Page 5 of 6

Posted: Wed Dec 26, 2007 1:29 pm
by Duke
I dont think I've ever tried that.

Btw, is anyone taking Eg's spot in this game?

Posted: Wed Dec 26, 2007 7:32 pm
by SmashFace
i am almost positive it is the latter korexus, i do remember doing this a few times.

Posted: Thu Dec 27, 2007 8:15 am
by Aussie Gaz
Everyone.

In reply to korexus's query.

At the moment Ewok does the following:

Upgrading anything to something else costs the amount shown in the manual. (ie ARM to KNI 6 wood, ARC to CAT 8 wood).

Downgrading to ARM costs nothing.

Downgrading to something else will also cost the amount shown in the manual (CAT to PIK 2 wood).

The downgrading is not as per the manual (sorry).

I have to rewrite this part of the code now so what do we want?

Posted: Thu Dec 27, 2007 9:51 am
by Duke
I vote for the manual style.

It should be as hard to train a knight into an archer as it is to train a grunt into it.

A navy seal isnt good a parachuting (or is he? well you get my point)

Posted: Thu Dec 27, 2007 10:40 am
by korexus
Duke wrote:I vote for the manual style.

It should be as hard to train a knight into an archer as it is to train a grunt into it.
Good to see you kept the same thought all the way through those two sentences, Duke! :P

I don't think that the justification was in difficulty to train, you still need to use an order to make the transform. I think it was in availability of wood. If you're takeing a catapult apart then you'll probably find enough resources to make a bow, which is why you don't need extra wood.

That much is clear in the manual and is quite a nice game feature (if you're really desperate for knights, you can make loads of them by downgrading catapults, even if you have no wood). The other part of the question is less clear, does this downgrading system being free been that upgrading between types should be cheaper? - An archer to a catapult taking only 4 wood instead of 8?


korexus.

Posted: Thu Dec 27, 2007 3:03 pm
by Duke
Naturally since he can use his fragile bow to make a 15 feet catapult out of :roll:

It generally only takes about 3-4 minutes too :wink:

Posted: Sat Dec 29, 2007 11:25 am
by Duke
I've been doing some thinking. *waits for the laughter to end* and I would say that the use of wood simply is a symbolic thing that is the equivalence of all the things needed to create an archer/knight/catapult/pikeman It doesnt make sense otherwise. What wood is needed to make a knight? Are we creating Knights of Ni here? In that case we need a category of shrubberies instead of the general word wood.

Nope, I vote that wood sums up all that is needed in terms of men with the physique (or women, or transvestites or whatever), stuff needed to build whatever they use (bows for archers, armours for knights etc) and any other factor that might be needed for the transition from a peasant to an archer or such.

Image

Posted: Sat Dec 29, 2007 11:37 am
by Aussie Gaz
Brykovian subs for Egbert.

Posted: Sat Dec 29, 2007 12:21 pm
by korexus
Duke wrote:What wood is needed to make a knight? Are we creating Knights of Ni here?
The lance is made out of wood, and you'd need wood to heat the forge to make the armour, and the shield could well be made out of wood and, eh, the mounting block and there's little bits of wood on the horses stirrups. I get your point, but the game would be hopelessly complex if you had to grab all the raw materials needed for each upgrade.
Nope, I vote that wood sums up all that is needed in terms of men with the physique (or women, or transvestites or whatever), stuff needed to build whatever they use (bows for archers, armours for knights etc) and any other factor that might be needed for the transition from a peasant to an archer or such.
I have no problem with that but are some of those resources re-usable? Should they be? Not just from a real life perspective but also within the game.


korexus.

Posted: Sat Dec 29, 2007 2:55 pm
by Brykovian
If I properly remember playing the original Gassner-ware WOK5 engine, upgrades between levels cost the difference in wood and downgrades cost no wood. That made perfect sense to me and I thought it worked well as a design too.

Duke is on the right track (do *not* quote me on that in the future, Duke!) ... wood is the generic resource for all non-food resources and is used to "pay" for upgrading your military units. The cost listed in the table is to go from the base unit up to an improved unit ... moving between improved units should cost the difference between the two (no less than 0).

Personally, I think that works well.

-Bryk

Posted: Sat Dec 29, 2007 9:32 pm
by trewqh
Duke wrote:wood sums up all that is needed in terms of men with the physique, stuff needed to build whatever they use (bows for archers, armours for knights etc) and any other factor that might be needed for the transition from a peasant to an archer or such.
And how do you explain that wood comes only from provinces that have forests?

:roll:

Posted: Sun Dec 30, 2007 9:06 am
by Duke
Because that is where the trees grow.

Posted: Sun Dec 30, 2007 10:18 am
by Xarfei
Brykovian wrote:If I properly remember playing the original Gassner-ware WOK5 engine, upgrades between levels cost the difference in wood and downgrades cost no wood. That made perfect sense to me and I thought it worked well as a design too.

Duke is on the right track (do *not* quote me on that in the future, Duke!) ... wood is the generic resource for all non-food resources and is used to "pay" for upgrading your military units. The cost listed in the table is to go from the base unit up to an improved unit ... moving between improved units should cost the difference between the two (no less than 0).

Personally, I think that works well.
This pretty much exactly sums up my opinion.

I think Ewok should initially be an exact copy of the original Wok5. Later we can think about some changes (EWok v 1.5?), once you start fiddling with one thing, you might have to change another as well.

Xarfei

Xarfei

Posted: Sun Dec 30, 2007 5:32 pm
by Dameon
How did we know Eg was leaving? Did he send an email? I'm asking because I have this suspicion that there's something wrong with gmail....I'm getting emails from Duke that were sent days ago, and if Eg sent an email resigning, I never saw one. This gmail account I'm using is relatively new to me and if I'm missing emails/some emails aren't getting out I might need to switch it, I suppose.

Posted: Sun Dec 30, 2007 5:53 pm
by korexus

Posted: Wed Jan 16, 2008 5:18 pm
by Nemesis
------ Phase II: Use Items from the SPP ------

You deflect the spell. Remaining MRES is XXXX.
Should I have more information about this, i.e. what spell or at least who cast it on me. My suspicion is 'Yes' but I do not really remember.

I also edited my MRes, it doesn't really say XXXX :wink:

Posted: Wed Jan 16, 2008 6:29 pm
by Ultyguy
You deflect the spell. Remaining MRES is XXXX.

Nemesis,

I got the same message, but I don't know if we should have gotten more info.

I also edited my MRES.

Ulty

Posted: Wed Jan 16, 2008 7:50 pm
by Duke
Who is throwing spells around? I thought we all had NAP's?

As usual I have no clue

Posted: Wed Jan 16, 2008 8:26 pm
by korexus
The engine should tell you who casts the spell, what spell, what province and how much MRES it'll hurt. I've identified a possible bug in the script and mailed details of it to Gaz.


Chris.

Posted: Wed Jan 16, 2008 8:27 pm
by Ultyguy
From the game map it is pretty obvious that I was aggressive against SmashFace. I have no NAP with either member of CoN as I wouldn't agree to one that ended at the same time.

This will all likely come out soon enough so maybe I'll save some pain by posting here. Korexus has told me that the following information should be shown anyways.

You attempt to cast TREEHELL on province 53 owned by Nemesis.

Ulty