Difference between revisions of "Suggestions:Game mechanics"

Revision as of 05:36, 22 May 2007

Suggestions

Items | Skills | Classes | Game mechanics | Miscellaneous

Game mechanics suggestions are made here. See Suggestions for a list of other suggestion categories.

Suggestions for Shartak are not often implemented but are always welcome. Comments on and improvements to existing suggestions are appreciated. Please don't remove suggestions you don't like.

Before adding a suggestion, please take the time to view the guidelines for advice on what suggestions are feasable, and please check existing suggestions to ensure that yours (or a very similar one) has not already been made. Please add new suggestions to the bottom of the page.

Implemented suggestions are moved to Suggestions:Implemented. Bug reports should be added to the Bugs page.

Example

To use the template, enter the following at the bottom of the page, but replace emboldened text with text appropriate to your suggestion:

===Suggestion Name===
{{suggestion|
suggest_type=Skill, balance change, improvement, etc|
suggest_scope=Who or what it applies to|
suggest_description=Full description. Check spelling and be descriptive.|
suggest_time=~~~~~|
suggest_author=~~~|
suggest_comments=
<!-- COMMENT **BELOW** THIS LINE - DO NOT DELETE THIS LINE -->
Comment here
<!-- COMMENT **ABOVE** THIS LINE - DO NOT DELETE THIS LINE -->
}}

Game Mechanics

Conversion

Author	Timestamp	Type	Scope
One of many doctors	23:22, 16 February 2006 (GMT)

When an Outsider/Native dies they are reborn as a Native (don't really understand the spirit thing too well). The Outsiders then get a new class/skill, "Religious Conversion" that requires a "Holy Scripture". This allows a "Priest" to convert one native into a Outsider". The converted native would most likely start off as a Settler.

Comments

I believe that Natives are reborn as Natives and Outsiders are reborn as Outsiders, but I could be wrong. From a game balance perspective, I am not in favor of type-swapping skills unless Natives are presented with an ability to counter or convert Outsiders as well. It does fit nicely with the theme though. --Lint 23:41, 16 February 2006 (GMT)

That would probably be the shamans job, however it may have worked for Urban Dead but I don't think it will work in this game as whichever group has the most players to begin with will, once conflicts begin to arise, dominate by switching people from the side they are on the side the priest/"whatever the natives use" side making you able to graph one groups population by looking at the graph pop=(1/2)^x. Also since there wouldn't seem to be a way, short of finding a converter player to switch you back, to go back to playing as you once did would make the amount of people on one side quickly die off (even though thats what would happen in real life, favouring the outsiders) it would be a very unfun aspect of the game. And really these are HOSTILE natives, or so it seems, why would they let some devilman outsider tell it how it is? They wouldn't, they would simply spear them and laugh! In short all the converting ideas suck, I know I wouldn't want to log on to find I'm playing for the wrong side. -- Daylan 10:55, 17 February 2006 (GMT)

So that means if my soldier dies, he's reborn as a native? Not only that, but to become an outsider again, first I would have to find a priest (which would be next to impossible with such a small number of players), and then he could convert me into a settler. That means I'll never be able to be a soldier again, which is a real punch in the throat for RPers. -- Grigoriy

All valid points. I guess this wouldn't really work we have the same number of players as Urban Dead. But this would be a great way to balance out the sides later on. Say there are too many natives, you just drop more "conversion items" and balance out the sides. Too many Outsiders? Just drop the number of conversion items. Doubt it would catch on though. --One of many doctors 02:44, 19 February 2006 (GMT)

Conversion doesn't have to be forced. It could require action on both sides, like a native doning a religious item and an outsider using the skill on that native. After all, conversion isn't real without true faith. The native counter to this could be similar, requiring an outsider to die holding a packet of that headshrinking powder while a shaman uses the Zombification (ala Haitian witchcraft) skill. -- frisco

You don't change class or anything when you die. --Murk 12:31, 4 March 2006 (GMT)

I gave a response to this idea under "Holy Scriptures," I think, offering another idea for it that may piss a lot less people off. *points over there*--Wifey 07:15, 29 March 2006 (BST)

Capturing villages

Author	Timestamp	Type	Scope
One of many doctors	03:41, 1 March 2006 (GMT)

Since this is like some war between Outsiders and Natives I thought this appropriate. If all the (say) Outsiders are killed in York and there are none left, then it becomes a Native village and vice versa. Probably needs harder requirements to capture settlements though. Maybe each side could have one permanent place that can never change hands?

Comments

Not sure about this - what about all the idle players within the village? They might "wake up" after a couple of weeks to find they're in enemy territory. --Simon 11:00, 1 March 2006 (GMT)

You could have it so idle players goto the nearest friendly village-- Daylan 02:58, 3 March 2006 (GMT)

Turf control in a limited AP browser game like this just invites lame zerging behavior. I don't like it. --Jackel 00:00, 4 March 2006 (GMT)

Not villages, perhaps 3x3 square 'forts'? --Grigoriy 01:10, 4 March 2006 (GMT)

I do like the idea, but I think Jackel's observation hits a key point. --Lint 08:40, 5 March 2006 (GMT)

Agreed with Jackel and Lint and Simon. --Berry 13:32, 7 March 2006 (GMT) Additionally:
- Please don't impose your assumption that Shartak is at heart a "war between Outsiders and Natives" on the rest of us. That is not the only possible direction in which this game can go. For example, an Outsider village might turn out to be populated by a trading company that views the other Outsider villages as competitors whose extermination would be good for business, but it could just as easily develop into a peaceful scientific outpost, a pirate haven of drunken debauchery, or a missionary settlement devoted to finding the Natives and learning their language (gotta spread that old time religion). I believe it would be better to keep the objectives more freeform, and let the players create the course of history. --Berry 13:32, 7 March 2006 (GMT)
- On a hopefully more helpful and positive note, one could simulate/approximate capturing a village by amassing an army of suitable size, carving messages of ownership all over the territory of the village in question, killing all members of the village, and repeatedly killing the village shaman so they can't get back as easily. (Ouch. I hope no armchair megalomaniacs out there have been taking notes.) --Berry 13:32, 7 March 2006 (GMT)

Unique skills

Author	Timestamp	Type	Scope
One of many doctors	02:34, 5 March 2006 (GMT)	Skill, balance change, improvement, etc	Who or what it applies to

I think that each class should start off with one unique skill that the others may never aquire. That way it stops all the classes from becoming too generic. For example Settlers could have a "farming" skill, Soldiers could have a "bravery" skill, etc. Or mabey they could just have a attribute like Soldiers have an extra 10% chance of striking the target, Warriors have an extra 10% chance of finding animals, Settlers have an extra 10% chance of finding an item, Scouts have a 3% chance of recovering 1 HP per AP spent, etc.

Comments

I am in favor of this (if it is not in effect currently). We'd have to work out the details to make sure each class is getting their fair share, but something that encourages players to try other classes or team up with other players using different classes for a better playing experience sounds good to me. --Lint 08:40, 5 March 2006 (GMT)

I am in favor of each class being able to acquire (but not necessarily starting off with) a unique skill or attribute that the others may never acquire. Sounds to me like the kind of thing that would be unlocked as one's reward for a rite of passage, rather than granted as a right of birth. --Berry 12:53, 7 March 2006 (GMT)

Perhaps a Research skill of some kind for the Scientist, maybe allowing them an advantage when doing things with dead animals (would need something to do with dead animals, obviously!).MorkaisChosen 16:09, 16 March 2006 (GMT)

Pirates should have a skill to steal their fallen enemies' gold coins. Arr. Would probably result in a lot of outsider in-fighting, though, and outsiders are currently outnumbered.--Wifey 07:18, 29 March 2006 (BST)

I agree with this as well. It seems Shartak is on the way to giving each class their own benefits (Soldiers/Warriors with gun skills, Settlers/Villagers with animal affinity etc.), but so far only a few have been made unique. At present there is really no point to being a scientist. He starts with 10 gold coins... what the? So I'm pushing for each class to have at least one unique skill they can purchase with XP. --Rip Purr 11:50, 3 June 2006 (BST)

I feel the introduction of the unique skill system would make the game much more interesting. but i disagree with the idea that people should just start off with one, rather i feel it should be purchased like the other skills on offer. Additionally rather they have one skill strand/branch like that of the gun skill or animal affinity, it would be interesting and more fun to have a multiple skill branches in line with the specific character classes, like for instance giving the soldiers/warrior classes defensive skill strands in additional to their offensive ones. Furthermore there should be distinctions between the native & outsider classes so they’re similar yet different. Like for instance the firearm/blowpipe skill upgrades are currently identical, I hope in future they could be retooled to promote native/outsider gameplay differences. --A for anarchy 03:47, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

A for Anarchy is right about warrior/soldiers skill trees. One idea to lively things up is for Native warriors to get a skill allowing them to manufacture a poison dart if they have a bunch of poisonous berries. This will allow them to not have to go back to their home villages to restock on ammo, they could 'live off the land' by simply searching the local poisonous berry bushes and making poison darts themselves. Soldiers should get something else, in line with the theme of the game. (Of course if it was up to me, the whole ranged weapon system would be overhauled. Another problem with ranged weapons is that they are useless to non-soldierwarriors) Arminius 23:38, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Pet System

Author	Timestamp	Type	Scope
Lint	08:40, 5 March 2006 (GMT)	Game mechanics	All classes

I will combine aspects of the Animal and Pirate suggestions and propose a pet system that allows you to tame one of the animals on the island. First, you have to weaken the animal. Then you throw a sphere device at it and shout "SHARTAK SPHERE! GO!" for 1 AP. There's a slight chance that you have captured and tamed the animal. The more powerful the animal, the less success chance. You earn no XP for taming an animal. Players can only have 1 pet at a time. They can release a pet whenever they want. If the owner dies, the pet runs away. Pets have fixed HP, attack, and accuracy based on the type of animal they are (ie. they do not level up or heal, just to keep it simple to design). They follow the player around and only attack when the player attacks. It would be nice if they attacked while you were not playing, but auto-defense mechanisms are unnecessary. Enemy animals randomly determine whether they are attacking the owner or the pet. Other players will have an option for targeting the owner or pet. There is no XP gained for attacking or killing a pet to deter any attempts at farming pet killing (I can't believe we even have to consider preventing such a thing). For added flavor, owners can name their pets.

Comments

ROTFL. Sounds a bit like Pokemon or Yu-Gi-Oh (don't worry, I'm not a fan, I have kids that were!). Perhaps instead of spheres, you could keep the monkeys on a leash, heal a tiger or elephant to make it less likely to attack you, tame deer by feeding them, etc. Some animals like the wild boar would have to be pretty difficult to tame. --Simon 15:14, 5 March 2006 (GMT)
I was with you right up until you got to the "sphere device" bit, and I rejoined you afterwards. ;) The rest of your suggestion otherwise seems to be pretty well thought out. Personally, I'd prefer to attempt to tame the animal into becoming a pet purely by offering it food, rather than "weakening" it by other means. Especially since food is scarce enough that offering it to an animal would be a real sacrifice and therefore an interesting decision for the player to make. --Berry 14:49, 7 March 2006 (GMT)
I will confess that I had a lot of fun with the references. The problem I have with using an existing item to tame a pet is how to implement it. The player can't click on the fruit, because that will just heal themselves. And I think it is unecessary to redesign fruits like First Aid Kits and Medical Herbs, just so they can feed it to an animal. And a database check to see if the player possesses a fruit before providing a "tame" command seems awkward. Perhaps there is just one item called "animal bait" (from the Trade Hut most likely). It works much like a FAK or Herb, but can only be applied to animals (though there will be a "Yourself" option by default for those players that decide they enjoy the taste). Animals will then have a value called "tame count" in the database. For each successful feeding, this number is incremented. When a specific number is reached, the monster is successfully tamed. If a monster is killed, the number is reset to 0. Acquiring a pet should not reduce the population of animals on the island (ie. one should respawn to take its place). Furthermore, those with Animal Affinity should have a better taming success rate. (This is another attempt to give Villagers and Settlers a little boost.) --Lint 17:32, 7 March 2006 (GMT)
This idea, while somewhat interesting, is not very realitic. The animals of the island are wild. In reality, tigers, elephants, deer, "WILD boars" etc can only be made LESS WILD by extensive and careful training and handling when they are young, not be tamable by any means, certainly not enough to follow a person around and fight on their behalf. Maybe it would be possible with parrots and monkeys, but if Simon is going to implement changes, I'd rather see some of the more believable ones first. I do agree with Lint that it would give more value to Animal Affinity. Animal attacks, even from a tiger or elephant (which would realistically be very dangerous) are hardly to be feared, making this skill currently seem pretty useless.

The following is a Pet suggestion made by Richard Rose on 21:47, 24 March 2006:

as the name reades, simply have "pets" as a survivor living in the jungle, my first instinct would be to find support, in this case we could add a "tame animal" button, which would be clicked to tame an animal, the starting catching % would be something like 10% and could be improved the more the animal is damaged, like at 1hp, if full health was 10hp then you'd have 55% of catching it, (i added 5% for every 10% missing from the creature's health) this could also be improved with new skills such as

Amateur Catching Skills (adds 10%)
- Catching Skills (adds 15%, doesnt stack)
  - Taming Skills (adds 30%)
Net (adds 10%, does stack)

certain animals could be ridden, other would do funny things or find objects for you, ex: Mr. Bobo the monkey finds a bottle of rum in your pocket "gee i didnt know i had that"

elephants, large stags, and tigers could be ridden, small stags would haveto grow up before being ridden, after like, 10 days, or 20 kills they would mature, its all just theory...

parrots could become like flares, ex: Mr. TweetTweet flies towards you and drops a message "help, im at X, Y and there's a native village!"

the parrot could also say messages randomly, players (upon catching a parrot) would be given 10 slots and would type things into them, the parrots would randomly say one, ex: you attack elephant, Mr. TweetTweet says "polly want a cracker"

animals could also act like extra space, like a backpack, if you will. animals are named upon capture.

