Alex2121
Karma: 1
|
Better gameplay ideas - 2007/09/18 20:45
A few suggestions to hopefully make the game more exciting.
Rotating cities- people are getting bored of building the same city over and over, everybody knows each others designs and its weaknesses. Every 24hours cities should be changed or summin like that.
1 account per person- People are getting fed up with smurfs. Only 1 account should be allowed per person. I dont know how you can make that possible but its an idea.
Saboing- Bombs should be only dropable 5 spaces away from the nearest building in that city.
Dfg quiting- i know you tryed to stop this but there are buttons called ALT and F4 on the keyboard, so the work that has been done it pretty useless.
Number of building before orbable-
11 is such a low number when building. i think cities should only be orbable at 30 or possibly some sort of time limit.
In game tutorial for new players-
instead of the video of the bc site, maybe an option should be avalible after people log in for the first time for a tutorial. The players must do as the tutorial says, like build a house and place a turret ect. Then the players will only be able to play once the tutorial has been completed. This could also stop smurfing, because the players wont want to waste time going through the tutorial just in order to annoy a player.
Post edited by: Alex2121, at: 2007/09/18 17:48
|
|
|
| | The administrator has disabled public write access.
|
Weebo
Karma: 19
|
Re:Better gameplay ideas - 2007/09/18 21:56
Good suggestions Alex.
Rotating cities is something I'd like to see in the future as well. The main idea behind the current implementation is that we keep the available cities relatively close together so that players do not need to travel forever to find a battle. This would work fine if we had more people online, because more cities would always be available.
Ideally, a new system could be built so if the first player who logs on selects resistencia, then cities around that open up, and cities could then theoretically spread and open up in any direction depending on the cities people select.
Or we could just hardcode another ordering like we have right now, and switch between the different ones every now and then, but thats ugly code =p
1 account per person would be impossible do enforce. We could make the whole registration process more annoying like it used to be, but we opened it up hoping this would encourage more new people to complete it and start playing. (You used to have to enter a different valid email address for each account, then enter the activation code it sent you in order to create an account).
Account registration will work differently once we move to the game portal, because on the game portal, one account will work for all games.
For DFG quitting, if someone hits ALT F4, they are dumb because it will take them longer to get back in-game than if they just let them self die. Also, in most battles, you never lose points because during the time you die, your team kills a few people. So technically, while the person is out of game, they are probably losing a few points rather than saving them self 2. We could come up with some other ideas here, but technically if someone is dumb enough to leave, you have a better chance at orbing them. They are out of the game longer and they must bug their mayor!
The number of buildings before being orbable is something I want to completely change if ReMoTe agrees. In the future, I'd like to have a timer and a ready button. You'll have 10 minutes to build, or can hit the ready button if you are done sooner.
I'd also like to have the ability to "save city design" before you hit the ready button. That way, next time you join that city, you could hit "load city design", and then click ready right away to continue your battle.
In-game help exists as those little tips, but definitely much more can be done and a tutorial wouldn't be a bad idea.
Post edited by: Weebo, at: 2007/09/18 18:57
|
|
|
| | The administrator has disabled public write access.
|
Alex2121
Karma: 1
|
Re:Better gameplay ideas - 2007/09/19 18:18
Good idea on the save city design.
The rotating cities would work so that like now, when you log on, there are 7 cities or so open, you could just move it to different cities close together like it is now.
Maybe blida, arequipa, constantine, luanda, bogota, Canberra and pretoria.
Dont really like the idea of 1 city open to start tho because then its pretty much the same as it is now you will have the same cities.
(map of cities open in different window lol!)
Post edited by: Alex2121, at: 2007/09/19 15:47
|
|
|
| | The administrator has disabled public write access.
|
Weebo
Karma: 19
|
Re:Better gameplay ideas - 2007/09/19 20:37
I did not mean to say only one city would be available to the first person to login. In fact, I meant to say the opposite, that ALL cities would be available to the first person to login.
Then the second person to login would be limited to the 8 surrounding the one the first person selected.
For example, if the first person to login selected Buenos Aires, then the available cities would pretty much be the same as now (Andorra, Bahia, Pos, Beng, Resistencia, Huambo, Cordoba, Rio cuarto).
