Voluntary "Homework Assignment!" - Page 2

Chowlett · May 9, 2002, 20:30

Top Marks that man! Such an easy thing to forget, and I haven't seen it mentioned yet! You may possibly be the first person to point the obvious out to us.

Apologies if we had already thought of this, and I'm just slow

Velociryx · May 9, 2002, 22:11

No...I hadn't seen that mentioned anyplace as yet either...and yes! Another outstanding idea!

As part of my ongoing research, I just purchased a copy of Lords of Magic....it's a very different *sort* of game than what we're shooting for, but it bore enough similarity that I thought I might learn something from it.

And btw, I really like Cyclo's alternative plan of dealing with diplomacy....either way....a "minimize and I'll get back to you" window or a "howdy" and then "me again" approach...both would work quite well and accomplish the goal of allowing the player to take all the time needed to make diplo decisions....

-=Vel=-

Zealot · May 9, 2002, 22:26

Quote:

Originally posted by Velociryx
No...I hadn't seen that mentioned anyplace as yet either...and yes! Another outstanding idea!

You mean my name will reach the Credits?

j/k

Quote:

Originally posted by Velociryx
both would work quite well and accomplish the goal of allowing the player to take all the time needed to make diplo decisions....

Hum, don't forget to include a timer for Multiplayer!

About The General, wow, I can't believe I just spent over 2 hours on it and... lost!

Quite addicting! Simple and addicting!

Now it's bet time.

Cyclotron · May 9, 2002, 22:28

Basically, diplomacy would happen spanning one turn... which is probably more "realistic" anyways, since messages weren't exactly instant back then.

During any player's turn, that player may contact any other player with a deal or offer. The other player recieves that offer at the beginning of their turn. At the end of their turn, the contacted player must make their decsion and do their bargaining.

A question: Should bargaining be absolute? As in, if I say to my friend that I will ally with him for 20 gold, does he choose to either deny or agree to that as is (he must send me a counter-offer if he wants to change the price), or can we bargain a la Civ3 when he contacts me back?

Ramo · May 10, 2002, 00:05

I can't seem to use my mouse in DOS games in Windows XP. I'd appreciate some help.

ravagon · May 10, 2002, 00:16

Quote:

Originally posted by cyclotron7
During any player's turn, that player may contact any other player with a deal or offer. The other player recieves that offer at the beginning of their turn. At the end of their turn, the contacted player must make their decsion and do their bargaining.

This begs the question though as to whether an AI/player can rescind/alter a deal during the course of a round.
For example, if a slightly war weary AI were to offer a peace treaty at the beginning of a players turn, the player would otherwise then be able to loot/pillage/strike unconditionally during his/her turn only to accept the AI's offer at the end (by which point the AI's position might have changed ... drastically).

ravagon · May 10, 2002, 00:18

Quote:

Originally posted by Ramo
I can't seem to use my mouse in DOS games in Windows XP. I'd appreciate some help.

If you're running XP you might not have dos drivers installed.

Cyclotron · May 10, 2002, 00:59

Quote:

Originally posted by ravagon
This begs the question though as to whether an AI/player can rescind/alter a deal during the course of a round.
For example, if a slightly war weary AI were to offer a peace treaty at the beginning of a players turn, the player would otherwise then be able to loot/pillage/strike unconditionally during his/her turn only to accept the AI's offer at the end (by which point the AI's position might have changed ... drastically).

I understand. Well, I would assume that in the negotioation phase at the end of the target player's turn, either player could reject the treaty. The deal cannot be altered during the round, but it can still be altered during the negotioation phase.

Velociryx · May 10, 2002, 09:10

Actually, having slept on it, it seems to me that both methods discussed allow for the exact same thing, with a minor variation in presentation.

Under either method discussed, you would either send the diplomat on his way for a bit while you took your turn, or minimize the diplo window and go about your business...moving units, attacking, taking your turn, whathaveyou, and then, at or near the end of your turn, you could resolve the offer tabled.

's a good point though, regarding the acceptance/declination of a tabled offer, and, IMO, this is the very reason why diplomacy in other games require immediate resolution of the tabled offer (because events during the course of the current turn can, and most often will change the equation.

Two ways come to mind re: handling this.

First, we could allow players faced with a diplomatic offer to do everything but move troops and attack prior to the resolution of the offer. This would enable to you take care of your current build orders, etc, check on whatever reports you needed to consult to determine whether or not you wanted to accept the offer, then resolve the diplomacy before making combat oriented moves (which makes sense....the army is often put on hold pending diplomatic negotiations).

Or, we could freeze the game until the diplo offer has been resolved. Take a "you can look but you can't touch" approach to the various screens. (can consult any screen or report you want, but can't make any changes till the diplo offer is resolved).

Which is preferable, or, is there some other option I've not thought of yet?

