Topic: Ruleset and other game play Specifics

[Corbomite]

We're using the basic shiplist format. Any metric that has a delimiter can bet set (within limits) to what ever you want.

[[UFP]Exeter]

Now that I have a better understanding of the shiplist system I will think more on it.

[Javora]

I see what you are saying Adam, our only concern about that was the damage by weapons were also tied to percentages.  Having two max amounts for Armor and Shields might screw the game up.  Otherwise the weapon damage would cause two radically different values in combat.  This leads me to think of three different scenarios:

1.  We have a max armor = 4000 and we have a max shields = 5000.  We adjust weapon damage so that every weapon has two damage charts.

2.  We have a max armor = 4000 and we have a max shields = 5000.  We don't adjust weapon damage and we tell people that armor can't absorb damage from weapons the way shields can.  The I think we also have to consider changing the weapon damage charts so that weapon Z can do 2x the damage against shields while weapon B can do 2x damage against armor.

3.  We have one max value for all.  Shields, weapons, and armor.

As you can imagine I am all for option three.  I think this gives us more flexibility in a ever expandable video game.  It gives us simplicity as one value rules them all, which makes coding much easier.  Plus we don't have to worry about weapons that specialize in affecting armor or shields.
 

[Corbomite]

I think you guys are really over thinking this. We aren't really trying (yet) to build a balanced game. We are trying to build a game engine that takes your parameters and puts them into effect. We aren't really concerned with if any of it makes sense or is balanced or fair. We assume most people are just going to be placing preexisting game info into their charts, so the games will be balanced if the source is balanced. People who want to make up their own games are just that - on their own.

[Captain Adam]

.

[Captain Adam]

.

[Corbomite]

I think you guys are really over thinking this. We aren't really trying (yet) to build a balanced game. We are trying to build a game engine that takes your parameters and puts them into effect. We aren't really concerned with if any of it makes sense or is balanced or fair. We assume most people are just going to be placing preexisting game info into their charts, so the games will be balanced if the source is balanced. People who want to make up their own games are just that - on their own.

Ehh Nevermind. 

Don't lose hope. I said "yet". We have acknowledged the possibilty that we may have to create a gaming system as well. It's just that we are light years from that decision at this point.

[[UFP]Exeter]

To chnge th ubject, lets talk models.

We are able to utilie th OP models, we can translate the form.

For new or recreations, the preferred format is ms3d, milkshape 3D, for low cost and to allow greater poly count over the mod format. other fomats can be read, but our focus will be ms3d.   

[Corbomite]

The overall priority of things is as follows:

1) Get the game engine running to the point that we can...

2) Begin to graph on our SFC/SFB mod as a proof of concept test bed which will...

3) Lead to a better understanding of how to make a game that hopefully will be a part of the generic engine.


That is unless we are just going to have the engine with nothing in it but blank fields at load up and the player has to set all metrics. That seems a bit cruel. Not everyone wants to mod their game to death.

[Captain Adam]

.

[Corbomite]

He has the version that can do it. Maybe he could share?

[Corbomite]

I think I might've changed my mind. The button/readout size in1280x1024 is still good and readable and gives us pretty much double the real estate to pull out or make our own readouts.

[[UFP]Exeter]

if not milkshape then tell me the program.  I can handle may formats.  Just the conversion of existing models get to milkhape

[Javora]

The overall priority of things is as follows:

1) Get the game engine running to the point that we can...

2) Begin to graph on our SFC/SFB mod as a proof of concept test bed which will...

3) Lead to a better understanding of how to make a game that hopefully will be a part of the generic engine.


That is unless we are just going to have the engine with nothing in it but blank fields at load up and the player has to set all metrics. That seems a bit cruel. Not everyone wants to mod their game to death.

I understand where you are coming from.  Having a generic engine that does not have anything to do with anyone else and that can be used by anyone should be the goal.  Unfortunately I have no experience with models or graphics, so I'm not going to be any help in that area.  I can help with game design and with my old computer science background I can help manage beta testing.  But I'll set out while you handle the modeling issues.

[Corbomite]

Oh come on, with a name like Javora we were hoping that you could just hang around and serve coffee and doughnuts (or beer!). 

[Javora]

Javora is the Chechnyan word for maple.  Speaking of old, the hard drive just crashed on my computer.  I may have a spare around here somewhere, but I'm going to be limited to my phone until I can get it fixed.  I'm sure I can get this thing working in time for beta testing.

[Corbomite]

Well Corbomite is the Star Trek word for blowin' sh*t up! I hope we are at that point by the time you join us. 

[Captain Adam]

.

[Corbomite]

I will have to see if gmax or 3ds max 3/4 can export to ms3d. If not I'm sorry but I can't afford to purchase those big $$$ modelling programs. Too much.

Adam

I don't think you're understanding. We need MS to covert any models in .mod format to something we can use. Anything else that was listed as compatible can be used too. If you can convert yours using something else then use it.

[[UFP]Exeter]

I can read 3ds and milk shape is $35 US, forever license.