Jalpha wrote:I don't think anyone should get an unlimited number of lives.
Yeah one is enough, you have a second one now though with valhallah.
Re: Game Development: The Danger Zone
by stya » Wed Jan 20, 2016 2:22 pm
Yeah one is enough, you have a second one now though with valhallah.
-
stya - Posts: 943
- Joined: Wed May 21, 2014 3:13 pm
Re: Game Development: The Danger Zone
by Kaios » Wed Jan 20, 2016 3:06 pm
stya wrote:Yeah one is enough, you have a second one now though with valhallah.
Valhalla is okay but I'd rather come back as a Nidbane so I could travel the lands spooking the players
-
Kaios - Posts: 8703
- Joined: Fri Jul 30, 2010 2:14 am
Re: Game Development: The Danger Zone
by pedorlee » Wed Jan 20, 2016 3:11 pm
Kaios wrote:stya wrote:Yeah one is enough, you have a second one now though with valhallah.
Valhalla is okay but I'd rather come back as a Nidbane so I could travel the lands spooking the players
Thats a great idea with a lot of players and different servers. Actually its 2 much xploitable.
-
pedorlee - Posts: 1291
- Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2012 10:36 pm
Re: Game Development: The Danger Zone
by FerrousToast » Wed Jan 20, 2016 3:24 pm
Kaios wrote:stya wrote:Yeah one is enough, you have a second one now though with valhallah.
Valhalla is okay but I'd rather come back as a Nidbane so I could travel the lands spooking the players
perhaps murder nidbanes could be entirely automated, like the other ones, but allow the option to log into it and gain semi control, would be very cool. would still travel on a direct course to get to the target, and only engage if they are online, but you can watch your spooking, and if your target is offline, you can spook around their base exploring. Can't pick anything up but as you can float through walls, you can look in every container, stockpiles would be the only thing you couldn't check. the moment your target logs on/24 hours have passed you make a bline back to target and agro them if you still can. fight can play out automatic, or if you press a key you can take control of the nidbanes fighting.
-
FerrousToast - Posts: 307
- Joined: Tue Dec 17, 2013 9:36 pm
Re: Game Development: The Danger Zone
by lachlaan » Wed Jan 20, 2016 3:27 pm
20 pages later, let's see if I can write some coherent thoughts.
THIEVES + Wall climbing and catapults (catapults for faster, more material investment oriented breaching) meant to allow only stealing seems like a good idea.
- Make players not collide with most objects, or all objects to avoid the spam of such objects for hindering thieves (only when in "thief mode", much like the visitor debuff)
- Make some objects not collide but rather slow down a player, so that if a defender so chooses they can make a fugly obstacle course that a thief will need to seriously consider the passability of before attempting to go any further.
- Have inventory size / amount of stuff stolen affect the thief's ability to escape with the loot, forcing said thief to micromanage just WHAT he's willing to take. As suggested earlier in the thread, thieving would become easier with a developped character, but the more you steal the more the risk to the character. Perhaps add some random events like "sprained ankle" from jumping too many obstacles, "paranoid anxiety" slowing the character down for a period of time cause he's worried of making noise due to just how long he's been there and how much he's stolen, "hurt back" from stealing too much stuff and carrying it around without exitting and unloading.
-Give the character a debuff so they can't go back in right away, again forcing them to only steal meaningful loot and not pick everything up and throw it down (that's why picking up should count towards paranoia or the like, while actually looting should count towards something more greed oriented but more lenient).
SABOTEURS + wall climbing and catapults could be used similarly to thieves, but their skillset would disallow them any theft, and instead would enable them to inflict damage to industry buildings, damage separate from the actual HP kind you can deal now. Said damage would need extensive repairs in several sessions, hindering the target for at least as long as the saboteur has spent time damaging the place. Potentially instead of wall climbing and catapults they could employ lockpicking to enter through gates instead, since they are after all crafty bastards. Could also sabotage doors to not allow for a key until it's cleaned out (short process of 30 seconds, allowing a soon to be detected saboteur to skedaddle, but not long enough to cause griefing, and not repeateable too quickly after the first time).
ACTUAL VISUAL STEALTH : Obviously in such stealth modes, players would possibly require actual visual stealth, but too many custom clients would hax the crap out of that :\ Maybe a system where one client need not know about a stealthed player's existence at all? A bit like the server didn't use to tell the player the purity of a potted plant in Salem, and they could only learn once the plant was picked. The hints of a thief's presence could only be shown when the thief interacts with stuff and when a player is in close enough range.
