|
Post by: TrickytotheMaximus(8206) 2005-01-27 06:16:58 |
There has been talk for over a year about Dark Elven and an extension of the Astral Fortress. When can we expect these areas to come online.
While we are at it, how much interest is there in this? Am I the only one that cares? There seems to be a higher drop-out rate among advanced players. If these are going to be done, it would be great to see them advance the story line from the sfp.plit.dk page. Anyone remember Archflavius? |
|
Post by: FloriZeus(7923) 2005-01-27 07:32:09 |
Yeah, I remember him. The castle in the story is logically the Ancient Castle. About the NW there is no storyline yet...
Maybe we should start up some thinktank about it, I am at least interested, I intend to finish Dark Elven in february(and indeed it will then have taken a year to make :)), play more again, update the Manual, and other stuff to juice up SfP again :) |
|
Post by: Infamous_Infants(23) 2005-01-27 07:53:17 |
I’m also going to play again(well I have said that more than once, but something always seem to come in my way)
Hopefully I will be moving around at a slow peace somewhere in February. Also have a lot of stuff for SFP on the paper.. |
|
Post by: Doug the Designer(55) 2005-01-27 23:15:28 |
I completed the next level of the Astral Castle and gave it to Peter in November. Unfortunately, the number of hacker attacks, general administration troubles (server problems, etc), and Peter's need for livable income turned his vacation from a creative holiday to a working holiday in the real-life, non-fun sense. At least that was the impression I got. The creation of the new forum trumped most of the projects in the pipe and probably set everything back by a few months.
As for SfP in general, the game suffers from two fundamental problems. The first is that it is broken for high-level players. While the skill advancement scheme is fine for the lower levels, it breaks down at the higher levels, allowing for absurdly powerful parties that can only be counter-acted by absurdley powerful monsters. It is Peter's view that this flaw is fatal, meaning that to really fix it the game needs to be broken down and rebuilt from the ground up, meaning a reset. While I've been pushing for that option with suitable compensation, Peter is obviously very concerned about pissing off the donating players and is hence very squeamish about doing that (it was also his first project, and is kind of his "baby," so he has sentimental attachments to it). While I'm sure this makes you all happy in the short term, for the long term it means that SfP will take a back seat to pretty much every other money-making game out there, because developing a broken game isn't high on the priority list. The second problem is its lack of point and purpose (and the reason I stopped playing). Right now, the game is just kill and loot, kill and loot, kill and loot some more. I created the plot with the intention of having plot-directed goals incorporated into the game, but met the many stumbling blocks which caused me to abandon that idea. Problem 1: The game engine does not support goal-oriented adventuring. In order to have specific items that "do" things, such as keys, unique items (things that only exist in a certain place and can only be found by one party), unique monsters (monsters that dissapear forever when you kill them), and interactive board (locked doors, booby traps, items assembled from components, puzzles) the game engine needs to be broken down and rebuilt, meaning a restart. The second problem was the immense creative task of giving each character class it's own plot line through the story. The third problem was that having a plot meant that someone could theoretically "win" the game (defeat Archflavius). This is the easiest to solve in theory (the winner becomes a new NPC bad-guy, since absolute power corrupts absolutely) but the player still loses his party. So, basicly, until the game is rebuilt and reset, we are left with a very shallow, plotless game that will only stay fun as long as the players develop a good community that keeps them playing in spite of it's flaws. I think that community is in place now, but as soon as key players leave, I think the game will totally collapse. Just my 2 cents. If the SfP community wants the game to be made better, it will have to accept a restart. Probably the best thing you can do to promote your game is to talk among yourselves about if you want to accept a reset, what you would want in compensation for the loss of your parties, and the types of new features you would want, how much effort you want to volunteer to the development process. Once you settle on all that, you should elect a representative and approach Peter and push him, using your combined will, to make the changes. Then be prepared to wait a while anyway. Without a reset, there is very little that can be done. |
|
Post by: FloriZeus(7923) 2005-01-28 00:52:16 |
Thanks for the interesting notes, Doug.
I think they are all correct, the main reason I keep playing the game is the development of my party members. Unfortunately, I have been having a very busy semester which actually disrupted my "computer time" to a fifth of what it was before. In second place with the installing of the cap a month/two months ago (the training cap), my goal(the development of my party) was a bit of destroyed since my advanced party almost does not increase (quickly enough) in skill to my liking. Therefore, the paid training was a solution, you fulfilled quests, looted dungeons, got a bit of training experience, although not enough, and spent all gold (lootings, selling of named items) on training and strengthening your party. As I said, I have been working on a Dark Elven Dungeon, I still intend to finish it after my exams, so that is middle february. Doug is quite right in that the problems are for advanced parties, in the Old World everything is fine, enough parties help out newbies, the Manual also helps out with most problems(most, not all, since changes to the game have been made, but that will be solved with a game update). So what do we want? A restart is harsh for parties that spent hundred thousands of action points on developing there party. Yet, it is I think necessary in the long term. The creators can not keep developing areas for the higher parties forever. As for restart compensation, I think that donators should probably receive one new action point for every ten they spend on the old version, and also keep all they have yet to spend. Besides that, it might be fair that a eight-man party restarts with an eight-man party, and a ten man party as a ten man party. Besides that all parties could maybe all be rewarded with 1gold per ap spent on the old version. And I am sure there are other ways for compensation(a bit like the reset of VOW last february). Well there is much more to say...:) |
|
Post by: Doug the Designer(55) 2005-01-28 02:02:42 |
Another option besides a reset is to just "abandon" SfP-1 and make a SfP-2. That way, players that really don't want to leave 1 can stay there, but that will eat up a lot of bandwith for just a few players.
I like compensation in AP and characters, but I think compensation in gold will destroy the game balance. |
|
Post by: raynbow(16237) 2005-01-28 02:29:13 |
I love SfP, it's really the game that keeps me a paying player. So hearing that development on it has been all but abandoned makes me sad.
I'd be more than willing to accept a reset if it meant a better game. |
|
Post by: TrickytotheMaximus(8206) 2005-01-28 03:47:52 |
I like the SfP2 idea. If you and Peter are going to put time and effort into game development, I would vote for a new game based on the old one, but with new rules. You might even be able to leave the old one up, so people in mid game can finish what they started.
Now that buying training has been capped, there are 2 tiers of parties. Huge old ones and younger ones that will never have the chance to get their skills to the crazy levels we are at. If you built something my size, only a few very old players could enjoy it, and if you built it for everyone else, it would be too easy for us. Here is something for a new version that might fit into the existing game structure, and at the same time add some new depth. As it stands now, I can equip everything I find or buy. Would it be possible to give an item a minimum skill to equip i.e. I can't equip a 2-handed sword until until my strength is greater than 25. Wands and scrolls would take minimum magic or charisma. Really special items, like named items would require even higher skills. Would that work? |
|
Post by: Omen(10371) 2005-01-28 07:15:21 |
Wow...a restart or reset of the game... Bye-bye potions and my strong party yet weak at the same time... This is sad--okay, I accept! As long as the new version is better =oD Like Rayne, I'm a Strive for Power gamer. The other games come second. Strive for Power: Version II is a good idea, but who would play the first one if the second one is better? Maybe after the release of Strive for Power: Version II, you can close down the first version after six months or less...that if the new version is successful.
