What would you change?

Old MUME discussions.

Moderator: Builders

Forum rules
The posts in this forum should be related to MUME.
Elec
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2008 7:19 am

Re: What would you change?

Post by Elec »

Wobbler wrote:Pay closer attention to your ob/spellcasting abilities and you will notice the ridiculous panic effects.
ridiculous indeed.
After 20 or so hitnflee OB was reduced by 4. since I was buttnaked i also got 2 light wounds and 1 deep one.
after just standing still after that for few seconds the OB went down another 2 points. So, after a 20+ hit'nflee total of 6 points loss in OB. including the inflicted wounds.
I'm sure that it will differ by situation, but still, I wouldnt call it massive drawback.
Do you really mean that instead of trying to outplay their opponents, everyone should just create hugegroup traps?
No, this is not my intention. Traps dont have to be hugegroup. I'd actually really like to see more 1on1 fights.
The only ways I can think of to encourage someone to stand still and suffer damage from every opponent present is to make him so powerful that no matter how much damage he sustains he still wins (who should be selected for this superpower and who will fight him then?), or make it impossible to have more than one player attacking the same opponent at the same time - both of which would be far inferior to the current system.
I can understand your points and it surely would make things worse in such cases - but, if the change is done carefully I'm sure such problems would be avoided.
You see, the multiple flee penalty would be exactly the thing that would encourange you to stand still a little bit more.

I try to rephrase my idea. flee as such should work fine for lets say 2 or 3 times. just like it works now. If you are the victim, overrun by more powerful opponents than yourself, you can use those "freebies" to get away. If you suck at running away and have to to it more times you then will probably die alot faster because of multiple flee penalty and loss of stats.

If you are the attacker you dont suffer any penalty unless you start to flee. You do it 2 or 3 times to regroup or gain advantage in whatever way you need it but when you do it more than lets say 2 or 3 times you will start to suffer multiple flee penalty. That could (and should) actually change the outcome of the battle. Previously underpowered victim suddenly becomes more powerful because he fights without fear and previously stronger attacker would become weaker because of fear and covardly tactics.
This would most definetly make things a little bit more interesting and would favor the ones who prefer to hold their ground. Ultimately players would adapt and change their tactics so that flee is not a first tactical choice in battle but rather the last one, when all other means of beating your opponent(s) have been exhausted. And you have to flee to save your butt.
So basically I'd just like to see a change in overall tactics so that there would be somewhat more enjoyable fights and another tactics than just hit'n'flee. Making the flee to have penalty when used alot is right now the easiest way I can think of to accomplish that.
And yes. the cumulative effect should only last for a very short time. Lets say that a tick or so, not more. So if you flee and have time to rest for few moments, before you are attacked again you again have those 2-3 "freebies".
For attacker this is also useful if he/she uses such tactics, but victim is probably by that time long gone.

Hopefully I made myself clear this time. If i didnt - well. tough luck. I seriously hope that immortals and coders give it a deep thought. In my eyes - it would make things a little bit better and a little bit more interesting. But then again I could be very wrong and it would make things alot worse.
Elestir
Posts: 231
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2008 11:47 pm
Location: Olomouc, Czech Republic
Contact:

Re: What would you change?

Post by Elestir »

As long as fleeing (leaving the room) is the only effective and easily accessible way of interrupting bashes and spells, ppl will hit-flee, it's easy as that. Even vs group of nonbashing warriors/scouts, hit-fleeing gives advantage, as they can get melee on next attempt to engage, but not if they are already engaged. Melee system could use a revamp though.
Elmir
Posts: 38
Joined: Fri Feb 29, 2008 5:52 pm
Location: Stockholm

Re: What would you change?

Post by Elmir »

You cannot flee and attack at the same time!

;)
Naralón
Posts: 17
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 9:37 pm

Re: What would you change?

Post by Naralón »

I would like to upgrarde BN's a little. Bn scouts seems totally unplayable for me, I've never even tried to level one up:P

Don't have any ideas for how to make the scouts better but, maybe make BN casters a race of it's own, so that all caster spells are class "Sorcerer" insted of "mage" and "cleric" to get a tad better spells on BN's.
Wobbler
Posts: 393
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 10:02 pm

Re: What would you change?

Post by Wobbler »

So that every BN can walk around protected by two permaglowing Trolls?

BNs are supposed to be the hardest race of all to play.
Politicians are wise and benevolent and will gladly sacrifice themselves for the common good. Anyone who implies that there might exist dishonest politicians is obviously a terrorist who should be locked up indefinitely without a trial.
Naralón
Posts: 17
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 9:37 pm

Re: What would you change?

Post by Naralón »

Wobbler: Whats stopping a bn from doing that today? Bn's can prac sanc, it just sucks alot :P And trolls can only spam around _that_ much with their moves and with the fact that the sun is up sometimes. And then there is the manacost with no staff :P

Trolls, orcs and bn's are for experienced players.
Zorcs are for the very experienced players.

Yet, the fact are. A zorc is maybe the hardest race to legend...

...but all of the races mentioned above, except bn's, have their benefits which makes them "strong" in some fields.
A zorc warrior or a zorc warthief can kill almost anything in a 1vs1 fight. Same goes for trolls and orcs obviously.

Compare a puke warrior with an orc warrior. Yes, the puke warrior has a small advantage with foci and some pracs. But the outcome of a fight between them is not predetermined.

Compare a puke combo with an orc combo. Yes, still there is the foci advantage both for db or staff. But a warshaman could still stand a chance.

Compare a puke mage with a bn mage. It's close to impossible for the bn to win if the pukemage has just a scent of a clue.
...Same goes for puke cleric vs bn cleric.

I bet if you would ask those who have been playing alot of BN scout, or even just tried it out, they would tell you that they are almost unplayable compared to any other scouts. A BN thief can't kill anything unless it lands a stab first, or if the victim is already low.

At least that's my view...
Aglach
Posts: 33
Joined: Fri Feb 29, 2008 6:59 pm

Re: What would you change?

Post by Aglach »

I would change the xp limitation for creatures you've encountered before. Or at least still give xp, but maybe not as much. As a new player, I'm exploring and run across plenty of things that put me in peril, but since they're common, I get no experience from them anymore. THAT'S WHAT EXPERINCE IS! DOING SOMETHING OVER AND OVER. I can understand if you greatly out level them, but if its close enough to your level to put you in peril you should be rewarded for it.

I get that you don't want a 20lv ranger that did nothing but kill hedgehogs, but he should always get some xp for killing a huge, black wolf (or whatever is near his level).
Wobbler
Posts: 393
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 10:02 pm

Re: What would you change?

Post by Wobbler »

He does.
A huge, black wolf should hardly be perilous at level 11, however.
Politicians are wise and benevolent and will gladly sacrifice themselves for the common good. Anyone who implies that there might exist dishonest politicians is obviously a terrorist who should be locked up indefinitely without a trial.
Thanik
Posts: 79
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2008 11:36 pm

Re: What would you change?

Post by Thanik »

Well Elec, I actually think your suggestion has merit now, although I don't agree with the reasoning. If you want an example of a running battle in the books, where a small force performs a fighting retreat against a stronger force, with a fair degree of success although ultimately ending in a loss, check out the breaking of the fellowship.

I have no personal experience on the matter, but I read and am told that close to every duel has periods where one fighter will retreat in order to deny the opponent any chance to attack, in order to establish his position, recover some energy, or whatever else. Just watch a boxing match to see this in action. A mugging is hardly a duel.

However, I would like to see perhaps slightly more depth to the combat system. While it can be quite intricate as it is (evidenced by the hugely differing skill levels of players within the game), more options could improve things. Right now position is pretty much everything. See latest notable log on ER for an example.
Elethre
Posts: 4
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2008 11:17 pm

Re: What would you change?

Post by Elethre »

More rentplaces so that i could actually have time to play and explore this game with my bussy schedule
Matu
Posts: 21
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 8:51 am
Location: Tartu

Re: What would you change?

