Suggestions:Game mechanics - Revision history

Jaqs: /* Game Mechanics */

2012-03-03T15:37:07Z

Game Mechanics

Maunder: /* Whistles and Shouts */

2010-02-02T01:25:21Z

Whistles and Shouts

Maunder: /* Animal Corpses */ more feedback

2010-01-29T05:15:37Z

Animal Corpses: more feedback

Maunder: /* Whistles and Shouts */

2010-01-04T01:13:02Z

Whistles and Shouts

Maunder: /* Whistles and Shouts */ clarifying

2010-01-04T00:54:30Z

Whistles and Shouts: clarifying

Maunder: /* Whistles and Shouts */

2010-01-03T18:56:14Z

Whistles and Shouts

Maunder: /* Whistles and Shouts */ expanded per forum discussion

2010-01-03T18:54:43Z

Whistles and Shouts: expanded per forum discussion

Maunder: /* Whistles and Shouts */ added forum link

2010-01-03T16:43:30Z

Whistles and Shouts: added forum link

Maunder: /* Familiar Ground */ excluding sand, and added comments

2009-12-16T19:28:15Z

Familiar Ground: excluding sand, and added comments

Maunder: /* Whistles and Shouts */

2009-12-16T19:06:57Z

Whistles and Shouts

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:37, 3 March 2012
Line 131:		Line 131:
	}}		}}

−
−	~~=== Forest Fire ===~~
−	~~{{suggestion\|~~
−	~~suggest_type=Game mechanics, natural disasters\|~~
−	~~suggest_scope=Terrain\|~~
−	suggest_description=This is a potential temporary minigame that will either lead to players to band together and save the island or perhaps just lead to all-out chaos. A fire script is created which designates one block as fire (it is identified by a little fire.gif in the background). Every 20 minutes the fire script will check if there is <del>Grassland or</del> Jungle nearby with density from 1-10. If there is, it spreads to the next block. It will not spread to any other terrain (including villages and ruins). Thus, the best way to prevent the spread of the fire is by chopping vegetation down to 0. The initial fires will be placed randomly around the island. Actions performed in a fire occupied space deal 2 damage. For this event to be more devious, there should be a means to quickly restore vegetation (dropping driftwood, planting fruit, watering with gourds).\|
−	~~suggest_time=03:58, 17 March 2006 (GMT)\|~~
−	~~suggest_author=[[User:Lint\|Lint]]\|~~
−	~~suggest_comments=~~
−	~~<!-- COMMENT BELOW THIS LINE - DO NOT DELETE THIS LINE -->~~
−	*I like some things about this suggestion, I think it could work really nicely if there was also a rain algorithingamajig, so that maybe, if some part of the island dried out, wildfires could break out, or if it rained too much villages could flood and get swamped. Its a neat idea. -[[User:BananaBear\|BananaBear]] 04:55, 17 March 2006 (GMT)
−	* I like the idea of rain and fire, however there's no telling if the server would handle the database access/calculations required when the number of players gets into the range that Urban Dead has. --[[User:Simon\|Simon]] 11:17, 17 March 2006 (GMT)
−	** I thought it might be a bit much. Ah well. --[[User:Lint\|Lint]] 19:32, 17 March 2006 (GMT)
−	** Not the idea of fire itself, that may well be quite feasible. I meant having rain causing flooding, or not enough rain leading to fires might be a bit awkward.. unless I can think of some way to reduce the work that needs to be done regularly. --[[User:Simon\|Simon]] 23:38, 18 March 2006 (GMT)
−	* Maybe fires could also destroy huts, and then there could be a skill to rebuild them. Maybe even give people the ability to start their own fires. It might make for interesting tribal wars. -[[User:BananaBear\|BananaBear]] 18:22, 20 March 2006 (GMT)
−	** Imagine what would happen if an ammo hut caught on fire!--[[User:Darkferret\|Darkferret]] 04:32, 1 April 2006 (BST)
−	** I kind of wanted to restrict fires to the Jungle (removed my Grasslands comment from the original suggestion) since a lot of Huts provide resources for starting players and players that have just been revived. I think it would be unfair to prevent them with the opportunity to gather supplies. As a tactic, it may also be unfair. Native villages appear to be completely surrounded by burnable Jungle, while Outsider villages are bordered by the Beach. --[[User:Lint\|Lint]] 19:46, 20 March 2006 (GMT)
−	** Good point. The pirates would be completely free of burning too. I still think a way to temporarily damage structures could be fun -[[User:BananaBear\|BananaBear]] 19:59, 20 March 2006 (GMT)
−	** As a general rule, real world jungles don't burn terribly well, although there are a few notable exceptions (such as the Indonesian forest fires in 1997-98). Grasslands, however, burn quite regularly, and in fact such fires are necessary for the good health of the grass. Fire kills off sapling trees in the area which would otherwise grow to the point that they overshadowed and killed the grass. I don't know whether the game has any grasslands large enough to make this kind of thing interesting, though. --[[User:Jackdaw\|Jackdaw]] 15:55, 25 March 2006 (GMT)
−	~~<!-- COMMENT ABOVE THIS LINE - DO NOT DELETE THIS LINE -->~~
−	}}

	=== Auto Attack ===		=== Auto Attack ===

@@ Line 1,849: / Line 1,849: @@
 * (3) no shouted message can have more than 5 vowel groups.
 In the longer term, a bit more difficult-to-implement suggestion: the shout message could be mangled in the same way the languages are, and possibly vary the intelligibility by distance.
 ==== Game Play ====

@@ Line 1,702: / Line 1,702: @@
 I like this suggestion as well.  People will want to carry trophies though, selling them for gold is boring.  Perhaps trophies should not weigh so much, I think some should weigh zero.  If we could turn skins into backpacks (with their own descriptors, eg,: "a buckskin rucksack") or other wearable items (would require clothing "slots", a la Urban Dead), that would add a bit to roleplaying.  A further refinement might allow teeth or claws to embellish clothing pieces.  I find it a little disappointing currently that the only place I can "wear" alligator skin trophies is in my text description.  Also, please add alligator TEETH as a trophy! -- [[User:Maunder|Maunder]] 07:15, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
 <!-- COMMENT **ABOVE** THIS LINE - DO NOT DELETE THIS LINE -->
 }}

@@ Line 1,834: / Line 1,834: @@
 * Both shouts and whistles can penetrate a hut's walls, but range (both hearing, understanding, and identifying) is reduced by 2 for sounds traversing the wall in either direction.  Thus a shout inside a hut can only be understood by those inside and outside the hut, and heard at most 3 squares away.
 * Both whistles and shouts would give the listener an indication of cardinal direction: "Someone whistled to the (northeast)."
-* A shout should allow communication: up to four or five syllables.  Listeners who do not understand the language, or more than 3 squares away from the shouter, however, will not be able make out the words.  [*]
+* A shout should allow communication: up to four or five syllables.  Listeners who do not understand the language (by having Expert Language skill), or more than 3 squares away from the shouter, however, will not be able make out the words.  [*]
 * A shout should reveal the shouter's gender.  "From the (north), you hear a (female) voice shout...".  This means gender would have to be added to a player's profile!
 * Listeners from the same town as the shouter, or who have the shouter in their contact list, have a good chance of recognizing the shouter's voice (the chance depends on the range) when hearing the shout: "From the south, you hear Maunder shout...".  The chance of recognition depends on the range, perhaps: 100% at range 0 (same square), -10% per additional range unit, down to 50% at maximum range 5.  Note: A shout travelling through a hut's walls reduces identification chance by the two distance units mentioned above (-20%).

@@ Line 1,834: / Line 1,834: @@
 * Both shouts and whistles can penetrate a hut's walls, but range (both hearing, understanding, and identifying) is reduced by 2 for sounds traversing the wall in either direction.  Thus a shout inside a hut can only be understood by those inside and outside the hut, and heard at most 3 squares away.
 * Both whistles and shouts would give the listener an indication of cardinal direction: "Someone whistled to the (northeast)."
-* A shout should allow communication: up to four or five syllables.  Listeners more than 3 squares away from the shouter, however, will not be able make out the words.  [*]
+* A shout should allow communication: up to four or five syllables.  Listeners who do not understand the language, or more than 3 squares away from the shouter, however, will not be able make out the words.  [*]
 * A shout should reveal the shouter's gender.  "From the (north), you hear a (female) voice shout...".  This means gender would have to be added to a player's profile!
 * Listeners from the same town as the shouter, or who have the shouter in their contact list, have a good chance of recognizing the shouter's voice (the chance depends on the range) when hearing the shout: "From the south, you hear Maunder shout...".  The chance of recognition depends on the range, perhaps: 100% at range 0 (same square), -10% per additional range unit, down to 50% at maximum range 5.  Note: A shout travelling through a hut's walls reduces identification chance by the two distance units mentioned above (-20%).
@@ Line 1,850: / Line 1,850: @@
 The range suggested allows a whistle to cover all the 5x5 map segment a person can see in the game interface, plus exactly four squares beyond it (3 spaces directly N, E, S, and W).  Therefore, occasionally you might be informing someone unintentionally with your whistle.
-Alternatively, the shout allows you to communicate a brief message, but, because it reaches a wider area, at much greater risk that unintended listeners will hear it.
+Alternatively, the shout allows you to communicate a brief message to the same area, but, because it can be heard over a wider area, there's a much greater risk that unintended listeners will hear the shout (but not the message).
 Of course, in either case, a hut's walls will also hide potential listeners from the shouter/whistler.

@@ Line 1,855: / Line 1,855: @@
 Abusing these skills for spam purposes is possible; but these skills have an AP cost, while talking doesn't!
-To reduce the chances of newbies, or angry people, from creating accounts solely to shout spam, the skills should be granted at maybe level 3 and above (but still at no XP cost).
+To reduce the chances of newbies, or angry people, from creating accounts solely to shout spam, the skills should be granted at maybe level 5 and above (but still at no XP cost).
+|
 suggest_time=07:05, 5 December 2009 (UTC)|

@@ Line 1,832: / Line 1,832: @@
 suggest_description=If spirits can scream, why can't living people?  Humans should be able to shout and whistle.
 * A whistle would be heard by other players within 3 squares of the whistler, and costs 1AP; a shout can be heard up to 5 squares and costs 2AP.  [I envision calculating distance the cartesian way: range 3 whistle reaches only two diagonal squares away (2.8).]
-* Both would give the listener an indication of cardinal direction: "Someone whistled to the (northeast)."
+* Both shouts and whistles can penetrate a hut's walls, but range (both hearing, understanding, and identifying) is reduced by 2 for sounds traversing the wall in either direction.  Thus a shout inside a hut can only be understood by those inside and outside the hut, and heard at most 3 squares away.
-* A shout should allow the shouter to express himself: up to three words, perhaps.  Listeners more than 3 squares away from the shouter, however, will not be able make out the words.  (Longer term, the shout message could be mangled in the same way the languages are, and vary the intelligibility by distance?)
+* Both whistles and shouts would give the listener an indication of cardinal direction: "Someone whistled to the (northeast)."
-* Listeners from the same town as the shouter have a good chance of recognizing the shouter's voice (the chance depends on the range) when hearing the shout.
+* A shout should allow communication: up to four or five syllables.  Listeners more than 3 squares away from the shouter, however, will not be able make out the words.  [*]
-* Both shouts and whistles can penetrate a hut's walls, but range (both for hearing and understanding) is reduced by 2 for sounds traversing the wall in either direction.  Thus a shout inside a hut can only be understood by those inside and outside the hut, and heard at most 3 squares away.
+* A shout should reveal the shouter's gender.  "From the (north), you hear a (female) voice shout...".  This means gender would have to be added to a player's profile!
-* A shout should reveal the shouter's gender.  "From the (north), you hear a (female) voice shout..."
+* Listeners from the same town as the shouter, or who have the shouter in their contact list, have a good chance of recognizing the shouter's voice (the chance depends on the range) when hearing the shout: "From the south, you hear Maunder shout...".  The chance of recognition depends on the range, perhaps: 100% at range 0 (same square), -10% per additional range unit, down to 50% at maximum range 5.  Note: A shout travelling through a hut's walls reduces identification chance by the two distance units mentioned above (-20%).
-* Whistles or shouts should attract angry beasts (ferocious tigers, rampaging elephants, and the like), most of which have more sensitive ears than humans and can hear them at greater range!  Some other animals might be scared away by shouting.
+* Whistles or shouts should attract angry beasts (ferocious tigers, rampaging elephants, and the like), most of which have more sensitive ears than humans and can hear them at greater range!  Other aggressive animals might be similarly attracted, at some probability (not too high-- avoid making hunting easier!).  Some other animals might be scared away by shouting.
 I opted to suggest whistle not be a learned skill; what pirate or native can't whistle?
+|
 suggest_time=07:05, 5 December 2009 (UTC)|
@@ Line 1,852: / Line 1,869: @@
 As discussion here is lacking, I've now posted a (slightly expanded) version of this suggestion [http://forum.shartak.com/index.php/topic,2527.0.html on the forum]. - [[User:Maunder|Maunder]] 16:43, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
 <!-- COMMENT **ABOVE** THIS LINE - DO NOT DELETE THIS LINE -->
 }}

@@ Line 1,858: / Line 1,858: @@
 suggest_type=Balance/Strategy adjustment|
 suggest_scope=Movement bonus in home settlements|
-suggest_description=Each movement ON LAND within 6 units of the home settlement (including inside the settlement), a player has a 25% chance that 0.5AP less than usual are consumed.
+suggest_description=Each movement within 6 units of the home settlement (including inside the settlement), a player has a 25% chance that 0.5AP less than usual are consumed, unless the square is WATER or SAND.
 If more than 6 units away, but less than 12 units, the chance of saving 0.5AP is 15%.
 If more than 12 units away, but less than 18 units, the chance of saving 0.5AP is 5%.
@@ Line 1,871: / Line 1,871: @@
 It doesn't make a lot of sense to have "familiar ground" in the open water -- even if you're familiar with it, it's unlikely to make you swim any faster (I can imagine some exceptions but will not mention them).
 If this movement benefit remained for the water, I would argue to keep it as 0.5AP despite the base movement costs being higher, to lessen its effect.  I'd also suggest ranges for the effect be diminished by water.  Since implementing this would be trickier, I opted to suggest the benefit does not apply in water areas. -- [[User:Maunder|Maunder]] 19:06, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
 <!-- COMMENT **ABOVE** THIS LINE - DO NOT DELETE THIS LINE -->
 }}