PlaneShift
Gameplay => General Discussion => Topic started by: sekhmet on August 18, 2003, 02:11:52 am
-
I was wondering if it might be possible to get some place on the web where we could read wat the current view is of the future of PS by the core dev team. Wat skill system will their be? Will their be levels? Will their be clan wars? Will their be pk\'ing? This way we could be more constructive and expand on ideas wen discussing on the message boards. Everything is pretty vague for me atm and I\'ve read tons of posts on these boards already.
btw a pool for spells and skills would be neat too.
-
Originally posted by sekhmet
Wat skill system will their be?
Complex system. Mostly around the idea that you get good at what you do. If you don\'t do stuff you won\'t get good at it. Specifics? Cannot say yet since it is still in development. I\'m sure people will know all about it once it is in a state that it is worthy to talk about.
Will their be levels?
No. It is a skill based system. This does however present a problem on how you judge the \'worthyness\' to let somebody in your group or guild. Sometime we will have to figure out.
Will their be clan wars? Will their be pk\'ing?
I fully expect guild wars to be a large part of the game.
Everything is pretty vague for me atm.
The honest truth is that it is the same for us. We have some ideas and we are trying to get those down on paper but a lot of the game is still floating around in our heads and in chats on irc. That is often the reason why there is not a lot of \'offical\' information. We simply are not 100% sure of how things will work and we don\'t want to give any impressions on things that my be totally different later on.
-
Originally posted by acraig
No. It is a skill based system. This does however present a problem on how you judge the \'worthyness\' to let somebody in your group or guild. Sometime we will have to figure out.
Maybe the person asking to join could show the guild their skills? (IE: The player goes up to the guild and shows them that he can do [this] and [that]. really easy and doesn\'t require much programming and stuff.
-
Yes, that is one option being considered. The leader of the guild may be able to see all the members stats or something along those lines. Or a player may make \'particular\' stats public. Just a couple of the options available here.
-
Their should be some stuff certain at this stage thou, like the things I asked earlier. Even if you have no idea yet how it will be in the future, mentions this so we know that at least.
-
Read the forums. Info on every question you asked is here.
- Venge
-
Why not make it the responsibility of the guild to gudge the skill of a player by grouping with them and seeing for themselves - in otherwords, no public skills or anything, just good old fashioned communication - kind of like how you guys work the member system - they start off as wanna be members then when you find out over time that they are worthy you make them members
Sorry, this has probably been said before and is probably what Saphire meant, but since it wasn\'t said here yet, I figured why not? :)
-
Vengeance: maybe true those questions are discussed but it is by far unsure wat dissisions the dev team make, thus how planeshift will look like in the future. In a thread there are often many different ideas, are you saying they are all gonna be implemented? I guess not, I just want to see wat dissisions have been made. Offcourse they can always change in the future but I\'d like to see the current view wat, how, where, everything you would like to put in the game. Sounds pretty obvious you would want a paper like that to not get off-track in development, isn\'t this one of the thing you learn first in project managment on collage? Would save a lot of time for new people to know wat way PS is heading instead of reading up on the boards for houres and houres and houres.
PS. I already knew the answers to the questions I asked it were mere samples. I\'m only after centralizing information, that\'s all (:
-
that leads to a very serious problem ACraig. A group would be able to have a very \'uber\' character in the group and they would all get some macho xp for doing nothing.
You cant base it on how many skill points they have either because say if all their skill points are on say cooking... Sure the person will have alot, but he wouldn\'t be to helpful in a combat situation.
~Dan
-
DannMann brings up a good point BUT I have to say that other game\'s ideas for dealing with this possible problem aren\'t the best IMHO.
Level systems based on XP often allow devs to make simple rules about who can group with who - for example, a player 10 levels under another player will recieve no XP - this is ok, but there are tons of reasons why this is bad. For one it\'s just plain fun to group with people way stronger than you, especially if your a newbie. Another reason is the realism of the whole idea - in rl lets say you are a beginner taking a walk with your teacher of (insert some martial art here) a gang a punks jumps you in an alley and demands your wallets, your teacher isn\'t going to do that for whatever reason and kicks the crap out of the guys, you don\'t do much, or maybe you do nothing, but just witnessing this feat gives you experience - you can\'t reproduce the feeling of being jumped in the dojo - well, maybe you can, but that\'s a different thread.... Also, even the act of observing what your teacher does can help you out.
I could continue with the little narrative but I\'m sure you get the point by now (or at least I hope you do) Now, you might be saying, \"Ok, ok Snow, that\'s all good but how else do you do it?\" Glad you asked. One way you might do it would be to create an algorithm that considers a number of different factors via a number of different equations. Some factors might be...
-The difficulty level of a NPC/MOB
- How long was the encounter?
- What, if any, where the complications?
- Has the PC seen the NPC/MOB type before?
- Anything else you guys can think up
Now to explain these guys
*Difficulty*
This is the big one, that requires the most thought, and maybe even an actuary, lol :) [gotta love the humor]
WAIT! I know what you\'re thinking and no we are not back to square one with the level - yes or no thing. The outcome of a battle cannot be based on a single stat alone - esp experience. Thinking like that leads to problems like, \"If the PC is really strong but too slow to hit the target is he really all that strong?\" and the reverse \"If a PC is fast enough to land 6 hits in the blink of an eye, but each only takes 1/10 of a hit point, are they going to stand up to someone with tons of stamina? Like lets say Rocky for example...\"
The way around this is an equation that determines the likelyhood of a PC beating a MOB. How you do this is with a large string of comparisons of stats. Who\'s faster? Ok, by how much? [what is the probablity of PC hitting MOB based on agility and vice versa] If those hits do connect how badass are they compared to the opponent\'s stamina and health points? [How many hits to a kill? If the slow guys only needs to connect ONCE the odds are better of him winning, then if it were 100 times - making the odds close to zero]
After those two big ones you might want to consider other party members and their strengths. This creates a tiny problem b/c you are calculating each PC indepently and since they are each considered in each others\' equations, you get a loop going back and fourth. This isn\'t really a problem because in the loop situation you are comparing each PC\'s powerlevel in COMPARISON to the MOB - I see you forgot (or maybe you didn\'t ;)) So, before hand to fix this you create a hierarchy of who is the strongest group member by having the algorithm pit the PCs in a fight against each other using the same equation as used in the PC versus MOB senario.
You can apply a similar methodology to multiple mobs by breaking up each fight into separate mini encounters....
At the end, you get a single value X where PC Alpha has an X% chance at dropping MOB Beta
*Encounter length*
This one is simple - Which leads to more XP in two battles between the same two forces - a shorter one or a longer one? This whole concept reflects the skill of the people fighting (Two people of equal strength fight, but one is MUCH more skilled at playing his/her character and annihilates the opponent in a couple of seconds VERSUS two equally matched fighters that duke it out for an hour)
This one leads to exploits b/c PCs could deliberately draw out battles for more XP - but seriously if someone really wants to do that, make it worth their time! Just make sure you make a note that even though the battle lasted an hour, the PC still had a 98.7% chance of winning...
*Complications*
-Did your Uber buddy leave the group stranded?
-Did your Healer die?
-Did a Caster draw hits?
etc - these are more flat out values that you would add XP for, or possibly scale the total value at the end....
*Have you seen this MOB?*
If you have faught a million tree lizards before, you are gonna know how they move, their weakspots, etc
So, if you haven\'t seen a MOB before you get bonus XP.
This idea presents problems with logistics because you\'d have to keep a list of what you\'d seen before.
OR you could rate the rarity of a mob and then reward XP that way.
*Put it together*
I\'m just going to use an example here.
TEST BATTLE: PC Alpha Versus Beta the Baddie
Alpha has a 72% chance of beating Beta
Fight lasts 15 seconds
Alpha is a Caster and takes a hit
Beta dispite his name, is a EXTREMELY RARE MOB
Details:
Alpha is slighty faster than Beta and has decent attack power when compared to Beta\'s Stamina and HPs
However, Beta is only slightly slower and can probably kill Alpha with two or three hits...
Alpha defeats beta but takes a longer than expected amount of time for the 72% chance of winning - however it does not appear the amount of time was TOO much suggesting a drawn out battle [this wouldn\'t be a cut off, but a curve of the 4th power most likely]
XP
since Alpha had a decent chance of winning ...... 50 XP
A little extra time on the field [add ten percent] *1.1
Caster takes hits [flat bonus] ............................ +3
Beta\'s Rarity [flat bonus] ................................... +20
--------------------------------------------------------------------
78XP
Well there it is, just an example of a more complicated XP system. Any other ideas out there? Changes? Requests that I keep the post size down, lol?
-
lol how long did it take you to type all that down snowwolf?
-
If you people really have such a hard life deciding what\'s good about group fighting and what\'s not, then why don\'t we all just look at it from my point of view?
[Insert \"Boo / Bah\" Comments here]
I know, I know... :D
Well, first of all.
1) You get better at something by doing it. That\'s a proven fact.
2) You can get better at something by looking at it. That\'s a proven fact as well.
That draws us to one simple conclusion - I should get all the XP and ... No wait, wrong... :P
People can fight in groups, share the XP/whatever they gain because of group things, but the XP/whatever should be (dramatically?) lowered when grouped, simply because you\'re now more people to share the fixed amount of XP/whatever, and you\'re able to kill bigger mobs which results in you get (dramatically?) more XP/whatever than you would do alone and ... Well, that was simple, wasn\'t it? :D
-
Originally posted by Gronomist
People can fight in groups, share the XP/whatever they gain because of group things, but the XP/whatever should be (dramatically?) lowered when grouped, simply because you\'re now more people to share the fixed amount of XP/whatever, and you\'re able to kill bigger mobs which results in you get (dramatically?) more XP/whatever than you would do alone and ... Well, that was simple, wasn\'t it? :D
Yeah, I agree with that, you mean like a group of ten people kill a dragon worth 10 000 XP, so they should get 1000 XP each...
but what about the uber guy who smashed the dragon with his axe while the others were doing nothing ? should he get 1000 XP too ?
No, I think there should be like 75% you earn according to what YOU did, and 25% according to what the group did.
Anyway, that\'s just a detail, what really bothers me is that \"XP/Whatever\" thing, because it\'s more likely to be \"whatever\" than \"XP\"...
so let\'s say I\'m a noob wannabe wizard, and I group with an insanely strong warrior, who kills hundreds of enemies with his axe (yeah, I like axes). Remember we said you should get better at what you do ? so should I get stronger at fighting with an axe although :
1- I don\'t care about it, I don\'t even have an axe, or any other weapon
2- The only thing I did during the fight was to cast a healing spell on the Uber player
???
-
We-e-e-ell.. You\'d get XP/whatever for doing your healing spell, and you\'d get better at ax\'ing things? :D
-
If you\'re in the vicinity, you\'re not doing nothing, because you\'re a potential target. Realistically, just seeing you there might have caused the enemy to react differently, change his tactics, possibly giving the uber-PC better odds of winning.
SnowWolf\'s idea does work, rather well, I made a similar system on a MUD I ran a while back. One or more characters versus one or more other characters are taken into an equation that judges \'power levels\' of each individual. Basically, it takes into account each characters stats, including armor and weapons, enhancing spells, and skills used during combat, and then keeps track of the length of fight and what characters were present and for how long. In the end, the combined power level of the group over time vs the monster determines total experience, which is divided depending on how much of that power each character contributed and how long each spent there. So, since I usually don\'t make much sense writing, I\'ll throw some numbers:
The party, consisting of uber-PC A and semi-newbie B, takes on a troll. Based on stats, current health, and a few other things, it is determined that PC A has a power rating of 100, and PC B has a power rating of 20. The troll has a power rating of 100 also. Let\'s say they both team up and take on the troll. That\'s 120 power vs 100 power, we give them 80 exp. (just making up a number) Now, let\'s say that PC A decides he has better things to do, and leaves at exactly halfway through the troll\'s death. Assuming that PC B defeats the troll, we have 120 vs 100 for 50% of the fight, and 20 vs 100 for 50%. Do the math and you can come up with a real number, it\'s morning here :)
One thought... would you only receive experience if you actually killed the thing? If you fight for a while and then flee, haven\'t you learned a bit about combat regardless? Maybe exp can be awarded when you leave the scene, it would make the above equation go something like, PC A leaves halfway through, he is immediately awarded a chunk of experience (the game can just judge the troll at half dead based on hit points). This puts the other character(s) fighting in a new fight with exp carried over from the last, PC B vs a half dead troll, with, say, 15 exp carried over from the first half. We end up giving him a few hundred when he finishes.
-
Originally posted by Gronomist
People can fight in groups, share the XP/whatever they gain because of group things, but the XP/whatever should be (dramatically?) lowered when grouped, simply because you\'re now more people to share the fixed amount of XP/whatever, and you\'re able to kill bigger mobs which results in you get (dramatically?) more XP/whatever than you would do alone and ... Well, that was simple, wasn\'t it? :D
The xp from teaming shouldn\'t be lowered very much, since that would seriously discourage teamplay! I know that from the early version of Anarchy....
-
I\'ve always liked the idea of encouraging team play by giving grouped characters an experience bonus, something along the lines of 20-30% maybe. Of course, this still means it would be divided among the members. Numbers again, it\'s still only afternoon, I almost have one eye focused on the screen:
Group composed of 3 players, A, B, and C, kill something, the group receives 100 exp. 20% bonus for grouping, 120 exp. Assuming they split it equally, that\'s 40 each. Yes, I know, this is a pretty simple concept, I\'m just used to being misunderstood.
-
how long did it take me?
lol, I started at 2am and finished at somewhere around 5:55 so I didn\'t even bother going to sleep
kinda sad when you replace sleeping with writing mathematical equations for a computer game
ahhhh, to have a life :)
-
very good discussion guys
Here are some of my thoughts
One. Regardless of grouping status you should get exp everytime you do an action. with higher amounts for successful actions vs. non-successful actions That action may be casting a spell or swinging a weapon or just punching something.
Two. If the objective is to get a exp boost from grouping there are really two ways to possibly accomplish this.
- you could give grouped people a higher likelihood of a successful action in the fight. this translates to more exp for grouped people but only according to their cooperation in the battle.
- or you could just give an across the board exp boost to all members applied to whatever activity they did the most or divided among all the activities according to their percentage of use in the battle.
Personally I think the first one is the best. The rational? Being gouped basically gives you a better chance of being successful in an action because your enemy has to divide his attention between you. Thus your more likely to get off a spell or get past his shield or punch his lights out before he can resist, block or dodge. Also this system would work to nullify things like killstealing for exp. Since killing the mob isn\'t necessary to gain the exp just trying to will accomplish it. No one can steal your exp by stealing your kill. In fact the only thing actually gained by having the kill is the loot.
-
I want to ask something about the Future.
Will the game be everytime for free ????
Will nobody have to pay to play the Game ???
I am wondering abot that because thats the first gme I have ever seen, that looks sooooooo good and is free !!
THX Nico
-
Originally posted by Rakurai
One thought... would you only receive experience if you actually killed the thing? If you fight for a while and then flee, haven\'t you learned a bit about combat regardless?
I think you should gain xp for every sucsessful hit you land, or evey time you dodge/parry and attack. More xp for hitting a quick monster, and a bonus if the hit is really crushing (big bonuses for 1-hit kills). Of course this would have to depend on damage done, so you couldn\'t gain way to much experience for doing 3 damage to The Scary Dragon fourty times. This way even if you must run, you get the proper amount of experience for what you\'ve done. (a power comparison between you and the monster would be needed to decide how much xp per hit)
Healers/spellcasters gain xp per spell, perhaps even getting experience for individual spells, as well the overall type-of-spell stat.
Like said above, if you stand in the battle area you would get experience too. I think the idea of 75% you, 25% group is great.
-Jax
-
Yes it will be free! :)
-
Thats greate, really you guys are greate !!!
I LOVE YOU, hehe or better your game ;)
(If I could play it this dam problem...)
-
I like the xp for everything idea, assuming of course that it was a very tiny amount.... I\'m not sure about one hit kills though, then you could just go around mowing weak enemies meant for newbies and getting crazy xp - maybe that idea could be mixed in with the length of battle idea and changed to bonuses for killing things that are your strenth fast - or something like that....
My question though - should general \'xp\" be giving for doing actions or skill specific xp? In other words should xp earning for mowing down baddies for an hour be able to be put into say, cooking, or should the xp go directly to what you earned it for? For instance punching things makes your punches stronger, taking damage brings up stamina, losing hps raise health, etc, etc, etc.
I personally prefer action specific xp, especially since this is a skill based game, but I\'m not sure about the logistics of having that many types of xp... Then again you could just skip the xp and just buff the stat, but then you\'d have crazy stat inflation.... Maybe use a variable array like for every 100 or 1000 or whatever sub strength points you get, you recieve one point to strength? Would that be do-able?
-
Oh yeah, and on the subject of grouping...
Perhaps if you had xp for every action you could just scale the ammount of xp for each group member you have as any action you make (conceiveably) helps your group, attacking, healing, etc.
I was reading somewhere, in some book on being a DM, that really, people should get points for just being in a battle, as your very presence brings up the odds of a group winning, the idea that you could do something.... Besides that, your being there might make a MOB act differently, etc....
Also, you could have a running tally of everything that everybody does during the battle and then give xp prizes for first, second, third... for the most productive member - althought I don\'t know where it would go if xp went to specific stats...
That brings up another question - if we decide to go with stat specific xp do we eliminate \"experience\" all together or keep it as it\'s own stat since the experience of player does affect the outcome of a battle.... then again you could just put that under wisdom or intelligence....
Any thoughts?
-
a thought, since this is a skill based game... let\'s say, first off, that exp is not a general statistic, but each skill has its own exp level. you gain exp in a skill each time you use it. the amount you get is determined by how much of a threat is immediately upon you. if you\'re a spellcaster, healing yourself while sitting in town with no one around won\'t make you get better at healing very quickly. but, doing it in a high pressure situation, while a horde of orcs is charging down the hill at your party, will increase the amount dramatically. the reasoning is, that you\'re not just repeating the same old method of casting that you learned in mage school, you\'re frantically trying to do it as fast and as well as possible. the same would apply to combat-specific skills, if you swing your sword at the single pathetic little kobold, you won\'t learn much about using your sword. swinging it while a dragon is breathing down your neck (doesn\'t matter if you\'re swinging it *at* the dragon, the threat is still there) will make you better, faster.
this solves a couple of problems. it helps to eliminate botting, since practicing without the threat of death gives little to no experience. the game stays skill level and not character level based, which all in all makes more sense than some games, imho. there are probably more upsides than i\'m listing, depending on your point of view.
the downsides... well, i\'m not very good at picking out flaws in my own logic, but i\'m more than happy to listen to people with different points of view do it for me ;) one thing i see is that it changes how characters can choose their path. rather than gaining a level and saying, \"hey, i\'ve always wanted to be a little better at the fireball spell, i\'ll dump some points into that\", they only get better at what they use and practice with. i\'m not sure if this is a bad thing, but it does require more determined efforts by the player to advance their character the way they envision. care would have to be taken to make each skill useful, because players won\'t use stuff that\'s not. without some planning you could end up with a lot of very similar characters.
let\'s throw grouped characters into the mess. simple, really, when a member of your party performs a skill, the other members gain a small amount of experience in that skill, by watching. this does away with a set figure like 20% bonus exp for grouping, because it now has it\'s own benefits, that of watching others perform their skills. this also works out for guilds... let\'s say that there was a skill that involved fabricating widgets. your guild decides that they must make thousands of widgets for the upcoming annual widget sale. the guild gets together at the hall and goes on a widget making spree. you get better at it faster, because you\'re able to see others do it. in a more realistic sense, the characters are sharing their knowledge and new ideas about widget making, something that is tedious to roleplay and almost impossible to factor into experience through roleplay.
anyway, there\'s my rant for tonight. loving the discussion, by the way :)
-
actually, another thought. assuming that PS is skill level based and not character level based, that leaves it without a good way of increasing stats like strength, or hit points or magic points or whatever. hey, cool, found a flaw in my own logic. anyway, those could be tied to skill levels. say, a skill in blacksmithing could give +1 strength per skill level. just a thought.
also, someone pointed out to me that related skills could be tied together. say, you have a spell for shooting lightning bolts out of your ass, how much different could that be from shooting fireballs out of your ass? increase in one would increase the other, with ratios depending on which skills they are. also, btw, i think that spells should have individual skill levels, rather than just being good in the \'red magic\' group. maybe skill in red magic could be an average or something, or all red magics tied together like said above, but being able to cast one of those spells very well shouldn\'t mean you can cast all of them equally well, despite the similarities between them.
-
in answer to what to do with the experience bonus from a group, why not just boost the rate at which you gain experience in a group by 20% or whatever? This way you would still use the specific skill xp system, and be able to incorporate group xp without just lumping it into an unusable pile.
For example, 2 characters are in a battle with and average MOB. Each gets a boost in the rate at which he gains xp for using his skills. There could be a flat experience boost based on the difficulty of the MOB and the threat of the situation (far from town, more enemies nearby, etc.) This flat boost could be divided between the members of the group, depending on their skill level.
This would cover the problem of how to handle larger groups of pc\'s, as well as that of what the group xp bonus actually accomplishes.
-
Right, boost xp for everything just because you\'re grouped? .. Kliche, if you ask me. \"U wan group?\" or \"U wan party?\".... \"Err.. No?\" ... \"U wan party?\" ... It gets very tiring at some point. Nah, decrease xp when grouped, so you\'ll have to risk something to go hunt bigger mobs, that\'s the way it should be. :)
-
As I said up above. No one should be able to get exp when grouped when they do nothing in the group. I suggested giving grouped individuals a higher percentage of successful actions while grouped this works out to more exp since you accomplish more in the group than you would alone.
Also Botting which is a possible problem in Skill Based leveling could be controlled by limiting the action to target based. certain actions would reqiure a target, no target no action. This keeps people from just setting their character to perform an action till they get better at it. Also, I don\'t think a particular fireball spell should have a skill level. I think the class of fire spells should have a spell level. thus performing one spell over and over would not up your skill level as eventually the spell would be too easy and you would never be able to progress in it. You instead have to learn an even harder spell to get better at that skill. This also keeps botting to a minimum. Target required and exp caps on an action. Those are my particular thoughts on the subject.
-
i dunno about the target required thing... not all ways of combat or helping out a group involve actually targetting another character. like, enhancement spells, how would you get better at those if you could only cast them on yourself? i still have to argue in favor of the risk based experience. 0 experience with 0 risk is perfectly acceptable. the lone kobold that has no chance of penetrating your armor with a butterknife, is 0 risk. so is sitting at the local bar casting \'haste\' on yourself.
i\'m trying not to rehash my previous note, but sometimes i have trouble clarifying my thoughts without further argument on their behalf :) i don\'t believe that realistically you could get better at related spells as a group by practicing one individually, hence the suggestion for a group skill level being an average of the skills within, and even tying them together so that getting better at one will increase skill in another. if you actively practice \'fire wall\', your skill in \'fireball\' should increase, although not as much. the skills are related in that you are creating fire, but not identical. being able to cast the more powerful \'firestorm\' could come as a result of a high average with the fire magics, whether you simply perfected the art of casting \'fireball\' or you have a decent level in more than one fire magic.
-
Risk could probably add to experience, but I wouldn\'t think it should take away. What if you\'re practicing fighting a sword dummy? Wouldn\'t that give you a _little_ experience, though the risk = 0?
To make a perfectly horrible analogy: Little Billy is studying his spelling list. Just because he\'s not in a spelling bee doesn\'t mean he\'s not getting \"spelling experience.\"
With the guy hasting himself in the bar, if he does it sucessfuly, won\'t he be better at hasting himself in battle?
-Jax
-
Originally posted by Gronomist
Right, boost xp for everything just because you\'re grouped? .. Kliche, if you ask me. \"U wan group?\" or \"U wan party?\".... \"Err.. No?\" ... \"U wan party?\" ... It gets very tiring at some point. Nah, decrease xp when grouped, so you\'ll have to risk something to go hunt bigger mobs, that\'s the way it should be. :)
sorry man but i think what the devs want to do is encourage the team play and interaction with other players to make the game more enjoyable. In my opinion thats the whole point of MMORPGs, cause if u\'re not going to interact with other players why bother playing mmorpg when u could play a normal RPG or adventure game
-
The scale for grouping doesn\'t need to be a lot - you can always give MULTIPLE bonuses. A small scale just for grouping, and other larger bonuses for participation - things don\'t have to be a simple as one single xp scale just for grouping!
Comments?
-
very good point, Jaxan, about the risk factor into experience. 0 experience is just an idea to minimize potential botting for skills, i\'m sure there are plenty of other solutions that afford better realism.
curious, other than immediate risk to your person, what other factors would realistically influence how much experience you get for an action?
-
The more critically wounded someone is when you heal them, the better the experience would be. For archers perhaps, the quicker and more agile a monster is, the more experience they get (since they are often not in direct danger). The more remote the region you reach, the more the experience (reference to my idea about Exploration Experience). Ummm, it\'s late, and I\'ve only read half this thread, but maybe I\'ll think of s\'more stuff... or maybe not.
-
I don\'t think a particular fireball spell should have a skill level. I think the class of fire spells should have a spell level.
Okay...
Casting fireballs makes you better at lighting fires? Of course, unless you start the fire by casting a fireball, I don\'t see much relation between those two spells. That\'s plain logic. It\'s the same as saying that casting a Lightning shield should suddenly make you better at doing lightning nova spells. It just seems a bit too odd if you ask me. :P
-
alright, relating fire based magic was a poor example ;) relating fire based attack spells with similar effects would probably be better, since part of the spell involves conjuring fire and controlling it. also, different \'similarity\' ratios might apply to spells. flameshield and fire wall might be rather similar, they\'re both conjuring flames and holding them in place. neither of them are very similar to fireball, which is more of an explosion. and the only thing they have in common with \'create fire\' is that you\'re conjuring fire. so, i guess being really good at casting fire wall would make you at least somewhat better at creating normal fires. you concentrate, and where there was no fire, now there is fire.
-
Originally posted by Gronomist
Right, boost xp for everything just because you\'re grouped? .. Kliche, if you ask me. \"U wan group?\" or \"U wan party?\".... \"Err.. No?\" ... \"U wan party?\" ... It gets very tiring at some point. Nah, decrease xp when grouped, so you\'ll have to risk something to go hunt bigger mobs, that\'s the way it should be. :)
Says who? :P
But ok, I don\'t know if the devs want to promote team-play in this game... If the xp is decreased, and then shared, it will have a bad influence on the number of teams formed.. even if they went after bigger mobs, the xp would be decreased, and they might as well have gone solo and killed some mobs their own level and gain more xp than when teaming and killing tougher mobs...
-
We have rules people that work on that aspects of the game. We have anayized majority of game systems out there, from tabletop to rpg to mmorpg and we are trying to get the best from all and add our new ideas to the result... add 2 ice cubes, shake for 40 seconds and wait the explosion :)
I think we now have a good idea of the fundamentals of the game rules, like the skill based system and the magic system, but as other devs said, we do not want to disclose more information just to avoid confusions. Until we implement those rules in game (and even after!), everything can change.
When the next release is out we will have more ways to test our basic rules and so we can make changes/additions. Unlike commercial games we can test, look at the result and improve as many times as we want. Commercial games can just give out the Beta and then make simple adjustments after.
So don\'t worry, sooner or later we will have a very good gaming system :)
-
Originally posted by Talad
We have rules people that work on that aspects of the game. We have anayized majority of game systems out there, from tabletop to rpg to mmorpg and we are trying to get the best from all and add our new ideas to the result... add 2 ice cubes, shake for 40 seconds and wait the explosion :)
I think we now have a good idea of the fundamentals of the game rules, like the skill based system and the magic system, but as other devs said, we do not want to disclose more information just to avoid confusions. Until we implement those rules in game (and even after!), everything can change.
When the next release is out we will have more ways to test our basic rules and so we can make changes/additions. Unlike commercial games we can test, look at the result and improve as many times as we want. Commercial games can just give out the Beta and then make simple adjustments after.
So don\'t worry, sooner or later we will have a very good gaming system :)
I can\'t wait :D Anything would be better than this Kran-unfriendly crystal hunt!