|
I have nothing helpful to contribute because I am a worthless piece of poo poo but I want to say that this all makes me very excited.
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2017 22:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 22:54 |
|
|
Put Johnny in
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2017 22:50
|
|
|
I can't really contribute but I'll happily provide moral support. I like the wide variety of guns and ammo, but I am a colossal weaponry sperg so I like the suggestion of keeping that as a mod and having only a few different guns/ammo types in the base game.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2017 23:09
|
|
|
Re: Consensus. Specifically gun, but everything else too. I think this can actually be done rather easily, by just finding a consensus on what will be in the basegame and what the mod. Kevin is an rear end in a top hat who does not seem to like the idea of giving players the choice. I think we should do it the exact opposite way. I personally love the gunsperging, but I totally see the idea behind making it easy. So the best solution would probably do the sperg part in a mod.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2017 23:47
|
|
|
i dont mind the gunsperging but (like everything else) the mechanics are obtuse as hellllllll tracking bullet dispersion in arcminutes is 
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2017 23:54
|
|
|
Michaellaneous posted:Re: Consensus. Specifically gun, but everything else too. That's basically what I was saying, though it could probably be better phrased as "first priority should be to codify a solid overall guiding philosophy and concrete goals and project structure for how future design decisions will be made (which does require consensus, so everyone is working on the same project and not fighting over their vision of how it should be) before getting bogged down in the coding logic behind any given set of mechanics that could be delegated for players/modders to tweak however they want" I mean, it's fine to put forth ideas for what features could be added/removed/tweaked, but those suggestions should be collected and held in reserve until someone has actually prepared a way to organize the discussion so even though there won't ever be a perfect consensus on whether bitcoins should be lethal to robots, at least there's a way to resolve the disagreement in a way that doesn't alienate people who are honestly trying to make the game better; just encourage them to make their own SR4 beating-furries-to-death-with-a-giant-purple-dildo sidequest mod rather than "lolno permabanned" public GDA googledoc posted:Goon Days Ahead II: The Fun Strikes Back I mean, that seems to be the way it's going but at some point it should probably be an explicitly stated goal that it isn't going to be any one person's project to control: it shouldn't just be anti-Kevin but designed to be inherently kevinoid-proof in the future, because if the project goes on for any length of time eventually the chief devs will get real jobs or have kids or whatever and pass the reins to someone else and that shouldn't be the thing that dooms it to being a dumb sperg wankfest like DDA currently is.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2017 00:51
|
|
|
My 2 cents, a good split like this would focus less on changing core gameplay, and more on creating content. Monsters, areas, maybe some cool stuff with the portals and mi-gos and poo poo? Just remember that fiddling with the core stuff and editing basic text values for weapons is what is already happening
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2017 01:08
|
|
|
Real glad to see something like this get going. Don't have any input of my own just yet, since it's been a while since I last played; I got turned off really hard by the whole dumb car gear business followed by all the gun nerfs. I will say though that I do like weapon (particularly gun) variety, and wouldn't mind seeing it put into a mod for the sake of making the game accessible-but I also like the idea mentioned about making the mechanics behind gun damage/accuracy more visible and easy to understand.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2017 01:14
|
|
|
What language is this written in? If it is one I know I might be able to help.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2017 06:31
|
|
|
Roadmap item: Make rubber hose into a tool instead of a special snowflake if/else if/etc behavior, and then let me craft a toolbox w/rubber hose.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2017 07:01
|
|
|
I feel I might have come off as a little too militant last night. There's nothing innately wrong with having a big selection of guns or whatever, the problem is that Cataclysm does a piss poor job of modelling and communicating the actual differences between them. I'm not opposed to having an 'extended/realistic guns' mod for people who enjoy gun porn. Those guns just need to be meaningfully balanced, too, and it's easier to work with 20 different guns than 200. More choice is always a good thing, but a choice between two identical things or a choice made without information about the consequences of said choice isn't really a choice at all. (Incidentally, this is one of the reasons the mutation system is strictly inferior to bionics, right now; you can't really design a build around random mutations, plus there's negative mutations to bite you on the rear end, while you know exactly what you'll get out of a CBM.)
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2017 08:04
|
|
|
I silently agreed with the idea of fewer, generic guns. Magazines for gun xyz that you don't have yet are inordinately valuable compared to their weight/volume and are also hilariously tedious in the inventory screen because they do not have a common prefix.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2017 08:19
|
|
|
turn it up TURN ME ON posted:What language is this written in? If it is one I know I might be able to help. c++
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2017 12:40
|
|
|
Work on the Design Document is going along nicely, and I will soon start to write everything together nicely into a proper one (or find goons who wanna do that). In coding news, I have created a step-by-step guide (With screenshots  ) to set up Visual Studio and CDDA to be ready for programming. It should be better than the garbage guide provided in their GitHub, hopefully.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2017 14:00
|
|
|
Well, since work is actually happening, I went ahead and made a fork of the repo for us to do whatever in. Link your github and stuff and I'll get you set up on the project. For actually contributing, I'd like to do this if we could: - All work should be done in branches, even 'trivial' things like updating the docs or whatever. Just name the branch whatever you're doing, so like "updating-docs" or whatever. - When the work is COMPLETE (not necessarily DONE, but the task is finished and it's presentable), issue a pull request to the Master branch. - Someone who's not you should then give the code a cursory look to make sure it doesn't look ridiculous in some way and merge the branch. This has a couple of benefits: - It's easy to see what's changing on task to task, or historically, what CHANGED on a specific task. - It spreads knowledge around a little bit so structurally we're less likely to have a Kevin who is able to do whatever they want by virtue of being the only person who knows how to do anything - It keeps us a bit more honest about how we go about doing stuff to hopefully make the project less of a trainwreck over time. I can help with the writing and organization of the design document - I've done Agile junk irl a lot in addition to my programming work, so I've got enough background to be able to do that without using my entire brain on it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2017 16:48
|
|
|
Is there a "how to do changes for idiots" guide for github? There's a lot of work that'll need to be done just in the .json and fiddling with github will be by far the most difficult hurdle for non-coder types.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2017 16:56
|
|
|
Good call. For this thread, right now, just use Git Extensions. It's a graphical interface for Git that makes interfacing with Github a lot easier. I'll be sure to add that when I start screwing around with project documentation.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2017 17:04
|
|
|
Coolguye posted:Well, since work is actually happening, I went ahead and made a fork of the repo for us to do whatever in. Link your github and stuff and I'll get you set up on the project. I was going to suggest can it be possible to have multiple, erm, superadmins of the repo? So that basically anyone can add stuff? It's not like DDA really suffers from being a little bit of a kitchen sink and the ultimate anti-kevin would seem to be to not let anyone have final say and work off consensus?
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2017 17:08
|
|
|
The basic way I had this plotted out in my head is that anyone who completes a nontrivial task (basically anything that shows they can get something done in C++) will get permissions to do code reviews and integrate changes, yeah - at least in the short term. Longer term we'll need some way for the major contributors to weigh in and stuff but for the immediate moment I'd say the primary task is making sure someone who's not me has decision-making power on project matters. I honestly haven't even played DDA in months because I've been so disillusioned about Kevin's leadership and the changes that have been happening so I'm absolutely clear on the fact that I'm insufficiently wise to make these decisions myself.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2017 17:16
|
|
|
mormonpartyboat posted:Is there a "how to do changes for idiots" guide for github? There's a lot of work that'll need to be done just in the .json and fiddling with github will be by far the most difficult hurdle for non-coder types. I put a guide for that in the document. 2, now actually. Michaellaneous fucked around with this message at 18:11 on Sep 14, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2017 18:09
|
|
|
So I wrote the text on the "about" page on the wiki (linked below). I can't code but, on occasion, I have a lovely turn of phrase. Let me know if there is any writing to be done. I'm also happy to be part of the discussion generally. http://en.cataclysmdda.com/pages/1/display
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2017 18:18
|
|
|
The grammatical error involving a rogue apostrophe is not mine however! That was edited in by an anonymous moron.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2017 18:21
|
|
|
Who said SA is dying? You guys are loving awesome and inspiring!
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 04:27
|
|
|
I might have to get in on this. I don't exactly have masses of C++ experience but I've done a little. At one point I made a bionic that let you charge your cyborg batteries from a car, as well as one that dosed you with vitamins. I never actually made a pull request for them though because while I got them working I couldn't be assed to balance the numbers and then I forgot all about it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 09:00
|
|
|
mormonpartyboat posted:Reliable Unreliability: Change the granularity of item condition to a 100.00% scale; 0% is when the item breaks, each 20% corresponds to an existing pip, with an item reinforcable up to 120%. Then change both damage and repair so you always take durability damage when the item is used, and always repair an amount based on relevant skills, and normalize them so there's no effective statistical change. So say right now your cudgel has a 5% chance to be damaged to chipped (down to 4/5 pips) by a swing - you have a 5% chance to take 20% damage. Instead your cudgel now takes 20%*5% = 1% per swing. Keep the performance plateaus the same (at every 20%) so you can use your cudgel for a while before it gets damaged, and the decision to repair your unexpectedly damaged item or not is shifted to how much condition do you want to bank up in case of emergency. Then similarly, say you have a 5% chance to repair, instead you're repairing 1% per attempt. Then get rid of the chance to damage the item when you're trying to repair it, because repairs should take time and resources and be annoying without breaking your things. Most importantly, this would make repairing something a lot more straightforward than the current low-odds crapshoot which just feels terrible. Tweaking the repair amount up or down or how much skills impact it is also a nice knob for game tuning, if you want to go full milsperg or just want a fun zombie slaughtering romp.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 09:33
|
|
|
If you guys get a patreon going, I could kick in financial support.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 09:47
|
|
|
Slime posted:I might have to get in on this. I don't exactly have masses of C++ experience but I've done a little. At one point I made a bionic that let you charge your cyborg batteries from a car, as well as one that dosed you with vitamins. I never actually made a pull request for them though because while I got them working I couldn't be assed to balance the numbers and then I forgot all about it. You can charge your bionics from any kind of car battery if you take it out, examine it, and 'E'at it. The functionality is there, but the way to get to it could sure be streamlined!
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 09:59
|
|
|
Turtlicious posted:If you guys get a patreon going, I could kick in financial support. Hahaha oh god please don't do that. In fact until some goon wrestles this project out of my hands, I will strictly forbid any kind of monetary donation. Go spend your dollars on a burger or something else. e: To elaborate on that a little bit; we have neither a leadership, nor do we keep track of who does what. So splitting the money would be a loving nightmare that I am not willing to put up with. Michaellaneous fucked around with this message at 10:41 on Sep 15, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 10:13
|
|
|
Unimpressed posted:Who said SA is dying? You guys are loving awesome and inspiring! Worst post/username combo ever.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 10:18
|
|
|
TBF didn't grenade just keep all the money himself, and then put up Code Bounty stuff out of pocket?
