Game Development: Color Wheel

[terechgracz]

Hey Loftar! First off, I’m genuinely stoked to hear you’re still thinking about pushing Haven & Hearth forward with these ideas. The whole object-controlled objects (OCO) thing sounds super promising. It’s ambitious, but I know you're the kind of guy who thrives on that.

From what I remember (and correct me if I’m off-track here), OCO is all about creating objects that control other objects, like a meta-system. Imagine you have a bridge or a wall in-game—an OCO would allow the game to understand that these are special kinds of objects that can be “walked on” or interacted with in ways typical game assets can’t. So instead of just being static structures, these objects would have game mechanics tied to them (e.g., walking, climbing, interacting with items while on them, etc.).

[h3]Breaking it down:[/h3]
1. Walkable Walls and Bridges: You want walls and bridges to not just be background objects but walkable surfaces. So a bridge would have logic that understands it can be walked on from two sides, while a wall would have rules about allowing players to walk or climb it.
2. Towers & Archery: With OCO, towers wouldn’t just be decorative—they’d actually affect gameplay. You could place archers or other ranged units there, and they'd have a tactical advantage, with the game treating the tower as a valid position to shoot from.
3. Dynamic Interactions: These objects would need to interact with each other. So like, a wall could have gates, and you’d be able to pass through, but the game would know the difference between a normal walkable surface and a restricted one like a wall.
4. Expandable Gameplay: With this system, you'd be adding layers to H&H. Imagine future mechanics where boats or siege engines could interact with OCO-based structures in strategic ways, making battles or base-building a lot more interesting.

[h3]OCO System:[/h3]
In simple terms, each object (like a wall, bridge, tower, etc.) has its own set of rules, and OCO allows one object to control or “override” another. For example, if a wall is next to a floor tile, the OCO system would manage how players can move between them, or it would dictate how a character can interact with both. You’d basically be building a rule hierarchy for how these objects should behave.

[h3]Dev Roadmap:[/h3]
1. Define the Behavior of Each Object: You need a way for the game to distinguish between “static objects” and “dynamic” walkable/usable ones. This could be some kind of tagging system.
2. Interaction Layers: You’ll want to make sure different objects like bridges, walls, and towers can coexist in the same space, without bugs. This might involve layered pathfinding or collision detection logic.
3. Climbing & Elevation: You might need to mess with the game’s Z-axis mechanics. Make sure climbing or moving vertically feels smooth.
4. Combat Enhancements: Think about how archery or ranged attacks from towers would be handled. Do arrows follow different physics if fired from an elevated position? How do hits and misses work from a tower compared to ground level?

[h3]My Two Cents:[/h3]
You’re essentially aiming to make H&H more immersive by giving objects more functionality beyond just being barriers or decorations. By implementing OCO, you can allow players to feel like they’re interacting with the world on a deeper level. I’m imagining a siege scenario where players have to think about where to shoot from, how to position themselves on walls or towers for tactical advantages, etc.

This whole thing feels like the next logical evolution for H&H’s PvP and base-building. Adding more meaningful structure mechanics would push the game to a new level, especially for the hardcore players who are all about tactical depth.

Let me know what part of this fires you up the most! We can start small and build up the framework together. Keep the fire alive, man! This project’s got big potential.

[DonVelD]

[*] Pursuit mode is not engaged if we are already within range when executing a combat move/attack. (Assuming this is controversial, so feel free to present counter-arguments)

Yes this is controversial btw, Felix didn't start pursuing (even outside of the range) to opknock multiple times, losing him a fight.

[Nightdawg]

wdgmsg("prs", (int)rel.gobid);

Add this to your custom clients to all moves except take aim and think

You know the drill XD

[Dawidio123]

It should be made so it doesn't pursuit only if you are MOVING AND in range, so you can still take aim and run/run alongside someone and hit them without turning to them.
Edit: idk, after a second thought, that would probably still be kinda bad if someone suddenly made a turn xd maybe make the "in range" a bit smaller than the actual range so it doesn't only activate the moment ppl are out of range.