-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 388
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Add granular monster object control for resurrection maps #9491
Comments
Hi, @idshibanov ! I agree that the basic object Mon is absolutely unadaptable and cannot be used in any way. Even in the original game there was an issue, where by default a random creature is generated (note, without tier 6 or some of the most powerful tier 5 creatures) in approximately equal quantities (on average from 15 to 30): this could be 20 goblins or 20 mages).
Regarding flags - I completely agree. And I would even go deeper and allow the mapmaker to specify individually which creatures can appear and which cannot. I mean the full creature list. But those flags could be also useful for RMG, where specific creature type (ranged/magic immune/etc) could be generated for the particular place.
Kind of casual point but it still could be used for sure. 👍
I want to note that we should not touch the original maps regarding the random generation of the object MON(x). Lets leave the original maps working same as before. (I'm only concerning about full random MON, as it has differences, as I noted above). In my opinion, specifying the exact number of creatures can only be relevant when placing a specific creature, not a "random" one. Random MON objects should, in my opinion, first of all correspond to a certain difficulty of overcoming (strength). And only after determining the strength, you can try to determine the quantity parameter so that the game offers some specific creature that corresponds both these parameters.
I personally don't see such a problem with just 4 MON(x) objects if we implement sort of strength value. If game correctly places randomly just 1 dragon, or 5 paladins, or 15 unicorns instead (I'm not sure about the actual strength difference) and the only improving aspect here could be just adding "no flyers/shooters" flags. Or working with the full creature list to exclude some particular ones. The only difficulty I see in such approach is that we don't have any reference for that strength value yet. So It would be hard for a mapmaker to find out, what value corresponds the creature type and its quantity. We do also miss many deeper things regarding monsters placing in the editor, like "0" growth; joining/offensive mood; special event text on interacting with monster; reward event on winning the battle, etc... |
Hello @idshibanov and @Branikolog, Here's how I see it. These are the settings available when the new window is open: Allow Creature Type: Knight
Barbarian
Sorceress
Necromancer
Wizard
Warlock
Neutral
Quantity:
Allow Growth: Allow mixed creatures during combat: Afterwards, as @Branikolog writes, many other possibilities can be added. Morale of the troop of wandering creatures:
However, the +1 moral bonus still applies if the wandering creature troop is made up of not upgraded and upgraded creatures when the scenario creator doesn't change the default value. Luck of the troop of wandering creatures:
Degree of aggressiveness:
Additional setting.
Etc. Edit. To indicate to the scenario creator which "MON" objects have extended settings, the "MON" of the "MON" sprite can be in white. |
For the sake of ease for developers we can just allow to select monsters from defined lists for these 5 objects as we've done for some objects on the Adventure Map. It solves 99% of cases for map makers. |
Preliminary checks
Describe the problem requiring a solution
Current random monster editor options (that are matching original game behaviour) work as follows:
Although we have to treat original MON1-MON4 object as is for backwards compatibility, you can clearly see that MON3 and MON4 are unbalanced and hard to work with. As as mapmaker if you want to make sure map area stays well-protected you are forced to place a specific monster rather than keeping it interesting or thematic. I want to hear your opinions on both proposals.
Describe the possible solution
Solution 1.
Re-use existing
RANDOM_MONSTER
object (just MON) to add additional metadata for the fheroes2 resurrection maps. Instead of monster count the new field could include:If configuration set by the map maker is too restrictive (i.e. no valid monster can be found and placed) treat it as a fully random object. If no metadata was set (or it is an older version map) use the current behaviour.
Solution 2.
In order to keep the spirit of original game the monster levels should follow the strength values rather than dwelling level:
This should unlock the ability for map maker to balance the encounter difficulty without worrying about randomness. We introduce two new map objects MON5 and MON6 (with similar graphics for the editor) and process them accordingly. When loading maps made by original editor we convert old MON3 into either 3 or 4 based on a random roll. Same for MON4 which becomes either the new MON5 or MON6.
Additional info
We could implement both.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: