Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 31 of 31
  1. #21
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    2,330

    Default

    I don't know. This sounds like an idea that would be fun, but would provide horrible xp/min. DDO can either be a game that mixes xp/min quests with other types of quests, or it can simply be a game with high xp/min quests. From all the complaining about low xp/min quests, useless explorer areas, and challenges, I can only decide that the DDO community only wants high xp/min quests added to the game and anything else will just cause complaining and be highly unpopular.

  2. #22
    Community Member azrael4h's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Skara Brae
    Posts
    2,780

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wanesa View Post
    To generate random maze is core algorithm of every rogue-like game. And most of them are written in the Flash. I don't see any difficulty to implement something in the DDO. There will be probably some issues with downloading the generated map to the clients with present protocol.
    Most Rogue-likes don't even have graphics, just use ASCII tilesets. Furthermore, most of them were written before Flash even existed. Some were written in various flavors of BASIC, a few in Assembly (which is a pain), Many in C or C++. A few in Java. I think ADOM2 is being written in Java.

    I don't know of any Rogue-likes being written in Flash.

    Further, Even Diablo can be boiled down to a bunch of boxes connected to other boxes, either directly or via line hallways. It's very, very simple compared to DDO and a full 3D environment.

    Finally, speaking as a programmer with experience in game coding, the first sign of failure is when someone says "it can't be too hard". It would be a large undertaking, with many hours of coding work, many more hours of testing, then more coding, just to get something that may or may not have any real return. Random world generation is not a trivial matter, not to get it looking good, and relatively bug free. Even Minecraft has world generation issues, and the world generation is very limited and generic there,
    It was the night before Hogswatch....

    Optimus Prime/Grimlock 2016 Because in diplomacy, sending in the Dinobots is the only answer.

  3. #23
    Community Member Wanesa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Prague
    Posts
    527

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by azrael4h View Post
    Most Rogue-likes don't even have graphics, just use ASCII tilesets. Furthermore, most of them were written before Flash even existed. Some were written in various flavors of BASIC, a few in Assembly (which is a pain), Many in C or C++. A few in Java. I think ADOM2 is being written in Java.

    I don't know of any Rogue-likes being written in Flash.
    Just an example after one minute of googling
    http://www.mochigames.com/game/dungeoncrawl/


    Quote Originally Posted by azrael4h View Post
    Most Rogue-likes don't even have graphics, just use ASCII tilesets.
    Imagine that data about the maze design is similar to HTML page. In the same level of imagination, 3D graphics is similar to CSS and set of referenced image files. So you can generate rogue-like maze however this can be presented by prepared fagments and you won't recognize it. There will be no ASCII tilesets.

    IMHO all harbor quests looks like generated dungeons. But they are always the same.

    Quote Originally Posted by azrael4h View Post
    Further, Even Diablo can be boiled down to a bunch of boxes connected to other boxes, either directly or via line hallways. It's very, very simple compared to DDO and a full 3D environment.
    Certainly generated dungeons cannot compete with hand crafted dungeons. They should not at all. Their main advantage is they are random or should be random.


    Quote Originally Posted by azrael4h View Post
    Finally, speaking as a programmer with experience in game coding, the first sign of failure is when someone says "it can't be too hard". It would be a large undertaking, with many hours of coding work, many more hours of testing, then more coding, just to get something that may or may not have any real return. Random world generation is not a trivial matter, not to get it looking good, and relatively bug free.
    Back to the beginning. There are A LOT OF algorithms from the beginning of IT age able to generate random maze. Nobody has to invent a wheel.

    Thelanis: Shewind the Airbender (Sorc20/Epic5 -> Bard20/Epic8 -> Rog20/Epic8/Epic2 -> Harper_FvS20/Epic4 -> Art19), Azaxe (Rog18/Wiz2 -> Sorc20/Epic6)

  4. #24
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    3,018

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ungood View Post
    Which brings me to Torchlight, a game I have never played, so, I have to ask, does it have any goal at all involved in it? Like say, a max level, or something? Do you ever at any point hit a wall, or win the day, or do you just keep running these random dungeons till you just eventually burn out or get bored?

    ....