The following is a Pet suggestion made by Nosimplehiway--Nosimplehiway 15:09, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

1. Create several new skills, with Animal Affinity as a prerequisite:
- Small Animal Training (base 25% chance of success): by expending a unit of Animal Feed, you can convert a small animal (monkey, parrot or small deer) into a friendly pet. This would function mechanically just like any other item in your inventory, except when clicked on it does some random fun thing visible to thos around you. eg: a parrot might tell a little joke, the monkey might do a little dance, and the deer just stands there looking irrestibly cute.
  - Large Animal Training (base 10% chance of success)by expending a unit of Animal Feed, you can convert a large animal (elephant, tiger or large deer) into a friendly pet. This would function mechanically just like any other item in your inventory, except when clicked on it does some random thing. eg: a elephant might trumpet majestically, the tiger might roar, and the deer does, umm, impressive deer stuff.
- Combat Trained Animals: Allows the possessor to command their large or small animal to attack. Mechanically this makes the previously trained animals into weapons. Small animals hit at 50%, doing 1 point of damage. Large Animals hit at 10%, but do 5 points of damage. With each attack, there would be a chance similar to that of a machete to go dull or break, in the case of an animal, though, it dies or runs off, and is therefore lost.
2. Create an item called "Animal Feed". It would be available from the traders, for approximately the same as a FAK. It is used up by rolling either Train Animal skill, whether the roll is successful or not. In the case of Combat Trained Animals, it might be expended in a manner similar to a rifle's bullets. Not sure about that last part, though. lol

Conch Shell Hunt

Author	Timestamp	Type	Scope
Lint	08:40, 5 March 2006 (GMT)	Game mechanics, minigame	Event

Capture the Flag-ish minigame. Somewhere on the island is a single conch shell item. It can be found by searching anywhere. It takes 1 inventory space and appears when anyone views their profile. When the conch holder is in the presence of other players, flavor text is added to the area description to inform the others that the conch holder is in the area. If the person in possession of the conch drops it, dies, or is idle for more than 5 days, the conch returns to the system. The person who holds the conch the longest gets recognized in the statistics. Killing the conch holder earns special bonus XP. Adept conch holder killers may also be recognized in the statistics. Problems: Someone with multiple characters could take advantage of having the conch on one character and reap the XP and fame with another. There will be a point where a race condition will occur and might result in multiple conches and a broken game.

Comments

This kind of thing has been on my ideas list, although this is much more detailed version than the one-liner I had. --Simon 15:05, 5 March 2006 (GMT)
I have the conch! I'm allowed to speak! *ahem* I mean, um... >.>--Wifey 07:21, 29 March 2006 (BST)
- Suggestions: (1) Skip bonus for the conch-killer and you remove incentive to zerg. (2) Have the conch break when the conch-bearer dies (respawns on a random beach) and you remove the race condition. (3) Give the conch-bearer an action to blow into the Conch. (You hear the booming echo of a conch being sounded to the south-east.) Maybe 50% chance of 1xp each time you blow the conch, just to give you incentive to attract attention to yourself. --Tycho44 02:31, 23 April 2006 (BST)
- 1XP isn't much of an incentive to do anything, except spam everyone (depending on the radius of the sound of course). Maybe it should be 10XP or more but a low (<5-10%) chance of making a decent sound that everyone hears. Another possibility, either in addition to or instead of the blowing action, is that you can take the conch back to a trader or shaman for some kind of bonus item or amount of gold, thus encouraging the conch holder to take it back to civilisation. Ignore the race condition, I have this part dealt with such that it won't happen. --Simon 10:43, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
- Implemented. I'll leave you to figure out just how it works. --Simon 22:06, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Forest Fire

Author	Timestamp	Type	Scope
Lint	03:58, 17 March 2006 (GMT)	Game mechanics, natural disasters	Terrain

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 ~~Grassland or~~ 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).

Comments

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. -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. --Simon 11:17, 17 March 2006 (GMT)
- I thought it might be a bit much. Ah well. --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. --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. -BananaBear 18:22, 20 March 2006 (GMT)
- Imagine what would happen if an ammo hut caught on fire!--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. --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 -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. --Jackdaw 15:55, 25 March 2006 (GMT)

Auto Attack

Author	Timestamp	Type	Scope
Qberry	02:34, 20 March 2006 (GMT)

I've never liked the fact that while I am away from the game, things can happen to my character, like being chewed on by a tiger or slashed with a machette. How about a setting where you can turn your character on to auto attack anything that hits you. It should, of course, be user selected. This would change the game mechanics a bit, as you could no longer move in on a target and attack it withough fear of a counter-strike. To me this is far more realistic, in that even if you are sleeping, when somebody hits you, you're going to wake up and do something about it with whatever engery you have left.

An alternative selectable action might be an auto-run. You can pre-specify the direction you want to run and how many squares upon being hit. A character with trekking could stay alive just by running a few square whenever they are hit.

Comments

The main problem with this is that players will be discouraged from attacking other players, as this will become extremely dangerous, and the native warrior who wants the outsiderts out will effectively be penalised.MorkaisChosen 15:47, 20 March 2006 (GMT)
Sorry, but I don't like this. I feel that that this will lead to interactions with players that are no different than interacting with an NPC. Could someone theoretically max themselves out by just leaving this option on and checking in every now and then to make sure they haven't become a spirit? --Lint 17:28, 20 March 2006 (GMT)
Yeah, I'm not a fan of being able to do something by not doing something, such as fighting or running without being there to fight or run. Also, would it be free of AP and IP hits, or would it be possible to come back and have no AP or hits left? It seems like these problems would wreck any sort of auto action. I can understand not enjoying being macheted while away, but I don't see any way around this. -BananaBear 18:20, 20 March 2006 (GMT)
I must admit that I don't like the idea all that much, but if it was implemented it would probably be something that was user configurable. I don't think running away would make sense, but fighting back does. For example, no more than X AP to be used fighting back until you next log back in, and they wouldn't be used unless you had more than Y AP left. This way you could set X to 10 and Y to 6 and if you ran out of AP, set those values, it would be 2 hours (6 x 20m) before you were likely to attack, and it would use no more than 10 AP fighting back. Because the values are configurable, it would be hard to know who would fight back and who wouldn't. Setting X to 0 would disable the feature. I think probably the attacks would gain XP if successful, same as normal, but because you wouldn't be able to set the number of AP to use to more than your max AP value, it would be impossible to level up a character by simply leaving them alone (not to mention you would disappear from the map after being idle for a bit). --Simon 21:01, 20 March 2006 (GMT)
i like the idea of counterattack , but with some limits. You have only a % of counterattacking someone (25%?) , you don't consume AP , you don't get XP. But , whit wich weapon do you attack?--JonesDye 10:05, 27 March 2006 (BST)
The impetus behind auto-attack is to lessen the chance and impact of Badness happening to your character while you're away, but auto-attack isn't the proper solution to this. Shartak's appropriate skill would be jungle hiding, though a construction skill would work too, if we want to be more like that other game. --Frisco 13:51, 4 April 2006 (BST)
What the animals are doing now is basically what I was saying should be an option for players. In fact, now that the animals counter-attack, it's become far more safe to attack a high-level soldier than it is to attack a parrot. All the more reason to implement this feature. It will also introduce more strategy into gameplay, such as how many AP to reserve for counter attacks, etc. It could be as simple as: enable auto-attack (toggle), if enabled, select weapon (pull-down menu), select AP to stop self-defense (pull-down?). If you select 0, you'd attack until exhausted or they left. If you select some non-zero, you'd attack until you were down to that amount. I kill a lot of other players, but I still say this would be very good for game mechanics, especially considering the new animal behavior. --Qberry 06:00, 1 June 2006 (GMT)
- I would only agree with that one if it was only against animals. I don't think auto-defense was a good idea at all, but now that it's in, I think that ours should only work against NPCs.--Wifey 20:11, 1 June 2006 (BST)
  - Unfortunately this could only exacerbate the Banshee Wailing Spam problems. An auto-defense option is worthless against spirits, and Banshee Wails could easily be the leading cause of damage and death in Shartak (during May 2006). Implement Exorcism before worrying about AP-costs and pull-down-menus for melee parry defense systems. --20:48, 1 June 2006 (BST)
    - Exactly. Actually, I've been thinking more on this. It's really a good thing that the animals are so dangerous now. The focus should be more on the struggle between natives and outsiders. Plus, it makes Animal Affinity that much better, which gives a good reason to play a villager or a settler.--Wifey 23:48, 1 June 2006 (BST)
I support this idea in theory, but of course it must be approached carefully. I like JonesDye's idea of not gaining XP for counter-attacks, and there are so many other factors to consider. QBerry-- you should start a thread about this in the forums to get all sides of the debate and get discussion going. This could be a great feature if implemented correctly. Arminius 00:47, 4 June 2006 (BST)

Flavor Text

this section is where "users" add "flavor" to the game, im just suggesting that every few steps the computer say a message depending on location, here ill give a few examples:

grasslands
- the grassy field sways under the wind's rush as you take a step.|
- something far off squaks and makes a strange throaty bellow.|

water
- a wave crashes calmly in the distance|
- a spalsh can be heard from far off|

jungle
- a parrot's call can be heard distantly|
- the bushes nearby are rustling from the small wildlife in them|

village (outsider)
- the smell of gunpowder wafts into your lungs|
- the smoke comming from a nearby hut smells of fresh turkey|

village (native)
- the shaman's voice can be heard traveling through the village|
- you step on the bones of what appears to be a rattlesnake|

beach
- the hot sand burns your feet, yet feels wonderfully different|
- several sea shells catch your eye from far off|

please feel free to update these with more, as they are just a list (if simon decides to) that will be used for flavor. i want to do this because the game gets kinda boring simply traversing through square after square

Comments

One of the noticeable, distinct aspects of that other game are the different messages for each building; i really like this idea. A criticism, though - i'd refrain from mentioning living animals/people or useful items in the descriptions, they could be confusing to newbies. In other words, "a parrot's call can be heard distantly" isn't appropriate, and "the shaman's voice can be heard traveling through the village" might not be appropriate if the shaman is currently dead. The following could substitute: "You see a large ant colony busily rebuilding their hive" (an animal that has no game impact) and "The spirit of Shubar is felt all around you" (doesn't matter if Shubar is alive or dead). --Frisco 14:05, 4 April 2006 (BST)
I sort of feel like this is something that could easily be put together with a Greasemonkey script. It would be nice, but it isn't really necessary. --Lint 05:35, 5 April 2006 (BST)

See the end of the list at The Shartak Wiki:Community Portal#Greasemonkey scripts. — Elembis (talk) 23:31, 11 June 2006 (BST)

slots/ new inventory

slots and inventory could be implemented where, a picture of a silhouette was shown, with names of equiped items in slotted areas, ex: you skin a goat, find some sharp rocks and fashion yourself some claws, you then put them on, giving you +1 damage to all melee attacks animal wearings

"Comments below"

Making Claws? and not "all melee attacks" but only punch attacks --Slith 06:45, 29 March 2006 (BST)

I don't see why you need item slots for this. Having a pair of claws in the inventory would just improve punch damage by 1. That said, I don't like the idea of making oneself claws. Seems a little silly, when you have actual weapons around. Seems a little silly, either way, really. Perhaps that's just my sense of aesthetics, though, and not that of the majority of the players.--Wifey 06:37, 4 April 2006 (BST)

Boat Construction

Author	Timestamp	Type	Scope
Slith	06:42, 29 March 2006 (BST)

Boats wouldn't be able to go into The very deep water people can't go into because the tides would rip them apart but could go move in all water for only 1 AP and it also prevents sharks from biting you. Multipule people could get into a boat based on how much wood is used, like n*.001 x 1 = People Where n = The amount of wood used.

Edit:

When Boats are being boarded each player may vote on who they decide should be the captain. The captian may move boat, call the boat any non vulgar name and anyone may jump off the boat at any time except the captain. Boats could only be built on a beach and automaticly once built move the person who constructed it into the nearest water square. Players may board the baot at any time by moving into the same square as it and selecting enter. When the captain moves the boat onto a land square the boat is destroyed and all people who boarded are thrown onto the beach. Players may change the captain at any time by changing there vote. Natives can not board Outsider boats and outsiders can not board native boats. What the boat looks like and is called depends on the size of it.