Hmm? Interesting...definitely full of intelligent input. Thank goodness Zeus said something about this in Strive for Power. Thank you, thank you, Zeus! Now, for ideas of idiocy, I am here =oD Things that I want for the new game version are mentioned above by current long time gamers...and those who quit the game (shame on you--just kidding). For Items, I like having unique items (items that can only be created by the pieces you acquired from high level monsters or NPC parties), custom-made items, and special items (better than unique items). Also, there should be items that are worth a lot when sold to buyer like gold nuggets, diamonds, ruby, etc... We have Gather Herbs in grassland, Gather Rumors in towns, so why not a Mine Area in mountanous area? The Alliance Building should not be just a link to an inventory, but an actual dungeon where you can add a store or other services for other travelers. You can upgrade the building by adding a level or two and buy monsters to put in there. Also, there should be a limit to the number of Alliance Building in a town depending on how big the town is (5 AB's the mininum). Now, for monsters, there should be common monsters, dungeon monsters, dungeon boss monsters, and rare monsters. Common Monsters are...well, common in that area (we have this in the current Strive for Power). These monsters should respawn every thirty minutes. Dungeon Monsters are monsters that are only found on that specific dungeon (we also have this in SFP). These monsters should respawn every hour. Dungeon Bosses are monsters of that specific dungeon. They respawn every six hours if the whole dungeon's not thoroughly cleaned (two hours if the opposite). And finally, the Rare Monsters. These monsters are mythical monsters that appear from time to time and are very powerful. If you kill one, you'll get a component for a special item (better than the unique items when complete). They respawn once a month and if not killed or found within a week, it'll disappear for another month (now, you'll be using the "Gather Rumor" on this). The Ocean...we haven't really used this in the current Strive for Power, except, to wall us in one big land. There should be monsters to kill in every system of water. In the shallow area, you'll need to reach a specific level to be able to learn how to swim. And in the deep water, you'll need a small boat (can be use once or twice) or ship (permanent like the alliance building). Now, we can travel to another area without paying that tricky gatekeeper! The Arena for Players, we need this instead of the Book of Blood thing. We can bet items or currency or lives in this Arena as long as you and the other player or more players agree at the start. I'm not a programmer, so I don't know how hard it would be to develop some of the things I've mentioned. But, nothing is impossible right? Anyway, for compensation...how about naming a tower after me (exclude Zeus on this one)? Muaha haha ha! Omen |
|
Post by: Doug the Designer(55) 2005-01-28 10:12:40 |
Omen - because gathering herbs and rumors doesn't require hard digging, earth removal, and engineering proficiency ;)
raynbow - development hasn't been abandoned. In fact, development is ongoing. It is just implementation that is very much delayed. Assuming no more crises arise, you should expect to see implementation eventually. TrickytotheMaximus - I don't think skill minimums are currently covered under the current program, but they wouldn't require a restart to implement, just a retooling of the database and some new code. However, if you are going to retool a busted game, may as well retool it all. All - If we are to follow along a main plot line in a new SfP game, we need to decide if the plot is local or universal, i.e. other parties can't change your plot, while universal is everyone shares the same plot, and anyone can change it. The former would be easy to do, but the latter would require lots of work, but might yield a richer game in the end. The former will probably also take up more bandwith, having to save everyone's plots. The easiest example would be the following: Local: Archflavius is guarded by the Balrog Karazdar. He is unique, so once you kill him, he's gone forever and you get a unique item. If Party A kills him, he still exists for everyone except party A. Benefits: easier to plan for. Cons: Huge database to store plots, possibly requiring a diluted plot to reduce database size. Universal: Party A kills Karazdar and gets the unique item. He is removed from the game for everyone. The reason this may yield a richer game is that it will force players to cooperate (or kill) to get unique items. As such, it will require much more thoughtful pre-planning. Another bonus is that it might allow for tougher monsters that can't be brought down by one party. Problems: A super party clears out everything interesting, gets all the items, and no one else gets squat. One thing necessary in universal is to give new players important roles in the game. The way to do this is to only allow certain more advanced things to happen if certain basic requirements are met. The basic requirements would always be