# Helping in making a video game

218 replies [Last post]
X3M
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
Yes/no

For the targetting on ground, air or both...
All I need to do is check if one can hit something the other cannot.
If this simple question is the case as, yes.
I can change the bonus to 100%???
I need to double check on paper if this is an absolute fact.
But in my mind, it already is.

X3M
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
Other attributes and PP.

Attributes of weapons

So, I got these twins.
I need to make sure the calculator does it right in regards to choices as well.

It should be part of the same factors from the piercing and tier calculations.

An example would be the organic/mechanic twin.
If a weapon is good against organics, the factor might be 1.5. The mechanic portion automatically goes down to 0.5.
The opposite would yield 0.5 and 1.5 for this twin.

The other twins are unit/structure and noShield/shield.
The total of the last twin is 1.5, the rest 2.

More twins could be added in the future. But that is for later concern.

In contrary to piercing and tiers. I need to consider each twin as well.
A weapon will be multiplied by the factor. And thus its effect.

I need to be careful here. Since I only calculate the factors. The total damages are used to determine the bonus factor.

So, I need to consider what happens when comparing 2 opposites. And see what the damage does.
Each twin will create a new factor.
And I need the factors and inverse factors of 2 weapons.

Let's say, only the first twin has this change. We got 1.5:0.5 and 0.5:1.5.
The damages for the last calculation should be x1.5 on itself. And 0.5 on the other weapons target???
Not exactly.

We calculate what a weapon would do in terms of damage on its intended target.
It's times 1.5.
The same goes for the other weapon. Also 1.5
This will cancel each other out.
So, we still calculate the effect on the targets of each other.
0.5 for both.
So we end up with 1.5 over 0.5 for both weapons.
The bonus is (F=0.5)*(1.5-0.5)/1.5=0.333

Good, that makes sense.
Now for a more extreme version that should yield a maximum bonus of 0.5.
(F=0.5)*(2-0)/2=0.5

Ok, so.... what do I do now?
I guess I should simply multiply the intended damages by the factors. The highest of each twin.
And then see which factor the other weapon has for that calculation.

Opposites will yield 1.5 on themselves. And 0.5 on other targets. So, I still need to see which one the max is. Then select whatever factor the wrong weapon has in that same spot.

A bit more complicated than the initial idea. Kinda opposite of the other attributes.

PP

In other news, I agreed with the great Squatch to have the Production Points being calculated slightly differently. And not linked to resource costs.

This means that we got PP for the complete body.
A body is a main body, then with upgrades and what not's.
That is the first PP that a player see's. And with the additions, it simply increases.

Then we add the weapons 1 by 1. Each weapon shows it's individual PP, as if it was the only weapon to be added.
However, we got 2 substractions from this. Well, we simply add less in total. What we do is we also add each weapon or adjustment of a weapon, to the total of the weapon. Just like the bodies. And thus, 3 weapons will cost less PP than then sum of each individual weapon. The PP is rounded upwards for the player to see. The game uses very exact numbers.

The grand total will be 3 PP from the bodies into 1 PP. And the same for the weapons.
The 2 PP's are added up for a final PP. Rounded upwards again, for the player to see.
But.... when loading the cargo ship for dropping your army on the surface of the planet. When adding PP, the total will not go as fast. There is spare room. You play mr. cargo guy in this regard.
A tight fit if you will.

If any player finds this forum somehow. And this particular post. It would learn something about the game that others have yet to figure out.

X3M
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
All done

Next step.
Doing some actual designs again.

X3M
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
Reverse engineering

The possibility exists to have nice round figures to the costs of bodies and weapons.
And keep them that way.

What I am planning is to reverse engineer the result of a design. Then see how much health truly is needed. And/Or...how much damage is truly needed.

Not sure how the results would be.
And I am not sure if I can put in another balancing factor.

But we already agreed on the health and damage to be fixed numbers. So, the factors involved would only be applied in the game.
We get 1 factor for the incomming damage.
And we get 1 factor for the outgoing damage.

***

There are more things to consider. But if I keep the file intact. I can simply add a couple of columns. These colums will as for a fixed price. And with this fixed price, I would be getting the intended correction(s).

I need to think hard on how much I would correct. There will be some designs that might double in costs. And thus, the correction would double as well.

I also could make use of this opportunity to remove my cost calculation. And reverse engineer this as well. And simply apply a correction factor to the lowest value; body or weapon.

***

Result would be that the total costs will always add up. Regardless of other properties on the design.
And the main axis of the body and weapon (thus health and damage) are to be modified.
Perhaps give it another name.

Shield too.
Durability is an option??

X3M
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
Rework?

Let's just say, I had some good and some bad news these past few months.

Did my rework on the costs calculations in reverse engineering. This went well.

Did my rework on the vision mechanics. This went well as well.

Did receive a message of things that are scrapped.
This was an oof for me personally. However, I accepted the message because the initial idea's together are overkill.

