Some small top-down pixel art for a game - A&A related

Do you have something in mind -Let's hear it.
Post Reply
Blair
Posts: 46
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2004 6:55 pm
Location: Canada

Some small top-down pixel art for a game - A&A related

Post by Blair » Sat Aug 12, 2006 5:33 am

Hey hey, I just wanted to let people know that I am going to be (eventually) making a game that is most likely going to be some sort of Axis & Allies hybrid.. I havn't figured much out yet about how I want the game to play out, but I do want it to be hexagon based. It's just a matter of if I want it to be closer to A&A:Minis or possibly like D-Day or the upcoming Battle of the Bulge.

I just started this project yesterday, and have only worked on possible artwork thus far.

Once the gameplay mechanics are pretty well thought out and written in an organized fashion, I will start the basic coding in Gamemaker. Gamemaker is a well, gamemaking program that I have been learning for some time now, and will need to still learn quite a bit about before I can make this game into what I want it to be.

Anyways, back to the artwork, this is what I have completed so far.

Image

I know the Panther and Sherman might not look completely accurate, I just hope it's easy to know which is supposed to be which. :wink:

The soldiers that I have right there are just basic riflemen, m1 garand and kar98 respectively.
The other thing hopefully looks enough like a flak88 to be recognizable. :D

Anyways, those are some rough ideas, and that's what I'm trying to get the game to look like. If there is anyone here that wants to help in any way (ideas, graphics, programming, etc) just let me know.
Oh, and if you want to critique anything, go for it. I think the tanks don't look amazingly accurate, but I hope it's enough.

Ah, one last thing, maybe.. If this post has been an unorganized mess, it's 4:30 am, so cut me some slack. Or don't, whichever. :lol:

- Blair

P.S. I hope this was the right section for this. If not, sorry Larry.
:)

Rune Blade
Posts: 99
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2005 8:01 pm

Post by Rune Blade » Sat Aug 12, 2006 7:43 am

Looks Good Blair. I like the idea of game pieces being shown from the top.

RB
Only the dead have seen the end of war - Plato

User avatar
adlertag
Posts: 1445
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2004 3:28 pm
Location: norway

Post by adlertag » Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:27 pm

Welcome to the forum where the dirty dozen hangs out.

First, you dont wanna do the same mistakes as the usual designers do. Lucky for you I will help you out, sonny. I just might be a future customer, so lets do this baby right.

1) just dont make too many of them damned territories.

2) Artillery is a long range big gun that delivers barrage in a pre-combat phase, and it is extremely difficult to defend against this. How about leting the artillery barrage an adjacent hex ??? Give it a thought.

3) Tanks is made for breakethrough-punch and explotation. Let the rules show that you are familiar with that consept.

4) Infantry are stronger in defence. If they are dug-in, it takes 3 infantry units to successfully attack one defending unit.

5) Please let fighters do air-to-air combat in an opening phase, I beg you.

Enough

GROGnads
Posts: 400
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2004 3:11 pm
Location: Aberdeen, WA state USA

F Y I

Post by GROGnads » Sun Aug 13, 2006 5:36 pm

Well, just remember that the 'scale' of the "Conflict" being portrayed has plenty to 'do' with setting anything UP for whatever. It is WHY within the "revised" version of the 'A&A' game, that the likes of "Artillery" should have little to do with that, since this would be an inherent 'component' OF any "Unit Formations", along with "terrain restrictions" where that otherwise has NO 'considerations' as well. Then there's the very "ahistorical" notion of NOT allowing "Invasions" of any 'Neutral' territories!?! ole "Adolf" wouldn't 'abide' by such and nor should YOU! These 'pics' of yours look GREAT by the way.
"You had to 'GO'!?! Now we ALL have to 'GO'!" BIG Joe-"Kelly's Heroes"-the MOVIE

Blair
Posts: 46
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2004 6:55 pm
Location: Canada

Post by Blair » Sun Aug 13, 2006 8:44 pm

This is probably a lengthy post, but please read it. :)

Thanks for the replies you two. I am not sure how to respond to Grognad’s post other than saying that scale and the size of the conflicts will definitely be looked at and thought about when I figure out what kind of conflicts I would like to add. Oh, and while we’re on the topic of what types of conflicts, including specific ones, everyone is more than welcome to add any ideas, including different types of conflicts.

Oh and thanks for the props to the artwork I did so far! :D

But on to Aldertag’s post. I’ll try to talk about some things you’ve mentioned. Just a heads up though, this game I’ll be making is still heavily in planning stages, such as I am not sure about what the combat specifics will be. I might have them like A&A Minis though, where the further away the unit is, the, pretty much, less accurate the guy’s shot will be. The beauty of programming random events though, is that you’re not restricted to a 6 sided die or 12 sided, or whatever. You can even, technically, have a 3 sided coin/die. Meaning every outcome has a 33% chance in occurring. But yeah, on to your suggestions and comments.

1) The board will be made up of hexagons, and I have included a picture with this post that shows a test I created with hexagons and most of the figures I have created thus far. The actual “territories” will be based on what kind of game mode is chosen. I will eventually want more types of modes, but for now I might just go with the kill each other and/or take over certain objectives. I do have other ideas though. So, I have no idea how many territories a certain mode will have, or however I will even set it up.
2) I do like this idea of having artillery do some kind of barrage before any combat occurs, but I will have to either get you to talk about this more or I will have to come up with a way to make something like this balanced.
3) While I love world war two and know quite a bit more than the average person, I am not entirely sure about what you mean by exploitation, and I am not entirely sure how I will add a breakthrough-punch and exploitation concept into this game. Please go on in more detail.
4) This makes a lot of sense, and I like how infantry attacking only hit on a 1 as infantry on defense hit on a 2 or less (well, in d-day that is the case). I mean, I like how it makes sense, but it also kind of makes you to not want to attack an infantry unit with your infantry unit. How would this be balanced out a bit more? Make it so that it takes your infantry unit a full turn to dig itself in? But it won’t take a turn to get back out (like, if you’re forced to retreat). But, I believe there should be some advantage to not having your infantry unit dug in (meaning, if you’re on the offensive). Something to do with mobility, but I’m not sure what exactly. If you wish to add to this, please do!
5) I will have to think quite a bit about air to air combat and air units in general, since I will probably not be adding any air units for a while since I want to focus on getting the ground combat set in stone first.

I hope that explains a few things, but please, keep replying! Every bit of information and every comment, be it positive or negative (within reason of course) will be of help.


So here's that picture:
Image

It was just meant as a test to see what the units would look like on the grass hexagons that I made. Another update though, the Flak88 was made a bit larger.

Oh, and on the topic of the sizes of the figures, I was just trying to keep the same style that Axis & Allies has had, with the figures not being in the same scale as eachother. Because lets face it, I can make infantry for the size of that tank, but they would be waaay too small (I tried it, and ther was pretty much no room for any good detail in a character that small). But also, if I make the tanks any larger, I won't be able to fit anything else in a hexagon, and would therefore have to make the hexagons even bigger, making people have to scroll even more during gameplay.

Thanks for the responses so far, I want to see more. :lol:

- Blair







EDIT: I just wanted to point one thing out. Aldertag mentioned something about being a customer (or that might have been someone else, not sure at the moment), but I wanted to just let everyone know. At this moment in time this game is being developed as freeware, but once I get the ball rolling and have quite a few people play it, who knows, I might ask for donations. :wink:

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests