FUN WITH FLAGS - game mode - description

[sado1]

Why "Fun with Flags" isn't the actual name of the script/mode? Seems much more catchy than Florescence to me, but ofc it's only a suggestion

[Lewin]

I thought of an idea that might be simpler to implement. But it looks like this is impossible with the current functions - like your idea because I'm missing the DamageDoneByPlayer-function.
My idea would to modify OnHouseLost. I need a check if the house is demolished by its owner (this part is missing). If yes, then I would return the (x,y) and check if that's inside the valley. If yes, then I'd subtract 2 points from the players forechecking value.
2 points because of the following: forechecking does +# destroyed - # of lost houses. So if the enemy destroys a house, he gets +1 and you get -1. To make it even, you get -2 when you demolish your house.

I'm thinking that it would be a good idea to merge OnHouseDestroyed and OnHouseLost, since there's really no need for having two events. Same with OnUnitKilled and OnUnitLost. You can tell how the unit/house died from the DestroyerIndex:
Same as owner of house = Self destruction (or unit killed by your own arrows).
Some other player index = Destroyed by another player.
-1 = Destroyed by some other means such as killed from script, or with units starving to death.

But currently there's no way to detect when a house is self destroyed, since it only triggers the event OnHouseLost which doesn't tell you how it was destroyed.

That's how it works internally in the game code so it makes sense for the script to be like that. The FullyBuilt parameter is also obsolete now we have States.HouseIsComplete, so I'll remove that too. I'll make sure to check all scripts included in the Remake (such as Vas' campaign) and update/test them if I make this change.


EDIT: I made the changes to OnUnit / OnHouse events which I talked about above, so now you can detect self destruction of houses easily. Read the script wiki section on those events for more information. I'll send you a new EXE to test them with.

[Siegfried]

Why "Fun with Flags" isn't the actual name of the script/mode? Seems much more catchy than Florescence to me, but ofc it's only a suggestion

Well, that's the oft-quoted 'historical reason'. I came up with the idea of the game mode first and have given it the name. Btw the working title was even lamer, it was 'kom - knights or merchants'

Then there was the map, but the name for the game mode was alrady established. And one word is still more practical than three words. As long as there is only map, both mean the same thing.

I made the changes to OnUnit / OnHouse events which I talked about above, so now you can detect self destruction of houses easily. Read the script wiki section on those events for more information. I'll send you a new EXE to test them with.

That's just perfect.

I have some progress to show. It has been about the text-GUI. The screenshot was made on a 1024x768-resolution. With 8 players (4 additional lines) plus the victory conditions (3 extra lines) it's still overfull. But it will be hard to shorten it even more. It's a pity because there is some space above the text that you can't use. Maybe you consider changing the TextOverlay in such a way that the vertical distance is dependent on resolution?



What do you think, apart from the bug that the <needed 25> should be a <25 needed>.

[sado1]

And one word is still more practical than three words.

I guess that's why we call all these popular gamemodes CTF, FFA, TDM, KotH etc. But it's your choice anyway, I just thought FwF (or maybe F&F?) would be better.

[Krom]

I like the new text layout much better. It is much more clear and easier to understand which number means what.

[Lewin]

KOM is pretty lame indeed

The GUI looks much better! I like the way it shows how much the leader has, or if there's no leader it shows the minimum required And the final flags are using a comma separated list? That should work well.

The space above the text is reserved for the speed indicator. Even though that's only in singleplayer, we'd rather keep the UI consistent between single and multiplayer. In the EXE I sent you you'll also notice that I changed the overlay text so it doesn't overlap with the message queue on the left (it's moved ~20px to the right so it fits next to it).

Maybe the variety flag could show the total number of unique units + houses you have so far? So if I had all units/houses except: a stables, mill, bakery, winefarm and a baker, it would show 35 and <40 needed> because I'm missing 5 out of the total of 40 (assuming there are 40 unique units/houses in total, which is the wrong number but I can't remember the right one). You'll have to write a function to calculate it of course but that shouldn't be too hard or inefficient. 0/1 looks kind of odd at the moment, and if I see 35/40 I'll think "I'm nearly there, I should focus on getting that flag now".

Maybe first flags should stop showing the amount you have and the amount required as soon as a player owns them, so it's very obvious that you can never own that flag now (if I see my counter increasing players who didn't read the rules or hint text might think they can take it from you). So once owned it would just show "Variety: Siegfried"

Something which doesn't matter so much: All of the first flags require similar tactics (build a little of everything). Maybe one or two of them could be changed a bit to require more specific tactics? Because right now the player who gets Variety is also likely to get City (they're similar ideas, build a small number of each building) and even the same with Iron Fetish and Strategist to a lesser extent (both leather and iron, a bit of everything). Just an idea, and certainly doesn't have to be implemented for "version 1.0". If you were to change any then I'd suggest City and Iron Fetish because I like Strategist and Variety.

