Current Development

Everything about Illarion that fits nowhere else. / Alles über Illarion was inhaltlich in kein anderes Board passt.

Moderators: Gamemasters, Community Managers

Developer
Posts: 1948
Joined: Mon Sep 04, 2006 7:38 am
Location: Illarion Public Library

Post by Dantagon Marescot » Tue Jun 20, 2017 9:10 pm

Re: Current Development

I was working under parameters set by the matrix. Based on that matrix the only thing that mattered was the row numbers. After a brief discussion with Mkay, it is getting revamped so the rows and columns will both equal 100 and be a little more fair. Am going to work on that tonight and come up with a new matrix.

Developer
Posts: 924
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 4:58 pm
Location: AWOL

Post by ltgmkay » Tue Jun 20, 2017 9:44 pm

Re: Current Development

I'll explain my rationale and mistakes in more detail when I have time tonight, but just to clarify:

Dantagon's matrix was the product of requirements I provided. I stated that I needed a matrix to translate the Ars Magicka circle into something I could script, defined the meaning of the columns and rows and stated that the scripts mandated for the rows to sum to 100.

The result meets those requirements precisely, and any issues should be taken with me providing poor requirements rather than their implementation.

I had considered requiring the columns to sum to 100 as well (the core issue raised) but left that out as a balance issue and not a requirement for technical functionality, which is where my work is currently at.

Developer
Posts: 924
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 4:58 pm
Location: AWOL

Post by ltgmkay » Wed Jun 21, 2017 3:25 am

Re: Current Development

An extensive answer to a number of points below. I would encourage further discussion specific to the jealousy matrix to be done in the associated mantis ticket. I will use whatever final result is made there in my scripts.

I want to be clear that although I am "arguing" the points below, it isn't because I see them as invalid or I'm uninterested in the reasons that went into them. This feedback was the reason I asked for the matrix to be posted here before it touched my lua. Please, carry your concerns over into that mantis ticket, but also take into consideration the reasoning provided below for why things may be done in this manner.

First, mistakes made that will be taken into consideration in future work:
  • I should have opened a Mantis ticket specifying what I was looking for and what the requirements were before asking for help. That way, criticism about the requirements could be accurately given earlier and directly to myself before anybody did work.
  • I should have opened said ticket as soon as I knew the work would need to be done instead of waiting until I was ready to use the results.
  • I should have included a sum of each column regardless of if they all had to total 100, that way we can more easily see who is more jealous by nature than who.
  • When I couldn't turn the Ars Magicka page into useful numbers, I should have asked Estralis what it was trying to say. Clearly he was able to make numbers out of it trivially when I could not.
Responses:
GolfLima wrote: ==> what about the elder gods?
The elder gods are excluded from this table because they are not intended to be included in the jealousy system. You will still be able to gain favor with an elder god, but doing so will not make any other god jealous nor will gaining favor with any god make an elder god jealous. I haven't gotten to the point of working on them yet, so it may be a while before you hear much about the elder gods. I want to get to a deliverable state with the younger gods first so they can start being incorporated into scripts, quests, and NPCs.

Nobody, I'm taking it as implied. wrote: Why does this not look like the Ars Magicka circle?
  • I cannot easily see how to create scripts representing that circle and function well without translating it into a matrix of this format.
  • From my reading of the Ars Magicka page, I couldn't find useful math to create a matrix from. Clearly, Estralis is able to parse that document more effectively than I am.
  • Some of the relationships in the circle seem very off. E.g. It suggests Malachin and Moshran are rather close, but a cursory reading of the history and personalities of the gods would reveal that these two are bitter foes. After all, it was Malachin who defeated Moshran in single battle and was primarily responsible for his eons of imprisonment. This is an example of a broader issue I have with that circle: too many relationships look arbitrary and forced into place to make the system work rather than the system shaped to work with the relationships. I find this page useful for describing the intended behavior "you lose some favor to gain favor, randomly selected from weighted probabilities based on relationships between gods" but generally not very useful on the low level of implementation numbers. It is much like a well formed proposal post: A useful way to understand a system players would like to see, but not something I can sit down and write into scripts without some rework and further definition.
Both wrote: Why are the columns not all summed to 100?
  • This was something I considered requiring but decided against, because it was beyond the scope of my needs (the scripts -need- the rows to sum to 100, they don't care if columns do). The balancing of columns can be done later, I just need rows to enter before i can meaningfully test jealousy.
  • If the rows are viewed as how well liked the row god is, the column is how jealous the column god is. Stepping back from mechanics and balance, I do not read Cherga and Moshran as being equally jealous individuals. Cherga is well defined by her neutrality and universality. Moshran's page directly states "The few who dare to deal with this unpredictable god soon learn that he demands unquestioning loyalty." Giving Moshran a higher column sum would therefore mechanically define him as more jealous of a being than Cherga.
  • With the prior point in mind, I try to err on the side of what I perceive as a more RP-oriented, breathing world over what I perceive as more mechanically balanced. Everybody being 100% is better for balanced MMO mechanics, but I think it is much worse for the role-playing orientation of Illarion. Luckily, this is something trivial to change down the line when I'm proven wrong!
Estralis wrote:Why is this not symmetric?
I don't see it as necessary for the relationships to be symmetric. It makes sense that Elara would be more annoyed by the drunkards and tomfoolery associated with Adron than Adron would be by the withdrawn scholars of Elara. Perhaps he would see them as stuck up party-poopers or something, or they may be off his radar altogether. Such lack of symmetry makes the game more dynamic and alive. Perfect symmetry and perfect balance does the opposite: it makes the game more boring, the personalities more canned, and the choices less meaningful.
Estralis wrote:Assuming random player behaviour, after some time, everyone would have minimum alignment with Moshran and maximum alignment with Cherga.
Correction: They would have neutral (zero) alignment with Moshran and their alignment with Cherga would be closer to the work they put into appeasing Cherga specifically. Jealousy does not take you negative, it only dampens you from what you've gained down to zero. This is assuming they do nothing to actually offend these gods (increasing their negative favor), like killing priests.

This is an intended consequence, although magnitude could benefit from discussion. It is natural to the personality of Moshran for him to generally dislike everybody but his own followers, and for Cherga to generally be neutral toward everybody. After all, Moshran openly attacks and tries to murder everyone alive and is eternally at war with all of the other gods. Cherga on the other hand is the neutral goddess of death who touches everybody equally, and in our world seems to grant near-infinite second chances to everybody. Having the mathematical outcome be a more favorable relationship with Cherga and a less favorable relationship with Moshran isn't accidental, it's natural to our world. I hold that the system should match the RP world, not that the RP world should be distorted to match the system.
Estralis wrote:To me, it looks imbalanced and arbitrarily chosen.
That's a first draft, and this feedback is why I encouraged Dantagon to post it here before I sit down and try writing any scripts based on it. It is imbalanced, although somewhat by design. It isn't entirely arbitrary, it is based on the definitions of the gods, their personalities, their followers, and their history.

It is absolutely not final and not perfect.
Estralis wrote:Also, the numbers you have chosen seem to ignore the god relation circle ...


When I asked Dantagon this weekend to make up the matrix I specified to take the circle into consideration, but not to hold it as a binding contract. As mentioned above I find the circle to be arbitrary, overly abstract, and difficult to parse into numbers. As demonstrated by the matrix you provided, apparently it can be turned into numbers trivially enough, but only by somebody more comfortable with it than myself.
Estralis wrote: ... that was discussed quite intensively in the past.
Can you provide a citation to the discussion that informed this circle? I checked the citations given in Ars Magicka and it wasn't mentioned in any thread I opened. Further, the page with the circle itself never justifies any of the relationsips or provides the criteria used to place some gods closer to others. I cannot comment on why I am ignoring discussions that I cannot read.
Estralis, with some editing wrote:Is there a special reason why [Mkay] rewinds such discussions to start?
Yes, but only ones that will get me in trouble.
  • Many such discussions gather years of developmentally useless cruft as people spin elegant ideas endlessly on top of each other but lose track of the fundamentals of how the system can be coded. When I look at proposals in such a state, the best I can do is to take away the basic valuable core from the discussion and try to work with it, leaving aside the 5+ years of irrelevant chatter. The most valuable part of divine favor I found defined in Ars Magicka was it being individual to each god and the younger gods being jealous. As far as I can tell, nothing done or put forward so far has compromised that, but it has brought it several thousand lines of Lua closer to reality than years of spun theory.
  • Another big issue is that these discussions I "rewind" tend to only be found in the sv chat and staff forums. I hold staff-driven proposals on equal ground as player-driven proposals unless they directly relate to work a staff member is doing. As I see it, treating proposals from staff (which is how I always have viewed the contents of Ars Magicka) as extra special is a form of supremacist thought. We frequently seem to "rewind" player discussions that need reconsideration before scripting, therefore I see no reason not to "rewind" equally valid staff discussions.

