26averyj wrote:

Jimmyrooster wrote:

Matchmaking:

Why?
Imagine if I have many expensive cards and I play against someone new. That is not fair is it?

How?
Each card gets a hidden ranking value depending on how good it is.
We take the sum/average of all the ranking values of all the cards that the player owns.
Given that value we assign each player a target game slot from 1-4 (1 is bad cards and 4 is great cards) - we can have 4 games running at one time - each player in each game gets their own cloud variable.
The player tries to join that game and waits for an opponent.
If this takes over X minutes then the player tries to join a game ranked above or below them.

What do you think of this?

That seems to be the simplest logical solution. However, it still doesn't completely solve the problem of unfairness. If my cards amount to level 1 and another person's cards amount to level 4, we're still going to wind up playing together. Then my opponent has an advantage and will most likely win, not allowing me to earn coins and improve my card level.
I propose a different idea that might help solve the problem . Here's how it works: the cards are divided into 3 categories: defense, offense, and attack. Archers are for defense, paladins and wizards are for offense, and lightning and meteor swarm are attacks. In the bottom bar, you always have one of each type (we would add more defense cards). When you place down a card, a new card of the same type replaces it, but has a five second cool down period where you cannot place it. Buying cards allows you to have more varietly, not volume. Different cards will have different advantages, but buying more cards will not cause you to have a decisive advantage.

26averyj wrote:

Jimmyrooster wrote:

snip

That seems to be the simplest logical solution. However, it still doesn't completely solve the problem of unfairness. If my cards amount to level 1 and another person's cards amount to level 4, we're still going to wind up playing together. Then my opponent has an advantage and will most likely win, not allowing me to earn coins and improve my card level.
I propose a different idea that might help solve the problem . Here's how it works: the cards are divided into 3 categories: defense, offense, and attack. Archers are for defense, paladins and wizards are for offense, and lightning and meteor swarm are attacks. In the bottom bar, you always have one of each type (we would add more defense cards). When you place down a card, a new card of the same type replaces it, but has a five second cool down period where you cannot place it. Buying cards allows you to have more varietly, not volume. Different cards will have different advantages, but buying more cards will not cause you to have a decisive advantage.

26averyj wrote:

LightBalloon292 wrote:

hey guys im sorry but im going to leave I cant really help and I've done nothing so im going to leave

OK. We'll be sad to see you go, but we understand that you want to leave and we respect your decision.

ingery_bob wrote:

Holy crud, this is still alive. Good to know!

NitroTyper3000 wrote:

Username:
Alternate account(s) (if any): this one, and @–nextgen– are my main. (I have a couple of inactive ones
Job(s) you want: advertising agent
Why? yeet i mean i like advertising and i think it would be epic to help with it
How active are you on Scratch (on a scale of 1/10): everyday except sunday
Are you following this topic (yes/no): yes
The languages you speak: English
Comments (if any): If you want some references i mean i can give some…
One of your projects to see (if possible): Yeah sure um https://scratch.mit.edu/projects/395871698/

bgvikings08 wrote:

Hello, I am reapplying!

Username: @Bgvikings08
Job(s) you want: Coder/Designer
Why? I think I would be good
How active are you on Scratch (on a scale of 1/10): 7-8
Are you following this topic (yes/no): Now I am
The languages you speak: English
Comments (if any): What do I do to start?
One of your projects to see (if possible): https://scratch.mit.edu/projects/386586115

Thanks!

Time for some more

Designers/Artists:

• Draw the extras and instructions icon.
  
• Animate skeleton or paladin.
  
• Design new cards (as always) and animate them.
  
• Tell me if you are alive.
  

Programmers:

• Create list for values of cards (damage attack, health etc) and render them with icons in the shop.
  
• Add the gems rewards thing to the server.
  
• Finish damage engine (@Jimmyrooster)
  
• Work on multiplayer matches.
  

Sound designers:

• Work on sound effects. Post about sound effects: https://scratch.mit.edu/discuss/topic/345718/?page=14#post-3903860
  

All:

• Refine card descriptions (found in text engine sprite).
  
• Report bugs.
  
• What do you think of having a list of your cards? It is kind of confusing at the moment, not knowing what cards you have.
  

Jimmyrooster wrote:

bgvikings08 wrote:

Hello, I am reapplying!

Username: @Bgvikings08
Job(s) you want: Coder/Designer
Why? I think I would be good
How active are you on Scratch (on a scale of 1/10): 7-8
Are you following this topic (yes/no): Now I am
The languages you speak: English
Comments (if any): What do I do to start?
One of your projects to see (if possible): https://scratch.mit.edu/projects/386586115

Thanks!

Do you think you can make this style of art? (Vector with pretty realistic gradients)

To start, complete some weekly goals (coming when I have written them).

bgvikings08 wrote:

Jimmyrooster wrote:

bgvikings08 wrote:

Hello, I am reapplying!

Username: @Bgvikings08
Job(s) you want: Coder/Designer
Why? I think I would be good
How active are you on Scratch (on a scale of 1/10): 7-8
Are you following this topic (yes/no): Now I am
The languages you speak: English
Comments (if any): What do I do to start?
One of your projects to see (if possible): https://scratch.mit.edu/projects/386586115

Thanks!

Do you think you can make this style of art? (Vector with pretty realistic gradients)

To start, complete some weekly goals (coming when I have written them).

no… I only make realistic graphics and not cartoon ones… where are the goals?

light_cloud wrote:

Ok, I'll animate the skeleton

LightCloudGreatester wrote:

light_cloud wrote:

Ok, I'll animate the skeleton

I did the skeleton - https://scratch.mit.edu/projects/396266570/

• Castles: focused in the middle.
  
• Paladin: front (Note we can't use this art in the final game)
  
• Wizard and Archer: from behind and slightly to the left.
  
• Unused Chinese Solder and Skeleton: directly above.
  

• Directly above: Sprites can easily be made to walk in a different direction by rotating the sprite. Sprites lose some realism and visual depth and at can be slightly hard to draw / animate.
  
• In front: Sprites are clearly visible and look quite good. Sprites look bad going to the top of the screen and firing arrows / casting spells / whatever up the screen.
  
• Behind and to the left: Sprites have a secretive air and look quite good. Sprites look bad going to the bottom of the screen and firing arrows / casting spells / whatever down the screen.
  

Jimmyrooster wrote:

bgvikings08 wrote:

Jimmyrooster wrote:

bgvikings08 wrote:

Hello, I am reapplying!

Username: @Bgvikings08
Job(s) you want: Coder/Designer
Why? I think I would be good
How active are you on Scratch (on a scale of 1/10): 7-8
Are you following this topic (yes/no): Now I am
The languages you speak: English
Comments (if any): What do I do to start?
One of your projects to see (if possible): https://scratch.mit.edu/projects/386586115

Thanks!

Do you think you can make this style of art? (Vector with pretty realistic gradients)

To start, complete some weekly goals (coming when I have written them).

no… I only make realistic graphics and not cartoon ones… where are the goals?

Two posts above this one. https://scratch.mit.edu/discuss/topic/345718/?page=24#post-4020587
Are you sure you can't do something like https://scratch.mit.edu/projects/280886515/ We are making most of the game in that style.

Jimmyrooster wrote:

LightCloudGreatester wrote:

light_cloud wrote:

Ok, I'll animate the skeleton

I did the skeleton - https://scratch.mit.edu/projects/396266570/

This raises the issue of perspective of the board.

• Castles: focused in the middle.
  
• Paladin: front (Note we can't use this art in the final game)
  
• Wizard and Archer: from behind and slightly to the left.
  
• Unused Chinese Solder and Skeleton: directly above.
  

We can't really have all of these perspectives in the game, so we have to settle on one. Here are some advantages and disadvantages:

• Directly above: Sprites can easily be made to walk in a different direction by rotating the sprite. Sprites lose some realism and visual depth and at can be slightly hard to draw / animate.
  
• In front: Sprites are clearly visible and look quite good. Sprites look bad going to the top of the screen and firing arrows / casting spells / whatever up the screen.
  
• Behind and to the left: Sprites have a secretive air and look quite good. Sprites look bad going to the bottom of the screen and firing arrows / casting spells / whatever down the screen.
  

There is currently much confusion on perspective in the artwork for King's Defence and I would like to know what perspective you think would be best and why.