Re: [crawl-dev] Re: Crawl 5
- // From: "Linley Robert Henzell" <linley.henzell@...>
// Just a couple of comments:
// - IIRC the Angband variant explosion had more to do with Ben
// Harrison's cleaning up of the source code than with the
// external data file thing. All of the variants I can think of
// involve a lot of source-level changes (there may be one or two
// which are just info file based, but none of the big ones).
// I'm not saying that enabling non-compile-requiring modifications
// wouldn't help people make variants, but it certainly isn't a
// necessary condition.
A lot of them start as changes to the data files and only minor
adjustments to the code. A fair number of variants never really
get any further.
Overall, its the nice clean Angband Engine that people like. In
fact why don't we do Crawlband instead of Crawl 5.0.
Here are some issues:
-- monsters: I have a quick little program for pulling out data
from the monster list, which could easily spit out a monster
data file (I've already done this for AEMoria, something I
really should finish up).
-- skill system: would have to be brought over, but the bulk
is already fairly moduralized. Most of the work would be
in tying in the exercise calls to the correct parts of the
-- dungeons/subdungeons: various types already been done in a
few variants, most of the work would be in bringing over the
dungeon generation code so we can have Crawl-like caves.
As a bonus, we'd be getting larger levels and a lot of extra
vault types (ooh, Crawl with Greater Checkerboard Vaults!).
-- items: Crawl has relatively few so they can be quickly done
by hand... some little snippets of code will need to be added.
-- persistant dungeon: would have to make changes to the save
formats to accomidate that.
-- unneeded stats and resistances could be quickly ripped out,
the character description pages would need some rework.
-- race/class: Angband has some structures for these things, which
is a definite start to making them data-driven.
-- combat system: Oangband combat is quite nice, especially
if we reverse the time system like Cthangband, so that we
can have something close to our current combat time system.
-- magic: The memorization system is already there, and with a
few tweaks it could be practically identical. Is having
to lug around books so bad? If it is we can always create
an artificial list for the old behaviour.
-- gods: Pretty much adding the religion module from scratch.
Wouldn't want to get involved with a lot of the variant
systems at all.
-- macros: Crawl macros have problems, Angband has fixed the
bugs I had problems with and has a very powerful system.
Overall, quite a win.
-- options: Angband has nice option screens that allow
options to be modified while the game is running...
it'd be nice if Crawl had this for the 4.0 release,
but we could hold off on it for Crawlband. Another
-- Angband has more portibility and would quickly get us
X Windows and tileset support.
-- inventory: Unfortunately, we'd probably be stuck in the
short term with the annoying Angband/Moria one where
items are regularly shifted around. A big loss until
its rewritten... although having equipment on a separate
list is a bit of a win.
Overall, it shouldn't be much more than a months work to get
Crawlband up and in running order.
PS Happy April Fools Day!
- On Mon, Apr 01, 2002 at 05:37:23AM -0500, Brent Ross wrote:
>You really had me goin'. Nice work. :)
> PS Happy April Fools Day!
Daniel Ligon maglorn@...
Bringing in the Lords of Chaos Sucking out the souls of heroes
Bringing up the Beasts of Hades Laying waste to knights and ladies
- At 5:37 AM -0500 4/1/02, Brent Ross wrote:
>// From: "Linley Robert Henzell" <linley.henzell@...>You had me going to. :-) I've been working on getting Crawl5 up and
>// Just a couple of comments:
>// - IIRC the Angband variant explosion had more to do with Ben
>// Harrison's cleaning up of the source code than with the
>// external data file thing. All of the variants I can think of
>// involve a lot of source-level changes (there may be one or two
>// which are just info file based, but none of the big ones).
>// I'm not saying that enabling non-compile-requiring modifications
>// wouldn't help people make variants, but it certainly isn't a
>// necessary condition.
>A lot of them start as changes to the data files and only minor
>adjustments to the code. A fair number of variants never really
>get any further.
>Overall, its the nice clean Angband Engine that people like. In
>fact why don't we do Crawlband instead of Crawl 5.0.
>PS Happy April Fools Day!
running. What I'm doing is getting a very basic game up and running
with a very crude level design, one very stupid monster, and no
combat. In other words the skeleton of something we can build on.
I have most of it done now. After I finish I was planning on
uploading it to an FTP site so that you guys can make comments and
then hopefully switch to SourceForge or something.