Cadomyr
Posts: 770
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2011 7:13 pm
Location: Göttingen

Post by Katharina Brightrim » Wed Jun 21, 2017 12:36 pm

Re: Current Development

A short question just for me to understand: Is this about having "effects" from the different gods(1)? Or is this just about to which god your char is "loyal"(2)?

So for EXAMPLE: (1) You do something God A likes and your luck increases because of that. But when doing so, God B hates you and let's say your strengh decreases?
(2) You do something and God A just like you for what you do, so you are closer to him/her, while God B is upset and you dislodge(?) from him?

This is just an example for me to understand what is in progress.

Developer
Posts: 924
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 4:58 pm
Location: AWOL

Post by ltgmkay » Wed Jun 21, 2017 1:16 pm

Re: Current Development

At this point in development it is only about the gods liking you more or less, your point 2. The broader effects of that favor can't be done yet.

Cadomyr
Posts: 770
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2011 7:13 pm
Location: Göttingen

Post by Katharina Brightrim » Wed Jun 21, 2017 2:05 pm

Re: Current Development

Alright, thank you. I was just curios :)

Developer
Posts: 1948
Joined: Mon Sep 04, 2006 7:38 am
Location: Illarion Public Library

Post by Dantagon Marescot » Wed Jun 21, 2017 7:24 pm

Re: Current Development

Alright guys and gals, I made 3 different drafts in total. They can be found at http://illarion.org/mantis/view.php?id=11587

Please, please, please take a look and tell us what seems to fit best. Also please tell us if you disagree with any part of the 3rd draft where how jealous each god is is defined (may need to switch a few around). These are not final.

Posts: 1288
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 8:48 pm
Illarion e.V.: Active Member
Location: Exilant aus Trolls Bane

Post by Banduk » Sun Jun 25, 2017 1:31 pm

Re: Current Development

Currently I work on the playerlookat function and implement some fixes and changes.
  • Quality of wear ignores empty slots.
    Be aware, jewelry has twice the influence to the quality as clothes
  • Text on parchments and open pells is not shown.
  • Items in the belt show no detailed description at all.
  • Special names taken into consideration.
For which items should the detailed description you see in yellow in the general lookAt bypassed.
Currently I have Parchment and open pell.
How about labeled bottles and potions?
Last edited by Banduk on Sun Jun 25, 2017 2:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Posts: 3221
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2002 3:34 pm
Illarion e.V.: Active Member
Location: Berlin

Post by Djironnyma » Sun Jun 25, 2017 1:38 pm

Re: Current Development

Banduk wrote:How about labeled bottles and potions?
I would preffer if you just see the color of potions

Posts: 516
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2001 10:59 pm
Location: Silberbrand

Post by Tialdin » Sun Jun 25, 2017 4:48 pm

Re: Current Development

Ragorn wrote:
Banduk wrote:
Drugar Stonesmasher wrote:Hallo Banduk,

hast du bedacht, daß das automatische Herauslösen der Gems beim Verkaufen, Zerstören, Spenden ein kostengünstiges Umgehen des Herauslösens beim Gem-NPC ist?
Wäre allerdings zu lösen, wenn nicht das herauslösen Geld kostet sondern das sockeln... was aber glaub ich anderweitige Probleme erzeugt,
weil das programmatisch vermutlich viel schwerer zu realisieren ist.
Drugar hat hier einen guten Punkt angemerkt.

Aktuell: Wenn jemand einen gesockelten Gegenstand verkauft oder spendet sind die Edelsteine weg -> Pech gehabt

Lösungsalternativen:
1. Bereis von Drugar vorgeschlagen: Sockeln ist kostenpflichtig (was programmatisch unproblematisch, da es genauso schwer oder leicht zu lösen íst, wie vieles andere)
2. Alles bleibt, wie es war - natürlich mit Ausnahme der sockelbaren Werkzeuge (never change a running system :))
3. Gesockelte Items können weder gespendet noch verkauft werden
Edelsteine weg bei einem unachtsamen Doppelklick beim verkaufen ist einfach mist und betrachte ich persönlich als Bug.
Da sollte dringend eine technische Sicherung rein das das nicht passieren kann!!!
- Pech gehabt - lasse ich da nicht gelten. Wenn es technisch besser geht sollte das auch geändert werden!!!

Was das Spenden von Gegenständen und das zerbrechen angeht.
Das da die Kosten für den Edelsteinbastler wegfallen spielt keine Rolle.
Immerhin ist der Gegenstand (mit genau dem gleichen Geldwert) dann ebenfalls weg
und muss irgendwie ersetzt werden.

Lia

User avatar
Posts: 908
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2010 9:12 pm
Illarion e.V.: Support Member

Post by Lia » Sun Jun 25, 2017 5:37 pm

Re: Current Development

Tialdin wrote:
Edelsteine weg bei einem unachtsamen Doppelklick beim verkaufen ist einfach mist und betrachte ich persönlich als Bug.
Der Bug sitzt dabei aber vor dem Bildschirm.

Mal ehrlich dann muß man eben aufpassen. Oder sollen die Devs jetzt einführen das man bei JEDEM Gegenstand den man verkaufen möchte nochmal gefragt wird "Willst du wirklich?"

Entschuldige aber Illarion ist an sich ab 16. Und ab dem Alter sollte man schon soweit denken können das man eben wertvolles vorher raus packt oder so sortiert das man es eben nicht ausversehen verkauft.

Dem einzige was ich okay finden würde ist das man für 1-2 Minuten noch die Möglichkeit hat zurück zu kaufen. Das wäre eine akzeptable Funktion.

Posts: 1090
Joined: Sat May 05, 2007 9:13 am
Illarion e.V.: Support Member

Post by Q-wert » Sun Jun 25, 2017 6:49 pm

Re: Current Development

Mal ehrlich dann muß man eben aufpassen. Oder sollen die Devs jetzt einführen das man bei JEDEM Gegenstand den man verkaufen möchte nochmal gefragt wird "Willst du wirklich?"
... wenn dadurch in vermieden werden kann, dass jemand in einer blöden Lagsituation Jahre von Fortschritt in den Sand setzt, ja. Ich denke, dass die Implementierung die nach Behebung des Serverbugs angedacht ist hier sinnvoll ist. Dabei kommt dann auch keine lästige Nachfrage.
Ich würde es bevorzugen kein Spiel zu spielen, das auf 'selber Schuld'-Mentalität gebaut ist.

Lia

User avatar
Posts: 908
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2010 9:12 pm
Illarion e.V.: Support Member

Post by Lia » Sun Jun 25, 2017 7:38 pm

Re: Current Development

Q-wert wrote: ... wenn dadurch in vermieden werden kann, dass jemand in einer blöden Lagsituation Jahre von Fortschritt in den Sand setzt, ja. Ich denke, dass die Implementierung die nach Behebung des Serverbugs angedacht ist hier sinnvoll ist. Dabei kommt dann auch keine lästige Nachfrage.
Naja dann wäre die Möglichkeit Dinge für eine gewisse Zeitspanne zurück kaufen zu können ( für die selbe Summe die man dafür bekommen hat) doch ganz praktisch. Das würde dann alles einfassen was man verkauft hat.

Gut man könnte es auch Dinge die beschriftet oder mit Edelsteinen geschmückt sind im Vorneherein die Frage stellen. Aber dann auch nur bei diesen Dingen. Ich möchte nicht bei jedem Item extra bestätigen müßen das ich es verkaufen will.

Developer
Posts: 3418
Joined: Sun May 28, 2006 10:23 am
Illarion e.V.: Active Member

Post by Jupiter » Sun Jun 25, 2017 9:47 pm

Re: Current Development

Ich verweise auf einen Post von Nitram zu der Thematik: http://illarion.org/community/forums/vi ... 74#p707274

Sobald die nötige Serverunterstüzung da ist, wird auch ein Sicherheitscheck eingeabut werden, so dass man seine mit magsicehn Edelsteinen versehenen Dinge nicht ausversehe verkaufen kann.

Posts: 516
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2001 10:59 pm
Location: Silberbrand

Post by Tialdin » Mon Jun 26, 2017 12:51 pm

Re: Current Development

Lia wrote:
Der Bug sitzt dabei aber vor dem Bildschirm.
Danke für die "aufmunternden" Worte. ((zynismus off))
Q-wert wrote:
Mal ehrlich dann muß man eben aufpassen. Oder sollen die Devs jetzt einführen das man bei JEDEM Gegenstand den man verkaufen möchte nochmal gefragt wird "Willst du wirklich?"
... wenn dadurch in vermieden werden kann, dass jemand in einer blöden Lagsituation Jahre von Fortschritt in den Sand setzt, ja. Ich denke, dass die Implementierung die nach Behebung des Serverbugs angedacht ist hier sinnvoll ist. Dabei kommt dann auch keine lästige Nachfrage.
Ich würde es bevorzugen kein Spiel zu spielen, das auf 'selber Schuld'-Mentalität gebaut ist.
Danke Q-wert, das sehe ich genauso. Jahrelange Arbeit und Fortschritte zu verlieren ist immer ärgerlich und halt auch Motivationskillend.

Developer
Posts: 7638
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2003 9:51 am

Post by Nitram » Tue Jun 27, 2017 4:57 pm

Re: Current Development

Ich bin an dem Problem mit den Steinen im Kontext von NPC Verkäufen bereits dran. Das Problem ist komplexer als ich angenommen hatte, aber es ist in Arbeit. Die Änderung an der ich Arbeite ist in jedem Fall die Basis für jede technische Lösung. Aktuell lässt sich beim NPC verkauf technisch nicht herausfinden ob in dem Gegenstand Edelsteine sind oder nicht. Das ist der eigentliche Fehler der dem ganzen zu Grunde liegt.

Wenn der Fehler gelöst ist, werden wir eine passende Lösung einbauen damit man nicht aus Versehen ein paar Jahre Arbeit verkauft. Der NPC kann dann ja die Edelsteine nehmen und dem Charakter den Gegenstand lassen. :wink:

------------

I am currently looking into the issue related to selling items with gems to NPC. The problem is sadly not as trivial as I anticipated, but I am working on it. In any case the issue I am working on is the base for any technical solution to the problem. Currently it is not possible to determine if a item contains gems or not when selling it to the NPC. This is the issue that is the root cause of it.

Once the issue is resolved we'll discuss and implement a solution to avoid that one sells a couple of years of work by mistake. The NPC could take the gems and leave you the item or something like this. :wink:

Posts: 1472
Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2009 2:06 pm
Location: hier und dort

Post by GolfLima » Tue Jun 27, 2017 6:01 pm

Re: Current Development

Lia wrote:Der Bug sitzt dabei aber vor dem Bildschirm.
Mal ehrlich dann muß man eben aufpassen.
:arrow: interessante Interpretation, gerade von Dir ...
:arrow: ich werde Dich bei Gelegenheit an diese Sätze erinnern

Lia

User avatar
Posts: 908
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2010 9:12 pm
Illarion e.V.: Support Member

Post by Lia » Tue Jun 27, 2017 6:52 pm

Re: Current Development

GolfLima wrote: :arrow: interessante Interpretation, gerade von Dir ...
:arrow: ich werde Dich bei Gelegenheit an diese Sätze erinnern
Ich habe noch nie ausversehen etwas verkauft was ich nicht verkaufen wollte. Du kannst dir also dein Kommentar sparen.