1 person: Raft

2 people: Large raft

3-4: Small boat

5-6: Boat

7-9: Large Boat

10-24: Huge Boat

25 and up: Gigantic Boat

Comments

check out the skills section, i already suggested something like that.... anyway, check it out --Richard Rose
While the huts are handled in Richard's suggestion, I am interested in the boat aspect. I think that placing multiple players on a boat will be troublesome. Who decides where the boat goes - the server? the first player on the boat?
It's also important to keep in mind that we already are offered a skill to help with moving in water - Swimming. If we are to introduce rafts, there should be some mechanics set in place to minimize their usefulness.
Perhaps carrying a raft through non-water terrain doubles movement cost to discourage players from carrying one everywhere. Perhaps the raft only has a limited amount of moves in deep water before breaking up. --Lint 22:44, 29 March 2006 (BST)
- Yeah I changed the suggestion based on your suggestion's :) --Slith 04:40, 30 March 2006 (BST)
"Welcome to the Shartak ferry sevice. Please pay the captain your fee of 3 coins. We will be departing for the pirate ship in 3 hours. The captain has locked the destination coordinates and will not change directions unless the boat's integrity is threatend. We will arive in 50 AP + 10 AP per passenger + 5 per day due to drift. You are encouraged to help paddle the boat as this will help us arive sooner. If you decide to leave the boat at any time we will not refund you or allow you to reboard. Please do not pull out any corks or kick any boards as the boat is fragile and will sink if badly damaged."--Darkferret 05:06, 1 April 2006 (BST)
- Yeah ^^ That too --Slith 00:48, 3 April 2006 (BST)
Boats sound cool. There are a lot of different ways to implement boats that aren't that complicated. Here's one example: suppose that a boat can hold 4 people. Anyone who wants to control the boat spends 4 AP to move the boat one square (larger boats move more slowly). Thus the boat could wander back and forth depending on who currently has the helm, but is unlikely to travel faster than a swimmer. Anyone (native or outsider) can dive overboard or climb onboard at any time, and the boat can be chopped up and destroyed by enough effort. ... The way I envision it, a boat never leaves the water -- the boat gets constructed on a beach square and then can only be moved onto water. It is never an inventory item. --Tycho44 09:31, 2 June 2006 (BST)
- That's a good idea. I would go so far, though, as to say that it has to be constructed in shallow water.It would just make it easier. I would propose that the boat require four pieces of driftwood, plus two for every extra person. Thus a 1-man raft would be 4 pieces, a 2-man raft would be 6, a 3-man would be 8, and so on.--Wifey 18:26, 2 June 2006 (BST)
  - Although there's no reason not to require, umm, a boatload of wood for construction, rather than just 2 + 2 per person. If the boat has any advantages at all over swimming, you could easily require huge quantities of wood without game imbalance. The original suggester had 1000 pieces per person, that's over the top, but why not 18 wood per person or something. That means N sailors could build an N-person boat in a single day searching at Shartak's Boatyard. Although construction might require another day of additional AP, and a hammer... --Tycho44 23:07, 2 June 2006 (BST)
    - I'd be in favor of boat construction, but it should be significantly harder and MUCH more time consuming to work, really only the most hardcore players should try it. Realistically, a person should need about 20 pieces of wood to displace their own body weight, so 20 wood per person is about right. It should take at least a week of devoted searching to come up with this amount for one person, and would require a fair amount of organization to build a large craft, but come on, its a BOAT! Virtually no attacks from anyone ever! Easy access to hard-to-reach islands! It should be extremely rare and time-consuming to do this IMO.--Jackel 05:18, 3 June 2006 (BST)
i reckon the boat idea would be great especially for the CP so we are land police of york and water police of york!,hopefully this does work out!. riddick 21:17 10 June,2006 (GMT).
If boats are implemented, wouldn't it make sense to allow pirates a special skill regarding them? After all, the pirates on Shartak were all sailors before wrecking their ship. It would only make sense if they (for instance) used fewer AP to sail or something similar. Black Joe 8:53, 11 July 2006 (GMT)
I think that boats could add a valuable dimension to the game once more pressing issues (such as spirit exorcism/warding) are dealt with and the active population of the island grows by a few hundred (because boats would spread players out over an even larger area and make people even harder to find outside of camps). Anyway, here are my ideas.
- Regarding boat speed, realism would demand that boat travel be faster than swimming in at least some cases. At best, a boat should be able to travel from York to Derby (for example) faster than anyone could make the trip on foot (~160 AP with trailblazing; see my sandbox). Furthermore, a four-person crew should be able to outrun or at least keep up with a boat with just one person onboard. I think a boat should move for 1.5 AP regardless of how many people (up to 4) are in it. With cooperation, a full crew could make the York-Derby trip (~276 squares east to west) in 276 × 1.5 / 4 = 103.5 AP per person, or a little under a day and a half. A 1.5 AP move cost for boats would make swimming faster for a single player in shallow water but not in deep water, and a crew of two or more people would be able to outdistance any swimmer.
- The boat would have a virtual helm, and only players at the helm (captains) would be able to set the boat's course (one of the eight compass directions) and sail off-course if they desired. Non-captains would only be able to move the boat in the direction of the course or the two adjacent directions (so a NW course would only allow them to move N, NW and W). The helm could be shared, but only an empty helm could be taken (i.e., you have to kill the captain(s) first). This would keep players from climbing aboard and sailing far off-course (or perhaps to shore in hostile territory). A captain who left the boat would return as crew and would need to be promoted again by whoever had the helm.
- Boats could be entered, exited, or boarded from another boat for 1 AP. Players would leave boats (1) voluntarily, (2) by being killed, or (3) if they were not a captain and a captain forced them off for 1 AP.
- Construction would occur on the beach, as Tycho suggested. (A one-time script would flag beach squares next to water, and construction of boats would only be possible on those squares.) It would progress one piece at a time to (1) avoid unrealistic near-instant boat construction and (2) to allow multiple people to contribute driftwood to the effort. There would be a 1 AP "Build" button and a dropdown box for all boats on the square. ("[Build] <nothing / Ye Olde Boat> with a piece of driftwood.") After contributing a piece of driftwood a player would see how many more pieces the boat needed. There would also be a form for starting a new boat with one piece of driftwood. ("[Start building] a new boat named [text input].")
- Boats would be attackable with melee weapons and could disintegrate slowly (1) when they are unoccupied, (2) when they have been under construction for more than a week, and (2) as they travel. A boat would only disappear from the game if it had 0 HP and had been that way for an entire week. (A script could run every x hours to check for unoccupied boats and damage them, and a nightly script could check for destroyed and abandoned boats and delete them.) For realism and gameplay, it should be easier to kill all four passengers on a boat than to destroy the boat itself as well as more rewarding (i.e., hurting a boat would yield few XP, if any). Attacks that targeted the boat would be visible to everyone onboard just as if they themselves were being attacked. Players onboard would be attackable by anyone on the square, whether the attacker is riding in another boat or swimming. (If sailors were not attackable, natives raiding outsider camps would be able to take sanctuary in boats just offshore.) Giant squids would attack boats about as often as they attacked the people onboard (unless a passenger had attacked the squid, in which case the squid would focus on that player until they were dead). Sharks, however, would leave boats and their occupants alone.
- Most important, in my opinion, is that the best boat builders and/or repairers would be settlers, villagers and pirates. While boat construction would be too fun to not share, those three classes need unique skills. An exclusive repair skill might be appropriate; unskilled captains would push a boat until it couldn't go anywhere (or hire someone to repair it), but settlers/villagers/pirates would be able to repair boats (including any abandoned ones they found). Fully repairing a nearly destroyed boat should probably be about half as expensive, in terms of both AP and driftwood, as building a new one. Needless to say, boats could be a real chore to implement, but they would surely make the game even more distinctive and rich. — Elembis (talk) 20:48, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

PvP Protection

Author	Timestamp	Type	Scope
Iamtas	10:00, 13 April 2006 (BST)	Game mechanics, pvp, nopvp, vs, player versus player	All Classes

A full implementation of player versus player protection. This would be a nice feature for newbies allowing them time to adjust to the game without getting slaughtered. I envisage something allowing you to enable nopvp without the ability to disable for at least 100AP. Also when you hit a player who is flagged nopvp then you would get a message along the lines of "As your blade bounces off an invisible shield you suddenly notice a shamanic medicine pouch around the neck of target, they are protected, it would be pointless to continue to attack target." where target will be replaced by the players name.

Comments

This is a good, well-thought suggestion. But while I don't generally like PKing, I think it is important to keep it available to those that do enjoy it. With XP penalties and easy resurrection, PKing not ruining the game from my perspective and it shouldn't be restricted further. I would not mind a method of informing players that view my character profile to see that I am flagged for pvp or not, but I am against preventing PVP without purchasing such an ability. --Lint 21:16, 13 April 2006 (BST)
New players already get an AP bonus and need less XP to level; I don't see the need for a newbie specific ability. I'd rather see a safe area over a moveable system - something like a sacred hut in native villages and a guard hut in outsider villages which anyone who hasn't attacked another player in 100 AP can enter and within which all PvP activity is prohibited, wastes AP, or perhaps results in HP loss only to the attacker ("Your attack has angered the mighty (spirits or guards) in the area; they smite you").--Frisco 04:12, 14 April 2006 (BST)
Having both a PvP pirate and a pacifist shaman, and having been PKed on both... I don't like this idea. I like the 100AP newbie status. I don't like the "enabling" nopvp. Sorry. Death is a part of the game. If you walk into a tribe of hostile headhunters, they aren't going to just stand by and let you through--no matter how peaceful your business.--Wifey 04:27, 14 April 2006 (BST)
I'm aware that new players get extra AP and newbie protection isn't what this is about. It is more useful for being protected from the players that sit in their home town bashing away at their own folk. Even with that said my main reason for nopvp was for another idea I have for a skill track that at the time of thinking about it I thought would require a nopvp implementation. I may post the skill track idea sometime when I have finished thinking about all the details.--Iamtas 12:07, 14 April 2006 (BST)
How about you can't be attacked in your village/settlement by people that come from your village/settlement? --Slith 06:30, 17 April 2006 (BST)
As much as I don't care for PK-ing (especially against newbies like me!), it is something many people enjoy (and I am in full agreement with Wifey about how newbies could visit enemy territory and be invincible) and is an excellent way of gaining XP if you choose to do so. I second the notion of having a PvP free hut in each settlement/village; perhaps disable the attack command entirely while in there? As a penalty for using such a hut, there should be no resource items there, so that players will still need to 'risk' being in resource huts to restock. Or, at least charge 5AP to enter (you have to talk your way in or at least convince the guards to allow you entrance; thus people who 'play it safe' will need to conserve their AP as they are not taking risks). One of the hallmarks of games like this is AP managment, and most of us learned that the hard way...--John Sevier 19:28, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

New strategic location on island

Author	Timestamp	Type	Scope
Arminius	21:02, 22 April 2006 (BST)	New location, Game mechanics,	N/A

I think the addition of one or more major new "strategic" locations on the island would greatly improve the game. What exactly it would be can be worked out, all it really has to be is very valuable to occupy and far away from any village or town (i.e. far away from any shaman). Both sides would rush to occupy this location and would fight each other for control of it.

This would have 3 major benefits for the game that I can see: 1) It would get the action away from towns/villages/shamans, 2) It would make death more meaningful and make killing an enemy meaningful (all death means in towns/villages now is having to float five spaces or so to the shaman and then you get a free revive. There are no easy/free revives out in the center of the island, you would lose both location and the 50 AP to contact, unless you decide to stick around and play as a spirit), 3) It would give people a goal in the game, a major location to fight over and defend, a location that isn't pointless to fight over, as towns/villages are because they cannot be taken. All in all it would have the benefit of making the game more fun.

As far as what the new location would be exactly, one idea could be gold mine(s). They would be valuable because standing on a gold mine square would give you 1 gold coin/hr and require no AP expenditure. The specifics of this are wide open and dont even much matter, as long as the location is far from settlements and very valuable to occupy so players will flock out there and fight for control, making for an exciting time and making killing enemies non-pointless.

If implemented, it should only be one new location at first, with maybe a couple more introduced later once things get going. The location should have a name, and it should be relayed to players in the form of Game News so that everyone knows of its existance and where it is in general terms, e.g. "A gold mine was discovered just south of the mountain, Natives and Outsiders are both rushing out there for control".

