Re: [crossfire] Interview for Gamasutra Article on Open Source Games

2011-06-27 Thread Michael Thomsen
Hi Nicolas,

Thanks for the reply! Do you have contact info for either?
 
Michael Thomsen
323.203.8322
amboabe: aim
www.manoamondo.com



From: Nicolas Weeger nicolas.wee...@laposte.net
To: Michael Thomsen mikt...@yahoo.com
Cc: crossfire@metalforge.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2011 4:28 PM
Subject: Re: [crossfire] Interview for Gamasutra Article on Open Source Games

Hello.

 I'm a writer in New York and am working on a story for Gamasutra about open
 games. I'd love to include some discussion of Crossfire both because of
 how long running it's been and for how dramatically it seems to have
 changed over the years. It would be great to speak with someone by phone
 or email or whatever format's most convenient about the roots of the game
 and how it's changed over the years.
 
 Would anyone be available for, say, a 20 minute call or maybe some email
 questions?


Glad to see people have an interest in the game :)


One long-time contributor would be Mark Wedel, though I'm not sure when he'll 
have again time for Crossfire.

Rick Tanner has also been on board for quite some time (and manages the 
website, forum and wiki, as well as the most popular server).



Regards


Nicolas
-- 
Mon p'tit coin du web - http://nicolas.weeger.org___
crossfire mailing list
crossfire@metalforge.org
http://mailman.metalforge.org/mailman/listinfo/crossfire


Re: [crossfire] Materials

2011-06-27 Thread Mark Wedel

On 06/26/11 05:28 AM, Nicolas Weeger wrote:

Hello.


In the code is support for NEW_MATERIAL_CODE.


Enabling it randomizes the material for many items, leading to proliferation
of items with different materials and properties (more damage to weapons,
different resistances, and such).


Material support is half-written for multiple combinations (iron + paper for
instance), but not totally everywhere.


I wonder whether to enable that (extended material) support by default and fix
issues, or totally remove it.


 Leaf did pretty well summarize the issues, but there was another annoyance I 
found with it:


 For most items, the material made very minor difference.  So following on 
Leaf's example, no only would you have 6 different boots of speed (instead of 
them stacking), but save for maybe 1 point of resistance here or there, or one 
being a little bit lighter, they were all basically the same.


 So you got a lot of inventory clutter for very little gain.  And the way the 
code work, it would find something of 'iron', and then randomize the material 
for all the things that could be iron.  Some materials might make a difference 
for armor, but not weapons, and vice versa, but the material code itself had no 
way to restrict that. so you would have 6 times of metal armor, with maybe only 
one or 2 of the materials being different enough to really care about.


 So I would say that the material logic could be removed.  If one was to 
improve it, these are my thoughts:


1) Make it more like the artifact code, where one can restrict it to different 
items.  Thus, a yew bow may be really good, so you would find normal wood bows 
and the better yew bows, but wouldn't find pine, spruce, etc.  OTOH, this starts 
to look like just another stack of item bonuses, and is it worth it to do it via 
material instead of just making some bows better and in the description say they 
are made from yew?


2) Ability to regionalize materials.  It might make perfect sense in the area 
far to the north where only pine trees grow that the vast majority of wooden 
items would be pine, in a jungle area, bamboo, etc.  That would sort of 
eliminate some of the stacking problem - since you would typically do your 
adventuring within an area and then go to the shop to sell at once, most of your 
items would be made from the same local material.  But even then, I would have 
to ask if the changing of materials really gains that much?


___
crossfire mailing list
crossfire@metalforge.org
http://mailman.metalforge.org/mailman/listinfo/crossfire