Post by Matu »

Elethre wrote:More rentplaces so that i could actually have time to play and explore this game with my bussy schedule
What do you mean by that? It takes a maximum of 5 minutes to run from Isengard to Tharbad or Rivendell. And that's about the most remote place I can think of.
Elmir
Posts: 38
Joined: Fri Feb 29, 2008 5:52 pm
Location: Stockholm

Re: What would you change?

Post by Elmir »

Matu wrote:
Elethre wrote:More rentplaces so that i could actually have time to play and explore this game with my bussy schedule
What do you mean by that? It takes a maximum of 5 minutes to run from Isengard to Tharbad or Rivendell. And that's about the most remote place I can think of.
My assumption is that he's kind of new since he wants to explore the world of Arda! Then it actually takes longer than 5 minutes. If he's got 30 minutes and decides to explore Shire, that'd take longer than 30 minutes. Imagine if he'd want to go to Dunland!
Wobbler
Posts: 393
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 10:02 pm

Re: What would you change?

Post by Wobbler »

With MUME's forced-idle policy, it might take half of those 30 minutes before he can even start his journey towards Shire!
Politicians are wise and benevolent and will gladly sacrifice themselves for the common good. Anyone who implies that there might exist dishonest politicians is obviously a terrorist who should be locked up indefinitely without a trial.
Aglach
Posts: 33
Joined: Fri Feb 29, 2008 6:59 pm

Re: What would you change?

Post by Aglach »

Aglach wrote:I would change the xp limitation for creatures you've encountered before. Or at least still give xp, but maybe not as much. As a new player, I'm exploring and run across plenty of things that put me in peril, but since they're common, I get no experience from them anymore. THAT'S WHAT EXPERINCE IS! DOING SOMETHING OVER AND OVER. I can understand if you greatly out level them, but if its close enough to your level to put you in peril you should be rewarded for it.

I get that you don't want a 20lv ranger that did nothing but kill hedgehogs, but he should always get some xp for killing a huge, black wolf (or whatever is near his level).
Yes a huge, black wolf is not particularly perilous to a 11lv which is why I put (or whatever is near his level).
Mafaz
Posts: 8
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2008 1:13 am
Location: chile

Re: What would you change?

Post by Mafaz »

I would make it much easier to start new chars (not wasting hours to get it to lev 10 to see if they work or anything) not even gettin into the fact that they are useless for anything. I mean a 12 year old can kill a frog with a dagger in one hit, now let us consider what an "orc-kid" growing in a war infested enviroment such as noc could do.

the other thing i would do is make it ALOT harder to get safe, basically make all towns safe spots no port. Would make a lot more closables. Make the abilitie to watch outside from a door while its open. Would make different ways to block/repair doors etc, posted some brain damage about that last point on some thread here...
Perhaps add more skillz to change races like warriors, something like the "stim packs" from starcraft or "kill frenzy" like when u go low on hps your char randomlly goes for a 1 tick kill frenzy in which he hits like a mofo, faster stronger but more damagable or smth.
Diff ways of achieving the same.
But what i would really do if some1 would give me the chance to be an A+ and do something, that would be to hand it over to the guys being A+'s now. I thank you all for all you are doing all that you are doing atm. :)
Bök
Posts: 2
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2008 10:42 pm

Re: What would you change?

Post by Bök »

Warmules!
Snarp
Posts: 39
Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2008 12:09 am

Re: What would you change?

Post by Snarp »

500ms link cap!
Razoor
Posts: 77
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2008 10:20 am

Re: What would you change?

Post by Razoor »

1 month limited rerolls!
leikzum
Posts: 5
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 2:20 am

Re: What would you change?

Post by leikzum »

I'd like to see some nice Zaugurz changes, like ability to capture towers with a small small troop mobs only, and/or some zaugurz artifact or special herblore or quest! just something!!

We're winning the war down here, sending up carts and carts of shining booty and what do we get in return from up north? orkish shortbows and war arrows! It's time for the southern outpost to be greatly rewarded for it's deeds.

Hail The Uruk-Zaugurz!
Shala
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 4:53 pm

Re: What would you change?

Post by Shala »

I would definitely remove the extra move cost of track. Hunting a wounded opponent by tracking should be a viable option for those that really specialize in that type of play (high track, high moves or bob, high wilderness/ride).
Locked