OneFishDown wrote:
And I could make a library while I'm at it too! Ah, okay I'm starting to get it. When you said you thought this was a community of programmers helping each other improve their skills, and that you would leave if that ever changed, what you MEANT was that this was a community you would use to improve yourself as much as possible, but that you would go out of your way to never actually help someone else become a better programmer. All the discussion about "I could tell someone in half an hour how to do a pathfinding" library confused me. I thought it meant you actually would do things like that, in the spirit of belonging to a community of programmers helping each other. No problem. Thankfully there are a lot of people here willing to help each other, and your refusal to participate won't keep others from learning. But it's too bad -- and I am completely serious about this -- that you have no interest in helping maintain the spirit of the community you say you want to be a part of. Well, I've got stuff to do. This has been educational, but I'll have no more to say on it. | |
Posting articles isn't the only way to help people learn to program. I have helped people learn to program far more than I have been helped by others. Just because I help people over AIM or in Chatters, where you can't see it, doesn't mean I'm not helping them. I would rather explain to every person individually how something works than to write an article on it. That saves me time because, thanks to open source libraries, few people care how things work.
If someone asked on the forum "How do I make a *pathfinding routine?" I bet everyone would say to use a library; nobody would tell them how to make one. *a pathfinding routine is an arbitrary example of something thought of as complex. | |
OneFishDown wrote:
Simply put, I refuse to write articles for BYONDscape. Then BYONDscape shall write articles for you! | |
Nobody would tell them to make one because it's a waste of time to reinvent the wheel. In the rare instance that they will be unable to use any library whatsoever, then, according to you, they could spend 30 minutes looking it up and making one themselves, but why would they bother making one themselves to do a very simple, small-scale project? And, if you're soo uptight about people stealing your library, inset a few dozen errors into it, and tell people to fix the damn thing themselves.
| |
So let me get this straight... spending a few hours to write the same exact thing that someone else has written is more efficient than ust using said pre-made thing? Gee, that makes sense! Maybe you should look up the definition of "efficient."
| |
Garthor wrote:
So let me get this straight... spending a few hours to write the same exact thing that someone else has written is more efficient than ust using said pre-made thing? It's not the same exact thing, in this case it isn't even that close. The routine is more efficient, not the process of creating it. | |
Try reading my posts before you reply next time.
It isn't the same thing. They might accomplish nearly the same task, but that is all they have in common. | |
OneFishDown wrote:
Simply put, I refuse to write articles for BYONDscape. The write one for digitalBYOND! =) I would rather explain to every person individually how Umm...how? Let's see: ten people could read your article at the same time, say within 15 minutes - or you could spend 150 minutes individually chatting with each individual, repeating yourself each time... That sounds like a method for practising your typing skills, not saving time... =P | |
One thing to consider is to have each unit able to move based upon some attribute (speed, manuverability, etc.). Any player could set their production facilities and fiddle with their management options at any time. The output of a production facility is determined at the end of each round and the movement order of units is also determined.
The benefit to a system like that is that fast moving units actually get to move first, outflank, and use different strategies than slower units. It also mixes up the order players move in so you don't have to worry about any unfair advantages a player would have from being able to go first or last every time. Lastly, it allows players to stay in the game more since they don't have to wait for every single enemy unit to be moved. One of the downsides is that those long waiting periods aren't arround anymore for you to think up strategies and change facility productions. Perhaps you could help fix that a bit by having an automatic 30 seconds - 2 minute delay at the start of every few rounds so players have time to manage facilities, take a bathroom break, and do whatever they need to do. It could be skipped by having all of the players saying they're done. | |
Your post was on topic, wow =D
That's a good point about the game moving too quickly. I don't want a player to have to sit around and wait too long, but I don't want them to be rushed. However, I am trying to simulate actual combat situations. A player might have a strategy already planned, and make a quick move. Because of that quick move, the other player's didnt have much time to plan a move of their own. This rewards the quick thinker by giving their enemies less time to plan. That would be an advantage, but not an unfair one. Any player could make a quick move like that, and by doing so they may not see a flaw in that move. As for the instance of bathroom breaks, I could have timeouts. While it takes away from the reality of combat, it considers the fact that it isn't reality, and people might have to leave their computer for some reason. The number of timeouts would be determined before the game begins. I suppose I'd allow players to call a timeout at anytime, but the timeout wouldn't occur until the end of the turn. I was leaning more towards a chess style of gameplay; you move one unit per turn. The units can move up to as many tiles as the unit's speed var allows. Each unit could attack once per turn, and attacking wouldn't take away from the distance they are allowed to move. However, any of those restrictions could be overridden by speical abilites of each character, and all of that is subject to (much) change. I could have automatic timeouts at the beginning of each new cycle. This too would probably be a time you can set prior to the start of the game, that way you could have an minute after every cycle, or no time. Thanks for the ideas. [edit] And to pass the time, java applet mini-games! The idea just hit me while implementing timeouts. Two minutes is a long time to sit around, especially considering the short attention spans the players probably have. | |
One option you might consider is variable initiative. It's used a lot in table top war games, which are basically TBS with real models. A simple roll of a six sider - or any sider you'd like - would easily provide a changing turn order without making it too ordered, thereby adding in some of the chaos of the battlefield many players like.
You could even take it one step further with different armies have bonuses or penalties to initiative. Or, possibly award initiative bonuses for victories. Anyway, just an idea =) | |
No problem -- make a post!
I believe you when you say you are interested in helping people become better programmers.