Chaosforge Forum

  • March 29, 2024, 07:07
  • Welcome, Guest
Please login or register.



Login with username, password and session length

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Thiebs

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 8
61
Century Lounge / Re: [U|Ao100|98%|YAVP] Wayhay!
« on: January 30, 2014, 02:28 »
In my opinion, not always. You want to keep your distance with that build, so the accuracy is pretty big. I'd say that the first two SoG are pretty much a given, but by the third, take your loadout into consideration. If you have a sufficiently powerful pistol, the extra accuracy would go further. But if you're still stuck with the standard fair, I'd personally go for the third SoG and use aimed shots at extreme ranges.

62
Century Lounge / Re: [U|Ao100|98%|YAVP] Wayhay!
« on: January 29, 2014, 12:30 »
Time for UV ArchAo666?

There is never enough time for ArchAo666. Seriously, though, congrats! Yet another player on here that's better than me, hehe! ;)

63
General Discussion / Re: Design Rant : Inventory
« on: January 26, 2014, 23:47 »
Guys:
I plan to address some issues that I often have with such interfaces in other games. Namely there will be a toggleable option to autofit items (seems as most UI programmers never heard of "dynamic programming" -_-), secondly, the rotate option will obviously be there for use.
Toggleable option to autofit.

64
General Discussion / Re: Design Rant : Inventory
« on: January 26, 2014, 07:00 »
I like the first two parts a lot. But here are my thoughts on the last section:
  • Any solution that leaves items on floor pushes people towards optimizing carried items at level exit by boring backtracking of their steps and filling up inventory with junk.
  • It doesn't make much sense to leave opening containers for later, as you barely will use up items in your inventory (due to ammo boxes, spent ammo doesn't free up space) -- you also have no idea what a given container/corpse will hold.
  • Backtracking is enabled to allow for more complex quests. Auto-travel however will exist to speed up any longer journey through explored space. Also, some levels will change on return, or have places that are inaccessible earlier.
  • The game will prompt the player before item "destruction", this system was used in many games (also online) and I havn't heard much complaints about the destruction being final.
  • Items on floor introduce clutter, and foggen what is actually happening.
  • Items on floor also introduce interface complexities that could be fully avoided.
  • The general rationale is "you go forward and leave what you don't need behind"
  • People will still try to carry as much as possible at all times to maximize their later options. It just means they'll be scavenging in a different manner, not that they won't be scavenging.
  • To me, it seems like it would make it more important to save containers until I'd cleared out the area/level. I wouldn't want to open a container with a cool item only to have to ditch a medkit I'll be using in a few moments, or find a bunch of ammo in one, then a new container to hold it in another after the first one is exhausted. (This would be avoided if you could go back to containers, but that would just make for even more shuffling about.)
  • I love every part of this point. :D
  • This is also valid, I never thought accidentally loosing items would be an issue.
  • True, but they can also add to a sense of realism, as bodies and fallen weapons go hand in hand, though this is a minor point.
  • Very true, unfortunately. :(
  • While I can suspend my disbelief if needed, this feels a little thin, since you'll be leaving things behind whether you destroy them or not, and I imagine a lot of people won't realize or appreciate that it was a conscious decision.
And I feel it's worth stating again: The first two sections definitely have my vote, for what little that's worth! :P

65
General Discussion / Re: Design Rant : Inventory
« on: January 24, 2014, 06:24 »
Personally, I like the 2D box inventories like Diablo and Resident Evil 4, so long as you can rotate items. However, if one were to do a 1D list, there are a couple of ways to maximize the space. Imagine your 2D box, and in it a pistol is a 1x3, a medkit 1x2, an armor 2x4, and ammo is 1x1 boxes (for like 15 bullets). In a list, you could just take your largest regular item, the 2x4, and consider that the standard size. Then, you would simply make other items stackable until they added up. So you could stack up to 8 ammo boxes, 4 medkits, 2 pistols, etc. You could even represent this graphically, since you'd need much fewer slots, you could draw the image next to the name in the list, with multiples in the same slot having smaller, side-by-side images. I'd still prefer the 2D myself, but I hope this gives ideas.

66
General Discussion / Re: Design Rant : Inventory
« on: January 23, 2014, 10:46 »
It might, but then it would seems as a engine limitation, not a conscious design choice. Not allowing items on floor at all will provide a system that is much more consistent.

