Jump to content

Creating a board game based on RTS games.


X3M

Recommended Posts

Added D; manual updates.

 

I noticed how I forgot to add the new rules regarding moving units.

 

If a squad of the enemy moves around, and you only have a chance on shooting it while it passes by. Then there is a chance of missing the targets. 2 factors need to be taken into account:

 

1) The movement of the squad on the board. If speed is 6, while they only move 4, then 4 is the number you need.

2) The range of your own units.

 

If Range is lower then the movement. You take Range for the number of extra dice rolls.

If movement is lower then Range. You take movement for the number of extra dice rolls.

Thus the lowest number counts.

 

For each projectile, you throw an extra number of dice. Meaning with a movement of 4 and a range of 4. Thus 4 is the result. We have 4 rounds of dice throwing. Every dice that lands on the number 6 is discarded (disdiced :)) Thus having a 5/6th chance on hitting for 1 range/movement, 25/36th chance on hitting for 2 range/movement, 125/216th for 3 etc.

 

0 ranged units have no need for these rolls. Except if they are provided with the temporary +1 bonus range.

That same bonus counts for all units though. But only if the squad would move in a region out of range of those units. This changes during the firing, so keep it in mind.

 

Attackers can keep in mind:

attacking with more action points at different levels, if a long ranged could attack at a stage without terrain influence. While the shorter range can only attack when they move behind forests or something else that blocks.

 

Movers can keep in mind:

If the moving squad can move faster by using another region that is not in the path. They should do so. Example would be if a squad would normally only move 4, while they have speed 6. It is wise to have them move an extra 2 during this movement. Thus an extra reduction of 25/36th. However, this cannot be done if other units are part of the squad with only speed 4. You pay 1 action for 1 movement. Split the squad, or take the damage. (divide and conquer)

 

Extra example:

An army passes by on 3 range with speed 4, it is a full squad of 3600.

You decide to attack it with all the ranges available.

0 range, gets +1, but is still out of range.

1 range, gets +1, but is still out of range.

2 range, gets +1, now the moving squad is in range. 3 < 4. Thus 3 dice.

3 range, perhaps gets +1, but there is no need any more for extra range. 3 dice.

4 range, 4 = 4, 4 dice

5 range, 5 > 4, 4 dice

6 range, 4 dice

etc.

 

Without a full squad, 2 range does not get +1.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Normally 6 actions per player per round.

Upgradable with Event Cards and Structures.

 

A squad is allowed to play 1 Action.

Thus 6 squads are allowed to do something.

 

Moving a squad costs 1 Action.

Attacking with a squad costs 1 Action.

You can't have both. Unless you play for example an Assault Event Card.

 


 

Should I allow players to pay 2 action points for an Assault?

Movement + Attack, but with hit chance reduction as a penalty?

 

Should I allow players to have a squad do more then 1 Action in a round?

The second Action would cost 2 Action points. The third Action would cost 4 Action points. etc.

Thus 1 squad can do 3 Actions if a player has 7 Action points to spend.

 

Should defenders be allowed to do the same with the new suggestions above?

 

These improvements to the game could result in more complex strategies. Like, moving in, harass the enemy, then run away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had some brain dead activities on my work. Thus I spend that time brainstorming new idea's.

 

The new rules regarding spending Action Points (APs)

 

Main concept:

1 player is in turn forced playing at least 1 action point. Then other players can interfere while paying action points as well, but those are not forced.

 

The main action costs for each player are:
- 1 AP for movement.
- 1 AP for an attack.
- No movement or an attack while the player is in turn, results in 1 AP discarded for that Round.
- 1 AP for defending (not forced).
- 1 AP for moving "away" with a reduced damage effect (not forced).
- 1 AP for intercepting a moving player with a reduced damage effect for the interceptor (only one squad/player).
- 2 APs for moving and attacking with a reduced damage effect for both players. (Comparable with an Assault, which costs 1 AP + the Event Card)
- 2 APs for defending and moving with "an extra" reduced damage effect for both players.
- If the Squad already paid an APs, then the next one costs: what has been paid + what has to be paid = the total AP costs.

