Subject: "Different Damage Representation Idea." Previous topic | Next topic
Printer-friendly copy Email this topic to a friend CF Website
Top General Discussions Gameplay Topic #1017
Show all folders

ZepachuMon 12-May-03 06:55 PM
Member since 04th Mar 2003
223 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to send message via AOL IM
#1017, "Different Damage Representation Idea."


          

Well, I thought of this awhile ago but then forgot. Just today it recropped up in my head and I figured I'd post it. Basically this is an idea that involves the way CF represents the damage you have taken and the damage you have done.

As it stands, the damage verb is based on the AMOUNT of damage, number-wise, nothing else. So, MUTILATES is some range of values, MANGLES is another. And so forth.

To me that seems a little misrepresented. If, number-wise, you are to hit someone for about 40 hp, that would MUTILATE them. But, would it really? What about a mob that has 5,000 hp? Shouldn't that same 40 hp shot be represented as "scratches" rather than MUTILATES?

Basically, I think that the damage you do should be secondary to the percentage of damage you do when compared against their current to maximum health.

Follow?

At level 5 you may get hit for 35 hp and it would MUTILATE you, but if you got hit at level 51 for that same 35 hp, it would still MUTILATE you.

I think it should 'scratch' you because for all intents and purposes at level 5 you may have only double-triple the amount of damage you just took from the 35 hp hit, but at level 51 you have 20x-30x that amount and it really wouldn't effect you that much.

I guess I understand the rational behind it. Psychologically people would feel less gratification if their damage verbs weren't going up and they'd start feeling inadequate and insecure, but whatever. Just a suggestion.

  

Alert | IP Printer Friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

JhyrbianMon 12-May-03 10:25 PM
Member since 04th Mar 2003
917 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list
#1020, "RE: Different Damage Representation Idea."
In response to Reply #0


          

So basically.
You want them to take the code that Riftshadow used and implement it here.


Let's not and say we did.

Cheers.
Jhyrb.

  

Alert | IP Printer Friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
ZepachuMon 12-May-03 10:37 PM
Member since 04th Mar 2003
223 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to send message via AOL IM
#1021, "RE: Different Damage Representation Idea."
In response to Reply #1


          

Never played Riftshadow.

In fact, I think it's pretty obvious that it isn't a "WOA! ZEPACHU! YER AMAZING! YOU'RE THE ONLY ONE IN THE WHOLE WORLD TO EVER HAVE THOUGHT THAT UP!" idea.

But hey.

I brought it up. Didn't your mother ever tell you if you didn't have anything nice to say, shut the #### up?

What happened to you Jhyrb, you used to be cool.

Ideas are proposed to bring forth more ideas, if not elaboration on the one at hand. If the mention of them doesn't do that, then whomever brought up the idea merely wasted their time that apparently they feel was well spent or else they would not have brought it up in the first place.

Basically. I didn't know "Riftshadow" owned the idea, or even implemented it. I'm sure hundreds of other MUDs have done it. It was merely brought up for discussion.

I'm sorry if you are associated with Riftshadow and think that I'm trying to steal an idea.

Zep.

P.S. Are we still allowed to use magic missile?

  

Alert | IP Printer Friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
nepentheTue 13-May-03 10:17 AM
Member since 04th Mar 2003
3430 posts
Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list
#1025, "RE: Different Damage Representation Idea."
In response to Reply #2


          

>I'm sure hundreds of other MUDs have done it.
>It was merely brought up for discussion.

Yup. I remember seeing one of the CF 'spinoff' MUDs do this back in '95 or so, among others.

That said, having seen it in play, I don't really like it. Sure, it's amusing the first time your dirt kick obliterates a kobold, but I don't think it makes for a better game overall.

  

Alert | IP Printer Friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

            
ZepachuTue 13-May-03 02:40 PM
Member since 04th Mar 2003
223 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to send message via AOL IM
#1029, "RE: Different Damage Representation Idea."
In response to Reply #3
Edited on Tue 13-May-03 02:41 PM

          

Thank you for a well thought-out reply, and for not telling me to go play a simpler game, "like checkers" or to "think outside the box."

I wish SOME people would take lessons from you.

Oh, and from Zulg and Valg too. The way you three can reply to a post, rip into a person, and make it funny... quite a talent.

Though Valg is a little less "obvious."

I thought about this more after reading your reply, and you're right. This is one of those cases where "realism" isn't necessarily the path to go.

  

Alert | IP Printer Friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
JhyrbianTue 13-May-03 03:18 PM
Member since 04th Mar 2003
917 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list
#1035, "RE: Different Damage Representation Idea."
In response to Reply #2


          

::What happened to you Jhyrb, you used to be cool.

Being cool got me sitebanned.

::I brought it up. Didn't your mother ever tell you if you didn't have anything nice to say, shut the #### up?

She did. But she also said a bad idea is still a bad idea and should be treated as such.

::Ideas are proposed to bring forth more ideas, if not elaboration on the one at hand. If the mention of them doesn't do that, then whomever brought up the idea merely wasted their time that apparently they feel was well spent or else they would not have brought it up in the first place.

Sure. They bring forth more ideas, great. But a bad idea is still a bad idea. Bringing forth more bad ideas.
Thanks for clearing that up. Frankly, i think you wasted your time on that one. Sorry.

::Basically. I didn't know "Riftshadow" owned the idea, or even implemented it. I'm sure hundreds of other MUDs have done it. It was merely brought up for discussion.

Yea, you brought it up and it's just a bad idea. Sitting there fighting hell mobs hitting scratches and grazes for 10 hours just isn't that impressive or exciting.


::I'm sorry if you are associated with Riftshadow and think that I'm trying to steal an idea.

No. Never said you were trying to steal the idea. Quit assuming things and your tender feelings won't be hurt and no i'm not associated with Riftshadow, i tried it out briefly like alot of others but that very suggestion you just presented turned me off completely. Let's stick to. Let's not and say we did.




Cheers.
Jhyrb.

  

Alert | IP Printer Friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Top General Discussions Gameplay Topic #1017 Previous topic | Next topic