ongoing, meaning that lower level parties could always engage in them. Example: The ancient castle needs to be cleaned out in order for a portal to another place to be opened. It would be much more practical for a party separate from the gate user to clean out the AC. In fact, every step could depend on the upkeep of the steps before it (so to get into the Astral castle, dungeons Easy, Moderate, and Hard would have to be cleaned out). This forces the more advanced players to become leaders and organize efforts among all players so they can get to where they want. Defeat of Archflavius would require tremendous coordination and, as a rule, be nearly impossible to pull off. If it were done, it would be a victory earned by most of the players in the game. The down-side to this is that decreased interest in the game (due to seasonal shifts) could make the game unplayable at the highest levels. In order to keep late-comers interested, there would also have to be a mechanism for spawning unique monsters every once in a while that the late-comers can kill, otherwise they'd be stuck killing the common fare that is implemented now, while the best parties are out killing the unique bosses. This could be accomplished by a random stat and name generator, and the bosses could be placed as described by Omen. Finally, there needs to be an existant and expanded role for evildoers in a plot-driven game. Open-endedness could be simulated by good guys having to turn required unique items into NPCs, which are then killed by the bad guys and the unique items returned from whence they came. A persistant evil player presence in the game would make defeating Archflavius impossible, possibly necessitating periodic inquisitions of evildoers on the part of the good guys. Balance could be achieved by using a "force" type mechanism, where relative power is based on the number of good and bad guys, i.e., if there are only 2 bad guys, they are both extremely powerful, while having lots of good guys will effectively eliminate any "force" advantage. Of course this will work both ways. |
|
Post by: TrickytotheMaximus(8206) 2005-01-28 20:48:13 |
Why not have rounds? Make impossible beasts in hard to reach places. First round we probably won't make it to Archflavius. Next round, our characters reset, but we have the maps from the previous round so we build and kill our way closer to the final goal. I think it would foster in-game cooperation and trading. Eventually we would get to the final goal. |
|
Post by: FloriZeus(7923) 2005-01-28 20:53:34 |
A) I like the universal idea, but as you say that will cause the game to "close" and restart every now and then(a few months I suspect with our current ap reserves)
Maybe you could work with different "Worlds" that play at once. Every month for example one round or game opens and parties can sign in. A month later signups close and new parties will have to sign in the new round. In the start every round would be the same scenario(if we have one worked out plot that will be a great start yet), but later on there could maybe be variations. AN idea of mine, but probably hard to do, is a combination. The old game is kept, but there are one-way portals to other "worlds", a Portal appears when this world opens, the portal disappears after three or four weeks,(meanwhile another appears for other parties somewhere else in the OW) and the parties that are in that world then have to complete this World's plot in order to return. Once the final objective is reached a portal appears that goes back to the Old World and parties have two weeks to get out of there or maybe they just automatically return to the OW. Sidenotes: a party that enters one of these worlds would keep his characters, but skills would be reset to the starting level, also death would ofcourse be final. Or, when the new version is launched all parties are reset(though they keep their ap and number of characters( and their alliance buildings?) and get 1 ap extra per ap spent in the old game. Then, when parties would enter a world they are weak, they work up through that scenario and when the final objective is reached, this World is cleared, reset(and thus the parties that campaigned in it) and ready for a new game. I don't know whether this would work, or whether it is possible, probably there would be even more flaws then there is now(eg a Party that does not initially compete in any worlds but that uses the Dungeons of the Old Version to work himself up even into the NW, once he feels he's good, he enters a world, able to finish it almost immediately.) Then, besides this, terms of motivation: I like the idea of really Unique Magic Items, that you get for killing these Unique Monsters, yet I feel that you should be able to keep these with your party for ever? Not? B) On a sidenote, a small list of things that I would like to see in either the Old or the New Version. They have to be in SfP no matter how it works...:) 1 - Alliance Shop: Easy to explain, alliance members can put items up for sale, when sold the gold is deposited into the Alliance Treasury 2 - Private Storerooms: I think this is not difficult to make, and it would just be fair we have them so we can store some of our things that we don't need right away but that we want to keep nonetheless. In addition, the gold earned from items put up for sale from this Private Storage would be deposited in the Private Storeroom of the same member. 3) As Omen said, and I believe Greyhawks(inactive) had that idea before too, it would be nice to see the AB as a real "Area". One only alliance members can enter naturally, and where different buildings, facilities could be installed. In such a scenario the Alliance Shop could be located outside the Alliance Gates so that parties that are not member of the alliance can visit the Shop still. 4) Training Grounds/Alliance Arena: A place where the alliance parties can fight against own monsters(own? yes, captured, bought or bred or something like that), naturally as some sort of training facility. Probably we would need ways of different difficulties to be installed since all alliance members would need to find a good fight there. This point, obviously difficult to make, however many different workouts of this idea would be possible. 5) Banks? Maybe this is one thing not necessary, yet it would be fun for those who have slightly too many gold, to put it on the bank and meanwhile see it increase in number(probably something with a daily increase at an interest rate of 0.01 or so(or less)). 6) The Non-Lethal Party vs Party Arena Parties can sign up for this Arena event that would happen like once a week, entrance fee, experience needed to be decided(keeping it fair, there should, like in AF, be different groups of people of same level(maybe based on average class skill) and the Fee could also increase with the number of party members and the skill of the party). Fights would occur at random, maybe like in AF in some sort of rumble, maybe in direct duels of one party vs one party in a knockout competition(like the VOW Tournaments). Besides that, there could be in addition even an Alliance Non-Lethal Arena fight once a month or so, again Alliance Leaders sign up(after every alliance member has said he wants to participate), and then we could make big fights, all parties of one alliance against all parties of another, or slightly smaller but more, individual parties pitched against each other, either by selection or at random, the alliance that wins the most duels advances(ie, an alliance with 5 parties versus one with 8, in this case thit would mean 5 fights, and the one that wins three or more moves on to the next round). Or a massive mighty rumble that would probably crash the server, all alliance parties against each other in a big fight. Probably impossible to make... :) Right, this post has grown more than I intended, if you read this far, thank you :) |
|
Post by: raynbow(16237) 2005-01-28 23:51:32 |
Just a few random comments.
Plot really isn't that important to me comapred to game mechanics. I'm ok with just having a generic plot that we don't really effect. I'm more interested in having good game content than having plot. I really don't like the idea of rounds very much, one of the reasons I like SfP is that I can just keep building up and I don't have to restart every round. I think seeing a little expansion to the usefulness of alliances would be cool. I'm not sure exactly what I want, but making it more beneficial to be in an alliance with multiple people rather than it just being a glorified store room would be nice. And the non-lethal arena would be fun. |
|
Post by: Doug the Designer(55) 2005-01-29 03:59:31 |
Floris:
1) Shop - yes. 2) Private rooms - yes. 3) Modular HQ - yes. 4) Training - don't like it, as is has a high cost to benefit ratio. 5) Banks - too dangerous, and too modern for a fantasy setting. Thoughts: Players that are not part of an alliance now are stuck with having to haul all their crap around. The new version should have a "bury treasure" function. It would be up the player to remember the coordinates (the game won't remind you). Looting buried treasure would be allowed but not made easy. 6) Arena - I don't think this fits in with the feel of the game. However, combat is transparent enough that there is nothing stopping a third party from creating a SfP combat simulator that works outside the game. However, it is something that should be discussed more. |
|
Post by: Doug the Designer(55) 2005-01-29 04:35:24 |
Thoughts on plot, open-endedness, and a Universal goal system:
