Nicolas Weeger wrote: >> Maybe. Or just say that the level basing is that a character of level X >> can reasonably take on a group of 5 monsters also of level X. >> >> But as said, I think some of the failure is the AI in crossfire, so the >> make up for stupid monsters, there are just more of them. > > > That's part of the game genre, no? > Many monsters, not smart.
Maybe. But many monsters may have abilities/items they don't effectively use. I'm not sure how much is historical relative to CRPGs vs tabletop - for tablestop, the monsters often would be smart (as they are played by a real person). I don't know for sure, but I could imagine that in early computer based games, the system just didn't have a lot of resources to have a really good AI (if you have memory and cpu speed constraints, you make do with what you have). So I guess it depends on how far ones go back into the genre. > > > Should we try to go towards less monsters smarter? I think so - not every monster has to be an expert tactician, but at least having some of them be so would be reasonable. It would certainly be nice for the end of map/quest boss monsters. _______________________________________________ crossfire mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.metalforge.org/mailman/listinfo/crossfire
