Also spracht Juergen Kahnert (Wed, 04 Jul 2007 15:16:11 +0200):
> On Wed, Jul 04, 2007 at 02:42:05AM +0000, Lalo Martins wrote:
>> I could even like it if examining a player reveals her "master" skills
>> -- which usually won't be more than a few anyway.
>
> Do you have an idea how it could looks like? Maybe by clicking on the
> character, extending the equipment list.
Yes, that's what I thought.
>> So pitching a self-taught amateur that took years to get to level 20
>> against a professional who got to this level before "graduating",
>> should get an approximately even match.
>
> I don't think so. Having a master able to teach you the deepest
> knowledge (which was gained over generations) is something else than
> practicing by your own for years.
This is represented by the caps. "The deepest knowledge" is the highest
levels.
Also, you're missing a point. Read the preceding part again. "Crossfire
levels are not a function of experience. They are just that: a measure
of how effective a skill is due to experience." Levels are a measure of
effectiveness; that's what they mean, at least in this game. So two
people of level 20 have the same ability, because that's what level 20
means; if one of them had less, then he wouldn't have level 20.
>> The comparison with an untalented black-belt vs. a talented one is IMO
>> not fair. A better way to think about it is comparing two fighters who
>> were given black belts by the same, rigorous master, in which case they
>> should have more or less the same skill.
>
> I can't confirm that. They won't have the same skill. In fact there
> can be huge differences between them, even with the same master teaching
> them at (and over) the same time.
Then I'm sorry, we seem to have a fundamental difference of philosophy
wrt. the real life. I don't believe in that.
Bear in mind, I'm not talking about two people training for the same
time. I'm talking about two people being awarded the same degree by the
same (rigorous) master. The person who's talented will get there
faster. The not-very-talented will take a long time. The untalented
will never get there. I've seen it happen myself many times on martial
arts schools.
>> That said, I'd put a cap on levels. If we retain the current level
>> system (110/115), I'd cap amateurs at 40 and professionals at 90.
>> (Master is of course uncapped, or capped by the system's own limits,
>> currently 110).
>
> I don't think that this will change much. Check out the characters
> running around. Do you think they have much skills over 40? Fighters
> tend to stop training sorcery after reaching town portal. A level cap
> of 40 won't change that...
Er, do you really play on the servers? I routinely see people with
skills of levels above 100, because that's the only way you can level up
at that point.
Besides, it still does make a huge difference for things like weapon
skills.
Finally, there has been talk of redistributing spell levels, and I'm
taking for granted that this *will* be done for 2.0. The current spell
levels are artifacts from when the highest level was, I don't remember
exactly, 40 or 50.
>> It would also be interesting to introduce "difficult" items; for
>> example, weapons that require pro level in their skills.
>
> I like that idea. But didn't you said level 20 should be level 20 no
> matter of the version of the skill? ;)
>
> I would simply check the level, not the grade of the skill.
You got me there :-) But what I meant to represent here is that someone
who had formal training is likely to have more breadth than the self-
taught. The examples I use below -- longsword and battle axe -- are
really though, and it's unlikely someone will ever bother to spend the
time to learn them, if they have to actually live their lives as an
active adventurer. Other weapons go beyond that into the barroque: I
think someone would have to be really incredibly skilled already before
they could self-teach a kusari, for example, without dying in the process.
>> Despite appearances, it's just not possible to fight with a longsword
>> or a battle axe if you've never been trained on it.
>
> That would mean you need a lot of skills. For every weapon type a new
> skill. And to stay fair, each spell needs to get an own skill level,
> too.
>
> I consider that as an overkill.
Oh no, sorry, I'm not proposing different skills. I'm just saying, an
untrained person will use the tools (weapons in this case) that are
easier to grasp, while someone with formal training will have more
breadth.
>> Training to increase proficiency should take time. A way to represent
>> that could be:
>>
>> - The system only considers the proficiency for the "instance"
>> of the skill with highest level; so if you're amateur archer 20 and
>> pro archer 18, you're still amateur.
>
> I don't get that. How could you be level 20 and simultaneous level 18
> of the same skill?
>From the point of view of the system, they are two different skills.
> I would like to see regions for players of the same level. You either
> need much more of those regions (for every nationalty an own beginning
> region) or stay with mixed maps. But mixed maps lead newbies into
> death. Having a cave of goblins next to one with dragons won't urge
> newbies recommending this game to others...
Agreed. The starting towns shouldn't have maps that are too dangerous.
Maybe only one harder quest, with abundant warnings around it (in Scorn
I'd leave the Old City quest).
>> I'd take that opportunity to "regionalize" the choices of gods. One
>> possibility is that praying at an altar doesn't "convert" you, you need
>> be "converted" on that god's society
>
> On the one hand you're saying, that you should be able to master every
> skill by your own to the same level as others with a teacher. On the
> other hand you deny that for the praying skill. I think that's
> inconsistent.
Er, no, I never said that, where did I?
Besides, the two things aren't related at all. The choice of what god a
character worships has nothing to do with skills. I just think, for
flavor purposes, the choices of religion should be regional. That has no
impact at all on how far and how fast a priest can advance, just on what
"kind" of priest she can be.
>> New skills, at amateur level, should be IMO taught at a relevant
>> society.
>
> How do you learn magic skills if you're a warrior? Or are you allowed
> to enter all societies? Or won't you ever get a chance to learn magic
> skills as a warrior?
Only by joining an "advanced" society as I described later, one that only
admits you if you are a warrior and then teaches you some magic -- making
you the equivalent of today's "warlock".
>> It also, on a crowded server (which we hope to get if we make CF2 cool
>> enough), facilitates characters meeting others of the same society and
>> forming parties. Conversely, if you need one mage for you party of
>> fighters, you know where to go; just stand in front of the Academy for
>> a while.
>
> Wouldn't it be much easier to use "chat" instead of camping in front of
> a guild? ;)
I thought that as I was writing. Then I thought, our current chat system
is somewhat aberrant. We have channels and we have a "main" channel, and
everybody joins the "main" channel; but that's because the servers aren't
too full. If we make this cool enough and the servers get really full,
then I wouldn't expect people to be in the same chat channel anymore, or
actually playing the game will become impossible.
> Besides that, I think CF needs much more party support to make this work
> well - if ever on a tiled 2D map. I don't see much parties going deeper
> at raffle2 after the trolls are dead. A CF party is just used to level
> up a character fast, nothing more.
That is at least partially true, maybe completely. But I'm assuming
we'll address that for 2.0 as well. Even if we don't, it's worth making
it easier to party, if the cost isn't very high, because then we're more
encouraged to improve partying later, in 2.x :-)
best,
Lalo Martins
best,
Lalo Martins
--
So many of our dreams at first seem impossible,
then they seem improbable, and then, when we
summon the will, they soon become inevitable.
-----
personal: http://lalo.hystericalraisins.net/
technical: http://www.hystericalraisins.net/
GNU: never give up freedom http://www.gnu.org/
_______________________________________________
crossfire mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.metalforge.org/mailman/listinfo/crossfire
