[CF List] Leveling at high level
Peter Mardahl
peterm at tonks.EECS.Berkeley.EDU
Thu Aug 29 11:08:41 CDT 2002
Andy says that levelling for high level players
takes "a constant amount of experience" after level 50 or so.
Is this true?
I thought monsters were worth less the higher your level.
So, say, you murder a dragon at level 20: 100000 exp
at level 108: 3000 exp
So you've got to murder 10x as many dragons at high level (100)
to level than at say, level 50.
Is this true or not?
PeterM
>
Hm... some very interesting topics
>
>
in reply to Mark W.:
>
>
> > > But is weight of the money any real issue?
>
> [...]
>
> But are gems really that hard to use?
>
>
I think weight of money is okay. The problem with gems is
>
they are hardly better than money. AFAIK, all standard gems
>
are in the price range of 3-5 platinums.
>
The special gems like "flawless beauty" cannot be used
>
for most game-mechanisms (e.g. altars) because their
>
special title is not recognized.
>
>
Hence, two things could be done for gems:
>
1. make standard gems cost more (of course adjusting
>
the amount of random-gems in the process)
>
2. make titles be recognizeable by altars and exchange tables
>
>
> > I said the rent should have to be paid every time
>
> > a player logs in,
>
>
I think banking-systems, apartment/town fees, gambling and
>
second-hand stores, those are cool ideas but they will gain
>
only a small deal for the money problem.
>
Mainly, it is hard to scale such fees for player levels
>
properly. Most likely it would add too much trouble for
>
lowlevels while leaving high levels without any concern.
>
(This tends to happen for a lot of things)
>
>
> One question may be - what do people in general think of
>
> having some of the random artifacts available for purchase?
>
> I know with the removal of potions, the idea is that we
>
> wanted players to have to go out and find items. That is
>
> now the case, but doesn't leave anything to be bought.
>
>
Please don't put artifacts for sale.
>
We have removed potions from shops, because it was obvious
>
that anything which is available for money is like
>
available for free above level 20.
>
If we put artifacts for sale, I believe we would worsen
>
the effects of the broken economy.
>
>
> The biggest problem is just the large amount of money
>
> available at higher levels. That is what really needs
>
> to get cut down.
>
>
Come to think of this, I believe the main "switch" in a
>
players life is the point when he starts to kill titans
>
and dragons. Before he can do that (<= lvl 20), he hardly
>
has any money. After he can do it (>= lvl 20) he can get
>
all the money he can carry, anytime, anyplace.
>
>
Maybe we could improve the system a little by just
>
reducing the average drop-value for red/elec dragons,
>
titans and big wizards?
>
>
> Note that one of my long range goals would be to change the
>
> game/movement so to go to wolfsburg, you would buy a boat
>
> and have to navigate it yourself to wherever you want to
>
> go. Thus, you now have some real travel time, and you
>
> would chew up money buying a boat. Some of the very old
>
> ultima games did this.
>
>
Yes, I also greatly prefer the idea of "adventurous travel"
>
versus "instant travel" with teleporters.
>
>
> > You could have a set of statues that could be modified for
>
> > a price. Every time someone makes a change, the price to
>
> > change that one again goes up.
>
> [...]
>
> some of these points requires the players to care. Eg,
>
> if I don't care about having a statue with my name on it,
>
> that doesn't suck any money out of me.
>
>
I believe you underestimate the value of pride. :-)
>
The statue-bidding idea seems quite exciting to me.
>
At least I've heard of people who played night-and-day
>
just to beat someone else's highscore! ;-)
>
>
> > Item repair is a great idea - it works well for
>
> > another game I know of.
>
>
>
> I think we are somewhat agreed that this is a good
>
> starting point. We should really do this first and see
>
> how it effects cash for the players.
>
>
Yeah, I believe that would really have a good effect
>
on economy. It would greatly help with balance too.
>
And there's not much to loose or fear about it.
>
>
> > Training is an old standard - you pay to level up once
>
> > you got the xp. Would be tricky to implement perhaps.
>
>
Hm yes, why not. This could be another good way to
>
leech money out of those high-level pockets.
>
>
> > [...] having a player get to level 99 in three months
>
> > is aceptable for a singleplayer campain type game but it
>
> > pretty bad if you are shooting for a multiplayer persistant
>
> > type world game.
>
>
>
> Are people getting to level 110 because monsters give too
>
> much exp? Or is it they can just go to the right dungeons
>
> where there are 300 of the right monster?
>
>
This is indeed another one of the "root problems" in CF.
>
Guess I already said that, but the leveling problem is
>
definitly caused by the lack of experience gaps between
>
higher levels.
>
>
After level 50, the amount of exp you need to gain levels
>
does not rise anymore. It stays around 3 million, which is
>
FAR too low. In other words, once a player reached level 50,
>
he can gain any other level in a linear amount of time.
>
But the penalty for dying does not increase either.
>
So in fact, it is even worse: The player needs less time to
>
gain additional levels because he gets stronger in the process.
>
>
Obviously, increasing the experience gaps between levels
>
would be a good thing to do.
>
However, I believe one of the underlying problems here are
>
limitations in length of variables, or not?
>
Would it be possible to just raise the amounts of exp without
>
running into an overflow?
>
>
>
Andreas
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
>
crossfire-list mailing list
>
crossfire-list at lists.real-time.com
>
https://mailman.real-time.com/mailman/listinfo/crossfire-list
More information about the crossfire
mailing list