[crossfire] Priority feature list

[Juergen Kahnert]

On Tue, Jul 24, 2007 at 11:23:01PM -0700, Mark Wedel wrote:
>   I agree that in principle, most of the classes and races should be
> about equal in power/balance.

There are two styles possible.  Make all classes and race combination
equal in power from the very first beginning.

Or you have some classes / races which are weaker in the beginning and
become stronger on higher levels than the other ones.

A bad combination is having weak classes / races which always stay weak.


> A certain race/class shouldn't always be the best to play.

I fully agree.


> And in broad terms, fighters and spell casters should be about equal.

Which style do you prefer: Equal strength from the first level or make
spell caster become stronger than an equal level fighter?


>   However, I don't think all races/classes have to be equal.  I know
> in the past, certain races were made available, but made available as
> 'challenge' classes

Challenging in the beginning, on mid / high level or always?  There is
no need to play a combination which won't never ever give out any
advantages.


> I don't think everything needs to be perfectly balanced.

No, not perfectly balanced.  But it depends on the style how much
differences between class / race combination is acceptable.



On Fri, Jul 27, 2007 at 09:22:20AM +0300, Juha Jäykkä wrote:
> One question, though: do we need the overall level at all?

For things like stat improvements an overall level is fine.  I would
keep it.


> We could bind HP, dragon abilities etc to the relevant skill level

What's an appropriate skill for HP?  Overall level is not bad.  This is
well proven.


> and really, we should change this to "higher better"; the lower better
> system is a D&D relic

Yes, the higher the better is easier to understand for newbies without
D&D experiences.

And having attack and defense values for every skill, not only "Wc" is
more logical.  It's easier to understand why someone is harder to hit
who's using a small shield and a short sword (easier to defend) than
someone with a plate mail and a two handed sword.

But in fact, using a small shield gives you ac -1 and a plate mal ac -5.
And the monsters will now miss the slow one with the heavy armour more
often.  This D&D style isn't really self explaining...

It's ok for pen & paper dice rolls, but that's it.



Summary:

Some classes and races are more challenging to play in the beginning,
but should get some in-game rewards on higher levels.  What means on the
other hand that those who are easy to play in the beginning become
harder to play on higher levels.

Making the speed of the weapon and the weight of the armour affecting
the dodging skill is more logical.  Introduce a "Dc" skill for the
defense and remove "Ac".  The armour is well represented with the
percent value.

    Jürgen