From leaf at real-time.com Tue Sep 2 15:50:35 2008 From: leaf at real-time.com (Rick Tanner) Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2008 15:50:35 -0500 Subject: [crossfire] [Fwd: SourceForge.net Subversion service downtime scheduled 2008-09-04] Message-ID: <48BDA71B.2020304@real-time.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Sending this as an FYI - -------- Original Message -------- Subject: SourceForge.net Subversion service downtime scheduled 2008-09-04 Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2008 20:47:58 UT On 2008-09-04 at 04:00 UTC, Subversion service write operations will be offline for no more than 24 hours. During this time, Subversion write operations (such as commit) will fail with an error. Read operations (checkout, ViewVC, etc.) will succeed as normal. This downtime is being used to migrate data on to new storage hardware and conduct performance testing. We are taking this downtime approach (leaving service online, with write operations failing) to minimize the functional impact to users. Questions or concerns regarding this downtime may be directed to SourceForge.net staff by submitting a Support Request at https://sourceforge.net/projects/alexandria/support/ Thank you, Jacob Moorman Director of Operations, SourceForge.net -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFIvacbhHyvgBp+vH4RAgEGAKDE3lN/eyv+CjlYeb4je1vrwypG5gCfYmxG uRJZfqLmeM4sraLiaZxcNKI= =90YW -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From raphael at gimp.org Mon Sep 8 10:58:43 2008 From: raphael at gimp.org (=?UTF-8?B?UmFwaGHDq2w=?= Quinet) Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2008 17:58:43 +0200 Subject: [crossfire] Maps for spellcasters (and melee vs. ranged attacks) Message-ID: <20080908175843.72ac7c40.raphael@gimp.org> Hi, Looking at the current set of maps and especially some of the recently added quests, I see that several high-level maps can only be completed using melee. Ranged attacks are useless in many of these maps because magic and prayers are blocked, or because the monsters reflect spells and missiles, or because they are immune or highly protected against most attacktypes or diseases and they are too high level to be charmed. This is fine for warriors and similar types of players, but I think that it would also be fun to have quests for those who want to focus on ranged attacks (spellcasters, bowmen, etc.). This is not a problem in low- and medium-level quests because most of them allow ranged attacks and the player can usually kill monsters safely from a distance. However, some high-level quests can be completed easily using melee but not ranged attacks (think about Eureca or the recent additions like the pygmies). I would like to balance that by adding some quests that can be completed without too much trouble using ranged attacks (spells or missiles) but are very hard to complete using melee. However... there is no easy way to do that. Map designers can easily block magic and prayers in a map by using "no_spells" floor, but there is no such thing as a "no_melee" floor. I have been thinking about various ways to discourage melee, but I am posting this message to the list because I hope that some of you have better ideas. Currently, the solution that I am thinking about is to allow melee but discourage players from using it. For instance, the monsters could have very low WC, hitback and a nasty combination of attacktypes such as acid + cancellation + weaponmagic. Maybe these monsters could also be mixed with other monsters having ghosthit or death in their attacktypes. So attempting hand-to-hand combat would result in damaged equipment and a high risk of being killed. But maybe there are better ideas? Do you have any suggestions? -Rapha?l P.S.: I would also appreciate some replies to my previous messages about how to handle the "Modified" info in map headers, and also about whether SVN revisions 9751 and 9752 should be reverted or not (type and material of items in the Fun Zone). From leaf at real-time.com Mon Sep 8 11:10:01 2008 From: leaf at real-time.com (Rick Tanner) Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2008 11:10:01 -0500 Subject: [crossfire] Incorrect Type and Material on multiple objects in Fun Zone In-Reply-To: <20080825201653.c6c119b6.raphael@gimp.org> References: <48AA215F.6030003@real-time.com> <20080825201653.c6c119b6.raphael@gimp.org> Message-ID: <48C54E59.50107@real-time.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 > As this was intentional, I would like both r9751 and r9752 to > be reverted and I think that the mapper tool should be modified so > that it doesn't complain about objects of type/material 0. Server logs also "complains" about these custom material types too. > However, > if someone can suggest a better way to handle this, I would be happy > to discuss other solutions. Make the server accept or aware that material type 0 is valid? Would anything need to be changed in Gridarta as well? (I.e., material type 0 = indestructible?) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFIxU5ZhHyvgBp+vH4RApetAJsHr0s4m0eGeQ/U5RdEh0upT2lJlgCeOH3A cHtYdUWyjzgH9tRPuJnDf+c= =iXt5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From leaf at real-time.com Mon Sep 8 11:19:26 2008 From: leaf at real-time.com (Rick Tanner) Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2008 11:19:26 -0500 Subject: [crossfire] Handling of "Created" and "Modified" info in map headers In-Reply-To: <48B38B50.5020109@sonic.net> References: <20080825203946.62e417a0.raphael@gimp.org> <48B38B50.5020109@sonic.net> Message-ID: <48C5508E.8040409@real-time.