Stop making content. Make good engine

[Reaper]

And i have a question. It’s (!) SURVIVAL game right? Why i don’t have hardcore survival? Now it hard to die in wildness. Just make longbow. Permadeath from zombear for zoose - it’s not survive - it stupid permadeath. Death after day from get infection - too. Why i can’t cut infected limb and/or become cripple, then make hand/leg-crutch/install bionic leg/arm? Cataclysm become easy. They don’t want my death. How long, devs?
I can kill with throw rock, but can’t kill in melee. It’s bullshit. Where is balance?
For why so much food recipes for hotdog or something else, if you may do flags “can stew” “can boil” “powdered” etc and just write/remove prefix/ inc/dec nut./quench / become liquid? Really need only few recipes: “stew”, “boil”, “rehydrate”, “salt”, “add sugar” may be “dry” instead so much. Sugar+fruit/berries+boil = fruit jam fruit + Sugar = fruit with sugar. Any boiled plant food with sugar in container - brew. After rotting brew may distill and get potato/apple/berries moonshine. Stewed salted/boiled meat without special recipe for it and more other.
Why you don’t want this way? You make much profession why you not make generator/creator for it? Stop making content. Do environment for content. You make much new monsters instead just do monster editor and system to plug in/plug off him in game. You may do functionality plugins yes. You may write modular code (getters, setters, don’t modify public fields). You may do develop easy and fast. Why you don’t do it?

[Zireael]

I agree that flags for food are a good idea.
Cutting off infected arm/leg is a good idea too.

And pls change thread title. “I have some questions” is not informative. “Cut off arm/leg and flag for food” is better.

[Hague]

Well, how about the ability to set spears and other polearms for charges from large creatures? To set a polearm, activate it while you’re wielding it. It will prompt you for a direction. The first creature to step into that tile gets preemptively struck with your polearm. A to-hit bonus based on the size and fearlessness of the creature and a damage bonus based on size and speed of the same. Fearless and frenzied creatures would be less cautious about your spear and as such are much more likely to be struck by it (impaling themselves) Fast and heavy creatures will take more damage as their weight and movement speed contribute to them impaling themselves. Moving with your spear set cancels it. You take a dodge penalty while in this stance as your movement is restricted (crouching, grasping the spear, bracing it against the ground or in a small divot) Single, large, raging and/or fearless animals are therefore the most ideal targets for a set polearm. If you’re being swarmed, it’s less ideal but it can be a saving grace for melee users in combat against very fast creatures like the Jabberwock.

[Arek_PL]

cutting off arms and other were sugested some time ago but impaling enemy on spear is good idea

[FunsizeNinja123]

[quote=“Hague, post:3, topic:6607”]Well, how about the ability to set spears and other polearms for charges from large creatures? To set a polearm, activate it while you’re wielding it. It will prompt you for a direction. The first creature to step into that tile gets preemptively struck with your polearm. A to-hit bonus based on the size and fearlessness of the creature and a damage bonus based on size and speed of the same. Fearless and frenzied creatures would be less cautious about your spear and as such are much more likely to be struck by it (impaling themselves) Fast and heavy creatures will take more damage as their weight and movement speed contribute to them impaling themselves. Moving with your spear set cancels it. You take a dodge penalty while in this stance as your movement is restricted (crouching, grasping the spear, bracing it against the ground or in a small divot) Single, large, raging and/or fearless animals are therefore the most ideal targets for a set polearm.[/quote][quote=“Hague”]Well, how about the ability to set spears and other polearms for charges from large creatures?

To set a polearm, activate it while you’re wielding it. It will prompt you for a direction. The first creature to step into that tile gets preemptively struck with your polearm. A to-hit bonus based on the size and fearlessness of the creature and a damage bonus based on size and speed of the same. Fearless and frenzied creatures would be less cautious about your spear and as such are much more likely to be struck by it (impaling themselves) Fast and heavy creatures will take more damage as their weight and movement speed contribute to them impaling themselves. Moving with your spear set cancels it. You take a dodge penalty while in this stance as your movement is restricted (crouching, grasping the spear, bracing it against the ground or in a small divot) Single, large, raging and/or fearless animals are therefore the most ideal targets for a set polearm. If you’re being swarmed, it’s less ideal but it can be a saving grace for melee users in combat against very fast creatures like the Jabberwock.[/quote]Hague wtf

[KA101]

Hey, Reaper.

I’m sorry that you’re not feelin’ the hardcore survival vibe.

Unfortunately, that’s not the only type of game DDA aims to be. I can accept lost-limbs, and a substantial amount of the playerbase would probably find that Groovy.

DDA includes survival elements but is not intended to be purely a survival game. You might take a look at the design doc, if you haven’t already.

[Hague]

Oops, removed my double-post.

[Reaper]

[quote=“Zireael, post:2, topic:6607”]I agree that flags for food are a good idea.
Cutting off infected arm/leg is a good idea too.
And pls change thread title. “I have some questions” is not informative. “Cut off arm/leg and flag for food” is better.[/quote]
I talk not about it. I talk about develop way.
I want modular code. Modular UI, NPC, health system, fight system, etc. And possibility of many implementation of all this.