Some corrections to your English that I've been trying to find alternatives to for a while:

"at limit" -> I can't think of something to put here, but "at limit" doesn't really make sense to me. Maybe "minimum amount required"? (if that's what you intended "at limit" to mean) You might not even require a hint here because these are the "normal" flags where the player with the highest score gets it, only the other flags need hints because they have special rules (e.g. future flags are the same as fact flags other than the unlock time)

"after time" -> "unlocked after time"

"only to first" -> "first player to achieve objective"

"while condition" -> "individual". Meaning you don't fight other players for them. All flags are "while condition" so I don't think it should say that (also it's not correct English)

[Siegfried]

I guess that's why we call all these popular gamemodes CTF, FFA, TDM, KotH etc.

That's why you introduce those cryptic abbreviations, right? My favorite mode usually is either Deathmatch or Assault; so much for that

But it's your choice anyway, I just thought FwF (or maybe F&F?) would be better.

But I finally agree with you and switched the names. Now 'Florescence' is the specific map, 'Fun with Flags' is the game mode. I hope I don't forget changing the thread title

Thanks for pointing that out.

And the final flags are using a comma separated list?

That's already implemented, but still untested as the AI usually does not train 160 civilians

Maybe the variety flag could show the total number of unique units + houses you have so far?

That's something that had been on my mind for a while, but other things have been more important (proper implementation of teams). Because of a bug I had to separate the calculation into a separate function, so this should be easier now.

So once owned it would just show "Variety: Siegfried"

That's done.

All of the first flags require similar tactics (build a little of everything).

Just recently I noticed this design flaw - but rather with the fact flags, not the first flag: 3/4 fact flags need fighting while only 3 of the other 11 need military units, none of them needs actual fighting. What do you think about that?

3/4 first flags need a fully developed city with everything. But that's actually the idea behind the first flags. They shall be awarded not before mid-game and only to those, who really make a 'complete' city. The intention was to make an economy mode (although I now also agree that we should not call it that way), so I thought it would be good to award more flags to a full cities. And each flag is a bit different.

If you were to change any then I'd suggest City and Iron Fetish because I like Strategist and Variety.

That's why I will definately keep Strategist and Variety. You can consider them the 'definition' of a first flag behaviour.
But I will also keep City because I love it. It awards people who keep their city balanced in all aspects. You can't brute force this flag like you can with all the other first&final flags - unless with a massive amount of buildings. This flag in its current state is almost untouchable

But I am still not 100% convinced with iron fetish. It's meant to be a similar flag like almost every future flag. You can go for it with mass leather or with mass iron. Or you try to keep a balance.

If anyone has a good idea, please say it.

Some corrections to your English that I've been trying to find alternatives to for a while:

That's very good! Apart from some real errors, I intentionally violated the language because I tried to keep it as short as possible. There's already so much text so every additional word hurts

"at limit" -> I can't think of something to put here, but "at limit" doesn't really make sense to me. Maybe "minimum amount required"?

That's too long. Maybe you're right and we can skip this text completely.

"after time" -> "unlocked after time"

That would double the length. Maybe it's possible to shorten this to 'time-depending?

"only to first" -> "first player to achieve objective"

I already changed this to 'stays with first', but I'm not entirely happy yet.

"while condition" -> "individual".

'individual' is very good. I had changed it to 'multiple owners' in the meantime to make it clear that everyone can get this flag even while others hold it. But I think I'll take your suggestion.

[Lewin]

My concern with the first flags is that I've seen how powerful they are from our game, and now I'm thinking that everyone must go for a complete village to try and get some first flags, otherwise one guy will get them all and win because of it (like you did). But I guess you only need 2 or 3 guys to also go for a complete village to make them far less valuable (because you can't get so many), so if a few players go for a specific economy it can still work for them.

I see what you mean about the fact flags being mostly military. Although fact and future flags become the same thing in long games so it doesn't matter so much, but in short games it could be important. Maybe swap one of the future flags with a fact flag? I was thinking you could swap "wooden leg" (doesn't require an army, you can just stockpile weapons) and "commander" (would make sense as a future flag with a longish unlock time), or something similar.

"time depending" doesn't really work because it implies they vary with time (e.g. different objective at different times). Maybe "time locked" if you want to keep it short, that explains it concisely without violating English.

"stays with first" doesn't really make sense. Maybe just "first player"?

EDIT: Another thing I just remembered, will it still work if players select teams? I think you said the proper team game was delayed until version 2.0, but it should still work for now if players choose teams in the lobby without realizing. You could override teams at the start by setting everyone to enemy (you'll need to cover their map areas too), or maybe you have a better idea?

[dicsoupcan]

this is just a small question, but are the amount of flags i need random eveyr game? since sometimes i see you need 9 flags and sometimes i see you need 5 or 7.

[Shadaoe]

The new text layout is really good !
Here is what it looks like with a way to see the death area, tell me what you think (I don't see anything else to put instead of that) I'm not quite sure about wether I put it at the right location, it's quite hard to test with towers :p but you get the idea.

