151 replies to this topic

[tabc3dd]

Bug(1) Clarification: When I'm trying to build something say from a relay and say I'm trying to build a turret. Well when the turret button is over say a collector and I click the turret button, it favors the collector and opens the collector's build menu rather than selecting the turret to be built. So make it so that the click is favored for menu items *if* there are more than one click available. Meaning, don't disable other clicks until the player closes the menu. =P
New version : on click of button, if instance_number(oBuilding_To_Place) = 1, exit. Should work.


Minor Change (2) Response: All you need is to bring up the hangar screen while pausing the game and then resume the game when the player clicks a button. My guess is you're using rooms. If you were to recreate the hangar to be shown by a controller object, you could bring it up regardless of where you are. This would also be nice in the campaign if you were to create some ships, change the blueprints and then create a different ship. (Yes I realize there are 6 ship cores, but the point is to let the player adapt to the situation as it develops)
But how could i save the state of the room and then return to it ? I'll have a look. However, that would totally go against the multiple core idea, which is to prepare a ship for most situations. I mean, only one core would be necessary for all your ships, and you'd end up with a ''stack all parts on a ship'' type of strategy, which i don't appreciate. To be honest, i don't really like the idea. I'll play with it, get feedback, but i'm not sure i'll implement it.

Minor Change/Question 5) Another thing I thought of is... When the player destroys an enemy's relay station, does it affect the enemy's buildings that were connected to it? Along this line, there's a bug when this happens. The enemy's buildings that were connected to the relay station (now no longer existing) have their building connection lines shoot to (0,0) coordinate. A simple check whether they have a connection to a relay or home base before drawing the line would solve this.
Buildings connected will not longer get energy. Building requiring energy are : Turrets, collectors and repairs. Others only drain energy, but can survive without. The buildings used to check, but then i passed all building drawing line event to an ''obj_Underlay'' so that it drew under all, and i only had to set the alpha once. Problem is, i forgot to the the verification with the new object ( i think i did it for your building though, so they can destroy your relays without causing the bug).

Addition (3) Clarification: I'm glad you have at least that group assign/select feature implemented. One that would be nice is this: If there is no selection, Shift+1-6 selects all of a ship type. If there is a selection of ships, Shift+1-6 selects all of that ship type *within* the current selection of ships. This would help with strategy way more than the group assign/select feature.
Sure, will be done.

See bold .

[celestes9artiste]

Minor Change (2) Response: I've actually played both ways. Stacking all parts on one core or building unique ships. In skirmish mode (playing as the Support style) it doesn't work to stack all parts on one core because I end up having to build relay stations with turrets to take out enemy buildings because most of my parts are energy draining and take up too much energy for my destructive parts (cannons etc) to be used. Actually, that presents another idea. What if you were to make a way to let the player assign energy priorities towards certain ship parts? So like if there's an energy shortage, which part should get the energy, instead of having that be automated.

Edited by celestes9artiste, 08 October 2010 - 07:17 PM.

[tabc3dd]

Minor Change (2) Response: I've actually played both ways. Stacking all parts on one core or building unique ships. In skirmish mode (playing as the Support style) it doesn't work to stack all parts on one core because I end up having to build relay stations with turrets to take out enemy buildings because most of my parts are energy draining and take up too much energy for my destructive parts (cannons etc) to be used. Actually, that presents another idea. What if you were to make a way to let the player assign energy priorities towards certain ship parts? So like if there's an energy shortage, which part should get the energy, instead of having that be automated.

Well, i could. Problem is, some people already find the game too complicated. Not to mention, having to do that would mean having an extra check on all weapon fire, which would cause a bit of lag for only a small benefit.

Anyways, i don't see why the energy draining parts are the one taking up too much energy.After all, they are your only source of energy as Support. Both offensive and defensive start with a Regenerator, while Support drains their energy from the opponent. Maybe you are speaking about the shield draining parts ?

If you skipped the tutorial, you can destroy the parts you don't like in the vortex to get upgrade points.

Btw, as support, there is a very fun strategy. Upgrade your Leech ASAP, and then put them on your opponent's relays. They'll drain all the energy out of the relays and prevent the enemy from building or gaining ressources ^^.

[walkingbush]

Dude... Epic, and I mean EPIC starting cinematic thing. That was my first bit.Second, The problem with the buttons still remains, where you will click on th building under the button.Third, At some points I found the info screen to be in the way. If the button were near the bottom of the screen, the info would block out my view completely, which is a nuisance.Fourth, this game is incredible, and you are skilled.I dunno if its just me, but the AI is almost too good (at least in skirmish). I mean, he will have half the map covered in money nodes and Ill be like WTF you piece of crap where are you getting all these ships?!?!

[tabc3dd]

Dude... Epic, and I mean EPIC starting cinematic thing. That was my first bit.Second, The problem with the buttons still remains, where you will click on th building under the button.Third, At some points I found the info screen to be in the way. If the button were near the bottom of the screen, the info would block out my view completely, which is a nuisance.Fourth, this game is incredible, and you are skilled.I dunno if its just me, but the AI is almost too good (at least in skirmish). I mean, he will have half the map covered in money nodes and Ill be like WTF you piece of crap where are you getting all these ships?!?!

Lol thanks ^^.

Ye, all the problems you brought up were already on the list, and if the button bug hasn't been solved, it's because the new version isn't up yet . New version coming up in about a day.


Edit : New small version. Many minor problems have been fixed. Greater things, like the shop, will be implemented much later as they mess up all the current system.

Edited by tabc3dd, 11 October 2010 - 03:41 PM.

[gmx0]

You do know that Battleships Forever was made with Game Maker?

[tabc3dd]

You do know that Battleships Forever was made with Game Maker?

Yes, i know.

Your point ?


BTW, your RTS is not bad too.

Edited by tabc3dd, 12 October 2010 - 04:30 PM.

[tabc3dd]

Ok, new version with a massive change :
-The Shop is out. Depending on your playstyle, you can now buy any part for 150-200 credits.
-Upgrade points have been removed, upgrades now cost 400 credits.
-For simplicity's sake, upgrading a part is now an option in the information menu of any part ("I").
-Buildings sellable.
-Many glitch fixes and minor updates.


EDIT : BTW, i really need feedback on what to do next. Currently experiencing a "developer's valley" and i'm extremely unmotivated to keep working on this project, so i'll need all the information on what to do next i can get.

Thanks all ^^

Edited by tabc3dd, 14 October 2010 - 06:14 PM.

[Marchal_Mig12]

It looks way too much like Battleship Forever to me

[walkingbush]

So first what do you got? For example you have that skirmish mode. Okay so we take this skirmish mode and create scenarios. Some situation that you must command your forces to victory in. It could be much more interesting than plain old skirmish.

I haven't played battleships forever but what is similar about the two games?

[tabc3dd]

So first what do you got? For example you have that skirmish mode. Okay so we take this skirmish mode and create scenarios. Some situation that you must command your forces to victory in. It could be much more interesting than plain old skirmish.

I haven't played battleships forever but what is similar about the two games?

But wouldnt creating scenarios be kind of like playing missions ? I will try to see if i can't put some objectives though.

What is similar between Battleships Forever and Final Core :
- Ships shooting at each other.
- Parts of ships can be destroyed.
- The main menu glowing buttons and ship fighting each other in the main menu.( Although i had that idea first XD, theres a very old game i created with that concept ^^.)
- The initial color scheme : green-red . (But can that even count, i mean , how many games have that color scheme ? Anyways, you can change it, so whatever.)

What is different between Battleship Forever and Final Core :
- FC is an RTS, BSF is an RTT.
- FC has buildings you can create.
- FC has multiple ressource management, BSF has none.
- Ship building is a core part of FC, ships in BSF are prebuilt.
- FC is more comprehensible then BSF. ( Come on, who knows what weapons do in BSF ?)
- FC is optimized, BSF isn't .(You can lag in BSF in the intro screen, or with only 4 ships, with all settings at minimum. You can't lag in FC with 40 on 40 battles with normal settings.)
- FC has a much greater variety of parts, and you can upgrade them.
- FC has achievements and many Boss missions (Kind of like the huge enemy base mode in BSF, but with 13 others too.).

- BSF has awesome graphics whereas FC has low-medium graphics.
- BSF have 2 exclusif modes that aren't in FC (Survive for as long as possible // Harass a trade line).
- BSF also have parts that do nothing but build the ship, making them look much better then ships in FC. BSF has a huge amount of these parts, allowing you to build awesome ships.

- The setting is different (FC : Virtual world / BSF : Space )



I'm probably biased, or missed some things, so please point out what is wrong with my list.

Edited by tabc3dd, 16 October 2010 - 11:48 AM.

[walkingbush]

Kinda? I mean, scenarios are when there is like a halfway fought battle that you are taking over. (You have only three money thingies and a ship builder, and you cant build any more buildings. Win the fight.) Missions have objectives. (Get the orb and return it to the base.) You should have both You could indeed combine the two for max awesomeness. Its up to you.

By the way to all you haters, ship-building is an interesting concept, and will no doubt be available in many games, GM, Indie, Mainstream (Spore anyone?) So how about we make this game BETTER (or more original if it bugs you so much) than writing it off as a copycat?

[Marchal_Mig12]

You can build ships in BSF as well... and I don't know what you are talking about when you,re saying BSF is unoptimised. It is very well optimised. Anyways, I feel like you could've have done a lot more with that game to distinguish it from BSF. I do not particularly like BSF's menu and so I don't like yours as well. Maybe you could innovate again and create something new?

[tabc3dd]

You can build ships in BSF as well... and I don't know what you are talking about when you,re saying BSF is unoptimised. It is very well optimised. Anyways, I feel like you could've have done a lot more with that game to distinguish it from BSF. I do not particularly like BSF's menu and so I don't like yours as well. Maybe you could innovate again and create something new?

Exactly, emphasize on "You can" . Ship building has nothing to do with the mainstream game, it's only a side option. You cannot play any of the story with personal ships.