QUALITY SABOTAGE, a more complicated and material cost heavy process that would be meant to not let things get stale. Sabotage the other guy's best anvil and make it rust, having it drop quality veeeeery slowly and not let it be repaired from it at all. Have different acidic, organic, whatever sort of decaying processes be the applied sabotage tools, and have industry oriented chars be needed to detect the sabotage in the first place, or make people need to inspect like chumps if they refuse to keep industry oriented chars there worthy of the mighty tool being sabotaged.
Anecdotal example for above. Pour acid on anvil, effectiveness of it is determined by the relevant skill (smithing in this case?), char's int, char's stealth for being sneaky.
Town smithy passes it 2 hours later, his int * smithing * exploration perhaps could roll against the saboteur's stats to check if he's clever enough to see the damage from a particular range, perhaps the check could be for melee range when using it, and any further you get a chance to see it that's lower and random. Perhaps make it stay visible once seen so custom clients won't have the advantage by memorizing split second state changes.
Perception for guards vs Stealth for sneaky sneakies. Char's perception determines the range that they need to be from a stealther until the server even bothers sending vague position data (perhaps randomized the farther you are).
Siege / War - more costly, only meant to severely cripple your enemy at a high cost on the raider themself.
- Should be inevitable in outcome save for equal military force countering it.
- Should have varying degrees of permanence depending on raider's time investment.
- Put buildings out of use for hours/days until they can be rebuilt.
- Leave rubble without actually removing building, so as to dissuade bashing stuff down and replacing.
- Allow for damage to % of HP, damage in the form of making it unusable regardless of "bulk" hitpoints, perhaps a set of time gated more delicate repairs. Allow for damage to quality, down to a limit of whatever you may deem is enough.
- Damage to quality should be tuned to be in balance with how often you expect people to afford such raids.
- Allow for total destruction with a crapton of effort on the raider's part, but that should be more expensive than it is lucrative.
- Should have a system where there are multiple time windows where you can both work towards defense and attack. Perhaps opposing concepts like, adding weight to the ram, adding reinforcement beams to the walls. Sabotaging the ram itself with a sneaky saboteur of your own, or sabotaging walls with some form of corrosive substance to weaken it, only detectable by a guard-statted character with perception on it.
COMBAT REWORK - No clue what needs to be done but god does it need to be done. Others have more eloquently listed in other threads what needs attention.
- Make zerging less effective
- Make alt-ing less desireable.
- Make a fight not last for 1 chop.
- Optimize a lot of game performance to make fights enjoyable and not a 2 second lagspike death
Dem flax fields i hear so much about.
- Make the card system less obnoxious to work with. With the new multitude of tactics, there is no way to find a proper deck, there is very little you can do in terms of controlling what a bulky deck will yield you and the random factor makes it unwise to even attempt.
Can't really think of much more, but it'd be a very complex set of changes, including changes to combat itself to make fighting for objectives (or around objectives) a legitimate thing to do. Consider fights shouldn't necessarily end in a total defeat to one side or the other, but rather be like the suggested quality sabotaging mechanics. Perhaps add smaller permanent wounds that can be inflicted during such conflicts, that can then be viewed by the char owner once they're home to lick their wounds. After viewing the owner could choose to accept the changes, displaying the new nerfed stats, hiding the debuff infobox, or, alternatively leaving it up as a reminder of the shaaaaame. I feel you either need to slow down the speed at which a main would get disposed of or need to make it easier to inherit, so as to encourage mains and not alts. And in the spirit of not encouraging spamming more than one titan, make the amount of permanent damage taken to LP and stats increase percentually the bigger and fatter the char is. The bigger they are the harder they fall?
THIEVES + Wall climbing and catapults (catapults for faster, more material investment oriented breaching) meant to allow only stealing seems like a good idea.
- Make players not collide with most objects, or all objects to avoid the spam of such objects for hindering thieves (only when in "thief mode", much like the visitor debuff)
- Make some objects not collide but rather slow down a player, so that if a defender so chooses they can make a fugly obstacle course that a thief will need to seriously consider the passability of before attempting to go any further.
- Have inventory size / amount of stuff stolen affect the thief's ability to escape with the loot, forcing said thief to micromanage just WHAT he's willing to take. As suggested earlier in the thread, thieving would become easier with a developped character, but the more you steal the more the risk to the character. Perhaps add some random events like "sprained ankle" from jumping too many obstacles, "paranoid anxiety" slowing the character down for a period of time cause he's worried of making noise due to just how long he's been there and how much he's stolen, "hurt back" from stealing too much stuff and carrying it around without exitting and unloading.
-Give the character a debuff so they can't go back in right away, again forcing them to only steal meaningful loot and not pick everything up and throw it down (that's why picking up should count towards paranoia or the like, while actually looting should count towards something more greed oriented but more lenient).
SABOTEURS + wall climbing and catapults could be used similarly to thieves, but their skillset would disallow them any theft, and instead would enable them to inflict damage to industry buildings, damage separate from the actual HP kind you can deal now. Said damage would need extensive repairs in several sessions, hindering the target for at least as long as the saboteur has spent time damaging the place. Potentially instead of wall climbing and catapults they could employ lockpicking to enter through gates instead, since they are after all crafty bastards. Could also sabotage doors to not allow for a key until it's cleaned out (short process of 30 seconds, allowing a soon to be detected saboteur to skedaddle, but not long enough to cause griefing, and not repeateable too quickly after the first time).
ACTUAL VISUAL STEALTH : Obviously in such stealth modes, players would possibly require actual visual stealth, but too many custom clients would hax the crap out of that :\ Maybe a system where one client need not know about a stealthed player's existence at all? A bit like the server didn't use to tell the player the purity of a potted plant in Salem, and they could only learn once the plant was picked. The hints of a thief's presence could only be shown when the thief interacts with stuff and when a player is in close enough range.
QUALITY SABOTAGE, a more complicated and material cost heavy process that would be meant to not let things get stale. Sabotage the other guy's best anvil and make it rust, having it drop quality veeeeery slowly and not let it be repaired from it at all. Have different acidic, organic, whatever sort of decaying processes be the applied sabotage tools, and have industry oriented chars be needed to detect the sabotage in the first place, or make people need to inspect like chumps if they refuse to keep industry oriented chars there worthy of the mighty tool being sabotaged.
Anecdotal example for above. Pour acid on anvil, effectiveness of it is determined by the relevant skill (smithing in this case?), char's int, char's stealth for being sneaky.
Town smithy passes it 2 hours later, his int * smithing * exploration perhaps could roll against the saboteur's stats to check if he's clever enough to see the damage from a particular range, perhaps the check could be for melee range when using it, and any further you get a chance to see it that's lower and random. Perhaps make it stay visible once seen so custom clients won't have the advantage by memorizing split second state changes.
Perception for guards vs Stealth for sneaky sneakies. Char's perception determines the range that they need to be from a stealther until the server even bothers sending vague position data (perhaps randomized the farther you are).
Siege / War - more costly, only meant to severely cripple your enemy at a high cost on the raider themself.
- Should be inevitable in outcome save for equal military force countering it.
- Should have varying degrees of permanence depending on raider's time investment.
- Put buildings out of use for hours/days until they can be rebuilt.
- Leave rubble without actually removing building, so as to dissuade bashing stuff down and replacing.
- Allow for damage to % of HP, damage in the form of making it unusable regardless of "bulk" hitpoints, perhaps a set of time gated more delicate repairs. Allow for damage to quality, down to a limit of whatever you may deem is enough.
- Damage to quality should be tuned to be in balance with how often you expect people to afford such raids.
- Allow for total destruction with a crapton of effort on the raider's part, but that should be more expensive than it is lucrative.
- Should have a system where there are multiple time windows where you can both work towards defense and attack. Perhaps opposing concepts like, adding weight to the ram, adding reinforcement beams to the walls. Sabotaging the ram itself with a sneaky saboteur of your own, or sabotaging walls with some form of corrosive substance to weaken it, only detectable by a guard-statted character with perception on it.
COMBAT REWORK - No clue what needs to be done but god does it need to be done. Others have more eloquently listed in other threads what needs attention.
- Make zerging less effective
- Make alt-ing less desireable.
- Make a fight not last for 1 chop.
- Optimize a lot of game performance to make fights enjoyable and not a 2 second lagspike death
Dem flax fields i hear so much about.- Make the card system less obnoxious to work with. With the new multitude of tactics, there is no way to find a proper deck, there is very little you can do in terms of controlling what a bulky deck will yield you and the random factor makes it unwise to even attempt.
Can't really think of much more, but it'd be a very complex set of changes, including changes to combat itself to make fighting for objectives (or around objectives) a legitimate thing to do. Consider fights shouldn't necessarily end in a total defeat to one side or the other, but rather be like the suggested quality sabotaging mechanics. Perhaps add smaller permanent wounds that can be inflicted during such conflicts, that can then be viewed by the char owner once they're home to lick their wounds. After viewing the owner could choose to accept the changes, displaying the new nerfed stats, hiding the debuff infobox, or, alternatively leaving it up as a reminder of the shaaaaame. I feel you either need to slow down the speed at which a main would get disposed of or need to make it easier to inherit, so as to encourage mains and not alts. And in the spirit of not encouraging spamming more than one titan, make the amount of permanent damage taken to LP and stats increase percentually the bigger and fatter the char is. The bigger they are the harder they fall?
