Re: OT: Multiball! (Re: Orbquest)

On Apr 23, 11:59 pm, lochok <loc...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 03:57:48 -0700, Antoine wrote:
On Apr 23, 10:42 pm, Gerry Quinn <ger...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
In article <1177296153.874057.28...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
abcgi.codemon...@xxxxxxxxx says...

On Apr 20, 2:59 pm, Antoine <antoine.from.r...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I haven't done anything with Guild for ages. While it was a cool idea,
the interface was just too fussy and a lot of micro management was
required. I do think it would be possible to do something along
similar lines as an Angband variant, and produce a much better result.
But one would need to think very hard about the interface.

Not a bad idea - take Angband or Nethack or whatever and just add the
ability to run a party instead of a single adventurer. Funny that the
interface is an issue as the interfaces for RL's are notoriously
difficult anyhow. RL 2.0 (ie modern RogueLikes) do need to solve that
issue.

I have experimented with multicharacter play in my game, but it seems
awkward to play - you hop from one character to the next every turn,
and really it would only work well if there was a much larger field of
view so you could see what all characters can see without having to
scroll.

I'm tending to think that pets work better in roguelikes.

I think multicharacter can work so long as the other characters are
like 'smart pets' and can do sensible things on their own and obey
your commands ('go there', 'fight this monster','heal me','run
away'...)

And it's nice to be able to swap from one character to another, but
just occasionally - not something you want to have to do any turn.

Pets are good too.

A.

I've always considered the 'guide' rather then 'command' approach would
work better. What you would need would be a semi-decent AI, that you can
feed a few potential goals, and if you want occasionally take complete
control (for example, synchronizing your party of lets say 8 against 3
greater blue dragons). I think that there needs to be a happy medium - in
ADOM for instance, I feel like I really have little control over my pets
where there is one group rouguelike where you move each individually - it
gets painfully slow after a while.

I think my original concept of Guild was that you'd usually play the
warrior and go round bumping into monsters with the cleric following
you casting Heal. When you got in trouble you'd switch to the wizard
and cast a couple of good spells, and when you were exploring you'd
switch to the rogue, leave the rest of the party behind and go and
search a bit.

Everything else was just detail :)

A.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Ethernet breaker
    ... disable control that is a) not software based (we already have numerous ... Use a managed ethernet switch at the center of the control system ... PS I'm using the groups.google interface for the first time. ...
    (comp.dcom.lans.ethernet)
  • RE: [fw-wiz] Dynamic routing on a firewall
    ... is on this interface", rather than having to work it out manually each time. ... Obviously, if the firewall is using dynamic routing, there would be no ... >> party is in their own DMZ. ...
    (Firewall-Wizards)
  • Re: Phone proxy?
    ... I shocked myself a few times from opening up MaBell's interface. ... get nowhere because the dispatcher will have no clue what loop ... The standard ringer ... The good old party line like ...
    (alt.2600)
  • Re: Third party applications on GPS receivers
    ... I assume you mean "will 3rd party applications running on a PC interface to ... GPS receivers built in. ... suggest, the NMEA data stream to provide position, heading, and speed ...
    (sci.geo.satellite-nav)
  • Re: Office 2007 Anybody? Anybody?
    ... we're starting to figure out what tab things are on. ... I'll just stick it out and learn the new interface. ... The 3rd party add-on is definitely worth it. ...
    (alt.sys.pc-clone.dell)
Loading