Okay - in my RPG which is slowly forming up, I have decided to make the main character an archer, to force the player to "team up" with the optional party members which come along during the plot. However, it doesn't look like I'm going to get to the optional members point before I release the first edition of the game. So my dilemma is, my PC is equipped with a bow which does a pretty good deal of damage (say, 9 attk). I'll probably have to give him a dagger too, as a close range because the reload time on the bow is about 2~3 seconds. So we'll give the dagger an attack of 3. So now he has 2 weapons. To balance this enemy-wise, I've made the PC move faster than the enemies, so a hit-and-run tactic should be viable for survival until the optional party members are introduced in the second edition. Right now, the only AI types I have are you're basic "charge and attack" and "ranged attack", but I'm planning to add more. Is this a viable solution for getting it done on time? ie., do you think it would hurt gameplay that much if you were armed with a bow as a primary weapon? I'm making myself think so... >_< I'm turning into Microsoft with these release date push-backs... going on the 3rd week overdue of my original plan. Oh well [wink] Mushu - trying to help those he doesn't know, with things he doesn't know.
Why won't he just go away? An question the universe may never have an answer to...

Long-range weapons combined with short-range attacks encourage hit-and-run play-styles. If your level designs account for that type of movement, I don't think there will be a serious problem.

As has been said, as long as the levels are designed to accomodate the style of play you'll essentially be forcing upon players, you should be perfectly fine with it. I'd think that it might possibly be better to simply wait until you have the extra features ready before release.

let the player decide how long the bow will be pulled for.
so sometimes they can let a really powerful shot out, and sometimes quick ones as the enemy gets near

2-3 seconds is a long time!

Quote: let the player decide how long the bow will be pulled for.
so sometimes they can let a really powerful shot out, and sometimes quick ones as the enemy gets near

2-3 seconds is a long time!

This is a really good idea, but I'm using a sprite-based animation system, so it may be wierd to incorperate - I'll have to play with it.

Quote: If your level designs account for that type of movement

As for level design - the majority of the plot will be outdoors with plenty of room to maneuver in.

The problem I forsee is the game itself losing some playability, due to the lack of different fighting styles, which I hope to balance out with content (which I sadly haven't even started on yet!, but since I have a very specific target audience - you - I can work all that out)

Quote: I'd think that it might possibly be better to simply wait until you have the extra features ready before release.

The problem with doing the friendly units, is that I'm using two completely different sets of game mechanics, depending on how many friendly units there are (one or many; refer to Overly Generic Engines thread). Since only the single-friendly mode is coded right now (and playable) I think I'll release a first version with just that to get the public interested, then release the second version once I get everything working as it should.

But I really want to finish up at least a demo so that I can get the public interested, and get some feedback and stuff. Right now, my to-do list (just for the "first version"/demo) is such:

• Main Menu
  
• add Texture Batching + drawing order (to simulate Z-axis)
  
• hard code some more advanced AI types
  
• add in game saves
  
• support for items and equipment
  
• content: plot, enemies, items, etc
  
• world editor

The bolded tasks are the highest priority right now, because I've backup up a lot of other work, including college apps, which need to be in next month!!

Mushu - trying to help those he doesn't know, with things he doesn't know.
Why won't he just go away? An question the universe may never have an answer to...

Is the angle of the game to run around and blast things, or is there more stealth to it? If you provide opportunities for the player to hide and snipe, get to high ground, and run around ninja-like, I think it would be fine. The player should be encouraged, and have the ability to, make the most use of a long range weapon as possible. Their dagger should be a last resort kind of thing.

Maybe you can take a lesson from our friend Legolas. He was always in the thick of battle but did just fine. Give the player upgrades and special attacks so that they can shoot multiple arrows at a time, perform trick shots, get special kinds of arrow-heads (flaming, acid, magic, whatever.)

You can make the bow a bit of a heavy sturdy one so that it itself can be used as a weapon.

There's nothing wrong with making the arrows very deadly, either. One shot to the neck or chest can kill. One shot to a limb can disable. If an angry mob is rushing the player, he shouldn't have any trouble picking them off in quick succession, eh?

There's nothing wrong with simplicity either. Sidescrollers are replayable despite limited functionality.

Read "An Archer's Tale" by Bernard Cornwell.

Good usage/examples of how to make an archer the central focal point of a story. With some good imagination, I'm sure you could find a way to use the "blow by blow" he gives you as a good "how to", when it comes to using archers.

Archers are usually my favorite type of characters in RPG's.

this might be better in your other thread that you linked to, but this one is newer and possibly relevent :)

no offense, but i think it is a bad idea to have real-time action-ish combat until you get party members, and then switch to a turn-based mode (assuming i understood what you meant, otherwise ignore me :) ). some people like real-time combat in RPGs, and others like turn-based, so releasing it with one might get you action fans and drive away turn-based fans, until the rest is competed at which point you alienate some of the the action fans that have been waiting for the newer version. i mean, i like both kinds of combat (assuming the game they are in is good of course), but i wouldn't want to switch mid game.

that's just my humble opinion :)

Quote: Original post by krez
this might be better in your other thread that you linked to, but this one is newer and possibly relevent :)

no offense, but i think it is a bad idea to have real-time action-ish combat until you get party members, and then switch to a turn-based mode (assuming i understood what you meant, otherwise ignore me :) ). some people like real-time combat in RPGs, and others like turn-based, so releasing it with one might get you action fans and drive away turn-based fans, until the rest is competed at which point you alienate some of the the action fans that have been waiting for the newer version. i mean, i like both kinds of combat (assuming the game they are in is good of course), but i wouldn't want to switch mid game.

that's just my humble opinion :)

I pretty much agree with you. Personally, I'm not much of a action-rpg guy. I enjoy them, but I really prefer the turn-based games a whole lot more.

Though what I have right now is just action, the second release will have the added option to include party members. I was actually thinking about adjusting the stats between modes, so that the enemies take a whole lot more to kill in multiplayer turn-based mode (in the action version, they only take between 1~3 hits right now)

That way, you can play to your liking, except in certain key battles where it will be necessary, plot wise, to introduce elements from each of the genres.

And I do percieve this as a problem, however, I'm going to try to focus more on content than gameplay! *hopefully*

Quote: Original post by RazorsKiss
Read "An Archer's Tale" by Bernard Cornwell.

Thanks, I'll look that up!

Quote: Origainal post by Adraeus
There's nothing wrong with simplicity either. Sidescrollers are replayable despite limited functionality.

One of my ideas was to keep adding content. Thus I designed an elaborate, dynamic system for maps, events, NPCs and such. That way I can write more stories while keeping the same engine build. Or change the engine build and keep the same stories. We'll see what happens as the project advances...

Mushu - trying to help those he doesn't know, with things he doesn't know.
Getting people interested in his upcoming game. Coming when? No idea.