So your tech scales will be like UO''s skill ratings... you have to work at them to keep them sharp. In the mean time, you don''t have time to work on others and therefore they atrophy away. If you spend 99% of your time on something, chances are that''s the only thing you will be good at. That makes sense. What would you say your tech categories might be?

Dave Mark
Intrinsic Algorithm Development

Tech categories, not so much. It isn''t quite that simple. A player gains experience with a particular design and that design has a cheaper/faster compile time. In addition, offshoots of that design aren''t as difficult to compile. Hence you have what I call a "base" design and a "derived" design. "Soldier" is a base design. "Soldier with extra appendages" might be a base design (if the player invests in making it such a thing) or it might be a derived design.

My rough library of stuff to start the player with goes:
Soldier
Walker
Wheeled Vehicle
Tracked Vehicle
Flyer
Watercraft
Submersible

My rough library of attributes:

Mobility
Armor
FirePower
Sensors
Flexibility*
Segmentation+

*flexibility refers to the use of combined-arms and combined-attribute specialties.
+segmentation refers to the ability to split up into smaller units & to combine into larger units (the transformations are not necessarily symmetric)

In SP, this is augmented with additional technologies as the player goes along, with the caveat that the matter compiler (in-game design/scripting studio) is always available, although different players are going to have different subsets available to them.

In MP, the aforementioned component store factors in, much like TA''s unit store.

Thank you,
ld

Look at Impossible Creatures, soon to be released by Relic Entertainment. This game deals with some of what you''re proposing, LiquidDark. Particularly, look into the technology Relic developed for the game.

R.

{begin worm-designer mode}
Yip, this game was announced a couple of years after I first thought up the idea for 'liquiddark'. It certainly deals with some of it, but it doesn't satisfy my desire for directed development. {end worm-designer mode}

I can't deny that I can't wait to play it, though

Now I look like a wannabe. But it doesn't bother me, not really. This idea is almost 10 years old now, and it's an obvious move, really. I would imagine that the boys at Relic thought it up even longer ago, in an offhand wouldn't-it-be-cool way.

[edit2]I know I didn't address the note about the technology, but until I've seen the game I'm more interested in researching the tech behind the two big physics kits.[/edit2]

Thank you,
ld

Edited once for clarity

Edited by - liquiddark on January 18, 2002 11:21:21 AM

Edited by - liquiddark on January 18, 2002 11:25:48 AM

Whew... perils of posting to this group... you run the risk of spending a lot of brain cycles getting involved in other people''s cool ideas!

Dave Mark
Intrinsic Algorithm Development

ld...don''t misunderstand me. I wasn''t trying to imply that you were copying, just that something along those lines is about to ship and you might find it interesting to see how they did things, and how what they did can be improved upon. If you go to the Relic Web site, there is some fairly detailed information about the technology they developed in support of this game, which might also be of interest to you.

R.

quote: Original post by Tacit
If you go to the Relic Web site, there is some fairly detailed information about the technology they developed in support of this game, which might also be of interest to you.

Didn''t notice this before. Thank You!

It looks like this engine is very much a product of the immediate wants of the developers...not much to say about the physics of the thing...still, the animation blending would be sweet to see.

ld

Over lunch today, I was discussing your idea and one of my buds told me there is a game called "Empire Earth" that has a rather complicated multi-R/P/S way of doing their units. Each type of unit, e.g. infantry, aerial, water... etc, has 3 different sub-types of units. Those 3 follow the R/P/S formula inside that type (e.g. one sub- of infantry vs. another sub-). Then, each type has a different matrix of advantages and disatvantages against the other types (e.g. aerial vs. infantry). That makes for an interesting balance between the types. Something to think about.

Dave Mark
Intrinsic Algorithm Development

Mmmm...empire earth (Here I drool so heavily that I almost put that in as my username).

Nice game. I shall be absconding with a (legitimate!) copy asap.

However, although it is in my list of "games to get, and fast(!)", EE is still essentially a component design. They just dress it up differently. I appreciate the reference, though.

thank you .
ld

One of the advantages of forums as communication platforms:
You can guide conversation like you never could in real life.

What thoughts on the idea itself? I have a pretty good idea of what it''s *like* and what it''s not *like* (although don''t let that discourage you from adding to the list - I''m the first to submit that I don''t know much about anything), but has anyone else had any raw thought inspired by the idea?

thank you.
ld