A new (?) movement style for multiplayer roguelikes

Quoting zircher <tzircher RemoveThis @yahoo.com>:
>Jos Yule wrote:
>>>Quick, represent direction-facing in a single ASCII character.
>>Have a separate "display" for the facing in the lower meta-data area.
>That's my off the cuff answer as well. Facing is additional data like
>stance, health, or weapon carried.

But you would want to know the facing of your squadmates and visible
enemies, too.

Of course, it doesn't have to be one character cell per thing.
--
David Damerell <damerell RemoveThis @chiark.greenend.org.uk> flcl?
Today is Gorgonzoladay, January - a weekend.
 >> Stay informed about: A new (?) movement style for multiplayer roguelikes 

Derek Ray <derek DeleteThis @moot.its.only.a.spamtrap.org> wrote in
news:slrnfq1g2r.ll9.derek@still.just.a.spamtrap.org:

> On 2008-01-30, zircher <tzircher DeleteThis @yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Jotaf wrote:
>>> This reminds me of X-COM. There you had time-units for each character
>>> that you could spend on moving, shooting, etc, for any given turn. But
>>> sometimes this "time management" got a bit too complicated for my
>>> taste...simple rules are best.
>> Hmm, it's kind of strange that no one has written an x-com rogue-
>> like. It's got all the right elements when it comes to tactical
>> combat. Even the over world and base building could be handled in
>> text if desired.
>
> Quick, represent direction-facing in a single ASCII character.

You could get the other mechanics without direction-facing.

Alternatively, though a bit more annoying to the player perhaps,
you could display facing only when the player looks at a specific
person.

Of course there are also Roguelikes that use graphics instead of
ASCII, and graphics can more easily show facing.
 >> Stay informed about: A new (?) movement style for multiplayer roguelikes 

Am Wed, 30 Jan 2008 09:56:23 -0800 (PST) schrieb zircher:

> Jotaf wrote:
>>
>> This reminds me of X-COM. There you had time-units for each character
>> that you could spend on moving, shooting, etc, for any given turn. But
>> sometimes this "time management" got a bit too complicated for my
>> taste...simple rules are best.
>
> Hmm, it's kind of strange that no one has written an x-com rogue-
> like. It's got all the right elements when it comes to tactical
> combat. Even the over world and base building could be handled in
> text if desired.

*turns around and went away innocently whistling*

Exactly that is my actual planning stage, but first there has to be some
more underlying code... I just get it further than the walking @ And
one of my personel problems is, that I would it not consider really
roguelike.

I dreamed about a overworld felling of play similar to Dwarf Fortress and
for the singel missions more standard rogueish, but what I really dont want
are timeunits and turn-by-turn combat. But stop to write down my dreams, I
should try to write some more stuff... The next time I have more time for
the Internet I will take a look on some libs.
 >> Stay informed about: A new (?) movement style for multiplayer roguelikes 

Timofei Shatrov wrote:
>
> In Urban Warfare facing is represented by FOV, and you can also toggle
> on enemies' FOV to see where they're facing.

That's rather elegant and would also have more uses than just X-Com
style combat. For example, using stealth to infiltrate an enemy
location. As a rule, I'd make toggling such information a 'zero cost'
action for the player. It would also give you game design options to
explore creates and devices with alternative FOV and sensing radius.
[ie. Trip wires that can only see in a line, creatures with radar or
sonar, monsters that can only sense by touch or smell, etc.]
--
TAZ
 >> Stay informed about: A new (?) movement style for multiplayer roguelikes 

On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 16:02:53 -0600, Derek Ray
<derek RemoveThis @moot.its.only.a.spamtrap.org> tried to confuse everyone with this
message:

>On 2008-01-30, Gamer_2k4 <gamer2k4 RemoveThis @gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Jan 30, 12:22 pm, Derek Ray <de... RemoveThis @moot.its.only.a.spamtrap.org>
>>> Quick, represent direction-facing in a single ASCII character.
>>
>> As long as you can differentiate by color or something, it can be done
>> with < > v ^ (one of my side projects uses this approach).
>
>Now do it for every single monster in the game, each of which are
>represented _already_ by a single ASCII character (typically
>alphabetic).
>

Of course this could be solved by *blinking*!

(hey, it works for Dwarf Fortress)

--
|Don't believe this - you're not worthless ,gr---------.ru
|It's us against millions and we can't take them all... | ue il |
|But we can take them on! | @ma |
| (A Wilhelm Scream - The Rip) |______________|
 >> Stay informed about: A new (?) movement style for multiplayer roguelikes 

On 30 Jan 2008 21:32:36 +0000 (GMT), David Damerell
<damerell.DeleteThis@chiark.greenend.org.uk> tried to confuse everyone with this message:

>Quoting zircher <tzircher.DeleteThis@yahoo.com>:
>>Jos Yule wrote:
>>>>Quick, represent direction-facing in a single ASCII character.
>>>Have a separate "display" for the facing in the lower meta-data area.
>>That's my off the cuff answer as well. Facing is additional data like
>>stance, health, or weapon carried.
>
>But you would want to know the facing of your squadmates and visible
>enemies, too.
>

In Urban Warfare facing is represented by FOV, and you can also toggle
on enemies' FOV to see where they're facing.