Floris' comment that he felt it would take a few months to defeat Archflavius, despite my comments that it would be next to impossible to do so, made me realize that open-endedness could be achieved by making the defeat of Archflavius actually impossible using intelligent game design (which means the players would then figure out how to do it in about a year, as opposed to a few months). Proposed plan: The role for Evil players will be greatly expanded. The world will be divided into factions: Good, Evil, and Neutral. Affiliation must be declared when your party is created (but can be changed later). Good and Evil have a base of operations in the Old World. The Good's base will be either with the Dwarves or Elves, while Evil's base will either be with the Dark Dwarves or Dark Elves. Alternatively, a new human castle can be built as a base for Good, and a new Orcish stronghold for the base of Evil. Players that choose to play Evil aligned characters get to choose from Human, Dark Elf, Dark Dwarf, or Orc, with the Orcs being the epidome of Evil and Hobbits being the Epitome of Good. Neutral characters can be of any Good race. In order to defeat Archflavius, the forces of Good need to complete a series of tasks roughly outlined above. It is the job of Evil to thwart these efforts. Each side is rewarded by their NPC king for accomplishing goals. In that sense, the game actually lives up to its name: Strive for Power. Neutral characters would just go about doing what most parties currently do: Kill and loot as an end in itself, mostly oblivious to plot (until they aquire a plot item and are then hunted by both Good and Evil factions, but they would probably just sell them at great price to the highest bidder). Imbalences in Good v. Evil would be offset by the short-changed side receiving bonuses in the form of bonus class relative to how outnumbered they are. (Roughly, the difference in sides in class, divided by half the number of people on the minority side)(subject to tweaking). The minority side would also see an increase in the payout for accomplishing goals. Neutral mercenaries could profit from playing to whatever side was lowest to gain the biggest reward. There obviously will be benefits to being associated with Good and Evil to discourage everyone from being neutral. War: Good and Evil must fight. That means there will be a new command called "Burn and Pillage." In the case of towns (under Good), this will burn the town to the ground, causing the loss of the buildings inside, which will require an investment to rebuild. Likewise, Good can pillage dungeons, causing their entrances to collapse, requiring gold to re-excavate the opening. Evil would also be able to use magic items and gold to regenerate killed bosses, meaning that Good will have to keep these items out of Evil's hands if they are going to progress. Alliances will be expanded and score will be kept on how many goals are achieved. Goal items cannot be held on characters, but must be turned into the king (so the opposite side can re-steal them). Kept items will cause bad effects on the holder that will *eventually* lead to character death it not unloaded. All this essentially takes the current SfP game and adds an almost capture the flag element to it. By pitting one side against the other, and by making it lucrative for new players to join the losing side (and neutral parties), this will create a near open-endedness in a game that has a supreme, theoretically achieveable goal (killing Archflavius), meaing that no further resets would be needed. In case of the game is actually "won" a contingency plan could be activated to keep the game running, essentially starting a new plot line. |
|
Post by: FloriZeus(7923) 2005-01-29 06:09:19 |
Thrilling, I'm all for it |
|
Post by: FloriZeus(7923) 2005-01-29 06:18:06 |
I actually meant with a few months to complete a plot is when all parties would work together with all their ap. I have 600k ap left to spend, II over a million, and there are hundreds of thousands of ap's on the other donators I believe.
But with this game mechanics that alter balance in favor of a side that is disadvantaged by quality or quantity of parties, this will indeed be solved. A sidenote: how will the ap's work? I mean, with such big reserves as these, we would be practically able to play a real big lot early on and if all parties would join good or evil, wouldn't there be a real big disadvantage for one of the two sides? Yet this is probably unrealistic, and I suspect that if you alter the advantages of the alignments also based on ap reserves of parties of both sides, this will be fixed. Then, the holiday function in such a case: a party who has joined the good side and is let us say inactive for a month or more he would, if a strong party, disadvantage his side by remaining part of the alignment, not? Yet, I think the holiday function would then remove a party temporarily from the calculations of alignments strength or make him neutral. These are some thoughts, actually not important yet, but I just let your ideas flow in my mind and come with these questions and (possible) solutions. Cheers, and I can hardly wait for the next post :) |
|
Post by: Doug the Designer(55) 2005-01-29 10:12:32 |
Floris,
and I suspect that if you alter the advantages of the alignments also based on ap reserves of parties of both sides, this will be fixed. It is possible. This also could be offset by having a "grand premier" when we try to get as many players on as possible the first day. This is definately a point to think about. Yet, I think the holiday function would then remove a party temporarily from the calculations of alignments strength Yes. |
|
Post by: raynbow(16237) 2005-01-31 11:44:01 |
I'm just a little nervous that all these changes might take the charm away from the game. I'm not against them, just nervous about them.