Posts: 3221
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2002 3:34 pm
Illarion e.V.: Active Member
Location: Berlin

Post by Djironnyma » Tue Jun 27, 2017 7:10 pm

Re: Current Development

Die Frage wurde beantwortet, wenn hier noch jemand am Thema vorbei die Meinung anderer Spieler kommentiert moderiere ich rabiat

Posts: 1288
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 8:48 pm
Illarion e.V.: Active Member
Location: Exilant aus Trolls Bane

Post by Banduk » Fri Jul 07, 2017 12:46 pm

Re: Current Development

After the first two parts bringing in gems into crafting I’m working on step 3 and 4 the capability, craftsman can repair items. See also Mantis 11337.

The function consists of some parts.
  • If an item is repaired at NPC there is a 30% * percentage damage chance the item quality decreases one step.
    With other words in average every third time one repair a nearly damaged item at NPC, the quality decreases.
  • A crafter can repair items, he/she is able to produce.
  • Gemmed tools improve the repair capability of a craftsman. A craftsman with skill 48 and a gemmed tool with a full level 1 gem set (12%) can repair items with level 60 (48+12)
  • If a craftsman repairs an item there is a 60% * percentage damage chance the item quality improves one step.
  • If a craftsman repairs an item what was produced by a player there is a 100% * percentage damage chance the item quality improves one step.
  • The item quality never can be better than originally crafted. It is not possible to repair an originally very good item into an excellent one.
  • To start a repair a craftsman needs all materials that are necessary to make the item new. If a material is taken is calculated by a 30% * percentage damage chance.
    With other words in average 3 times repairing a fully damaged item costs as many materials as creating it new.
  • Time needed, skill gain and food consumption is equal to make the same item new.
Since all quality reductions and improvements as well as the material consumption is calculated by chance all numbers are averages over a very huge number of repair actions.
In average one can repair 3 times at the NPC and 1 time by player to hold the quality of a player crafted item or 2 times at the NPC and 1 time by player to hold the quality of a found item.

But there is a chance for bad luck and a 1% damage repair at NPC costs you a quality, a one percent repair takes the full amount of material including pure elements or even the 10th full repair at player does not refurbish the quality.

On the other hand there is a chance for good luck and even the 10th full repair at NPC doesn’t take a quality, 10 times repairing by player takes no material or a simple polishing of a 1% damaged item by player restore a quality step.

P.S. The code is done, I'm on testing and verifying all the side effects.
http://i.imgur.com/66sewiw.jpg

Posts: 191
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2001 8:55 am

Post by Drugar Stonesmasher » Fri Jul 07, 2017 1:39 pm

Re: Current Development

Sounds interesting.

does the material required/used up consider the amount of damage beeing repaired?

or in other words, does it make a difference if something is repaired from nearly broken versus it barely having a scratch ?

Posts: 1288
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 8:48 pm
Illarion e.V.: Active Member
Location: Exilant aus Trolls Bane

Post by Banduk » Fri Jul 07, 2017 3:05 pm

Re: Current Development

Drugar Stonesmasher wrote:...
does the material required/used up consider the amount of damage beeing repaired?

or in other words, does it make a difference if something is repaired from nearly broken versus it barely having a scratch ?
Calculation takes percentage damage into consideration e.g.:
30% * percentage damage chance
So if we have a nearly broken item (damage e.g. 99%) the total chance is 29.7%.
If we have a barely scratched item (damage e.g. 2%) the total chance is 0.6%.

Posts: 180
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2017 6:42 pm

Post by Charlotte-ate-wilbur » Fri Jul 07, 2017 5:03 pm

Re: Current Development

So will having a high gem set and repairing at maxed levels cause the chance for degradation to be lower? Or is the gem effect only to help with repairing things of a higher level?

I mean what is the benefit for a maxed crafter using a gemset on their tool for repairs?

Posts: 434
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2010 9:23 am
Illarion e.V.: Support Member
Location: Franken

Post by Alrik » Fri Jul 07, 2017 5:20 pm

Re: Current Development

Great thing that repairing items through players will come back.

But one question came to my mind: What about things which couldn't be crafted by player characters? For example Drow weapons and armor? They are used by some players and if someone would like to have them repaired by a player... Not craftable, so the only option would be the NPC with the higher chance of loosing quality.

Posts: 1288
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 8:48 pm
Illarion e.V.: Active Member
Location: Exilant aus Trolls Bane

Post by Banduk » Fri Jul 07, 2017 9:09 pm

Re: Current Development

Charlotte-ate-wilbur wrote:So will having a high gem set and repairing at maxed levels cause the chance for degradation to be lower? Or is the gem effect only to help with repairing things of a higher level?

I mean what is the benefit for a maxed crafter using a gemset on their tool for repairs?
Gems on tools have 3 different effects depending on how the tool is used. There is one effect active only.
  • Gather raw material, produce intermediate items: Production time
  • Produce final items: Item quality
  • Repair final items: Needed skill
For the moment there is no plan to overlap the effects in any way.

From point of view of an maxed crafter a gemed tool for repairing simply is overkill and has no game physics effect. But it's extremely valuable to make new high quality items.

Posts: 180
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2017 6:42 pm

Post by Charlotte-ate-wilbur » Fri Jul 07, 2017 9:31 pm

Re: Current Development

Right, guess the idea is to have a flow of items instead of still being able to keep and repair just one.

Its a little depressing to think a fancy item with a discription will eventually lose it's lustre but all in all it should just motivate to get more nice things.

Thanks for the reply.

Community Manager
Posts: 4141
Joined: Tue Sep 19, 2006 6:03 am
Location: A field of dandelions

Post by Achae Eanstray » Fri Jul 07, 2017 10:48 pm

Re: Current Development

I like repair through players. I'm not fond of the possibility of degradation of items on repair or being hesitant to repair. I would prefer to pay more for repair then the possibility of reduction due to some special items my characters have.

I fear this coming in effect will have the same reaction as pre-VBU had... my character's best items again stored in the depot.

Posts: 154
Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2006 10:33 pm
Illarion e.V.: Support Member

Post by Ragorn » Sat Jul 08, 2017 1:36 am

Re: Current Development

Achae Eanstray wrote:I like repair through players. I'm not fond of the possibility of degradation of items on repair or being hesitant to repair. I would prefer to pay more for repair then the possibility of reduction due to some special items my characters have.

I fear this coming in effect will have the same reaction as pre-VBU had... my character's best items again stored in the depot.
Completely agree.

Posts: 1288
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 8:48 pm
Illarion e.V.: Active Member
Location: Exilant aus Trolls Bane

Post by Banduk » Mon Jul 10, 2017 7:37 pm

Re: Current Development

Alrik wrote:Great thing that repairing items through players will come back.

But one question came to my mind: What about things which couldn't be crafted by player characters? For example Drow weapons and armor? They are used by some players and if someone would like to have them repaired by a player... Not craftable, so the only option would be the NPC with the higher chance of loosing quality.
I added a capability to repair non craftable items.
For the moment there are drow items. If there are more quest items around that cannot be crafted please let me know.

Also quest items what are named or engraved have the same higher probability to restore quality compared to player made items.

Developer
Posts: 12201
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2004 9:14 pm
Location: Sir Postalot

Post by Estralis Seborian » Sun Jul 16, 2017 9:55 am

Re: Current Development

Did you calculate the necessary materials using the same principles as for all other items? So is the worth ratio in line with all other items?

I must say that I consider it pretty odd that players cannot craft these drow items but can repair them. I'd appreciate drow items to be something special; so special NPCs, special ways of repairing, special effects, special properties. Probably we should start a brainstorming on them.

Return to “General / Allgemeines (Player Forum)”

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
Designed by ST Software.