Topic: About the fish - self-breeding?
BeniH Topic Opener |
Posted at:
2011-06-13, 21:32 UTC+2.0
Hello, i wonder if fish is self breeding? So small lakes would only be depleted when overfished? ![]() ![]() |
Astuur![]() |
Posted at:
2011-06-14, 06:17 UTC+2.0
The answer is here: The next question is: Wideland features a very sophisticated auto-seeding for trees (I wonder who did this!) There would not be much sense in setting up a complicated system for fish, or even animals, The problem is mainly with the game balancing. I have myself suggested somewhere, that there should be a use for Being no programmer, I apologize for all my suggestions that imply undue workload and for other misjudgements due to lack of expertise or relevant skills. ![]() ![]() |
BeniH Topic Opener |
Posted at:
2011-06-14, 09:51 UTC+2.0
Hello, thanks for pointing me to the right location. Indeed, i think it would be a very nice thing if fish and animals would be self-breeding. Of course this should be slow enough to encourage over-hunting or over-fishing so care must be taken when placing hunters and fisher huts. I agree, that this needs to be simple yet enforce some constraints to be funny. Especially with the animals i think it is important that they only should spawn in rural, not urban areas so the player (other than barbarian) needs to maintain some space in "natural" form which cant be used otherwise. This can be done by binding the respawn to two simple factors: ammount of trees and ammount of animals nearby. Trees is surely a sign for "this area hasn't been domesticated so far", as well as animals are needed to reproduce. This simple factors should already give some very realistic breeding since overhunted areas need foreign animals to wander in again and rebreeding takes a longer time the less animals are nartive there. So my suggestions/blueprints are the following: FISH:
ANIMALS:
[1] Map geometry; here the center point like in http://widelands.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/widelands/trunk/doc/geometry/index.xhtml
Edited:
2011-06-14, 09:52 UTC+2.0
![]() ![]() |
Astuur![]() |
Posted at:
2011-06-14, 20:35 UTC+2.0
I like this! For animals I would not let this depend on "trees" only.
Edited:
2011-06-15, 06:09 UTC+2.0
Being no programmer, I apologize for all my suggestions that imply undue workload and for other misjudgements due to lack of expertise or relevant skills. ![]() ![]() |
BeniH Topic Opener |
Posted at:
2011-06-15, 10:09 UTC+2.0
Hello, Terrain affinity is surely a nice thing; however i think its a bad idea to couple that to the trees species. What i wanted to express with the trees idea is that usually "processed" terrain is cleared of trees to make room for houses. I do not want animals to spawn in urban and processed areas. And with the fish, do you mean my proposal is okay that way, or the implementation as it is now (that is no breding) ![]() ![]() |
Venatrix![]() |
Posted at:
2011-06-16, 08:57 UTC+2.0
Im not sure if it is that easy. For example, I dont know, whether the code differs between different species (I dont think so) and breeding a new animal from a fox and a deer seems rather strange. If I remember right, the main difference between animals is the image. Is there some coder here to give a hint, if there are differences and where? If there arent its the question if its worth to code them. Two is the oddest prime. ![]() ![]() |
BeniH Topic Opener |
Posted at:
2011-06-16, 09:39 UTC+2.0
Its true, that inter racial breeding seems odd. I dont think, that this is of any relevance here, however. This breeding shpuld not be modeled like it is... u know... in true nature. Its enough if there just spanws a new animal nearby, that would really be enough. This is not a breeding simulator, after all, its a game about ressources. ![]() ![]() |
Astuur![]() |
Posted at:
2011-06-16, 10:06 UTC+2.0
@BeniH: I like your fish suggestion and found nothing to improved there.
Not always and for all animals, but in some cases. I just wanted to have the conditions for animals multiplying more flexible, and not only "woods".
I understood that. In general I agree, but some exceptions should be possible to keep some animals within the settlements (Bunnies?)
No, it's far from easy. Currently no code exists. Coming up with nice ideas is all very fine, but actually implementing such things is a lot of work. Being no programmer, I apologize for all my suggestions that imply undue workload and for other misjudgements due to lack of expertise or relevant skills. ![]() ![]() |
martin |
Posted at:
2011-06-16, 10:30 UTC+2.0
Venatrix wrote:
All animals are objects of the class But of course, the type of animal has to be defined - this is done in the map data and can be manipulated via the editor.
And also there is a I guess, a kind of terrain affinity should also be done via the The implementation of breeding new animals is also possible, but I don't know if this is a desired feature. And of course, we should first discuss an acceptable compromise between modeling "true nature" well enough and not bringing too many rules and complexity into the game... ![]() ![]() |
BeniH Topic Opener |
Posted at:
2011-06-16, 10:47 UTC+2.0
Yes it is desired, because currently its possible to run out of meat. I think, a compromise with good results would be my proposal above, but with the option to add affinity like Astuur proposed. I think this would surely be a good path to implement this. After all, affinity is just an addition of detail. @Astuur: im not quite confident that wild rabbits would enter the surrouindings of humans. For gameplay reasons i would implement the breeding as such, that no animals are spawned in urban areas. This enforces the player to keep some "natural" space (but no dense forest) for autobreeding to work. What seems important to me is that there is a max population cap. Otherwise we might have tousands of animals in remote areas... ![]() ![]() |