|
|
Post by Gmr Leon on Mar 13, 2015 20:24:16 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 13, 2015 20:49:14 GMT
I wonder if you'll be able to navigate small mountain passes and narrow stairs/terrain with your warbands, or if they'll sit around with blank stare-ums on their face-ums.
|
|
|
|
Post by Crumpy Six on Mar 13, 2015 22:53:25 GMT
fuck-um
|
|
Lord Ba'al
Supreme Deity
Posts: 6,260
Pledge level: Half a Partner
I like: Cats; single malt Scotch; Stargate; Amiga; fried potatoes; retro gaming; cheese; snickers; sticky tape.
I don't like: Dimples in the bottom of scotch bottles; Facebook games masquerading as godgames.
Steam: stonelesscutter
GOG: stonelesscutter
|
Post by Lord Ba'al on Mar 14, 2015 0:40:05 GMT
The dancing astari are still stealing the show for me.  |
|
|
|
Post by 13thGeneral on Mar 14, 2015 2:45:20 GMT
Why does a lot of this info seem repeated? Also, combat stuff is interesting, but I don't find it too relevant to the current gameplay... yet.
|
|
|
|
Post by hardly on Mar 14, 2015 2:53:33 GMT
Why does a lot of this info seem repeated? Also, combat stuff is interesting, but I don't find it too relevant to the current gameplay... yet. Its not where I would have started ..... |
|
|
|
Post by Gmr Leon on Mar 14, 2015 4:01:42 GMT
Why does a lot of this info seem repeated? Also, combat stuff is interesting, but I don't find it too relevant to the current gameplay... yet. 'Cause it is. Iteration, at its first demonstration! The changes as I noted them were the removal of the charge move, the introduction of assignable groups via ctrl+1-5, and a clunky revision of how to group them together via select. Unless that select also happens to be a selection box, I'm not sure what they're thinking there. Leashing isn't that bad for selecting them, if it selects whole groups, it's only bad when you're trying to leash together a big group of individuals that it's problematic. Having said that, shift select for multiple ones isn't a bad idea, but I don't see the necessity of cluttering up the UI if you can use what you've already taught the player to your advantage. So...Good points: assignable groups, potentially faster group selection in some form, and free reinforcements if a warband survives and is returned near its military settlement. |
|
Lord Ba'al
Supreme Deity
Posts: 6,260
Pledge level: Half a Partner
I like: Cats; single malt Scotch; Stargate; Amiga; fried potatoes; retro gaming; cheese; snickers; sticky tape.
I don't like: Dimples in the bottom of scotch bottles; Facebook games masquerading as godgames.
Steam: stonelesscutter
GOG: stonelesscutter
|
Post by Lord Ba'al on Mar 14, 2015 11:27:40 GMT
Hmmmmm....... there's something about this image.......  |
|
|
|
Post by Gmr Leon on Mar 18, 2015 6:11:39 GMT
Also noteworthy: by rolling charge into default move, it looks like default move without a target may be essentially attack move, giving more purpose to the march move. March move, no longer clumsily trying to chain together warbands, now acts as a "stealth" or "stupid" move to avoid unwanted conflict with enemies (which could incidentally result in followers getting killed if you set them this way and don't notice enemies along the set path).
Slight concern from loss of chained functionality, however: it looks like warbands won't group together closely anymore, possibly resulting in clumsy pathing...? Or maybe the former idea would have, by making them incapable of navigating narrow paths? Although I'd think they'd simply shift into a column formation, in that case.
|
|
|
|
Post by FuriousMoo on Mar 18, 2015 13:49:20 GMT
Also noteworthy: by rolling charge into default move, it looks like default move without a target may be essentially attack move, giving more purpose to the march move. March move, no longer clumsily trying to chain together warbands, now acts as a "stealth" or "stupid" move to avoid unwanted conflict with enemies (which could incidentally result in followers getting killed if you set them this way and don't notice enemies along the set path). Slight concern from loss of chained functionality, however: it looks like warbands won't group together closely anymore, possibly resulting in clumsy pathing...? Or maybe the former idea would have, by making them incapable of navigating narrow paths? Although I'd think they'd simply shift into a column formation, in that case. I would look at these docs as 'potential solutions' rather than cannon. Features disappear and reappear throughout iterations of design. It's all conceptual at the doc stage and we don't know for sure what we need until we can play with the warbands in an actual battle. The chaining for example sounds nice on paper, but gets very fiddly and difficult to keep track of which warbands are chained together and to whom when you have a lot of them. Right now it feels like complexity for complexity's sake. If strong use cases emerge that this mechanic would provide a good solution, then it will be used. |
|
|
|
Post by engarde on Mar 18, 2015 15:16:30 GMT
I'm sure you meant canon....
