Sentience

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Gaming_World
Acculely, recoil is caused by a piece of matter moving out of the barrel. Any weapon that shoots ammo has a recoil (this includes a bow-and-arrow and rail-gun). Do a little reasearch on rail guns, and you will see that they have recoil, infact they have enough to knock over a SUV if placed on top...

With the time it takes to get to the target, place it in. Figure that the mechs auto-dodge bullets, the longer the ammo takes to get there, the higher the chance of susess of the dodge. You can also have chips to counter-act this (increase chance of dodging, or target-leading).

---

The recoil isn't caused by the matter moving out of the barrel. It's boiled down to Newtons laws. Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. In a chemical weapon it's the explosion of the propellant (that jerks the gun and moves the bullet). With a bow and arrow, it's the bowstring.

In a rail gun, the magnetic power pushing the bullet forward would push the rail backwards. It's dependant on how fast you accelerate the projectile and how stable the platform is. A wheeled SUV is not quite in the same category as a 40 ton battle mech resting on tracks.

Also in this stage of warfare, mechs are only likely to be able to dodge really slow missiles. They'd be buggered trying to dodge a gauss shell or laser beam. And really slow missiles would have homing technology, making dodging unfeasible.

The particle engine is going to be a trial and error thing anyway. We can't make it realistic otherwise there's be nothing to see - laser beams and gauss shells are going to be invisible to the naked eye. That's just something we'd have to play with to make it look cool.

The particle bits are altered in the sfx.ini, so if you really want you can have a play about. Download the components.xls from the website - it might help. Remember to save as .csv and then rename to .ini. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Arbiter


3 is the limit for augs. Come on Ian, you know this - we only renamed chips... ;)

Almost all weapons will have a less than 100% accuracy otherwise there'd be little point in having it.

To summarise: Mechs that fire then move will not suffer from the chassis penalty. Mechs that move then fire will. It won't stop guerilla tactics, but it would shift the balance towards the defender - where it should be.

---

I thought there was talk a few months ago about delimiting the number of augs, thats all. Eveything else I agree with entirely. :p

Excellent. Work shall begin immediately.

Recoil is caused by the object moving out of the barrel (with perfectly follows newton's laws). I found some web-pages which also states this: http://www.kitsune.addr.com/Rifts/Ri...or_Railgun.htm http://www.talsorian.com/bbs/messmz/768.html

I've been thinking a little about organic creatures. Their lack of power drain would make them preferable to mechs anyway, so I had an idea.

Every living unit should have a biomass drain. If there isn't sufficient biomass in stores, a living unit should behave as though 'rusted' - losing armour every turn (to represent sickness / hunger). A unit suffering like this can be put to sleep, whereby it can regain a small number of hitpoints at the cost of its turn. A sleeping unit would not incurr a biomass drain.

This gives us the potential later on for another project - something like a hospital, that negates the negative effect of not having enough biomass to support troops (it would be a nice idea to still have the drain though)

That's not feasible, and it doesn't tie in with the rest of the game.

How are units going to drain biomass from stores? If they can do that, why can't mechs drain ammo from stores?

We need to keep consistent. It's also a huge framework change - and how will it affect cybernetic units?

umm...

Well other than making organic units weak (and therefore pointless), how do we balance them with mechs, which have a constant drain?

The organic units are going to stick with the energy concept, but will simply be unable to drain from the global energy grid. The yeti lungs (reactor) will provide a finite amount of power and no more is available.

And weak isn't necessarily pointless. A zergling is weak, but boy do you run when there's loads of 'em - and they're fast.

Mechs do have a constant drain, but this is taken from their reactor first and only when they overshoot their reactors power does it drain from the grid. Units with only a power reception array (or whatever) will drain from the grid constantly.

What are you up to tonight?

You fancy coming round for a bit, or chatting on MSN?

PS - Kedaman beat me at SC last night. Well, actually it was this morning (about 0330) and I was pissed out of my face, but he still beat me. The lad learns quick.

:D

I'm really glad to hear it. Mind you, he's a machine really, isn't he...Kedabot...

Err...tonight...

I was thinking about coming down to finish that game of Heroes, but I think MSN, a bottle of wine, and graphics are a must instead...

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Gaming_World
Recoil is caused by the object moving out of the barrel (with perfectly follows newton's laws). I found some web-pages which also states this: http://www.kitsune.addr.com/Rifts/Ri...or_Railgun.htm http://www.talsorian.com/bbs/messmz/768.html

---

No responce on this?

Nope.

