|
Post by almordre on Nov 19, 2010 15:59:37 GMT -6
I think a tweak to the health points would help things a lot - good point that the current growth rate was in place long before the current skill system and the increased damage that brings. Maybe just bump it up to 8 or 10 per level for a test round?
Currently, I have points spread across a lot of skills, none approaching lvl10, even - way better use of skill points to add more lower skills, under current setup.
As far as skill level limits - by lvl99, you have had 386 skill points to use. With a cap at 15, that'd be enough points to max only 3 skills, with a few points to spare. With one starting class, the weapon class, and two spec classes (assuming 20-50-100 plan) at that point, you'd still have access to 16 different skills. So, enough to max less than 1/4 of 'em... Dunno what that means, just throwing out numbers from a different perspective... Maybe cap at 10 or 12 if you want to force more skill diversity, or at 15 if anyone thinks insane loading on one or two stats would be fun?
|
|
|
Post by Tim on Nov 19, 2010 15:59:50 GMT -6
Yeah. That's definitely true. Even with this change, it's not the most cost efficient to go from spend 15 points to raise a stat from +28 to +30, when usually you could raise other a combination of other stats by significantly more than that.
|
|
|
Post by almordre on Nov 19, 2010 21:23:43 GMT -6
That's kind of why I'm thinking that limiting the number of classes might work out for the good - then you'd have less chance for loading a dozen low-level skills, and you'd have to work a little harder for those later skill upgrades. Could slow the damage-potential growth a little, too, and help bring that back into balance with the health points, maybe? My last armor upgrade, applying the same talis as the previous armor, took 4 levels' worth of equip point bumps to get there. Doesn't seem like taking 2-3 levels' worth of skill points for a top-end upgrade would be too far out of line, when comparing it with that.
|
|
|
Post by fearless on Nov 20, 2010 8:40:37 GMT -6
as I rarely play characters past level 40 or so nowadays. isn't this a major problem ?... seems to me that we begin to lose active players as the game progresses... seemed to be a large influx of new players at the beginning, but they have petered out.....
|
|
|
Post by alSeen on Nov 20, 2010 12:15:05 GMT -6
maybe we should have classes only available after certain level? that may get people to play for that higher level to get the class they want. but the main reason people stop playing , i think, is that they start having less and less time for ALL their characters and then one day u just forgot and boom, u r 5 levels behind EVERYONE and have become the whipping boy haha.
|
|
|
Post by Tim on Nov 21, 2010 0:00:50 GMT -6
I stop after about 40 because I don't have time to play AND work on the next version. I agree that activity definitely still peters out after the first month or so. Not sure what to do about it. A second tier of specialized classes may help a bit, but don't know if that'd be enough motivation. Part of me thinks that there's not enough interaction going on to keep people hooked. After the first month or so, each of the big clans pretty much have their territory staked out and others are pretty much out of the running. After that, not much left to do other than personal development. I think there needs to be something for clans to do other than take towns, to make the game more social. All the veterans stick around because they interact with each other. New players do at the beginning, but then run out of reasons to and head off. Have some ideas to keep things interesting, but am open to suggestions.
|
|
|
Post by King Richard on Nov 21, 2010 0:41:57 GMT -6
I think there needs to be something for clans to do other than take towns, to make the game more social. All the veterans stick around because they interact with each other. New players do at the beginning, but then run out of reasons to and head off. Have some ideas to keep things interesting, but am open to suggestions. Cash prizes. Just a thought.
