Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

World-Building Pt. 2 - Official Discussion Thread


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, yianni said:

Did I hear orcs and lizardmen? 

 

Can we get the king lizard from SB on here. He can drop disciplines that would be awesome

Sli'Staak (I'm sure it was an homage to the "Sleestak" from the original "Land of the Lost Series") was the Lizardman King's name, he dropped a cool helm as well back in the day, the "Kings Helm".

Keep the Kings name

Edit: Also...Gurruk Chief's Son needs to be added as a thrall

DiscDropperGladiatorA.jpg

Edited by Armegeddon

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Armegeddon said:

Sli'Staak (I'm sure it was an homage to the "Sleestak" from the original "Land of the Lost Series") was the Lizardman King's name, he dropped a cool helm as well back in the day, the "Kings Helm".

Keep the Kings name

Edit: Also...Gurruk Chief's Son needs to be added as a thrall

DiscDropperGladiatorA.jpg

Oh yeah forgot about him. Didn't he drop the gladiator rune

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Kreigon said:

can we get orc as playable race?? PLZ

Well... I love the idea but... It would make it hard to fit given the HG and Mino races being of such similar vein, at least stat wise... but we definitely need a "green skin" race. How about a smaller one, say a STR/DEX/CON version of Guinecean....... a "Grobold" perhaps?(for those non SB players, think goblin) 

View Full Size Image

Edited by Reekor
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Pacifying NPC camps

The idea of using a capture point mechanic for NPC camps seems cool at first glance, but I'd caution the team about the practical applications here. One of the things I see players liking the most about the wrath map is the mixture of high volume mob spawns alongside the various high ranked nodes as it creates a more dynamic system that encourages a mixture of specializations.

If we could, for instance, pacify the end room in the current zombie canyon we end up with a system in which there's not really a good reason to bring along our combat specced friends as they don't really have anything to do after the initial trip except stand around and wait for other players to show up. In the current system we get around this by having spawns of zombies that can potentially interfere with the efficiency of our harvesters as although the harvesters are perfectly capable of dealing with the mob spawns, it is actually more efficient to bring a few "guards" specifically tasked with clearing out mobs so that they don't have to. This gives everyone something to do and creates a "guards and workers" dynamic which is good for PvP without also falling in to the common open world issue of nobody wanting to guard harvesters.

Without the mobs functioning as a possible impediment to the efficiency of harvesting, guard duty is double boring. You're standing around with nothing to do AND your very presence serves as a deterrent to anything interesting happenning as any prospective gankers are likely to have softer unguarded targets elsewhere due to guarding being so boring.

Mob respawns serving as impediments to other activities can actually be better for moment to moment play in some cases than allowing players to shut off the spawners. The goal of "clearing out" a spawn should probably be balanced against "will our combat and noncombat archetypes still have something to do in this space if it is cleared out if no pvp happens?"

Perhaps rather than shutting down a spawn, taking over a mob camp in order to exploit its resources or paths should simply move the spawners a short distance away and path the mobs to attempt to retake it. In this way you've removed uncertainty of having mobs respawn on top of your harvesters, but your combat element still have something to do by guarding the ingress the mobs want to use to knock over your flag. This also allows players, who are smarter and generally more mobile to exploit the mob's vector of attack by choosing a less obvious ingress and flanking the harvesters rather than announcing themselves by fighting mobs on the way in to the location that is being exploited for resources. If all of your guards are hanging out at the hot gates to stop the mobs from getting back in, gankers that can use the goat path successfully may actually have a better chance of a quick smash and run than if the mobs are simply respawning in the room, or not spawning at all. If there are multiple paths of ingress, these types of locations may even deliberately split up guard elements to further encourage ganks by slightly advantaging the ganking group and encourage more PvP than a full clear or constant respawn mechanic.

Edited by PopeUrban

LMAO my website is broken please click this to apply to Flames of Exile (maybe, if that's not busted too)

On 5/11/2015 at 1:48 PM, CAWCAWCAW said:

Rub rock on face and say "Yes food is eaten now time for fight"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great stuff!

I had a thought regarding the choice of what theme to put where on the roads, and the issue of whether things would get stale or not, or make logical sense, and the possibility of dynamic content in this area. One of the great features of Crowfall is the seasonal progression, which includes the alteration over time of the mobs themselves, and it would be interesting if not only did certain themed parcels undergo this kind of seasonal transition, but if there were other transitions as well.

So for example, a 'burned out' themed parcel was mentioned - it would be interesting if that location started out with a normal, or NPC-occupied version first, and then over time, at some point it would change to the burned one, suggestion not just that some even happened in the past, but that it happened in the recent past, that was actually a present moment during the existing campaign. If this tech existed, you could even do something similar in terms of 'logical progression' for the other types - so for example, first a human tileset along a road or in a NPC town, then a spider-infested version where you have both with the fake-fighting, then a burned out one, then a risen one (the dead NPCs having fallen in the spider conflict or the fire caused by trying to burn them out etc.). Basically something that would suggest the living world element but without needing moment-to-moment NPC activity, but rather larger chunks of progression through thematic change of parcel and other flavor-asset types.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It sounds really interesting and exciting.

