[crossfire] Project Vote results

[Juergen Kahnert]

On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 10:29:07PM -0700, Mark Wedel wrote:
>   Not that many votes - next time it will need to get better
> publicized I think. 

I don't think that's the problem.  It's more about that this kind of
voting is suboptimal at all, as I already stated here:

    http://mailman.metalforge.org/pipermail/crossfire/2007-August/011780.html


> I think anything beyond the third or fourth place is probably pretty
> meaningless

I don't think so, see below.


> One problem with this vote, and maybe something I'll include in future
> votes, is there wasn't an actual question of whether some item should
> even be done.

This won't help either.


>  From this list, 1 is top priority (thing to work on next), 2 would be
> to work on after that, etc.  I'd probably say the first 2-3 things
> could be completed before another vote is held - redoing votes
> periodically is I think a good idea

I don't think that redoing of this vote is a good idea, see below.


>   I'll start a new thread discussing the top point - that way the
> subject will be more meaningful.
> 
> 1) Slow down combat so one can use tactics

Now the problem starts:


On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 12:13:10AM -0700, Mark Wedel wrote:
>   I'm also going to include the #2 point

Before you started to discuss #1 you have to include #2.  What about
your "2 would be to work on after that" (see above)?


> - "Balance magic & combat skills so they are more equal" a little bit
> I don't think slowing down combat is going to make that all work out,

That's it, but #2 in combination with #1 won't do it either.  You have
to design a consistent world, not work on single points without taking
care of the big picture.


> I'll also note that when talking about these things, everything should
> really be on the table - things should not be excluded because it is
> different than it is now, would result in incompatible characters
> (while this change could probably be made without requiring fresh 
> characters, some of the other big points can't be), etc.

Trying to make #1 that you can keep old characters is wasted time if #2,
#3, #4 or any later points will break this compatibility...


> I think if we try to focus too narrowly we won't be able to find good
> solutions.

Right, but you have to think about _all_ changes first before you start
coding.


>   I think stat bonuses may also need to be tuned.

Now you're talking about #3, too.


> 2) Increase creature AC
> 3) Increase armor value of creatures

That's part of #12.


On Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 11:53:25PM +0200, Nicolas Weeger wrote:
> I would also consider, even if later, the implications on map. If it
> takes 5s to kill a "middle-level" monster, we probably don't want a
> map with 500 of them, could be messy.

That's also #12.


> it should take some time to grind through many monsters. This could
> also introduce new fun spells, "repel"?

That's #4.


> Or more hp? One (partial) alternative solution is to up the maxhp of 
> creatures. Even if you attack fast, you need time to kill due to high hp.

#12


> Well, the bolt spell's speed could be reduced, maybe? And change based on 
> casting level?

#2, #4


> Also, maybe we should introduce more attacktypes for weapons, 
> like "bash", "cut", so eg a mass against a skeleton is powerful, but a
> sword isn't?

Not even part of the list...


> Don't forget to reduce monster's attack, or increase player's hp :)

#12


> Note that increasing player's hp will imply tweaking the various healing 
> spells, and maybe meditation.

#3


> I think the hardest part will be correct balancing of everything,
> whatever solution we use :)

#1 - #12 + more


On Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 10:04:27PM -0700, Mark Wedel wrote:
>   Yes - rooms full of monsters would likely need to be changed.

#12


>   This actually has some other dramatic effects - large area of effect spells 
> are less useful (if the room only has a few creatures, the spell only hits a 
> few, and not a dozen).

#4


>   But this also would reduce treasure income quite a bit (probably a
> good thing).  I think exp of monsters would have to be adjusted

#12


> that also allows effectively unlimited stat values, since it is now a
> simple formula.

#3


> Right now, that is somewhat guesswork I think, and I have a feeling a
> lot of monsters are not good challenges/balanced because certain of
> those attributes are out of whack (monster never hits, or hits too
> often, etc).

#12


>   I suspect the problem with spells right now is that most spells do a
> lot of damage, relative to how many hp players have.

#2, #4


>   I think if hp is adjusted, grace and mana would have to go up also.

#3

And so on, I guess you know what I mean.


> and perhaps some of the other things on the vote before trying to
> balance everything - it may not make sense to try to balance it after
> this, and then balance again after spell changes, then balance again
> after ...

You got it!

So stop talking about single points and start working on a consistent
world before coding.

    http://wiki.metalforge.net/doku.php/dev_todo:cf2.0:roadmap

Without the big picture working on single points is wasted time.  So I'm
out if you continue this way.  That doesn't mean you have to do it my
way it's just that I will spent time only if there is a clear concept.

I suggest to work on the roadmap until we got a consistent world.  That
will take some time (many months) without coding on this points.

And for those who needs to code should concentrate on bugfixes. Make the
server more stable (no crashes, less lags, ...) and clean the codebase.
No changes in gameplay at all.

Both will take some time.  After the 1.x server is stable and the concept
for the gameplay changes is complete, the coding work on CF2 will start.

    Jürgen