 

Further detailed information:

Since normal combat allows short ranged to fire first. An Assault with short ranged units can be very effective. However, if the victim decides to defend. He/she might also decide to intercept instead. Which can often be a more useful approach.

 

When attacking moving players. You start looking at each region where they move though. And you deal with it in that order. Meaning, longer ranged units might fire before your short ranged units.

 

When both players move, [attacker and victim]. The Attacker moves first. So the victim deals with each region where the attacker move through, first. Once the attacker arrives. Then victim will move away. Where the attacker deals with each region, where through the victim moves. Mostly resulting in firing all projectiles at the first region.
- However, this way one might suggest:
That there is no extra reduced effect for both players. But normally there is already a one time reduction if the defender moves away if the attacker stands still or vice versa. That is why the reduction is done twice when both players move. Just for balance.
- The second suggestion that I discard is:
Having both players move at the same time and keeping the distance the same. This will be to complex. And could result in having no combat at all.

Fast units targeted by long range (speed/Range = 7) already have a hit chance of only 28%. With both players moving, it is only 8%. Still enough to kill one or two units though. But this 8% can be compared with keeping the distance. It is as if the defending player thinks: damn, need to move, I am under fire.

 

Range of flying projectiles are compared with the Speed of targeted moving units. Lowest counts and is a reduction with 5/6th with each dice used. Speed/Range = 7 means having to roll 7 dice for each projectile targeted at this unit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Need to redo the terrain.

 

The rules regarding determining the value's of projectile reducing chances and movement by size limitations is inadequate for inexperienced newcomers to the game.

 

Ehm, let me rephrase that...

 

A terrain, mixed by several types. Is too confusing for new players.

Used to have 4 types. Need to go down to 2.

 

1 region, has 6 triangles.

And each triangle has a center and 3 corners. Or 4 information spots.

 

Tree's cover 2 of the 4 information spots. But automatically say if it is grass or dessert.

But the other 2 spots need to give additional information about the region. So every spot will have to be a factor instead of a solid number. Not just the tree's. This gives problems when you have 24 information spots in the entire region.

There are no lines.

 

Well, I have tried. But mistakes are to be learned from.

Thank god I only created a very small piece of map with the new terrain :D.

Thank god I didn't ask you to smooth all things up D2k Sardaukar.

Since I can now throw the results of this concept away.

 

I need to rethink this.

Suggestions, anyone?

 

Having 6 segments is still a good idea though. Just not going into detail.

And having the 3 corners act as 1 information and the center as the second information is still good to go.

 

There is either tree's with water, or

tree's with rocks, or

water with rocks.

 

Not tree's with and water and rocks.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Lets see, what has my to do tumtiedo list for me?

 



I have several things running at the same time at the moment:

A1 - 8 Health army.

A2 - If map matrix size 15 x 15 fails in being useful to 8 Health army. Checking matrix size 18 x 18 or bigger.

A3 - Reviewing map size and pieces sizes.

 

B1 - Tier 2 terrain textures; hexagons and triangles and all the needed combinations.

B2 - Checking usefulness of the complexity. Perhaps simplifying afterwards.

B3 - Reviewing definition of the terrain influences.

 

C - Tier 2 unit textures.

 

D - Manual updates.

 

Current status:

 

A1 = Discarded.

But the 8 Health option is now memorized. Meaning that the little new designs are saved if I continue on this version.

 

A2 + A3 = Yeah, going for 15 x 15, unless I find a way to make 24 x 24 a good option for either 3 Health or 8 Health. The main problems lies once again in board size and pieces size compared to region size.

 

B1 = Completed once.

 

B2 = Done by play testing. Results are lower then expected. The problem lies indeed within complexity. Thank you Buddy-B and Comrade-C.