[ShinQuickMan]

I suspect those are several good reasons as to why some devs are hard at work with refactoring Whales’ jumbled code; after all, it really wouldn’t make much sense to implement such things if you’d have to rewrite it all over again anyway.

But don’t quote me on that, though; I’ve little clue on the actual inner workings when it comes to this game’s development.

[kevin.granade]

I think you’re asking that we continue to refactor the code, which we’re doing, and continue to make the code more modular, which we’re doing, and continue to add more interesting mechanics, which we’re doing.

Where it runs into problems is the, “stop making content” part. Due to the way items and such are defined, it’s not really taking that much dev time to handle it. Halting content creation wouldn’t significantly accelerate the rest of development, since the people who are interested and capable of doing heavy-duty refactoring and modularization are doing so, and not working much if at all on content.

As for the streamlined and procedural food system you’re proposing, the setting of the game is contemporary, having specific food, recipes, etc instead of genericised versions of the same is part of the setting. People can feel free to develop a set of alternate items that are generic, and we’d support swapping them out, but the current reality-based items are what we want for the core game.

I don’t really follow about the monsters, do you mean go with procedural generation for those as well? If you have a more specific concept in mind than “generate them”, I’m all ears, but it’s not as simple as randomizing their stats.

[Reaper]

I think you’re asking that we continue to refactor the code, which we’re doing, and continue to make the code more modular, which we’re doing, and continue to add more interesting mechanics, which we’re doing…

It’s excellent. I saw you do json saves. But i need more.

but the current reality-based items are what we want for the core game.

Ok. If i don't want see energy Weapons i use "No energy Weapons mod" for example or any self build mod. If someone add new energy gun i need rewrite my mod after game update. Better way is "No energy weapons mod" but just "Energy weapon mod". Can do mosters packs "Zombie animals" "Classic zombies" "Zombies with ranged attacks" "Zombie dogs" "Medieval zombies" etc. You lump all together. You should not do it. You need to use unix way. Also with mechanics. And i have questions: 1. If i write horde/running/something else as switchable module do you include it in main code? 2. How do you want these modules look?

I want this game looked like linux.

[Weyrling]

You come off pretty demanding, if you really think the game needs a better engine, you should start working on improving it yourself, most of the development on CDDA is by people doing work for free, you can’t really ask for more unless you plan to pay them yourself.

While starting with nothing and applying everything through modules is technically a very straightforward method of creating and maintaining a program or game, that isn’t necessarily a good enough reason to make the entire game a foundation with a bunch of modular pieces.

Cataclysm does have a story, in that story people had teleporters, energy weapons, cybernetics, and mutations. There are now zombies, and some of them have mutated to give off clouds of smoke, or spit acid, or smash through walls, these are all part of the ‘vanilla’ game.
Mods are (usually) specific modifications to the original, which is why there’s a “No Energy Weapons” mod, and not an “Energy Weapons Mod”.

[Paquito]

[quote=“Kevin Granade, post:10, topic:6607”]I think you’re asking that we continue to refactor the code, which we’re doing, and continue to make the code more modular, which we’re doing, and continue to add more interesting mechanics, which we’re doing…

It’s excellent. I saw you do json saves. But i need more.[/quote]

There’s a guy in my management chain who’s idea of management is hearing a time-estimate, and then asking "What would it take to have this dome in [time-estimate/2]. Then he pushes hard for getting the project done in that “half the time” estimate. It’s eye-roll inducing.

[Reaper]

There are now zombies, and some of them have mutated to give off clouds of smoke, or spit acid, or smash through walls, these are all part of the ‘vanilla’ game.

In some time zombies with clouds of smoke and zombears not be part of ‘vanilla’ game. Better if everyone decides that it is necessary, but not when they decide for him.

You come off pretty demanding, if you really think the game needs a better engine, you should start working on improving it yourself

..and get full incompatibility with main repo. You really think "it good idea"?

I need a road map from devs for refactoring. I don’t know what code architecture they want. This road map they should do because they is project owners. “Make good engine” means organization of the task in first. If different people make one task without consent - they don’t do good work.

[Obscure]

I need a road map from devs for refactoring. I don’t know what code architecture they want. This road map they should do because they is project owners. “Make good engine” means organization of the task in first. If different people make one task without consent - they don’t do good work.

I think there is a road map, and as was pointed out, the things you are demanding are being done. this may not be ideal, but these guys are VOLUNTEERS. don’t expect a shiny and clean plan and results to your expectations. if it wasn’t for these guys, this game would not be in it’s current state, which is quite a bit better than it was when they started.

If you think what they need is a more concise plan, work with the devs and MAKE ONE. these guys need people to help them, so instead of complaining about where they are lacking, help them.

[Weyrling]

If you think what they need is a more concise plan, work with the devs and MAKE ONE. these guys need people to help them, so instead of complaining about where they are lacking, help them.

This is the main gist of what I was trying to say, CDDA development isn’t some kind of exclusive club, anybody can volunteer and help out.
Also, if something needs to be collaborated between all of the main developers then it’s probably best to discuss it on IRC or Github instead of here.

In any case Reaper you do have some good points, I disagree with your categorization of mods but I do hope you stick around and help out, more developers who can work well with others is always a good thing.
You could try to be more cooperative instead of demanding, considering that this is not a commercially driven project, but I understand how language barriers can make somebody come across more rude than they might intend.