Beta bugs, more like a tick and a gnat really
|
*Speedealer* Posted Mar 7, 2007, 5:53 pm |
Sick of seeing the noobish topic: 'title'
Here's some more for ya sam. Some may not be bugs, but I'm not sure if the actions are what you intended, so I'm putting them here: 1. No option to rename the squad. Also, what happens with 2 squads of exact same name? 2. I modified a car at Jake's and was able to take it into battle well before the ready date. Wow, I guess that's it! The other stuff on my list is suggestions which I will post there. 
one more: This may not be a bug, but if a lorry can carry 6 people, how come 6 people can't shoot? Are 2 people in cargo or something? And if so, couldn't you theoretically carry a lot more? ok, the noob needs to sort his list better apparently 
Spectating loot: is this not possible just for privacy? It would be cool to see the booty when watching. Surrenderred cars: I would think that they would automatically stop shooting upon surrender but they don't. Isn't that the point of a surrender, knowing you have 'captured' that vehicle? On a related note, the npcs tend to not give up until their engine is completely destroyed. Very difficult to salvage cars but maybe that was your intent. 
|
||||||||||||
|
*sam* Posted Mar 8, 2007, 10:20 am |
I'll add a rename option. Two squads with the same name wouldn't cause any gameplay issues, but it's not ideal either, you're right. I'll fix that.
Thanks, I have fixed that. I had forgotten to check that in the squads spawning code.
6 people should be able to shoot.. assuming 6 guns have targets in their firing arcs. It must be a bug. And yes, the limit of 6 is too low for large vehicles, but I ran out of space on the vehicle GUI. (=lame excuse)
Yeah, there's no particular reason for having the 'non winners' unable to view the looting process. It didn't occur to me that they'd be interested, but you're right.
The intention at the moment is that the whole squad surrenders when their last member does so, but until then no-one has actually surrendered, they have merely declared that they'd like to. I could change this, but we'd need to be careful not to let players exploit it - when you surrender, you'd have your guns and engine disabled, for example. And maybe even firing at surrendered vehicles would have to be disallowed altogether: this is pretty unrealistic though.
Again, it's a realism thing as much as anything. At what point would you surrender, knowing that you lose the car, its cargo, and quite likely even its characters* if you do so..? * regarding what happens to characters with no car after the battle - that's not fully implemented yet. What I'm thinking is that 'gates of' missions will let them get back to town automatically, while pure wilderness missions will either kill them or take them out of your gang and leave them back at Dex's. |
||||||||||||
|
*Speedealer* Posted Mar 8, 2007, 4:57 pm |
not sure how this would be exploited, unless you mean that after a vehicle surrenders, one would stop shooting at it to preserver the booty? I don't mind, I'll keep pumping rounds in until they're not breathing. Or at least not drive in front of the firing arc. Realistically I would think a gang member would surrender after some blood loss, shattered hip and two missing toes, but then again, there's no shortage of gang members at Dex's. Hmmm...
|
||||||||||||
|
*sam* Posted Mar 8, 2007, 7:22 pm |
What I meant was, you could 'pretend' to surrender so that the NPCs stopped shooting at you, and then you could make a run for it or attack them when they had their backs turned. I guess another way it could work is just to have your car removed from the 3D game when you surrender..? |
||||||||||||
|
*Speedealer* Posted Mar 8, 2007, 7:28 pm |
oh! I see what you mean now. In my mind it always meant you couldn't operate the vehicle or shoot any longer. I don't know if you need to change it though, I'll just assume they will take a shot at me if they can.
|
||||||||||||
|
*sam* Posted Mar 8, 2007, 8:08 pm |
Does anyone else have an opinion on this? I can see merits to the approach of having the car disabled when you surrender. It would also be necessary to stop other people from shooting at it..?
Another possibility this raises is one of characters having a braveness 'skill'. A cowardly character will tend to surrender even before you want them to. Not sure if that's a good idea or not... the issue is whether you are roleplaying 'as' the character or not. |
||||||||||||
|
*viKKing* Posted Mar 8, 2007, 9:34 pm |
So, I would like you to consider my "morale" suggestion.
