Inspired by Hero Quest, a game for Android and Windows Phone

[nante]

Nante, just a suggestion about multiplayer:
You mentioned before that you're not sure if you're going to implement it, and if you do, you're not sure if it's going to be real-time multiplayer or delayed turn-based.
I just want to throw in my opinion while you're developing part 2. Make it delayed turn-based if possible. For example, if three players are playing cooperatively, one player takes a turn and ends his/her turn which then sends a notice to their teammate's phone (device) notifying them that it's their turn, and so on. A quest can go on for quite some time like this, but it can also be pretty quick if everyone is away from work.
Again, just a suggestion.

Hi, thanks for the suggestion. I really need to see if the game will have enough users to see if it's worth a multiplayer implementation.
Server costs are pretty high and would need to be covered by the game revenue.
It's something I will evaluate later on

[sajungzak]

If there is only one search function for traps, secret doors, and treasure, then there would be no possibility for a trap on a treasure chest. Well, it may be possible, but less dangerous and less fun. It would take away the element of surprise or the satisfaction of "catching it" before anyone got hurt.

Wrong, the generic "search room for treasures" action (button on the top of the screen) will never trigger a trap or monster, and it also has low % to find something good.

What you talking about is the "search chest" action, which you trigger by tapping on a chest. This action would not be changed in any way. This is also the one that can trigger traps/monsters.

It was a while ago that I played your game now, I didn't remember the "search chest" action, which you trigger by tapping on a chest.
So, yeah. As long as you keep the "search chest" action, which you trigger by tapping on a chest, then there would be more than one search function for traps, secret doors, and treasure.

[nante]

I'm going to release an early preview version on Android only in the next few days.

It will miss a lot of stuff, but I need to know if we're going in the right direction.

Anybody interested please drop me a message

[KT_Cobra]

Message sent

[Daedalus]

I'd like to add my thoughts on the Search Action. If your goal is faster gameplay, then you are right that all searches can be combined into one action. If your goal is instead to recreate a Hero Quest-like dungeon-crawler, then you should keep the searches seperate. Hero Quest fans have come to expect it as part of the exploration process.

A staple of the Hero Quest that provides a good part of its character is search options. I think this was done to incorporate a sense of choice and measure of time in a Quest. If a Hero in one room is searching while the other three are attacking one monster each in another room, there is a slight nod to versimilitude that a standard time--one turn--must be invested in both instances to achieve an action. Allowing a Hero to accomplish all searches in a single action makes that Hero three times more efficient. Requiring a seperate search each for traps, secret doors, and treasure (NA rules) or a search for traps and secret doors, and then a search for treasure (EU rules) evens the turn cost of searching with attacking.

Still, if measuring Quest progress is the main goal, then abstracting searching as a single action in a room won't upset things much other than altering the familiar sense of time. As a default, Hero Quest lacks an outside pressure that penalizes the Heroes for spending extra search turns. You'd have to introduce such an outside element that pressures Heroes to maximize thier turn efficiency if you want to justify the splitting of search actions. Personally, I'd prefer such an addition. If you don't want that, then there isn't much of a case for not abstracting searching further into one action.

[nante]

I'd like to add my thoughts on the Search Action. If your goal is faster gameplay, then you are right that all searches can be combined into one action. If your goal is instead to recreate a Hero Quest-like dungeon-crawler, then you should keep the searches seperate. Hero Quest fans have come to expect it as part of the exploration process.

A staple of the Hero Quest that provides a good part of its character is search options. I think this was done to incorporate a sense of choice and measure of time in a Quest. If a Hero in one room is searching while the other three are attacking one monster each in another room, there is a slight nod to versimilitude that a standard time--one turn--must be invested in both instances to achieve an action. Allowing a Hero to accomplish all searches in a single action makes that Hero three times more efficient. Requiring a seperate search each for traps, secret doors, and treasure (NA rules) or a search for traps and secret doors, and then a search for treasure (EU rules) evens the turn cost of searching with attacking.

Still, if measuring Quest progress is the main goal, then abstracting searching as a single action in a room won't upset things much other than altering the familiar sense of time. As a default, Hero Quest lacks an outside pressure that penalizes the Heroes for spending extra search turns. You'd have to introduce such an outside element that pressures Heroes to maximize thier turn efficiency if you want to justify the splitting of search actions. Personally, I'd prefer such an addition. If you don't want that, then there isn't much of a case for not abstracting searching further into one action.

You are perfectly right, the problem is not when there are monsters around, but when you are alone. It seems just a waste of time having to click "search secrets", then "search treasures" every time you clear a room.

[DmitryM]

You are perfectly right, the problem is not when there are monsters around, but when you are alone. It seems just a waste of time having to click "search secrets", then "search treasures" every time you clear a room.

The most slowing things in game are movement step by step and attack|defence dice rolling. As I know, you've solved that, so there is anough time for both search actions.

[nante]

Yes, movements are smooth now, you can just tap where you want to go, and while one character is moving, you can select another and perform other actions.
Attack/Defense dice have been unified in a single roll, so it's quite faster.

Let's see how it plays in the beta, if anyone miss the double search actions, it won't be a problem to reintroduce them

Thanks as always for your support

[nante]

Ok so I'm in trouble with the combat system... I'm discussing this with a few friends, but any idea would be really appreciated!

My original thought was:
1. Using HQ dice is too limited. I can have a weapon with attack 4, 5, 6, but that's it, there are not enough combinations.
2. I introduced colored dice. Yellow die has 3 sides with 1 sword. Red die has 2 sides 1 sword, 1 side with 2 swords. Green die has 2 sides with 2 swords, 1 side with 3 swords. And so on. The idea came from D&D fantasy adventure:

3. I used the same idea for attack and defense dice
4. I'm stuck. This way I can have results like 9 - 0, 12 - 1 and so. It's easy to kill a boss enemy in one or two hits!
5. I cannot revert everything to another dice system, and I don't have graphics/animations for dice with more than 6 sides.

So my idea now would be to remove the defense dice, and give a fixed defense value to each character (hero or enemy). Equipment can still affect this value, by adding to the base defense amount. It's somehow limited in the combinations I can have, but should be playable. My fear here is that a character can become virtually unbeatable if he has enough armor, it must be very carefully balanced.

Another way is a mixed solution, where each character has fixed defense + value from the roll of a certain number of dice. I fear this way it would be complicated to understand how it works.

Any comment? Idea to share? Any game with a simple but deep dice system to look into?

[slev]

I think that, for cases like this, Flint's dice would be ideal.
This shows their releive distrinutions: