Newsgroups: rec.games.roguelike.development
From: Da-Breegster <dabreegs...@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2005 15:57:03 GMT
Local: Sat, Dec 17 2005 10:57 am
Subject: Time in turn-based systems yet again
Hey. I know this topic has been brought up too many times before, but I just Something like delayed fireball, which takes one turn to chargeup and one to It gets tough in the case of picking up multiple items. Somebody suggested it What I could do is have every action performed schedule itself to actually You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
| ||||||||||||||
Newsgroups: rec.games.roguelike.development
From: Da-Breegster <dabreegs...@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2005 22:31:36 GMT
Local: Sun, Dec 18 2005 5:31 pm
Subject: Re: Time in turn-based systems yet again
On 2005-12-17, Da-Breegster <dabreegs...@gmail.com> wrote:
[snip original message] I probably wasn't too clear earlier. My basic conflict was how to handle partial turns, like getting 6 items taking 1.2 turns. I've figured it out, I think. For actions costing more than 1 turn and less than 2, they will be performed in that one turn instead of carrying over to the next. This is done to preserve proper order for characters. But the fact that they rushed to perform a certain action will temporarily decrease their dodging stat or the general preparedness and defence. I think this should work out OK. Still, though, any advice? It's a solution, but it doesn't seem "clean." You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
| ||||||||||||||
Newsgroups: rec.games.roguelike.development
From: "Michal Brzozowski" <ruso...@poczta.fm>
Date: 19 Dec 2005 02:05:57 -0800
Local: Mon, Dec 19 2005 5:05 am
Subject: Re: Time in turn-based systems yet again
Da-Breegster wrote: I don't see the problem. In my game I've got a priority queue, which > On 2005-12-17, Da-Breegster <dabreegs...@gmail.com> wrote: > [snip original message] > I probably wasn't too clear earlier. My basic conflict was how to handle > partial turns, like getting 6 items taking 1.2 turns. I've figured it > out, I think. For actions costing more than 1 turn and less than 2, they > will be performed in that one turn instead of carrying over to the next. > This is done to preserve proper order for characters. But the fact that > they rushed to perform a certain action will temporarily decrease their > dodging stat or the general preparedness and defence. I think this > should work out OK. Still, though, any advice? It's a solution, but it > doesn't seem "clean." returns the creature earliest in time. Then every move has some assigned duration, say 100 for walking, 50 for running, etc. A faster creature may have a multiplier for this. So after every move the creature is pushed back into the queue, with updated time. There are no turns. You can say a turn is 100, but if your PC moves in 80 units, you will get 5 moves in 4 turns. You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
| ||||||||||||||
Newsgroups: rec.games.roguelike.development
From: Da-Breegster <dabreegs...@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2005 23:37:23 GMT
Local: Mon, Dec 19 2005 6:37 pm
Subject: Re: Time in turn-based systems yet again
On 2005-12-19, Michal Brzozowski <ruso...@poczta.fm> wrote:
The possibility of simply eliminating the traditional concept of turns did cross my mind in fact. Or rather, keeping turns or a 100/1000-tick system simply for purposes of recording action points. I'll consider this again without the concept of turns hindering me. A thought. Say the player just executed some action and they 0 action > Pick up the bread ration? y - The goblin thumps you in the head. > Pick up the great sword? n > Pick up the really heavy troll corpse? y You've picked up the items. The problem isn't an enemy killing them during this delay, as events You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
| ||||||||||||||
Newsgroups: rec.games.roguelike.development
From: nj...@hotmail.com
Date: 19 Dec 2005 05:57:34 -0800
Local: Mon, Dec 19 2005 8:57 am
Subject: Re: Time in turn-based systems yet again
You can take a look at XRogue 8.0 at http://roguelike.sourceforge.net
or Advance Rogue 7.7 (i think, but i don't have that version posted yet) which handle this. I haven't quite followed it completely, and I am not 100% sure I like it. In those versions of rogue there are 10 segments of each turn, every command generates an action which is assigned delay (counted in segments) until completion (when the action actually occurs). What I don't like about it is that you can send a command to move into an empty space but by the time that command is acted on a monster could move into that space and your action result will be to strike the monster. The players speed is adjusted due to effects (haste, slow, etc) and attacks can take up variable amounts of time. Not too much is still based on the full turn, but a couple things get triggered every 10 segments so I guess thats still the definition of a turn.The player and each creature can have only one action pending. So I guess they can't walk and chew gum at the same time. Not saying it is the best or most clever solution (it is not even *my* solution). But it is *A* solution. It of course requires something anagolous to ticks which I guess you didn't want to have. You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
| ||||||||||||||
Newsgroups: rec.games.roguelike.development
From: Da-Breegster <dabreegs...@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2005 23:40:43 GMT
Local: Mon, Dec 19 2005 6:40 pm
Subject: Re: Time in turn-based systems yet again