Cool Will you then agree to enter the script-competition as a team? I'll ask Menszu if you still refuse

Well I have absolutely no problem with going in team with you for the competition, the only thing is that it prevents me from entering any mission of my own :p I can live with that though, and it would be sad to see you being penalized for not making the terrain if we're not in team

[Lewin]

this is just a small question, but are the amount of flags i need random eveyr game? since sometimes i see you need 9 flags and sometimes i see you need 5 or 7.

It depends on the number of players With more players flags are fought over more, so you need less flags to win. With less players it's not so hard to get lots of flags, so you need more flags to win.

Here is what it looks like with a way to see the death area, tell me what you think (I don't see anything else to put instead of that) I'm not quite sure about wether I put it at the right location, it's quite hard to test with towers :p but you get the idea.

It looks good to me

Well I have absolutely no problem with going in team with you for the competition, the only thing is that it prevents me from entering any mission of my own :p I can live with that though, and it would be sad to see you being penalized for not making the terrain if we're not in team

But it would be a shame if you don't get to enter your own script too, since you seem to have a fairly good understanding of scripting. Maybe you can come to some arrangement with Ben?

[dicsoupcan]

But sado and i are also a team. sado does the scripting, i do the map. I have not heard any objections from ben so far.

[Lewin]

But sado and i are also a team. sado does the scripting, i do the map. I have not heard any objections from ben so far.

The problem is that Shadaoe made The Valley of Dangers which Siegfried used for Fun with Flags, so to enter it he needs to team up with Shadaoe. But Shadaoe also wants to enter his own script in the competition (by himself or in a different team)

[Siegfried]

this is just a small question, but are the amount of flags i need random eveyr game? since sometimes i see you need 9 flags and sometimes i see you need 5 or 7.

They depend on the number of players that join the match.
With 2 players, you need 10 flags, 3p -> 9, 4p -> 7, 5p&6p -> 6, 7p&8p -> 5 flags.

My concern with the first flags is that I've seen how powerful they are from our game, and now I'm thinking that everyone must go for a complete village to try and get some first flags, otherwise one guy will get them all and win because of it (like you did).

Krom was not to far away from some of the first flags. If Shadaoe hadn't attacked him, he maybe had won some.
But I will think about this a bit more. I want to hear the opinions of the other testers, too.

I was thinking you could swap "wooden leg" (doesn't require an army, you can just stockpile weapons) and "commander" (would make sense as a future flag with a longish unlock time), or something similar.

That might work. I noted that down for a possible swap.

Maybe "time locked" if you want to keep it short, that explains it concisely without violating English.

Concerning the language I will follow your suggetions. You're a native speaker

EDIT: Another thing I just remembered, will it still work if players select teams? I think you said the proper team game was delayed until version 2.0, but it should still work for now if players choose teams in the lobby without realizing. You could override teams at the start by setting everyone to enemy (you'll need to cover their map areas too), or maybe you have a better idea?

The victory calculations do not respect teams atm. So each player plays his own game, everyone is considered as an enemy concerning the flags.
BUT: you can't attack your teammates and the victory condition is set in a way the whole team wins. And you share map sight.

I really want to finish team support in this version. A huge part has already been done, I have sets containing the players. So it's "just" the victory condition that has to be adjusted.
The difficulty lies in the fact, that there may be mixed states. So some players are teamed up, some are not. Therefore I have to introduce the team 'unteamed' that has to be calculated in a different way from the real teams.

Btw: I wanted to set up a match with a second computer of mine. I took RC3 and copied the latest exe in there. Then I started and wanted to set up a local server so I can test. But after clicking the start button in the lobby the server stops with error message 'EPSException: Could not call proc'. Is it a problem with the KaM_Reamke_Server_win32.exe that is still the old version?

[Siegfried]

Here is what it looks like with a way to see the death area, tell me what you think (I don't see anything else to put instead of that) I'm not quite sure about wether I put it at the right location

It is the correct location. x-coordinates 86 & 122. So if you enter x=86, your unit dies. on x=87 it stays alive.

The stones are very neat, you can't overlook them. Nevertheless they don't change the entrance. I wonder what happens if you build a road on top of it.

Judging from the screenshot: maybe it is a good idea to extend the death zone one more tile (x=87 & 121). Because there is an angle in the mountain texture. What do you think, would it look better then? Extending the death zone is no problem inside the code, we can depend on the aesthetics of the map here.

Well I have absolutely no problem with going in team with you for the competition, the only thing is that it prevents me from entering any mission of my own :p I can live with that though, and it would be sad to see you being penalized for not making the terrain if we're not in team

Oh, sorry. I didn't know you wanted to enter the competiton with your own work. You're not on the list yet

Then it's settled. We don't team up. It would be counterproductive if my work prohibited your work. That's not how it's meant. Not from my side, nor from the competition's side.

Well, I can live with being penalized. I broke many of the competition's instructions, so I actually deserve that