Why should HP be based of levels gained?

[Mactavendish]

I can kinda see FB's point, but will say that if HP increases it should top out to a cap any player could reach, NOT just those that can play 12-18 hours a day.

This is billed as a survival game.

So I would expect your survival and success in this game to how much time you devote to surviving not mindless grinding.

So, My though would be that your HP could be based off how well you are doing personally. The less thirsty/hungry/tired/encumbered you are and the more comfortable you are the higher your hp is towards a cap.

This way, crafting lots of levels only affects the quality/durability/damage/bonus an item has.. as it should. And it won't affect HP as it should not.

Damage levels should go up with how high your combat skills are. HP should NOT go up from combat leveling.

The combined effects will be ANYONE can get their HP to the same capped high level, and only quality of weapon and combat skills will give any advantage, and comfort level ( including hunger/thirst/etc.. ) will determine how much damage you can take.

THIS is what I would like to see and would agree with.

[MrDDT]

What about stats?

[Mactavendish]

What about them?

Adding str should come from any activity that requires physical effort.. be that masonry, terraforming or armed combat. All have an equal opportunity to excel.

I am not unhappy with the gains from these activities atm, and don't immediately see any problems.. BUT perhaps I'm missing something?

If stats make a HUGE difference, then they too should have a cap based upon actual effort to balance it.

An old saying goes, "it is not always the swift that wins the race nor is it the strongest that wins the battle." This is true in reality, because sometimes the swift depend too much on prowess and not enough on planning an efficient route, nor do the strongest always win, due to them fighting a smarter opponent.

So Putting all players on as even a footing as possible adds to the enjoyment of all. The only ones that will argue against balance are those that don't want an equal competition. Such ones have to be right, always win, and seek to disrupt equality.

[MrDDT]

What about them?

Adding str should come from any activity that requires physical effort.. be that masonry, terraforming or armed combat. All have an equal opportunity to excel.

I am not unhappy with the gains from these activities atm, and don't immediately see any problems.. BUT perhaps I'm missing something?

If stats make a HUGE difference, then they too should have a cap based upon actual effort to balance it.

An old saying goes, "it is not always the swift that wins the race nor is it the strongest that wins the battle." This is true in reality, because sometimes the swift depend too much on prowess and not enough on planning an efficient route, nor do the strongest always win, due to them fighting a smarter opponent.

So Putting all players on as even a footing as possible adds to the enjoyment of all. The only ones that will argue against balance are those that don't want an equal competition. Such ones have to be right, always win, and seek to disrupt equality.

I dont like even footing thing, because then why level anything at all? I mean if you want even footing why have skills at all in game? Just have it FPS counter-strike style.

Stats have little effect on HP. I believe they should have a larger effect on HP.

Also your problem with "skill of the player" is that players that are not great at FPS combat will always lose even to 1 day old players. These players would like to have effects that help them a little if they have trained up.

I would like to see both. HP closer to newer players HP. While still giving skill options to players who are good in combat.

If you look at the link I did about 10 replies back you will see that's what Ive been trying to do. Give people a chance to have higher HP using stats and training options. While still keeping it close to newer players. So newer players have a chance to kill vets, but vets should have the advantage. Just not as great as it is now.

In changing this, a lot of other options would need to be changed. Things like healing rates, healing options, stamina regen and stamina healing options. Without that, fights would be very bad. Ive explained all this before in other threads.

[Book]

Don't people who play more than others always have an advantage in a game? Even in an FPS, someone who plays a lot and has more practice will know the trajectory of each weapon better, react faster, know the map better... there are certain facets in which that's just unavoidable.

If the problem is that the current system leads to an overpowered player who uses that for nefarious purposes... that person would find a way to pester others regardless of what advantage he/she can find. It's a mindset. Paving junk, clearcutting, wiping out breeding animals... whatever. It's a nuisance, but I think it's beyond the scope of game design. It's like team-killers in an FPS. Nothing to gain but the frustration of others and that can always be accomplished in one way or another.