However, if the first person took Andorra instead of Buenos, the available cities would become Algiers, Pago, St. Johns, Annaba, Bahia, Banta, Benguela, Buenos Aires.
The algorithm would then only begin opening more than 8 once a certain number of people logged on, but the 8 cities would continue to move dynamically based on a non-existing algorithm that we would have to make.
By this I mean, say that dude joined dorra, then someone joined Buenos and orbed him. Then the available cities would go back to Andorra, Bahia, Pos, Beng, Resistencia, Huambo, Cordoba, Rio cuarto.
Then lets say I joined Rio and orbed the dude in Buenos, the available cities would then switch too Buenos, Res, Santiago, Cordoba, Kumyari, Corrientes, Rosario, Kirovakan!
Of course, the algorithm would need to be a bit more complex than this simple example because hopefully there are more than 2 cities online and we will still want to try to keep them close together!
For example, lets say there is a dude in Buenos, I join Rio and someone else joins Andorra and we kill Buenos. Then the available cities shouldn't change yet.
But if I joined Rio, someone else joined Posadas and we killed Buenos, the available cities would move over and become Bahia, Pos, Santa Fe, Buenos, Res, Santiago, Cordoba, Rio, Kumyari.
Basically, we would need to try and determine the best "9 city square" all-the time based on which cities people are in. Then, if ever enough people logon, we simply expand the size of the square.
This would allow the open cities to change dynamically all day long while keeping the battles close together.
This is just an idea 
Right now city-opening is hard-coded. There is a specific order in which cities will become available based entirely on how many people are online. Some cities will therefore be permanently unavailable in this system until we have over 100 people online at once 
Post edited by: Weebo, at: 2007/09/19 17:39
|
|
|
| | The administrator has disabled public write access.
|
Nightwish
Karma: 7
|
Re:Better gameplay ideas - 2007/09/20 02:44
im in ur forums approving ur ideas
|
|
|
| | The administrator has disabled public write access.
|
c0rey
Karma: 2
|
Re:Better gameplay ideas - 2007/09/20 04:48
does anyone have the cliffsnotes to weebos posts?
|
|
|
| | The administrator has disabled public write access.
|
vindkast
Karma: 11
|
Re:Better gameplay ideas - 2007/09/23 20:28
Weebo wrote:
we could just hardcode another ordering like we have right now, and switch between the different ones every now and then, but thats ugly code =p
LIES, ITS BEAUTIFUL
| Code: |
private void openCities( int startingCity, int citiesWanted ) {
int counter = 0;
int citiesFound = 0;
boolean isNeighbor = true;
int i = 0;
while( citiesFound < citiesWanted ) {
// Loops 1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 3 etc times to spiral outward from city
for( i=0; i<(counter/2)+1; i++ ) {
lastCity = targetCity;
// Simulate moving right, down, left, or up on the map depending on the value of counter
targetCity += 1 + 7*(counter%2) - 2*((counter/2)%2) - 14*((counter/2)%2)*(counter%2);
// Check for edge-wrap-- if found, turn off isNeighbor until another edge-wrap occurs
if( (targetCity%8)!=((lastCity%8)+1-(counter%4)) && (targetCity/8)!=((lastCity/8)+2-(counter%4))) {
isNeighbor = !isNeighbor;
}
// If the targetCity is a valid index and didn't edgewrap,
if( (targetCity>0) && (targetCity<64) && isNeighbor ) {
/* insert code to open the city at targetCity index */
citiesFound++;
if(citiesFound == citiesWanted)
break;
}
}
counter++;
}
}
}
|
... ok fine, it's ugly as hell, but you have to love bizarre trial-and-error algorithms
but one good thing about object-oriented java is that you should never need weird algorithms-- you could just make the City objects (or a container, like a Map object) aware of the geographical relationship on initialization (possibly like a 2d linked listed), then all operations could be as straightforward and intelligible as map.getCity(5).open(), map.getCity(5).getLeftNeighbor().open(), map.getCity(5).openNeighbors(), map.closeAllCities(), etc
edit: also, making the map wrap at the edges (round world) would simplify things a lot...
Post edited by: vindkast, at: 2007/09/23 17:31
|
|
|
| | The administrator has disabled public write access.
|
Jetli
Karma: 4
|
Re:Better gameplay ideas - 2007/09/23 23:20
old topic i saw these suggestions long time ago.
|
|
|
| | The administrator has disabled public write access.
|
Weebo
Karma: 19
|
Re:Better gameplay ideas - 2007/09/23 23:24
While certain issues brought up in this post have been discussed in the past, it is still very important for us to discuss them every chance we get so we know best how to implement changes in the future!
For example, i've spoken several times about having a "ready button", but have heard little feedback about the idea. It would be best to hear complaints now, rather than after the change is made...
|
|
|
| | The administrator has disabled public write access.
|
vindkast
Karma: 11
|
Re:Better gameplay ideas - 2007/09/24 00:59
I personally don't really like the idea of a ready button, because I think it approaches the "not ready!!!" issue from the wrong angle. I'd prefer solutions that let people become ready faster, rather than ones that prevent early attacks.
|
|
|
| | The administrator has disabled public write access.
|
Weebo
Karma: 19
|
Re:Better gameplay ideas - 2007/09/24 05:44
My reasoning behind the idea is that I am constantly told that players really do not like being attacked while building. It seems many feel that building is the designing stage of the game where they should be left to build, and once done, they can enter battle with others. A "ready" button would then make this a reality.
Part of the idea would also be the "loading" and saving of city designs. In that sense, we will have in fact really sped up how long it takes to get people back in battle as it would be near instant.
Another reason why I like this idea is because it would give new players more time to figure out how to go about building a city! People would also be more willing to hire new players because being orbed won't mean much down-time.
|
|
|
| | The administrator has disabled public write access.
|
Makaveli
Karma: 6
|
Re:Better gameplay ideas - 2007/09/24 11:19
i love the idea of saved city designs, it would mean constant battle instead of all the waiting that goes on. if that was the only thing you changed for BC java, it would still make it a much funner game.
i'm not sure i like the ready button though. what if you built a city design tool into the game (integrated with the ability to save city designs), that way you could design an entire city without being attacked and save it, then just press a button for it to appear when you're ready to play. this would give newbs plenty of time to build, but would eliminate having players hovering around a half completed city waiting for the mayor to press "ready"
|
|
|
| | The administrator has disabled public write access.
|
Weebo
Karma: 19
|
Re:Better gameplay ideas - 2007/09/24 14:49
Well, the "ready" idea and the load/save city designs is really one idea. I don't really think they can be taken apart. However, what you have described as an alternative sounds exactly like the idea I have proposed except you suggest that buildings be invisible to others until the "ready" button is pressed. This could be good, but I like the idea of people being able to chat with each other while online rather than adding single player modes.
The idea is that mayors would begin in designer mode during which they could load a city design or construct a city and save it, before actually beginning to battle. Once they are satisfied and have saved their design, they would be "ready" to start playing/fighting.
Otherwise if we just let people load cities, we put new players at a huge disadvantage because not only can people attack them right away, they have no design to load and no time to slowly think about building a good one. They could start building, someone else would log on, load their city, and come kill them... The idea would be to instead give them time to think about making a good design, then once ready, save it and start playing. (while in this designer mode, they could still hire a team or talk to other players online by driving around just like now in case they just want to chat or someone wants to offer help! The idea would be to make the city indestructible while in designer mode and have items be inactive)
If we are letting people instantly re-load their city, we have to give others time to build theirs... Otherwise, someone with no saved designs or someone who wants to make a new design will be lamed worse than ever. Just imagine you log on to try building a new city and then suddenly the 5 people in the meeting room see you as fresh meat, enter the battlefield, load their fully built cities, and come after you while you are at 1 building still... If you have any enemies on the game, they could troll you like this and make life very miserable. =p
Cliff Notes:
In order to introduce save/load city designs, we need to give mayors a designer mode during which they can either load a design or build then save a design.
This implies we need a sort of ready button, that would indicate when the player is ready to leave designer mode and use their city for battle.
The alternative would be to have an offline single player designer mode, but I am reluctant to head in this direction with a multiplayer game that needs more players online! =p
Post edited by: Weebo, at: 2007/09/24 12:04
|
|
|
| | The administrator has disabled public write access.
|
|
