Jump to content

Fire and Buildings.


Lion.Kanzen
 Share

Recommended Posts

best effect I think is on Ancestor Legacy (here at 9:22 for example)

 

Beside the really good fire effect, another element would be for the building to revert to its own skeleton structure, when it gets completely eaten by the fire. Any suggestion on how to make it? Maybe add a scaffolding as a prop in the "death" variation?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, I was experimenting a bit with fire / damage (only on an aesthetical level, not as "burning" mechanic), and I have a couple of feedbacks:

- The effect, while artisanal, is pretty good! Is very nice to see the damage progression that you inflict to the buildings and it really adds a layer of depth in the gameplay

- Flames and smoke are also a nice touch. It works well with rams too, without looking so "weird" as some people feared (that's my impression..) 

- - - - - - -  - However: 

- Rams are, as usual, too fast/strong in destroying buildings. It takes a couple of thrusts and any building already collapses. This is nothing new in the game but I always found it a bit "weird", because buildings seems super fragile with rams. While they should be a bit more "sturdy".

- I think the strength of rams comes from a gameplay necessity: it can't take too long to destroy a building for obvious reasons. But the mechanic comes off as weird and unrealistic

- - - - - - -  -  So I thought of a compromise:

- What if, instead of destroying buildings so fast, you just need to reach a critical point (25% of health?) and the building then is "de-activated" (gaia?). Fortress/towers won't shoot arrows and barracks can't be used to train soldiers. Then, only at this point, is possible to capture it. Or you have to repair it to regain functions. (or burn it mercilessly to the ground)

- I think that, by using visual cues of damage it could actually make sense to have this sort of distinction.

- This way, buildings can have more resistance to ram thrusts (more realistic), but at the same time this won't compromise the gameplay, as you don't need so much extra time to get a building and change the whole balancing during sieges.

- I think it could be both realistic and also it could be an alternative to the weird mechanic of conquer + demolish that I, among many, find annoying.

 

I don't know if it's the right place to discuss it. But I thought it may be relevant connected with visual improvements of damaged buildings. And also it could be integrated with the idea of "burning" the buildings (maybe after 25% of health the building health slowly depletes itself anyway?)

 

EDIT: attached a video of my experiments with building damage

 

Edited by Radiotraining
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Radiotraining said:

 

 

I don't know if it's the right place to discuss it. But I thought it may be relevant connected with visual improvements of damaged buildings. And also it could be integrated with the idea of "burning" the buildings (maybe after 25% of health the building health slowly depletes itself anyway?

There should be several types of damage to the structures.

 

Fire. — It could be that only ruins remain. But it is unusable.

Structural.— this damage is because it can collapse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Radiotraining said:

What if, instead of destroying buildings so fast, you just need to reach a critical point (25% of health?) and the building then is "de-activated" (gaia?)

One could try using the controllability (in cmpIdentity) of a structure for this, but I think there are still some caveats with that.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

the problem is the influence of territory.

Is not a problem, because you want to have that critical advantage during a siege. So is okay if the player would lose functionalities and territory when the building is attacked.

(Or maybe I understood the problem wrong?) 

My only concern was to not alter too much the current gameplay: if you have a turret, you want to knock it off rapidly with a ram. And that's okay. But maybe, by adding more layers to it, you can make the building more steady and resistant, so it takes another 25% to really demolish it to the ground. 

The reason would be mainly better realism. In addition, it could make the attack the primary choice of units (instead of the clunky conquering) and, as defender, you may have more chance to save a collapsing building by repairing it.

Edited by Radiotraining
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Radiotraining said:

Okay, I was experimenting a bit with fire / damage (only on an aesthetical level, not as "burning" mechanic), and I have a couple of feedbacks:

- The effect, while artisanal, is pretty good! Is very nice to see the damage progression that you inflict to the buildings and it really adds a layer of depth in the gameplay

- Flames and smoke are also a nice touch. It works well with rams too, without looking so "weird" as some people feared (that's my impression..) 

That sounds really nice, good job! However, it looks like the link to the video of the experiments is broken, could you update that please?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Nullus said:

That sounds really nice, good job! However, it looks like the link to the video of the experiments is broken, could you update that please?

True! It was working just fine on my laptop but from the phone I have issues. But I thought it was only me. 