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 10:49
|
|
|
I just started playing again and I have to ask, what is even the point of zombie evolution? By day 3 I'm pretty sure the only special zombies I haven't seen are necromancers, hulks and some location specific ones. Also I remember why I stopped playing, there's so much busywork and about 1/2 my playtime has been traversing the great apocalypse that is Cataclysm's inventory/crafting UI. I hope one of the things GDA does is add some quality of life things. Here's just some stuff off the top of my head that would be nice to have: Getting rid of thirst probably a good idea, having 2 food clocks adds nothing but micromanagement. If I try to light a fire on a tile with nothing flammable, let me select a flammable object from my inventory. If I'm in a vehicle, my crafting range should extend to the entire vehicle as long as there aren't any hostile creatures in there too. Similarly, let me designate a home area with the same benefit as long as I keep hostiles out. Batch crafting should probably be the default, if I don't want to craft multiples I can just choose to craft 1. Have a quick stack option that takes everything in your inventory and dumps it in the surrounding tiles if there's already a stack of that item there. Have an option to disassemble all of a single item type rather than just one thing or everything. There's probably loads more that could be added but that's what I can think of after ~2 hours of playing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 12:06
|
|
|
Zombie evolution is a decent idea conceptually (it should encourage you to play in a less conservative way because you're worried about falling behind the curve, while simultaneously preventing normal running around cities from becoming totally safe) but it doesn't actually work that way in practice. I definitely agree that even with the balance and power curve for the game being wildly out of line, just adding QoL improvements to reduce time spent in menus etc. would be excellent.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 14:22
|
|
|
oh yeah one of my biggest pet peeves is starting at the beginning of spring maybe shift the starting date to midway through spring so characters don't get frostbite going outside without winter clothing (also i play 90 day seasons exclusively so it might be a bug related to that?)
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 14:26
|
|
|
Anticheese posted:You can charge your bionics from any kind of car battery if you take it out, examine it, and 'E'at it. The functionality is there, but the way to get to it could sure be streamlined! Actually there's a bionic for charging directly from cars now. It's pretty cool, you basically have a port on your hip you plug into with jumper cable leads on the far end. I found it in a game but never got a chance to use it before stupidly trying to take out a zombie grenadier. You only really need to fail at killing a C4 hack once before you're SoL. I'm glad to see this picking up. Maybe tomorrow when I'm off I'll find the time to write up some opinions and suggestions based on my recent runs through the latest master branch.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 15:14
|
|
|
Speaking of, can we take out like, zombie grenadiers, C4/nukehacks, all that from the default spawn lists? I feel like explosive weapons should be pretty much limited to the player and certain extremely rare boss-type monsters, not a random zombie. They're super cheap and near impossible for most characters to defend against. I started jotting down ideas to tweak the logic for (ranged) weapons and this is beginning to look like a total code overhaul. Who the gently caress tracks scatter in arcminutes?
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 16:25
|
|
|
zombie grenadiers ARE boss zombies imo, the problem is that they are not treated as such by the game's spawn procedures
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 16:45
|
|
|
Coolguye posted:zombie grenadiers ARE boss zombies imo, the problem is that they are not treated as such by the game's spawn procedures That's my point exactly. Also, I had to Google what the gently caress even is an arcminutes. It's 1/60 of a degree. Who the fucks tracks dispersion by arcminutes in a turn-based game - nerds. Nerds do. I'm going to refactor all the weights to slugs and slinches I swear to god, see how they like it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 16:49
|
|
|
Coolguye posted:zombie grenadiers ARE boss zombies imo, the problem is that they are not treated as such by the game's spawn procedures admit it, zombie grenadiers are only in the game because someone wanted to make a dynamite hack pun
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 16:50
|
|
|
Strudel Man posted:I have to say, as a personal thing, I really hate feeling that every single use of a weapon is a step towards using it up completely. Having occasional damage randomly strike, and which can be made vanishingly rare by having sufficient skill, feels a lot more bearable. More like an unfortunate occurrence than the relentless march of entropy. You could probably combine both concepts. Make weapon degradation a random chance to occur so you don't feel like every hit is just slowly chipping away at your weapon, but when weapon degradation DOES occur, it's in increments of like 2% rather than 20%, so you don't end up being a few bad rolls away from a full durability weapon just disintegrating in your hands.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 16:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 22:54 |
|
|
hrm. i'm actually curious how the og xcom handled dispersion. i doubt seriously that had any loving around with arcminutes or whatever, but it worked great for the most part and was quick enough for freaking 486 computers.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 17:49
|
|