Note: One of the raisons d'etre for this suggestion has been eliminated with the shaman changes, so this suggestion is less relevant than it was and in some ways outdated. It might still be workable, though it will have to be approached differently. Arminius 00:27, 4 June 2006 (BST)

Comments

I realise it was just an example, but 1 gold per hour without any AP requirement is probably a bit much. Definitely something to expand on though. I like it. --Simon 21:46, 22 April 2006 (BST)
- For example, award 1 gold coin to any one player at random who is on the mine for at least the full hour. Or only award 1 gold coin at random to any one player if only one side occupies the mine -- if both outsiders and nativers are present, they are fighting for control and no one is mining. Generally speaking, 24 gold coins per ~~hour~~day fed into the entire game will not mess up the economy -- that's probably less than 75-150 AP of searching (and a trip to the trading hut). Alternatively, allow players to search the area with a ~~15%~~ 40% find rate for one gold coin, as long as none of the opposing faction are present in the square. Drawbacks: (1) This sort of high-impact location could also increase zerging/cheating, which wouldn't be fun for anyone. (2) A gold mine could rapidly devalue gold coins until they're effectively worthless, ending the "value" of the mine. --Tycho44 02:22, 23 April 2006 (BST)
  - Giving out small numbers of coins to only a certain percentage of the people on the mine square seems too low a reward, while the original 1 gold coin per hour is definitely too high. But unless people get something tangible every hour that they stand there, people may not bother to fight for control of the mine, which is the whole point. Here is an idea: Make a new item called "gold nugget". Every hour that you are standing on the gold mine square and your faction controls it, you get one gold nugget. Then create a hut 1 square adjacent to the mine and inside have an NPC called "gold prospector Jim" (for example), who will "cash in" your nuggets, 10 nuggets (or 5, or whatever is deemed the best number) for one coin. Gold nuggets on their own would have no value. Arminius 14:57, 29 April 2006 (BST)
    - You could achieve the same effect without creating a prospector hut just by giving a straight 10% (or 20%) chance of 1 gold coin each hour. (To me a single "prospector Jim" gets a bit sketchy if a thousand people are rushing the mine...). In my opinion, you get better scalability and realism if the gold-per-person decreases as people increase. If there are a thousand people on the mine, then each person gets only 5% chance per hour (=50gc/hour production). If there are 10 people on the mine, then each one gets a 100% chance per hour (=10gc/hour production). Gold can't be earned from the mine when competing factions are on the location, creating a contested site is the purpose of implementing this suggestion. --Tycho44 09:41, 2 June 2006 (BST)

If there is a 10% chance to get one gold coin per hour, and if during a large portion of the day both natives and outsiders are on the gold mine square so no mining is going on, then the odds would be that the lots of people would get 0 gold coins (or very few) before being killed, a total waste of time for them, and they might not bother going back after they're killed, which defeats the gold mine's purpose as a strategic location that people will fight over. This is why I say people need something tangible every hour. In fact, that should be revised to "something tangible every AP turnover", i.e. every 20 minutes. Even if someone is there for only a short time, they should have something to show for it, which they almost certainly wouldnt with a low % chance per hour of getting one gold coin. Your idea of scaling the gold that the mine produces could be implemented by making Gold Prospector Jim give fewer gold coins the more nuggets he receives. In other words, a gold mining version of the current trading system. Since he will have received 0 gold nuggets as the mine is first discovered, one gold nugget could trade for one gold coin, and as more people start cashing in, the value of a gold nuggest would go down, to where he wants 20 or so nuggets for one gold coin. The value would fluctuate throughout the day and week as people cash in more gold nuggets. This way, scalability is achieved while continuing to be able to reward something tangible every AP turnover. Also, I would say gold nuggets should take 0 inventory space just like gold coins, since in theory 72 could be given out per day to one person, and that would fill up anyone's inventory, allowing them to not receive any more. Arminius 00:27, 4 June 2006 (BST)

An alternative to the gold mine would be some kind of ancient treasure hoard, so not just gold coins but also statues, ancient armour and maybe some pretty nasty weapons. However, to get the good stuff you'd have to go into the trap-filled maze and actually make it into the chamber where the treasure is. With spirit-proof doors so people don't just die, go in, find the correct route, revive and go in...MorkaisChosen 17:33, 24 April 2006 (BST)
- This is interesting but seems overly complicated, and seems like more of a one-shot kind of thing, but most significantly there is no real value in holding such a location. A gold mine would be a simple, straightforward, and constantly of high value to occupy. Also, once one person finds the way through the maze, soon everyone would know. Arminius 14:57, 29 April 2006 (BST)
  - Good point... Ignore my suggestion, it's not very good... MorkaisChosen 12:27, 2 June 2006 (BST)

Life cycle

Author	Timestamp	Type	Scope
One of many doctors	03:22, 29 May 2006 (BST)	balance change	NPC animals

Currently the main way of leveling up is by killing things (i.e. NPCs & characters) I suggest there be some sort of life cycle for animals. For example, when there are massive amounts of tigers being killed less spawn. But if everybody leaves tigers alone, more spawn. If would look something like this:

0-5% of animal type killed, x5 spawn rate

6-15% of animal type killed, x2 spawn rate

16-45% of animal type killed x1 spawn rate

46-75% of animal type killed x0.5 spawn rate

76-99% of animal type killed x0.1 spawn rate

100% of animal type killed, animal is extinct

This forces people to find alternative ways to gain Xp (possibly more lucrative ones?)

Comments
I have the funny feeling that animals would start going extinct, which would just be a pain. I'd rather not see this one implemented.--Wifey 15:50, 29 May 2006 (BST)

Would work if there was a total animal population that was always kept, so if tigers start to become extinct more deer appear, but this would lead to an island of only elephants. Would also work if the animals that were extinct reemerged later on, then it would just be annoying. But the goal of "find alt ways to gain Xp" won't be realised via this manner - it would instead lead to more player vs player action. Instead of taking away our current methods, perhaps other methods of xp gaining could be added, like the agriculture skill, or some current activities could have an xp bonus (we get xp for uncovering trees, why not for finding fruits? Could trading become xp-worthy?).--Frisco 16:47, 29 May 2006 (BST)

I don't know why we should force people to find the lucrative alternative ways to gain XP. Animals are extremely rare in some areas of Shartak, and PKing and PvP is common. Banshee wailing spam, punch-heal farming, and gratuitous healer orgies are annoying enough already. Basically, the non-healing/non-harming XP paths need to be more viable: XP for exploring, chopping, discovery, contacting foreign villages, and so on. --Tycho44 10:01, 2 June 2006 (BST)

Message in a bottle

Author	Timestamp	Type	Scope
Lint	05:33, 6 June 2006 (BST)	New item, message system	All characters in Beach terrain

Much like the "make signpost" action, creating a message in a bottle will only be available to players standing in Beach terrain. Unless the "Refillable containers" suggestion is implemented, to create a message in a bottle will require a bottle of beer, bottle of rum, or bottle of water and some newer items - parchment and charred driftwood or berry paint. There would be a textarea and a button, much like the existing message actions. Upon clicking the "make message" button, the items required are removed from the player's inventory and their text message is added to the database.

Although it would be neat to actually see the bottles floating in the water and following unique movement patterns, that would lead to some very cluttered areas. So instead the message in a bottle becomes a rare search result in Beach terrain.

When a player finds a message in a bottle the system generates a random number and selects the associated message to that number from the database. After reading the message, the player has the option to destroy or return the bottle. Destroying the message in a bottle removes it from the database. Returning it throws the bottle back into the sea to be found again. There should probably be a default message in the event that all the unique messages are destroyed or the search odds could be modified to reflect that there are no more messages in a bottle to be found.

Each message could also have a stat to display how many times the message was read before.

Comments
Nice idea. I'd rather have the message bottle also be rare-findable in water. I think it'd be kind of neat to have some items found in water, even if only text messages generated by other players. The suggestion does await parchment, although I think that berries alone would be sufficient for ink ("you write in berry juice") rather than requiring a separate ink item. Implementing parchment might get a bit complicated - I'd prefer a very streamlined approach so that players aren't carrying around six (or 71) different message'd parchments at once. --Tycho44 21:23, 16 June 2006 (BST)

Map quest

Author	Timestamp	Type	Scope
Lint	19:53, 6 June 2006 (BST)	Quest	All characters, new NPCs

There is a limited usefulness for the map for those without access to the mapping scripts. There is also a limited incentive for players to explore foreign camps. This suggestion provides a simple quest for players to hopefully address both issues.

Each town will possess a new NPC (or possibly a retooled home shaman or trader) that has a fragment of a map. The fragment will display the general vicinity around the camp. After a player interacts with the NPC and acquires a map fragment, they can view map.html and see two new buttons: "view torn map" and "compare maps". "View torn map" will display the collection of map fragments acquired by the player. "Compare maps" will overlay the player's personal map on top of the torn map.

I imagine the map fragments to resemble the parchment look featured in the game logo, but each camp might use a different medium or writing implement which will give the torn map a patchwork appearance.

The map fragments will not take up any inventory space and not even be listed in the inventory. On a character's profile page it may be possible to display their progress with the quest: (1/7 map fragments).

Obviously, having just the area of the camps mapped out will leave some large missing chunks in the torn map. There could be a hermit NPC that will complete the torn map once each fragment is obtained. The complete map can also have the feature of unlocking new territory. Talking to special elder NPCs will mark the map with locations that are viewable and enterable only by those with complete, marked maps.

Comments
Sure, this makes sense to me. Ideally, the special code (possibly including search outcomes, NPC interactions, non-item flags in character data, and so forth) would be generic enough so that it could also be borrowed to implement treasure hunts, scavenger hunts, secret locations, and other future plot-lines in Shartak. A Shartak map itself, even complete, would just show the same info that can be found via web or wiki, so it is not going to harm game balance. --Tycho44 21:27, 16 June 2006 (BST)

Monsoon

Author	Timestamp	Type	Scope
Aco	17:28, 16 July 2006 (EST)	event	all

Add seasons to shartak, matching RL events. The sea level would rise by 1 square, the river would swell by 1 square, crocodiles would become plentiful, and the pirate ship would lift off of the rocks. The ship would then randomly drift around, 1 square per day, and would still be accessible but players would have to swim out to it. Deforested squares would also recover faster. The ship wouldn't be directable because 'The sail is too tattered to use.' or something. The monsoon would also match, more or less, RL duration.

Comments

All this would be do-able without too much extra coding except for moving the pirate ship. It would however take a while to work out which bits of beach, swamp and jungle would become submerged and to do it in such a way that it's easily reversible later. --Simon 22:39, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Something that would require even less work on Simon's part, but would still convey the feel of a hurricane would be to change some descriptions temporarily. Add, "The wind howls about you and the rain drives fiercely", to all outdoor descriptions. Add "The deadly storm rages just outside. You don't know how long this little hut can survive." to indoor descriptions. He could also temporarily expand the range of "sharks" to include all outdoor locations (possibly with a lower likelihood of being bitten, as it seems more or less automatic once you swim far enough out) but change the description to "A piece of flying debris injures you." This would make being indoors scary and being outdoors potentially deadly.--Nosimplehiway--Nosimplehiway 14:36, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

I have just advocated a similar ideas for storms at the new forum. Have a mass of black cloud move onto the island. The rivers swell and move rapidly, causing death to those in the water. Lightning strikes and strong winds cause HP damage or death. FirstAmongstDaves

Identification of strangers

Author	Timestamp	Type	Scope
Elembis	06:18, 28 July 2006 (UTC)	Ability	Identification of strangers

As a native, I would like an "Identify an outsider" button when standing on the same square as one or more outsiders I can't recognize. (Outsiders would have the same thing for natives, naturally.) It's unrealistic that the best ways to identify people are to attack them or give them gold. It's also bothersome; gold coins are hard to find in the wilderness, and a cheapskate may attack a stranger only to regret the attack upon discovering that their target was a peaceful person. If you're the sort of player who likes to attack every stranger you meet, that's fine. However, many people do discriminate between strangers, and it shouldn't be unduly hard for them to simply figure out who someone is.

Identification would cost 1 AP. Flavor text could be something like

You examine an outsider until you're able to tell them apart from all the others. They are Leaky Bocks.

I estimate that this change will have the following effects:

Identification before an attack will be easier and thus more attractive to moderately peaceful players, resulting in less "gratuitous cross-class violence" (as Tycho44 put it) at the hands of players who wish to avoid it.
Identify Friend or Foe supporters will no longer be subject to the current "peace tax".
Non-participants in the IFF initiative will neither receive gold from curious players nor see who has identified them. However, after they are identified they may still be given gold or even spoken to (which I prefer from a roleplaying perspective) if cheaper identification makes people more willing to interact with those they identify. I know I'd rather spend 1.5 AP to identify someone and speak to them than 1 AP and a coin to merely identify them.

Since it's already possible to identify a stranger in ways that help them (by giving gold) or hurt them (by attacking), why shouldn't there be a more direct middle path?

Comments
I'm looking for a flaw in the reasoning here, but I can't find one. I support this. 18:40, 31 July 2006. Black Joe

The only flaw I can see is already in the game. How do you figure out who someone is, just by giving them a gold coin or attacking them. *slash* Oh, scuse me a second while I check the back of your jacket for a name tag. Same sort of thing applies to staring at someone and figuring out what their name is. --Simon 00:40, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
- "I'd like to stare at someone long enough to figure out what they look like and what they're wearing and carrying." I support this. For convenience, the game has already conflated face-recognition with user-profile. There doesn't exist an in-between level: either you know all their skills and their profile description, or you aren't able to target them at all. We could eventually migrate toward a solution (and perhaps introduce new skills and actions, such as Disguise that would conceal your skillset and kill stats). But in the meantime it would be nice to have the suggested convenience. --Tycho44 21:05, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Drowning

Author	Timestamp	Type	Scope
Zeff	22:10, 1 August 2006 (UTC)	Game mechanics	Environment

Perhaps there should be some rules for drowning? Many players in Shartak (including my character, Zeff) like to camp/sleep in the water. I feel there should be a risk of drowning when a player spends a long period of time in deep water - shallow water would not apply. Perhaps something like this - If a player spends over 2 hours in the water "drowning damage" comes into effect (regardless of whether or not the player has the swimming skill) and every futher hour 10 damage is dealt to the player - either "drowning damage" or instant drowning after 3 hours - with a message "you have drowned". Another additional possibility is have the character drift in the water - especially if they go into deep water - I like the idea of leaving a character in the water when you log out, and when you log back in they are washed up on another part of the island with most of their hit points missing. Although that might be a bit complicated to do...

Comments

Nice. Drifting could be done, although it may make things complicated if you drift too quickly. I certainly don't think you'd move very far in a few hours otherwise it would be far too easy to lose sight of the giant squid you were attacking (for example). There would probably have to be some kind of data in the map that says where you drift to from that square, even if the drifting changes slightly. --Simon 22:39, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
Sounds like a good idea. Also, driftwood could possibly be incorporated into this, perhaps giving a lower chance of drowning, lower drowning damage, or maybe making the player drift further. -Peg-Hand Grimm

Pigeon postal service

Author	Timestamp	Type	Scope
One of many doctors	17:06, 18 August 2006 (UTC)	improvement	Outsiders (I imagine a different version for Natives

Right now I have encountered difficulties whenever I try to contact someone in game. There is (currently) no way right now of contacting people in game without finding them. To improve on that, I thought there should be a sort of postal service. The idea is simple. You go to a post office to do one of three things 1) buy a pigeon so you can write a letter from anywhere and send it to the post office (at a cost of 2 GC) 2) write a letter at the post office for posting (at a cost of 1 GC) 3) receive mail (at a cost of 0 GC). To prevent harassment of players you can even instruct the postal staff to burn any letters from ignoramus people (you must tell them before hand otherwise they will burn everything).

The postal staff has burned 3 letters from unwanted peoples since your last visit.
You buy a pigeon at the cost of 2 GC. It looks anxious to be on its way home again.
The post woman takes your letter and smiles knowingly.

The idea may need some tweaking but this is just a suggestion on how to create in game messages.

Comments
Sounds like an interesting idea. The only real problem that might happen is that if you've off on long journeys, you may not have the time to stop into a town and check your mail. Perhaps the pigeons could also fly to you, where ever you may be, and give you the letter? --Che 22:24, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Could you buy local pigeons and deliver them to another town for sale at a higher price?--Darkferret 02:25, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Since pigeons can only return to one place I imagine that foreign post offices would pay a premium for pigeons that can go to other cities. For example, a pigeon bought at York and will return to York is only 2 GC, but a pigeon bought at York that will return to Derby will cost 10 GC or more because you can't raise pigeons to fly to Derby in York.

Climbable Trees and high areas

Author	Timestamp	Type	Scope
Zeff	11:49, 21 August 2006 (UTC)	Game mechanics and Skill	Environment

This is more like two suggestions bundled into one, but they are closely related. I think climbable trees (areas of jungle) would be a great addition to the game. With the use of a climbing skill (perhaps easier to learn for natives) players can "climb" into the jungle canopy (for 5AP) providing the jungle is heavy (dark green and above). This would provide an excellent way to "hide" from other players and give another bonus which I will get back to. If a player chops jungle where a player is hiding above them, that player falls to the ground for a medium amount of damage. Other players would have a chance of spotting people hiding above them, each time they move to a different jungle area (50% and 100% if you use search in the area - a message "you spot *name* hiding in the canopy above you"). Also players will be able to jump from tree to tree for 2AP. Now, onto the "other bonus" mentioned earlier - this bonus also effects areas such as the mountain and the crows nest at the shipwreck giving "high areas" more of a tactical use. These areas should allow you to spot people (outsiders, pirates and natives) in the distance. When you are in one of these areas you would be able to "see" the number of people to the north, east, south and west - this will include areas such as north-east and south-west as "north" will mean a general cone shape north of the player. For example in the crows nest at the shipwreck, there will be a button "lookout" which would display the following text- "You scan the horizons - North - You see 1 native nearby. East - You see 6 pirates nearby. You see 3 pirates in the distance. South - You see 12 pirates nearby. You see 4 pirates and 2 outsiders in the distance. West - You see 7 pirates nearby. You see 2 pirates and 4 natives in the distance." Of course if you did this on the mountain, you wouldn't be able to see through solid rock. The sight range would be perhaps 20 squares, anything over 10 squares is defined as distance. If this suggestion is implemented it will I feel it would add a whole new level to gameplay (literally!) as well as possibilities for watch-towers, and long-range rifle/blowpipe sniping!

Comments
I had thought of climbable trees, but hadn't planned on people being able to move around whilst in the tree. The biggest problem with letting you see further is that (a) it'd require more processing to handle the extra 24+ map areas, (b) Displaying the map would be quite tricky due to the sizes of squares required to be able to hold text and icons. I had envisaged something like "You climb a tree. [down]" as the stuff on the right, no other actions except down. The left hand side would be a map area about the same size as currently, but where each block was replaced with a 3x3 area. This would give you the ability to see terrain from 7 blocks all around (15x15 grid). --Simon 00:52, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

To be honest, I wasn't thinking of actually showing the areas you can see, I was thinking along the lines a purely text feature, that would operate in a similar way to "search". There would be a button that would "list" each direction (N,E,S,W) and the players you could see in those areas. Actually displaying more sqaures on screen sounds pretty complicated... --Zeff 19:58, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

The problem with just text is not everyone is going to be directly north or west or south or east of you, most of the time they will be at strange angles. Simon's idea of a 15x15 grid when you climb a tree is a good one, if it is able to be done. Here's the idea I got while reading this suggestion: firstly, new item-telescope (explorers would start with one, they would be occassionally found in outsider towns. natives would have no access, like gps). Going atop a tree or crow's nest or climbing on top of ruins would give you four buttons: look north, look west, look south, look east-- but only if you have a telescope. Each would cost 5 or 10 AP (it would take a long time to throughly search with the horizon with your telescope.) You would be shown something like this map (but not as big), it would display the area north of your immediate area if you chose 'look north', south of yoru area if you chose 'look south, etc, and it would tell you where others are.

- Arminius 23:18, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Zeff, You are on the right track with your hiding suggestion I think, but it shouldnt be atop trees. People should have an ability to hide in the jungle, and an on-ground hiding skill has been suggested before. I still think it is a good idea. Here is one version of the idea, suggested by Armadox on the forum: <<Armadox_The_Butcher wrote: What about a skill that allows you to use your last 10 ap to hide in the foilage? It marks you off the map, like being a spirit. Spirits can still see you, and anyone searching the area can uncover you. but it'll keep your hide safer untill you log back on?>> <<Arminius wrote: This is a good idea, but how about instead of having to search, someone who steps onto the same square automatically discovers you? But people wouldnt be able to see you from other squares like they can now. Currently if you are standing on any of the 25 squares in someone's line of sight, they can see you, but if you were to be hidden they wouldnt be able to unless they are on your square. This could serve as an ambushing skill as well as a hiding skill. By ambushing I mean hiding and then waiting till someone comes to a square near you to rest, and naturally they wouldnt know youre there, then you emerge to kill the poor sucker>> <<Crowjane wrote: sounds generally nice, but what if everyone has it. I foresee no ambushing but endless travels without any human contact...>> <<Tycho44 wrote: I like the idea of having an extremely expensive Hide Skill (12AP-30AP to use?) that only works to cloak you from those not in your square. By hiding, you would prevent animals and players from seeing and pursuing you unless they actually stumbled into your square (Trackers could use Tracking Skill). When the cost of hiding is high, many players will choose to step 5 or 15 spaces further back into the wilderness instead, so the game impact would be relatively mild. Also, hiding could require Jungle d5 or higher to use, just like concealed huts and trees. That would prevent ambushes from inside the town.>> (From here).
- Arminius 23:18, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Oppose. Complications aside, the original suggestion would effectively make the island larger, which would make player interaction more rare, and that's simply bad. I'd support an x AP "Lookout" ability in suitably dense jungle that would simply return flavor text revealing the location of one or more nearby players or animals. ("You climb a tree for a moment and see someone to the northeast.") But I think concealment in treetops is a bad idea, and the server load of a large map view should be avoided if a simpler "lookout" action will work about as well. — Elembis (talk) 04:30, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Importance of the Islands of Shartak

Author	Timestamp	Type	Scope
Gandhi	16:00, 23 August 2006 (UTC)	Improvement	Environment

The many Islands of Shartak have been the source of some of the most heated conflicts seen to date; however, such islands truly offer nothing more then a secluded patch of beach and jungle. To make these Island more desirable, I think new or stronger animals should be confined to these Islands, or possibly an implementation of the "New Strategic Location on Island" suggestion. When Darwin visited the Galapagos Islands, he noticed that the species he found evolved separately from creatures on the mainland. The same should be true with Shartak.

Comments
Possible animals:

Gorillas - stronger than a monkey, hit harder
Rhinos - less HP than elephants, but more aggressive and hit harder

Or Mythical/Exotic Creatures:

Ogopogo - like the Squid, but confined specifically to the waters around the Island; could possibly give special power/stat increase when successfully killed
Dragon - Travels between all Islands; hits extremely hard, but flies to adjacent squares after hits; impossible to heal.
Big foot - from adjacent squares, it is seen as "An Outsider" but once on the same square, he appears as Big Foot. Same stats as outsider, with more HP. Gandhi 16:00, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps the islands may have a strategic piece of terrain, such as an ammo hut?Lantz 13:53, 26 November 2006 (PST)

Message huts

Author	Timestamp	Type	Scope
Elembis	05:12, 7 September 2006 (UTC)	Communications	Players in camps

For the sake of roleplaying, I'd like more communication between players to occur in a realistic fashion in-game than for it to occur outside of the game (on forums and the wiki). One way to accomodate this would be to establish message huts, run by new NPCs, in which a player (Alice, a native) can leave a message for another player (Bob, an outsider) to be read when Bob enters the hut to check his messages. A message left in Derby for Bob would only be readable by Bob, and only when Bob entered the Derby message hut to ask for his messages. If Bob had no language skills the message would appear garbled, as always.

I see two problems with this system: one is that players could spam everyone by leaving hundreds of messages in each hut, and the other is that the server could have to store hundreds of thousands of messages. The first objection could be solved by charging the sender 1 gold coin (or perhaps more) per message per hut. The second problem might be fixed if we (1) kept a sender from leaving more than 1 message in each hut; (2) held no more than 100 messages total in each hut, dropping old ones as new ones arrived; or (3) restricted message-sending to registered players. (Obviously, a message would be dropped as soon as its recipient arrived and read it.)

This change would make camps more popular, give everyone another way to spend their gold, and, most importantly, make it easier to contact people who leave no contact information in their profiles, something that can only be done now after a huge and often difficult game of hide and seek.

Comments
Would be nice if the other NPC's mentioned to you that you've messages to read in the hut - "Trader Toe says, 'Have you been to the message hut lately? I hear you have a message there.'" Otherwise i doubt i'd ever check. --Frisco 16:01, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Clan Bonuses

Author	Timestamp	Type	Scope
John Sevier	19:11, 7 September 2006 (UTC)	Improvement	Everyone

If implemented clan founders can set one out of a list of bonuses in order to provide benefits for clan membership. I would suggest that this change be 'locked' for at least a day, to prevent abuse. The bonuses are all small buffs to various factors in order to augment the play style each clan inspires. I am making this suggestion because despite a wide variety of clans on Shartak, most players have yet to chose one and there are several clans, such as my own, that only have the founder as a member. By giving clan members a small bonus, clans should be able to facilitate recruitment. What follows are a few suggested bonuses; please feel free to suggest more or comment on those suggested:

Search Bonus: 5% added to base search odds.
Melee Bonus: 5% added to melee accuracy.
Range Bonus: 5% added to firearms accuracy.
Plunder Bonus: 10% increase to find gold coin at any location where they may appear (this should not be applied to the base search, rather it increases the probality of a successful search resulting in a gold coin).
Explore Bonus: 5% chance of a character getting a 'free' movement; flavor text could read 'you find that you were able to easily move forward'; applies only to land movement.
Faith Bonus: 5% evasion to spirit attacks.
Hunter Bonus: +1 damage to any animal

Given these small size of the bonuses, I doubt any of these will seriously affect game balance, and the suggestion is merely one to increase clan membership. I am sure there are other reasonable bonuses out there, and I believe each of the above encourage roleplaying, be it pirates placing importance on finding gold or explorer groups getting bonuses to find goods or possibly cover even more ground with less AP.

Comments
The only thing I don't like is what about people who don't want to join a clan? I think How clans are right now are fine.--Michael edwards 22:48, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

I am strongly against clan bonuses - the incentive to join a clan should be social (i might be for clan penalties - management takes its toll). What problem is this supposed to solve? If a clan isn't popular, there's probably a good reason (lack of leadership, lack of purpose, lack of distinction, etc) that should be addressed by the clan leadership. If it was implemented, you'd have to restrict a character from changing clans more than once every X hours/turns as well as the clan from changing its bonus/penalty. Maybe it wouldn't be so bad if the clan had both a bonus and a penalty - choose any one bonus and one penalty (and the penalty grows directly proportional to clan size - what can i say? i don't like management). This would help leave balance as is (for the independants) but give clans more flavour --Frisco 02:19, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Excellent points, both of you! Frisco, I believe you are right that this unfairly penalizes independents, I see that as a serious fault now too. I believe the best way to balance it is to give independents a bonus or bonuses, though different than clan bonuses and thus encourage independent play. The main I one can think right now of caution bonus: independents are more wary of others and thus get a 5% evasion to any player attacks. This negates any clan attack bonus against other players and would also be useful for new players who are prime targets for PKing. In regards to a clan penalty, I would best leave this up to others such as yourself as to what you think is fair. In addition, your statement about switching clans for bonuses on the fly is an abuse I did not think of; I think the best solution would be that some minimum amount in the clan is necessary for the bonus to activate, such as 24 hours. As far as proportion goes, I think that would be too complicated, as the server would have to constantly check clan size to assess the bonus/penalty amount. The purpose of this suggestion is to enliven the clan system, not to punish anyone. Basically, I am just trying to think of way to make the clan system more attractive, is in all honesty it has no effect on the actual game other then filling a field in your profile. Furthermore, out of 1113 active players, only 246 were affiliated with any clan, and this gap is even larger if you take into account inactive players (roughly 4000 at this writing). Perhaps a bonus system is not a solution, though I think their should some in-game effect, maybe inter-clan communication or something (i.e., the clan leader(s) can send out messages or something, though if Elembis's suggestion above is implemented this will be moot)? Even though I doubt this will be implemented, I want to encourage debate and see if a fair proposal arises that does not offset balance. Looking forward to hearing more on this. --John Sevier 02:48, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

I agree that there should be more of an incentive to join a clan - just to give clans a bit more flavour, but nothing that penalizes independant players or makes the game unfair. There is a similar clan bonus system on Nexuswar, where clans have a certain bonus depending on how powerful they are. Independents also get a bonus that depends on how long they stay alive. But to be honest, I would dislike that system if it was applied to Shartak. Perhaps something like an optional clan skill? A minor skill that actually replaces an existing skill (depending on the clans speciality -searching, attacking etc), making the clan members more specialized than independant players. Although independant players would not have access to that skill they would still have as much power as the clan members, having access to the skill that the clan members do not have. Zeff 12:52, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Additional Pirate Ships

Author	Timestamp	Type	Scope
Darkferret	11:25, 17 September 2006 (UTC)	Dividing the growing pirate population	Pirates

If not the high HP and access to many riches, it is the fact that they all live close by that gives pirates an advantage over Natives and other Outsiders. I suggest we add two more pirate ships to help control the coordination imbalance. After it is implemented any pirates who dies may choose to change their home ship once. The ships will need names.

