Return to “General”


Construction events (DL July 18)

I'm still torn between a world in which "enabling" objects directly create events (like a construction module creating a construction event), and a world in which "enabling" objects give their owner the ability to create an event (like a construction module as the "key" to unlocking the player's ability to create a construction event).
I cannot say much about NPCs, that would require background knowledge about your architecture I don't have.

But for the player, the "key" approach seems more intuitive. Because the construction module does not decide on its own to buold something, the player says "now build me that Angelripper railgun".

Re: Construction events (DL July 18)

I'd have to agree with Rabiator. It seems that if module is the key, it becomes more versatile. If the interface for the module is general enough, it means that the construction module (whether visible or invisible) has the potential to be re-used regardless of where it's use is (i.e., the module becomes the same for both the player, AIs, factories, and the like).
Early Spring - 1055: Well, I made it to Boatmurdered, and my initial impressions can be set forth in three words: What. The. F*ck.

Re: Construction events (DL July 18)

What if the construction module is always trying to produce, but requires a NPC as a "key" for it to be able to do so?

That might simulate best the idea that anything can happen (in fact everything is TRYING to happen) but it requires the attention of an entity with agency in order to do so.
The personalities of the NPCs then drive what is to be the likely occurrences.

Then, making random and/or genesis events happen is a matter of plugging in a non-npc driven "key" as an exception, or controllable variable of occurrence.

Re: Construction events (DL July 18)

What you are right about is that the properties of objects will create and change events.

Here are some thoughts on those properties:

* Policy: Individuals and organisations usually have a purpose of some kind. These are reflected in the decisions of ship captains. They will also have certain traits that are racial, organisational and individual. A simple way of looking at it is good/bad/neutral. But there are other traits such as whether they are enterprising, innovative, war-like, social, etc. These can all procedurally vary.
* Location: proximity between objects will guide whether battle, trade, collision, etc. can take place
* Infrastructure: capability of ships will form the basis on whether an individual/squadron instigates a battle.
* Process: How do individuals and groups achieve their policy/aims/purpose. How do they organise themselves to achieve these policies
* People/Organisation: Knowledge is part of this - e.g. awareness of their environment where a race only knows to mine at x, y, z if it knows that asteroids exist at x, y, z. A similar abstract could be built for technological research during the game. Race X may discover new weaponry that counteract race Y's shields - a process accelerated during war conditions and capture of opponent technology. Standings are important - between opposing organisations/individuals and even organisations/individuals supposedly on the same side (e.g. triggering internal coups). Communication is also key - on a hierarchical basis, who is the leadership - how are orders distributed? What happens if the leader is killed - do elections or in-fighting take place?
* Economics: Who has what money? How much is an object worth? What infrastructure can it contribute towards? How they spend and obtain it is driven by Policy (see above)

High level events can also contribute to intergalactic news.

An awesome procedural event system makes an awesome procedural game. It takes a lot of work, but is as immersive as good graphics.


Online Now

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest