Re: CF: Obsolete options

[David Andrew Michael Noelle <>]

> Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 17:48:15 -0700
> From: Mark Wedel <>
> [...]
>  Adjusting that some so perhaps monsters it runs into reduces it
> could do some of hte above.  So if where that 3 is on the third row
> is instead a monster, the last row may instead be something like:
> 
>  1223221
> 
>  That way, hiding behing big creatures reduce affects at least some.

The best way I can think of to do that would be to change the way
cones propagate so that the damage is determined by the number of
merged objects, and each object divides its number evenly among the
three directions when it moves.  For a icestorm with 30 damage, that
would look something like this:

                     C
                 30 30 30
              10 20 30 20 10
            3  9 20 24 20  9  3
         1  4 10 17 22 17 10  4  1
         1  4  9 15 17 15  9  4  1

Or, to keep it from dispersing so fast, they could pass half of their
number on in each of three directions, with a special case in the
merge function to limit the number to a maximum equal to the original
damage.

                     C
                 30 30 30
              15 30 30 30 15
            7 22 30 30 30 22  7
         3 14 29 30 30 30 29 14  3
      1  8 22 30 30 30 30 30 22  8  1

Throwing in a couple 2x2 monsters, which absorb half of the damage at
each square, we get this:

                     C
                 30 30 30
              15 30 30[15| 7]
            7[11|15]30[12| 5] 3
         3  8[15|27]30 23  9  3  1
      1  5 12 24 30 30 30 16  6  2  1

I don't particularly like the idea of adding another special case to
the object merging code, and the first example, dividing evenly and
dispersing quickly, is more realistic, but it significantly reduces
the power of cone spells.  That may not be such a bad thing, if the
base damage of the cone spells is increased to compendate.  They would
do serious damage up close, but very little at long range, especially
along the edges.


>  The problem is that if you are surrouned by creatures right next to
> you, your cone is effectively absorbed at that point.  So perhaps
> adding adding some min range, where the cone continues to grow in
> power until it gets to that affect would work out.  So you would
> know that your burning hands will at least go 2 spaces before
> starting to get absorbed by the monsters or something.

By reducing the damage only partially for each creature in the way,
the cone is sure to go a few squares before completely fading out.
But the way they work now, cones start out weak and grow to full power
after a few spaces.  The way I'm suggesting would have them start at
full power and weaken with distance.  Maybe your suggestion applies
just as well to this form.  Setting maximum damage for at least the
first few squares would certainly help it not fade out so quickly.
With maximum damage for at least two squares, the example above would
look like this:

                     C
                 30 30 30
              30 30 30 30 30 
           10 20 30 30 30 20 10
         3  9 19 26 30 26 19  9  3
      1  4 10 17 24 26 24 17 10  4  1


>  I can see consuming extra food to regen HP - that is physically
> damage that needs to be repaired.  I am not so sure about that for
> mana, since that is more mental and should not really demand food as
> much.

One way to balance this would be to increase your rate of food
consumption while you're regenerating instead of this 1:1 cost.  That
would make it cost a point of food to regenerate a percentage of your
HP or SP.  And SP should increase the hunger rate less, maybe half as
much.


>  The other thought I have would be to remove food as such a visible
> stat.  Do more like nethack, and say you are hungry.  Perhaps when
> hungry, mana and hp regen is slowed down, since you don't have food
> in your system and that way you have at least some more time to get
> food before starving to death.
> 
>  Not sure on the current starvation code, but one thing would be
> when at 0 food, no hp/sp regen happens.  Maybe track food into the
> negative, and when you get to -1000, then you die of starvation.
> Chances are, the lack of hp/sp/mana/whatever regeneration before
> that time is likely have some pretty bad affects.  If worse affects
> are needed, add some weakness effects to the player.

I think that currently, when you run out of food, you start losing hit
points instead.  That effectively prevents regeneration and spell use,
since regenerating either 1 HP or 1 SP then costs 1 HP.  I think
tracking negative food is a good idea, and effects should be based on
how negative it is.  Regeneration would slow and then stop, and past
some point, you'd start losing Str and Con, then HP and the rest of
your stats.


> > Permadeath is prejudiced against single-player play.  If you party
> > with your friends, they're usually able to clear out the dungeon and
> > resurrect you.  It can be nail-biting to watch, though!

Good point.  Maybe we need both.  Or maybe temples and healers could
sell "life insurance" that would basically enable non-permadeath once
for that player.  Once you could afford that, it wouldn't be as
dangerous to go out alone, but you'd still be better off with someone
else around to save you the experience and stat loss.


>  That is also true about permadeath (or the same player needs a
> second character of the like).  It certainly seems that crossfire is
> actually starting to move at least a little more multiplayer with
> the client, since back when it was X11 mode, one slow connection
> would spoil it for everyone.

Encouraging cooperative multiplayer mode is a good thing, but
resurrection vs. permadeath is a pretty extreme way to do it.


>  One thought on this would be the idea someone else had on
> reputation - if that player is known as the great orc killer, then
> the orcs would not come rushing towards him.  At minimum, monsters
> should perhaps take a rough look at the player and make some simple
> judgement calls - those orcs, while they may try to rush taht level
> 5 player hoping to overwhelm him, will probably leave that level 10
> person alone.  So if that is done, then such method os exp really
> won't work, since the mosnters won't approach.
> 
>  Such a simple level comparision/run away is fairly easy to code -
> certainly much easier than many of the other ideas that has been
> discussed.

I think that's probably the best solution to that problem.  At least
the best I've seen so far.

-- 
            -Dave Noelle,                 
            -the Villa Straylight,  http://www.straylight.org
Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial Email  ==  http://www.cauce.com

Disclaimer:#include <std_disclaim.sig>

Quote of the Day:
He has the heart of a little child...  it's in a jar on his desk.
-
[you can put yourself on the announcement list only or unsubscribe altogether
by sending an email stating your wishes to ]