Warzone 2100 Forums

wz2120 mod has a nice set of models that can be easily taken if necessary, i guess.

Goth Zagog-Thou wrote:....... I agree that the community possesses the know-how, creativity and brainpower to make something like this work.
......

Another set of practical considerations that may or may not amount to a perpetual fly in the ointment.

Everything you do has to be concurrently engineered to the Master Build's development - v.2.3.x & v.3.x are effectively dead as I understand it.

So... you will have to be as clear as possible on the Master Build's Development Road Map in an effort to match your concurrent engineering as best you can (which also depends on how ambitious this project becomes as far as the development time involved to bring it to completion).

What I am saying is that this process will not at all be like forecasting working for a year against stable v.1.10.

How it will differ is that your work done in certain areas will be broken no matter the competency of your efforts and you will have to go back and do fixes you had no hand creating in order for the work as a whole to maintain the currency of simply working. In other words, to your regular work load of creating and perfecting what your creating you will have to add cycles of fixing as a direct result of the Master Build's Development...

For some, temperamentally, these bouts of fixing are like mana from heaven and they thrive.... for others it could be fundamentally frustrating and discouraging. There are really 2 very different mind-sets at work here and their reconciliation is a factor in a project of this scope (under these circumstances) even if it is not officially a consideration spoken to or addressed.

- Regards, Rman.

EDIT: Out of a sincere respect for the sober nature of these considerations I firmly resisted a barbed witticism concerning mixed blessings.

.

Rman Virgil wrote:v.2.3.x & v.3.x are effectively dead as I understand it.

There is no v3.x yet, just a bunch of dead-end alphas, and some snapshots with a version that may or may not end up as "v3".

As for 2.3.x, at least I intend to keep supporting that line for a while. That means you can safely make work against that line now. Of course, players tend to move on to the latest shiny thing/version, so that may not mean much when the next big release eventually happens. However, big releases tend to happen with 1-2 years apart, and we do not break things in a stable release series, so as long as you stay on a stable release series you should be fine.

Once the next big release is out, I will try to explain in detail how mods can be ported over. I also try to put all script related changes in the scripting forum as they happen.

Rman Virgil wrote:v.2.3.x & v.3.x are effectively dead as I understand it.

Per wrote:There is no v3.x yet, just a bunch of dead-end alphas, and some snapshots with a version that may or may not end up as "v3".

As for 2.3.x, at least I intend to keep supporting that line for a while. That means you can safely make work against that line now. Of course, players tend to move on to the latest shiny thing/version, so that may not mean much when the next big release eventually happens. However, big releases tend to happen with 1-2 years apart, and we do not break things in a stable release series, so as long as you stay on a stable release series you should be fine.

Once the next big release is out, I will try to explain in detail how mods can be ported over. I also try to put all script related changes in the scripting forum as they happen.

Well that is very important & helpful information to know for a project of this scope & complexity.

(I still have reservations about "smooth sailing" on a stable release series - look at NTW & DyDo for example. However let's assume a best case scenario of minor blips & readily made course corrections to continue "smooth sailing".)

Some key decisions to be made going forward Goth, starting with what binary / data-set.

- Yebo sanibonani, Rman.
.

I guess my comment on 2.3 and 3.0 was a bit short.

2.3 is more or less on life-support - not dead, but not much happening there either. If someone finds the time to backport larger changes like x-player support or universal features that break compatibility, that might become 2.4.

For 3.0 up to beta4, lets just say, it seemed a good idea at the time.

ok not really understanding why all the different branches yet, this sounds quite depressing.

what branch is going somewhere pls?

Master. The problem there is with keeping up, if you develop something against that, since it's a moving target (ok, not that fast-moving at the moment...).

Thank you, gentlemen, for the input.

My thoughts were to conduct development on the current 2.3.x branch. Less chance of breakage, and I wasn't planning to do anything unusual other than custom voice sets, some music, and videos. The scripting, as I understand the current state thereof, isn't much changed from 1.10, so nothing unusual there. And maps, of course. Must have maps to play on, and so far the maps I have made are all stock Arizona tiles. No custom research items, either. Objects likewise are stock.

Of course this is all coming from my end, currently. This being an open and free community, things are subject to change.

I do have a side question: are the maximum number of tiles per tileset fixed, or has it been changed? I ask because during the 1.10 / 1.11 days there was a limit to how many you could have.

And yes, I know the 3.0 trunk has the new renderer and tilesets. Its' future is not certain, however. Correct?

I'll gladly defer to the community in this matter - 2.3.x or 3.0 series.

Oh, I should note that x-player support would be helpful, but not required.

.

I think v. 2.3.x a good choice, for what it's worth. (I think your biggest audience will be running this for some time to come..)

I also like the first 5 Missions you've drafted.

Not including artifacts of new stuff to research & focusing on the Scavs shifts game play attention away from how the original CAM was constructed around always being behind technologically & seeking artifacts to try to sorta keep pace (along with the Timer constraints) - to the player having to come up instead with more clever field tactics on the way to triumph - at least, that is my take.

I also appreciate your opening narrative hooks - NEXUS controlling the Scav opposition, etc..

(Because the very last NEXUS sequence in the original CAM too easily degenerated into a mop-up OP instead of being an EPIC of barely surviving to triumph.... I have come to think of it as a False Flag to divert The Project's attention from the true mission of a CAM 4. )

I would only make one suggestion that would take you away from using all stock and it is all related to revitalizing the Scav opposition with new stuff that has already been made but never used for a project of this nature that has been released and these fall into 2 categories. This would give you compelling new eye candy that would also serve in some fresh game play tacs (Scav Air Force) and not be unduly complex to integrate in scripts and placements.