Nevertheless, I'd like to constructively point some of my concerns on a couple issues.

 

As has been said before, NPCamps and it's pacification, are a nasty business.

Too few enemies, and caravans become just a boring procedure. Too many enemies, and you'll always need a good team for moving resources around. Not enough danger, and gatherers won't need any combat support at all. Too much danger, and the risk/reward balance for making roads appealing goes off track. It won't be an easy thing.

 

My other concern is that, by using only those anchors to generate roads, those roads may end up being always too straight. You get out of town, and take the road that goes straight to the stronghold. No curves anywhere to be seen. And when you get out of the stronghold, you take this other road to that next anchor point. Autorun always on. It kinda feels anti-immersive.

Maybe the road generator algorithm will be complex enough to solve this, or the "road parcel set" will hold so much variations that even then roads won't feel monotonous, or maybe there will be such an abundant number of anchors (maybe new artificial anchors that aren't key POI?) that this won't happen at all... But right now it's still a potential concern.

 

By the way, I love Anthrage's idea of bringing more depth to seasonal progression. Making use of different themes, or changing it's diorama's so that parcels may "evolve" sounds great. Maybe it could affect the usability of roads and passages. An avalanche has made the mountain passage unaviable (temporarily... or not); hunger has already pierced it's way through a canyon and now it's just an abyss of mists; the constant work on the mine ended up creating an unexpected underground mountain passage;...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm writing the rules for road placement soon.  I have ideas on how we'll break them up.  I've explained to the team how we should order the continent breakers (mountains, canyons, etc) prior to generating roads, so the roads have a higher chance of meandering.  We did discuss how roads will search for a close road parcel and attempt to link up to it, which would create Y intersections.  I'm definitely concerned about straight roads and will look into putting variations (noise) into them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/1/2018 at 3:57 PM, Hanseshadow said:

I'm writing the rules for road placement soon.  I have ideas on how we'll break them up.  I've explained to the team how we should order the continent breakers (mountains, canyons, etc) prior to generating roads, so the roads have a higher chance of meandering.  We did discuss how roads will search for a close road parcel and attempt to link up to it, which would create Y intersections.  I'm definitely concerned about straight roads and will look into putting variations (noise) into them. 

What are the rules for the roads? Are they suposed to connect what to what?

Last video Todd wanted them to connect strongholds. And i couldn't hear much of anything in this video (Full house and no headphones) but that shouldn't have changed...

I feel perhaps the roads should folow how the world was before the hunger came. Y`know, from stronghold to near town and stuff you would expect in a real medieval world. It seems you guys are too focused on making the roads super convenient to the players. I mean, you guys wanted mountains and rivers to make way for them after all.

Having players adapt to how the roads are placed instead of them just magically connecting everything worthwhile.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, BarriaKarl said:

What are the rules for the roads? Are they suposed to connect what to what?

Last video Todd wanted them to connect strongholds. And i couldn't hear much of anything in this video (Full house and no headphones) but that shouldn't have changed...

I feel perhaps the roads should folow how the world was before the hunger came. Y`know, from stronghold to near town and stuff you would expect in a real medieval world. It seems you guys are too focused on making the roads super convenient to the players. I mean, you guys wanted mountains and rivers to make way for them after all.

Having players adapt to how the roads are placed instead of them just magically connecting everything worthwhile.

Isn't that the job of roads? To connect everything worthwhile for easy transport and directions.

That is exactly what I would expect from roads built before the hunger came.

 

Edited by KrakkenSmacken
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Roads will grow from parcels that have road connectors defined on them.  I expect the connector to be on different sides of keeps, towns, and other populated areas on a map.  Once that connector has been defined, there will be an algorithm (that I write, most likely) that attempts to create the road to the nearest connector or other road.  Currently, we do not have any parcels for going through mountains or over canyons, so the roads will meander around them.  I'll also introduce some noise to make sure the roads are not straight lines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Hanseshadow said:

Roads will grow from parcels that have road connectors defined on them.  I expect the connector to be on different sides of keeps, towns, and other populated areas on a map.  Once that connector has been defined, there will be an algorithm (that I write, most likely) that attempts to create the road to the nearest connector or other road.  Currently, we do not have any parcels for going through mountains or over canyons, so the roads will meander around them.  I'll also introduce some noise to make sure the roads are not straight lines.

How about diagonal roads? Will that be a thing eventually? Or will they all follow the stairway-like principle when trying to reach a destination in diagonal direction?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We could do diagonal roads, if the road ended at a corner and began at another.  Having a road cross a corner would be problematic, because you'd have to make adjacent cells to allow it to flow properly (and that just ends up being an entire parcel unto itself).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...