Jagged Alliance 3 from Haemimont Games

[raeven]

I’m pretty sure if the JA3 team had listened to the Codex for game development advise they would come up with the perfect simulation of a giant machine with a big black dildo attached to it where you strap yourself to it and turn it on for a year non stop.

holy shit that sounds awesome

 

[Aemar]

Bless your hopeful souls for submitting yourselves to uncertainty so that others don't have to

Uncertainty? There's been enough info in this thread already to classify this game as certified trash. Not exactly the Jagged Alliance most people have been waiting for for ages.

 

[ArchAngel]

Bless your hopeful souls for submitting yourselves to uncertainty so that others don't have to

Uncertainty? There's been enough info in this thread already to classify this game as certified trash. Not exactly the Jagged Alliance most people have been waiting for for ages.

If they really limited weapons to these short ranges than it is 100% certified trash. I might suffer some of the other shit design decisions but I will not suffer this shit.

 

[Shaki]

Ok, so comparing the weapon stats with JA2 it looks like the ranges were limited afterall, e.g.
PSG1 - 36 (JA3) vs 80 (JA2)
M82 - 40 vs 150
Minimi - 30 vs 50
M14 - 24 vs 33

For other guns their range stats looks similar, I have the feeling that they wanted to put standard long barrel weapons ranges to reach 30+ without attachments, and sniper rifles to be able to barely reach further, but not by much.

I just don't understand the logic. After multiple sequels failed because their devs had dogshit original ideas instead of following the spirit of the original, they try to make another one, swearing this time it's a real successor to JA2... Then they fucking change everything good to their shit original ideas anyway. Do all these idiots just like losing money? They had literally one fucking job, make JA2 with better graphics and new map. That's it. Amazing game, free $$$. But nah, instead they decide to just FUCK IT UP like all the other failed sequels. Why? How are these morons able to even brush their teeth without choking to death, being this mentally deficient?

 

[Aemar]

Bless your hopeful souls for submitting yourselves to uncertainty so that others don't have to

Uncertainty? There's been enough info in this thread already to classify this game as certified trash. Not exactly the Jagged Alliance most people have been waiting for for ages.

If they really limited weapons to these short ranges than it is 100% certified trash. I might suffer some of the other shit design decisions but I will not suffer this shit.

Well, you already know the answer then.

 

[ArchAngel]

Bless your hopeful souls for submitting yourselves to uncertainty so that others don't have to

Uncertainty? There's been enough info in this thread already to classify this game as certified trash. Not exactly the Jagged Alliance most people have been waiting for for ages.

If they really limited weapons to these short ranges than it is 100% certified trash. I might suffer some of the other shit design decisions but I will not suffer this shit.

Well, you already know the answer then.

Well I am still hoping it is just to make trailers more interesting with no need to scroll the camera.

 

[agris]

Ok, so comparing the weapon stats with JA2 it looks like the ranges were limited afterall, e.g.
PSG1 - 36 (JA3) vs 80 (JA2)
M82 - 40 vs 150
Minimi - 30 vs 50
M14 - 24 vs 33

For other guns their range stats looks similar, I have the feeling that they wanted to put standard long barrel weapons ranges to reach 30+ without attachments, and sniper rifles to be able to barely reach further, but not by much.

I just don't understand the logic. After multiple sequels failed because their devs had dogshit original ideas instead of following the spirit of the original, they try to make another one, swearing this time it's a real successor to JA2... Then they fucking change everything good to their shit original ideas anyway. Do all these idiots just like losing money? They had literally one fucking job, make JA2 with better graphics and new map. That's it. Amazing game, free $$$. But nah, instead they decide to just FUCK IT UP like all the other failed sequels. Why? How are these morons able to even brush their teeth without choking to death, being this mentally deficient?

The maps are small and compressed, compared to JA2. I think this is one of the root causes of the auto fire -50% dmg decision, as well.

 

[Lord of Riva]

Ok, so comparing the weapon stats with JA2 it looks like the ranges were limited afterall, e.g.
PSG1 - 36 (JA3) vs 80 (JA2)
M82 - 40 vs 150
Minimi - 30 vs 50
M14 - 24 vs 33

For other guns their range stats looks similar, I have the feeling that they wanted to put standard long barrel weapons ranges to reach 30+ without attachments, and sniper rifles to be able to barely reach further, but not by much.

I just don't understand the logic. After multiple sequels failed because their devs had dogshit original ideas instead of following the spirit of the original, they try to make another one, swearing this time it's a real successor to JA2... Then they fucking change everything good to their shit original ideas anyway. Do all these idiots just like losing money? They had literally one fucking job, make JA2 with better graphics and new map. That's it. Amazing game, free $$$. But nah, instead they decide to just FUCK IT UP like all the other failed sequels. Why? How are these morons able to even brush their teeth without choking to death, being this mentally deficient?

So what am I missing here, are people claiming that the values have to be identical?
Why?

You can't just look at some values in a 24 year old game, compare them to a new one and pretend they mean the same...?
I have not watched any of these trailers or gameplay stuff, so I have no clue about actual ranges but you guys simply do not know the metric they use in these games and comparing two completely unrelated variables does not serve a purpose.

Again, I have no opinion on the matter at this point in time, but that does not sound logical in the least,

 

[Beowulf]

So what am I missing here, are people claiming that the values have to be identical?
Why?

You can't just look at some values in a 24 year old game, compare them to a new one and pretend they mean the same...?
I have not watched any of these trailers or gameplay stuff, so I have no clue about actual ranges but you guys simply do not know the metric they use in these games and comparing two completely unrelated variables does not serve a purpose.

Again, I have no opinion on the matter at this point in time, but that does not sound logical in the least,

Well, we don't know what distance is 1 "square" in JA3 and does 24 range translate to 24 "squares", but it is reasonable assumption that it does (we didn't know that for JA2 either, but you can infer it by comparing real life effective weapon range to the range stat in the game).
And the point to be made by this comparison is not about how the values compare directly to the same weapon in the previous installment, but to show that everything has been compressed. The difference in range between shotguns and AR's is smaller, the upper range for AR's is smaller and the range for sniper rifles just reaches the AR's range from JA2. The ranges for shotguns and SMG's shown in the trailer are roughly the same as in JA2.
From that we can infer, that the engagements will happen on smaller ranges in general. Does that sound logical for you?

Of course, the devs can still surprise us with how the game handles all this, and that's kinda what majority of us hopes for.

 

[Lord of Riva]

Of course, the devs can still surprise us with how the game handles all this, and that's kinda what majority of us hopes for.

I am not optimistic, "streamlining" is something very modern. I get the issue you describe and just wanted to point out that the wierd comparison was pointless.

I meam I read that the ranges seems pretty short from people seeing it in the trailer, but that is easily perceivable just visually. In the end my whole post was just me being a bit autistic, I guess, please continue.

 

[Zombra]

the original

Oh, you mean Jagged Alliance 1?

 

[Ghulgothas]

Well, you already know the answer then.

I wonder why they chose such a small environment to show off their shotguns of all things.

 

[raeven]

The PSG1 and M82 aren't even in JA2, only in the 1.13 mod...

 

[spectre]

The PSG1 and M82 aren't even in JA2, only in the 1.13 mod...

Actually, both were in Unfinished Business.

 

[raeven]

During the Dev stream today they talked about engagement ranges a lot. Apparently they will be fairly sizable, but I guess we won't know for certain for another week....

 

[raeven]

The PSG1 and M82 aren't even in JA2, only in the 1.13 mod...

Actually, both were in Unfinished Business.

Fair enough then!

 

[Harthwain]

I wonder why they chose such a small environment to show off their shotguns of all things.

Because for some reasons (balance reasons, I guess) shotguns are usually presented as CQC weapons.

 

[Aemar]

Cloak of Invisibility confirmed.

 

[Thorgeim]

Id love a good JA1/2 sequel but not getting my hopes up. It all seems a bit too zoomed in (edit: actually watched again and apparently its possible to zoom out more), I get it they want to show 3D things and its 2023, isometric isnt good enough apparently. But I watched some streams and AK seems to have a range of 24, which is about across a road and a bit more, Some KAR type rifle was 32, which is a tiny bit more. I know they have to scale this to game areas but its short, it will be more cramped in than nu-xcom most probably. Its all a bit too cartoony as well. Lets see, maybe it wont be so bad...