    Personally, overlooking the vast disparity between one players 5 min and another players 5 min, case in point, I have been on 5 min Mindsunder runs, and I have been on runs that took 45 min. Thus, If you could in fact have a means to gauge 5 min of effort then you might have something to work with here.

    .....

    The a typical MMO builds off the platform of each mobs is worth a set amount of exp, and that is how they gauge progress and effort, but DDO does not work on the mechanic so they would need to either revamp their entire exp system (never going to happen) or find a way to make a "completed" check point in this random dungeon thing, but that brings us back to the problem you brought up of "half a Mindsunder", IE: if you don't get to the check point, you don't get your loot/exp.
    Torchlight has a "quest mode" with a traditional boss-at-the-end kind of deal, and an "endless dungeon" mode that doesn't. Granted, the loot-hunt is more of a MacGuffin for Diablo-clones than it is in DDO, but I still think that the game would benefit from having content where the gameplay IS the point, where you have fun playing it, not just jumping through hoops to get your named item or flag for another quest you actually enjoy...

    5 mins is different to everyone, yes - but even in open ended dungeons, 5 mins for a casual soloer would be different than 5 mins for a hardcore full group. The only difference is the casual soloer cant get ANYthing for his 5 mins, right now...

    Quantizing the XP is the challenge, yes, which is why I went with slayer deeds - using a current system - rather than suggesting straight XP/kill, which would be the best way to quantize it, although it'd be a departure from the existing game philosophy as well as more trouble to implement.

    Quote Originally Posted by bsquishwizzy View Post
    Looking at what you have today, when a quest starts it has a specific, set level range under which it operates. If you are way above or below levels, you’re going to have some issues.
    ...
    Essentially what you’ve described is what they’ve basically already done with High Road and King’s Forest (or any other wilderness area). You’re just adding portals.
    ...
    People run quests for two basic reasons: loot and XP. If you aren’t providing XP, then you’d better be providing decent loot. If you don’t provide either, the odds that the quest will be run is going to be rather low.
    ...
    The issue is with the soft cap. Because you will have people who will attempt to break the cap regardless. So a soft cap will translate into a hard one.
    ...
    The other issue is that when you hit upper levels, you start to run out of monsters with a high enough CR rating to extend the run. The only result is to recycle current mobs, and jack up the CR rating. However, I suspect it is probably more complicated than that.
    The level range question is self-correcting. You cant run these over-level, by design, so you're always either at- or under-level. If you're too far under, that's your own problem - if you cant hang, leave the group and start your own at-level run. Existing group XP penalty mechanics are sufficient to prevent people from powerleveling in quests way way over their level.

    Do High Road and King's Forest have repeatable, per-session slayer deeds? That's the big difference between this idea and the current adventure zones - that, and the non-linearity of the AZs.

    XP is the main motivation you'd run these, yes. Not as much XP/min as quests, but more than - for example - Cannith challenges. Enough to make it a viable component of the XP hunt, but not enough to make it the centerpiece, or render questing for XP obsolete. The loot would be a secondary reward, again like the chests you get from killing Challenge bosses.

    A soft cap is a soft cap - people can try to break it, but there's diminishing returns and only so much you can squeeze out. The "cap" on the best possible group is only going to be an extra 1-2 more levels than a good group, which is only 2-3 levels more than a random PUG, etc. People aren't going to be cruising down 100 levels in a single run.

    There's always monsters at the current 'endgame' to draw from. L20, it was Devils from Amrath. L25, its Drow and all the Underdark mobs. L28, it'll be the Shadowfell mobs. Endgame +10, you can start to stick in some "iconic" mobs like the odd dragon, lich, etc. if you want. I don't think you'd ever get so far over endgame level that you'd notice its still just the same mobs, just with higher CR, or get bored with them.

    Quote Originally Posted by jalont View Post
    I don't know. This sounds like an idea that would be fun, but would provide horrible xp/min.
    Not good, not horrible - just decent. Granted, yes, the min-maxers might shun this system because they can get better xp/min running Litany on Epic for 15 times in a row...but you cant cater everything to your min-maxers

    If everything new had to be better xp/min than whats already there in order to be worthwhile, then obviously you're only ever going to have 1 thing that people ever do, and as soon as the next thing came out, the old thing would be obsolete and ignored.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wanesa View Post
    Back to the beginning. There are A LOT OF algorithms from the beginning of IT age able to generate random maze. Nobody has to invent a wheel.
    Heck, its already in game - what I'm suggesting is basically how Shadow Crypt works, with the prebuilt rooms that randomly connect. Granted, those just have 3 different preset "patterns" of connectedness, but this idea is simpler than Shadow Crypt, since it'd be linear rather than a maze, and also wouldn't need to be connected to a "boss room". I wouldn't expect that it would be that much harder to have the game decide randomly what room comes "next" in an open-ended dungeon.

  5. #25
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    1

    Default Combine two turbine games

    I get tired of questing and would like an area where I can just go kill individual creatures for individual XP. It would be easy do in my opinion ( I am not a programmer). Take the current wilderness areas and add a doorway to an open / free kill area. It could even have lairs and random boss level monster. You use an open area formatting that Turbine can steal from LOTRO.
    Last edited by Jamespt; 08-10-2013 at 06:15 PM.

  6. #26
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    4,643

    Default

    I like this idea. It would add another element of playstyle to the game, and variety is a good thing.
    http://myaccount.turbine.com

    Je ne suis pas
    DDO Alpha Tester

  7. #27
    Community Member bsquishwizzy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    2,822

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by droid327 View Post
    The level range question is self-correcting. You cant run these over-level, by design, so you're always either at- or under-level. If you're too far under, that's your own problem - if you cant hang, leave the group and start your own at-level run. Existing group XP penalty mechanics are sufficient to prevent people from powerleveling in quests way way over their level.
    So, again , you have one of two things: a brand new XP scaling / determination system, or something that mimics a wilderness zone.

    Right now they can do one of three things presently: use the wilderness mechanic (and no one gets any XP), what they’ve done in Crystal Cove (static CR level for a quest), or what they did in the Marbar (level ranges). And in each of those, you run into big problems that are corrected by the players before they enter the quest: mainly no XP and no loot when you get a kill (or whatever).

    Maybe you’re talking about the same thing, I’m not 100% sure.

    Quote Originally Posted by droid327 View Post
    Do High Road and King's Forest have repeatable, per-session slayer deeds? That's the big difference between this idea and the current adventure zones - that, and the non-linearity of the AZs.
    I don’t think that’s a decent comparison. There are relatively few people who will do 1,500 slayers because they LOVE to kill stuff. They do that amount for the XP. And in addition to that, they have rares and explorers to find (which I really only do so that I can see the entire map and use the navigator on the airship).

    Quote Originally Posted by droid327 View Post
    XP is the main motivation you'd run these, yes. Not as much XP/min as quests, but more than - for example - Cannith challenges. Enough to make it a viable component of the XP hunt, but not enough to make it the centerpiece, or render questing for XP obsolete. The loot would be a secondary reward, again like the chests you get from killing Challenge bosses.
    Again, I don’t think XP alone will make people want to run these.

    Quote Originally Posted by droid327 View Post
    A soft cap is a soft cap - people can try to break it, but there's diminishing returns and only so much you can squeeze out. The "cap" on the best possible group is only going to be an extra 1-2 more levels than a good group, which is only 2-3 levels more than a random PUG, etc. People aren't going to be cruising down 100 levels in a single run.

    There's always monsters at the current 'endgame' to draw from. L20, it was Devils from Amrath. L25, its Drow and all the Underdark mobs. L28, it'll be the Shadowfell mobs. Endgame +10, you can start to stick in some "iconic" mobs like the odd dragon, lich, etc. if you want. I don't think you'd ever get so far over endgame level that you'd notice its still just the same mobs, just with higher CR, or get bored with them.
    Again, I don’t think that it is a simple a matter as jacking up the CR level, or that it is a simple calculation that translates that moving up one CR level means you will have X HP, and Y saving throws. If I’m wrong, then I am wrong. The differences between something like epic casual, epic normal, epic hard, and epic elite are not linear, and some mobs in one level of difficulty may be vulnerable to a specific spell, but in other difficulties are immune to these spells altogether. So again, I don’t think it is a simple calculation.

    And that’s another thing, how can devils and demons be gimpier than Drow? Or wolves, as in the case of the High Road? That I don’t get…

    Which brings to mind one thing that no one has brought up thus far (to my knowledge): how does this affect BB?

  8. #28
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    3,018

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bsquishwizzy View Post
    Right now they can do one of three things presently...

    ...

    Again, I don’t think that it is a simple a matter as jacking up the CR level, or that it is a simple calculation that translates that moving up one CR level means you will have X HP, and Y saving throws. If I’m wrong, then I am wrong. The differences between something like epic casual, epic normal, epic hard, and epic elite are not linear, and some mobs in one level of difficulty may be vulnerable to a specific spell, but in other difficulties are immune to these spells altogether. So again, I don’t think it is a simple calculation.

    ...

    Which brings to mind one thing that no one has brought up thus far (to my knowledge): how does this affect BB?
    I don't see why you keep having an issue with the XP scaling - its very simple. The initial level is set at the highest level in your group, when you generate the instance, and moves up every time you go into a new zone. XP rewards are calibrated by that initial level. XP sharing penalties follows current rules for quests, to wit:

    Quote Originally Posted by DDO Wiki
    Power-leveling penalty: (individual) If you are exactly 4 levels below the highest-level character in the party, you receive a -50% penalty. If you are 5 levels below, you receive a -75% penalty. If you are 6 levels below, you receive a -99% penalty. If you are 7 or more levels below, you receive no XP regardless of bonuses. Characters that are level 20 or 21 do not receive a power-level penalty, even when grouped with level 24-25 characters.
    The group would not be allowed to add any new members, as long as the instance was still open - so there would be no way to get any "ringers" in your instance, or otherwise abuse the dynamic level system to make the instance "too easy" for your group.

    ----

    There would be "tiers" of CR mobs, definitely, just like there's the Kobold tier, the Drow tier, the Hobgoblin tier, etc. in Crystal Cove. You could hand-craft a couple different "flavors" of mob for each CR tier - ie a couple Undead, a couple Ogres, a couple Xoriats, etc. - but within a +/- 5 CR range, you can tweak that with numerical adjustments (HP, saves, damage, etc.) as well as unlocking some additional spells for casters, just like you see on Elite vs Hard/Normal.

    Once you get to endgame+10 or so, then you can just scale up the numerical factors ad infinitum until you hit that "soft cap" I talked about where their numericals just overwhelm you.

    ----

    They wouldn't factor into BB at all, just like Challenges don't, just like Wilderness zones don't. No bonus, no disruption. They don't have different difficulty settings.

  9. #29
    Community Member FranOhmsford's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Staffs, England
    Posts
    9,265

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bsquishwizzy View Post

    And that’s another thing, how can devils and demons be gimpier than Drow? Or wolves, as in the case of the High Road? That I don’t get…
    This is Off-Topic and really a subject for a whole 'nother thread!

    BUT

    I agree wholeheartedly that it is incredibly silly that we're STILL seeing Hyper Jacked-Up Wolves and Rats etc. in what's supposed to be EPIC Content!

    The High Road is a low level pack masquerading as a high level pack
    -----------------------------------------------------------------

    The quest and explorer design is that of Harbour/Marketplace/House quests and The High Road would have fit far better into the game at Lvl 11 Max in my opinion {epic option available if you like}.

    The Same goes for many of the quests in Eveningstar, King's Forest and Schindylrynn

    Drow are Mid-Game Opponents for use in Lvl 8-15 Content - With some exceptions {Lloth - Possibly Matron Baenre before she came up against Drizz't and Companions...Who btw were around Lvl 9-12 at the time!}.

    Before Epics entered DDO we had a nice scaling of mobs:

    Skeletons, Zombies, Rats, Dogs, Wolves, Orcs, Kobolds, Hobgoblins, Troglodytes
    Ghouls, Wights, Ogres, Hill Giants, More Powerful Hobgoblins & Troglodytes
    Wraiths, Shadows, More Powerful Hill Giants, Vampire Bosses
    Fire Giants, Reavers, Renders, Flensers, Beholders, Vampires, Spectres, Gnolls, Mummies, Scorrow
    Devils

    Yes Player Races {as they should}, Spiders, Scorpions, Hobgoblins, Orcs, Kobolds and Trogs showed up throughout.
    Yes we had some anomalies - Fiendish lions at Lvl 3!