On 2005-12-19, nj...@hotmail.com <nj...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> You can take a look at XRogue 8.0 at http://roguelike.sourceforge.net That'd be a problem, yeah. But for something like moving one adjacent > or Advance Rogue 7.7 (i think, but i don't have that version posted > yet) which handle this. I haven't quite followed it completely, and I > am not 100% sure I like it. In those versions of rogue there are 10 > segments of each turn, every command generates an action which is > assigned delay (counted in segments) until completion (when the action > actually occurs). What I don't like about it is that you can send a > command to move into an empty space but by the time that command is > acted on a monster could move into that space and your action result > will be to strike the monster. space, I think the player will already require 1 action point, or whatever the required amount is, so it won't be a problem. As far as a long-term travel thing, an event could interrupt it when an enemy appears on the screen, like with crawl's nifty Travel patch. > The players speed is adjusted due to effects (haste, slow, etc) and It sounds decent, but I think I won't use it. I probably will eventually > attacks can take up variable amounts of time. Not too much is still > based on the full turn, but a couple things get triggered every 10 > segments so I guess thats still the definition of a turn.The player > and each creature can have only one action pending. So I guess they > can't walk and chew gum at the same time. Not saying it is the best > or most clever solution (it is not even *my* solution). But it is > *A* solution. It of course requires something anagolous to ticks > which I guess you didn't want to have. allow for walking and chewing gun simultaneously. Thanks for the idea though. You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
| ||||||||||||||
Newsgroups: rec.games.roguelike.development
From: "Gamer_2k4" <gamer...@gmail.com>
Date: 19 Dec 2005 07:48:14 -0800
Local: Mon, Dec 19 2005 10:48 am
Subject: Re: Time in turn-based systems yet again
My method gives creatures a turn counter and a speed for each action.
The counter starts at 0. When the counter reaches 1000, the creature can act again and 1000 is subtracted from the total. When the creature acts, the speed for that action is stored temporarily. This happens for each creature on that game turn. Then the next turn comes, and the counter is checked. If it is less than 1000, the speed value of the last action is added to the counter but the monster does not act. Example: So we see that the bat moves again at turn 9, but the player can only You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
| ||||||||||||||
Newsgroups: rec.games.roguelike.development
From: "NIm" <bladedpeng...@gmail.com>
Date: 19 Dec 2005 08:36:55 -0800
Local: Mon, Dec 19 2005 11:36 am
Subject: Re: Time in turn-based systems yet again
It seems like everyone is relying on ticks for thier game turns, or
discarding the excess. Is there any way of taking up 1.2 turns without that? I personally prefer ticks, but if you don't want to go there you could keep a tally of how much time you gave left over, and when it's a whole turn, you get an extra turn. That's kind of like ticks though. other than that I like the OP's current solution, which makes the pc 'hurry' to finish a move, and suffer a stat drain. I like this solution because stats are basically there to make up for what you can't simulate. you can't simulate. You can't simulate the partial turn without a tick system, so use a stat equivalent of not having a full turn. You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
| ||||||||||||||
Newsgroups: rec.games.roguelike.development
From: "Gamer_2k4" <gamer...@gmail.com>
Date: 19 Dec 2005 10:44:37 -0800
Local: Mon, Dec 19 2005 1:44 pm
Subject: Re: Time in turn-based systems yet again
Nlm wrote: OTOH, it's not exactly fair to the player to penalize him for certain > You can't simulate the partial turn > without a tick system, so use a stat equivalent of not having a full > turn. actions. There could be a game option, though: Rush Actions. If it was on, then all actions would take the same amount of time, but the player would suffer stat penalties for slow actions (maybe bonuses for quick ones?). If it was off, then the player would take longer to finish actions, but would suffer no penalizations. This might be the best way to implement this. You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
| ||||||||||||||
Newsgroups: rec.games.roguelike.development
From: Da-Breegster <dabreegs...@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2005 00:01:41 GMT
Local: Mon, Dec 19 2005 7:01 pm
Subject: Re: Time in turn-based systems yet again
On 2005-12-19, Gamer_2k4 <gamer...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Nlm wrote: Since I'm designing an engine (see my reply to the post above this >> You can't simulate the partial turn >> without a tick system, so use a stat equivalent of not having a full >> turn. > OTOH, it's not exactly fair to the player to penalize him for certain subtree), this might be the way to go. You can choose (in the game or by the player) to lose a turn and get a preparedness bonus on the carryover or keep a turn but lose preparedness. As long as preparedness was an essential factor in everything favoring the player (or actually, whichever actor is going), this will work out. All actions would never take the same amount of time in either system. Actions taking 2 turns take 2 turns in both systems. I was just talking about fractional parts. You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
| ||||||||||||||
| Create a group - Google Groups - Google Home - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy |
| ©2009 Google |