FWD: RE: [CF-Devel] PR (Partial resistance)

[Andreas Vogl]

-----Forwarded Message-----
From: Michael Toennies [mailto:
     
     mtx93 at tzi.de
     
     ]
Sent: Tue, 14.11.2000 04:01
To: Andreas Vogl
Subject: RE: [CF-Devel] PR (Partial resistance)

>
     
      Mark W. wrote:
     
     >
     
     
     >
     
      > > 3) Determine values for the current resistance and immunity
     
     >
     
      > > and write a quick program to sort through archs and change all
     
     >
     
      > > to partial (ie prot -> 33%, Immunity -> 90%)
     
     >
     
      >
     
     >
     
      > This actually does not need to be done right away.  For testing
     
     >
     
      > purposes, it may be easier to add something like this to the item
     
     >
     
      > loading function:
     
     >
     
      >
     
     >
     
      > If protected/vulnerable/immune to attacktype, assign default value
     
     >
     
      > to the relevant protected field.
     
     >
     
      >
     
     >
     
      > This at least gets you up and running quickly, and probably should
     
     >
     
      > be done anyways (with a debugging statement), simply becauses there
     
     >
     
      > may be old maps out there that don't get converted right away.
     
     >
     
     
     >
     
      Good point. Maybe we should just leave the old style immunities
     
     >
     
      working as they do (in the code)? It might be desireable to give
     
     >
     
      monsters or non-equipment-items 100% immunities for some reason
     
     >
     
      (e.g. make a crystal that cannot burn, etc).
     
     >
     
      And what we like to change can be done in the maps and archs.
     
     >
     
      For the old-style protections, we can assign a default value as
     
     >
     
      Mark proposed.
     
     >
     
     
     >
     
      That way we could do the changing and re-balancing slowly and step
     
     >
     
      by step. We would skip the period of "chaos and anarchy" that could
     
     >
     
      otherwise happen shortly after the patch.
     
     >
     
     
     >
     
      > Now there are some issues that may be of debate. Like should
     
     >
     
      > immunity potions really be 100% or instead something like 90%.
     
     >
     
      > Same for some monsters.
     
     >
     
     
     >
     
      Potions should definitly NOT give 100%, because I don't want to have
     
     >
     
      all the work on this patch wasted!
     
     >
     
      I think they should give an absolute value of about 80% and not add up
     
     >
     
      on the player's protection. So when a player gets equipment with good
     
     >
     
      protections it will be more and more inefficient to use potions.
     
     >
     
      That way low-level players get the help they need, while high-level
     
     >
     
      players don't.
     
     >
     
     
     >
     
      > Also, if/when the protected, immune, and vulnerable fields go away,
     
     >
     
      > i think there may be some objects that use those for non obvious
     
     >
     
      > purposes (I think the gods code did so at one time).  That ability
     
     >
     
      > will be gone.
     
     >
     
     
     >
     
      Uh oh. Very important to track these down.
     
     >
     
     
     >
     
      > I actually don't think getting it working will be that hard.
     
     >
     
      > Getting it balanced will be the much harder part, as that entails
     
     >
     
      > twiddling values of the object, running again, seeing if it works
     
     >
     
      > out correctly, etc.
     
     >
     
     
     >
     
      That is exactly how I feel about it. I'm willing to help with all the
     
     >
     
      balancing stuff, but someone must first code the patch... =)
     
     >
     
     
     >
     
      > As a side note, currently armour in the object structure is an 8 bit
     
     >
     
      > signed value (-127 to 127).  If we presume the vulnerable equals -100
     
     >
     
      > protection (double damage which is currently the case), you probably
     
     >
     
      > want to use 16 bit values to reduce the danger of overflow if someone
     
     >
     
      > has a few vulnerable items.
     
     >
     
     
     >
     
      Using 8 bit values would be a terrible mistake. Those have already caused
     
     >
     
      so much troubles in the past.. It is still possible to get various kinds
     
     >
     
      of buffer overflows on different stat-values (ac, dam, etc).
     
     >
     
      So please use 16 bit.
     
     >
     
     
     >
     
      Also, I would be very interested in the exact calculations that we're
     
     >
     
      about to use in the PR-patch. How much prot. will a player get for
     
     >
     
      wearing an amour with 99% fire resistance? How much % resistance on
     
     >
     
      equipment is required to reach 99% as a player? ...
     
     
Thats the point why i want potions: I don't want a player which have armor,
rings and
amulets on, giving him 99% prot in fire and cold and all the stuff. Remember
a char can wear&wield
at the moment more than 13 items at the same time (yeah, count it!). You
will come in some problems
to balance it without a cap.

I want a value X you can maximal get with items, which gives you enough
protection to avoid
killing by fire for example of a red dragon, perhaps the abillity (if you
are fast) to kill the
critter with a good weapon, but you should nearly dead then. To boost your
res to nearly immunity, you
never should be able to do this permanent with armors or other tricks.
Also, when he has about
80%-90% natural in all (that means you can cut through a row of red dragons
all times you want),
i will call the char and the game then broken. We dont want this kind of
super chars.

If you really want then attacking 5 dragons, you must drink a potion, giving
you for
a short time immunity. Or you should cast a spell.

** The protection spells in the game are really useless at this point **!
I never use them, because when i get them i always have items which do the
same.
So, simply make potions and spells cap indepentend and you got the non
permanent style
we all want.

Real caps are shown to the player too and are simple to include.
If you have a armor of fire res +30% and a amulet of 30% you should not get
automatically
60% fire res. Every point you got nearer the cap, you need more points to
get closer.
If yur caps 60, you got 40 points for example. If your caps are 70, you got
44% from both or so.
And if you caps are 20, you got 19.
(i think all here knows the prinzip).

So, make a low cap. This will sacrifice most game parts also:

- Different races/professions have different personal caps.
- Gods will give different caps.
- Perhaps quest can give you permanent higher caps!! (invisible items!)

I play in a MUD with this prinzip and i remember it as really great, because
you chars get a highly different style to play.

Also, all items automatically fits in the system, no one can give you to
much. If they do, they get caped.
Calculate also the numbers of items with a special res, so you get more res
>
     
     from 5 items with all 10% fire res
     
     as from wear one item with 50%. This will cap the "super items".

A great thing if you do this and what i remember as i play this MUD is, that
if you do this in the way i describe, different items fits in a different
way in chars with different caps, because the get caped
in different ways. That means that a item are great for some chars, and not
so great for others.

MichToen