 

B3 = Far from being done. But first I need to fix the basic rules for terrain influence. Once this is done, all expanding rules can be altered and perfected. (I really want to add the boats and such)

 

C = Not even touched by me since that post. We love our sticks and stones units, no reason to upgrade them yet while terrain isn't done yet.

 

D = All the new rules are spread through this and another forum. I need to gather the new data. But only after the terrain has been upgraded. Luckily there is no need for new data tables.

 


 

Thus the list got shorter.


I have several things running at the same time at the moment:

A3 - Reviewing map size and pieces sizes.

 

B1 - Tier 2 terrain textures; hexagons and triangles and all the needed combinations.

B3 - Reviewing definition of the terrain influences.

 

C - Tier 2 unit textures.

 

D - Manual updates.

 

And I got new stuff on the terrain too.

 

A region has 6 triangles.
Each triangle is from now on a basic terrain and can be:
- ...Water, ...0 space, 6/36th hit chance
- ...Grass, .600 space, 6/36th hit chance
- ....Sand, .300 space, 6/36th hit chance
- Mountain, ...0 space, .....0 hit chance

 

Tree's divide space and the hit chance by 2.

 

Terrain with tree's:
- .....Forest, .300 space, .3/36th hit chance
- Dead Forest, .150 space, .3/36th hit chance
- ??? tree's in water are called? ....???
..................0 space, .3/36th hit chance
- ??? tree's on mountains are called? ???
..................0 space (=S), .0 hit chance (=HC)

 

Terrain Combinations:
- Water with Grass; Swamp, ............300 S, 6/36th HC.
- Water with Sand; Mud, ...............150 S, 6/36th HC.
- Water with Mountain; Rocky sea, .......0 S, 3/36th HC.
- Grass with Sand; ???, ...............450 S, 6/36th HC.
- Grass with Mountain; Rocky terrain, .300 S, 3/36th HC.
- .Sand with Mountain; Rocky dessert, .150 S, 3/36th HC.

 

Combinations with tree's:
- Water, Grass; Swamp Forest, .......150 S, ..3/36th HC.
- Water, Sand; Muddy Forest, .........75 S, ..3/36th HC.
- Water, Mountain; ???, ...............0 S, 1.5/36th HC.
- Grass, Sand; ???, .................225 S, ..3/36th HC.
- Grass, Mountain; Chaotic terrain, .150 S, 1.5/36th HC.
- .Sand, Mountain; Chaotic dessert, ..75 S, 1.5/36th HC.

 

In case of 1.5/36th HC, there are always 2 segments with these. Unless the region is a halve one.

All the space is added up, and all the hit chance are added up.

No multiplying or dividing any more.

Then the region is complete in design and in statistics.

 

Halve regions have 12/36th or 6/36th hit chance per triangle
and one-third regions have 18/36th or 9/36th hit chance per triangle. As if the rest of the missing region would be the same.

With 20 different terrains, there are 64 million design possibilities for 1 region. However, I rather have only the possible 20 triangles being placed in 1 hexagon. And 400 possibilities of the lines in between. That is 420 pictures as a basic setting.

D2k Sardaukar, if you are interested. Please ask me for the details. The request is solely about making proper "professional" terrain pictures.

For others who might be interested in helping:

Please give suggestions at the ??? spots since I will be needing to give proper names now.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Using 6 triangle's for each hexagon doesn't work. Still to crappy regions.

So back to "pure" terrain.

 

Now I ask any one to come up with names for "mixed" terrain. Since my english is only good to understand people, but not for comming up with good names.

 

For example.

Sand only is Dessert.

Rocks only is Mountains.

Sand with Rocks can be, Dessert hills or mountain passes.

 

Grass only is Plains.

Grass with Rocks can be, Plain hills or mountain valleys.

 

Stuff like Deep Forrest or Deep Sea are welcome too.

 


 

The more names I have, the more detail I can add to a map.

So shoot!

 

All mixed terrain can come from:

Water/Grass/Sand/Mountain/Forrest

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Some teeny, weeny, little updates:

 

- Gathering HD foto's for terrain. They will be turned into hexagons. They will be having an up and down side. But terrain is going to be printed in "1" piece any way.

