just adventuring around solo.

[Muz]

Got an idea about when you are going to release the Alpha? I don't mean to push you but I'm just excited for the game

Ha, I'm aching for a good combat sim roguelike too. Either URR or that new release of DF is looking good. Ah well, I guess I'll just go back to playing IVAN.

[Ultima Ratio Regum]

Got an idea about when you are going to release the Alpha? I don't mean to push you but I'm just excited for the game

Ha, I'm aching for a good combat sim roguelike too. Either URR or that new release of DF is looking good. Ah well, I guess I'll just go back to playing IVAN.

Still looking at some time before the middle of this year, but I can't give any more accurate than that. World generation is basically done, along with various components of various parts of the combat mechanics, which all need pushing into a coherent whole. It may be sooner than I anticipate, but I think it's best to err on the side of caution

In other news, the world generation algorithms have been redone. No longer do we get massive blob-continents, but rather things like this:



Full size @ http://www.ultimaratioregum.co.uk/game/files/2012/02/map1.png

[Mephansteras]

Looks pretty good. Obviously a fairly low-water world, but reasonable for the most part. Although the mountain ranges are oddly N-S/E-W alligned. Might want to tweak them a bit so they don't look so artificial.