Jump to content

Erik

Very Important Vintarian
  • Content Count

    240
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    36

Erik last won the day on November 2 2020

Erik had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

101 Excellent

About Erik

  • Rank
    Ironsmith

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. A very recent and almost identical suggestion already exists on these forums: Personally, I think fixed classes fit the game better, it's a survival game after all and not a RPG. The aim with these classes will probably be to offer some variation and specialization opportunities while the main focus is on allowing for hand-crafted specialized challenges, like characters in many survival games or rogue lights allow for (Don't Starve and Isaac come to mind). A trait selection system would put more of a focus on min-maxing advantages, which is in my opinion simply not that interesting in th
  2. Having used the prospecting for quite a while now, I now also think it's ok. Personally I now think the ore distribution should be different per ore type, i.e. metal. Most ores should stay unchanged, so generating in large disks that are easily found by combining prospecting and vertical mining. Large thin disks may not sound the most appealing for ore generation, but the advantage of being easily found is just too good to ignore. Iron generation should however be completely changed imo. It shouldn't rely on the ore density map and should be readily available everywhere, like surf
  3. I think a system with fixed classes is actually better than a trait based system, as it allows to more carefully design interesting characters for the player to play with their own unique challenges and advantages. A trait system would require balancing the traits against each other and other perk combinations , which is not impossible to do but not easy either. It would probably lead to a situation where some traits would just never be picked and the traits would be picked in such a way that players play optimal build, that cover their weaknesses with their strengths. Having specific weakness
  4. The idea of a "round" world isn't as complicated as it may seem at first. It would be a lot of work though. This thread has some info on how to archive it, especially in the video in last post: A torus (i.e. donut) would be chosen for the shape of the world. The world would need to be big enough so the same chunk (or even region) can only be loaded once at max viewing distance, as there may be strange bugs when it is loaded multiple times. World generation would need some tweaks, so the world generation does connect at the former borders, which for terrain shape just requires some t
  5. Well, you can just carry the tool heads and craft the tools on the fly, since tool heads can't be damaged they would be able to be remelted for full metal return, so I see no problem there. I also don't see a problem with undamaged tools being able to be resmelted. Currently really everything needs some amount of full ingots. I also don't see how blocking a single mold would be such a big problem, you can still not melt the metal stuff and keep it in a chest if you really cared about it. Overall, I'm not against the concept of some generalist form of a small unit of metal, what wo
  6. You can't do anything with just one metal shaving, can you? You can however save up, till you have enough metal to fully fill a mold. That is why I prefer a metal scrap system here more. However, getting back 50% of the metal is still much better than getting back nothing, also why would someone have unused tools anyway?
  7. Erik

    Armor 2.0

    Armor damage and therefore repair would be frequent, when having the system I proposed, where armor damage also means lower protection. For such a system resolving around "destroying" armor, the armor wouldn't last for a few hundred hits, but probably 20 or so hits when against a monster that would after the old system be in the same tier. And even when this wasn't the case, armor damage meaning lower protection means, people would be encouraged to always have their armor at full durability. As for a repair system that allows quick repairs without huge resource investments: Just whack you
  8. Erik

    Armor 2.0

    Exactly, no one crafts early metal armor right now. Making early metal armor even more useless, by having its frequent repair also be a resource sink is therefore a bad idea. But having early metal armors last without huge resource investments and them having relatively good stats may actually still not be enough to have people use them, as people can shoot through the metal ages very quickly, like you describe, but it would at least give some more incentive.
  9. It doesn't, that is not the point of the system. I mean, with your system of metal shavings from voxels, the metal cost used for casting could still be adjusted to match the cost of smithing. Likewise, I could adjust the metal cost required for casting to be higher, to make smithing better without touching itemstats. It isn't something that is uniquely tied to the shaving system. Personally I think giving forged items a stat boost like more durability would be a better thing than a lower material cost, since such a system is bound to be introduced anyway, when quenching and tempering are intro
  10. I don't even see why such a metal shavings system is even needed, we can already have "partial ingots" via metal value in crucibles or in a bloomery. Having voxels represent actual metal value doesn't seem so fun to me, as it introduces a bit of micromanagement, when I feel like a plate or chain being worth (and able to be remelted into) two ingots is simple and effective. The only thing that's missing is smelting recipes for iron/steel that produce iron bloom and for the tool heads. There is only one slight limitation that should be removed: When I want to remelt my arrow heads, I can't jus
  11. Erik

    Armor 2.0

    Refitting tier to just durability damage is an option, but I don't think it is the best one. Taking the quotient of the tiers would mean that differences of lower tiers are making more durability damage than differences of higher tier. Tier 5 to tier 4 is just a durability damage multiplier of 1.2, while tier 2 to tier 1 is a multiplier of 2. That would mean that higher tier armor would last significantly longer in general, especially when the better materials also have higher durability, as the system still lacks some form of anti-armor. I don't think tying the armor balance to the cr
  12. It's certainly an idea that has been discussed a lot of times already: For me, my general opinion on this hasn't really changed, constantly having to sharpen weapons seems like a huge tedium. Furthermore, the whole idea of a weapon becoming dull is kinda hurting combat, as fights will drag on over time, rather than getting more deadly the longer they go (which is something that could be archived with armor effectiveness scaling with durability, which while potentially having the same tedium problem, would actually be an improvement to combat gameplay). I'm all for a repair system, b
  13. Erik

    Armor 2.0

    Well, your right. But it could easily be fixed by adding an armor bar on the hud like in Minecraft. The bar would need to be split into three sections, representing the different armor pieces, but generally it would be something easy to implement and for the players to understand that practically fixes the issue. This is also a valid concern. After all, I think having tools and weapons effectiveness scale with durability is a terrible idea. But I think armor getting this doesn't have to cause other things to get this treatment too, I mean clothing already kinda has this very feature ri
  14. Erik

    Armor 2.0

    I feel like the current armor system needs some work, currently it is very convoluted: We have different damage types, flat damage protection, percentage protection and damage/defense tiers, high damage tier resistance. What do damage types do? Currently nothing other than effect how much durability clothing loses when hit. What does tier do? A lot of things, effecting durability loss, being an important factor in the damage equation, etc. Is flat damage protection subtracted before or after percentage protection? Before percentage protection. So flat damage prote
  15. When combat will be improved there will definitely be some sort of blocking/parrying implemented. This however poses a problem: How to prevent the player from hiding behind his shield forever? The answer would be something I abstractly call a combat endurance system. The most straight forward solution may just be to have blocks not block all the damage, but to only reduce it. This however either makes blocking useless when the health cost is to high or makes it overpowered when it is too low, letting the player still hide behind the shield forever. This balancing problem is es
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.