driftfridge
Peasant
I offer occasional good advice
Posts: 23 
|
Post by driftfridge on Jan 26, 2015 11:51:33 GMT
I love this game and I was wondering if this game could have a money system like Armadillo Run. Different items cost different amounts of money and each level costs you money. But you have a set goal for the stage, like Ipsilon. If you don't meet that set requirement of money used at the end of the stage you have to go back and redo some of he missions to shave of Pounds, I think this would add some re-playability to the game. But it is just and opinion  he does a better job of explaining this, skip to 6:10 www.youtube.com/watch?v=4JoPlcyxxb4 |
|
|
|
Money
Jan 27, 2015 8:44:52 GMT
Post by twistedbronl on Jan 27, 2015 8:44:52 GMT
I'm not sure if Moneyis the correct motivator. since the siege engine has no human part i.e. driver it seems that its simply a sentient entety. A pile of mechanical death has no money, but thats a worry for a later time.
I would like a progression per island. so you gain money per lvl and if you have completed the lvl with less investment, you have more to spend in the next one!
|
|
|
|
Money
Feb 2, 2015 21:32:53 GMT
via mobile
Post by jcdenton on Feb 2, 2015 21:32:53 GMT
No, money would take the fun out of over-engineering, and overkilling. Money would force players to make practical contraptions, to clear levels. Also, it would mean you'll be penalized monetarily for building the ultimate machine of death and doom.
|
|
|
|
Post by octopod on Feb 3, 2015 5:16:20 GMT
No, money would take the fun out of over-engineering, and overkilling. Money would force players to make practical contraptions, to clear levels. Also, it would mean you'll be penalized monetarily for building the ultimate machine of death and doom. There's still the free-build mode though? A little bit of challenge might be a good thing. Just look at bridge-building games. |
|
|
|
Post by Von on Feb 4, 2015 3:20:18 GMT
A resource or money system is something we've been discussing, it could make the game a lot more challenging. It may be something that we add for specific levels or in a seperate game mode.
|
|
|
|
Money
Feb 9, 2015 2:41:01 GMT
Post by bloodstain on Feb 9, 2015 2:41:01 GMT
A resource or money system is something we've been discussing, it could make the game a lot more challenging. It may be something that we add for specific levels or in a seperate game mode. please make it a seperate game mode only being able to use a limited number of items per level would probably kill what is fun about this game and that is it doesnt limit you to how many objects you use to get the job done |
|
|
|
Money
Feb 9, 2015 15:21:06 GMT
Post by sirenapples on Feb 9, 2015 15:21:06 GMT
A resource or money system is something we've been discussing, it could make the game a lot more challenging. It may be something that we add for specific levels or in a seperate game mode. please make it a seperate game mode only being able to use a limited number of items per level would probably kill what is fun about this game and that is it doesnt limit you to how many objects you use to get the job done Heavens no. Gold / Coins as a resource is much needed to further the feeling like you're playing a game and can provide incentive to beat levels more clearly while not restricting it. You often win levels while your craft is a burning wreck. Something like that would be while not penalized, not rewarded. Whats more, a gold system would allow you to improve parts and keep it balanced. Stronger reinforcements like metal cores, wood beams (Not pieces), and the ability to work with metal blocks. Using gold would limit the use of such pieces while simply hitting Free-build mode would only give you far more options to work with to go all out using items that would have made the standard game imbalanced. I totally just made an account here just to say that. |
|
|
|
Money
Feb 9, 2015 15:47:52 GMT
Post by Zeblote on Feb 9, 2015 15:47:52 GMT
Gold / Coins as a resource is much needed to further the feeling like you're playing a game and can provide incentive to beat levels more clearly while not restricting it. You often win levels while your craft is a burning wreck. Something like that would be while not penalized, not rewarded. Whats more, a gold system would allow you to improve parts and keep it balanced. Stronger reinforcements like metal cores, wood beams (Not pieces), and the ability to work with metal blocks. Using gold would limit the use of such pieces while simply hitting Free-build mode would only give you far more options to work with to go all out using items that would have made the standard game imbalanced. The extreme over-engineering and limitlessness is what makes the game fun and why it is so popular. |
|
|
|
Money
Feb 9, 2015 16:04:15 GMT
Post by zodium on Feb 9, 2015 16:04:15 GMT
Yeah, seconding or thirding or whatever that the very last thing Besiege needs is a cost/resource system, for three reasons.