I can point to websites that claim Elvis is living on the moon.... ;)

Besides, the Sentience combat engine isn't going to go into that kind of detail, otherwise we're going to be including muzzle bore, missile mass, etc etc and it would get silly.

Guns recoil x amount depending on the gun. That's the detail we're going to. No further.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Arbiter
Nope.

I can point to websites that claim Elvis is living on the moon.... ;)

Besides, the Sentience combat engine isn't going to go into that kind of detail, otherwise we're going to be including muzzle bore, missile mass, etc etc and it would get silly.

Guns recoil x amount depending on the gun. That's the detail we're going to. No further.

---

...Thanks anyway, Gaming. It's good of you to go to that sort of trouble for us.

http://www.dreampod9.com/Images/Hgturret.gif

http://www.obh.snafu.de/~madley/star.../capture34.jpg

http://www.cncgames.com/rampics/ramturret.jpg

http://www.aldera.net/images/WeapTech/GunTurret.jpg

http://www.delcosystems.com/DS-v3/images/turret-30.jpg

http://www.delcosystems.com/DS-v3/images/turret-25T.jpg

Should have the majority of the accuracy framework in by the end of today.

If you could have a think whilst you're at work and post on here any benefits that you think augs might provide to a mech....

Thanks for replying to my other post Ian..... :rolleyes: :p

Anyway, you're going to like me even less for what I'm about to say....

Some of the big chassis/torso images require work. The problems with the transparentiness can be see in the mech design screen. I think fixing these would improve the smaller images as well....

I show you when you next come round.

We could also do with a nice funky interface for the pick player screen and mapmaker screen, it still looks a bit VB ish....

You got a bit to work to do now sonny.... :D

I also need some buttons from you:

(height x width)

105 x 25:
(*) Use Selected
(*) Delete Selected

153 x 25:
(*) Quick Build Mech (or words to that effect)
(*) New Blank Mech Design (or words to that effect)

If you need the buttons to be higher or longer, or just a slightly different shape then let me know and I'll see what I can do.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Arbiter
Should have the majority of the accuracy framework in by the end of today.

If you could have a think whilst you're at work and post on here any benefits that you think augs might provide to a mech....

---

oopss... sorry, been kinda busy.
Ok, here goes...

ENERGY:
Increase mech energy efficiency
decrease weapon energy drain
increase reactor output

PHYSICAL:
Increase mech speed
Increase mech weight limit
decrease processor drain

WEAPON:
Increase ammo efficiency (more damage per ton or more shots per ton)
Increase accuracy

ill post more as they occur

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Arbiter
I also need some buttons from you:

(height x width)

105 x 25:
(*) Use Selected
(*) Delete Selected

153 x 25:
(*) Quick Build Mech (or words to that effect)
(*) New Blank Mech Design (or words to that effect)

If you need the buttons to be higher or longer, or just a slightly different shape then let me know and I'll see what I can do.

---

I've been sat in front of my computer for hours now and I'm still not getting anywhere. Its really pissing me off. I tried to make a start on a spawning pool, but that looks dreadful too. Then I thought about comiling what work i'd done for you to see, but theres ****ing hundreds of files, usually multi-layered.

I'm not a happy bunny. Do you have any suggestions?

I'm going to the pub. I may be fortunate enough to find inspiration in the bottom of a pint glass...
...I doubt it though :(

Re: Buttons

You DA MAN!!!

You've got churning these out to fine art now haven't you?

They're all good, a quality job (no white corners that I can see).

The only ones I have a been about are the quick build ones. They don't look right with the words joined together. Could we have them with 'quick build' as seperate words, or maybe you could try different wording.

Ta for these dude. :)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Behemoth
I've been sat in front of my computer for hours now and I'm still not getting anywhere. Its really pissing me off. I tried to make a start on a spawning pool, but that looks dreadful too. Then I thought about comiling what work i'd done for you to see, but theres ****ing hundreds of files, usually multi-layered.

I'm not a happy bunny. Do you have any suggestions?

---

I don't mind how many files there are - as far as I'm concerned, the more the merrier. It gives me more to comment on.

Only prob is I can't access your PhotoShop files, so unless you want to install PhotoShop on my machine I'll need them as bitmaps.

If it'll help though, I'll comment on every graphic you send me and let you know what's hot and what's not.

Some mental blocks can be fought through with sheer perseverence and grit, but imagination blocks are difficult.

Mail me what you've got and I'll see if I can provide inspiration.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Behemoth
I'm going to the pub. I may be fortunate enough to find inspiration in the bottom of a pint glass...
...I doubt it though :(

---

It can help the creative juices, but it's probably just going to make you a lush. Look at me and my feet....

Still, a break/beer can be helpful. :)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Arbiter
Some of the big chassis/torso images require work. The problems with the transparentiness can be see in the mech design screen. I think fixing these would improve the smaller images as well....

I show you when you next come round.

---

This is something that needs to be looked at. It shouldn't be too big a job, and it's something that can be plugged straight in the game and be checked. Like I said, when I see you next we can discuss it.

You're doing good dude. Just keep chipping away at the graphics and we'll get there in the end.

Mail me your in progress files and I'll see if I can provide some inspiration. It's awful struggling along on your own, and in the dark.

Chin up big guy.... ;)

Revised ones below:

ENERGY:
Increase max energy drain
Decrease standing charge
Decrease energy used per move
Increase shield recharge rate

PHYSICAL:
Increase mech speed
Decrease mech weight (exluding ammo, armour and weapons)*
Decrease mech weight (overall)+

WEAPON:
Increase ammo burst size
Increase ammo amt per ton
Increase accuracy
Decrease weapon energy drain
Increase weapon range

MISC:
EMP pulse#
Self Destruct#
Decrease processor drain
Increase sensor range
Decrease visibility


#By having the EMP/Self Dest as augs it saves me having to recode the weaponry framework. Makes the game more stable.

*Replaces bits with lighter materials. Similar to stripping a car for rallying

+Overall weight decrease (grav nullifier, anti-grav struts etc)

Ok, feel free to send me what you've got.

What are you up to this evening? If you're free, you could pop round for a bit (bringing your copy of photoshop with you).

At some point today I'm going to be working on the mech visibility thing, but I'm not sure how I'm going to go about it...

The more visible a mech is, the further away it can be spotted - but I need an algorithm to support this.

A mech will have a visibility rating and a view radius.

How are these linked?

At the moment all I can think of is subtracting the visibility rating from the view radius so a mech will only be visibile within the modified value.

i.e. A mech with a visibility rating of -20 will be visible within only one diagonal square of a mech with a rating of 114 (normally allowed to view 2) and it would be completely invisible to a mech with a view of 57 (as 57-20 doesn't even cover one square). A mech with a visibility rating of +20 would be visible at a greater range than the spotting mech can normally see.

That's all I've got at the mo - comments?

That was pretty much what we came up with originally.

You had the idea of stealthed components to reduce a mechs visibility. Its speed would also make a difference.

We should have a cap so that a mech is never totally invisible - perhaps a mech would always be visible at 1 squares range.

sorry, busy this evening too.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Behemoth
That was pretty much what we came up with originally.

You had the idea of stealthed components to reduce a mechs visibility. Its speed would also make a difference.

We should have a cap so that a mech is never totally invisible - perhaps a mech would always be visible at 1 squares range.

---

Speed make a difference? How? Where would that fit in?

not sure...there are two possible situations.

a) a mech is moving really fast - it is difficult to make out properly, ergo its visibility is lowered

b) a mech is moving really fast, making a lot of noise and shaking the ground - its visibility is raised

perhaps we should ignore speed.

perhaps each component should be attributed a visibility rating. a tank chassis and a howitzer cannon is going to be more obvious than a toddler with a peashooter riding a tricycle.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Behemoth


a) something

b) something that contradicts 'a)'

perhaps we should ignore speed.

---

LOL!

anyway, yes - every component will have a visibility rating. I've got it sorted in my head now, I just need to shoehorn it into the existing framework.

Could be messy....

:p

http://gamespot.com/gamespot/filters...470764,00.html

http://www.gamespot.com/features/heroesiii_gg/

You could always figure that the mech is facing is the direction it last moved. Then figure out the radius from that. You could then make it harder to see a mech out side the main view radius, just like in real life. At one tile, it could be visible from all directions. But lets say that the mech has a view radius of just over 180 degrees (this could be modified from values like 1 or 2), then from "left" to "right" (-90 to 90 degrees), the mechs would be 100% visible, but after that it begins to get harder to see mechs. At 180 degrees, it would be inpossible to see a mech.

This would make it more like life, but less like robots. The mechs could have a mod (such as a sensor array), that increases the radius, but it might take 1 spot of a weapon, or chip.



This is unless you already have your own system.

Thanks for the input Gaming.

We don't have field of views for mechs, as we are talking pretty large distances (1 square = a number of miles) and as you hinted at, robots would use solely visual recognition.

They're more likely to use a combination of radar/sonar, infra-red, ultra-violet, seismology, and a herd of other complicated things.

So, for the purposes of Sentience, mechs can see in a circle of a radius X around themselves. We're trying to work out the best way of making enemy mechs more or less visible depending on what they're carrying.