Large Units in grid based game
Posted 09 March 2012 - 03:06 AM
Examples of game with single tile large units:
Dwarf Fortress (Bronze colossus and other megabeasts)
Advanced Wars (NeoTanks, Battleships)
And like 90% of strategy games
Examples of games with Multi-tile large units:
X-com (Terror Units)
Dwarf fortress (wagons, ballistas (I think, who uses them lol))
Fire emblem (Multi-headed dragons)
The pros of a single tile large units are ease of coding since you don't have weird pathfinding and bugs (mind controlled Terror Units in X-Com attacking their own feet) to work around, the con is it looks really stupid having a 25x25 pixie next to a 25x25 Ancient Dragon.
What would you choose, and what suggestions would you give for working with either choice?
Posted 09 March 2012 - 04:27 AM
From a player point of view, I'd prefer bigger units take up more tiles. I've played a lot of Advanced Wars and I always thought it'd be cool to have paths through the mountains only the smaller units could get through. It would add much more strategy to the game and prevent using a megatank as a blockade in narrow passages. It would also ease "swarming."
One thing to take into account is how big your average map size will be. If it won't be larger than 10x10, ask yourself if the bigger units have a reason for being bigger other than "a dragon should look bigger than a pixie." If not, don't do it. If so, I think it would be awesome.
Posted 09 March 2012 - 05:38 AM
Edited by greep, 09 March 2012 - 06:07 AM.
Posted 14 March 2012 - 01:37 AM
Consider Front Mission. The Raven had a large sprite in all of its forms but still took up a single tile. I can't remember how Gloster and Clinton were handled (maybe they took up a 2x2 grid). And I've seen some games make the large enemy take up a 3x3 grid but really they took up a 1x1 grid and you could stand on the enemy. I think Shining Force let you actually stand on/under Dark Dragon's heads.
Posted 14 March 2012 - 01:59 AM
Edited by greep, 14 March 2012 - 04:53 AM.
Posted 20 March 2012 - 01:32 PM
Posted 20 March 2012 - 03:26 PM
For example, in X-Com, accuracy plays an important role. When you're shooting at enemies, enemies which take up more tiles are easier to hit.
However there is no such distinction in Advance Wars, where size of enemies is purely visual and has no direct gameplay consequences; they're usually more powerful, but that is immaterial.
So to answer your question, it depends on the game.
Posted 20 March 2012 - 05:41 PM
Posted 20 March 2012 - 07:04 PM
To Geos: I think I'm going to stick with multi-tile even for visual effects, as one of the posters earlier said that a large world would benefit from it a lot. Dungeons will probably have none, though.
Posted 22 March 2012 - 12:12 PM
You misinterpret'd me. What I meant was, if you shoot one of these "labels", the label wouldn't be damaged; it would apply the effects of the attack to the "main" enemy. Also if you selected one of the labels and brought up the Status screen you'd see the HP/MP of the main enemy, and so on. So basically, you can position yourself so that you can hit only part of the enemy just to be able to stay outta its range, that should be the main reason to make them so big, right?
As for attack redirecting, I think this could work, but what if you have a ranged attack that allows it to hit a foot but the redirect tile is out of range?
This made me remember a scene from Disgaea 1, btw:
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users