Crossfire Mailing List Archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Crossfire Races



etc>
etc>>etc>> Locally we found that the game was grossly unbalanced towards
etc>>etc>> low level fighters and high level mages.
etc>>etc>
etc>>etc>Hmmm... Not really if you are used to playing mages.
etc>>
etc>>Around here we use partying to boost mage classes to about
etc>>tenth level, otherwise it's too slow...
etc>
etc>I never found mages hard at low levels - a lot of difference at first level
etc>can be the spell the mage gets.  If you have burning hands, it is typically
etc>quite easy to gain the first few levels.  Haven't played a mage for a while,
etc>so I can't say how the middle levels go.


exactly and getting the money to buy the right spell is a pain in the ass.


etc>
etc>>etc>> We also modified the mage classes such that their weapon class went
etc>>etc>> down at about quarter the rate of pure fighters, with others in 
etc>>etc>> between.
etc>>etc>
etc>>etc>Not a good thing. A better solution could be to create weapon skills
etc>>etc>and use fighting experience instead of level-based experience to
etc>>etc>calculate the weapon class.
etc>>
etc>>Granted but I'm not that smart, perhaps you should talk to bt
etc>>about that. He seems to be writing all that stuff, which is over
etc>>my head by miles.
etc>>
etc>>At the moment it works though at higher levels it is less valuable to
etc>>be a mage no matter how super your weapon is, you still couldn't
etc>>fight say a big wiz hand to hand...
etc>>
etc>
etc> But should a mage really be a great fighter hand to hand?  If a mage can
etc>take a big wizard on hand to hand?  IT would seem to me that if a mage is a
etc>good hand to hand fighter, what is the point of being the fighter then?

This is my dillemma a 30 level whatever is exactly that just thirtieth level
it doesn't matter what race you are the characters are identical in how they
play...

So why not play a fighter at low level, you can always get spells at 
higher levels and unfortuantely you can cast them.

etc> I know that Brian changed the fighter skill code recently so that wc and
etc>damage goes up as fighting skill level goes out.

I've only just compiled it and got it running. So far I like it
the guy is some sort of genius or something. There is still the problem that
all classes can learn all skills, it would be good say if a mage never 
improved with a weapon, and never could say. So he can't fight at high levels
because he can still only kill kobolds or such.


etc>>etc>[...]
etc>>etc>> P.S. I also hacked the disarm code such that the spell gives no
etc>>etc>> experience there are too many places to get experience without 
etc>>etc>> any risk.
etc>>etc>
etc>>etc>This is maybe a good thing. We get level 100 in about 45 min over
etc>>etc>here... Gige a Spellbook of rune of death to an angel and disarm his
etc>>etc>traps.
etc>>
etc>>Seems a pretty stupid thing to do, I can think of better ways to
etc>>get to 100th level, most of them are mind numbing though...
etc>
etc> I think there will always be potential problems of getting experience at
etc>some point.  I can't think of a good way to fix the rune of death to an
etc>angel problem.  It could be any rune spell I imagine.  Obviously, you should
etc>get exp for disarming runes that other monsters created.


Not with the spell, there is no risk with the spell so it's easy experience
too easy, make the spell give 0 exp and see how much slower characters make
tenth(twentieth) level. If they don't die disarming things at least some
of them go off giving them no exp anyway....


etc>>etc>>      I also coded a rough work around for the infinite spell point
etc>>etc>> feature. We had a lot of fun with that one for a while.
etc>>
etc>>Our work around has a small problem when you invoke a summon spell
etc>>it doesn't hold the golem in the range field so you can control it
etc>>a little as it moves around....
etc>>
etc>
etc> I believe the infinite spell point system was fixed in 0.92.1 - are you
etc>still seeing the bug in that version, and if so, how?


It should be! I mailed in a fix, seems every one else was content to have it
there to use if they needed it rather than fixing it....

And there is still the niggling problem....

In command_cast_spell(???) I changed it so that it swaped the range field to that
of the invoked spell, and afterwards it changed it back. It needs to check to
make sure the spell wasn't a SUMMON spell before changing it back.

It's a hack but it works....

I like the flowers you get with clerical spells, neat touch:-)


etc> One thing I would say before you get to involved is this:  How does the
etc>balance between mage and fighter work out in 0.92.1 with the new skill
etc>code?

Anyone??? I haven't fiddled with it much yet... sigh:-(

etc> It seems a bit pointless to start hacking too much code if the balance has
etc>been corrected.


Never pointless, and you still haven't even fixed the window crashing problem
I just got 1000000000000 million unaligned accesses from killing my window.
Kind of funny I think...

Seeing my hacked version of 92.0 worked flawlessly for the only time the
game crashed was when other errors occured. No doubling of stuff, no applying
regnerations permantnently and no doing maps over and over and over again from
the last level with the treasure in it.... (I just wish I knew how I did it??)

I like the new skill stuff... but I haven't really 
had time to test it out fully.



-- 
*****************************************************************************

                           oooo$$$$$$$$$$$$oooo
                       oo$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$o
                    oo$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$o         o$   $$ o$
    o $ oo        o$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$o       $$ $$ $$o$
 oo $ $ "$      o$$$$$$$$$    $$$$$$$$$$$$$    $$$$$$$$$o       $$$o$$o$
 "$$$$$$o$     o$$$$$$$$$      $$$$$$$$$$$      $$$$$$$$$$o    $$$$$$$$
   $$$$$$$    $$$$$$$$$$$      $$$$$$$$$$$      $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
   $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$    $$$$$$$$$$$$$    $$$$$$$$$$$$$$  """$$$
    "$$$""""$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$     "$$$
     $$$   o$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$     "$$$o
    o$$"   $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$       $$$o
    $$$    $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$" "$$$$$$ooooo$$$$o
   o$$$oooo$$$$$  $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$   o$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
   $$$$$$$$"$$$$   $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$     $$$$""""""""
  """"       $$$$    "$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$"      o$$$
             "$$$o     """$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$"$$"         $$$
               $$$o          "$$""$$$$$$""""           o$$$
                $$$$o                 oo             o$$$"
                 "$$$$o      o$$$$$$o"$$$$o        o$$$$
                   "$$$$$oo     ""$$$$o$$$$$o   o$$$$""
                      ""$$$$$oooo  "$$$o$$$$$$$$$"""
                         ""$$$$$$$oo $$$$$$$$$$
                                 """"$$$$$$$$$$$
                                     $$$$$$$$$$$$
                                      $$$$$$$$$$"
                                        "$$$""""

			To you, from me, with Affection.

****************************************************************************