When the gang leader is present, characters are less likely to surrender. This must be also bound to the "management" parameter we discussed briefy in an other thread. I have been thinking of a "stress" system to simulate fear in computer games - and for a FPS one. Player would lose control of his character if the stress level was superior to his own courage. Character's stress parameter is modified by different factors (numbers are for reference and are cumulative): - he is near a combat zone (-1) - he is being targetted/under fire (-3) - has lost contact with his team (-2) - has lost contact with leader (-3) - team member is wounded (-2) - team member is dead (-3) - team/player is out numbered (-2) - ammo low (-3) - opposite side has superior fire power (heavy weapons for example - or it can be a vehicle in a better shape) (-3) - fatigue (-1) - wounded lightly (-1) - wounded moderatly (-3) - wounded severly (-5) - starvation, etc. (-2) - lack of healing (-1) - team is close (+3) - leader is present (+5) - wounded opponent (+2) - dead opponent (+4) - team as superior fire power (+3) - team is out numbering opponents (+4) - full ammo (+2) - character is leader (+10) - medic present (+2) - experience/veteran status (+1/point) It is common in wargames to have units fleeing during a fight. Though, experience must compensate cowardice. That's complex to set up, but that's good. |
||||||||||||
|
*sam* Posted Mar 8, 2007, 9:43 pm |
Nice detail, vikking. I think everyone here is a fan of detail like that :-)
Yes, I was referring to what happens in wargames when I suggested the character makes a surrender decision on his own. I think this approach could add a nice twist to the game. It could also be used in arena combats and deathraces. But the question remains... do we want our Darkwind characters to have 'minds of their own': are we playing as their managers or are we playing as them? |
||||||||||||
|
*viKKing* Posted Mar 8, 2007, 9:58 pm |
Thanks. 
Regarding the fame and reputation system you integrated, and my suggestions on integrating gang leader, the player would be more like a manager. |
||||||||||||
|
*sam* Posted Mar 8, 2007, 10:02 pm |
Yep. Do we need a poll on this decision, or do we make a decision ourselves? I think it's an important gameplay decision. I think I'm happy to go with adding all this stuff and making the player into a 'manager'. | ||||||||||||
|
*Speedealer* Posted Mar 8, 2007, 10:04 pm |
very cool vikk! 
If we want to act as the player instead of manager of each particular gang member, all that stuff could still factor in, but the character would still be acting under the hand of the player, just severley handicapped if the player chose to still make the character stay and fight. For example, a character could have a perfect shot lined up, but if he was afraid for too many reasons (dead teammates, isolated from gang,etc), maybe his chance of hitting are greatly diminished. Like he's too shakey to shoot (similar to a jammed gun). And the ghost car starts acting erratic or what not for the driver. |
||||||||||||
|
*viKKing* Posted Mar 8, 2007, 10:20 pm |
I will come with a balanced solution:
Player act as a manager for the gang but has full control over the gang leader and sub-leader. I think it should suit everyone. |
||||||||||||
|
*Speedealer* Posted Mar 8, 2007, 10:47 pm |
hmmm....what if your gang leader or gang sub-leader isn't in the battle?
Personally, I'd rather have control over all my characters than let the npc drive one of my cars into another one or whatever. No offense to the AI there, they just don't necessarily know my playbook (or lack thereof)
|
||||||||||||
|
*viKKing* Posted Mar 8, 2007, 10:50 pm |
You missed the point. You will continue to handle the character until it reaches the limit of his own courage and flee from the battle field. |
||||||||||||
|
*Speedealer* Posted Mar 8, 2007, 10:55 pm |
Oh, gotcha. Just so they're high limits
|
||||||||||||
|
Black Mamba Posted Mar 9, 2007, 12:11 am |
I like the idea of gang members having a morale level. Right now it is a bit too easy for a vehicle to stay in a fight and get pounded into nothing. As much as I tend to throw my gang members lives away, I think it would add a bit more danger to fights if they might break and run if I asked too much of them. Also when exiting vehicles is added to the game you could make it so when a vehicle surrenders its concious occupants get out and run away, that would make it real easy to tell who was still in the fight.
ooohh, getting the door for Domino's. Will think on this and post more in a bit. 
|
||||||||||||
|
*JD_Basher* jd.basher@charter.net Posted Mar 29, 2007, 7:52 am |
When an NPC driver has 'decided' to surrender, engine and weapon controls should be disabled for the driver and any other occupants.
This would preserve the car for salvage/looting.
IMHO, the driver is the 'leader/captain' while in the car. If he says surrender, you surrender. I have had NPCs' surrender because the driver was shot up or dying, then the gunner jumps over and takes control driving and firing away. 
Like Speed, I want to control ALL my characters in combat. I don't want them surrendering just because I can't be seen on the other side of a sand dune. One problem doing the morale level for the NPC 'Trade Convoy', is when armed escorts turn to defend the 'Trader Convoy' the Traders continue on the road well out of sight of their defenders fighting we users. (Tron speak) Some rule to differentiate from defending/escorting NPC units and pure combat/non-escort unit morale/surrender would be helpful. Just so surrendering units have no control over their weapons or engines. |
||||||||||||
|
*sam* Posted Mar 29, 2007, 11:55 am |
JD- I can see your reasoning here. I think it would be necessary to also stop a player car from driving or firing when it had surrendered, in this case.
As it stands right now, although a driver wishes to surrender, nobody actually surrenders until the whole gang is ready. Announcing your wish to surrender is purely for information of your squad and the enemy squad- it's not an actual surender. The reason I have your characters auto-surrender is otherwise there is no mechanism to force you to end the game, even if your characters are all dead. |
||||||||||||
|
*JD_Basher* jd.basher@charter.net Posted Mar 29, 2007, 5:27 pm |
Absolutely! This rule is good for NPCs' and players alike. If you surrender, 'no driving---no shooting!' Although, switching NPC and player drivers should be allowed before the driver is completely incapacitated. (Maybe after the first life threatening concussion or bullet/shrapnel hit.)
If both driver and occupants are incapacitated = auto-surrender. If driver expires or voluntarily leaves position before surrendering, gunner can take over. I just feel that ANY surrendered cars (player or NPC)should not be allowed to move or fire again in the current game. |
||||||||||||
|
*viKKing* Posted Mar 29, 2007, 8:04 pm |
Maybe a gunner could shoot at a driver that would be willing to surrender: "no coward in my team" (bang)
|
||||||||||||
|
*sam* Posted Mar 29, 2007, 9:30 pm |
Sure. Is it realistic to have one army in a battle surrender piecemeal though? This is why the current system is that you haven't actually surrendered until all of your side have. Maybe we need a vote on this...
|
||||||||||||
|
*viKKing* Posted Mar 29, 2007, 9:40 pm |
I'm balanced between both points as I like both in fact.
Though I would give JD my vote; it would be more correct to have characters behaving that way. Player keep control of the vehicle as long as there is one non-surrendered character in it. It also depends on the amount of work Sam will have to carry to achieve that. |
||||||||||||
|
*Speedealer* Posted Mar 29, 2007, 11:13 pm |
I think they should still be able to shoot but at a pretty high aiming disadvantage due to very low morale.
|
||||||||||||
|
*JD_Basher* jd.basher@charter.net Posted Mar 30, 2007, 9:22 am |
Individuals (one man) that are members of an 'army' (platoon) as a whole surrender all the time while the rest of the army (platoon) fights on trying to sway the battle in their favor. (Surrendered units are not allowed to keep their weapons in real life either.)(For instance, The U.S. surrendered the armies in the Phillipines in WWII, only to fight on and retake the islands some years later.) I'm just saying that if a car surrenders it should not be allowed to fight again. The rest of their members could try to fight on. I'm not saying change the surrender rule, just stop movement and combat from surrendered vehicles NPC or Player alike. ================== If the other members of the (surrendered cars') squad win the combat, the surrendered car is considered 'liberated' and free to move and loot the defeated team as if he had not surrendered. |
||||||||||||
|
*sam* Posted Mar 30, 2007, 10:13 am |
Should there be any rule about attacking a surrendered vehicle? Maybe it negatively affects your reputation? And if a surrendered vehicle is attacked, is it allowed to 'un surrender' and start firing back? |
||||||||||||
|
*viKKing* Posted Mar 30, 2007, 10:30 am |
YES
They should be allowed to return fire to the offender only. |
||||||||||||
|
*JD_Basher* jd.basher@charter.net Posted Mar 30, 2007, 10:56 am |
I'd agree with both of Vikks' answers. If this were implemented, I'd shut up about this subject. Calm down guys!.... I have way too many opinions to be shut up permanently! Sorry! |
||||||||||||
|
*viKKing* Posted Mar 30, 2007, 11:45 am |
Heheh. 
|
||||||||||||
|
*sam* Posted Mar 30, 2007, 1:50 pm |
Haha. In fact, it's great to have gameplay issues being debated- this is how the game will be improved for all of us: so thanks
The reason I'm trying to tease out the details first is that we always have to avoid unexpected side-effects and exploits: e.g. pretending to surrender so you will be ignored by the NPCs, and then running away when they're far enough away that you can escape. This is why disabling the engine is necessary, for example.
Hmm.. that's a bit more effort to implement though. I'll think about that one... |
||||||||||||
|
*sam* Posted Mar 30, 2007, 3:21 pm |
This will also be a nice way to create NPC gangs with different personalities: the nastier ones will tend to ignore the fact that you have surrendered and will keep shooting you.
Also related to reputation: I'll add bounties for killing characters from a gang with very low reputation. The bounty is offered by local vigilantes/businesses and will be based on some combination of reputation and fame (a very famous, very bad rep gang will command the highest bounties).. if you have a bounty on your gang you will tend to get attacked by NPCs more.. |
||||||||||||
|
*viKKing* Posted Mar 30, 2007, 3:53 pm |
Sweet
|