|
|
|
Post by alSeen on Nov 21, 2010 0:53:52 GMT -6
what if we added the Ways? a super complex maze with a few ways out and tougher than normal (not just higher level, cuz i HATE that haha) enemies. that would be an extra thing to explore. and maybe trolloc invasions on the towns and or wildernesses where the players actually have to fight them or the town will be destroyed (for a few days or something like that. maybe just the shops, inns, and ect)
and the Black Wind. that would be epicness to fight
|
|
|
Post by Crom Cruach on Nov 22, 2010 8:14:51 GMT -6
Yeah, the solution to the loss of interest is in creating randomized extra-ordinary events, places or foes that break the routine. Shadowspawn invasions and the Ways exploration as in Alseen's post are good examples. Another (but probably less popular) option would be to slow down the whole upgrading process. Let people get to the top in 2 months instead of 1 and they'll be playing for 2 months.. but this isn't a very constructive advice, sorry
|
|
|
Post by alSeen on Nov 22, 2010 11:30:16 GMT -6
i think the ways should be hell to go in and hell finding a way out. no shops, no access to towns. this could also lead to those extra zones some people wanted a few versions ago
|
|
|
Post by Crom Cruach on Nov 23, 2010 8:03:09 GMT -6
...and still do ;D
|
|
|
Post by almordre on Nov 23, 2010 12:20:15 GMT -6
*Random* For some reason, I keep thinking that an early GoS version had some link between number of turns in battles and XPs... If XPs earned from battles were affected by how many turns the battles lasted (longer battles=more XPs), it might be an incentive to not pursue 1-hit kills so much, and maybe encourage a little more balance? Have to ride the line between damage and defense a little tighter in order to level? Thinking maybe a base (?10 XPs) for winning, plus 1 XP for number of turns in the battle, or something similar? Was that a piece of earlier version that got changed? Any thoughts on how a system like that would muck things up?
|
|
|
Post by Tim on Nov 23, 2010 13:29:33 GMT -6
Cash prizes. Just a thought. I'd need a lot more donors if that was the case. On Ways/special areas/special events: I still have plans for both of these (have a list of special places and how to get to them all mostly figured out). Its the special events that still need a lot of work, and special places without a reason to go there seems kinda pointless to me. Eventually I'd like there to be specific events tied to the WoT Calandar, with something unique (ish) happening every day or two. Problem is that's a LOT of planning and coding (handling all the events) and I'm not quite sure where to start. Am planning on it happening sometime though. I haven't forgot about this. On slowing character progression: I agree that it'd be better if it took people longer to max out, but don't want to slow things for the sake of slowing them. Don't want it to get like it was a few versions back where it took 5 days worth of battles to go from level 50 to 51 (and nothing but a few more equip points when you get there). Would much rather add more 'levels' of upgrading so it takes them longer because there's more to do, but still upgrade at the same pace. On tying XP to battle turns: I'm not sure if this was ever done, though it does sound familiar. Could have been an idea I was toying with. I like it and I don't. It would encourage people against 1 hit kills and would reward you more for facing truely challenging enemies. The down side is that it seems harsh on speed users, and rewards defenders too much. Someone could go pure defense and go against someone with less health. Battle would take max turns and they'd get max xp. Actually, that problem sounds VERY familar. Maybe this WAS implemented at one point...
|
|
|
Post by alSeen on Nov 23, 2010 14:47:09 GMT -6
the xp thing wouldnt be THAT bad on speed users as long as their attack isnt too high. pure defense will have the upper hand but then they do less damage and if the other person has speed with taint/poison (or even health gain so they keep that up) the guy tanking should lose even against someone one or two levels down. and honestly, pure defense should still not trump a pure attacker since knives have those handy little talismens (that shields dont) if the character wanted
|
|
|
Post by almordre on Nov 23, 2010 15:13:30 GMT -6
Don't want it to get like it was a few versions back where it took 5 days worth of battles to go from level 50 to 51 Just to clarify - With the "slowing" stuff, we weren't talking about slowing down XPs and leveling. We were discussing limiting the number of extra classes/skills, and the "slowing" was about the excessive stat boost coming from access to multiple+cheap skills. Kind of the flip side of a coin - increasing health point growth or decreasing damage potential - either could theoretically re-balance things from the current situation of pre-skills health point growth being overrun by skill-boosted damage numbers. Someone could go pure defense and go against someone with less health. Battle would take max turns and they'd get max xp. someone with less health would be a lower level, and therefore get nerf'd XPs because of that, right? Maybe take a tweak to the level-difference adjustment, but should still work out OK. Assuming that running a defense build did run the battle full count, and you could still win, I'm thinking this might actually make running a heavy defense build somewhat attractive, maybe? Some benefit to an approach other than SPEED+SPEED+SPEED? pure defense should still not trump a pure attacker wasn't that part of the earlier discussion, about balancing so that max'd defense builds were potentially on par with max'd attack builds?
|
|