Function Part Discussion

Tarpy wrote:

Unlike scythes and ploughs, hoes and ploughs have the same use. Hoes are, however, handheld and ploughs are run either by machinery or animals.

Should I make another poll regarding this?

IMO, it'll be best to have them as one FP, wich then in the TO editor could be either placed on something that you can hold in your hand; like for example a stick; or on a animal or an machinery.

ThrivingCheese- That's what I was thinking too, or they could just choose between a hoe and a plough once they select the FP.

Then that would be a case of making them two variants of an FP called plough, which I am for.

NickTheNick wrote:

Then that would be a case of making them two variants of an FP called plough, which I am for.

I like that idea.

what about scythes claws, say your creatures has a hive  and some warrior types beast had   scythes claw leftover the from aware stage,could you say tell those beasts to drag their claw's along the ground and and cultivate the ground then never developed ploughs,hoes and/or scythes in the first place

Jimexmore wrote:

what about scythes claws, say your creatures has a hive  and some warrior types beast had   scythes claw leftover the from aware stage,could you say tell those beasts to drag their claw's along the ground and and cultivate the ground then never developed ploughs,hoes and/or scythes in the first place

First of all, if someone doesn't respond to you in the next post doesn't mean you should spam just to get noticed. I, for example, and many others probably, check all of the posts since the last one, not just the most recent one, so we would have noticed you anyway.

Second, not to be harsh, but to me, that's an absurd idea. Why would they evolve scythe-claws at all in the first place? They would have just grazed on whatever they could have used them. Also, you don't use scythes to cultivate the land.

Tarpy wrote:

Jimexmore wrote:

what about scythes claws, say your creatures has a hive  and some warrior types beast had   scythes claw leftover the from aware stage,could you say tell those beasts to drag their claw's along the ground and and cultivate the ground then never developed ploughs,hoes and/or scythes in the first place

First of all, if someone doesn't respond to you in the next post doesn't mean you should spam just to get noticed. I, for example, and many others probably, check all of the posts since the last one, not just the most recent one, so we would have noticed you anyway.

Second, not to be harsh, but to me, that's an absurd idea. Why would they evolve scythe-claws at all in the first place? They would have just grazed on whatever they could have used them. Also, you don't use scythes to cultivate the land.

It could be an interesting idea if re-worked a bit; like say, your organisms evolve a kind of claw, or shell-like plates on x set of limbs, could they use those as tools to farm?

Tarpy I think its fine to close the poll. I think the agreement is to not merge scythes and ploughs (which I never intended to propose anyways, I meant hoe), and to have hoe and plough as two variants of an FP called plough.

I agree

EDIT: Could someone please help me out? This may sound stupid, but how do I close the poll?

I guess editing your first post, and checking the last box, which reads: "Close Poll" will probably do what you want.

Oh, I think I just realized why can't I see that box. It's probably because I said it to expire in 15 days. Could that be the problem?

Maybe it is because i'm a mod and only mods can close them. Anyway, i did it for you, hope you dont mind.

Jimexmore wrote:

what about scythes claws, say your creatures has a hive  and some warrior types beast had   scythes claw leftover the from aware stage,could you say tell those beasts to drag their claw's along the ground and and cultivate the ground then never developed ploughs,hoes and/or scythes in the first place

Because people ask I will build on my "absurd idea","scytheclaws" like a sword in your hands
like the

Spoiler:

Could you not "evole" a pair of those a big pair of those.

Let's come up with a hypothetical situation :You are a hive queen,you have noticed other races have been using something called a "hoe" and "plough" you notice a pattern a type maybe you could replicate it in your warriors with the two claws mutations and you instruct them to rake their claws against the fertile ground.Maybe your food will grow better .

Please don't go off-topic. Ask that in the miscellaneous thread. Is that all for ploughs?

I think so.

I think Missile is next then considering how it is next on the list. Tarpy, would you care to explain your thoughts on it as you were the one to introduce it?

NickTheNick wrote:

I think Missile is next then considering how it is next on the list. Tarpy, would you care to explain your thoughts on it as you were the one to introduce it?

I thought of it looking something like this:

When the player chooses the missile FP, he would first have to choose one of the sub-types of the FP. Subtypes would be:
1.Arrow
2.Blunt Projectile(can't think of a name, stones, cannonballs and the like)
3.Bolt
4.Bullet
Then, they would choose with which TO (or multiple TO's, in fact) would be used. The game would tell whether the missile is compatible with the TO. Arrows would be compatible with bows, blunt projectilles should be compatible with slingshots and every firearm and artillery, bolts with crossbows (and perhaps some firearms?) and bullets with firearms.

