Author Topic: Basic game imbalances  (Read 3981 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Glyph

  • Baron
  • ****
  • Renown: 143
  • Infamy: 40
  • cRPG Player Sir White Pawn
  • Turbulence incoming
    • View Profile
  • IRC nick: Horris
Re: Basic game imbalances
« Reply #45 on: December 18, 2011, 10:21:06 am »
0
You are right about this assumption, but only as far as both players are playing the same build.

I will repost the graphic so it's easier for me to explain:

(click to show/hide)

Both players will move along the same "diagonal" (which is their personal build diagonal, determined by their combination of equipment and skills), so that the higher level character will be better in both skills and equipment. But as soon as he reaches the line of the quarter circle, the maximum potential, he must stop, and the lower level player will sooner or later reach him. (Examples: the red and the green squares, or the grey and the brown squares (more or less, the latter two are not exactly on one diagonal, but that's natural, as on one point you level one aspect, at the other point you level the other one, it rather goes up like a "snake"))

If a player of a high level decides to use expensive equipment, he will have lower skills, which would be represented by the pink square. The other extreme would be to go for skills with cheaper equipment, looking like the yellow square.

The point is: not everyone who has a higher level has (considerably) more wealth than someone on a lower level (compare the yellow and the red square, for example). Of course the higher level player has some more advantages in general, that's why you want to level up, but in the end it's always a question of the two builds you are using.

I hope this answers your question. If not, please rephrase it, so I can have another try  :wink:
so skill and would both cost wealth points? so you have to find a balance for you to make it work?

thx for posting btw
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
 
Glyph you have obsessive Horse Archer and Horse hatred.
- Official diagnosis :)

Offline Joker86

  • Mad & Bad
  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1226
  • Infamy: 324
  • cRPG Player
  • Why so serious?
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Companions
  • Game nicks: Joker86_TP
Re: Basic game imbalances
« Reply #46 on: December 18, 2011, 02:09:48 pm »
+1
I think you forgot a word between "and would", but I suppose it's "equipment"?

Basically: yes. You have a basic item value budget, that raises every level, but it's only enough for the most basic equipment. If you want the better stuff you must spend a few skill points in raising this budget further. So you can actually say that skills "cost" wealth points. (By increasing skills you can't increase wealth points any more and vice versa)
Joker makes a very good point.
î saved for eternety (without context  :mrgreen:)

Offline Glyph

  • Baron
  • ****
  • Renown: 143
  • Infamy: 40
  • cRPG Player Sir White Pawn
  • Turbulence incoming
    • View Profile
  • IRC nick: Horris
Re: Basic game imbalances
« Reply #47 on: December 18, 2011, 05:32:09 pm »
0
I think you forgot a word between "and would", but I suppose it's "equipment"?

Basically: yes. You have a basic item value budget, that raises every level, but it's only enough for the most basic equipment. If you want the better stuff you must spend a few skill points in raising this budget further. So you can actually say that skills "cost" wealth points. (By increasing skills you can't increase wealth points any more and vice versa)
owww, now i get it thx
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
 
Glyph you have obsessive Horse Archer and Horse hatred.
- Official diagnosis :)

Offline Bobthehero

  • Duke
  • *******
  • Renown: 515
  • Infamy: 195
  • cRPG Player
  • Grandmaster Ultimate God Of Swashbucklin'
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Bridgeburners
  • Game nicks: Bobthehero_Whals and I am totally not all the Not_Bobthehero alts ever.
  • IRC nick: Buff Swashbuckling
Re: Basic game imbalances
« Reply #48 on: December 18, 2011, 09:11:18 pm »
0
Very boring system IMO and it will go even farther from being to customize your character.
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
The Narwhals, dedicated swashbuckler part of FCC


Stabbing is my speciality and one hitting people, my art

Offline Glyph

  • Baron
  • ****
  • Renown: 143
  • Infamy: 40
  • cRPG Player Sir White Pawn
  • Turbulence incoming
    • View Profile
  • IRC nick: Horris
Re: Basic game imbalances
« Reply #49 on: December 19, 2011, 10:48:15 am »
0
Very boring system IMO and it will go even farther from being to customize your character.
it may reduce the capebilety of choosing armor and skills, but people will use more variation then they will now, because if it's possible to get to the topright corner, you will, and now you have more sets to choose from without sucking really hard.
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
 
Glyph you have obsessive Horse Archer and Horse hatred.
- Official diagnosis :)

Offline Zerran

  • Count
  • *****
  • Renown: 276
  • Infamy: 48
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
  • Faction: KUTT
  • Game nicks: Caita_KUTT, Fellys_KUTT
Re: Basic game imbalances
« Reply #50 on: December 19, 2011, 08:06:00 pm »
0
Been thinking on this a bit more, and came up with 2 similar ideas.

1. This idea works on the fact that most of the imbalances in equipment are caused by armor, rather than the weapon (That is, generally having a higher end weapon gives you less of an advantage than higher end armor). So, add a "Heavy Armor" skill that requires 3 str per point. It would work as an additional requirement to just str to wear the item. For example, Gothic Plate might take 15 strength (as it does now) and additionally 5 or so points of the Heavy Armor skill (I realize that the strength wouldn't be necessary in this case, but in the case of a lower tier, but still high end armor, such as Coat of Plates, which takes 13 strength, might only take 2 points of the Heavy Armor skill.)

This would essentially reduce the number of skill points player who want to wear heavy armors have, and does so in a fairly realistic way. Due to this, they would have to choose between having less health, speed, damage, etc. It would also have no real effect on Archers, who really don't need any nerfs like this, and while it would effect heavy cav, it would do so in a less drastic way than making them put in enough points to afford their already very costly horse.

2. This idea works on the fact that even with enough protection, you're still a sitting duck if you can't move at more than a crawl. Basically, increase how much weight reduces wpf and movement speed pretty drastically above a certain point using a logarithmically scaled multiplier, starting at weight 10-15, and nearing it's peak at around 30-40 or so. So, for example someone with a weight under 10-15 or so would see no change, but someone around 30-40 weight (heavy armor all around) wouldn't be able to move at more than a walking pace, and would have a HUGE wpf penalty.

Now before you stab me for trying to make heavy armor worthless, this effect could be counteracted by using a skill. This skill would require 3 str per point, and would reduce this extra multiplier by a certain amount (If the skill is high enough that it reduces the multiplier to the point that the character would be less encumbered than before, the skill caps out and stops helping more) So, like idea 1, if a character wants to use heavier armor and not be basically useless they need to put points into this skill; and, once again, they would need to sacrifice damage, agility, health, etc, in order to do so.

This idea doesn't really do anything about cav, and might be harder to implement, but I still posted it because I'm not sure it's possible to have 2 requirements on armor (i.e strength and Heavy Armor skill).
visitors can't see pics , please register or login

Offline karasu

  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1751
  • Infamy: 316
  • cRPG Player Sir Black Rook A Gentleman and a Scholar
  • D̶͎̳͒́͗͋ẹ͕̲̠̳̄̃͂ͤ͑ͮṃ̮͎̗̦̏̿͊ͤi̥̪̼͕ͦ̀̊̐ȗ̘rͩ͋̅̊gͭ̿̋
    • View Profile
Re: Basic game imbalances
« Reply #51 on: December 19, 2011, 08:35:08 pm »
0
tl:dr  my signature.