 

- Pondering about pictures for units. I do have foto's, but this list is less than the terrain.

 

- Trying out yet another way to apply terrain rules:

+ Trying out altitude. For each extra height, 5/6th hit chance from down to up. Only range reduction for those on low ground. Thus firing up 3 levels means 125/216th hit chance and -3 Range. If another region behind it is lower again, it cannot be hit. See next rule.

+ Terrain behind altitude terrain counts as blocked by 100% mountain. Those rail guns will prove to be very usefull. Equal or higher ground behind the altitude is again hitable. But extra Range reduction and reduced hit chance is possible.

+ Not only Forests, but Rocks (mountains) as well are additions only. Actually I simplified the terrain. Thus only 3 basic terrain: Grasslands, Deserts, Water. These are open terrain. Forests add 50% block in speed and projectiles. Rocks 100%. They have subterrain and roots or bedrock. Only Air above, no Space any more.

+ Basic movement is 100% on grasslands, 50% on deserts and 0% on water. This is a factor 1. Boats have 2/3th in factor. Hoovers have 2 as factor.

+ Ignoring Forest effects on movement gives +50% costs.

+ Ignoring Rocks effects on movement gives +100% costs.

+ Air is a Hoover that Ignores Forest and Rock effects, except Spires. Effectively factor 2 + 50% and 50% = 4.

+ Projectile factors are applied the same way.

 

- Grenadier permanently reduced to a €150 unit.

- Minesweeper Infantry permanently increased to a €450 unit.

- Mines are the same, thank god! But they will have a different placement then Basic structures?

- Minesweepers overall must have their damage modified to the new rules. But I am lazy. :)

 

- Removed Mercenary rules. If a player is defeated, he/she will return with a standard starting base after 3 rounds. Enemy players are wiped out. The XP bonus equals unit costs at the first tier, then increases with 100% each tier.

 


 

The terrain by general names, also the pictures are like these:

 

Grassland ( (G) Grass)

Desert ( (S) Sand)

Sea/River ( (W) Water)

 

G+S Savannah

G+W River Crossing/Swamp

S+W Beach/Mud

 

Forest additions

on Grass is Forest

on Sand is Palm Forest

on Water is Mangrove Forest

on Savannah is Savannah Forest

on River Crossing will have Mangrove and visible grass in water

on Swamp is Swamp Forest

on Beach is Palm Beach

on Mud will have Mangrove and visible mud as ground

 

Rocks additions

on Grass are Rocky Terrain or Hills

on Sand are Rocky Desert or Desert Hills (Dune's)

on Water are Rocky Sea

on Savannah are Rocky Savannah or Savannah Hills

on River Crossing are Rocky River Crossing

on Swamp are Rocky Swamps

on Beach are Rocky Beach or Beach Hills (Dune's)

on Mud are Rocky Mud

 

Better descriptions are welcome. But this does give an idea of how the terrain will look like.

 

An Arrakis version would only have Buildable Rocks and Desert, and only Rocks as addition. All structures are to be placed on the Buildable Rocks only now. Thus cheaper by an additional 33% then normal units. And so is the Sandworm.

 

I wonder, who reads this besides of those who have posted?

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Why don't you try to make a video game out of it (I am sure a lot more people will be interested)? There are plenty of user friendly tools around even if you are not into low level programming with C++. You seem to be doing the whole job that a game designer would be doing (with bonuses) and you seem to be fairly knowledgeable in this area and you seem to be progressing at a steady pace.

I like your concepts so I'd normally be all in for helping you, but I need to find some time in between all the math we do in uni. I mean if I finish writing my engine (which wouldn't be anytime soon judging by the amount of math/programming assignments I get, and my laziness) we could even do a test project with some people from the community if you like the idea - I can do the whole C++/graphics rendering/pathfinding algorithms etc. part - the biggest problem is that it won't be anytime soon. I mean you seem to have most of the concepts down and it would be a wast imo if they just stay this way.