Arrows

Arrows would be used to bring down enemy troops from a long range and would, as said be fired by bows. How would we specify what a bow is? That's a problem. It would be very hard if we had to make the game see whether a handle could be a bow or not, that's why I would personally make it an FP or sub-FP.

Now, the player can adjust the length of the arrow. We should make it simple- The longer, the more accurate, but it can travel a smaller distance.

Do you agree with something like this?

Tarpy, i believe that would be projectiles. When i think of missiles, i think of something like this:
https://www.google.es/search?q=missile&tbm=isch

That would be comprised of two parts, some air-capable engine, and a bomb. Actually, it would be better to just not have them as FP, but instead assemble them from the tech editor as a vehicle, then make them into a unit in the squad editor, and finally tag them as missiles, or just as self-destructing units.

What you are describing i would call "projectiles" instead. However, taking into acount Nick sugestion in making projectiles free, where you only need to have a suply vehicle near to restock, i would vote to ignore them, using the weapon as to get all the values on damage, acuracy, range... and just supose the ammunition is there.

Daniferrito wrote:

Tarpy, i believe that would be projectiles. When i think of missiles, i think of something like this:
https://www.google.es/search?q=missile&tbm=isch

They surely need to be renamed.

WilliamstheJohn wrote:

Daniferrito wrote:

Tarpy, i believe that would be projectiles. When i think of missiles, i think of something like this:
https://www.google.es/search?q=missile&tbm=isch

They surely need to be renamed.

It should be renamed, but I'm pretty sure Dani meant we shouldn't even have a projectile FP at all, since Nick said that ammunition would basically be going to much in depth. It would just be treated as a percentage (there would be a bar for it), and when I look at it now, it's probably for the best.

Tarpy, as you said, I don't think ammunition should have its own FP. If anything, only ammunition storage, such as the stone pouch and arrow quiver, that I mentioned on the Ballistics thread, should be included. Each ranged weapon automatically uses its own implied ammo.

I also agree with Dani on not making a single FP for missiles. Rather, I think customizing a missile allows for greater diversity, instead of all nations using the same generic one, or several similar ones with different variants.

NickTheNick wrote:

I also agree with Dani on not making a single FP for missiles. Rather, I think customizing a missile allows for greater diversity, instead of all nations using the same generic one, or several similar ones with different variants.

I was thinking that from the beginning. Also, I think it should be named "bomb", or something, rather than missile.

Now, back on topic.

Since we won't be needing the projectile FP, we can cross onto the next FP, which is stirrup.

Well, this may be a bit hard. I'm not sure how are we going to be able to implement this, but my idea goes like this:

First of all, we would need some sort of system to determine the strength of the creature in question. If it has enough strength to move it's own mass, we would then calculate the surplus of strength. That being done, we can then see how many rider masses can it support. If the value is below 1, then it can't support any riders. Also, even if the number is 1.99 it still can only support one rider, but if it is 2 obviously it'll support two.

Also, since every creature will have some sort of invisible box around it's model, we would take the surface of the top part of the box, and if that surface is lesser than the bottom surface of the rider's box, then it can't support any riders, despite the fact it has enough strength to do so.

I need more ideas.

Well, the distinction between bomb or missile is that one you just drop, and the other one is self-propelled. Anyway, as there is no FP for it, we can just ignore the name.

Stirrup. What about saddle? It is more generic, and we dont need to make it out of many FPs.

Well, the value we want from charging creatures is the weight it can carry. Then it can carry anything with that mass or lower. That way it diferentiates between a heavy armored warrior, a lightly armored one or just some payload. Being closer to the total mass it is able to carry would slow the movemens, as it does with any creature.

Do we need a diferent FP if the load is just a container instead of a creature?

I'll rename it to saddle.

Your formula is good, and as you said, the speed of the creature would be reduced. It should be reduced like this:

If the creature carries something 26% of his mass, it's speed would be reduced by 26%, so if a creature carries something the same as its mass, it wouldn't move at all.

Would this work?

as for missiles, dont forget there are different types, common missiles, and guided missiles. there's also torpedoes which are their water version.