And if you want more details. Well...
I can't give you the details...
We have reached a certain point where we don't give these details.
Hope you understand.

https://www.patreon.com/InfiniteControl/posts

questccg
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
You sound a bit .. disappointed?!

For a thread with OVER 25,000+ views ... You seem like you are a bit disappointed. How? I'm not sure... Because you can't explain it either. So for everything you've shared with us, the visitors to your thread may be sad to know that you won't be offering them any new NEWS concerning your development.

But in any event, the people who want NEWS concerning the future development of Infinite Control (RTS) can subscribe to your Patreon.

This probably doesn't have anything to do with your own efforts outside the Video Game Development circle... Meaning you may get more interested in designing a NEW Wargame or TableTop Game that is NOT "Infinite Control"...

So if you continue your efforts on other Game Projects, we welcome to hear news about whatever else you may be interested in working on. While I'm not expecting you to start a BLOG and discuss everything happening with your other projects... Maybe you might have some kind of "Ahaa Moment" when it comes to designing games.

In the event that you are discontinuing your Development efforts in other circles because you have other more pressing matters, that is understandable too... For those who have the time, interest and desire to share whatever they are working on... BGDF.com welcomes both You and them.

Sincerely.

X3M
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013

questccg wrote:
For a thread with OVER 25,000+ views ... You seem like you are a bit disappointed. How? I'm not sure... Because you can't explain it either.

Well, originally I did write that I was a bit disappointed. However, that is a bit too much and undeserved to them.

When we started, we had plans. I knew things would be scrapped. But the main thing that is scrapped for now is the list of adjustments. It got semi replaced if you will. Not going to explain it further since the information isn't official released yet.

Let's say that where Warzone2100 is Y=X^3.
Yet it is now only Y=X^2.
From 'finding a balance' point of view, it actually makes total sense to make it simpler.

The biggest disapointment for me is that when we started. I asked what is even possible for the team. "How complex could I make the game?" I guess, I finally got my answer (read this with a 'lol' in mind)

questccg wrote:
So for everything you've shared with us, the visitors to your thread may be sad to know that you won't be offering them any new NEWS concerning your development.
Right now, I can't share the fruits....yet. The harvest is simply going to be a little less than I personally anticipated.

questccg wrote:
But in any event, the people who want NEWS concerning the future development of Infinite Control (RTS) can subscribe to your Patreon.
Well, the patreon is from the actual developers. I am only 1 keg if you will. But the patreon is managed by the big guy (I think).

But yeah, patreon members get the info much sooner than the Youtubers.

And the more patreon members we have, the more motivated the team will be. And the more influence I could get as well.

questccg wrote:
This probably doesn't have anything to do with your own efforts outside the Video Game Development circle... Meaning you may get more interested in designing a NEW Wargame or TableTop Game that is NOT "Infinite Control"...
Nope, no time for that right now. Sorry.

questccg wrote:
So if you continue your efforts on other Game Projects, we welcome to hear news about whatever else you may be interested in working on. While I'm not expecting you to start a BLOG and discuss everything happening with your other projects... Maybe you might have some kind of "Ahaa Moment" when it comes to designing games.

In the event that you are discontinuing your Development efforts in other circles because you have other more pressing matters, that is understandable too... For those who have the time, interest and desire to share whatever they are working on... BGDF.com welcomes both You and them.

Sincerely.

My day/morning/afternoon/night/weekend/vacation job is very busy too. And family goes first. ;)

X3M
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
Reverse Engineering in 2 worlds

In simple terms. If an unit has a weapon that is twice as expensive. Logically the damage would double as well. If an unit has twice the body value, then this too, would double in health.

Seeing as how the body has influence on the weapon and vice versa, this effect should be included.

And the square root of both is taken.
If a body value is 4 times higher. Then the health and damage will both double. If the weapon value is 4 times higher, yip! You guessed it. Again both health and weapon double again. Making the total factor 4 for all values and stats.

For the RTS, I included this effect indirectly. And it looks like it works perfectly. While trying to spare you the details. Lets say that the basis works the same. But, the prices are fixed.

An example would be a rifleman and a sniper.
Both have the same body. But a different weapon.
The value of the rifle is 50, the sniper is 450.
Previously, I calculated the costs through the support factor. Aka how logically it would be to target these first. And thus make them cheaper.
The cost would be around 400.

With the reverse engineering, the cost will be 500 now. What everyone expects.

And the health and damage are modified to accordance of the support factor. The infantry unit carrying the sniper will be more durable and deal more damage. Without the basic stats changing at all.

How? I keep that a secret.

***

As for my boardgame hobby. I do it differently there. But it is not on a computer.
I am forced to change the basic stats.
With health, this is often doable.
But with the damage, this is not.
So, I think I need to have the multiplier on the damage, being applied to health? I cannot do that for 0 damage units. 0 damage would have an infinite factor. So, I keep it separate. My options are simply very limited.

It is still better than calculating weird costs. So, it is a slight win for me with the new calculations.