 

[agris]

Ok, so comparing the weapon stats with JA2 it looks like the ranges were limited afterall, e.g.
PSG1 - 36 (JA3) vs 80 (JA2)
M82 - 40 vs 150
Minimi - 30 vs 50
M14 - 24 vs 33

For other guns their range stats looks similar, I have the feeling that they wanted to put standard long barrel weapons ranges to reach 30+ without attachments, and sniper rifles to be able to barely reach further, but not by much.

I just don't understand the logic. After multiple sequels failed because their devs had dogshit original ideas instead of following the spirit of the original, they try to make another one, swearing this time it's a real successor to JA2... Then they fucking change everything good to their shit original ideas anyway. Do all these idiots just like losing money? They had literally one fucking job, make JA2 with better graphics and new map. That's it. Amazing game, free $$$. But nah, instead they decide to just FUCK IT UP like all the other failed sequels. Why? How are these morons able to even brush their teeth without choking to death, being this mentally deficient?

So what am I missing here, are people claiming that the values have to be identical?
Why?

You can't just look at some values in a 24 year old game, compare them to a new one and pretend they mean the same...?
I have not watched any of these trailers or gameplay stuff, so I have no clue about actual ranges but you guys simply do not know the metric they use in these games and comparing two completely unrelated variables does not serve a purpose.

Again, I have no opinion on the matter at this point in time, but that does not sound logical in the least,

You’re completely right about comparing across two different values with different baselines. Yet, if you look at videos of combat, you’ll see it’s universally more compressed than JA2, which doesn’t mean there isn’t close quarters and more spread out combat. Just that at the most spread out I’ve seen, the scale is much closer than in some JA2 maps.

Also the buildings seem to suffer some strange form of dwarfism. Metal hangers look more like hobbit holes…

 

[Ghulgothas]

Somebody rouse the geezers over at Bear's Pit, mods will Fix It.

Dev Diary 13 - Co-op Mode & Mod Support

Yo, gamers! I'm Vlad Abadzhiev-Jahn, a programmer and designer at Haemimont Games. Today, I want to talk to you about two major features - our two-player online co-op multiplayer and modding!


Ticket for One That Seats Two

Multiplayer brings a whole other energy to a game's campaign. It allows you to explore tactical differences with your partner and devise strategies together, experience and discuss the story side by side, and it also adds replayability.

Translating the single player experience as closely as possible while accommodating two people frictionlessly was a challenge both technically and design wise. Fortunately, we at Haemimont Games have some prior experience which gave us a strong foundation to draw from.

Let's start with getting you and your buddy to Grand Chien. One player is designated the “host” and the other the “partner”. The host is the one who initiates the game and the partner is the player who joins the host’s game. When creating a game the host has the option of starting a new campaign with their partner or inviting them into an ongoing playthrough.

We aimed to make the co-op gameplay as seamless as possible. The host can save and load games at any time as if they were playing alone and their partner will be there along for the ride. Additionally there is no functional difference between a save made in a co-op and single player, and the host can continue the game in single player if their buddy drops out. Both players can also load any of the saves (auto-saves or manual saves) created during co-op gameplay and continue them in singleplayer.



We found that in co-op games it is important for both players to be aware of what's happening in the moment-to-moment gameplay. We implemented a system where conversations with NPCs are controlled by the player who initiated them, but both players observe the conversation happening in real time. The non-controlling player can even offer suggestions for conversation options.



In order for both players to be aware of what is going on, we had to make some compromises. For instance, both players can only explore the same sector in tactical view. Splitting up to tackle Grand Chien separately might sound appealing, but the majority of missions take place on multiple sectors and it can get disorienting.

On top of that, there's the issue of how time advances when one player is engaged in combat in a different sector. It would be tedious for one player to spend 40 minutes in the Satellite View waiting for their partner to finish their tough fight with the Legion. Considering the technical challenges as well, having both players on the same sector made the most sense.


Mercs for me, and for Thee

Both players can hire mercenaries and manage squads, but since you're on the same side, you share funds and strategize together. To remain flexible the host player can assign and reassign control over individual mercs at any time. When in a sector (tactical view) players can only order their own mercs around, with both players being able to explore the sector and interact with it at the same time. During combat both players share a turn, which ends when both players click "Ready". Easy and simple!



In the beginning we were focused on preventing the players from trolling each other. This resulted in a sort of adversarial system which included mechanics such as only one player being able to control a squad in satellite view, or prompts for standing conversations with NPCs. Through testing and iteration we shifted our focus to a system that promotes co-operation and flow rather than preventing trolling. I mean, you can always shoot your friend's mercs, but remember, they’re your mercs as well!

During development we discovered an interesting case where the host may take control over all mercs and leave none to their partner to control. With the partner unable to interact with the game all they can do is watch, which indirectly creates a kind of spectator mode for the game. It was initially reported as a bug, but it turned into a happy little feature.


Navigating the Desync Minefield

On the technical side chasing down desyncs was the most time-consuming part. For those unfamiliar with the term - a "desync" is essentially a mismatch in the result of a player's action between the two players' computers. Sometimes this can be as simple as the virtual dice landing on a different number, while other times as elaborate as a different merc appearing as hired on each person's screen.

Desyncs may occur at any time as a result of any system. From the camera, through the inventory, combat, and even animations. While we fix every bug we catch, we don't want your game to be ruined because we missed one. If you encounter a desync while playing, a popup with a "Resync" button will open on the host's screen. Clicking it will trigger a quick loading screen and your game will be resynchronized, with no progress lost or rollbacks.

Modding also directly impacts multiplayer. To ensure the game remains synchronized between the two players, any mods in use must be installed by both players. Mods that add content using our internal systems, such as weapons and mercs will be automatically synchronized. However, modders who dabble in scripting and coding will need to consider how to keep their functionality from desynchronizing and test their mods in co-op if they choose to support it.



Your Game, Your Rules - Modding in JA3

Modding has played a significant part in the history of Jagged Alliance as community made mods have ensured the game's continued longevity. Long after its original release in 1999, Jagged Alliance 2's torch keeps burning thanks to mods such as the popular 1.13 mod. From the get-go we knew how important it was to build the game with modding in mind for players and creators alike, and enable modders to create JA3's equivalent of the renowned 1.13 mod and much more!

Modders will have access to the tools we use internally to create content such as mercs, weapons, items, quests, voice responses, and can even add support for new languages.



We believe that mercs and merc packs will be one of the more popular mod types. Our appearance editor tool allows modders to reuse existing game assets by mix and matching different body parts to create new models for mercs or NPCs. Mercs made from premade body parts won't be as unique as creating an entirely custom model, but they'll be easier to create. We wanted to make modding accessible and keep multiple options open.

Modelers and animators can use Blender to export new assets for their mercs, weapon, or objects in the world. Adding new actions or a new weapon type such as dual wielding machetes for example, would require a whole new animation set as well.



To create a fully fleshed out merc modders will also want to upload 2D portraits (big and small) and create voice responses for their mercs. We look forward to seeing what kind of mercs the community comes up with!



When Will Modding Be Available?

All of these tools will be made available shortly after the release of Jagged Alliance 3. We want to focus on delivering a polished version of the game, and then release modding as part of the first major post-release update. The map editor and quest editor will come later on, with another major update, which will enable modders to create new maps, sectors, and entirely new campaigns. We're excited to see creators come up with their own stories and maybe even try to recreate Jagged Alliance 1 and 2 in JA3!



That's it from me! I hope you have fun in Jagged Alliance 3 side by side with a friend and join the modding community as a player or creator.

 

[Shaki]

Co-op Mode

 

[Sacibengala]

Co-op Mode

Yeah, ONLY 2 players sucks, lol.

 

[ArchAngel]

Co-op Mode

Now we know why they fucked it up

 

[Stavrophore]

The maps are small and compressed, compared to JA2. I think this is one of the root causes of the auto fire -50% dmg decision, as well.

Big decline, the JA2 1.13 community was very excited when AIMNAS was announced, sadly it was never finished. The scale is superb.