- lachlaan
- Posts: 472
- Joined: Sat Apr 06, 2013 9:32 pm
Re: Game Development: The Danger Zone
by dvsmasta » Wed Jan 20, 2016 5:01 pm
Most of these ideas will never work to balance out the system for hermits/small villages and medium/large villages.
The only true way to find a balance with that is implementing a proper war system so that villages can declare war on other villages and ally other villages. Allied villages cannot attack players/vandalize each other. You could have offering system and a feudal/vassal system built in for hermits and small villages to get out of war declarations from large factions.
It would be a very large system to implement, but would add a large segment to the game. Then the idea of shortening siege mechanics could be implemented without steamrolling hermits/small villages.
As a small village (2 players counts as a village i suppose?) if we lost everything from an attack it would be extremely hard to recover, especially if we worked our tails off to trade for *decent* industry. The changes to slaughtering animals is a huge improvement, and systems like that for other industry would be amazing.
You guys are doing a great job.
Just my 2 cents.
The only true way to find a balance with that is implementing a proper war system so that villages can declare war on other villages and ally other villages. Allied villages cannot attack players/vandalize each other. You could have offering system and a feudal/vassal system built in for hermits and small villages to get out of war declarations from large factions.
It would be a very large system to implement, but would add a large segment to the game. Then the idea of shortening siege mechanics could be implemented without steamrolling hermits/small villages.
As a small village (2 players counts as a village i suppose?) if we lost everything from an attack it would be extremely hard to recover, especially if we worked our tails off to trade for *decent* industry. The changes to slaughtering animals is a huge improvement, and systems like that for other industry would be amazing.
You guys are doing a great job.
Just my 2 cents.
- dvsmasta
- Posts: 216
- Joined: Sat Jul 13, 2013 3:58 am
Re: Game Development: The Danger Zone
by lachlaan » Wed Jan 20, 2016 10:12 pm
Also yes, Jorb and Loftar are doing a good job staying focused. Liking their enthusiasm their time round, and can only hope the community can move towards constructive feedback mostly and not toxic whining as was the case the previous time I saw Jorb/Loftar dev a game. You guys need to clarify on what gameplay level you want discussions to happen, and layer it from the dev point of view up. Then build actual mechanics suggestions around that.
Examples : We want PvP to only matter this much, and only in this cases.
We want such and such mix of interaction, self-sufficient gameplay, trade.
^ Then on top of those you can start construction the macro ideas and finally the specific details. Perhaps even release some patch notes 3 days before you actually release the patch, to have people theorize feedback just off the top of their heads.
Examples : We want PvP to only matter this much, and only in this cases.
We want such and such mix of interaction, self-sufficient gameplay, trade.
^ Then on top of those you can start construction the macro ideas and finally the specific details. Perhaps even release some patch notes 3 days before you actually release the patch, to have people theorize feedback just off the top of their heads.
- lachlaan
- Posts: 472
- Joined: Sat Apr 06, 2013 9:32 pm
Re: Game Development: The Danger Zone
by Pupsi » Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:29 am
Tonight we can expect update?
w5 Hermit>Road Ville>Horde>RQ
w6 The Sparta
w7 Isla de la tortuga>A.D>CookieVille (not sure if it was w7 or w6)
w8 Amish Paradise
w9 Amish Paradise
w10 Amish Paradise > Maid Cafe (until april 2017)
w11 Funcy Huts
w12
w6 The Sparta
w7 Isla de la tortuga>A.D>CookieVille (not sure if it was w7 or w6)
w8 Amish Paradise
w9 Amish Paradise
w10 Amish Paradise > Maid Cafe (until april 2017)
w11 Funcy Huts
w12
-
Pupsi - Posts: 550
- Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2011 4:31 am
- Location: heheh
Re: Game Development: The Danger Zone
by jaguar » Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:53 am
Should I rebuild my ram to use it again now? I started to build ram before update, now I tried to destroy my brickwall... 4 characters, 1 hour, 0% damage. 
-
jaguar - Posts: 251
- Joined: Sun Jan 16, 2011 11:59 pm
Re: Game Development: The Danger Zone
by DDDsDD999 » Thu Jan 21, 2016 5:54 am
jaguar wrote:Should I rebuild my ram to use it again now? I started to build ram before update, now I tried to destroy my brickwall... 4 characters, 1 hour, 0% damage.
I'm going to guess their strength is too low.
-
DDDsDD999 - Posts: 5519
- Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2010 12:31 am
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group