Although cannons firing followers has a certain appeal.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gmr Leon on Mar 18, 2015 18:33:33 GMT
Also noteworthy: by rolling charge into default move, it looks like default move without a target may be essentially attack move, giving more purpose to the march move. March move, no longer clumsily trying to chain together warbands, now acts as a "stealth" or "stupid" move to avoid unwanted conflict with enemies (which could incidentally result in followers getting killed if you set them this way and don't notice enemies along the set path). Slight concern from loss of chained functionality, however: it looks like warbands won't group together closely anymore, possibly resulting in clumsy pathing...? Or maybe the former idea would have, by making them incapable of navigating narrow paths? Although I'd think they'd simply shift into a column formation, in that case. I would look at these docs as 'potential solutions' rather than cannon. Features disappear and reappear throughout iterations of design. It's all conceptual at the doc stage and we don't know for sure what we need until we can play with the warbands in an actual battle. The chaining for example sounds nice on paper, but gets very fiddly and difficult to keep track of which warbands are chained together and to whom when you have a lot of them. Right now it feels like complexity for complexity's sake. If strong use cases emerge that this mechanic would provide a good solution, then it will be used. Absolutely, I was keeping that in mind but also tossing up possible problems from dropping some. Generally, you're right, that implementation would have been fiddly, but on the other hand, formations for armies could prove useful. That seemed like a very rudimentary look at that to me, which is why I said anything about it. Having said that, I'm still not entirely sure how the combat will fair in-game yet, so that could easily be as you say, complexity for complexity's sake. |
|
Lord Ba'al
Supreme Deity
Posts: 6,260
Pledge level: Half a Partner
I like: Cats; single malt Scotch; Stargate; Amiga; fried potatoes; retro gaming; cheese; snickers; sticky tape.
I don't like: Dimples in the bottom of scotch bottles; Facebook games masquerading as godgames.
Steam: stonelesscutter
GOG: stonelesscutter
|
Post by Lord Ba'al on Mar 18, 2015 21:14:24 GMT
I've been thinking the game needs horses. I'm actually not a fan of horses at all, but I think they could add more depth to the game. They could start of as wild animals until unlocking the domestication card (yuck I feel dirty now) and then be used to help out on the farms or, dare I say it, to transport resources. They could be used in battles with knights and horse archers. Not to mention jousting events and horse races or even equestrian events to keep the girls happy. Some followers could specialise as saddle makers or horse breeders/trainers and blacksmiths could produce horse shoes. Training horses could even be a minigame. I disgust myself. [/horse rant]
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2015 21:31:02 GMT
If I recall correctly, someone at 22cans (perhaps Fabs or PM himself) had mentioned that 4 legged creatures were not likely to end up in the game because "animation something something turning animation being difficult to implement something something".
|
|
|
|
Post by Spiderweb on Mar 18, 2015 22:57:54 GMT
If I recall correctly, someone at 22cans (perhaps Fabs or PM himself) had mentioned that 4 legged creatures were not likely to end up in the game because "animation something something turning animation being difficult to implement something something". PM said it in a Q&A video, but since we had wolves already I wasn't sure what the real issue was. |
|
|
|
Post by Gmr Leon on Mar 19, 2015 0:19:32 GMT
If I recall correctly, someone at 22cans (perhaps Fabs or PM himself) had mentioned that 4 legged creatures were not likely to end up in the game because "animation something something turning animation being difficult to implement something something". PM said it in a Q&A video, but since we had wolves already I wasn't sure what the real issue was. Wolves were present, but iceskated, as they never rigged up skeletons to allow for animations. With that being the case, I suppose most creature based efforts were nixed due to the efforts needed to make them animated. |
|
|
|
Post by hardly on Mar 19, 2015 0:54:51 GMT
PM said it in a Q&A video, but since we had wolves already I wasn't sure what the real issue was. Wolves were present, but iceskated, as they never rigged up skeletons to allow for animations. With that being the case, I suppose most creature based efforts were nixed due to the efforts needed to make them animated. This is lame. Sheep have been in all the promotional pictures, I demand sheep! |
|
|
|
Post by Gmr Leon on Mar 19, 2015 0:56:42 GMT
Wolves were present, but iceskated, as they never rigged up skeletons to allow for animations. With that being the case, I suppose most creature based efforts were nixed due to the efforts needed to make them animated. This is lame. Sheep have been in all the promotional pictures, I demand sheep! We have static sheep, those little white blobs on the sides of farming settlements. =P |
|
