Topic: Suggestion about Soldiers Part2
Astuur Topic Opener |
Posted at: 2011-03-26, 12:15
The information about soldiers' properties (AT, HP, DE, EV) is of no particular use to the player.A player, can not address any soldiers according to their properties and make them perform certain tasks. From a player's perspective each trained levels serve but one purpose: In order not to be misunderstood: The soldiers' properties (AT, HP, DE, EV) remain essential for determining the winner of a fight, As a consequence, the display of the soldier's trainings levels is unnecessairy.I would keep them for the individual display of soldiers inside the military sites, but get rid of the signes above the soldiers' heads inside the main window Instead, I would assign clear characteristics for the above mentioned ranks including weapon, armor, helm, even soldiers size maybe, so that the categories can be clearly identified by their appearance.I admit its again a lot of artwork to perform, but I hope it will be worth it. Being no programmer, I apologize for all my suggestions that imply undue workload and for other misjudgements due to lack of expertise or relevant skills. |
ixprefect |
Posted at: 2011-03-27, 14:09
I like the idea of getting rid of the level display within MapViews (i.e. within the visible game world), and replacing it by different graphical styles for the soldier levels. I'm curious what Chuck and others think about the artwork aspect of such a change. Again, doing a version for every possible combination of levels would probably be too much, but a level-based upgrading could be very satisfying. Top Quote |
Venatrix |
Posted at: 2011-03-27, 18:19
Well, I dont see it this way. Yes, the level display is a bit alien in the map, but on the other hand you can quickly see where your soldiers are. And you see also very quickly whether the level of the soldier is the wanted one. I think that especially on high resolutions a difference only in the armour and weapons is too small and can be overseen too often. Two is the oddest prime. Top Quote |
Astuur Topic Opener |
Posted at: 2011-03-28, 09:07
It will indeed mainly depend on the look of the soldiers and how easily they can be identified. Even if I cannot do much with the soldier.blends, I have at least looked at them @ Venatrix: There will still be the lifebar, and hopefully the plumes could show well enough what kind of soldiers they are. Being no programmer, I apologize for all my suggestions that imply undue workload and for other misjudgements due to lack of expertise or relevant skills. |
chuckw |
Posted at: 2011-03-29, 19:17
Let me preface my remarks with saying that I understand the principle focus in Widelands is economic viability. The player's attention is intended to be foremost on economic strategy. The element of warlike activity is an unfortunate necessity in the game's design for expansion of a tribe's economic influence into areas contested by another tribe. We aim to minimize the militaristic aspects of Widelands as much as possible to first: keep the play centered on economic strategy, and second, but more importantly: to keep any semblance of violence out of the game or reduced to "cartoonish" proportions. We do not wish to glorify conflict, least of all armed conflict. I grant that there is merit from an economic standpoint in categorizing the soldiers in order to better manage that "resource". The effectiveness of a soldier's training has a very real impact on the outcome whenever that "resource" is used. So, in consideration of improving the management such a categorization offers, I agree it would be beneficial to find a graphic distinction between units in different categories. Assuming soldiers of different categories will be distinguished by their physical appearance, we are faced with rendering a complete model for each category of each tribe. For 4 categories (I won't consider 11! ), we are looking at 3 more soldier characters for each tribe (9 additional models), each requiring a unique look that is easily identifiable in the scale of the game engine. The models will require animation for walking, attacking successfully, attacking unsuccessfully, defending successfully, defending unsuccessfully, and "dieing". (There also exist bug reports requesting the consideration of additional animations to distinguish between walking on the road, attacking fully armed, and retreating.) Physical Appearance Here, as Astuur points out,
I agree the soldiers could be "slightly" larger and definitely "bulked up" in the higher categories.
This is a perfect opportunity to put those advanced weapons like battleaxes and double tridents into play.
Because of scale, we will likely have to rely on the larger elements of the soldier's "kit", i.e helmet, plume, weapon, shield, etc. to distinguish one from another. In the action of gameplay, you'd likely not be able to even SEE the epaulettes. Animation Fortunately, in Blender, we have the option to utilize animations from one model in another, and that may very well be the method we'd use for the walking and battle animations. Some may think soldiers of different categories should differ in their attacks and defense. If we pursued that, we'd have to have different attack and defend animations for every soldier depending on the weapon and opposition they encounter. Regardless, care would have to be taken to ensure that any new battle animation will mesh well with the existing stuff and with each other. Currently soldiers use one defense regardless of weapon of attack. That is why spears and tridents are wielded like clubs, because you can't stab with an axe. I don't want to spend unwarranted effort on a facet of the game we wish to sublimate. In a nut shell, I feel there is merit to categorizing soldiers to enhance their management. Different appearances will entail a lot of work. While it would definitely be fun to work on new soldier characters, I don't see this happening until we get seafaring/water transport and inter-tribal trade bedded down. Ultimately, though, I defer prioritization to SirVer. He's the "man with the plan." Edited for clarity Edited: 2011-03-29, 19:29
I see little people. Top Quote |
SirVer |
Posted at: 2011-03-30, 11:23
I do not think I can prioritize Graphic priorities any better than you, chuck. I follow this thread closely and I want to throw in my 2c: I think the exact levels are interesting for the player, be it not for my own soldiers, but for the enemy's. I might deduce some of his economical problems from the training levels of his soldiers. I therefore also like the status emblems of the soldier as they carry all information on one glance. I agree that they are alien in the widelands worlds, as no other worker has status information over their head. Maybe they could be connected to the status text of buildings, which have the same functionality for me. I feel that different graphics for soldiers would help as well, but they would not carry all the information as we have now; nevertheless a total level based appearance would make the game prettier at the very least. Top Quote |
Astuur Topic Opener |
Posted at: 2011-03-30, 13:13
Are you willing to disclose some of the conclusions you draw from the status emblems ? Except for that last part, this would still be possible.
I cannot think of antyhing else, unless you want to compare the ratio from both trainingsites' graduates and deduct the numbers of each sort of camp he might have, but therefore an overview would be needed. Being no programmer, I apologize for all my suggestions that imply undue workload and for other misjudgements due to lack of expertise or relevant skills. |
SirVer |
Posted at: 2011-03-30, 17:41
No, of course not. For example when I see level one evade soldiers from the empire, I conclude that his gold production has not been started yet or that he has problems with marble. That gold is missing can also be concluded when you see many level 1-2 attack soldiers from the barbarians. One might also read that an Armorsmithy has not been build when only attack was trained. The player must manually throw out soldiers from the trainingsites for this to happen, but I've seen it done before. Top Quote |
fuchur |
Posted at: 2011-03-30, 20:37
Considering the fog of war: is it wanted to have detailed information on the enemies soldiers and therefore information about the economy otherwise not visible? Besides that I like the idea of a diffent look of the levels. I think in settlers 1 it was basically done by the helmets. Top Quote |