![[de]](/mwf/flags/de.png "Germany")
What are you trying to say? Yes, I understood what you're trying to do. I still think we should consider a more lightweight approach.
![[pl]](/mwf/flags/pl.png "Poland")
I would rather suggest something like this:
Buildings have an 'interior area' that is a separate map (simply reserving some space would not work, as somebody could get there, or it could be seen by zooming out.) and in which he can walk around, store objects and operate some levers/buttons/panels, and eventually switch view to 'view of building' and see thigs in 'real world'
Second option would be, that clonk walks up to lets say - A Mech, and jumps onto it, sits on special place with control panel, and starts controlling the Mech.
Buildings have an 'interior area' that is a separate map (simply reserving some space would not work, as somebody could get there, or it could be seen by zooming out.) and in which he can walk around, store objects and operate some levers/buttons/panels, and eventually switch view to 'view of building' and see thigs in 'real world'
Second option would be, that clonk walks up to lets say - A Mech, and jumps onto it, sits on special place with control panel, and starts controlling the Mech.
Would require multiple instances like the idea of multiple game sections at once (player 1 on section 2, player 2 on section 1...). But our actual engine isn't capable of this.
I also tought of something a bit other. Instead of having scenario designer reserve some space outside of area of map we could create special area outside of main map, that would not be normally visible, even when zoomed out, and when somebody builds a building with interior area some space gets reserved in the special area, and when clonk gets teleported there he does only see area of map reserved for specific interior. Area reserved for that could differ depending on no. of players and size of map - I really doubt, if single player would manage to build 100 special buildings-with-interiors on single tropic island...
Another problem would be detection of distance between objects... Anyway - it should be possible to do something like that (I think), but this should be an area reserved by engine, or master script, and not scenario designer, as it should be flexible enough to work with maps extendible with amount of players and generally random maps, etc.
Another problem would be detection of distance between objects... Anyway - it should be possible to do something like that (I think), but this should be an area reserved by engine, or master script, and not scenario designer, as it should be flexible enough to work with maps extendible with amount of players and generally random maps, etc.
![[ca]](/mwf/flags/ca.png "Canada")
Why not just make buildings have solid mask interiors? ie:WatchtowerBuildings could have a graphic overlay which fades to translucent (for the current player) when a Clonk enters.
If every building had solid interiors (like the watchtower) pushing trees and lorries around in your village would be quite hard :)
I really like this idea. As long as one can still store items in buildings, it doesn't have any gameplay disadvantages that I can see, but only simplifies the interface, and even makes Clonk more 2d ;-)I'd even display the building's menu without having to grab something. That way, you can buy/sell/store items from the Clonk when he has nothing grabbed, or from the lory when he has.
Something else on buildings. Should it be possible do destroy buildings without explosives? Just fire (half-related discussion), just an axe or a hammer?
I think it should be possible, as long as there is a way to prevent you from destroying your own building accidentally.
I like that idea - although it should only be possible for defined amount of uses. In the past a big base was just safe, by the enemy only beeing able to destroy one building at a time with explosives.
Idea extended: With tools, you can only break a percentage for most buildings (40-80%), which will effect its efficiency. For example, you won't be able to shoot exact with the cannon tower, or you can't build blimps anymore.
Uhm, again extended: Fire damage, explosive damage and melee damage can harm different parts of a building. Sawmill will get most destruction from fire, guard towers from explosives, but you can hurt everything in every way, but just with a certain efficiency and up to a certain level.
(Thats even something I could Implement. ;S)
Uhm, again extended: Fire damage, explosive damage and melee damage can harm different parts of a building. Sawmill will get most destruction from fire, guard towers from explosives, but you can hurt everything in every way, but just with a certain efficiency and up to a certain level.
(Thats even something I could Implement. ;S)
Sounds like you want a more real-time Strategy Game stylished Clonk. I always disliked the most of these games for not having the move-soldiers-inside feature. Actually I'm a fan of funny-but-not-so-usefull features, that is a reason for me to play Clonk. I would like to see a Clonk shooting with a bow from the window of a little crib. So, a big against it here. I think there should be even more ways of interaction with the buildings...just because it's funny.
The picture is a stupid 5 minute work of my fantasy, don't bother. :)
The picture is a stupid 5 minute work of my fantasy, don't bother. :)
> Sounds like you want a more real-time Strategy Game stylished Clonk.
You're confusing me. In most RTS I know, there are possibilities of putting units into buildings. Burrows anyone? I don't see how this is related.
> Actually I'm a fan of funny-but-not-so-usefull features, that is a reason for me to play Clonk.
You want to keep a feature precisely because it makes no sense? You are on shaky ground, my friend.
> I would like to see a Clonk shooting with a bow from the window of a little crib.
Great, this is exactly what I'm talking about. For really nifty possibilities, we'd have the Clonk attach somewhere, for example - so he can also use bows and the likes. There are already beds and anvils that use some sort of in-between-state. That should become the norm. Therefore, everything still remains an outside activity (=> easier scripts) and the interface is similar (=> easier playing). Everybody wins.
>You're confusing me. In most RTS I know...
Forget my example. Actually I just wanted to say, "you want to change Clonk in a direction I don't like..."
>You want to keep a feature precisely because it makes no sense?
Wait a second, with "useful" I meant perhaps more something like "handy". You now know what I mean? Of course it's an easier way just to grab the buliding instead of going in, but I think then there is something missing...buildings in Clonk should be like, uh, like buildings are, a place to move in, when you want to.
And btw, you kill many interesting features with your idea...and you know it (the going-inside-feature is very important atm)!
Well, what aspect don't you like? What is missing? Which feature is killed? What exactly is so important about it? I don't know, or I wouldn't be asking. I understand the point about Clonk shelter yet argue that it might not be as important as people make it out to be. Any other ideas?
It is not neccesary, but with grabbing buildings instead of goind in I would feel... uncomfortable.
I think without a house to move in, the Clonks would look like stupid zombies standing around your base. There are so many ways of using the "Clonk shelter" (under water; for some kind of ambush, when the enemy lurks around your place; to hide the Clonks from your enemys eye's at all, when you put them all just in one special building, the enemy is always going to blow it first), that you can't just take it away for practical reasons. I think new players would soon ask, why you can't move in buildings, and when you then show them CR, their heads would explode instantly!
And grabbing a buildind to move stuff in and out looks just plain unrealistic.
And where do you think the Inuits going to have their "rendezvous" then? ;)
And grabbing a buildind to move stuff in and out looks just plain unrealistic.
And where do you think the Inuits going to have their "rendezvous" then? ;)
I think there are some buildings that should maintain the ability to enter them. For instance, a wooden-cabin isn't a building you can just reach in the window to fetch things from. Buildings that operate as "buildings" and not "machines" should remain enter-able I think.
Well, as I already said - I feel the need for Clonk shelter arises from the impulse to "take Clonks out of the game", because it's simply impossible to control multiple Clonks at once. I would argue having fewer Clonks is therefore the more straightforward approach.
And newbies asking is solely a problem of graphical representation. A base could now become a flagpole with some wares grouped around it, for example. The anvil already doesn't look like you could enter it. All activity should become "open air" - in the best case, we can even do some proper Clonk animation. Wouldn't it look cool to have the Clonk build the blimp in the open?
And newbies asking is solely a problem of graphical representation. A base could now become a flagpole with some wares grouped around it, for example. The anvil already doesn't look like you could enter it. All activity should become "open air" - in the best case, we can even do some proper Clonk animation. Wouldn't it look cool to have the Clonk build the blimp in the open?
All buildings already finished except the mining hut are in this "open air" look. If you have an idea how an alternative hmm... market/base/camp/trading post could look, post it>Wouldn't it look cool to have the Clonk build the blimp in the open?
A construction animations for most vehicles shouldn't be that hard. The problem might be more the animation of the clonk.
If the building is accessible from the outside (ie: tools workshop), what is the point of requiring an entrance? If there are no entrances, you can add so much more detail than just 'another wooden-wall with a door'.
Have you ever seen a house without a door? When you ask somebody to draw a house, do you think he would ever miss the door? A 2D wooden house needs of course a door. Even when it's just decoration.
Mh, I connected the Building part always as a settlement part with clonk. Although it is correct - in my opinion settlement means at least 50% of the time to repeat jobs, such as carrying gold up one by one, filling a lory with materials or building vehicles and doing research. Altogether I think an approach to remove entrances will make the gameplay faster and get rid of boring jobs. But I just think buildings also beeing a protection, for example to keep clonks in there instead of beeing killed by your enemy.Also this would, in my opinion, just take away an interesting fact of clonk, which is the ability to store vehicles. Okay, this could probably still be done by a menu item.
So, all in all I think it is a bit unneccessary to remove it - but I'm probably just to used to CR.
So my new idea for this here: Every building is only grabable except one, a storehouse or some kind of robust base that you can build. It doesn't take much place away and you can store Clonks, materials and vehicles in it so those objects are protected. Maybe it should be possible (for Clonks being inside) to barricade or close the entrance, that could be breached by an axe... or crowbar.
What purpose will the wooden cabin serve? In CR, it serves as a marketplace and storehouse. I do like the idea you have presented, though.
Another thing with open buildings: You can build them slightly rotated.
Powered by mwForum 2.29.7 © 1999-2015 Markus Wichitill
