Game Development: Tough Jugs

[Nightdawg]

It was immediately after that post that Nightdawg threw a temper tantrum and deleted his post.

|
V

Realizing every hermit deserves it is the end game \o/

[Nightdawg]

No, the original suggestion was that, if the victim consented, you wouldn't need to KO them to steal their loot. There's a big difference there. It would require the victim to give up on running away in hopes that the attacker would only steal their shit without KOing them (the decision is left up to the attacker, who would also retain the current option of KOing the victim). Basically, it would make mugging far more convenient for the attacker (which would inherently encourage mugging by lowering the time/effort threshold), and Nightdawg was framing it as something he suggested out of the goodness of his heart for the poor sprucecaps, without any self-interest. From the most optimistic perspective, it was just a poorly-conceived idea that would not significantly help victims in practice. If you want to think more pessimistically, a griefer asked for a feature to make griefing take less effort.

Holy shit I actually read what you wrote.
My suggestion was to give us an option to loot scrubs without giving them wretched gores. If you give them wretched gores after KOing them, they literally lose the same amount of things they're currently losing (loot and time spent healing).
Idk how I'm "framing" this idea of having an option to not give them wretched gores, for the same price (a scent equal to battery), lmao.
The point of them giving consent was so you can't just scan everyone around you randomly for loot. If they don't give you consent, you don't know if they have good stuff or not, which would discourage people from KOing them instead of giving them extra assurance of good loot by just seeing their inventory without consent. You literally shoot yourself in the foot whenever you suggest something, or at least want to.

Also what are your thoughts on being able to hold those glass jugs in your belt? Just wanting to prove my point. Be genuine.

[Clemins]

a griefer asked for a feature to make griefing take less effort.

If someone's goal is to just steal your shit, then they will do it with or without Nightdawgs idea, no matter how much effort it takes. Honestly, you are severely underestimating how "difficult" it is to catch a "sprucecap". Seriously think about it, if someone is hell bent on killing you, they will, it's currently a feature in the game. Adding mugging just adds a way for that occasional criminal that JUST wants your pants to spare you instead of being REQUIRED to KO/Kill you.

If your next argument is "But, it'll add a method for criminals to trick someone running into stopping!"

1.

Honestly, you are severely underestimating how "difficult" it is to catch a "sprucecap".

2. Adding another method to get someone to stop running implies all the current ones don't work since you think this would be pivotal.

[DonVelD]

I want to remind you all people that the same man said this somewhere else:

With the stat difference, it doesn't make any difference and I'd be curbstomped whether I was naked or in top tier combat gear. If anything, steel armor would make it take longer for me to be KOed, meaning you'd cause bigger openings and perform more attacks in the fight and thus deal more HHP damage to me; I'd be better off getting KOed without armor.

People like this ruin good threads because of their masochistic/broken logic. The only thing they want is keeping up a façade of knowing what they're talking about. I don't see a point of trying to explain anything to this moron.

[WowGain]

duhh

I've genuinely seen flatworms with better reading comprehension than you

Hermits and sprucecaps deserve everything they get

[joojoo1975]

Hermits and sprucecaps deserve everything they get

why?

[VDZ]

The point of them giving consent was so you can't just scan everyone around you randomly for loot.

And if this 'scanning' is a crime (lighter than Battery but not insignificant, perhaps equal to Assault?), particularly if it's one requiring proximity to commit (as I suggested), how would that be a problem? You wouldn't be able to scan people outside of situations where you'd be able to attack them, and it would just the same tip them off that you're up to no good.

How does inventory inspection not solve your problem? If they are willing to work with you, you can just tell them verbally to drop the items you want. It does what you want (assuming what you want is what you stated you want), actually encourages letting victims go (due to escalation requiring further commitment), and has much fewer technical complications and edge cases than being able to take straight from their inventory while they're still standing.

Also what are your thoughts on being able to hold those glass jugs in your belt? Just wanting to prove my point. Be genuine.

I hadn't spoken up so far because I have no strong opinion on this subject. I would not be significantly be affected by that hypothetical change or the lack thereof. This question is better asked to whom it involves. But if you specifically want my opinion:

Undecided, I'd need to play with them first. My initial thought was 'oh, that would be a good upgrade for belt waterskins', but thinking a bit more I think mandatory belt water (at the expense of tool slots, the original purpose of belts) is kinda stupid, so perhaps having decent liquid containers in the inventory is the way to go (trading 2 belts slots for 1x2 inventory space). Then again, I can see myself getting frustrated at losing the inventory slots really quickly, so I might well change my mind on that after playing with them a bit.

But of course I'm mostly talking about the PvE purpose of water. If we're talking about the 'carry a bazillion liters of water for endless chases' PvP purpose, I think the way the whole system works is dumb. The fact that you're supposed to carry so much water that you barely leave any room for tools is dumb, and the fact that chases can take ages is dumb. I suppose theoretically people getting ganked would have better odds of getting away with a 67% water capacity increase, but gankers tend to carry a bazillion liters of water anyways so they're never going to win a battle of attrition either way; if they can't get away with waterskins they're unlikely to get away with jugs. I figure at most it would lead to a reduction of 'shields down' moments when people happen to be low on water.

I cannot properly judge what the implications of such a change would be on PvPer vs PvPer battles, which is almost certainly where it would have the greatest impact. As such, I think you should be voicing your opinion on the matter, not asking for mine. As such:

Outside of skii fights or the first two weeks of the world nobody is carrying water in their inventory. For PVP I can only rly see jugs being used during the snakeskin/grand belt era. Once you get a troll belt it wouldn't be the difference between 75L/belt and 125L/belt, it would just mean you have room for some tools/QOL stuff in your belt.

If anything, this would help scrubs that can't kill a troll after playing the game for 12 years.

Please elaborate on why you think this would help scrubs, whether or not you agree with Snail's assessment, and whether or not such a change would be welcome.

[DonVelD]

I hope they never add the search-down option so I'll never even consider not killing people like you.

Hermits and sprucecaps deserve everything they get

why?

Because of shit like above. Sprucecaps just shoot themselves in the foot and are being obnoxious most of the time.

[Audiosmurf]

Halfbucket is awesome good patch

[pawnchito]

[*] Added an animation to turn and look. When the character is interacting with things, he will now turn to look at them.

Cool animation, would be cooler if you could use the animation with emotes. Like squat and look or dance and look.