--
|Don't believe this - you're not worthless ,gr---------.ru
|It's us against millions and we can't take them all... | ue il |
|But we can take them on! | @ma |
| (A Wilhelm Scream - The Rip) |______________|
 >> Stay informed about: A new (?) movement style for multiplayer roguelikes 

On 31 Jan, 16:41, zircher <tzirc....TakeThisOut@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Timofei Shatrov wrote:
>
> > In Urban Warfare facing is represented by FOV, and you can also toggle
> > on enemies' FOV to see where they're facing.
>
> That's rather elegant and would also have more uses than just X-Com
> style combat. For example, using stealth to infiltrate an enemy
> location. As a rule, I'd make toggling such information a 'zero cost'
> action for the player. It would also give you game design options to
> explore creates and devices with alternative FOV and sensing radius.
> [ie. Trip wires that can only see in a line, creatures with radar or
> sonar, monsters that can only sense by touch or smell, etc.]
> --
> TAZ


Of course blinking, as suggested by Timotei, was my first idea
But seeing others' FOVs could be really useful for stealth play. This
could be shown using the background colors only, wasting no
characters. (I played Urban Warfare a while ago, can't remember the
method used there.)

Thinking of Splinter Cell, unaware opponents could move once every 2
or 3 turns, and you get to see what their next move will be (blinking
arrow character?). So you got 1 or 2 turns to do something when
they're about to turn around and catch you red-handed This could
allow for more daring moves because you knew you could react sooner
than the guard.
(BTW the real-world explanation is that he is 2 or 3 times slower than
you so you can see him while he's still turning.)

Jotaf
 >> Stay informed about: A new (?) movement style for multiplayer roguelikes 

In article <0ae21e27-a8e5-4995-9763-729dfc2f5fe5
@d21g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, jotaf98 RemoveThis @hotmail.com says...

> Of course blinking, as suggested by Timotei, was my first idea
> But seeing others' FOVs could be really useful for stealth play. This
> could be shown using the background colors only, wasting no
> characters. (I played Urban Warfare a while ago, can't remember the
> method used there.)


And then again...

Nowadays technology exists to display NPCs or character avatars in 3d,
so it is easy to see which way they are facing.

Really, if you are not using that technology, what's the point in using
a technology that has a poor interface to display it, if you can make
the same sort of game in that technology without needing it?

Roguelikes don't *need* facing, so if the technology makes it difficult
to implement, implement something instead that is important to
roguelikes.

- Gerry Quinn
 >> Stay informed about: A new (?) movement style for multiplayer roguelikes 

Gerry Quinn wrote:
>
> Really, if you are not using that technology, what's the point in using
> a technology that has a poor interface to display it, if you can make
> the same sort of game in that technology without needing it?

I believe the design challenge is the only reason you need. Call it
an exercise in creativity and problem solving using limited resources.
--
TAZ
 >> Stay informed about: A new (?) movement style for multiplayer roguelikes 

On 1 Fev, 16:37, zircher <tzirc....TakeThisOut@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Gerry Quinn wrote:
>
> > Really, if you are not using that technology, what's the point in using
> > a technology that has a poor interface to display it, if you can make
> > the same sort of game in that technology without needing it?
>
> I believe the design challenge is the only reason you need. Call it
> an exercise in creativity and problem solving using limited resources.
> --
> TAZ

Yeah we like to think out loud If you simply solve every problem
with more resources (in this case graphics) then most problems aren't
interesting at all. I'd ramble on about how imagining impossible
situations with impossible restrictions is good for coming up with
original (and indeed realistic...) solutions, but I'll stop now and
focus on the topic at hand.

Facing is just one of many aspects of X-COM combat, maybe taking it
out wouldn't be too bad (I can already see the fans raising their
eyebrows in suspicion). But if you show different FOVs there are many
other options available. Taz's examples of different uses for this are
really cool:

On 31 Jan, 16:41, zircher <tzirc....TakeThisOut@yahoo.com> wrote:
> <<I took the liberty of snipping out this part, although it's good stuff too>>
> [ie. Trip wires that can only see in a line, creatures with radar or
> sonar, monsters that can only sense by touch or smell, etc.]
> --
> TAZ


Jotaf
 >> Stay informed about: A new (?) movement style for multiplayer roguelikes