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 My interpretation and intent of the map header information was to add a "Created by" field to give the original author credit and a born-on date for historical purposes. Per the feature request in Gridarta[1], a last modified field giving credit to the person who made the changes along a time stamp so we know when the change was made. Now when a player types in 'mapinfo for a bug report they (without server admin or DM help) can easily see (and report) enough useful information to at least start troubleshooting. We know if the map is in SVN or not (or out of date with what is SVN) and when it was last modified and by who. If someone wants to look up the entire revision history of the map, there are online tools to do that (SVN browse at Sourceforge, svn2cl, svn log commnd, etc.) [1] - http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1811088&group_id=166996&atid=841185 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFIxVCOhHyvgBp+vH4RApvyAKCPQ/J3DOq34VwJWqD8Buqgo9bw5wCgh8SY /0exyuoZxEsdA/hpdXR+lx4= =0esk -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From leaf at real-time.com Mon Sep 8 12:00:48 2008 From: leaf at real-time.com (Rick Tanner) Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2008 12:00:48 -0500 Subject: [crossfire] Maps for spellcasters (and melee vs. ranged attacks) In-Reply-To: <20080908175843.72ac7c40.raphael@gimp.org> References: <20080908175843.72ac7c40.raphael@gimp.org> Message-ID: <48C55A40.3090601@real-time.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Rapha?l Quinet wrote: > Hi, > Looking at the current set of maps and especially some of the > recently added quests, I see that several high-level maps can only be > completed using melee. Ranged attacks are useless in many of these > maps because magic and prayers are blocked, or because the monsters > reflect spells and missiles, or because they are immune or highly > protected against most attacktypes or diseases and they are too high > level to be charmed. Most likely the maps were made this way to prevent the Charm Monster & kill pets abuse and the summon earth wall, cast deadly disease and wait abuse. =-/ > I would like to balance that by adding some quests that can be > completed without too much trouble using ranged attacks (spells or > missiles) butare very hard to complete using melee. However... there > is no easy way to do that. Map designers can easily block magic and > prayers in a map by using "no_spells" floor, but there is no such > thing as a "no_melee"floor. As long as weapons can have nearly any and all attack type, I don't think there is any way to make a monster immune to melee attacks. Not an easy approach or change to implement: all attacks get a category; melee, spell, prayer, missile weapon. Then monster(s) could get a category immunity (or immunities) thus making them only take damage from (i.e.,) missile weapons. > I have been thinking about various ways to discourage melee, but I > am posting this message to the list because I hope that some of you > have better ideas. Currently, the solution that I am thinking about is > to allow melee but discourage players from using it. For instance, > the monsters could have very low WC, hitback and a nasty combination > of attacktypes such as acid + cancellation + weaponmagic. Maybe > these monsters could also be mixed with other monsters having ghosthit or > death in their attacktypes. So attempting hand-to-hand combat would > result in damaged equipment and a high risk of being killed. But maybe > there are better ideas? Do you have any suggestions? Some ideas... Monster has an aura like spell, similar to Flaming Aura - but the damage is extremely deadly or dangerous to the player. Upon death the monster "explodes" in a small radius (area of effect) a very damaging spell. Nearby bullet or firewalls have an attacktype that the monster is immune to, but the player(s) will still take some damage from. For instance, a immune to hellfire demon in a room that has bullet walls swarming the area with bolts of bullets with the attacketype hellfire. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFIxVpAhHyvgBp+vH4RAvxHAJ0RSxkeSDONuVErN1Gszol4X97S0wCeJsiE iHiN6par3G0f1FSPzk3FrMo= =g0Ks -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From mwedel at sonic.net Tue Sep 9 00:14:57 2008 From: mwedel at sonic.net (Mark Wedel) Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2008 22:14:57 -0700 Subject: [crossfire] Maps for spellcasters (and melee vs. ranged attacks) In-Reply-To: <48C55A40.3090601@real-time.com> References: <20080908175843.72ac7c40.raphael@gimp.org> <48C55A40.3090601@real-time.com> Message-ID: <48C60651.9080904@sonic.net> It is fairly easy to make monsters which can only be damaged by spells - give them a high AC such that no one would reasonably hit it (most spells don't care about AC). However, that counters both melee and ranged missile attacks (bows), so probably isn't quite what you are looking for. As noted, players can get most any attacktypes in weapons that they can get in spells, so protections don't cover it. Auras and the like would work. A trickier part may be to get the monster to use it (lets face it, monster AI is lacking, so you could give them cool spells they may not use effectively). Related to that a lot of monsters will close to melee given the chance, so any map meant for range attacks needs a lot of space with few monsters (so players can run around, etc to pelt the monster) or protected areas (passages too small for monsters to get in, but large enough for a player). This later point does require that monsters make effective use of their ranged attacks. From juhaj at iki.fi Mon Sep 22 11:24:33 2008 From: juhaj at iki.fi (Juha =?iso-8859-1?q?J=E4ykk=E4?=) Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2008 19:24:33 +0300 Subject: [crossfire] Maps for spellcasters (and melee vs. ranged attacks) In-Reply-To: <48C60651.9080904@sonic.net> References: <20080908175843.72ac7c40.raphael@gimp.org> <48C55A40.3090601@real-time.com> <48C60651.9080904@sonic.net> Message-ID: <200809221924.37771.juhaj@iki.fi> I'm a bit late replying due, but... 1) Instead of no_spells, use player-moving floor tiles (I don't remember the name of the archetype): no way of getting close to monster, but spells and missiles still can. This needs a monster which will not close in itself, though. And is less than elegant since it means there is absolutely no way of using melee, *at* *all*. 2) I find it frustrating to have maps impossible or almost impossible to finish with a certain type of character - party-maps aside, the rest of the maps should be doable with any kind of character, given a proper level etc. If a melee-fighter needs son ?ber-weapon to finish the map, then it's ok for the spellcaster to need a comparably hard-to-come-by spell, but I think that's it. And most maps should need neither. Which brings me to another point: I'm still keen on being able to devise new equipment and spells on the fly, something like enchanting weapons on the fly... But since I'm in a hurry... later! -Juha -- ----------------------------------------------- | Juha J?ykk?, juolja at utu.fi | | home: http://www.utu.fi/~juolja/ | ----------------------------------------------- -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 197 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part. Url : http://mailman.metalforge.org/pipermail/crossfire/attachments/20080922/aa4338a9/attachment.pgp From mwedel at sonic.net Wed Sep 24 00:03:16 2008 From: mwedel at sonic.net (Mark Wedel) Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2008 22:03:16 -0700 Subject: [crossfire] Maps for spellcasters (and melee vs. ranged attacks) In-Reply-To: <200809221924.37771.juhaj@iki.fi> References: <20080908175843.72ac7c40.raphael@gimp.org> <48C55A40.3090601@real-time.com> <48C60651.9080904@sonic.net> <200809221924.37771.juhaj@iki.fi> Message-ID: <48D9CA14.9040307@sonic.net> Juha J?ykk? wrote: > I'm a bit late replying due, but... > > 1) Instead of no_spells, use player-moving floor tiles (I don't remember the > name of the archetype): no way of getting close to monster, but spells and > missiles still can. This needs a monster which will not close in itself, > though. And is less than elegant since it means there is absolutely no way of > using melee, *at* *all*. And IIRC, the player movers don't necessarily block movement, but rather push the person back (but could be misremembering) - that push back would be sort of an odd effect. > > 2) I find it frustrating to have maps impossible or almost impossible to > finish with a certain type of character - party-maps aside, the rest of the > maps should be doable with any kind of character, given a proper level etc. > If a melee-fighter needs son ?ber-weapon to finish the map, then it's ok for > the spellcaster to need a comparably hard-to-come-by spell, but I think > that's it. And most maps should need neither. I don't have an issue with some maps needing a certain type of character to finish. My main complaint would be doing 90% of the map, only to find that last creature requires a different type of character, and there being no warning to that. For fighters, the idea of needing a special weapon is pretty rare - some weapons would clearly work good, but for the most part, it may be having a weapon with the correct attack types, and there may be a fairly large number of weapons that do that. But for spell casters, it tends to be more of a problem, as those spell immune monsters have a high resist magic value, and may still have other resistances above that. So not only do you need a spell which doesn't add magic to the attacktype (which there are a few), but may also need a specific type of attacktype, which limits the spell to just one or two. As a spellcaster, I'd be just as annoyed to do most of a map only to find out I don't have that specific spell - in some sense, it isn't that much difference that not being the correct class. Especially if there is no warning. If, however, there is lore that any level of investigation reveals, different matter. For example, information about that final monster like 'The bullywug is highly resistant to physical attacks and magic. Weapons such as flaming swords are effective, as are spells that use elemental magic, like dragonbreath' This provides information everyone can use. That fighter can realize he doesn't have the right weapon, and the wizard can realize he doesn't have the right spells, and not waste on hour in a dungeon only not to be able to finish it.