Announcing new unnamed roguelike. feedback please

[purp...@gmail.com]

So I wpuld like to briefly go over the odeas of my rpguelike and hopefully get some feedback frok some people. I am pretty new to developing and have a couple thpusand lines so far of my roguelike completed.

The game will play like a traditional rl except the player will be leading a group of characters through the dungeon. I am leaning towards a grpup size of three, as i dont want to overwhelm the player woth too much micromanagigng. Now the player will directly control the party leader similar to rogue. The two allies to the player will be created by the player. The player will designate a formation for the allies to take and will also be able to change the aggro range and fighting style (melee, ranged, hybrid) for the allies to take. The player will also be able to manually set the targets of the allies or can let them choose based on their set playstyle. There will be a common inventory that the player will carry, but each ally will have a couple slots that they will be able to hold unequippable items in. For instance, potions or spellbooks etc. An ally will only be able to use items in the players inventpry if they are a certain distance from the player. Each ally will also have to be equipped by the player.

The game will consist of the player leading the parry through a dungeon, and will require some direct commands during tougher fights and bosses. For the majrity of the game though, the player will not have to directly control the allies. He will only need to set theor playstyles so the party will hve a well ranged strategy.

Types of.commands the player can give to allies will include (but definately not limited to).
-mkve to tile and return
-hold at til
-stop holding
-attack this monster
-use this item on this monster

So that is the gwbral gist if the roguelike. Let me know how it sounds and any ideas you have. I am very new to this group and hope to make some friends for the help i will surely be needing during development :)

Ps. The player will not be overburdened woth micromanagement. Just want to really clarofy that.-

[getter77]

I say go for it in full---there really should be more experimenting
with party oriented play this day and age. Good call on keeping it
down to 3 and a lack of micro---that should allow you to focus on more
interesting macro elements.

[David Damerell]

Quoting <purp...@gmail.com>:
>Ps. The player will not be overburdened woth micromanagement. Just want to
>really clarofy that.-

They will, unless the use of command and control facilities is game
mechanically limited. Otherwise, it'll always be possible to improve the
situation by fiddling more with orders.
--
David Damerell <dame...@chiark.greenend.org.uk>
If we aren't perfectly synchronised this corncob will explode!
Today is Second Tuesday, February.
Tomorrow will be Second Wednesday, February.

[Gerry Quinn]

In article <lM*ZW...@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>,
dame...@chiark.greenend.org.uk says...

> Quoting <purp...@gmail.com>:
> >Ps. The player will not be overburdened woth micromanagement. Just want to
> >really clarofy that.-
>
> They will, unless the use of command and control facilities is game
> mechanically limited. Otherwise, it'll always be possible to improve the
> situation by fiddling more with orders.

Agreed: micromanagement is going to be hard to avoid even if your
characters are basically highly evolved pets.

The interface may be difficult too unless the graphics are ASCII-sized.
I have toyed with the idea of parties but it clashes with my desire to
have decent-sized graphics.

Of course there is the 'Dungeon Master' option, in which the party move
in lockstep. In a roguelike this would translate to several actions per
turn, and graduated incapacitation where one party member is unconscious
but the others may be able to save him. I think this could work in a
roguelike, even though it loses out on tactics based on independent
movement.

- Gerry Quinn

[oot...@hot.ee]

On Thursday, 14 February 2013 21:58:51 UTC+2, purp...@gmail.com wrote:
> The game will play like a traditional rl except the player will be leading a group of characters
> through the dungeon.

I suggest you check out Dungeon Crawl Stone Soup. Its code base is C++ and lua in various
states of quality. If you are beginner then you will learn trick or two from it.

Ways to get and to manage permanent team is implemented there. User interface of DCSS
is outstandingly simple among rogue-likes. You can compare your ideas with theirs and
merged ideas often rise new levels of quality.

For trying out how it works play either in "wizard" mode or play orc priest of Beogh that will
get number of permanent allies soon enough during its adventures. DCSS is balanced for
very skilled players. Humanoid allies will use both ranged weapons and melee weapons and
spell-caster types will cast spells too.

[purp...@gmail.com]

> I suggest you check out Dungeon Crawl Stone Soup. Its code base is C++ and lua in various

Thanks, i'll check it out.

I'm coding in Python since I took a class on it in college so I have some small amount of experience. I did the python/libtcod tutorial and have modified it so that I have much of the basic framework completed. The only thing i'm having trouble with is creating a menu or small screen where the player can set the formation of the party. The formation will be set on some small grid (maybe 5x5) with the party leader in the center and than they will specfy each position for each party member. There is two keys on the keyboard that rotate the party formation by 90 degrees clockwise and counterclockwise so the formation can be kept when moving around corners.

I am also really trying to make it so that the classes are all unique and not totally well rounded, so that a the party composition will really have an impact on the experience of the game, and so that the player will need to use each party member correctly to make it far in the game.

But that is all in the future once I get the commands all fleshed out etc.

[paul-d...@sbcglobal.net]

Might as well have the player control each party member
directly. There's a board game called Arimaa (check it out!) meant to be
playable with a regular chess set, but harder than chess to write a
computer program for. Each turn the player gets to make four one-space
steps, distributing them among their pieces as they choose. Perhaps a
similar thing could work in a roguelike. The player can dash four spaces
with one party member, or can creep all three along. Explain it away as
"communication overhead". One member can act quickly without consulting,
or all three can act in concert.

[oot...@hot.ee]

On Friday, 15 February 2013 21:20:13 UTC+2, purp...@gmail.com wrote:
> > I suggest you check out Dungeon Crawl Stone Soup. Its code base is C++ and lua in various
>
> Thanks, i'll check it out.
>
> I'm coding in Python since I took a class on it in college so I have some small amount of experience.

C++/lua and Python are very different so on that case better ignore DCSS source code base.
C++ is pretty hard to master. The user interface of DCSS is certainly worth checking out.

> The only thing i'm having trouble with is creating a menu or small screen where the player
> can set the formation of the party. The formation will be set on some small grid (maybe 5x5)
> with the party leader in the center and than they will specfy each position for each party member.
> There is two keys on the keyboard that rotate the party formation by 90 degrees clockwise
> and counterclockwise so the formation can be kept when moving around corners.

That is interesting. How you pass narrow corridors and staircases? Do your team-mates
flee when badly hurt? Do they chase monsters that attempt to flee? What do others do when
someone falls into or is teleported away by some trap? How the inventory is shared/managed?
The more special and varying you make the surrounding terrain and its features, the
equipment pieces, the abilities of party members and the abilities and behavior of opponents
the more fun it gets. It will be not easy (IOW it will be fun) to achieve a group that cooperates
smartly at low micro-management in complex world.

> I am also really trying to make it so that the classes are all unique and not totally
> well rounded, so that a the party composition will really have an impact on the
> experience of the game, and so that the player will need to use each party member
> correctly to make it far in the game.

First try to get the team to cooperate in satisfying manner in trivial situations, then add
complexity to situations. Balancing is about spreading effects and defects and adjusting
constant values toward perceived optimal. Everything should be best tool for something
(IOW not useless) nothing should be best tool for everything (IOW not overpowered).
That is too addictive and distracting early, but it should be constantly done later. ;-)

[Gerry Quinn]

In article <871uchu...@sbcglobal.net>, paul-d...@sbcglobal.net
says...

> Gerry Quinn <ger...@gmail.com> writes:

> > Of course there is the 'Dungeon Master' option, in which the party move
> > in lockstep. In a roguelike this would translate to several actions per
> > turn, and graduated incapacitation where one party member is unconscious
> > but the others may be able to save him. I think this could work in a
> > roguelike, even though it loses out on tactics based on independent
> > movement.
>
> Might as well have the player control each party member
> directly. There's a board game called Arimaa (check it out!) meant to be
> playable with a regular chess set, but harder than chess to write a
> computer program for. Each turn the player gets to make four one-space
> steps, distributing them among their pieces as they choose. Perhaps a
> similar thing could work in a roguelike. The player can dash four spaces
> with one party member, or can creep all three along. Explain it away as
> "communication overhead". One member can act quickly without consulting,
> or all three can act in concert.

The point is that unless you have tiny graphics, you get certain issues
when characters can move separately. If they are not very close, you
have to scroll around. This is an even bigger problem on the small
screens of mobiles.

Lockstep movement isn't true multi-charater play, but it could be an
interesting option if you wanted to specialise in party-balancing and
suchlike.

- Gerry Quinn

[oot...@hot.ee]

On Saturday, 16 February 2013 15:27:15 UTC+2, Gerry Quinn wrote:
> The point is that unless you have tiny graphics, you get certain issues
> when characters can move separately. If they are not very close, you
> have to scroll around. This is an even bigger problem on the small
> screens of mobiles.

There is also option of switching between travel mode and battle
mode. In travel mode the party is one tile. In battle mode the location
is zoomed in and party and opponents are spread out for battle tactics.
That can work great on tiny screens of hand-held devices.

[purp...@gmail.com]

> That is interesting. How you pass narrow corridors and staircases? Do your team-mates
>
> flee when badly hurt? Do they chase monsters that attempt to flee? What do others do when
>
> someone falls into or is teleported away by some trap? How the inventory is shared/managed?

In a tight corrider, the allys will simply follow the lead player. Once they can spread out into their formation, they will.

Now, the player will need to set the settings for each ally. These include aggro ranges, which determine when an ally will move to attack a target, whether or not to assist another ally or player (only attack a monster that is the target of the assisting player), to attack with ranged weapons , melee, or a combination of both (and at what ranges). These settings are able to be changed with a couple key presses. It might sound like a lot of setting to manage, but once you figure out how your party will fight together, there really should be too many changes to this unless you are fighting a boss or something to that effect.

Now to attackfleeing monsters and to flee themselves, it will be the responsibility of the player to call those plays. In the command menu, the player will be able to override an allies target and movement with two keypresses. The player can tell the ally to move to a tile and hold there, which will override the allys aggro range. The player can also tell an ally to stop attacking their target andattack the monster that is running away. Also, I have it set up so that certain commands (move to that tile, and hold at that tile) are set up so that an ally will swap positions with the player or other ally if they are in the way. This means that a player will be able to successfully get an ally out of danger and swap in themselves or the ally, which should really open u some decent strategic options.

Now the inventory will be shared
and held by the player. Depending on the race and class combinations there will be a total weight that can be held, and each ally will have maybe two or 3 slots to hold potions, scrolls, etc. Each person will have separate equipment slots for armor. Also, the allies will be able to throw items to each other if they are close by.

The fov is generated by the player so far because I cannot figure out how to combine 3 fov's into one. So i will figure out how to handle an ally being teleported away.

I thought of doing it where the player moved each person individually, but that will be a pain in the ass I feel . Also, having a seperate view for moving and fighting really wouldnt feel like a roguelike to me, and it has already been done countless times.

[noonemustk...@gmail.com]

If you are interested in party-based roguelikes, you should try out Guild.
http://www.roguetemple.com/guild/

4 party members what can act on their own while you control the leader, or can be micromanaged each round. I think he did a really awesome job as far as control goes, but even then, it's still a little clunky. The medium simply isn't conducive to that sort of gameplay. And no matter what you do, your teammate AI is going to act retarded sometimes.


For FOV issues, you could simply go through the map once for each teammate and set isVisible. But limiting the display to the current "host" seems more appropriate.

[paul-d...@sbcglobal.net]

Sorry, I was still on the "micromanagement" train of thought. You can
consider my post more of a reply to David.

[alex23]

On Feb 15, 5:58 am, purph...@gmail.com wrote:
> The game will play like a traditional rl except the player
> will be leading a group of characters through the dungeon.

I'm really keen to see more squad-based RLs with a focus on tactics
over micromanagement. If you're interested in seeing someone else's
take on the idea, check out Steam Marines: http://www.steammarines.com/

It's always helpful to get a feel for what does & doesn't work in
other people's attempts, I think.

[David Damerell]

Quoting <oot...@hot.ee>:
>There is also option of switching between travel mode and battle
>mode. In travel mode the party is one tile. In battle mode the location
>is zoomed in and party and opponents are spread out for battle tactics.

I feel the lack of this sort of transition from exploration to combat is
fairly fundamental in what makes a roguelike.
--
David Damerell <dame...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> flcl?
Today is Second Friday, February.
Tomorrow will be Second Saturday, February - a weekend.