![[de]](/mwf/flags/de.png "Germany")
Since the carry heavy resources are currently being worked on, I'd like to share an idea.What about being able to lock carry heavy resources (rocks, gold, ore, wood(?)) in place with an additional metal as construction cost?
That could actually be the solution for the question how we were going to integrate castle stuff and I think it's a very clonky one, too.
The idea is basically that the player can place blocks and construct the castle walls manually. The idea itself is a very old one, but now we could smoothly integrate it into gameplay with the carry heavy resources.
Not only would it integrate with existing base stuff like the doors and triggers we have (because, face it: thick-wall-style castle were cooler anyway - a lot of scenario designers in CR already used material instead of castle parts to create unique and interesting structures), but imo it would also integrate better with the damage system we currently have (=explosives) - you could attack parts of walls with good visual feedback, could make walls stronger or weaker at will and extent your castle as necessary.
A few years ago we already discussed the castle stuff and I remember the suggestion that it should be possible to create castle walls with different materials that differ in strength (wood vs. stone). We would get that for free, too! You could either decide to construct your castle from carry-heavy wood or from carry-heavy rock. Oh, and the really cool guys obviously only build their castles out of pure gold.
And the best part: even though I actually see it as an improvement over the old CR-castle-wall system, it would be in fact faster to implement.
That would be the era of really clonky castles.
Comments?
I hereby license the file BoulderMockup1.jpg under the CC-BY license
I hereby license the file BoulderMockup2.jpg under the CC-BY license
Yeah, looks good. Unfortunately, you have a ban on thinking about new features until your GUI stuff is done.
You have a ban on posting +1's until the carry heavy branch is finished, and merged with the controls and master branches!
no u have a ban**until you do something useful again that's banworthy for!
Appealing suggestion, truly. I'm not sure about the second mockup though. I don't like these wall structures floating in the air without any support (I know that this is basically how it works with loam bridges).For castles, I'd like something with background walls that really looks like a structure.
Also, I fear for all scenario obstacles that depend on players not being able to construct endless ladders with rock and metal.
>I don't like these wall structures floating in the air without any support
You mean, like dug-out trees? Or skylands! Or buildings on small pieces of loam or metal.
Well, at least when you dig something out, tunnel material is left. So you can say that the tree is supported by the stuff in the background!
Well, might be enough to either allow the player to build purely visual background walls for a low price or to create such a background automatically when the block is above another block or something like that
I don't think any manual solution would work. The difference in Terraria is that you'll work on your world for days, weeks or months and want it to look cool (in fact, there is no other purpose at all). You wouldn't bother with that in a 30 minutes Clonk scenario.
>Also, I fear for all scenario obstacles that depend on players not being able to construct endless ladders with rock and metal.
Same for loam and metal then? Or blimps or catapults or.. *shrug*
All of these are easily limited. Unfortunately, rocks are the most basic resource of them all!
If I can afford rocks and metal for an endless ladder into the sky, I can probably also spare 6 wood and 1 metal for a catapult!.. if I can afford metal for an endless ladder into the sky, I could also just build it out of metal bridges..
> I can probably also spare 6 wood and 1 metal for a catapult!
But you can't construct it for lack of construction plans. But if these rocks are also plan dependent (like Sven suggested), that's all right.
>Also, I fear for all scenario obstacles that depend on players not being able to construct endless ladders with rock and metal.
Why would they depend on that?
Because overcoming landscape obstacles is a very common in scenario. That's the whole point in every sky island scenario! Or take the old Last Will scenario for an example.
So it's ok to overcome a span of a few pixel by using [method author had in mind], but not by establishing an industry and gathering enough ressources to solve that passage by stacking some of those blocks on top of each other? Either that scenario script is really fragile or the author is a nitpick. :(
You don't do it with very method the author had in mind. You play along the very story the scenario takes.Just like in Last Will: After passing an obstacle, you get the next one, have a dialogue with the NPC and start working on your task. You don't sit down at the beginning and start stacking rocks in a gigantic diagonal line through the map. Or to have a more recent, OC example: Dark Castle. The scenario is designed to climb your way up through the castle. With these stack rocks you can make your way up to the boss in no time, compared to fighting through the castle.
And it is not a sophisticated industry we're talking about here. It's rocks and metal. You'll get plenty of rocks from the first few blasts of a game and need only one building to get all the metal you wish for.
But you could also just use the metal to build metal bridges, that are probably even longer than the size of one block D:
Well, if the player chooses not to follow the mission at all, but rather boycott the story, then why even bother? Bringing up hours to produce metal to build a large bridge across a handful of interesting looking places and npcs doesn't happen on accident. And if some passages are solved in a different manner and it still works, even better. http://www.cc.striver.net/shots.php?action=sh&id=136
I'm all for giving the player lots of options to play the scenario. It's just that some solutions are easier to do than others and sometimes the scenario wants to force the player to pick one of the harder options.Preferably, this should be solved by good map design (e.g. in this case: Limit the amount of available rocks) and most construction plans should be activated.
However, this is not always possible (e.g. in this case: Rock is also needed for other buildings/items). So the option to disable certain strategies needs to be there just to help designers add some variety to their scenarios.
Having rock structure building dependent on a construction plan also opens the possibility to add this plan as a story element to allow progression in a scenario.
>Having rock structure building dependent on a construction plan also opens the possibility to add this plan as a story element to allow progression in a scenario.
Building the stuff normally with a hammer (and construction plans) was the idea all along anyway
![[th]](/mwf/flags/th.png "Thailand")
Sven2, you are banned from discussing about scenario balancing until you finish the league (or your PhD, whatever you can do quicker :-P).
Well, we should really set priorities here. Some stuff is just more important than other. I'd say, he should do the league.
>Also, I fear for all scenario obstacles that depend on players not being able to construct endless ladders with rock and metal.
Actually there is a solution: Apply some physics to those "bricks".
so you can't build like this:
_
/ \
|__|
/
/
/
|
The bricks should collapse, and we are fine from such abuse. This also gives some reason to build a "real wall" (as in background material): It is less fragile.
Also for melees this could be an interesting things to dynamite-box-kill the base-brick of a construction :)
![[py]](/mwf/flags/py.png "Paraguay")
I like your idea a lot ala and to solve the door issue you could make door frames that the blocks could rest on.
If we start applying physics, we would also need it for the real landscape. Otherwise, you'd just need to build a few pixels of loam to have your castle float on.Landscape blocks "falling down" if they aren't attached to solid or tunnel isn't something that would be completely impossible to do, but it would be a relatively big engine change.
I'm guessing it would take to much work ,but would it be possible for pixels of any martial to cling on to other pixels only so far... so say you have a stationary pixel and the dirt pixels can only cling on to the stationary pixel so far out and then they start to fall. It is hard for me to explain the concept. :P
By the way land right now is stationary until it is hit by an explosive and then physics are applied to the dirt particles until they hit the ground becoming stationary again ,so why not force loam and "castle blocks" to have physics ,but their origins (dirt for loam and rock for bricks)not to have physics. Or am I oversimplifying the answer? :/
Powered by mwForum 2.29.7 © 1999-2015 Markus Wichitill