1.) New Scav Structs created already by Black Project (& I believe Mysteryem has made some interesting ones too).

2.) Scav Choppers made by Black Project as per screens below from unreleased WS map/mod.

Afterthought:

This would give you compelling new eye candy that also would serve in your game play tacs and not be unduly complex to integrate in scripts and placements.

This rationale could also be applied to the new NEXUS contingent when you choose to introduce them by making use of XANAX's Mechs. (Radiosity aka Dancing Moogle & Chainsaw Monkey has also released his Mechs to be used by anyone. They are very different than XANAX's.)

Anyway... just stirring the kettle a little.

- Cheers, Rman.
.

Not including artifacts of new stuff to research & focusing on the Scavs shifts game play attention away from how the original CAM was constructed around always being behind technologically & seeking artifacts to try to sorta keep pace (along with the Timer constraints) - to the player having to come up instead with more clever field tactics on the way to triumph - at least, that is my take.

Thanks for seeing it. I approach the issue by having the player be forced to use hit-and-run tactics or else having the limited force destroyed (and failing the mission). It requires the Scav forces to be balanced so as not to be too weak or too strong. Some scripting tricks will ensure that things don't happen TOO quickly (eg, the player gets mobbed by ALL Scav forces on the map, at first -- remember there's a timer!), but instead requires tactics and being creative. So yeah, challenge-based missions will be around 70% of what the player can expect, along with some grab-the-artifact here and there. And to make use of the Command Turret the player is provided with, some missions will require it and it isn't turtled somewhere away from combat. That was my thinking.

I would only make one suggestion that would take you away from using all stock and it is all related to revitalizing the Scav opposition with new stuff that has already been made but never used for a project of this nature that has been released and these fall into 2 categories. This would give you compelling new eye candy that would also serve in some fresh game play tacs (Scav Air Force) and not be unduly complex to integrate in scripts and placements.

1.) New Scav Structs created already by Black Project (& I believe Mysteryem has made some interesting ones too).

2.) Scav Choppers made by Black Project as per screens below from unreleased WS map/mod.

I'd love to do that, if the mod authors in question are willing to allow it. Of course, it's always proper and polite to ask beforehand.

A little status update: I've finished the Mission 1 "Escape" map and force placement. At least, it's good enough to call a Beta build. This area is 1/4 of the main "Campaign 4" area. Here's a preview:
The idea of this mission is, of course, to escape to the west. The player starts in the top-right corner, and must escape to the top-left corner. The "Research Facility Takeover" mission will occur at the bottom-right corner, which is where the player will be expected to establish Delta Base. Once Delta Base is established, the rest of the map is unlocked (in stages) and the Campaign will proceed to the east and then eventually South and Southeast.

Remember folks: Missions 6-12 (or more -- I'm leaning towards 15!) still need to be drafted! I've gotten some worthy ideas so far (the Omega Device idea is a good one but rather obvious.. we'll keep it in reserve ). Feel free to come up with more ideas! Remember that the storyline must have good flow and be consistent, and that everything is subject to final approval. We'll need around 3 or 4 off-map mission maps too.

And if nobody objects, I'll have Milo do scripting, if he still wants to.

.

@ Goth: Black Project, XANAX & Radiosity have already given permission to use their mods in other works.

(Milo, an excellent team mate candidate btw, would have to make the CAM A.I. Templates for them to be script spawned / triggered. He'll also, of course, need your maps with EXACT coordinates for the precisely defined spawn/triggers - in some form of a very detailed pre-scripting analysis doc for each mission.)

I agree balancing the Scav opposition will be a key design challenge.

Lots of folks have already expressed over the years how much they would love to engage in the type of gameplay you are striveing for with the Scavs.

- Cheers, Rman.

.

I've been playing oblivion lately, but if you get me a copy of that map i'll have a look at it. I can do the main mission scripting but you may have to find someone else to do AI. Or I could always learn how to do it myself, we'll see how ambitious I feel

@ Goth: Black Project, XANAX & Radiosity have already given permission to use their mods in other works.

Excellent! Never hurts to be polite and ask first. It's just good manners.

I've been playing oblivion lately, but if you get me a copy of that map i'll have a look at it. I can do the main mission scripting but you may have to find someone else to do AI. Or I could always learn how to do it myself, we'll see how ambitious I feel

(Another game that I enjoy modding. Can't wait for Skyrim. )

I'm still working on Cam4's main map. I've been building this upon the 2.3.x branch, as suggested. The above capture of the northwest quadrant (mission area 1-5) is done other than possibly adding some more scav forces in the central western edge and southwestern corner to prevent the player rushing the main base too soon. I'll be happy to make it available for balance testing, but I've had issues getting it to load up in-game without it being a skirmish. I'm working on the other 3/4 of the map, currently in the texturing and incorporation stage, and it's time-consuming to do it properly (but it looks really good! ).

I've got more ideas for missions 6-8 that I'm still processing.

@Milo: As far as the campaign AI, we'll work it together. I've got some experience in that area, and we can certainly make a good Scavenger/Nexus AI. Drop me a PM with an email addy or Skype and I'll get the map to you. Please note that I'm building the maps in FlaME 1.15.

Lots to do. I'm going to do voice sets soon. Should be lots of fun and a good break from having my face buried in FlaME 6 hours a day.

milo christiansen wrote:I've been playing oblivion lately, but if you get me a copy of that map i'll have a look at it. I can do the main mission scripting but you may have to find someone else to do AI. Or I could always learn how to do it myself, we'll see how ambitious I feel

"the main mission scripting"

....

.... IS the Campaign A.I. - which is to say that SKI A.I. and CAM A.I. are quite different & apart in their modus. But perhaps I am misunderstanding your meaning here.

- RV
.