-=Vel=-

Chowlett · May 10, 2002, 09:20

As far as I can see, both methods are essentially the same: about the only actions that will affect a diplomatic situation are movement of troops, attacks and possibly gifting of units and money (if the proposal is "downgrade an alliance, which actually doesn't require a response except for "I acknowledge"). Basically, doing anything else shouldn't really affect either person's view of the deal in any significant way.

That said, since stuff you do may, in some minor way, affect the deal on the table, I would suggest the latter approach - you are the monarch, the diplomat is standing before you. You may call your advisors and check the latest reports, but out of pure courtesy you should supply a response to the man before you start telling your peasants to put up a new library. It simplifies things greatly as well - if you could do stuff before considering the offer, then you would have to give the other player the chance to adjust the offer. While this would be Ok in IP play, under hotseat or PBEM (which I assume we plan to implement), it means diplomatic deals could take many, many turns - which, as evidenced by SMAC, while workable is not ideal.

Velociryx · May 10, 2002, 09:47

::nodding:: That's an excellent point as well....essentially, allowing in-game activities to occur penalizes the one who initiates the offer unless we were to build in a mechanism to allow for renegotiation.

-=Vel=-

xRamsesx · May 10, 2002, 10:00

All this diplomacy talk Vel ... free version or commercial version?

Velociryx · May 10, 2002, 10:41

Definately commercial....didn't wanna give you a heart attack...

For the free version, I'm seeing MP as being largely open ended in that, MP games, players can communicate back and forth and make whatever informal arrangements they want...SP, the AI will be a big ol' punching bag, with two statuses (stati? lol) possible...either at war or not at war (neutrality)....no peace accords, no mercy....none of that stuff. It's either tooth and nail or leavin' each other aone for the time being.

-=Vel=-
(unless you think we can squeeze some of this stuff in! And in that case....

)

xRamsesx · May 10, 2002, 11:26

pffeewww

Nah, seriously, I personally think that the ideas brought up so far are really cool. Being able to check your info before commiting to diplomatic action is definitly something that's been missing in games (at least the ones I've played). Personally I'm attracted by Cyclo's idea ... i like the notion of being able to put the offer aside whilst you tend to other kingdom matters and think about it. I definitly agree that some kind of renogotiating system will be needed though. As for PBEM, and hotseat ... to be honest I don't think we can implement those. Parts of the game design are closer to RTS than TBS. Influence blocking for instance is one of them. The other being the combat. It's a tier based system that needs both player's input for the duration of all battles. That makes PBEM and (to a lessser extent) hotseat unrealistic ways of playing the game.

Ramo · May 10, 2002, 11:52

Quote:

If you're running XP you might not have dos drivers installed.

I don't follow you. What use are DOS drivers in XP?

Velociryx · May 10, 2002, 12:05

That's a good point...it'll be great to play in via LAN, but PBEM would be a nightmare....anytime you fought, it'd take weeks to resolve a battle....UGH...didn't really think about it, but you're right!

-=Vel=-
(PBEM we aren't!)

Velociryx · May 10, 2002, 13:15

As for "The General" LOL...I downloaded it and played around a bit but kinna got stuck on something. I had the economy part nailed...was racking up HUGE amounts of food...well, huge for only having one province, and had about six tons worth of scientists, BUT.....

I couldn't figure out how the heck to attack! I hired a general and some troopages, but couldn't get the troops IN the army (they appeared in a red number off to the right).

Eventually, somebody attacked me and put me out of my misery there...HELP!

-=Vel=-

Cyclotron · May 10, 2002, 17:31

Vel, I don't think there's any reason to make a "pseudo turn" or anything like that to review things for diplomacy. If both sides can negotiate and cancel the deal during the resolution phase, there's no reason to add that extra "no moves" turn or a "game freeze" mode.

Velociryx · May 10, 2002, 17:36

::nodding:: I'm just trying to visualize what that's gonna "look like" in game terms...I mean, I send out a deal to you (off goes some data from my pc, to the server, and then to your pc)...you look at it, take your turn, maybe even attack me or something, then accept my deal...but the conditions have changed....so off goes some data from your pc to the server and back to me....now I get to see that you've ransacked three of my provs and then accepted my deal...but suddenly I'm not so interested anymore....so I decline it, and do some ransacking of my own.

Your next turn, off goes the data back to your side indicating that the deal's off.

Or....I send a deal, you get it, do your stuff (which includes attacking me), then accept my deal and send it back. I get a popup right then (and I obviously already know that you've attacked my provs), we cancel the deal, and you end your current turn.

I like the second method better....the other way is too SMAC-ish...and takes forever...LOL

-=Vel=-

Cyclotron · May 10, 2002, 18:30

Quote:

Originally posted by Velociryx
::nodding:: I'm just trying to visualize what that's gonna "look like" in game terms...I mean, I send out a deal to you (off goes some data from my pc, to the server, and then to your pc)...you look at it, take your turn, maybe even attack me or something, then accept my deal...but the conditions have changed....so off goes some data from your pc to the server and back to me....now I get to see that you've ransacked three of my provs and then accepted my deal...but suddenly I'm not so interested anymore....so I decline it, and do some ransacking of my own.

Vel, you misunderstand my idea. It's more like this:

I send you off a deal on my turn. You recieve it at the beginning of your turn. You go off and play awhile... then, at the end of your turn, we get to bargain, a la Civ3. There would be no continuous back and forth over the deal spanning many turns.

On the other hand, we could do that... you'd have to actually put trust in people to get things done. Kinda like Pal/Israel today, eh...

Quote:

Or....I send a deal, you get it, do your stuff (which includes attacking me), then accept my deal and send it back. I get a popup right then (and I obviously already know that you've attacked my provs), we cancel the deal, and you end your current turn.

This is a more simplistic way, without the bargaining table... but it's ok if that's what you envision for diplomacy.

Quote:

I like the second method better....the other way is too SMAC-ish

Whoa, I never thought I'd hear that complaint from you...

Velociryx · May 10, 2002, 19:33

Yeah...LOL...that phrase *sounded* wierd coming from me....but it's true...SMAC's MP diplomacy left a good bit to be desired....I can't tell you how many times I got delayed 2-3 freakin turns getting a tech cos my partner didn't just accept the deal...lol

Anyway, yep, I think we're in agreement on how the diplo thing would work....I was just trying to visualize it from the perspective of data-handling in an MP environment.

-=Vel=-

FrustratedPoet · May 11, 2002, 06:27

Quote:

Originally posted by Velociryx
As for "The General" LOL...I downloaded it and played around a bit but kinna got stuck on something. I had the economy part nailed...was racking up HUGE amounts of food...well, huge for only having one province, and had about six tons worth of scientists, BUT.....

I couldn't figure out how the heck to attack! I hired a general and some troopages, but couldn't get the troops IN the army (they appeared in a red number off to the right).

Eventually, somebody attacked me and put me out of my misery there...HELP!

-=Vel=-

I had a similar problem ... I did figure out how to attack, though ... you have to position your general on a border. By selecting a neighbouring province in the menu on the left and then double-clicking on the general's status in the right-hand box ... or something ... you can change his orders (rest, study, defend, attack.) I think ...

When I attacked though my troop numbers came out as 0 Cavalry, 0 Infantry ... etc... even though i had bought a lot of soldiers. I'm not sure where i was going wrong.

Velociryx · May 11, 2002, 11:51

Hmmm....and the help file makes no mention of it either (attacking, that is)...so I'm thinking it must be fairly obvious, but if it is....I'm clueless!

Still, a strangely addicting game for being very...."spreadsheety"

-=Vel=-

Zealot · May 11, 2002, 13:11

LoL @ you guys!

Just double-click in the "on-border" column for each general you want to attack! Then on the rightmost part of the screen you'll see a vertical bar for you to assign how many troops you want for that general! Don't forget that he keeps attacking that country unless you tell him to stop or he loses his troops!

I just read the instructions carefully!

Oh yeah, and I've managed to win once so far!

Velociryx · May 11, 2002, 13:23

D'oh!

Okay....now I'm feeling like a bit of a nitwit....LOL

-=Vel=-
Thanks for the assist, Zealot!

Zealot · May 15, 2002, 16:02

Hey guys, I found this 1997 game called Cave Wars, wich might have some interesting elements to compare with Candle'Bre! So check it out!

Go get it here.
Hey, there's a tutorial there! Now they tell me!

Velociryx · May 15, 2002, 16:43

Saw that one and had it on my list, but if it comes recommend, I'll move it to the top!

-=Vel=-

Zealot · May 15, 2002, 17:32

Huh, about the tutorial, it's a bad link, wich means you'll have to figure out to play it by yourself.

Chowlett · May 27, 2002, 19:31

I was thinking about the tactical battle model, and the way it's shaping up makes me think of a game I played once or twice. It's Talonsoft's Battleground: Waterloo, the third installment in their Battlegorund series.

Now, It's been a while since I played it, and I didn't play it much - but from what I remember it was more or less the sort of model we're looking at, and could prove useful. It's apparently still published, and is available from Talonsoft for an unspecified price, Chips&Bits have it for $9.95. I have no idea what the other Battlegorund products are like, but I assume the basic combat engine is similar across the series. Don't quote me on that though.

Skanky Burns · May 28, 2002, 06:58

I've been playing War of the Worlds as "Bresearch."

The battles are basically a C&C clone, but the movement is badly implemented. The units all move to very near the same point on the map when group-moving, and even drive over each other without much worry. I've even had some of my tanks drive up sheer cliff-faces, sideways no less.

One interesting idea they have is that the map is divided into provinces (much like CB) and when an enemy army moves into a sector controlled by another player, battle breaks out (much like CB). Once a battle starts, the player is taken to the battle map which is unique to each province, and have the opportunity to attack the enemies buildings as well as their units.

Worth looking into for these features, but I don't think its available as abandonware.