 

P.S. I am still alive even if I don't come online much ( if you can call proving theorems/solving math problems, most of you time being alive xD ). How's AQIB doing btw?

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Huray, a reply.

 

My goal is creating a board game. I got offerings for a video game more often that you think. (This includes Spectral Paladin, who did the best job until now ;) )

 

I appreciate your offer.

There are plenty of RTS (real time strategy) games already. And players rather have RTS then a TBS (turn based strategy). This when they do video games.

So, no programming, unless it is a complete RTS. Then I would be more then happy to design the balance for your units. Even though I have no references to this.

 

With the board game design I can add whatever I want. Just like Magic the Gathering. I am completing the design for 1 design system. But can change it into any thing.

And yes, there is slow progress. I already did many battles. But often I have no time for weeks due to private stuff.

 

I am busy on this forum, and BGDF. You can´t miss me.

My latest work is still the regions. I have set up a new rules. But still play testing what is best for players to understand. It turned out I have to go to separate regions again instead of 1 giant map. But the plans are now having real foto´s cut out into hexagons. Still deciding on the resolution and size though.

 

The new rules:

Size unit is multiplied into the size on the type of terrain. To see if they fit.

A region is divided into 3 terrains by full numbers. Grass, Sand and Water.

The combination of the 2 above will help players determine when using hoovers etc.

Forests and Rocks/Hills will reduce the terrain size, but players have to do this themselves. Units like ninja and air can ignore these additions.

As you can see, the rules are a bit different.

 

Good question about AQIB.

AQIB?

Hello?

:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suggested a video game, because you seem to have an awful lot of calculations for a board game (it could be just me though, I don't play many board games, but I still think too many calculations kill the fun of it) - and computers are good at doing calculations behind the scene. TBS are not bad thb, I still remember when I used to play Warlords 3.

 

Good luck with the game!

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The calculations are just the background of balance. Players wont see any of it. Except buying stuff and region limits in size. Furter the counting of dice is important. But those are numbers dealing with 1 to 6.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why don't you try to make a video game out of it (I am sure a lot more people will be interested)? There are plenty of user friendly tools around even if you are not into low level programming with C++. You seem to be doing the whole job that a game designer would be doing (with bonuses) and you seem to be fairly knowledgeable in this area and you seem to be progressing at a steady pace.

I like your concepts so I'd normally be all in for helping you, but I need to find some time in between all the math we do in uni. I mean if I finish writing my engine (which wouldn't be anytime soon judging by the amount of math/programming assignments I get, and my laziness) we could even do a test project with some people from the community if you like the idea - I can do the whole C++/graphics rendering/pathfinding algorithms etc. part - the biggest problem is that it won't be anytime soon.

 

Now, what does this remind me of...

 

 

 

My goal is creating a board game. I got offerings for a video game more often that you think. (This includes Spectral Paladin, who did the best job until now )

 

 

 

:D

 

Development has become full time study/work for me now and therefore time for side projects is limited. I would be happy to contribute to someone else's attempt at it however.

I started working on program representations of this board game twice - both in C++, one using SFML, one with Qt. The code of both is atrocious by my standards today and there's little point in sharing it.

There's also Dune 2 the Maker, which Stefan has given up on for good - the code is still there for someone willing to put in some serious work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's the one I offered back then to balance. But he never returned the call completely.

I guess he was too busy with other stuff. He does have a wife and at least 1 kid. And a job to attend to.

 


 

I did some research 1 year ago on what players want. If it is a board game, they want to add their favourite stuff. And the board game tries to come as close as possible to RTS. But a board game will never ever be completely RTS.

Turning the board game into a video game will not work any way. After all, RTS are out there to play freely. So, no video version of the board game.

 

- However, I have one thing in my board game that RTS have not. The expandable balance formula. Where applied to games like C&C and Starcraft. These 2 universes can actually meet each other in combat. There is however 1 rule we need to keep in mind then, that is the types of damage and armor. We can't have one race being in the numbers of 50-200 and another race in the numbers of 200-800. All else can be toyed with for the fun of it (range/speed etc.)

