Full Games List
Featured Games
New Games
Reviews
Media
Blogs
Game Updates
Images Feedback Summary
Game Design Highlights
Tutorials
Articles
Scripts
Utilities / Plugins
Resources
Engines
Engine Bulletins
What is Makerscore?
Past Events
Achievements
Misaos
Forums
Chat
New to RMN?
Full Store List
RMN Music Pack (free)
Profile
Locker
Play ListsMASTEROFMAYHEM'S PROFILE
Close
Waring, content from this user my contain copious amounts of sarcasm. User should probably not be taken too seriously.
Search
Filter
All
Game Pages
User Statuses
Promised Abyss
NicoB's Let's Tries/Plays! *REQUEST YOUR GAME HERE!*
Hay Nico, are you actualy going to update this page? I know you've done more LP for Profit Motive. Com on man, don't leave us hanging.
Make the player use offense
author=Liberty
That's what I did do - minus the cap on items. Monsters have upward of 20% chance to drop healing items, could drop multiple items at that, and there was a lot of treasure scattered around. A lot. A lot, a lot - most of it a combination of healing items, damage items and money, with a few new equips thrown in. I like me some treasure.
One character even has a Pharmacy perk where they do double healing with items. Items that already heal 50%. That's an almost full heal right there.
Then I hope you have a lot of monsters that can do 70% or more damage to a character per turn, otherwise you’re in for a pretty easy game. Unless that’s the goal in which case; nice job.
Bottle.png
Coding a monster stampede
So I had this idea when at the start of some battles the enemies would damage the party by causing a stampede, providing there are enough monsters (the amount that show up are random).
Unfortunately I’m having trouble figuring how to code the thing in RPGM2003.
The idea is at the start of the fight the battle the game checks to see if there are the required number of monster on the field (in this case 4). If there’s not nothing happens. If there is the attack triggers and damages for entire party for X damage. And then it doesn’t happen again, just the once at the start of the battle.
Now I’ve tried lots of things; conditional branches mostly. I'm sure it's possible I just can’t figure out how to do it?
Unfortunately I’m having trouble figuring how to code the thing in RPGM2003.
The idea is at the start of the fight the battle the game checks to see if there are the required number of monster on the field (in this case 4). If there’s not nothing happens. If there is the attack triggers and damages for entire party for X damage. And then it doesn’t happen again, just the once at the start of the battle.
Now I’ve tried lots of things; conditional branches mostly. I'm sure it's possible I just can’t figure out how to do it?
Like a boss
Oh I’m liking some of these. I may not use them exactly as written, but I’ll defiantly keep ideas like this into consideration when I’m designing my bosses. Thanks.
Screenshot_RotVJump.PNG
Make the player use offense
Well I can defiantly see where you’re coming from. Another example would be Dark/Demons Souls. The most common strategy there is to just keep your shield up at all times and pump everything into Endurance and Vitality and you’ll eventually win. Or Dragon Quest VIII where most of the late game bosses are “heal everyone, raise tension, repeat”. And I can see why you would want to avoid that, because it makes your games boring to play and people will lose interest in it. And honestly who wants to make a boring game.
But I’m still not convinced that I need to avoid Defensive play. I don’t like it and I agree it’s boring, but I’m not going to punish someone for doing it. Besides how is “spam healing” any better that “spam attack” anyway?
I guess it comes from different design philosophers. I’m more of a designer who believes in giving players choice on how they want to approach a battle. Sure you can get through most fights by healing and defending, but they could also win by exploiting an elemental weakness or have one character cast berserk on your main attacker while another character lowers the enemies defence while it’s asleep. Basically there not any one way to beat a particular enemy or boss, that there are a lot of different strategies or tactics could work. And as a designer I like hearing that someone could beat a boss with a strategy I never conceded. But again different design philosophies.
But I’m still not convinced that I need to avoid Defensive play. I don’t like it and I agree it’s boring, but I’m not going to punish someone for doing it. Besides how is “spam healing” any better that “spam attack” anyway?
I guess it comes from different design philosophers. I’m more of a designer who believes in giving players choice on how they want to approach a battle. Sure you can get through most fights by healing and defending, but they could also win by exploiting an elemental weakness or have one character cast berserk on your main attacker while another character lowers the enemies defence while it’s asleep. Basically there not any one way to beat a particular enemy or boss, that there are a lot of different strategies or tactics could work. And as a designer I like hearing that someone could beat a boss with a strategy I never conceded. But again different design philosophies.
Make the player use offense
Wait I’m confused. You want people to attack things more?
From what I’ve seen more people concerned with finding interesting ways to incorporate the Defend command, because nobody uses it because they’d rather spend their turn attacking or healing.
Yes I understand the complaint; you want to shift the focus away from spamming healing and status buffs gaining victory by pure attrition because it’s slow and boring as hell. But why are you bothering!?
Personally not me, or anyone else I know, has ever played a game purely defensively before, because as people here have pointed out, it’s boring, boring, boring! I’m fairly certain when playing games most people focus on offence so I really can’t see how it’s that big of a problem.
So what if there are people who rely on “turtleing” to win? If they want to make their experience with a game as boring as possible let them. It’s there time there wasting, not yours. So why the hell do you care how someone else plays a game!?
Am I missing something here? Is there some small obvious detail I’m overlooking? Dose it offend you that these people aren’t playing the game “correctly”? What games is “turtleing” a massive problem in anyway? Maybe you self proclaimed “game design gurus” can enlighten me. Because I’m failing to see how “people aren’t attacking enough” is even really a problem.
From what I’ve seen more people concerned with finding interesting ways to incorporate the Defend command, because nobody uses it because they’d rather spend their turn attacking or healing.
Yes I understand the complaint; you want to shift the focus away from spamming healing and status buffs gaining victory by pure attrition because it’s slow and boring as hell. But why are you bothering!?
Personally not me, or anyone else I know, has ever played a game purely defensively before, because as people here have pointed out, it’s boring, boring, boring! I’m fairly certain when playing games most people focus on offence so I really can’t see how it’s that big of a problem.
So what if there are people who rely on “turtleing” to win? If they want to make their experience with a game as boring as possible let them. It’s there time there wasting, not yours. So why the hell do you care how someone else plays a game!?
Am I missing something here? Is there some small obvious detail I’m overlooking? Dose it offend you that these people aren’t playing the game “correctly”? What games is “turtleing” a massive problem in anyway? Maybe you self proclaimed “game design gurus” can enlighten me. Because I’m failing to see how “people aren’t attacking enough” is even really a problem.
Creator of Plants vs Zombies laid off a day after PvZ2 was announced
Jim Sterling's been warning us for years of EA's malevolance and stupidy.
Games - Tester
Games - Other