I get what you mean here, but from personal experience, it always ends up feeling like an engine limitation rather than a design choice, unfortunately. Perhaps have certain types of items deteriorate naturally? Think old school NES games, where things flash and disappear after a while. Maybe the corrosive environment is just too hard on things like exposed medkits/ammo/etc to be leaving them around, so after X turns, they melt away?

67
General Discussion / Re: Design Rant : Inventory
« on: January 23, 2014, 08:44 »
It might also appease players if instead of just disappearing, you got some small reward, though that might encourage vacuuming.

68
General Discussion / Re: Design Rant : Inventory
« on: January 23, 2014, 08:42 »
Ah, I see. This would make 100% kills a bit easier, anyway, though I can't say I like my items mysteriously disappearing when I let go of them. Maybe just clear items when you leave a level?

69
General Discussion / Re: Design Rant : Inventory
« on: January 23, 2014, 08:14 »
That's a big thing to leave out! This means that levels can be gone back to later, or am I reading too much into that?

70
General Discussion / Re: Design Rant : Inventory
« on: January 23, 2014, 06:35 »
I would assume that you would start with at least 1 ammo box, probably one of each (common) type? Doesn't seem like you'd need over 50 shells at any given time in the first few levels of most any game, since you'll be finding more loose ones all the time. And I'd also assume that ammo boxes would probably be slightly more common than in Doomrl, as they don't also provide fast reloads. Right?

71
General Discussion / Re: Design Rant : Inventory
« on: January 23, 2014, 04:55 »
Let's show some activity :).
Yay! Activity!
additionally we'll have a head slot and two device slots (think hacking and electronics).
Cooooolllll....
To balance this out, the inventory will be made Does this make sense?
Assuming you meant 'will be made bigger.' Correct?
The solution I'm thinking about is having all ammo in something that is similar to current ammo boxes.
I've spoken on this one before for Doomrl, and I like this solution. The alternate ammo container thing is iffy, though. Hmmm... Maybe have alternate ammo boxes be more compact, so as to mitigate the issue of carrying extra boxes? 'Cause Frag-12 rounds would be a pretty sweet thing to find, but probably a lot less common, so you wouldn't need as big of a box.

72
Very nice. But what's with the hate on the Jackhammer? I've prayed for that thing on shotgun builds. Congrats, anyway!

73
Discussion / Re: Where did my game go? :O
« on: January 14, 2014, 04:22 »
Would it be possible to put a number code in the save file (maybe date and time or something unique like that) that the game keeps track of, so you can't load the same save more than once? It would stop all but the most dedicated cheaters. How feasible would that be?

74
I like this line of reasoning. I always hated the idea of the AoCn and AoOC challenges because I'm neurotic about maximizing my character development, to the point of having a VERY hard time skipping special areas or not getting a %100 kill count, but you do tend to feel a bit grindy after a few games that way, so I might give them another try. Congrats!

Also, shamblers is beasts. I don't have a ton of advice, except that one-on-one they're easy to dodge, but with more than one, I'm not sure how well that'll work. I'm trying to get to Ultra-violent skill, so I guess I'll find out!

75
Discussion / Re: Quick questions thread!
« on: January 05, 2014, 05:31 »
Okay. Figured out why things seemed off. Sylph's test was at 7 spaces (which I didn't notice, I was thinking 8), meaning that you would see 10+ damage just over half the time, which matches the test. Which means that SoB 2 increases your odds of one-shotting a former by about 16% at max range. For knockback, I'm assuming armor DOES apply first, since the odds of getting at least 7 damage are quite good, (a roll of 15+, or about 74%) even without SoB. Which would mean that against an opponent with 2 armor (4 damage reduction vs. shrapnel), you would need 24 damage to score a knockback at max range, which is <1% with SoB at 0, 1, or 2, but jumps to 2.4% at SoB 3, and ~14% at SoB 5. Which is still nowhere near enough to take 5 traits. ;-P At point-blank range with 2 armor, the odds of a knockback are >99% to begin with, so no gain there. But a knockback 2 spaces from point-blank is 26% without; SoB 1 is 41.5%, 3 is 74%, and 5 is 93.5% and 6.5% of getting a triple. That's a little more interesting, though still pretty minor most of the time. I think the lesson to be gathered here is that SoB (of course) isn't meant to be used for shotguns, but if you're building rapid-fire, you can count on knockback with even a basic shotty in the prepared slot.

No promises on my math.

Oh, and if I had realized how in-depth this was going to be, I might not have put it on the quick questions thread. ;)

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 8