Comments
If you're correcting imbalances with this then dont forget to give us all a 5 damage, 60% hit weapon. A few HP difference isn't all that good. Anywhom, This seems a fair idea, but i dont like it. There's not so many pirates up at the wreck, and dividing them by three would be disaster. how about just two ships? The 'Hell Born Strumpet' (For Cap Whitney) and whatever Captain Edwards wants to call his? Rozen

There's a lot more pirates at the wreck than there are people in most of the other towns, to be fair. --Less Than Lethal 18:42, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

I wouldn't say a lot, more like 1.4x more. Rozen

Ignoring inactive players - most camps have about 120ish, except the shipwreck with 290 and york with 210. --Simon 21:09, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Also, I rather like it that the ship doesn't have a name. It allows new clans to say "We're part of a different crew." After all, clans come and go. There's no reason to think the current pirate clans will last forever.--Black Joe 21:37, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Well we could name them by colour, type of ship, or description of wreck like "Grey ship", "Frigate", or "Rock wrecked ship." Darkferret 21:10, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Spirit Stuff

Author	Timestamp	Type	Scope
Zutaka	13:25, 19 September 2006 (UTC)	Game mechanic	Spirits

Spirits under this new system would be bound to a specific distance from the spot where they died, with bonuses for actions (perhaps it'd halve the AP cost?) within that spot and possibly the four adjacent squares. (Alternatively, you could just be more noticeable in that area to mortals without Sixth Sense.) I know this could be abused, such as PKers waiting until players are far away from a shaman to kill them, but I've come up with some solutions or counterbalances. For example: being a Shartak noob, I don't know if there are roaming shamans, but if not there would be, thus giving a spirit another way to get back to the land of the living.

The next counterbalance is something I stole from the Dead Case, some ghost-related flash game thing, in which by freaking people out you gain their belief in you and can thus range farther from your grave; by going around your own territory and attacking things, you could quickly gain enough XP buy a spirit-only skill that adds half again or even doubles your current movement radius. Or there could be a new meter, some sort of power or belief level which allows you to go farther; maybe there's a skill that allows you to assimilate the essence of living beings you've screamed to death into your own, and thus travel beyond the initial limits of your "territory."

Admittedly, the whole extra incentive not to die idea would be quite confusing and probably rather tiresome for new players, so perhaps after your first death or two your spirit is resilient enough to ignore the penalty. Feel free to ridicule these random ideas.

A few more ideas to pick and choose from:

Spirits are more powerful when working together.
- However, to reduce the Screaming Medical Hut Gang's ability to harrass the living, another idea could be taken from Dead Case: you're unable to cross the threshold of a hut until you go beyond a certain level of power, belief, spiritual influence, whatever you want to call it.
Spirits are more powerful when in ruins, because everyone knows there are always powerful spirits haunting ruins.
Shamans can, after collecting a number of items, putting them all together and performing some ceremony or other, Curse a person's spirit so that its territory is severely diminished when its body dies?

Comments
Comment here

More Clan/Crew powers

Author	Timestamp	Type	Scope
Michael edwards	21:02, 22 October 2006 (UTC)	For Clan/Crew founders and leaders to be able to kick out players they don't want.	All Clan/Crew Founders and Leaders

It's quite simple If you have a disruptive player who joins your Clan or Crew to either make fun of it or badmouth or he does not fallow the clan Ideals He can be kicked out of the clan by the founders and leaders of the clan no questions asked. You would find the feature on the clan members list (Or wherever Simon wants to put it.) And click the "kick out" buttin to expel him from the clan.

Comments
Implemented with the December 2006 clan updates. --Simon 21:24, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Looting

Author	Timestamp	Type	Scope
Nicorus	11:35, 9 November 2006	Improvement	Gold

Players can loot gold from corpses. At base rate a player will be able to loot 1/4 of the GC on a corpse, at a cost of 5 AP. Pirates get a bonus, looting 1/3 of the GC. A skill “Looting” will double this fraction (1/4 to ½ and 1/3 to 2/3).

Comments
Sounds like Suggestions:Skills#Plunder. --Frisco 20:30, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Confine it to irates as an incentive to be a different class. - FirstAmongstDaves

Day and Night

Author	Timestamp	Type	Scope
MajesticNinja	19:26pm/12th Nove 2006	Game Mecanics	Everyone

Basicaly, turn the map a darker shade every amount of time. Maybe, animals could wander into towns at night, and players could only see tat there were a number of players in a certain square, instead of seeing that there were 1 outsider and 3 natives.

Comments
I've a feeling that that would be a massive, massive job to format. Sounds good but I think you'd need to download a grahics package, if not, the server would just...explode! Or not...i'm no programer by any description. Perhaps if there were three shades? day, noon and night? Rozen

Guildhouses

Author	Timestamp	Type	Scope
Erados^MG	21:05, 26 November 2006 (UTC)	Game Mechanic	Clans

Clans need guildhouses or headquarters, places that only members of the creating clan may enter(?). Basically, only available to clans with a relatively large amount of active members, such as 15. The way I see this (which is of course up for discussion) is so:

Two members of the clan are present. Both give 75 AP and 200 XP to create this building (think: Hut). Once created, it requires 50 AP per week to keep it up. This weekly AP can be donated by any of the members of the clan. For example, player 1 can decide he has 10 AP that he doesn't need, player 2 gives 4 AP, player 3 gives 25, and player 4 notices it's already Saturday and there's a dearth of 11 AP so he takes care of the last bit, thus keeping the hut "alive" for another week. General benefits (once again, up for discussion) would be: Access only to members of the clan, perhaps a "medical table" where you can convert AP/XP into healing much like the scientist can do, and a "Ammo cupboard" where one can find rifle bullets or sharpening stones or whatever items Simon sees fit.

Comments
Realistically, wouldn't the contents of this "ammo cupboard" have to be donated as well? --Lantz 13:43, 26 November 2006 (PST)

Yeah, that makes sense, but that could also be supported by the weekly AP donation. Keeping stocks up, etc. --Erados^MG 22:22, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Take a look at my 'temporary structure' suggestion in "misc."--Lantz 01:59, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

These are nothing alike. Mine is a guildhouse, does not involve driftwood at all. Gathering driftwood would be a major drawback for a guildhouse in the middle of the jungle, days away from beaches. Yours is just a form of shelter in the jungle, protection from surprise attack, where my suggestion is a base for a clan, and not meant for quick protection in the jungle. --Erados^MG 04:19, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Wouldn't a hut that only clan members can enter be easilly abused as an inpenetrable fortress to allow a clan to rapage uncontrolled through a town? --Less Than Lethal 11:22, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Not really. Simon could tweak the AP/XP requirements so it becomes *only* shelter from heavy attack (healing, restockage, etc), and not an actual heavy-artillery resistant bunker. Perhaps something could be added that having many people around it affects the AP cost or whatever, or the more people in the clan, the more expensive it is to keep up. This should be as much a hassle as it is a help. --Erados^MG 15:32, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

This gives a great advantage to team players over solo players. I'm not clear on how the upkeep would be kept fair - just create a disposable character whose sole purpose is donating AP to the guildhouse (perhaps you could trade such character use with your allies so as to not directly zerg). --Frisco 19:57, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

In the real world, working together as a team does have it's benefits. And if donating 75 AP resulted in 75 IP hits, then zerging would be mitigated.--Lantz 22:03, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

To stop people using it as a fortress, how about allowing non clan members inside, but whenever they attack, everyone in the room has a chance of hitting them with a melee weapon automaticaly? This is good for realism and stops abuse of the facility, as you can still get your ass whooped if your inside, and an agressor would be roughed up by security. Rozen

Trading XP

Author	Timestamp	Type	Scope
Black Joe	19:34, 4 December 2006 (UTC)	XP alteration	All traders' huts

Some people enjoy playing as traders. I know I do. However, there's a problem. Traders have to engage in other activities besides trading if they want to level up. Soldiers don't have to engage in healing, and healers don't have to kill if they don't want to. So why don't traders level up when they do their thing? My suggestion is this:

Every time you use an AP to make a trade in the trader's hut, you stand a chance to gain 1 XP. This is similar to standing a chance of gaining XP every time you chop jungle. Also, it actually makes sense. When you trade, you're learning how to haggle, to read the trader, and the real value of an item. That counts as legitimate and valuable experience.

Perhaps the chance of gaining XP would alter with the prices. For instance, if the trader is "glad to see a new face", you have a higher chance to earn XP because you're getting a better deal. If the trader's tired of you, there's less of a chance to earn XP.

Comments
I Think this is a brilliant idea, and something i was toying with the idea of myself, as a fledgeling trader. I find it incredibly difficult to level up as it is (I think i need 450 now) and now i've moved into a career of little violence with a little healing so i'm realy strapped for EXP. There's a president for this concept on at least two RPGs that i'm familiar with, the Elder Scrolls series (Mercantile skills) and Fable (Skill experience). Would it be too much to hope that we could push for a definate 1 exp and get a bonus for more costly items like Heavy Swords and unstocked/low stocked items? Rozen

Another idea suggested by Foo Fighter is that an item's rarity (as determined by the number in stock with that trader) should determine or play a role in determining the amount of XP gained. I agree that this makes sense, and I'd like it to be added to the original suggestion.

A variant of this has been implemented. --Simon 17:10, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Cupped Hands and Dumping

Author	Timestamp	Type	Scope
Darkferret	09:43, 5 December 2006 (UTC)	Action	The thirsty bottleless

You've finally slaughtered that elephant that nearly took all day to kill. Now since you have bled a lot of water out, you go to the creek for a drink. You get there and stoop down to fill your bottle, but it full of salt water! What do you do? Cup your hands and drink directly or dump the salt water out of course!

Comments
This idea makes a brilliant argument. But have you tried to cup water in your hands, it runns away...so you should only get +1HP back, maybe?

Use of Ranged Weapons as Melee Weapons

Author	Timestamp	Type	Scope
Johan Crichton	03:50, 8 December 2006 (UTC)	Action	Anyone with an ranged weapon - rifle, blowpipe or yet-to-be-added...

A heavy rifle can deliver a fair bit of damage when used as a club. Large blowpipes can likewise deliver some damage when used as a club or cane. Currently however, the game does not support the use of ranged weapons in melee - this suggestion would be to simply modify the game to allow that to happen.

Comments
The odds of hitting should be less, and damage shouldn't be much (less than a machete/cutlass). There should also be a chance of the weapon breaking (as per existing melee weapons).

I disagree that the damage output/hit rate should be less. If that were the case, there would be no incentive to use them as melee weapons, making the point moot.--Black Joe 04:42, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

I think giving somebody a whack on the head with a rifle butt would do more to kill somebody than a knife-wound, so i agree with Joe. I do think that they should be able to break, but pipes more easier than rifles. unless you had mastered melee and could put it into someone's eye. Rozen

There was some talk about changing the names of some weapons, just for variety - clubs, halbards, axes, other weapons instead of just machetes and cutlasses. - FirstAmongstDaves

Native Medical Hut Find Rates

Author	Timestamp	Type	Scope
Black Joe	12:02pm, 16 Jan. 2007	Alteration	Find rates in native medical huts

Native medical huts produce blowpipes and poison darts. These items should no longer be found in native medical huts. After all, they're only useful to warriors, and they should only be found in ammo huts. Outsider medical huts don't turn up rifles or bullets, so it's rather unfair that natives looking for healing herbs have to use IP hits to drop or trade away the surfeit of darts and blowpipes. It's another disadvantage to playing a native, the most underutilized faction. This could even be announced in a news item, something like "Native leaders have organized their medical huts better, removing all blowpipes and poison darts to the ammunition huts."

Comments
Good idea. Implemented. --Simon 13:33, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Carving edits

Author	Timestamp	Type	Scope
Black Joe	22:36, 23 January 2007 (UTC)	Game Mechanic	All carvings

Whenever someone alters a carving, anyone present in that square should be able to "see" them do it. For example, if someone alters a carving from saying "George's Place" to "House of Lame-o", and another player is in the same square, that player should be able to see who made the carving. This will lessen the graffiti taking place now.

Comments
Great idea, if I'm thinking what you're thinking. So it should say something like this: Since your last move: Che wrote: 0mg d00d teh Cp r s0000 st00pid! ? -Che 20:09, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Implemented a quick version where it tells you who carved something, but not what they carved. --Simon 23:54, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Hut Renovation

Author	Timestamp	Type	Scope
Black Joe	14:40, 1 February 2007 (UTC)	New possible action	All empty huts.

I'd like to suggest that players be able to modify the interior flavor text of huts. For instance, many clans occupy buildings and convert them to their own use. A button would become available saying something like "renovate hut." This would allow a player to type in their own flavor text for the hut. To discourage people from vandalizing the huts, the AP cost should be very high. Say, 50 to 75 AP. After all, it takes a lot of effort to clean out a house, even if it is a one room hut. This would allow Czech1, for instance, to customize his tavern to actually LOOK like a tavern. Traders' huts and supply huts could not be modified, naturally.

Comments
Another option might be that somehow a hut is tagged as being owned by someone and only they can modify the description. There would have to be some way to lay claim to a hut and some way to prevent it being taken over. Perhaps you have to 'reclaim' the hut once every X days (say 8 for those who only get to play once a week) otherwise it becomes open to all to claim? --Simon 22:03, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

That sounds good. How does one get claim over the hut? Do clans of some sort get first picks over a 'first come' basis, or perhaps an NPC landlord demands payment and shows up at your hut to collect it? RobZombie

I like the idea, I especially like me being mentioned lol.. I think that in some cases one can just pick a hut and make it theirs (I've used the same hut for months, and all I did was walk inside one day and make it a tavern, it was empty.) Maybe like, the hut has to be empty for you to lay claim to it? I dunno. --czech1

Major game change

Author	Timestamp	Type	Scope
Odysseus	12:30, 19 February 2007 (UTC)	Combat	Everyone

Let's break this down, in order of importance. It's a series of suggestions for more 'realistic' gameplay. Please comment on it even if you hate it.

A)I think that real-time attacking of the NPCs is a brilliant idea. However, it's very frustrating being killed in your sleep, as much as not rewarding killing others in their sleep is. Thus, is it possible to code an 'auto-behaviour' when away so that if someone attacks you, you fight back? That would make combat memorable.

B)Nerf HP to 10 or 20 so that it's more deadly (and realistic), or bump up weapon damage, A LOT. That would make for more 'deadly' encounters. Bumping up weapon damage would also make sure weapon attacks can be differentiated more easily, while right now all attacks do 1 to 4 damage. It would also make the whole 'average dmg per AP' pointless since this ain't a math problem, it's a game. To make sure however that you won't kill 40 people in a single turn, bump the AP cost of an attack to either 5 or an amount depending on the weapon, e.g. a knife would have 3 AP but a halberd 7 etc.

C)Is there a chance combat is instead a 'contested' roll? E.g. Instead of rolling to hit, if someone attacks another in melee, both roll and highest (with mods) is the one who gets to strike and damage. If not, perhaps it'd be great if there was a 'defense' skill too, like every time you're attacked and it doesn't miss, there's an X% that the attack is voided.

D)Speed of a weapon- how often it can attack. Weapons with higher reach like spears should get accuracy bonuses, but those with higher speed should attack more often. That'd probably be caused by a varied amount of AP per 'attack' or 'round' of combat, like I said, 2 AP for a punch, 3 for a knife, 4 for a machete, 5 for a sword, 6 for a spear, 7 for a halberd etc.

Comments
Some comments (edited/expanded) originally posted on the forum topic:
(B) I personally wouldn't enjoy much more deadly encounters - swimming with the sharks is dangerous enough, let alone if my characters only had 10/20 hitpoints. Player characters should be special too - not cannon fodder for anyone just walking around killing everything they see.
(C) It might be a nice tweak if some NPCs were more difficult to fight - perhaps a 'defense' attribute/skill, which is subtracted from the attack percentage? But keep it small values (10-20%) so that you don't get any situations where a low level character can't touch a high level character? Opposed rolls is more complexity - keeping the dynamic simpler would seem to be a good idea, no?
(D) This is a real time game. It doesn't have 'rounds'. That paradigm doesn't work on the Island. The shartak weapon/combat system is reasonably simple currently - does this really add any value, or just make the game more complex?
--Johan Crichton 07:35, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, everything Johan said. Plus, Shartak has developed in such a way that it is a game of exploration, not a combat oriented first person shooter. Making it deadlier does not make it more realistic, it just makes it more like Doom. If you want realism, how about an NPC police force that gathers evidence on random murders, hunts down the murderer, arrests them and either jails them or executes them? That's what happens in the real world. lol --Nosimplehiway 14:38, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Johan's (C) - the defense attribute - is actually already implemented for NPCs and has been for a long time. There's no reason why it wouldn't be possible to extend it to PCs as some kind of defense skill or armour-like item. --Simon 21:57, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Why not both skills and armour-like items? Skills could perhaps require 'Close quarter combat' as a pre-requisite, 'Close quarter defense' - giving a defense attribute of 10%, and 'Advanced Close quarter defense' adding +10% on top of that? Items could be 'shield' and 'helmet' giving a +10% - and if there was a way for an item to degrade overtime, then newbie outsiders/pirates could perhaps start with an item that gives a +20% as additional newbie protection? --Johan Crichton 00:59, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Huts: Body Dumping

Author	Timestamp	Type	Scope
Johan Crichton	02:10, 13 March 2007 (UTC)	New action	Everyone

Allow Shartak characters to dump dead bodies outside of huts through a new action button that appears when they're inside a hut and there's a body there. 1 body per 1 AP spent.

Comments
Comment here

What's the point of this? They're not like in Urbandead when the dead come back to life and eat people. -Kutless55 09:55, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

It just strikes me as unrealistic that folk are going to keep dead bodies lying around in huts. Moving the body outside doesn't have much if any game impact beyond allowing folk to clear the huts of bodies.--Johan Crichton 21:24, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

It would be kind of cool to kill someone and dump their body in th river. but what about dumping them in holes and burying them? How would that work? - First Amongst Daves

Villagers as NPCs

Author	Timestamp	Type	Scope
Apocalypso	14:08, 14 March 2007 (GMT)	New NPC - Villager	Everyone

This might require extreme coding, but will add to an already fantastic game. Essentially, villagers are NPCs. They are localised to squares entirely surrounded by cleared jungle. There could be ten villagers per square (turning off "see villagers" could be in the preferences to restrict annoyance). A camp needs 50 villagers to maintain an ammo hut, medical hut, shaman, and trader. For every 50 villagers after that, search odds in the huts are improved by 10%. Villagers could be attacked by enemies of the camp, but would have the same stats as elephants (high HP, good defence rate - reflecting reality). This would allow five developments which, in my very humble newbie opinion, might aid the game.

1) Players could all be soldiers/pirates/warriors/scouts/scientists, etc., i.e. playing the hero, without having to play as boring old villagers.

2) Attacks on camps would be meaningful, as lowering the number of villagers will hurt, or even wipe out opposition camps.

3) The Shipwreck would have no villagers, giving the pirates more distinction from outsiders.

4) Maxed-out players might find it more interesting.

5) Players could create new camps (perhaps only maxed-out players could have this new skill, "Colonise").

There could be distinctions between native and outsider villagers, etc. It might be very complicated to spawn new villagers once more squares are cleared as well. Anyway, it's a suggestion, what do you think?

Comments
I like this idea a lot. What would be the mechanism for regeneration of villagers? If some version of this is introduced, the old discussion of Defense comes up. There is absolutely 0 means to defend an area in the game right now, thus no way to protect your village(/viallagers) from being killed. I think that some means of defense is a 'must' if this is done. And a combination of this and defense would be a major boost for the game. There are several player-based inherent problems that come up, for example an Armadox or a Keichi or a Long Fin Killie, who freely and prolifically kill their own people, and cant be kicked out of town because the local shaman revives them cheap, might take to slaughtering their own civilians. Then of course there would be people creating alternate accounts specifically to attack these villagers of other towns, e.g. a pirate creating 2 or 3 dalpok natives whose sole goal is using every one of their AP attacking dalpok npc-villagers. (Perhaps local PKers and alt-abusers could be discouraged by having a light curse imposed on any character every time they kill one of their own villagers, 'the spirits are very displeased that you killed one of your own people'). Some means of actually being able to actually damage or even occupy(!) a settlement is thinking down the right path for sure. As of now we have no way of doing so, and this limits the game. -Arminius 01:08, 15 March 2007 (UTC

Hmmm, not bad. But attacking npcs to hurt a town would make it like a Halo Oddball game. Perhaps you'd get cursed even if you just TRY to attack (ie. miss) a friendly npc villager. But healing them won't curse you. They'd die just like everyone else too! They could respawn just like every other npc. But make them have professions. Like blacksmith, farmer, woodcutter, sculptor, etc. They could also wander around town, you know, like real village people. On the screen you can see them as an outsider and if you hover your mouse over them, they show the blacksmith or such. Like.. 10 villagers per camp. The shipwreck should have crewmen, the cook and the cabin boy! -Elegost55 08:26, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

These are good points alright. I would imagine that defence should be down to the players - although I like the idea of a "wall" square, similar to heavy jungle. Attackers would have a 20% chance of chopping it, and have to chop it twice to get through. Once inside the camp, if villagers are ten to a square, and have the stats of elephants, the attacker will have to be quite brave to go it alone. Large-scale attacks (as in real life) will be the only way to go, and given the nature of the game, and of th'innernet itself, defenders will have some warning of large-scale attacks and can work out a defence plan.

In relation to attacking your own villagers, this should result in them attacking you - a 2HP fine per AP-used until you leave the camp - and you would never be allowed back again. This exile-type character would appeal to some.

I like the idea of real jobs, it would add colour to the game. I'd leave this up to Simon, though - if he does go to all the trouble of coding this, he should have the fun of making up villager roles (i.e. "In this square are two Farmhands, a Town Drunk, a Blacksmith, and a Lady of Negotiable Virtue"). -Apocalypso

Vow of Peace

Author	Timestamp	Type	Scope
Johan Crichton	05:41, 21 March 2007 (UTC)	PKing opt out improvement	Any characters where the player decides to opt their character out of pking

A vow of peace could be sought from any of the NPC Shamans. Such a vow has the following effects:

(i) The character who has taken the vow cannot be attacked by another character. Any attempt to attack results in no AP consumption, and the message "such-and-such has taken a vow of peace - the spirits of the land prevent you from attacking them".
(ii) The character who has taken the vow cannot attack another character, without confirming the attack. Confirming the attack results in immediate damage to the effect of half the character's hp - "As punishment for breaking your vow, you are wracked with pain as wounds appear on your body".
Taking a vow of peace would require that the character sacrifice one of:
500 AP (as they meditate at the feet of the shaman, they can't play the character for nearly a week); OR
1000 GP (only 18 characters currently have that much); OR
2000 XP (only high level characters who've maxed out).

I realise that there are those who find the pk'ing element exciting or vital to their game - please realise (and perhaps respect) that there are those of us who have tired of it, don't find it exciting and not vital to OUR game. There's lots said about how Shartak is the game that you make it - it's hard to do that if you're constantly being involved in someone else's game.

Comments
I like this, this isn't just somebody's way of getting out of an annoying game feature, this is kind of like a way of life. You'd have to bend your character around the vow, rahter than just buying it and laughing. I'm not going to take it, but I can see why people would like to, and I support that --Rozen 06:49, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Sounds like a reasonable suggestion. I would make a few minor alterations to this suggestion though. Instead of attack attempts resulting in no AP consumption, perhaps they should use the normal amount of AP but the spirits of the land prevent the blow from reaching its target. Not sure about the AP cost to get it enabled - perhaps 5 days worth instead of 7? Also, if you break the vow and are wounded, maybe you should start bleeding from those wounds in a similar manner to being bitten by a shark. Any more comments? --Simon 20:34, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

I like this, definitely needs some work though. Perhaps rather than taking 5/7 days worth of ap, it halves peoples AP for a week? I see people taking a vow of peace and never coming back to the game, due to getting bored waiting. I'm not sure about the bleeding, maybe something more, spirity but with a similar effect? --Htkl 21:16, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Policy Discussion

Author	Timestamp	Type	Scope
Nosimplehiway	13:04, 3 March 2007 (UTC)	Discussion of policy	Suggestions page

http://wiki.shartak.com/index.php/The_Shartak_Wiki_talk:Policies_and_guidelines

Comments
This is a policy suggestion which will impact the suggestion pages. Your input is needed. Please comment on the proposed policy there, not here. Thanks!

Snakes

Author	Timestamp	Type	Scope
Mark D. Stroyer	02:28, 2 April 2007 (UTC)	Event	Grasslands

One thing I've noticed is that when searching grasslands, there is a slight chance to find a poison snake, which will then bite you. I propose a small change. In additon to biting for 3 damage, make it so the poison effects the player for the next three actions, similar to a poison dart.

Comments
Shouldn't detract from the game, adds a little more realism at no cost apart from discouraging some people from searching grasslands. Sounds good to me. --Johan Crichton 22:22, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Snakes would also explain where the natives derive toxin for their darts. - First Amongst Daves

Increased Animal Population

Author	Timestamp	Type	Scope
Johan Crichton	21:44, 4 April 2007 (UTC)	balance change	The number of animals on the Island, where they can be found

The game has grown to include a large element of PvP which has an impact on those who don't want PvP. It's an easy way to gain XP, and you don't have to go looking for animals to find.

As a way to perhaps tweak the balance somewhat, this suggestion is relatively simple: Increase the population of animals on the Island, and increase the locations where they can be found. This doesn't stop PvP play, but it does make the alternatives a stronger option.

Increasing the number of animals in the wilderness would mean more animal encounters for those exploring the wilderness - making it more difficult, and perhaps encouraging those who've stayed in town to perhaps get out and explore.

Increasing the locations where animals can be found is a simple modification - wild animals should be seen in town more often, given the lack of any fences to keep them out. With a lack of any rubbish handling in both outsider and native settlements, rats should also be a common feature of life in the settlements.

As a simple suggestion, rats should appear in any huts that have dead bodies within or that are empty (no one is resting within).

Comments
Another few hundred animals added, this brings the total to just over the number of active players. Look out for new creatures making an appearance soon (oops, said too much) --Simon 23:14, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

That's great to hear Simon - any chance of some information on the number of animals in the daily statistics? --Johan Crichton 01:33, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Gun Smiths

Author	Timestamp	Type	Scope
kenny rogers1	19:25, 12 April 2007	improvement	Anyone who uses guns

Back in the 1700's rich aristocrats would have custom firearms made for them. What I am proposing is that the outsider settlements be given a gunsmith. For a substantial fee these gun smiths could make improvements on your guns. These changes wouldn't be instant so you would have to come back later. Some of these improvements could be increased ammo capacity, more barrels on the gun, make it cause more damage etc. To keep it balanced the better the improvement the more it would cost and the longer it would take to do.

Comments
Only if guns are made breakable and the natives get a blowpipesmith. -Mark D. Stroyer 03:49, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Breakable (misfire/blowing up in hands/etc) guns are partially implemented - I have a few bits to finish off first though. --Simon 18:38, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

see my suggestion native temples kenny rogers1

Additional Ships

Author	Timestamp	Type	Scope
FirstAmongstDaves	15 April 2007	improvement	Pirates/Outsiders

As discussed here - http://forum.shartak.com/index.php/topic,364.15.html - Why not have a fleet of ships sitting offshore from the wreck, anchored and not moving? Say, five of them, each with masts, holds and the other features which we see on the shipwreck. Only accessible from the ocean by climbing the chain from the anchor to the deck.

A few benefits:

1. it explains the proliferation of pirates on the island. No one expects such a huge number of pirates from one vessel.

2. it gives pirates and people tempting the dangers of the shipwreck something new to explore, and potential turf wars between pirates. Some of the wrecks could have particular dangers or advantages - for example, a hold in one ship could have an abundance of gems, and another be filled with rats. While I'm suggesting five ships offshore from the shipwreck, it could just as easily be three, or it could be ten. The idea is to have several in any event. It would get the pirates engaged in intrigue against each other over turf, and make the area more attractive to other players.

3. it takes the place of the numerous huts you see in villages, which the shipwreck lacks.

Incidental to this suggestion is to have other ships sitting offshore from the outsider villages - there is a natural inlet north-west of York which I figured would be a suitable harbour. Other non-pirate ships at other strategic places, like the abandoned ruins are, but specifically offshore the settlements to explain how the settlers got there. This idea includes a ship on a river, to make the rivers even more interesting, and a ship beneath the eastern marsh, to attract players out there. All of those ships could be taken by any group determined enough to do so - pirates, natives, outsiders - maybe with roaming shamans nearby to assist.

This suggestion does not require any new coding innovation - you would simply replicate the coding for the shipwreck, but at other locales.

So, in summary with some suggestions on locations for other ships:

1. one ship in Unity Bay near the island

2. one ship in the Long Fin River delta given the number of players in the locality

in addition to:

3. the eastern swamp, to encourage travel to that region

4. the harbour north of York, giventhe large numbers of people in York and the amount of traffic that route gets

and of course:

5. the flotilla at the wreck, of 3+ ships

6. a ship in the water at each settlement.

Finally, the shipwreck only has one mast. While it may be that other mast were destroyed in the wreck, a one masted sloops is an unlikely choice of pirate ship. Corvettes and frigates had three masts. I am guessing it would be possible to easily create three masted ships.

Comments

Does it only have one mast or is it just one mast that you can climb? It wouldn't be easy to create one with 3 masts that you can climb unless it occupied 3 separate map blocks and that would make for a very large ship. Moving the ships around would be quite complicated indeed and would be prone to people disappearing into non-existent map areas or being left stranded at the top of the mast with no way to get down. --Simon 18:36, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps not moving the ships then? And if the original shipwreck is actualy a one mast sloop, then why couldn't the frigates/corvettes take up three squares? it makes more sense than having a sloop the size of a frigate. This is all ofcourse, based on the size of the shipwreck...just ignore me and carry on...--Rozen 19:58, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Assuming GPS co-ords are correct, isn't 1 block about 100m ? Were ships 300m long? We're talking roughly 900ft... seems awfully big. --Simon 10:21, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Simon, yes, I figured the mechanics of moving ships would be too difficult. The suggestion is that the ships are static, effectively "landmarks' at sea for people to climb over. They would not move, but be anchored at sea and approachable only from the sea. As for the masts, wouldn't the easiest thing simply be to have three options in one square, like you have with the shipwreck (the hold, the armoury, the galley)? "Climb main mast", "climb aft mast" and "Climb mizzen mast" would be options for players, all on the one square. - Dave

If they were fake masts then yes, that could be done. The current ship has a real mast where when you go up, you actually go up to a level above everything else. Shartak has a 4D map (x,y,z,inside), unlike UD that has a psuedo-3D (x,y,in_or_out) - it's hard to explain, but going up from one block to 3 different blocks just won't work. --Simon 10:21, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Simon, how does Shartak handle multiple huts in the same square? If the masts were treated as 'huts' instead of up/down movement, perhaps that might work? --Johan Crichton 02:14, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, exactly the same sort of thing. - Dave

Huts are treated as inside, because that's what they are. The difference between up/down and inside is that there can be multiple levels of inside but only 1 up/down. Hard to explain really without lots of complicated diagrams, but it allows all kinds of interesting tricks with the map such as tunnels that can cross over even at the same depth without actually becoming a crossroads. It does make generating the map somewhat awkward at times though. --Simon 11:24, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Since Masts don't essentially take you anywhere - and assuming the rigging is such that it's impossible to venture from one mast to another - for this suggestion at least, treating Masts as Huts would seem to work as a solution? --Johan Crichton 22:18, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Native Temples

Author	Timestamp	Type	Scope
kenny rogers1	13 April 2007	improvement	Natives

This suggestion is to try to balance out the gun smith suggestion but I think it should be a separate suggestion. A blowpipesmith wouldn't make sense but a martial arts temple would. Each native village would have a temple and each would teach a unique fighting style and sell unique sets of weapons. A lot of native tribes back then had really awesome fighting styles. Even if you don't like the gun smith idea I think this would help balance things for the natives.

Comments
Fair enough, not a bad idea. But if you want that, and gunsmiths, then its unbalanced for pirates. http://wiki.shartak.com/index.php/Suggestions:Items#Flintlock_Pistols my Golden oldie of a suggestion balances this. --Rozen 17:13, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

That looks good I can't wait to get a pistol.kenny rogers1

The suggestion is very old now, i made it when i first came onto the game. Its unlikely that Simon will implement it now, sadly. --Rozen 21:54, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Actually, November -> March was a pretty busy time. As Kenny said, I might just be waiting for the right time (got to keep the balance between native/outsider after all). --Simon 22:14, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

He may still put pistols in the game, he might just be waiting for the right time to do it.kenny rogers1

Trader Shipments

Author	Timestamp	Type	Scope
kenny rogers1	11:07 April 16	improvement	Everyone

My suggestion is that once a week or month traders get re-supplied from the mainland. With this previously rare items like shovels will be temporarily cheaper.

Comments
This is good, but only if some settlements get shipments of an item and others don't. Economies are built on scarcity. Think about the price of rifles in most Outsider settlements. They are non-consumables, never need to be replaced once a player has enough rifles, so they have virtually no value at the trader's hut. The consumables, which must be constantly replenished (eg: first aid kits), are the more valuable commodities. Dumping a large shipment of any one item would cause the trade value of that item to plummet, thereby nerfing those players who scavenge and sell as their main occupation in the game. On the other hand, if the shipments arrive unevenly (eg: first aid kits to Derby and shovels to Durham) then scavengers would have a reason to travel. --Nosimplehiway 11:50, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

At the risk of giving away too much info, shovels are not something that can be found. I believe the traders trade items for the raw materials and sit in their huts making the shovels themselves. After all, it's not like they're busy all the time. It keeps the prices up as they can only make one or two a day. --Simon 23:12, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Class change

Author	Timestamp	Type	Scope
Htkl	08:51, 30 April 2007 (UTC)	Skill fettling	Everyone

Currently people are stuck in whatever class they've chosen, often leaving them unable to get skills they would find useful for whatever they're actually doing.

So i'm suggesting a possible way to help these people, by offering a class change option which could be implemented by having it as an option that'd cost however much your next skill would cost, may also work as a temporary (single use) skill that allows a class change. possibly just giving you back the XP/levels you spent on any class-specific skills and dropping your level to match.

Comments
Any penalty for changing classes should be fairly hefty IMO. I think today I'll be a shaman, exorcise those spirits, ok now I want to be a villager to get the better scavenging search rates, and then having found all the herbs I need, I'll switch to a warrior and go take out some animals. Unless I've misunderstood the suggestion, giving back the XP for class specific skills could lead to this kind of thing. You should lose the XP for class specific skills - now that would be a sufficient deterrent to frivolous class switching. --Simon 00:43, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Extra Revive Option

Author	Timestamp	Type	Scope
kenny rogers1	May 16 13:23	improvement	people who die

I propose that we add an option to contact a shaman at a village other than the one you start at for 50 AP. You would be able to pick which village you respawn at.

Comments
I think that if you should die in a foreign village, you should also be able respawn there or at your home shaman if you choose. Spawning anywhere sounds too much like teleportation. --Wulla-mullung 17:55, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Originally you could respawn at the nearest shaman if you were stood on the same square. This led to some rather tedious XP farming with two opposing sides sat on the shaman square in Dalpok and as soon as you died, you were revived and got killed again. Let's please try not to go there again. --Simon 00:39, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Ah I see, I've never actually died so I'm a little newbish in the death department. Maybe if it was possible to tell how far away the closest roaming shaman was, determined by squares from where you died. Or if thats too precise perhaps work it like your home beacon: Roaming Shaman 50AP (Very far east) --Wulla-mullung 01:42, 22 May 2007 (UTC) Ok, I logged into my idle test pirate. 'es dead.

Well

Author	Timestamp	Type	Scope
Wulla-mullung	17:48, 21 May 2007 (UTC)	New inanimate object	Everyone in a village

Being a friendly fellow, I like to use my healing herbs on others and drink water for healing myself. The problem is, I have to treck a long distance to find any form of fresh water. What I propose is that in the center of every village there be a well. The well would be equipped with a bucket that would be used to bring water up from the well. For 1 AP, you can bring up the bucket that will be full of fresh water. Clicking on an empty gourd or bottle in your inventory would fill it with water, costing 1 AP each. After taking 10 scoops of water, it would need to be refilled for 2 AP (1 to drop the bucket, 1 to bring it back up). If you happen to attempt to get water from an empty bucket (0AP) a message would appear "The bucket is empty. Perhaps you should fill it back up with water."

The well would have an ingame graphic and would have a description of whether the bucket is down or up - "You see an old and moss covered well, it's bucket is raised to the top." / "You see an old and moss covered well, it's bucket is somewhere down below."

Comments
Hmmmm...awesome! I'm sure some clever person will think of a reason why this shouldn't be thought about, but right now, I think this is pretty good. --Rozen 05:36, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

@@ Line 1,107: / Line 1,107: @@
 <!-- COMMENT **BELOW** THIS LINE - DO NOT DELETE THIS LINE -->
-''comments are awesome''
+Hmmmm...awesome! I'm sure some clever person will think of a reason why this shouldn't be thought about, but right now, I think this is pretty good. --[[User:Rozen|Rozen]] 05:36, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
 <!-- COMMENT **ABOVE** THIS LINE - DO NOT DELETE THIS LINE -->
 }}

Difference between revisions of "Suggestions:Game mechanics"

Revision as of 05:36, 22 May 2007

Example

Contents

Game Mechanics

Conversion

Capturing villages

Unique skills

Pet System

Conch Shell Hunt

Forest Fire

Auto Attack

Flavor Text

slots/ new inventory

Boat Construction

PvP Protection

New strategic location on island

Life cycle

Message in a bottle

Map quest

Monsoon

Identification of strangers

Drowning

Pigeon postal service

Climbable Trees and high areas

Importance of the Islands of Shartak

Message huts

Clan Bonuses

Additional Pirate Ships

Spirit Stuff

More Clan/Crew powers

Looting

Day and Night

Guildhouses

Trading XP

Cupped Hands and Dumping

Use of Ranged Weapons as Melee Weapons

Native Medical Hut Find Rates

Carving edits

Hut Renovation

Major game change

Huts: Body Dumping

Villagers as NPCs

Vow of Peace

Policy Discussion

Snakes

Increased Animal Population

Gun Smiths

Additional Ships

Native Temples

Trader Shipments

Class change

Extra Revive Option

Well

Navigation menu

Search