I think, just like with any game, you should keep in mind the casual player. If someone wants to just logon, kill a few monsters, and not get horribly involved in the 'plot' there should be a way to do that. I think the new additions sound neat as just that, additions, but I'd hate to see them take away from the core gameplay of SfP. |
|
Post by: Doug the Designer(55) 2005-02-01 02:59:49 |
If someone wants to just logon, kill a few monsters, and not get horribly involved in the 'plot' there should be a way to do that.
Being Neutral will fulfill that function. |
|
Post by: Omen(10371) 2005-02-01 10:49:18 |
Muaha ha haha! I'll be a Neutral Party with Rayne! I'll be running around with the item that both Good and Evil is after! I'm worried too =o| I hope the new version doesn't have that Buy Training feature.
Omen |
|
Post by: Polare(30557) 2005-02-01 15:03:17 |
Just to chime in... Finally got my donation back up so I can play again :D
I agree that SfP as it is is pretty much broken. My 4-char second party is about as strong as my 10-char first party (and the 4th character is really gratuitous at this point). Nothing is challenging except Astral for both parties, and even that isn't really so bad with blesses and such. I too think that to "fix" things you'll need a complete reset/rebuild. If only it was written in Java I could help out :) It would be nice to have some "compensation" for long-term players, but I don't see it as really necessary. If need be I'd still be up for a reset even if everything were lost. The new plot ideas sound interesting, but I agree with Raynbow that extensive character development is what brought the game to enjoy the community it currently has and that not everyone will want to get deep into the plot. I'm going to start a new thread specifically oriented on "SfP 2 Wish List"... -Mockers |
|
Post by: raynbow(16237) 2005-02-01 22:31:52 |
Concerning neutral parties, the line about finding an item and then being 'hunted by both good and evil parties' makes me really nervous.
I don't want to be hunted. What does that mean? Is this good and evil thing gonna mean that everyone is automatically pk enabled? With death being permanent like it is, I don't want someone to just be able to walk up and gack me because they are bored or because I have an item they want. |
|
Post by: Omen(10371) 2005-02-02 00:54:14 |
Yes, I agree with Rayne. I don't want to be hunted for my potions! You potion-obsessed freaks! Thanks for pointing that out, Rayne. I don't like logging in and see a message "Create a new party. Your previous party Omen has been annihilated by the Phalanx of Zeus." just because I have found the all-powerful-item that they are after.
Omen |
|
Post by: FloriZeus(7923) 2005-02-02 03:15:21 |
Well, Omen, when finding a Powerful Item you could always make sure to message me and discuss the price of transfer...:) |
|
Post by: gatcholio(28366) 2005-02-02 05:17:03 |
I have a concern regarding monsters that don't respawn, ie. plot pertaining monsters.
This seems to be great for those that start when the game begins, but it doesn't make it newb friendly for others later on. Imagine the disappointment when you have just became a donating player, only to find out that all the story line creatures are dead. At that point, the game would become what it is now. A big vast area of constantly regenerating creatures with no plot points at all. |
|
Post by: Doug the Designer(55) 2005-02-02 22:38:08 |
In regards to PKing, being good or evil will necessitate having PK enabled, but it is conceivable that PK can be disabled for neutral parties provided that they cannot interact with plot monsters and items.
