What would you protect?

Old MUME discussions.

Moderator: Builders

Forum rules
The posts in this forum should be related to MUME.
Locked
Ilie
Site Admin
Posts: 95
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2008 9:50 pm
Location: Oslo, Norway

What would you protect?

Post by Ilie »

Imaging someone else became implementor for 3 months, what is the one thing about MUME you would hope wasn't changed?
-- Ilie Your friendly site Administrator
Rogon
Posts: 158
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2008 4:49 pm

Re: What would you protect?

Post by Rogon »

The PK atmosphere. It's what got me started on mume in the first place and what's kept me playing.

Most of what I do as mortal on mume is either PK or in preparation for PK. Levels are a way to perform better in PK. Same thing with equipment.

It's great with quests, herblores, it would be nice with other kinds of crafting. It's cool if roleplay can be encouraged, all that stuff. As long as the PK part of the game remains.
Thanik
Posts: 79
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2008 11:36 pm

Re: What would you protect?

Post by Thanik »

The equipment sinks+legend system. These are the most effective methods I've ever seen to keep people playing for 15+ years without massive mudflation. All else aside, I think that's the most important aspect of MUMEs playability.

To be honest, I would partially protect everything. If something changes, there needs to be an assessment of the effects of the change. If it doesn't work out, revert the change. Keep the work somewhere, it may work with a small modification that no one thinks of at the time, or it may work in conjunction with another, later change. But there's been a few 'wtf?' moments in mumes history that no one was willing to change back, at least not for several years, for whatever reason.
Gruenthar
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2008 3:41 am

Re: What would you protect?

Post by Gruenthar »

The Tolkien atmosphere. I have spent a bit of time on other "LOTR" MUDs that included such locations as Asgard, Amber, a Monty Python castle, and more. The focus on maintaining a world that rings true to the books is I think one of the (several) features that sets MUME apart from other MUDs.

I have about six more "just one things" that I may add later, if no one else gets to them first.
Thanik
Posts: 79
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2008 11:36 pm

Re: What would you protect?

Post by Thanik »

Tell us! This thread is too quiet, it's making me worried that people don't like ANY of the features in the game they are playing :(
Timodeus
Arata
Posts: 301
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2008 9:20 am
Location: Germany

Re: What would you protect?

Post by Timodeus »

To be honest... I'd keep at least a large part of the "harsh" punishment for death. It is one thing that makes MUME different from other (especially modern) games.

The "punishment" should be capped, like you do not loose ALL age on a mobrip (only 30 or 50% of it), it could become a bit easier to get at least a decent set, Mandos Sleep should be capped (or changed to something else), xp-loss on mobrip and pkrip should be capped (not at 50k, but maybe at 300k or so). But in general, the fear of "loosing" something is inherent to MUME and even when it is annoying - it is an important part of what MUME is.

(And yes, I am still a bit annoyed about sunripping a troll. But that is inherent to that race (the "loss" driven to an extreme), it is inherent to what the game is.)
Maulpaw
Posts: 10
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2008 9:47 pm

Re: What would you protect?

Post by Maulpaw »

The timesinks. The waiting for shops. The resting for mana and hits. Things that keep you from being able to constantly run around killing mobs.
lomadia
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2008 6:33 pm

Re: What would you protect?

Post by lomadia »

I agree, Maulpaw! I think having to rest and regen makes the game super-interesting, for some reason. I mean, if it was just running all over the place whenever you wanted, casting whatever spells as often as you like, etc, the game wouldn't be the same. Having regen time makes us want to practice certain skills and keep certain stats up or down. And the ability to choose all your own stats keeps variety. ^^
Elemmakil
Posts: 88
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2008 10:03 pm
Location: Massachusetts, United States of America

Re: What would you protect?

Post by Elemmakil »

With Timodeus.
Gothmog
Vala (Mudller)
Posts: 259
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2008 10:46 pm
Location: Stockholm, Sweden

Re: What would you protect?

Post by Gothmog »

I think the risk/reward structure of MUME is great. Many a player has confessed that MUME is the only game, ever, that made them literally shake from an adrenaline rush when playing. If it was to become softer (like many MMORPGs) we lose that particular aspect. If we'd make it even harder (say, all deaths being realdeaths) it would attract fewer people and be less fun, given that anybody can have link problems.
Elemmakil
Posts: 88
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2008 10:03 pm
Location: Massachusetts, United States of America

Re: What would you protect?

Post by Elemmakil »

I guess I'm fine with the mob-xp-loss (if you're stupid enough to die, then it's your own fault). However, losing 500k xp at level 50+ per PK death isn't very appealing and I'd say that a ton of high level characters play wimpy because of this.
Thanik
Posts: 79
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2008 11:36 pm

Re: What would you protect?

Post by Thanik »

You don't have to decrease risk to change the risk/reward ratio btw. You can encourage braver play by increasing the potential reward for it, without reducing that adrenaline.

What if you could upgrade equipment at certain outfitters in the game based on how many warpoints you currently have? Kormock devotes several hours to reinforcing the metal wall shield of Grishnakh Dwarfslayer, mighty captain of the orcs (+2pb). Using ancient elven techniques, Angdil adjusts the balance of Aladrias engraved broadsword, for she is known as a noble slayer of trolls (+1ob). Of course that may be entirely ridiculous, but the main point was in my first two sentences.
Caerroil
Bug Hunter
Posts: 214
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2008 12:25 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: What would you protect?

Post by Caerroil »

I very much agree that the penalties for dying should be kept quite high, it adds a lot to the excitement when playing. If any changes were to be made to balance the risks I'd very much prefer to add rewards like Thanik suggested and possibly alter how much age you lose from a mobdeath.
Timodeus
Arata
Posts: 301
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2008 9:20 am
Location: Germany

Re: What would you protect?

Post by Timodeus »

I'm not sure if "even more and more powerful eq" is what the game needs... but one can surely think about allowing items to be upgraded.
Thanik
Posts: 79
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2008 11:36 pm

Re: What would you protect?

Post by Thanik »

I agree that the last thing the game needs is more powerful equipment. It was just the first example that occured to me to demonstrate a way to adjust risk/reward without reducing the risk.

As things stand, when 2 decent level players fight, the net result of one dying is less xp in the game. They risk more than they stand to gain. I LIKE that. Picture a graph. The y axis as your xp loss, the x axis as your chance of winning a fight based on character strength. The line should curve upwards, so that it becomes progressively more difficult to make a net xp gain through PK, and only truly good players can do so at higher levels. That's how it works now I think, and it shouldn't change.

The problem however, is when high level characters are matching their set and 500,000 xp against the enemies set and a potential gain of 100,000 xp. With only a slight increase to their chance of winning based on relative strength of the characters, the odds need to be pretty heavily stacked in their favour before that becomes a good wager.

By adding extra rewards without significantly increasing the risk, you encourage people to take more chances. You can't increase the xp rewards without changing the whole balance of the game, but there are other incentives. The problem with the reward of being able to loot your opponents gear is that you usually risk just as much or more than you stand to gain (usually more, since both of you will often be wearing equal gear in some slots, or what is optimal for your opponent may not be optimal for you, such as a smiter vs a pounder), so it's null, and xp becomes the only consideration. Since many characters are risking more than they stand to gain there as well, you need a third reason to fight. There's bragging rights and the enjoyment of the action, but right now, those are coming at a cost that seems too high for many.

A reward system based on warpoints may not be the answer. After all, warpoints mostly go to the most patient trapper, not the brave fighter. There may not be an answer. But it might be something worth looking at.
Locked