Re: Misc notes/thoughts.

[Tadah <>]

On Mon, 11 Dec 1995, Jonathan Roy wrote:

> Well, I have a question. Why isn't the client going places? It seems to me
> running the client would use far less bandwidth than a remote X terminal,
> and a quality client could bring in a lot more player, with large central
> servers (given the significant drop in bandwidth needed.) With a good protocol
> designed up front, going back and adding clients in Win95 or Java or whatever
> wouldn't be hard if that protocol was "standardized"...
> 
> Just some thoughts. :) I'd love to see people able to play over a 28.8 modem
> and connect to a server with hundreds of players! :D
> 

Yes, that would be great.  At least bring it up to netrek levels.  16 
players is awesome. :>

Of course 16 players on a small make makes it look like alot, but 100might
make more since on crossfire being that the maps are pretty big. :>

Player interactivity I think is the biggest focus we should have on 
crossfire.  I love the fact we keep adding to it, it keeps the game 
alive, but as fun as new features are for us, we need to start cleaning 
up some stuff.  Make crossfire easier to install/upgrade/addto.  Make it 
available, like you just stated, on other OSes like WIn95 (I think Java 
is a superb idea!).  Optimize the the game for smaller bandwidth so we
can get modem players, etc.  Also lets put more into the party idea and 
other player to player interaction.

Also, why make the player disappear when you save for the day?  I 
remember playing RPG type games on BBSes, some of you might remember 
them..  "Land of Devestation (LOD)", "Operation OverKill", etc.  They 
were pretty fun, allowed teams, also allowed the build of forts which 
would be a cool idea for crossfire.  If a player saves in a inn, fine, 
can't touch him.  But allow for camping out.  Be able to save anywhere, 
but if your not in a well built inn (like in Scorn city, not like in port 
joesph where you have to watch your back <G>), leave some chances to at 
least get something stolen from the player if another player finds him in 
a not well protected area.  Also, allow fighting when the other player is 
not on, assign some AI values to the otherwise inactive player.  Sound 
cruel?  Not if its not made to penilize the player that is not on.  Make 
it so the active player can gain exp, etc from the player he killed, but 
still maintain the players save file, changing little if at all.

Just ideas anyway guys..  if the player is weak, chances are he's still
saving his guy in Scorn City where attacking sleeping players should not 
be allowed.  And if its a strong player that decides to sleep in the 
woods, well..  :>

-Link