    BUT we had scaling!

    Then Epics come along and Phiarlan Carnival and Sentinels of Stormreach are Epicced with no thought to changing the style of mobs we face in those quests.
    For Partycrashers and Big Top this isn't really an issue - It's not a stretch to accept Lvl 20+ Tiefling NPCs!
    BUT
    For Snitch {Rats and Dogs} and Small Problem it is a heck of a stretch!

    For Sentinels - Black Loch, Spies in the House and Tide Turns work OK as Epics BUT BoB just doesn't feel Epic!
    And they didn't Epic the one quest in that pack that really should have been....
    Storm the Beaches!

    Epic Gianthold should have many more Rakshasa, Fiendish Trolls, Frost, Stone, Cloud and Storm Giants + Dragons of Course.
    Lose the Hill Giants, Drow, Orcs and Hobgobs - They're NOT Epic Mobs!
    We'll just have to accept the Minotaurs and Dwarves.

    Fill Cabal and Feast with Frost and Stone Giants since we wiped out the Orcs and Hobgobs on heroic!
    Fill Trial with Fiendish Trolls
    Fill Maze with High Lvl Minotaurs.
    Fill Foundation with High Lvl Dwarves
    and Cry with Rakshasa!

  10. #30
    Founder & Hero Uska's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Phoenix
    Posts
    22,926

    Default

    Maybe some kind of open dungeon might be cool but NO 10 million billion trillion times to a individual kill xp wow style slayer area

    The ANTI-Realms FANBOI NUKE THE REALMS ITS THE ONLY REAL WAY TO BE SURE

  11. #31
    Community Member bsquishwizzy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    2,822

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by droid327 View Post
    I don't see why you keep having an issue with the XP scaling - its very simple. The initial level is set at the highest level in your group, when you generate the instance, and moves up every time you go into a new zone. XP rewards are calibrated by that initial level. XP sharing penalties follows current rules for quests…
    Ok, let’s turn this around: does what you are proposing even remotely exist in the current system? If it requires a new scaling mechanic, it is highly unlikely to bet accepted. DDO’s scaling – even scaling in general – is less of a science and more of an art form (as are all things related to balance in DDO).

    It’s not a matter of my misunderstanding what you want to do, or even if it sounds logical. It is a matter of what already exists in the game that can be re-used, and can be “sold” to the Devs as already being in the system. New coding takes time to write, test, and accepted by the end-user. If they can recycle what is already there, then it stops becoming a barrier to implementation.

    Quote Originally Posted by droid327 View Post
    There would be "tiers" of CR mobs, definitely, just like there's the Kobold tier, the Drow tier, the Hobgoblin tier, etc. in Crystal Cove. You could hand-craft a couple different "flavors" of mob for each CR tier - ie a couple Undead, a couple Ogres, a couple Xoriats, etc. - but within a +/- 5 CR range, you can tweak that with numerical adjustments (HP, saves, damage, etc.) as well as unlocking some additional spells for casters, just like you see on Elite vs Hard/Normal.
    I personally think that’s a cool idea.

    Quote Originally Posted by droid327 View Post
    Once you get to endgame+10 or so, then you can just scale up the numerical factors ad infinitum until you hit that "soft cap" I talked about where their numericals just overwhelm you.
    Once more, I don’t think mob CR levels scale according to a simple numerical formula. I think it is more complicated than that. So your soft cap potentially becomes a hard cap.

    Quote Originally Posted by droid327 View Post
    They wouldn't factor into BB at all, just like Challenges don't, just like Wilderness zones don't. No bonus, no disruption. They don't have different difficulty settings.
    Cool. That would definitely sell and work.

    (Honestly, I don’t follow BB anyways, hence the reason why I asked.)

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

This form's session has expired. You need to reload the page.

Reload