[DISC][PLAYER] The final new object types

[92Dexter11]

I've had an idea for a while now, but it might be a little too complicated/complex to implement: the Regeneration Field.

Regeneration fields can be placed over the top of terrain, or over air, much like a force field or updraft.
Any modifications made to terrain within a regeneration field revert back to their original state after a short time (around 1 second?).

For instance, you can bash through terrain which is covered by a regeneration field, but the terrain will slowly "regenerate" back to being solid after 1 second.

In regards to the effects of constructive skills, I can think of two possibilities:

1 - Additive mode: Any new terrain introduced into the field becomes a permanent addition to the field. For instance, if a lemming constructs a stacker, then the stack will regenerate its terrain if bashed through.
2 - Revert mode: Any new terrain introduced into the field is removed shortly afterwards, taking the same amount of time as normal terrain takes to reappear. For instance, a if a lemming constructs a builder, then the staircase disappears behind him after 1 second.

One main problem I forsee with this concept is lemmings getting trapped within terrain if they are following behind a basher. Perhaps the field should also automatically kill any trapped lemmings?
Additionally, maybe having terrain revert after 1 second would be too quick. Perhaps 2-3 seconds would allow for more interesting gameplay?
It would also have to have a clear visual indicator to the player without being overly flashy, since it can be placed over terrain or air. Perhaps a twinkling stars effect?

Again, this may be too difficult to implement, or may not fit with neolemmix, but perhaps a simpler idea could be drawn from this? Let me know what you think.

[namida]

Not practical. In general - anything that creates terrain (including "restoring existing terrain") should be considered out of the question.

[WillLem]

I like 92Dexter11's idea as an idea, but it does feel a bit like earlier culled gimmicks like Hardworkers, Lazy Workers and Non-permanent Skills, i.e. those which affect the skill itself - in this case, making its effects non-permanent. I'm generally not in favour of such ideas in practice, because they tend to make the game more annoying than anything else.

Having said that, it would create another interesting way to separate a worker, and could even be used for backroute-prevention, so the idea itself is not without its merits.

Of course, it's already been ruled out, but I thought it was worth discussing anyway

[Dullstar]

Since the splat/antisplat fields have been rejected, could we by any chance get a splat/antisplat pad graphic that looks halfway decent when it's applied to a whole terrain piece? The current ones that I'm aware of (since so few styles implement them, it's not easy to find them) awkwardly hang off the edge if an entire ledge is covered by the trigger area.

[WillLem]

Since the splat/antisplat fields have been rejected, could we by any chance get a splat/antisplat pad graphic that looks halfway decent when it's applied to a whole terrain piece?

I've been playing around with this for a while now and so far haven't come up with anything I'm really that happy with; it's one of the reasons I suggested the fields in the first place.

FWIW, here's what I have so far. It's a work in progress, I'll likely keep coming back to brainstorm it from time to time.

[Dullstar]

it's one of the reasons I suggested the fields in the first place.

I'd like to see the fields reconsidered on this basis: with current graphics, there's a reasonable use case for the existing objects (covering the entire surface of a terrain piece) that's completely mechanically fair, yet visually ugly. In fact, it's part of the reason I suggested the Downdraft as well - I couldn't use a splat pad because it would have hung off the edge of the terrain, so instead I just had to make the level taller than would have otherwise been necessary.

[WillLem]

I'd like to see the fields reconsidered on this basis

+1

Fields have always seemed to me a much better way to implement a splattable/non-splattable area of terrain. I think the issue that came up with them was to do with how they overlap with Builder (and similar) bricks that are built into a field area that has already been destroyed.

The topic is still open, although it's not filed as a suggestion as yet.

[namida]

This is a problem that could be fixed with the existing object types. One example that comes to mind is a graphic similar to the (anti)splat pads in namida_wasteland, but with the pins at a 45 degree inwards angle, so that the pins hang out the side of terrain and the actual (anti)splat area can exactly overlap it. See attached rough sketch.

(Anti)splat fields remain on the rejected list, for all the reasons that they were already there for.

[WillLem]

One example that comes to mind is a graphic similar to the (anti)splat pads in namida_wasteland, but with the pins at a 45 degree inwards angle, so that the pins hang out the side of terrain and the actual (anti)splat area can exactly overlap it. See attached rough sketch.

A good idea, but it doesn't address irregular-shaped terrain and is still too similar to the existing default splat/anti-splat pads.

I'll keep brainstorming this one; there has to be a way to make it work with the existing objects. When my creative block has lifted I'll get on it

[namida]

A good idea, but it doesn't address irregular-shaped terrain and is still too similar to the existing default splat/anti-splat pads.

For the former, are there that many situations where we need irregularly-shaped (anti)splat zones, rather than being able to create the level in a straight-edged tileset (or use a straight-edged piece, if the tileset is a mixed one)?

For the latter - sorry, but I don't see how this is a problem? Maybe we're not quite on the same page here - I'm thinking in the sense of "create a new (anti)splat pad object, using the existing object type, that has the pins at an angle, this being designed to cover the entire top of a terrain piece" as a solution to "existing graphic can't nicely cover the entire top of a terrain piece".

[WillLem]

For the former, are there that many situations where we need irregularly-shaped (anti)splat zones, rather than being able to create the level in a straight-edged tileset (or use a straight-edged piece, if the tileset is a mixed one)?

Probably not, to be fair, or the idea may have gained more support/traction when initially suggested.

a solution to "existing graphic can't nicely cover the entire top of a terrain piece".

Your graphic does indeed work for straight-edged pieces, but I interpreted the issue as being "not able to cover the entire top of an irregularly-shaped terrain piece" - mostly due to the word "nicely," which indicates that there is some element of irregularity to the resulting setup.

I do agree that the current object should be more than sufficient for most, if not all, uses. Hence why I keep coming back to consider other ways of depicting it.

And - it can in fact be used as a "field"-type object, with the trigger area covering however much of the terrain is desired. The only issue is its interaction with constructive terrain (i.e. Builders, Stoners, etc) in areas which appear empty, thus creating one of those pesky "unfair use" cases.

[namida]

in areas which appear empty, thus creating one of those pesky "unfair use" cases.

I don't see what's unfair about it, after all, the player will be able to see an (anti)splat pad in that location. If there isn't already terrain there, the only conclusion the player could draw is "I am meant to (or not meant to, in the case of a splatpad) add terrain there". Or, of course, "the level designer wants me to think I should put terrain there but that's just a decoy".

Unless you were talking about using the deprecated AND always advised only to be used with no-effect objects "only on terrain" feature together with the existing splatpads? In which case this is a "don't do that" in general, whether or not it's in empty space.

[WillLem]

I don't see what's unfair about it, after all, the player will be able to see an (anti)splat pad in that location.

I'm pretty sure it was mentioned somewhere that the reason why (anti)-splat pad trigger areas shouldn't be used to create fields covering large areas of terrain is because a Builder might build into what seems like empty space, but in fact contains part of the trigger area.

The trigger area would, then, affect the Builder's bridge. Like this:



If (anti)-splat pad triggers could be tweaked so that they don't affect Builder/Platformer/Stacker and Stoner-created terrain, they could be used to cover large areas of irregularly shaped terrain without any potentially unexpected or unexplained behaviour.

[Proxima]

That was the reason why using anti-splat pads as "fields" was discouraged, yes.

But that's now a moot point, because the above construction depended on the "Only On Terrain" feature, which is now deprecated (i.e. it is due to be culled, and the only reason for not culling it immediately is to give creators some time to tweak their content so it no longer needs the feature).

[namida]

At any rate, I think there's been more than enough discussion about them at this point. The bottom line is that they are not going to happen - and while discussion about "how can I find another way to implement this idea that needed them" is a fair point of discussion in general, this is not the topic for it at this point.