(Ragnor's party approaches the Demon Horzalock. Suddenly, a blinding wall of force is erected, preventing the party from advancing further. Horazlock's voice rings in their ears, "valueless fools, the protected cannot approach me! Ha ha haaa!") In this manner, a neutral non PK-enable party would play the game almost exactly as it is now, except enchanced with all the brokeness fixed. |
|
Post by: shaggs(84927) 2005-04-03 11:19:27 |
hey I have made a map for strive for power i hope you like it. I named it Mt. everest I hope you like it, it's my first design. If i need to contact some1 plz tell me how.
Thank you Shaggs |
|
Post by: Doug the Designer(55) 2005-04-07 21:17:45 |
No need to contact anyone. There are thousands of player contributed maps on the server (most are empty or only contain one square, or are too small). Someday, when Peter makes a filter to autodelete these unusable files and the game is actually fixed, I'll comb through what's left and possibly use some for new areas. |
|
Post by: Wolverine(1) 2005-04-17 02:07:35 |
Oh Doug.....
We probably need to delete these manually since I have told players they could also just write ideas in the comment fields and not actually make maps. Peter |
|
Post by: Doug the Designer(55) 2005-04-20 20:57:33 |
In that case, realisticly, no player maps will ever be used, since I'm not gonna sort through thousands of entries of rubbish to find the 25 or so good maps in there. Sorry. If you feel strongly about your area, once the game is fixed, you can alert us to it's existence and we'll take a look at it. |
|
Post by: fatboi(88277) 2005-05-04 23:09:46 |
Just read the whole thing, missing my lecture whilst doing so... anyway im relativly new to this game, its taking up my social life and my life in general.
I dont think i'll be donating now after reading this, it seems as though you guys are still unsure of SfP's future. I'm not a programmer but would it not be possible to make SfP 2 with all the alliance things and plot themes (all improvements) etc BUT give the option of all parties in SfP 1 to take a one way ship to the new world (SfP 2)? The party gets to bring all items over, any parties with alliance buildings get a huge some of Gold. New players who wish to sign up for SfP 1 cant and have to start on SfP 2, then slowly all the players in SfP1 will leave for the new SfP. Once Players new or old, they must choose a party leader which the story line will then be based upon. So if the leader is a rouge then the story is based around that profession and so on. SfP is great as it is (so far) im not paying yet so im not complaining, but when i do im sure i wont do any. Make SfP 2 but when you guys do, i hope i can transfer my party over to it, with all their stats intact. |
|
Post by: managerr(74301) 2005-05-06 04:38:20 |
Since you're doing SF2 anyway, is there any way that you can release just enough of the code (or an example of an area or two) so that those of us who can program can submit the code to go along with our map designs?
I'm guessing that (presumably) the reason that more maps don't make it into the game is because (even if they are good) you have to write the code behind. But if we can write our own code, then that will take that part of the equation. (And you guys would just need to debug) |
|
Post by: Wolverine(1) 2005-05-07 15:29:04 |
It is a bit too complex to explain how to make the map codes.
You have to insert several database tables and mistakes could screw the whole game. Peter |
|
Post by: Doug the Designer(55) 2005-05-08 07:30:05 |
If a SfP2 is ever made, I doubt parties will be transferable. The current game is entirely functional at low to moderate levels, but breaks down at high levels, so, at the very least, high level parties would have to be reset. That said, it only seems fair to reset everyone. |
|
Post by: Kubala(25078) 2005-05-14 12:41:48 |
Just checking up, has there been any developments since January when this thread was created? |
|
Post by: Wolverine(1) 2005-05-15 12:50:43 |
No development done on SfP for half a year or so.
Peter |
|
Post by: suepahfly(59692) 2012-02-01 12:29:56 |
Peter,
No plans on upgrading to SfP 2? Or making changes to SfP? I'd love to help out on some programming though. The game needs an end-game, to say the least :) |