|
Just saying, I appreciate your answers to all my questions in the previous thread about the gameplay, and you should really do a writeup on the battle system and a video or series of pictures showing how it works. I can't say I speak for everyone here but I for one am unlikely to even consider pre-ordering a game without first seeing a working prototype. As a potential video game-buying customer, I agree with jizzy sillage's analysis of your reply to reiterpallasch's questions. They way you have answered them is extremely defensive, gives little information, and makes me suspicious of your ability as a development company to actually produce and release a complete, enjoyable product. There is a 90s tactical combat game called Shadow Watch that has a vaguely similar interrupt/conterattack system to yours: you can assign unused action points to shooting at enemies that enter your line of sight, during their turn. If the enemy takes a path towards you that avoids your line of sight, they can attack safely without interruption. While it was overall a fun game, it did skew the game balance vastly in favour of the defender because it was easy to ensure a stealthy approach was impossible. Crazy Achmed fucked around with this message at 13:03 on Jan 6, 2017 |
#
¿
Jan 6, 2017 12:57
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 6, 2024 22:24 |
|
|
Saint Isaias Boner posted:xcom did the same thing. Reaction fire isn't a new mechanic. Yep, you are totally correct. I mention shadow watch as it's a particularly extreme example of this leading to half-baked gameplay: the player characters (and enemies alike) had relatively few hit points - you could only take two or three bullets before being very dead - and because of this it was almost impossible to enter a room with just a couple of guards watching the doors. Most maps were best handled by finding a way to manipulate the enemy AI to come to you, or finding a way to operate extremely stealthily. I'm wondering if the OP will comment on how their system will avoid this kind of gameplay problem.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2017 13:11
|
|
|
Thanks for tellng us more about the battle system. Will the player's success depend heavily upon the stealth elements, or is that more of just a nice bonus? Also, is there much of a reliance on character stats versus their equipment, and if so is there a mechanism to let players 'grind' to level up between major battles? Also, is that a sketch of Armandine threatening her captor with a sword? I wasn't aware that two-handed swords were still in use during the French revolution - and nobody trained in fencing would ever two-hand a one-handed weapon like an infantry sabre/spadroon/etc. They also wouldn't be standing with their body squared towared their opponent... unless she's got her hands on a Japanese katana somehow and is also skilled with that?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2017 12:53
|
|
|
hyperdevbox posted:That's a very good observation! But I'm sorry to disappoint you, as Golden Goat said, it's a stick!
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2017 11:34
|
|
|
Reiterpallasch posted:
 In all honesty though, tactical RPGs are fun and a ragtag band of misfits against a backdrop of the french revolution is an interesting setting. There's just, well, not much more to say about the game other than nitpicking fencing-related stuff until we see a working prototype. Crazy Achmed fucked around with this message at 13:04 on Jan 15, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jan 15, 2017 13:01
|
|