Maybe is the .mov format.. I'll convert and post it again! 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Nullus said:

It looks very nice! Do you know if there is a way to cause the fire animation to only be triggered by certain attacks, e.g. flaming arrows?

Eh, you're asking too much from me! :P I'm only exploiting the functionalities available, but I wouldn't know at such deeper level. As I'm aware no, there isn't a functionality to distinguish types of attack > different damage and it would require some re-coding of some mechanics, I guess. 

We can leave the fire aside, if too unrealistic. I get it is a bit random, but to me it doesn't looks too bad. It looks like a structural failure of the building when it comes from inside. 

> Maybe someone inside has left the gas open in the hurry of defending the building :P

Edited by Radiotraining
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Radiotraining said:

The reason would be mainly better realism. In addition, it could make the attack the primary choice of units (instead of the clunky conquering) and, as defender, you may have more chance to save a collapsing building by repairing it.

That remind me... there should be more technologies to repair buildings.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Radiotraining said:

Eh, you're asking too much from me! :P I'm only exploiting the functionalities available, but I wouldn't know at such deeper level. As I'm aware no, there isn't a functionality to distinguish types of attack > different damage and it would require some re-coding of some mechanics, I guess. 

We can leave the fire aside, if too unrealistic. I get it is a bit random, but to me it doesn't looks too bad. It looks like a structural failure of the building when it comes from inside. 

> Maybe someone inside has left the gas open in the hurry of defending the building :P

Our programmers can give us some hints.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

Our programmers can give us some hints.

I'm sure! but, another issue is how to implement it: it's already a bit of an hassle, and it would require double the work for each building to assign a a different response each time to different attacks, so i would go with a solution that can be standard (with fire? no fire? only smoke? only demolishion..?) and leave this a little bit as a secondary priority, at least for now! ;)

But hey! Obviously if some of the programmers have suggestions or want to collaborate closely, I welcome that! :) it would make everything much easier anyway!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To do a really -really- good job, the best thing would be to have animations with physics. So you see actual pieces falling down etc..

But this is a bit beyond my skills/knowledge at the moment and again, it requires some serious dedicated work. So I would opt for simple solutions that can implemented more easily. The texture degradation is one of those! :)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Radiotraining said:

I'm sure! but, another issue is how to implement it: it's already a bit of an hassle, and it would require double the work for each building to assign a a different response each time to different attacks, so i would go with a solution that can be standard (with fire? no fire? only smoke? only demolishion..?) and leave this a little bit as a secondary priority, at least for now! ;)

But hey! Obviously if some of the programmers have suggestions or want to collaborate closely, I welcome that! :) it would make everything much easier anyway!

you need always start with the standard to go the specific.

 

You start with small buildings. Those of phase 1 civilians-economic.

many  of them are similar in size.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Radiotraining said:

But this is a bit beyond my skills/knowledge at the moment and again, it requires some serious dedicated work. So I would opt for simple solutions that can implemented more easily. The texture degradation is one of those! :)

 

For structural dame I have ideas.

 

Some inspiration. it can be done to full texture.

 

 

I'm not asking for  full realistic that bring the buildings broken into particles.

 

With only deterioration textures, you get the idea when you see it.

Edited by Lion.Kanzen
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speaking of destruction, I got a curiosity on something I've seen on DE @wowgetoffyourcellphone : i noticed since the first time I played that the primary choice of units is for attack and not conquering as in Vanilla. How you did that? 

I actually tried to look a bit into the files, but couldn't understand much from the JavaScript jargon :P ahaha i didn't know where to put my hands

 

Well, anyway, I think that this discussion around fire, hell and destruction could make better sense if the attack mode is privileged over the conquest

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Radiotraining said:

Speaking of destruction, I got a curiosity on something I've seen on DE @wowgetoffyourcellphone : i noticed since the first time I played that the primary choice of units is for attack and not conquering as in Vanilla. How you did that? 

I actually tried to look a bit into the files, but couldn't understand much from the JavaScript jargon :P ahaha i didn't know where to put my hands

 

Well, anyway, I think that this discussion around fire, hell and destruction could make better sense if the attack mode is privileged over the conquest

I don't remember, I think it was a setting in the templates files.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...