Open world?

Here you can make and discuss suggestions to improve the game. / Hier kannst du Vorschläge einreichen und diskutieren um das Spiel zu verbessern.

Moderator: Developers

Locked
User avatar
Mephistopheles
Posts: 1059
Joined: Sun Jul 21, 2013 10:04 pm
Location: Murica

Open world?

Post by Mephistopheles »

I propose that the Sandbox housing be pushed outside of just towns for the purpose of guilds or small settlements and allowing up to 3 static tools, one depot, and perhaps one trader. Cost will obviously be much more for the depot and tools.

Rules regarding such a settlement/guildhall should be that It requires a total of 10 characters (roughly 14% of our current player base) or more and a gm to to help set up a quest to take control of the area, refine it with manpower and materials.

If this many players want to leave the safetyof their town and reliquish the luxury of weekly gems, then why stop them?

Sandbox housing proposal can be found here http://illarion.org/mantis/view.php?id=9829

I edited my original nonsensical proposal
Last edited by Mephistopheles on Wed Oct 21, 2015 3:35 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Fooser
Posts: 4725
Joined: Mon Dec 23, 2002 2:25 pm

Re: Open world?

Post by Fooser »

tl;dr: Players should be able to exist and self-govern in groups other than the completely lame pre-made factions, preferably with depot and tools
User avatar
Kugar
Posts: 595
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2008 6:07 am

Re: Open world?

Post by Kugar »

Well, I support it. Sounds good.
User avatar
Aldan Vian
Posts: 553
Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2008 2:48 am
Location: Eating a cookie!

Re: Open world?

Post by Aldan Vian »

I am completely in favor of this proposal. My time with the Union was some of the best time I have ever spent in game and with our current game state its almost impossible to re-achieve that without compromising the true spirit of said guild. One of the biggest appeals of the game to me back in the early days was the ability to go out into the world and carve a place for yourself and others, and that type of gameplay has for the most part been lost to us. I doubt such a proposal is unreasonable, and I'm under the impression that city based crafting isn't held that favorably by the playerbase anyway. I wouldn't be opposed to making the maps and doing any other technical labor myself if that's what it took.
User avatar
Lia
Posts: 909
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2010 10:12 pm

Re: Open world?

Post by Lia »

I must admit , I understand only part of it . ( Maybe someone likes it in the German language translation )

In any case, I would like nevertheless to say something .

For example, the depots .

Suppose you live in town A , but you'll banished from the city . The only passages in the city are heavily guarded .
Then you come , logically , not those in the city to your things .

On the one hand you talk about Realistic , the next moment but that is forgotten.
When your character makes trouble , then he must either expected Plan . for example by placing compensation for important things , outside the city . Or he just had bad luck .

This is tough but fair.

Exactly the same with the workbenches . I think that you mean with the Static tools . ?
If not then I got it wrong. then sorry.

Here , your character can ask friends in the city for help . If he has not , then that's said evil , his problem .


You last part with the occupying a part of the world , I find again not bad .
Especially for criminals characters that would be interesting .

example

a group of criminals takes the stronghold of dwarves high up in Cadomyr ( I know the name just does not ) good as a hiding place , as their camp . ,


Then they can conquer and occupy it yet . And bit by bit everything building .
Of course you must then also expect resistance . eg by Cadomyr storming these criminals stronghold and wants to take it apart .
Or try the dwarves there to retake .
etc.


So i hope it can be unterstand what i mean.
User avatar
Kugar
Posts: 595
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2008 6:07 am

Re: Open world?

Post by Kugar »

Lia wrote:example

a group of criminals takes the stronghold of dwarves high up in Cadomyr ( I know the name just does not ) good as a hiding place , as their camp . ,


Then they can conquer and occupy it yet . And bit by bit everything building .
Of course you must then also expect resistance . eg by Cadomyr storming these criminals stronghold and wants to take it apart .
Or try the dwarves there to retake .
etc.
I really like that example. Is it allowed to conquer an NPC settlement?
User avatar
CJK
Developer
Posts: 970
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 4:58 pm
Location: cjk@illarion.org

Re: Open world?

Post by CJK »

Kugar wrote:
Lia wrote:example

a group of criminals takes the stronghold of dwarves high up in Cadomyr ( I know the name just does not ) good as a hiding place , as their camp . ,


Then they can conquer and occupy it yet . And bit by bit everything building .
Of course you must then also expect resistance . eg by Cadomyr storming these criminals stronghold and wants to take it apart .
Or try the dwarves there to retake .
etc.
I really like that example. Is it allowed to conquer an NPC settlement?
RP it and see what happens. I would advise talking to a GM of the area (So, Silverwing for Hammerfall).


EDIT: I'll collect my thoughts on this overall idea and post them later.
User avatar
Azure Lynch
Galmair
Posts: 672
Joined: Sat May 31, 2014 5:24 pm
Location: Lost in my mind
Contact:

Re: Open world?

Post by Azure Lynch »

Well I know one thing that got me hooked to the game. Was hexis. he told me we could build our own place pre vbu I was all in krand Bloodfist was born. But I had other things pop up and didn't get involved like I wanted. Then when I came back and azure was born I was disappointed to hear you couldn't build like that. I had plans to make azure the best builder in illarion. But I found other things that interested me. I might not be for random depots but I heard there used to be mules. Which would work better for people that got to move. I don't mind the towns withe there unique workbenches. But I can see maybe some tables and clothing tables. Cause honestly. You can carve wood and saw wood without a table just makes it easier. Same with clothes.
User avatar
Evie
Developer
Posts: 1210
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2011 6:55 pm
Location: on a mana stream

Re: Open world?

Post by Evie »

I know this is different than the purpose of this proposal, but every static tool is available somewhere in the wilds. That is at least out there. A bit off topic, but there is something for criminals.
User avatar
CJK
Developer
Posts: 970
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 4:58 pm
Location: cjk@illarion.org

Re: Open world?

Post by CJK »

I am not opposed to this change of our design principles. Would gladly discuss specifics with relevant parties.
User avatar
Djironnyma
Posts: 3221
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2002 4:34 pm
Location: Berlin
Contact:

Re: Open world?

Post by Djironnyma »

Part of the milestones are sandbox like options to build. For the beginnig it will be used to give chars/players the option to build houses inside a town. Anyway it is very unlikly that there will be the option to build own settlments or simmilar into the wild. Somethign like that will hardly happen because the ammount of work it would need for devs and because the past (=Gobaith) prooved that EVERY player ruled settlement/guild/group failed to handle game relevant aspecst (like map, tools, depots) for a longer time (Except of the order, indeed 8)). Please dont forget that a town is not build by some walls, a depot and a static tool. There will be never ever again such ghost towns which will be empty and liveless cause the homies which build it dont play at the moment (Sleep, work, girlfried etc) or leaved the game. The ammount of NPCs and Quest a town needs to give it a basic ammount of live, of something to do is a giant ammount of work. A work no dev(s) will do as long as he/they dont believe it is a absoult fantastic idea which will improve the game so much that it will solve so many of our problems - and i dont see that will happen any soon.

And serious. If you believe, that you are over ten people active and strong and working all together, then try to take over a own town. Indeed the Townleader as NPC will stay with option to step back into power if you fail (=if you get inactive again). But if you are active and cleverenough and have enough support of other chars it is absoult possible to take over a town with the town leading npc becoming mostly inactive/backround.
User avatar
Jupiter
Developer
Posts: 3477
Joined: Sun May 28, 2006 11:23 am

Re: Open world?

Post by Jupiter »

One the one hand, people demand a one-town-game. On the other hand, people demand a unlimited-towns-game.

How do you prevent that stuff happens like Caelum, Goldburg, Nodmark or that lizard settllement? They only caused the player base to be scattered all over the place and in the end, the people in those new settlments became inactive for the most part. What is your solution to this?

You talk about freedom and other fancy stuff but I haven#t read anything about this very concrete and big problem that was actually there. Having Evie run after the dead settlements of the inactive players to clean up is not an option. If you have no convincing answer to that question, there is no need to discuss this further. So: 1. How do you prevent that the players become inactive in the first place because there are now even more places where they may are and therefore less interaction (exactly what happend on Gobaith).
2. What happens with stuff of inactiave players? Just keeping an other dead and soulless place on the map?

I would rather see some more influence on players on tehir houses and flats in town for now. Cause that's add soem more creativity and possibilities without those seriosu problems.
User avatar
Pugnacious
Posts: 264
Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2010 6:38 am

Re: Open world?

Post by Pugnacious »

I dont see why Hemp Necktie Inn can't be an alternative town. All it needs is some static tools and the trader to buy and sell more items. Also, there are many camp sites across the map that are outside of any towns borders that could serve as trading outpost. Just add the NPC's, a depot and tools. There wouldn't be any security in them. Wandering monsters or raiding players would need to be dealt with by the residents. Outlaws or hunters shouldn't expect more. If these places fell out of use by players after some time, would it really matter? Not much was put into them and no real change of the map was made. In time, another group may make use of them. And with any of them, there wouldn't be any gems given for taxes, unless some player organized governing group set up a system of their own to do it.
Fooser
Posts: 4725
Joined: Mon Dec 23, 2002 2:25 pm

Re: Open world?

Post by Fooser »

Jupiter wrote:One the one hand, people demand a one-town-game. On the other hand, people demand a unlimited-towns-game.

How do you prevent that stuff happens like Caelum, Goldburg, Nodmark or that lizard settllement? They only caused the player base to be scattered all over the place and in the end, the people in those new settlments became inactive for the most part. What is your solution to this?

You talk about freedom and other fancy stuff but I haven#t read anything about this very concrete and big problem that was actually there. Having Evie run after the dead settlements of the inactive players to clean up is not an option. If you have no convincing answer to that question, there is no need to discuss this further. So: 1. How do you prevent that the players become inactive in the first place because there are now even more places where they may are and therefore less interaction (exactly what happend on Gobaith).
2. What happens with stuff of inactiave players? Just keeping an other dead and soulless place on the map?

I would rather see some more influence on players on tehir houses and flats in town for now. Cause that's add soem more creativity and possibilities without those seriosu problems.
If they go inactive fill it with dwarves or trolls who move in and turn it into a hunting spot
User avatar
Mephistopheles
Posts: 1059
Joined: Sun Jul 21, 2013 10:04 pm
Location: Murica

Re: Open world?

Post by Mephistopheles »

The dynamic housing proposal of Estralis' says it aims for a state of decay without proper upkeep. I don't think that means Evie has to run after all the player buildings in the game, at least I hope not.

I don't really mean for this to happen immediately, there are plenty of things that have priority and have been already worked on. Obviously it can't happen until the dynamic housing enters the game.
User avatar
Sammy Goldlieb
Posts: 578
Joined: Thu Aug 27, 2009 10:29 am
Location: Cadomyr

Re: Open world?

Post by Sammy Goldlieb »

So, why not make it that way: Allow citizens of the towns to build their own houses, guildhouses etc. With the tool coming with the muilestone, that shouldnt be a Problem. But dont allow it in the wilderness! Near towns would be more suitable for making sure, the Players dont spread wider then now.

For the decaying thingy:

There are that field funktion, that gives you a msg by walking over a tile, or a row of tiles. Would it be possible to build in another function there? What I have in mind is following:

Place that function at the door of specific house, set a decaying counter to 6 (variable number). Each month, there isnt an walk over this field lowers the decaying counter by 1. if the decaying counter reaches 0, the building is destroyed and the building space is free for another building again.

For renovating building:

Lets say the decaying counter is 3, so half decayed the building is. Set a podest in the building, similar to that we have now for managing the town. Every player should be able to access it. By clicking the podest, a menu opens with digfferent Points, like make a new key, alter the describtion of the building etc. One is renovating the building. clicking that button opens a new window, with the current decaying counter.
To raise the decaying counter by one, a specific number of resources and gold is needed. The closer the decaying Counter is to 0, the more resources is needed to bring it up by one point. the used materials are directly fetched out of the bag of the Person that uses the podest.

About the other Points, we can talk laters :)
User avatar
Estralis Seborian
Posts: 12308
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2004 9:14 pm
Location: Sir Postalot
Contact:

Re: Open world?

Post by Estralis Seborian »

Dear all,
with great interest, I've read the opinions, ideas and concerns in this thread. Let me first express that the general direction of Illarion should indeed aim at being a unique, remarkable and somehow "different" game. We'll never be able to compete with AAA titles, so the indie niche is what Illarion is made for.

Sandboxing is a development goal with high priority. We dedicate one milestone to that goal and it is fully acknowledged and confirmed that sandboxing will attract many new and old players. However, it also has to be understood that it is a very difficult objective and a lot has to be done to really have a convincing and satisfying environment in the game. One thing is clear: We should not idolise Gobaith beyond any reason as many things just didn't work out as planned.

As this is the proposal board, we should always try to derive concrete proposals what can be changed and how. While it is generally the job of developers to flesh out the details, the details of this proposal do not become clear to me. As stated before, the general goal to have a more "sandboxy" game is confirmed. But how does the road to that goal look like? I've read about depots. We have four depot systems in the game, one for each faction, one for the Hemp Necktie Inn. Wilderness depots, as in "stashes", were proposed and there is not much that speaks against them. But is that what you call sandboxing? I fear the request here aims more at having Cadomyr depots somewhere in the forest to throw in your stuff without having to walk to town. The same impression pops up on static tools. As Evie pointed out, we have static tools in the wilderness. So they are not strictly limited to the existing towns.

I guess it was made clear by others that we don't want to have a map full of "village remainders" like we had on Gobaith. We used to have more villages/towns than players in the game! Generally, the freedom people had back then is what we want to bring back, but without the severe drawbacks of wasted work. Good conceptions are needed and I'd be happy to discuss any cool idea how to realise all this.

These days, we suffer a little from players being spread too much over three factions. The consequence should be to bring players together. If you want to have a remote village where nobody can bother you, it might be appealing for a while and for a small group, but it's not the vision of Illarion. Instead, I'd like to see a dynamic world where you can a) really influence the existing world and b) shape it in a way without having to rely on developers and Gamemasters to realise your stuff. The premade factions might not be appealing to everyone, but it was always the concept to let players influence the factions. The faction leaders are the "Lord British"s, the ingame representatives of the GMs that give you the opportunity to realise things beyond player abilities and also, to throw in keywords to initiate interesting events and storylines. Compared to Gobaith, where obscure "Builder Characters" or random princes appeared out of nowhere to change the world, we have a plausible ingame tool now.

It is my vision to let players build houses within the given towns and also, to build "outposts", comparable to the Farmer's Union of Gobaith, at locations to be approved by the gamemasters. This building should be dynamic and almost automated - we can erect houses by scripts and also, the decay can be controlled easily. The technical options we have are way beyond what restricted us on Gobaith to manual building of huts.

To establish a foundation for such a building system, we'd first of all need a price list. Sounds easy? It isn't. We have hundreds of individual items for buildings, tons of tiles and the "architecture" of houses should be beyond simple square huts with a roof everywhere. A set of floor plans can vastly help a semi-automated building script. The same holds for parameters for upkeep, building time and resources. There is a draft concept for the "how to build" and it is not too difficult to realise if the conception is kept simple and straight to the point. To have dynamic NPCs and further gadgets for player real estate might be a little beyond focus now.

This might sound like a lot of work, but it isn't a lot compared to what manual work was spent on e.g. Silverbrand. The big benefit of a semi-automated system is that we save a lot of work and the players do not need to rely on anyone to make their dreams come true. I'd like to stress that the manpower situation in the Illarion team is strained. The core has fulltime jobs in responsible positions and any support is appreciated. The good thing about development is that all you need is common sense and some spare time. It is not necessary to hold a PhD in computer science to help establishing e.g. a price list or crafting recipes. The LUA you need to understand how the game works technically isn't too difficult, either. The difficult parts starts when you want to get things done that work the way you want them to - and first you need to define what you really want.

Estralis
User avatar
Sammy Goldlieb
Posts: 578
Joined: Thu Aug 27, 2009 10:29 am
Location: Cadomyr

Re: Open world?

Post by Sammy Goldlieb »

Estralis Seborian wrote:
To establish a foundation for such a building system, we'd first of all need a price list.
mkay. Working at it. 'Just' for the items in the mapeditor right? Send me a pm about that. And also anybody who wants to help with working out the list.

Edit: Can you send me a list with the item/zile and the ID? That would help much.
Locked