BSF IS unoptimized, no question on that . Look at all online videos of the game, you'll see major lag (not caused by the recording system, or very partly). And as i told you, i can barely play the game due to incredible lag with a pitiful amount of units. If you manage to make my game lag, then hats off to you ^^. How can you even say BSF is very well optimized ?

And when you say i could have done a lot more to distinguish both games, why don't you give examples ? Any help is vastly appreciated.


TBH, i like my menu, so unless i get more negative feedback, i'll keep it.

Thanks !


@Walkingbush : Nice, i didn't know the distinction between scenarios and missions. But are you allowed to build more buildings in scenarios, are do you start with a predefined base that you cannot modify during the match ?


Edit : New version is up. The usual bug fixes and optimization.

2 new fun gimmicks :
-Press S and type 'Circle' (with the capital C) with some units selected. They will move into a circle formation, aiming outside. Now imagine your units have strong frontal shields, you get a turtle strategy XD!
-New button, on the left of achievements, named "Bonus Modes" . I plan on having an RPG mode, and Arcade mode, a Puzzle mode, a Shooter mode and a Simulation mode. Currently, the Shooter mode is technically ready. Press "Shooter", choose the number of the ship you want to play, and then move around with WASD, mouse to aim and fire. Survive as long as you can against enemies.

Thats right, this game is also a TDS !

btw, i might make the TDS part of this game multiplayer. Imagine tons of custom made ships fighting off in a huge arena ^^.

Edited by tabc3dd, 17 October 2010 - 03:39 PM.

[tabc3dd]

Ok, new version:

-As always, a good amount of optimization. Here, mainly removing useless parts, optimizing shields, not counting Interceptor shots as projectiles, and a huge amount of improvements on building ships.

-Solved many minor bugs.

- Solved a major bug : All parts in the Hangar that aren't used used to jump to the mouse's position, so you could potentially block enemy shots by mousing over them, and get your hangar parts destroyed.

-Solved a major bug : All parts in the Hangar that are used used to jump to the 0,0 position, making them destructible by stray shots.

Both these issues have been solved by forcing these parts out of the screen.

-Improved all the enemies ship to be more compact. If you believe they are too compact and it looks messy, tell me.

-New gimmick : Press C in the Editor screen and then choose a number to load an enemy's ship design.

- Removed a couple of message boxes.

- Other small improvements and mission updates.

[gmx0]

Tried it. The first cinematic seemed too much since lots of red ships just appeared. Also, make the game save only ship designs, not ally or enemy, and convert it to an ally or enemy after you load.

[tabc3dd]

Tried it. The first cinematic seemed too much since lots of red ships just appeared. Also, make the game save only ship designs, not ally or enemy, and convert it to an ally or enemy after you load.

What do you mean by "too much" ? Is it too complicated ? Too exaggerated ?

As for saving only as a design and converting after, i can try, but currently all my attempts have failed or have some possible glitches. And to load them in the test room, i'd have to introduce a new option. But you are right, it would open possibilities and simplify the user's life. Thanks for the input.


Thanks alot for pushing me in that direction, the system now works, and it has allowed me to simplify and improve my Editor and Test mode.

Edited by tabc3dd, 12 July 2012 - 09:31 PM.

[walkingbush]

Well, I like the idea of scenarios mainly because I can create some sort of backstory. For example, there is a base, and a few turrets, and a couple ships, and you gotta survive for 5 mins. BLAND. But what if, there is a valuable outpost whose signal is being jammed by an attacking enemy fleet. Scouts pick up the blip on their sensors and run to back up the base, and have radioed HQ, who sent backup. The reinforcements are 5 minutes away though, and the enemy fleet is closing fast. All you have is the two turrets left with the base, along with three scout ships.
That might not be the easiest or most practical scenario, but a fine example. Missions normally tie into some larger storyline that you are progressing, as in a campaign. Scenarios stand alone

Yeah not sure wether or not you still care about that, but that is something to do with your game.

Edited by walkingbush, 24 August 2011 - 04:41 PM.

[tabc3dd]

Well, I like the idea of scenarios mainly because I can create some sort of backstory. For example, there is a base, and a few turrets, and a couple ships, and you gotta survive for 5 mins. BALND. BUt what if, there is a valuable outpost whose signal is being jammed by an attacking enemy fleet. Scouts pick up the blip on their sensors and run to back up the base, and have radioed HQ, who sent backup. The reinforcements are 5 minutes away though, and the enemy fleet is closing fast. All you have is the two turrets left with the base, along with three scout ships.
That might not be the easiest or most practical scenario, but a fine example. Missions normally tie into some larger storyline that you are progressing, as in a campaign. Scenarios stand alone

Yeah not sure wether or not you still care about that, but that is something to do with your game.

Sorry bout that, was off the screen for some time.

I'm planning on removing free play, and changing it into skirmishes. One of the skirmishes will be simulation ( the equivalent of free play), and then i'll add some more, such as what you proposed. However, i'm currently concentrating on polishing the campaign.

Since last post, new versions have been made and are up.

Thanks all.

[tabc3dd]

New version, separated myself from BSF some more, simplified stuff, added upgrades to some buildings, improved missions, solved some bugs, optimized. The usual stuff .

Have fun ^^!