If the problem is that "King of the Hill 3" is coming up and it's already a foregone conclusion... well, competition generally involves loss, however frustrating as that may be. If there comes a point where nobody wants to bother, I'm sure some tweaking of some sorts that doesn't have to change basic mechanics can be thought up. Don't go dropping a nuke to kill a mouse.

[MrDDT]

I think the King of the Hill 3 event isnt really the problem, anyone can win that. Even a 1 day old player using tactics.

The problem is MrDDT is able to kill one of the hardest mobs in the game without dying or doing any special skills. Just stand there and attack non stop. There is no player skill or tactics, its a HP vs DPS game.

Andrew tried it, same tactics and he couldnt do it. Other players get killed in seconds. Monsters never miss, and standing still and attacking players dont either. So clearly there is a problem here. Where are the skills and tactics?

[Book]

I think the King of the Hill 3 event isnt really the problem, anyone can win that. Even a 1 day old player using tactics.

The problem is MrDDT is able to kill one of the hardest mobs in the game without dying or doing any special skills. Just stand there and attack non stop. There is no player skill or tactics, its a HP vs DPS game.

Andrew tried it, same tactics and he couldnt do it. Other players get killed in seconds. Monsters never miss, and standing still and attacking players dont either. So clearly there is a problem here. Where are the skills and tactics?

Wouldn't Andrew then need to find another solution? Is there no other solution? Any chance of circling the beast in some way?

MrDDT sounded pretty happy when the advert screenshots were going on. Excited that it was taking many people to kill large mutants with some people not making it.

The fact that MrDDT has such high HP versus PvE monsters can certainly make the game boring in the long run. Not sure the solution to that is nerfing his HP though. A more dynamic AI would be nice but probably not the easiest thing to implement. Haven't played with LISP much, and I'd assume those that do cost a lot.

A temporary solution would be to have some of the guides Raguel is looking to hire allowed to roam as mutant bears. Obviously would need the right kinds of folks in that role so inter-personal dislikes aren't carried over to the professional environment but I'd imagine a human brain behind a mutant bear body could perhaps bring some excitement back into it for DDT and others who have advanced to a very high level.

For those who can't stand still and win... for goodness's sakes, duck and cover or something.

Incidentally, the guide driven monster was implemented in Jumpgate back in '01. It really did lead to some good fun. Those monsters had a unique whale song that let you know what you're dealing with before you even see it. Got the blood pumping scurrying about. They weren't always the biggest and baddest and could be killed but threw something new into the mix.

[MrDDT]

That guide event would be cool too.
My point was that there should be more than HP vs DPS. Like you said cirlcing would be one option if it worked. Plus animals would need to be stronger.

Overal there is a lot more problems here than HP. Which is why the whole sysem needs to be looked at. Changing HP system without looking at the other reasons only changes a messed up system to another messed up system.

[Mactavendish]

At least this has lead to constructive dialog among all parties.

So I am happy with all this chatter going back and forth.

On a side note, yeah you may have spoken about this before, but I would rather not bring up old posts commented on by players no longer here.. thus the new threads.

[MrDDT]

Yeah much better to just talk to the few left playing than people that quit over broken systems.

These same things were said then. So you just talked about the same things they already said. So instead of posting a reply like always you make 3 or 4 threads. Pretty sure its breaking forum rules but guess only some people get in trouble for that.

Something should be done and it would be nice if they gave us ideas what they have planned.

I've asked about this in the q and a long ago. Still nothing changes.


Here is some more food for thought on the HP issue.

regarding character advancement.
- As it has been reported that char hps increases with levels, the char with the most skills trained, will be the highest level and will have the most hps, question: Once skill degradation is implemented, will it be possible to lose levels/hps as you lose skill levels?

You will not lose levels as that is simply a hidden stat to track overall skill gain through xp and has no other effect. There are no plans to have players lose hp, but these will be adjusted by stats and combat skills.