1: The game physics already impose excellent implicit constraints on machines. There's nothing to gain by tacking on an explicit top-down constraint system when what's already there works so well.
2: The costs will be essentially arbitrary, even if they are made relative to the block's objective properties. There's no way to determine the 'utility value' of any block a priori, it can only be determined in the context of a specific machine. Any cost system, no matter how clever, will therefore emphasize arbitrary designs over good/cool designs.
3: Doing a cost system even acceptably well will take tons of development time to balance, and it will be a permanent, ongoing cost. Each time the physics change, the cost matrix needs to change in unpredictable ways, too.
|
|
|
|
Money
Feb 9, 2015 16:06:12 GMT
Post by sirenapples on Feb 9, 2015 16:06:12 GMT
Gold / Coins as a resource is much needed to further the feeling like you're playing a game and can provide incentive to beat levels more clearly while not restricting it. You often win levels while your craft is a burning wreck. Something like that would be while not penalized, not rewarded. Whats more, a gold system would allow you to improve parts and keep it balanced. Stronger reinforcements like metal cores, wood beams (Not pieces), and the ability to work with metal blocks. Using gold would limit the use of such pieces while simply hitting Free-build mode would only give you far more options to work with to go all out using items that would have made the standard game imbalanced. The extreme over-engineering and limitlessness is what makes the game fun and why it is so popular. Which is why it's not limited at all. Free-build is free-build, whether normal building uses gold to balance material placement or not. As I said, all the fun people have is already using free-build. Gold would only allow more creativity and reliability both in and out of free-build by allowing pieces that would otherwise be imbalanced and render other options less than desirable. Such as wood blocks vs iron or steel blocks. Which could then be used freely in FREE-build. |
|
|
|
Post by bloodstain on Feb 9, 2015 16:16:33 GMT
The extreme over-engineering and limitlessness is what makes the game fun and why it is so popular. Which is why it's not limited at all. Free-build is free-build, whether normal building uses gold to balance material placement or not. As I said, all the fun people have is already using free-build. Gold would only allow more creativity and reliability both in and out of free-build by allowing pieces that would otherwise be imbalanced and render other options less than desirable. Such as wood blocks vs iron or steel blocks. Which could then be used freely in FREE-build. having a cost syemtem would not allow for creativity it would severly limit it everyone would end up with the same lame machine to get the job done every time and it would just become another one of those games where you have limited pieces and a time limit and well those are BORING ! this game if i want to use 1000 cannons to shoot 1 guy I can or i can make some complex machine that shoots 12 bombs makes a Penis butt and drops a flaming crate on a house and that to me is what makes it fun maybe you should look at playing other games or this one should at most consider it an optional game mode and not the main game mode because putting restraints on what you can build with money or not would quite literally kill the game and all hype it has because you just wouldnt be able to build all the crazy contraptions you see players currently building Edit: well thats the 1st time I've had a forum change a word to something else that means the exact same thing instead of just out right filtering it out  |
|
|
|
Money
Feb 9, 2015 17:07:09 GMT
Post by sirenapples on Feb 9, 2015 17:07:09 GMT
Which is why it's not limited at all. Free-build is free-build, whether normal building uses gold to balance material placement or not. As I said, all the fun people have is already using free-build. Gold would only allow more creativity and reliability both in and out of free-build by allowing pieces that would otherwise be imbalanced and render other options less than desirable. Such as wood blocks vs iron or steel blocks. Which could then be used freely in FREE-build. having a cost syemtem would not allow for creativity it would severly limit it everyone would end up with the same lame machine to get the job done every time and it would just become another one of those games where you have limited pieces and a time limit and well those are BORING ! this game if i want to use 1000 cannons to shoot 1 guy I can or i can make some complex machine that shoots 12 bombs makes a Penis butt and drops a flaming crate on a house and that to me is what makes it fun maybe you should look at playing other games or this one should at most consider it an optional game mode and not the main game mode because putting restraints on what you can build with money or not would quite literally kill the game and all hype it has because you just wouldnt be able to build all the crazy contraptions you see players currently building Edit: well thats the 1st time I've had a forum change a word to something else that means the exact same thing instead of just out right filtering it out You cannot do any of that outside of Free-build regardless. I assume you must be from imgur, very few if any of the fancy creations that get shared or even front paged there fit outside of free-build and those that do are likely to be unaffected by a would-be coin change. A coin system isn't going to limit you to a dozen pieces, it would allow you to trade a hundred wooden blocks for a few dozen stone or iron ones. It'd let you trade a dozen cannons for half a dozen gatlings. It'd let you trade a carpet of propellers for rockets. Wheels with treads. Meanwhile it'd provide reason to use a few cannons instead of a gatling, reason to use wood blocks instead of iron blocks. Then with a touch of a button, you could build whole flaming arenas of iron or giant death robots because that's just how it works in Besiege where everything is made up and the points don't matter. |
|
|
|
Money
Feb 9, 2015 18:06:47 GMT
Post by zodium on Feb 9, 2015 18:06:47 GMT
If everything is made up and the points don't matter (I agree), what good is a cost system?
|
|
|
|
Post by sirenapples on Feb 9, 2015 18:37:07 GMT
If everything is made up and the points don't matter (I agree), what good is a cost system? Literally everything I've already said... You could add things like steel blocks without a coin/gold/ plunder system but it would largely render lesser things such as wood blocks useful only as a thematic choice which isn't really good game design (you might as well just have paint jobs for the steel blocks to keep utility without sacrificing for vanity). Which, for the record, I'm highly in favor of allowing paint jobs. Though I imagine the way the game is built, adding paint layers would just be another contribution to tanking fps. |
|
|
|
Post by Arlekin on Feb 9, 2015 19:09:48 GMT
Quite a discussion here!  I must say i understand and agree with sirenapples - she doesn't want to put constraints on what player could do, she is proposing to set is as an additional challange, and incentive to use all of parts. So her idea is actually protecting the game from two things: too easy levels presenting no challange - which, lets be honest, we all would hate; and second - abandoning blocks like wood in the wake of the addition of metal bars and such. On the other hand i find all this arguments - although very good and valid - disturbing me, as a player. I mean i would probably go bananas if at the end of meticulous design and build it would happen that i have no money for the final few blocks. I think though that making it little more specific like "all blocks are no limits, except for cannon and gatling and you can have either 6 of the former OR 3 of the latter" - this way i think nobody would be really limited in what they can build, but some things would be nerfed (like amount of cannons) - it would do some good on levels in which a little more strategy than simply wave of cannonballs is required (providing there will be one). About reason for using wood. Given that physics would be good enough there should be simply logic behind using lighter wood, than much (and i mean a lot) heavier metal. I don't know how long sirenapples has been playing and how much did she tried, but i can assure her that even in simple flying construction wood is often heavier than we would like. Also if there ever be ship (ish) machines possible i think wood will be indispensable. Also take a peek at Praesumo's giant walker - it breaks under its own weight already! So i think that simple physics would balance the game ideally without the need for artificial balancers - except for specific one for each scenario in campaign where it makes sense. So thats about my input to the subject. On a little bit unrelated note, that imho fits the subject perfectly: I think the building box isn't necessary a good thing - it disallows some pretty valid design for solving level - like most flying machines capable of being weaponized at all, or catapults and such. Maybe better approach would be unlocking parts along progress in campaign (like you get new units along most RTS campaigns). Of course there should be some boundries (to keep it all sane) but i think much bigger ones. |
|
