Build system discussion

[cbaker]

I'm hoping this forum is set for all to see. Anyways, we here at CGO are approaching an Alpha release soon (hopefully in the next couple of months if things get ironed out). One of the main components is a build system similar to GR. Resource gathering is already implemented at this time, but the real challenge is how to lay out building things. The skeletal concept is that any idiot can build basic structures (lean-tos, huts, dig a well, etc), but someone with knowledge of architecture can do it in less time and with less materials. How do we translate a set list of build-able structures into a skill set? One suggestion is make is similar to TEC's tailoring system with lores. What do you suggest, and how should it be implemented to make it worthwhile to make a "foreman" over a grunt?

[Lucentius]

I'm hoping this forum is set for all to see. Anyways, we here at CGO are approaching an Alpha release soon (hopefully in the next couple of months if things get ironed out). One of the main components is a build system similar to GR. Resource gathering is already implemented at this time, but the real challenge is how to lay out building things. The skeletal concept is that any idiot can build basic structures (lean-tos, huts, dig a well, etc), but someone with knowledge of architecture can do it in less time and with less materials. How do we translate a set list of build-able structures into a skill set? One suggestion is make is similar to TEC's tailoring system with lores. What do you suggest, and how should it be implemented to make it worthwhile to make a "foreman" over a grunt?

I think the primary difference between skilled and unskilled labour should be relatively realistic. An unskilled worker could never build a 10-room guild hall, or, if he did manage to through sheer luck, it would collapse within the hour (Which may be just enough to have collected his pay and be well on his way to the next territory.)

I think the primary difference should be survivability, and lasting power. With regular maintenance, everything should last forever. But, that's the key: _regular maintenance_. I'd much prefer it if it weren't an automated system, but rather something that players have to do. Otherwise, we'll encounter the same problem with builders that GR has now. Which is, they have nothing to do. Which isn't entirely the case, but, my builder has two skills maxed that are more or less useless.

I think that after a few months of gametime, even if our 10-room guild hall was built by a master craftsman, it's going to start showing signs of damage. A small crack in the wall, a leaky roof, a door not closing right and/or swinging open randomly (depending on the season). The chances of stuff occurring quickly should go down based on the original builder's skill, and/or the repairing builder's skill. Again, any idiot could re-paint a wall to make a crack unnoticable, but the crack will still be there.

[Nothing]

I'm personally against an actual architectural system for playerable characters. I think it causes too many logistical and playability problems.

Huts, shacks, lean-to's, wells, walls maybe, and a few other structures are what I think players should be limited to. Beyond that, their role in the architectural process is resource gathering. They gather the resources (or buy them from other gathering sources) and the staff architect builds the structure for them. The goal would be to allow primative and/or small villages to be built by players, but as each nation develops and becomes more sophisticated it requires more professional (staff run) characters.

The player built structures should need regular player conducted maintenance work, depending on quality of craftmanship, materials, etc. While the professional built structures would require monetary upkeep, which could be conducted using a more advanced form of the TEC upkeep system.

I think any release of professional architects as a skillset is doomed to failure, but definitely early in the game development it should be restricted completely to the staff. Otherwise, like Lucentius said, there isn't going to be enough work for them to do (i.e. none initially) and players that have chosen that skillset are going to get bored.

You'll end up with something like GR has now, where the skillset is not workable as a stand-alone primary skill, and people will just roll alts to take care of it. That's not really what we want to happen.

[Lucentius]

I get what you're saying, Cam. While I understand your reasoning, I don't like the concept of the game having to rely too much on staff involvement. I'd like to have buildings destroyable by players, as in a raid, and I'd rather allow players to rebuild their structures themselves. Although, I suppose alternatively, you could have a player raid reduce the GM-built structures to ruins, instead of complete demolition, if that is where your heart is set. As I said, however, I would rather have it more player involved, in case of a problem with GM activity (Though, I would expect us to be willing to bring on additional _productive_ staff in that event, unlike some others games.) we won't totally fuck over our playerbase. Maybe for the beta make it staff-only for larger buildings, but once we go gold, I think it'd be better to let the playerbase handle it.

As for upkeep, I think that it should be entirely handled by the playerbase. That would, at least, provide some additional use for the advanced building skillset, to avoid the slump. As long as we go for RPI, instead of something more lax, simply being able to maintain and repair buildings will make the builder as useful as a tailor, or a broker.

[wbbaldwin]

What is this game? And am I allowed to test for it as a player?

[Nothing]

Major developments to this game are temporarily suspended until there is more player interest and until we can attract more developers that are able to commit time to the project.

There is quite a bit of work done on the gameworld, but relatively little overall interest from even the TEC community.

[Ducky]

If you're really short on coders and crap, I have a fair bit of spare time these days and wouldn't mind helping out. Providing the game is actually relatively decent. ;)

Go take a gander (duck pun) at Accursed Lands' crafting and building system, it's pretty epic. At least in comparison to most games anyway, but their combat system is utter shit.

I think I'm still coder staff over there if you need/want any of their secret projects or coding harvested. Dunno though, haven't logged in there for like a year now.

[Nothing]

Depends what you mean by relatively decent. It's not really ready for players at the moment to begin Beta testing and there's a shitload more work to be done to make it ready.

Also, from what I gathered, there wasn't a lot of players that were interested in starting a new game, even with incentive packages.

But if you want to contribute to it, I'd log in a few hours a day to build some more.

[thriceblinded]

I also contacted cbaker about helping out, currently trying to learn more about ColdC and Genesis - I spent awhile trying to compile Genesis to run on Linux but that didn't go well... :P Cbaker pointed out that you guys don't run it locally, but what I want to know is how you 'could' run it locally :) Don't want to screw anything up if you guys have a public server.

[cbaker]

The server does back up 3 times a day or so and has a daily/weekly/monthly retention, so messing something up isn't too terrible as long as you tell me beforehand. I suppose I could also create a blank test server for you guys to work on to play around if you want.

[thriceblinded]

That would be useful, it's going to take some playing around to even figure out how to start working with this and get to the point where I can actually contribute code.

[wbbaldwin]

If you did that, I'd definitely want to play around!

[cbaker]

I'll try and get it going tomorrow and let you guys know.

[Ducky]

Coolio.