Crossfire Archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: CF: Stupid: strange ring
Mark Wedel writes:
> On Feb 18, 2:00pm, Steve Yegge wrote:
> > Subject: CF: Stupid: strange ring
>
> > > So how about removing the stupid strange ring from the list of random
> > > artifacts? After all, it's on top of the most useless artifacts list...
>
> Just because it is useless hardly means it should be removed. Should we
> remove dragon armor from the list of random artifacts because there is now
> power dragon armor? What about most of the artifact weapons? There are
> certainly a few which are useful, and many which are curiousities.
>
> Plus, having found a strange ring of electricity once, that was pretty neat.
Hi Mark,
I agree with your statements here, and just for the record, the
suggestion to remove the strange ring was from Christian. I can
understand his feelings on the issue, but the solution needs to
go the other direction: rather than removing the ring, it needs
to be made more valuable, by restricting the artifact supply.
> > - fix it so that the maximum experience you can receive from
> > ANY monster is 15,000 experience, or whatever is needed to
> > take you to the next level, whichever is less at the time
> > you kill the monster.
>
> Might actually make more sense to just add a secondary experience table for
> each level which lists the most exeperience you can recieve in any one time for
> a particular level.
Anything that slows the rate of experience gain would be useful.
> > - implement a working "unique-artifact" system, so that you
> > can *never* see two of the same unique artifact together
> > on the same system. Make sure it checks saved player files,
> > or better, prevent people from saving with artifacts in
> > their possession.
>
> I will if that can be reasonably done - it is not a trivial task. And if you
> can't save with an artifact, then you just get a point where a player hides it
> someplace until they return (maybe that is reasonable, maybe not), but with the
> huge number of maps out there, hiding stuff is certainly pretty easy for
> someone to do.
You could reset the server periodically, perhaps once a day. There
are other online internet games that make daily (or weekly) resets
mandatory even if they're not required for run-time stability,
because resets are good for smoothing out problems with hoarding items.
My understanding is that most CF servers reset fairly often anyway.
And for people that succeed in hiding something while they're away -
well, I think that enhances the fun-factor, so it's OK. The game
could use some treasure-hunting as an alternative to killing monsters.
> > - make more of the artifacts (strange ring, ring of life,
> > bonecrusher and so on) unique.
>
> I am not sure if that really fixes anything - it seems to me, that the first
> person on the server to get those various things is in good shape, and everyone
> else is left to scramble for the various leftovers.
There are already lots of artifacts on the game, and as you point
out, more are being created as time goes on. And you shouldn't have
to have an artifact in your possession in order to play the game.
Christian pointed out once that he feels gold and gems are useless.
This is in fact true: CF lacks an economy. People have nothing to
do with their money. The game needs more money-sinks. Here are
some things that are done in other games to address this issue:
- make artifact shop prices extremely high, and don't allow
people to save with artifacts. It encourages people to
sell items to each other.
- require people to place their inventory in "lockers" before
saving. Place a daily surcharge on locker use, based on the
value of the items in the locker.
- more importantly, restrict the money supply. Fix the maps
so that it's only marginally profitable to clear a map out,
after deducting the cost of healing and identifying items.
You're right that simply making more artifacts unique won't fix the
problems, which are widespread. But it would be a good start.
> > - lose the "trade 50 scales for this shield"-type artifacts.
>
> I think some of those have been fixed. There are still the anvils where you
> can get armor/shield by bringing in scales, but still need to pay for it. Are
> those considered unbalanced?
Actually, in retrospect, I think not. By the time you're high enough
level that obtaining the scales is trivial, the shields have no value
to you anyway. My main concern is that it's possible (and common!)
to become powerful enough that clearing out PeterM's dragon caves is
a 2-minute exercise in boredom.
> > * the progression up to 30th level should take a very
> > experienced player at least 2 months of round-the-clock play.
> > For inexperienced players it should seem to be an almost
> > unattainable ideal.
>
> Certainly, there are problems in progession - if I start a new character, I
> can get to 3'rd level in about 15 minutes - after that, it starts to slow down.
I would hope so! Games that you can "win" too quickly tend to lose
their appeal just as quickly. You'll keep people playing the game
longer if they have to put a *significant* time investment in their
character.
> The first few levels are easy, as you just kill the huge numbers of orcs,
> goblins, kobolds that are around - not a lot of exp for each one, but there are
> a lot, so you just retreat when hp get low, and kill some more.
>
> I actually tend to start really slowing down around level 10-15 - can kill a
> lot of stuff, but most things are not available in the huge numbers. However,
> if we change the exp award so that for any level, you need to kill at least 100
> monsters, that might slow down progression.
Anything that slows down the progression would be fine. For those
that believe there shouldn't be a hard cap on experience level,
you could set it up so that there's an exponential growth required
beyond, say, 25th level, so that (when combined with reasonable limits
on the gain you can get per monster) higher levels are theoretically
impossible for all but the most fanatical player.
> > * the experience of finding ONE artifact should be so
> > exhilarating that it actually breathes life back into the
> > game.
>
> There are at least a few problems in the current setup, without any real
> easy fixes:
>
> 1) As the number of maps increse, so do the number of random artifact in those
> maps. As such, artifacts start becoming more and more accessible.
>
> 2) As people play and get all these artifact, new map designers come up with
> even tougher maps that contain even better artifacts. Repeat this step a few
> times, and some very powerful artifacts are created.
>
> 3) After playing a while, people tend to know what artifacts are good and what
> they want. The good artifacts are useful for all classes. What would be nice
> to see is more artifacts that are race/god aligned, so if you start a new
> character, there is an entire new set of artifacts that you would now find
> useful to use.
>
> What might be useful is some idea of what the absolutely best artifacts should
> be allowed to do/have (ie, an artifact should never have an AC better than
> this, armor better than that, etc). Right now, there is no criteria, so when
> +8 dragon armor is added, or a +3 weapon that add +3 to 3 stats, they are not
> immediately recognized as non balanced.
That is exactly the right solution, I think. You should establish
caps on the abilities of the various weapons, armor and game items,
and enforce them in the engine, or failing that, in the maps. Otherwise
you get into an arms race, spurred on by map designers who (naturally)
want to make maps that are interesting and different from past maps.
You should also set limits on the number of artifacts per area,
and also make sure that all maps have a "level" rating that determines
the highest-level artifact you can find in that area.
People who are used to playing under the current system will
inevitably be disappointed by the "leveling of the playing field"
at first. I remember how annoyed I was, way back when you changed
it so that items weren't automatically identified when you found them.
But I learned to appreciate the change because it made the game much
more challenging. The changes I'm suggesting will enrich the game
in much the same way.
> On a seperate point - is high levels as much a problem? Does the skill system
> make high levels better or worse compared to the old system? Do people think
> some maximum level should perhaps be applied (let score (exp) rise as high as
> you want, but limit level advancement?)
To be honest, I haven't played CF for a year or so, and I may have
exaggerated my case, since I know you've been taking steps to
improve the playbalance. My personal opinion is that being very
high level should be an exclusive club open only to those who put
hundreds (or thousands) of hours into the game. It just works out
better that way.
> --
>
> -- Mark Wedel
> mark@pyramid.com
>
-steve
stevey@cabochon.com
[to unsubscribe etc., send mail to crossfire-request@ifi.uio.no]
Follow-Ups:
References: