Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Puzzlemaker]

So.

Working on re-doing a lot of code, and junk, etc etc.

So, just finished putting organizations in.

It's not really ready for a release, but there are a lot of new back end things.  I am hoping to get rid of what is there and slowly move to the new system.

So far, I have...

Made a system for the reading in of configuration files.  It should be very easy to move this system to work with things other then organizations.

Made a muuuuuch more manageable system for handling the saving and loading of complex objects.  I am very proud of it, and so far it has proven to be quite robust and easy to implement for anything new added.  Very easy.

Put in -basic- organization AI... Right now they can only publicize things (change public opinion) and siege you.  They will choose based on a priority system; if a topic is doing badly, they will start to publicize about it.  If you attack them a lot, they will siege you.  Very basic at the moment.

No inter-organization communication is in yet, but the back system for that is all in, it just has to be implemented.

Currently the old sieging system still exists, PLUS the new one, in the code.  In fact, for a lot of stuff that is the case, there is definitely a duality type thing going on.

Big things that still need to get done...

1.  Move creatures and locations to the new system (Going to be painful).
2.  Finish implementation of all the little odds and ends.
3.  Remove as much of the old system as possible and move to the new system; not too much front-end change, but it would make everything work off of config files and be much more manageable code-wise.
4.  Move everything else to the new system, like guns, armor, etc.

If you would like, you can get the latest version off of subversion and try it out, to get a sneak peak; feel free to mess with the config files and post any bugs/balance issues/other observations.

[Dwarmin]

Do you mean like..the genetics company is an official entitity? With their own mercs and propaganda? Can you totally destroy them if you damage their personnel and property enough, or bankrupt them?

[a1s]

there was an idea floated around before that if you damage a site enough it becomes a safehouse (and then once someone buys it again it would be a corporate building again, unless of course it's houses your own business [front]), we could tie that into this.

[Hanure]

Does that mean I could possibly own every site in, and out of, the city?
Perhaps at some point there can be an option to go to different cities?
Ooo, maybe have a map of the US, and have it colored in by political views!
Thus I could feel like I was running a more military campain against the evil conservative machine!

[Puzzlemaker]

The genetics corp isn't an organization, but it could easily be defined as one.

Locations will all be tied into organizations.  Right now they are, but it's hardcoded.  I want to move it into the config files and junk eventually.

Anyway, I plan to implement a sort of health system.  You can "Kill" an organization by closing all of their locations and/or doing a certain amount of damage to them.  Of course, some organizations can't be killed, and almost all of them should be able to "Come Back", although with reduced power, at least for awhile.

As for locations, I really hope to implement a more dynamic system; AKA, you only start with the homeless shelter and one safehouse.  You can scout out for other places, buy property, rent apartments, etc.  Certain locations will disappear after they stop being of any use.

Anyway, that's the plan.  It could change.  I could also not be fully implemented, as I am working this summer.  And then I have school.

[Little]

While we're on the topics of location, could we please have enemy safehouses in a diffrent catagory?

[Jonathan S. Fox]

What do you mean by category? Right now sites aren't categorized in any meaningful way, at least not in any way that concerns the player. Maybe you mean have their own submenu in the go forth screen? With the current system the submenus are grouped purely by location, and not by type, so that would imply all their safehouses are in the same part of town. But it would not be difficult to have them sorted by type instead (industry, business, media, government, leisure, residential, safehouses, enemy safehouses...) -- accessibility by car is assigned by individual site, and you can mix car-only with no car required sites in the same group.

[Little]

That's exactly what I mean. Enemy Safehouses having their own submenu.

[Puzzlemaker]

quote:Originally posted by Little:
<STRONG>That's exactly what I mean. Enemy Safehouses having their own submenu.</STRONG>

Quite possible!

Although enemy safehouse's are going to be a lot more common... every organization should have at least one (AKA Corporation HQ would be the corporations safehouse).

They might have another location that's more hidden... lots of possibilities here.  I just have to finish it, hehehe.

[Little]

So, will a sub-menu occur?

[Puzzlemaker]

quote:Originally posted by Little:
<STRONG>So, will a sub-menu occur?</STRONG>

Depends on what you mean.

There will prolly be something, though.

[Little]

Improvment is good.

[Dryn]

quote:Originally posted by Puzzlemaker:
<STRONG>Although enemy safehouse's are going to be a lot more common... </STRONG>

It would be nice if there was another district in that case. I think it would be preferable if every location in a district was displayed on one page.

Is it in the works that you will be able to convert organisations to your side? I.e making a AM radio station liberal?

[Puzzlemaker]

Update on this:  Work on this is going slowly, because real life work is getting in the way.  Bug push to get some software out the door to some (Potential) clients.

[E. Albright]

Right now they can only publicize things (change public opinion) and siege you.  They will choose based on a priority system; if a topic is doing badly, they will start to publicize about it.

I was wondering how this would ultimately be handled. Would it (as now) just be a list of "concerned" issues? It occurred to me that an explicit political agenda definition for every org might be nice to have, rather than just a binary alignment and a list of interests. A crude sketch of a more nuanced/convoluted alternate conception follows. Given the chance, an org would want to influence opinion on an issue towards their preferred position, rated from 0 (C+) to 4 (L+), with -1 indicating indifference. E.g,

CCS: {0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0}
LCS: {4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4}
Radical Moderate CS: {2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2}
Apolitical CS: {-1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1} (they'd probably actually want strict police regulation tho' )
NRA: {-1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 0 -1}
PETA: {-1 4 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1}
genetics corporation: {-1 0 -1 -1 -1 -1 1 1 -1 1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1}
ACLU: {4 -1 3 4 3 -1 -1 -1 -1 4 -1 4 4 -1 -1}
Leninist CS: {-1 -1 0 0 0 -1 -1 -1 4 -1 4 0 -1 4 4}
militia: {0 -1 4 4 2 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 3 -1 0 1*}

*Digging through the various status descriptions, the monarchist/fascist/Dominionist position (C++?) of "There are no taxes, etc." would probably actually fit best, but the C+ "The tax code is a nightmare, etc." wouldn't do at all, hence my opting for the C "A flat tax is in effect".

[edit: it occurs to me to try to define a matrix like the above for CCS-y orgs like the Klan or the Phineas Priesthood, but some of the things most dear to their hearts aren't currently laid out in the Liberal agenda: civil liberties, miscegenation, immigration, etc.]