- Another thing to keep in mind with having a RTS version is that combat will be completely triangular. This means that the smaller units will die faster. The only ways to counter this are: 1, having XP being cheaper as well and 2, having special bunkers and apc's that offer first protection and 3, size needs to be implemented in the map. Thus having infantry path ways.

- Almost forgot about the cooldown or rate of fire of the weapons. In my board game the rules are simple. 1 shot each round, and some weapons shoot more then 1 projectile. And some weapons have less effect too.

- Crushing infantry, will make tanks weaker who can do this. However, calculations turned out that we need 4 types of armor at least. Before it becomes a fair weapon. (yes, crushing is not an ability, but a secondary weapon)

 


 

So, anyone of you building a RTS at the moment?

 

Worked on a cutter that will help me getting nice hexagons out of pictures. Here is the basis for all the possible cutters:

 

Who wants to get high?

post-2682-0-65056200-1397983670_thumb.pn

 

Still, the foto's that I have, have sharp and un-sharp regions. Thus I need better ones.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If any one knows good terrain pictures. No matter the viewpoint. As long as a big part of the picture is sharp. The links are welcome.

Google and other search engines are starting to fail me :).

 


 

- Created a check list of how many designs I have of a certain terrain combination.

- I will make 2 versions of a terrain. One with only the centre point and one with terrain information added as well.

I would like to have opinions:

post-2682-0-47938700-1398084414_thumb.pn

 

This is just a picture from paint. But the result would be 4 cm for each size.

- Is the centre point obvious enough?

- The colour purple, right choice?

- Should I change this into a monochrome dot centre, with white/black circle's?

- Where to place additional information? It's going to be 4 numbers in total. A 4 x 4 box if you will.

- Additional information in a cleared out box?

 


 

When I place several terrains in 1 word document. I only have to print it once. And the modifications for all the terrain are the same. Each picture even tells me the % in size it is in after inserting. Thus I can make the same size in paint, then place it in word. And give them all the same %.

 

Even though they all have the exact same size. One of the 4 pictures gets completely different scale. And word says it's 100% !!! WTF is up with that?

 

post-2682-0-19375600-1398086408_thumb.pn

 

All are on 27%. Well, I did discover a difference. The little one is saved in 2008 apparently (bits doing time travel). Any one care to explain how that happened?

 

And I sincerely hope that the hexagons remain hexagons. Some Microsoft programs simply change a square pixel into... something else.

 

Any way, all stuff is fixed at the moment. Awaiting comments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find those in post #194 more clear and 'happier' than the one in post #195. What I remember from other games, like The Settlers of Catan, is that the board pieces are simplistic, yet clear, colourful and a little cartoon/child style instead of very artistic or realistic.

 

The center-thingy (small hexagon) is not very clear to me. Perhaps make the lines thicker? Where is it for? What does it add? You could also experiment with borders around the hexagons.

 

The information you add on the hexagons needs to be readable to players on each side of the board? Perhaps add text 'circular'? Is the information like a look-up-thing that all players have (and will slowly be remembered during playing) or is it different on each tile/hexagon (with the same type of ground)? ...etc. I can ask millions of questions if you like. :)   I don't play board games a lot but if I do the manual is always too unclear. Or the special abilities of an unit/species are too shortly written and can be interpreted in multiple ways.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you for replying both.

 

@criver

Well, I meant with that. If the whole board was done like those 3 hexagons attached to each other. Would it be playable?

The smallest board would be 2 hexagons :D.

 

@D2k Sardaukar

The ones in #194, some are redone in #195. And yes, cartoon style is better. However, I am very bad in arts. You remember the previous generation? They too are in this forum. Yet insufficient since those would force players to count, then calculate. Over and over again. And counting is a bit hard. The resolution was very low as well. Now I have a resolution that is 15 times higher.

 

The center is still to hard to tell?

Please look at the unhappy lonely tree texture in #195.

That is the one I applied now.

If you zoom your screen that a side of one terrain hexagon is about 4 cm.

The diameter from corner to corner is 8 cm.

Then you need to tell if you still can see the center dot.

I can make it bigger, or cut out a smaller hexagon. Which also makes the center bigger. If you can tell me what size it should have, I can adjust better. In the current print outs the black center hexagon is about 3,6 mm. The white with the asterix is about 1,8 mm.

Perhaps also making the asterix thicker would help.

 

The centers have a main focus point in the game. To determine the line of sight. The corners and sides of hexagons are in this too. I want to remove discussion during game play as much as possible. Thus the center dot. When there is a fight. projectiles fly from center 1 dot to another. All the hexagons that are in this line, count as damage reducers when they own tree's, hills and rocks. Even if it is just a corner of an hexagon that is over the line of sight.

When the side, or border, is exactly on the line of sight. Both hexagons count both for 50%.

And perhaps you are right about adding more clearness on these borders as well.

 

Since a maximum of 6 players is possible. I could add the tekst on each side. Best would be only the top and bottom. Since that is applied simple with paint. But it makes hexagons look flat. Thus it is 1 corner, or all around indeed. The bad think about paint is that you cannot add a 60 degree turn. Only 90 degree.

 

The information about hexagons could still be a look up. But I realized that I could have millions of these just like units. While units will remain look ups. The terrain it self would start looking like each other sooner then one might think. The best examples in this are different amount of tree´s and different altitude of the hills. And stuff like that.

Thus for terrain, I need to put the numbers somewhere on the hexagon.

Or revert completely back to cartoon like hexagons. But then with a better touch in art. It would still mean that terrain would have more equal worth than when putting the numbers on the hexagons. With numbers on the hexagons, I can have "3600" options for only amount of grass. Well, the smallest opening needed for game play currently is 60.

 

Some same looking terrain still can have different numbers, even though this difference is small.

I hardly doubt that some terrain are remembered slowly during game play.

 

Ask as many questions as you like. It keeps me thinking and reviewing.

 

The manual...

Yes, you are right in that. And I know that my manual is also still very confusing. Not only that. But I still have to rewrite some things etc.

I also need to track future expansion plans without removing current balance of the game. This takes time though.

 

A manual is just a list of rules in the best example. And players need to remember these rules.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unhappy tree hexagon center is indeed more clear, hehe.

 

I think designing the hexagons should not be limited by the design program (paint in this case) you use. So I suggest trying a different program (I mentioned inkscape, but perhaps paint.NET suits you better and can do 60 degree steps?).

 

What I get from your post is that numbers on the hexagons is overall better than multiple images. Some nice colourful hexagons for game style is nice, but the main required "game data" needs to come from the numbers.

 

Is this perhaps an idea (because you mentioned line of sight, perhaps each sector of hexagon has different properties?):

 

post-2251-0-80056200-1399132870_thumb.jp

 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey, odd thing.

I actually got paint.net on my computer :D

I will try things out there.

 

The Unhappy Tree. A good name for that region :D.

 

 


What I get from your post is that numbers on the hexagons is overall better than multiple images. Some nice colourful hexagons for game style is nice, but the main required "game data" needs to come from the numbers.

That is correct. And we are talking about 3 numbers and a code for the number of tree's and rocks/hills

 

Something like:

3000-0000-0600-3T2R

Mostly grasslands with a bit of water and 50% is forested (25% space reduction) and 33% are rocks (+33% space reduction).

Now players still have to calculate the true space though. With 2,5/6th of space of any number.

3000 would become 1250 for land units and

600 would become 250 for boats.

 

So I am not sure about the numbers either. There are tree jumpers and rock climbers in the game who ignore the last code.

Thus the 3000 and 600 remain. (There is 1500 space for hoovers and 3600 space for shinobi).

