Topic Different Ownership concept
This board is threaded (i.e. has a tree structure). Please use the Reply button of the specific post you are referring to, not just any random button. If you want to reply to the topic in general, use the Post button near the top and bottom of the page.
In Response to Kizzurazzgabi
1
I don't really support the AI clonk idea. I ALSO would like to keep the AI to a minimum when it comes to clonks.
I say that if you give a clonk a sword, gun, or bow, they shoot or swing at anything near (if left idle) and chase for a limited time
(but doesn't blindly walk into pits). The AI should be similar to whats in the tutorials, wimpy, clumsy, conquerable. but they don't just sit around and do nothing. I think this would make the player feel like he's superior to simple AI, and can outmatch(with a little skill) a uncontrolled clonk.
but if anything i think the clonk should at least know how to use a shield and block the enemy. giving the player time to react before it dies.
2- I'm a little skeptical about the ownership part, but ill have to see how it all pans out.(personally i don't see why everything cant be neutral, especially in melees. never had a problem with it(is sealing off parts of the castle from the enemy not good enough anymore? it just seems like a complicated mess right now) BUT like i said ill have to see how it all pans out)
Personally i think castles should be a large "thing" that people fight over. If someone hasn't killed every unit inside then the castle isn't "truly" conquered. Whether you have ownership or not, the rogue units inside can still perform a counter attack.
Basically, in all that time your enemy has a huge fighting advantage, even though he actually "lost" the castle.
-but YOU have a fighting advantage as well, you are IN the castle with all the other clonks. If ownership is something fought over then
i see no problem with having the castle take a while to "truly" own it.
-IF the previous owner had fortified it with a few units then BAM! their preparation has paid off because they have the # advantage.
-Castles are made(at least when i make them) to be breached. Meaning that once 1 spot is taken over, i can seal the spot from the other parts of the castle. Breaching a castle(thanks to the grapple gun and other things) is much more probable now, so they will find a way in anyways (Not a bad thing, i love it)...
Having the advantage never means that their victory is written in stone, it means the others will have to work harder, or think faster to overcome that obstacle.
I don't like fighting being too simple. having one clonk seems to do just that. The clonk dies, you wait for respawn(or whatever the case is) and by the time you return to the castle, its taken over. As complicated as things seem to get, that seems to be what it comes down to.
My two cents
I don't really support the AI clonk idea. I ALSO would like to keep the AI to a minimum when it comes to clonks.
I say that if you give a clonk a sword, gun, or bow, they shoot or swing at anything near (if left idle) and chase for a limited time
(but doesn't blindly walk into pits). The AI should be similar to whats in the tutorials, wimpy, clumsy, conquerable. but they don't just sit around and do nothing. I think this would make the player feel like he's superior to simple AI, and can outmatch(with a little skill) a uncontrolled clonk.
but if anything i think the clonk should at least know how to use a shield and block the enemy. giving the player time to react before it dies.
2- I'm a little skeptical about the ownership part, but ill have to see how it all pans out.(personally i don't see why everything cant be neutral, especially in melees. never had a problem with it(is sealing off parts of the castle from the enemy not good enough anymore? it just seems like a complicated mess right now) BUT like i said ill have to see how it all pans out)
Personally i think castles should be a large "thing" that people fight over. If someone hasn't killed every unit inside then the castle isn't "truly" conquered. Whether you have ownership or not, the rogue units inside can still perform a counter attack.
Basically, in all that time your enemy has a huge fighting advantage, even though he actually "lost" the castle.
-but YOU have a fighting advantage as well, you are IN the castle with all the other clonks. If ownership is something fought over then
i see no problem with having the castle take a while to "truly" own it.
-IF the previous owner had fortified it with a few units then BAM! their preparation has paid off because they have the # advantage.
-Castles are made(at least when i make them) to be breached. Meaning that once 1 spot is taken over, i can seal the spot from the other parts of the castle. Breaching a castle(thanks to the grapple gun and other things) is much more probable now, so they will find a way in anyways (Not a bad thing, i love it)...
Having the advantage never means that their victory is written in stone, it means the others will have to work harder, or think faster to overcome that obstacle.
I don't like fighting being too simple. having one clonk seems to do just that. The clonk dies, you wait for respawn(or whatever the case is) and by the time you return to the castle, its taken over. As complicated as things seem to get, that seems to be what it comes down to.
My two cents
Powered by mwForum 2.29.7 © 1999-2015 Markus Wichitill