 


 

That white looks better then black though. But there are very light regions. Thus perhaps it is better to do a negative instead.

Which program allows for selecting multiple parts and make them negative?

 


 

Just tested panning pictures in paint.net

I noticed how 60 degree's does not return the correct 60 degree's?

 

I look at every pixel as a square around the singularity.

When I take the numbers 29 width and 26 hight for a triangle, this one can be turned 120 degree's and fit. According to my theory. Or did I make a huge mistake... again?

 

I must there for print some hexagons. That group of 3 regions, print it twice, cut them out, and test my theory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Isn't that just great. Again I find out that I did something wrong.

I am clearly not an artist.

 

I applied

15 (+14 #) x 26 (+25 #)

But it had to be

16 (+15 #) x 27 (+26 #)

 

I applied the pixel rule in the wrong direction!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, I have now hunted for new options regarding the right amount of pixels for my triangle basis.

Of course going into the right direction this time. There are 3 rules that I apply for this. Since I am getting the hang of this.

 

Rule number 1

With my calculator I went for the most accurate numbers possible. Thus on a 21x21 hexagon map, the pixel miscalculation would be under 0,04 pixel for every line that is drawn in a triangle. That´s right 4% of 1 pixel is the allowed fault.

Panning a complete map that is 1 meter wide, would result in a mismatch of just a little less then 1 mm.

To my surprise, even 0,03 pixels or lower was possible. Thus obvious less then 1 mm.

 

Rule number 2

However, I also remembered that there might be uneven sequences or asymmetric sequences.

I am talking about the number of pixels that shift when making a diagonal line. 

For example a 121 line means going upwards 1 dot, then 2 dots, then 1 dot. While going sideways 1 dot at a time. This line can be turned 180 degree´s and fit itself.

If you have 12131. Then this line cannot fit itself when turned 180 degree´s.

 

Rule number 3

Of course I can't make the lines super big. I still have to see pixels while seeing the triangle in a whole. While completely zoomed in. On my screen.

 

Summary:

- Accuracy of 1 mm or less on a 1 meter map.

- I need lines that can fit themselves when turned 180 degree´s.

- I need the triangle to fit on my screen with maximum zoom.

 

I narrowed down my selection to 3 with these rules:

 

Size; +26 x +45, 27 x 46 pixels

Inaccuracy on 1 meter; 0,74 mm   :)

Sequence; 131213131312131

 

Size; +41 x +71, 42 x 72 pixels

Inaccuracy on 1 meter; 0,20 mm   :happy:

Sequence; 1312131313121313131312131

 

Size; +56 x +97, 57 x 98 pixels

Inaccuracy on 1 meter; 0,05 mm   :O :laugh:

Sequence; 1312131313121313131213131312131

 

The one's are 1 pixel.

The two's and three's are groups of 2 pixels. A 2 is 4 pixels in total and A 3 is 6 pixels in total.

If you add a sequence up, you will see that they are the width in pixels. If you add them up and counting 4 and 6 instead of 2 and 3. You get the hight in pixels.

The + numbers are what you add in pixels when you place 2 triangles on top of each other or against each other.

 

I don't know which one to choose yet. Perhaps I should take a look at the sub sequence.

Red is the center.

While orange are sub centers, but only if the sub lines can fit themselves too.

Hmmm, seems I can even add sub+sub centers. YELLOW!!!

It is obvious that they increase in accuracy. And an accuracy of 0,05 mm on 1000 mm is ridiculous accurate. I sure hope that printers can be that accurate :D.

 

Of course I still need to test this in paint.net by panning 60 degree's ;)

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Still don't get why you work in pixels... Won't it be better if you work with vector graphics (you can have "limitless" precision)?

I am computer retarded.

So with what program can I do that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Check in see also at the bottom of the page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vector_graphics

I believe this one is free: http://inkscape.org/en/

I usually do all transformations in code, and not with an editor so I can't say which is best, but counting pixels seems pretty crazy. You can always make your hexagons in a vector graphcis editing software then convert to a raster image too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...