Messages

My regrets for the drama. Mind if I delete all of my posts that did not apply to the topic. Personally, I would hate reading this if I was trying to find information about the game.

Glad were back on topic  . The reason I was defending it was because I believe people were too quick to reject it. I'm pretty sure none of us have tested this system, and thusly we can't rightfully argue that it definitely won't work. My opinion, though, and I don't believe people are in favor of it. I kept up my argument, and that went bad, so I did the best I could to prevent it from being worse. But I'm very glad were not doing the whole anger thing anymore. It's not the kind of thing that fits Geek PvP discussion, lol. Thanks .

Oh, and also back on topic. Your post made sense, staff should look into such a situation, but you had a slight inaccuracy. Silent Majority is a term that describes the fact that the group that is currently being supported will not voice there opinions unless the opposing group takes power(The fact that it was first used by Nixon descreases it's credibility, but still). Obviously that rule does not apply at a major level here, but it has some implementations. Also keep in mind that this is not the only site he is broadcasting on. If you really want staff attention, though, you should check out the Valhira Forums, which you can access from the site. It has a whole thread dedicated to complaints.

[after]

I'm going to give you one last warning. If you don't believe that I'm an expert on these things, just google "Draco6slayer". And let me tell you, they are all me. I've been everywhere, I know how internet mobs work. If any of you know what the mob mindset is, that is how flame wars work. In any flame war you start with somebody making a point. Somebody else agrees, and it goes on until somebody makes an opposing point. The "Mob" at this point has built up just enough momentum to argue. The first party argues back, and then the flaming starts. Both arguments are repeated again and again and again. Both groups grow more and more sarcastic, and develop more and more violent language. (This is where I noticed we had a problem, and it is the last possible chance I had to stop it.) After that enough Mob Mind Momentum is built up that everything is ignored to make a point. Now you may think that this hasn't happened yet, but look at this:

Blizzard: Your orginal statement was simple and made a nonargued point. It was that most developers don't release unencrypted versions, and that others can be found elsewhere. Now look at your more recent posts:

QFT means Quoted For Truth. It would have taken you less time to write down those two sentences than to type it in Google as it took me more time to write this down right now. I only seconded winkio's statement because I concur.

You're getting angry at me for asking a question that took you 20 seconds to answer, and then you plow straight through my apology for getting worked up. Then you go on to insult my personality and tell me I won't get anywhere in life. This is after I pointed out that we had a flame war approaching. You did make a good point in the middle, and that's a good sign that this topic hasn't dies yet.

Winkio: You started out by point out actual data, which is great. But more recently:

Oh great, another game developer that is too stubborn to accept criticism.  This is giving me bad deja vu of cw7.

I know this might come as a shock to you, but there are game developers on this site that are not working on this specific game.  You are in fact one of them.

Firstly you attack my personality, like Blizzard, and secondly you compare me to somebody who apparently you didn't like. I haven't seen you act like this anywhere else in the forum. Then in your next quote, you get strangely angry when I don't understand your meaning. Whenever this has happened elsewhere on the forum, people are OK with mistakes. Also you have switched to using facts that you don't know are true, and in fact are not. The biggest game I have ever made was 5 maps. If that counts as game developing in your mind, than sure, I'm a developer. But still I'm not being stubborn about my game, so it doesn't apply.

Draco6slayer: I started out by making the point that we should have an open mind to these things, and shouldn't just reject them. My most recent arguing post included words like "Hell" and "Damn" and said this:

Since when is realism dated...? and I'm getting tired of the sarcasm at this point. There better not be too much more...

Even now, as I try to keep my cool, I onl seconds ago argued Winkio's point:

The biggest game I have ever made was 5 maps. If that counts as game developing in your mind, than sure, I'm a developer. But still I'm not being stubborn about my game, so it doesn't apply.

Believe me I'm not criticizing you, I'm warning you. I've seen all of this before, and it looks as if I'll see it again. If you choose to press on, please do so in another thread. I at least don't want this thread to go down with this argument.

About the gardening system: Will players be allowed to purchase a plot of land, for some price, to allow them to keep it in the long-term, or will they have to rent indefinetely?
And graphically, will it look cool, or is it just an event that you check occasionally?
EDIT: And no, I'm not the game developer. Heck, I didn't even know the game existed until 5 days ago. And believe me, this is what I consider "provoking".

Dang... You see where you put me now? If I argue, I lose. If I don't, I lose. I would have thought at least you would have some idea about how flame wars work...An analogy here would be that I poured a bucket of water on a flaming forest. I'm gonna hold out and not argue, at least until somebody calls me out on it, so please don't do it. I'm using every ounce of self control not to go into some form of angry post that will surely be the end of this entire topic. As a matter of fact I can see the end of the topic within a few days, and it says "Locked".

Alright, that's like 90 complaints all at once, lolz. I'll try to answer them. Working from top to bottom.

Wait, we've never seen an MMO before?  This must be the most revolutionary concept ever where you were from.  Did you come here in a time machine from 1990?

I meant an MMO of this nature. I have never seen a game with this type of PvP system, that may be because it's a bad system, and may be because people reject it. I want to find out which before I complain about how it is. There are a few games you can be attacked whenever anybody wants, but the basis behind this is that fighting somebody who fights back strategically is more difficult than fighting a defenseless NPC. And no, you'll never find my time machine. I didn't come here from 1990,persay. I'm not a time traveler.

Also, your justifications hold no logic.  If you want to demonstrate real war, wipe a player's account when they die.  Then see who plays your game.

So by no logic, you mean limited logic, correct? I know a few games that almost demonstrate this, but this is not realistic war. You will have X players who go in to war, X-Y players die, remaining players shrivel up and ignore eachother. Real war has constant incoming troops, with people coming of age, people who were already strong entering war, and etc. this is demonstrated by allowing current players to go on. Not precisely realistic, I'll admit, but damn close. You make a good point though, perfect realism is unfun. Also, that part of the post was in response to the earlier quote by NAMKOR,

People can very well not fight in a war.  It happens all the time.

QFT HAH!

Unfortunately I don't know what QFT stands for, so I guess I can't combat that argument/compliment/easy money making guide/cheese. No sarcasm intended, I honestly don't know what it means...

You quote WoW as your basis, yet WoW can pull off having PVP servers because it's so commercialized and is able to run literally hundreds of servers. And of those, there are Normal servers, RP servers, and PVP servers. And in that case, there are areas even in PVP servers where you don't have to be flagged for PVP.

I don't understand how having multiple servers with lots of players applies. More player=More death, not less. And from what I understand(Correct me if I'm wrong, but) it costs like 50 bucks to change servers. Also, as far as the PvP safe zones, I think that is virtually created in this game by the fact that each side will avoid hanging out in the enemy side's main cities, because that would be stupid, you would die.

You're not simulating actual war, you're just using a dated system. It already was tried out, I mean it's not like it takes a brilliant mind to say 'lolololol you can always die.'

Since when is realism dated...? and I'm getting tired of the sarcasm at this point. There better not be too much more...

And didn't Diablo have something where you cna play on a hard mode and when you die your character is locked?

I'm not sure, I don't own diablo. But I don't think this is an argument point, so I'll move on.

In WoW, there are PvE servers where you always have to flag or nobody can attack you.  WoW gives you the option to PvP or not PvP.
Your suggestion doesn't.
Being max level is irrelevant, people don't just start wanting to pvp at max level if they aren't interested in it to begin with.

Again, avoid the borders, avoid PvP. It's practically the same system, only a little more limiting. I never said anything about max level...

Blizzard themselves has said that they feel too few players join guilds.  That's why they're implementing guild progression and levels an bonuses in Cataclysm, because they want people to guild up.

So if a big company like Blizzard has a bright idea to encourage getting into guilds, why can't a little game that does the same by making being in guilds a way to live easier?

I'm not the only one saying this.

Not sure what you mean, but you also have never played the game, and neither has anyone else who's saying that the game should change. I'm also not saying that the game should change prior to testing.

Yes we have.
WoW has PvP servers where you can be attacked at any level anywhere (except Sanctuaries, few and far between), this is comparable to your level 40 experience.  Unless you like PvP, it's not fun.

Dang it! We have not seen this game before. That's all I mean! You can't cut off a feature without testing the freaking thing!
Again, let me say this. If you have never played the game, you can't criticize it. It's like watching previews and then reviewing the movie.


EDIT: I probably sounded really angry in this post, and I'm going to apologize up front for that, but more importantly I'd like to say why I sounded so angry, and you probably have the same concern. I'm arguing the same point, over and over again against other people who are arguing the opposite point again and again. And we know what this means... were talking about a basic level flame war. And basic level flame wars can grow, oh so easily. So I propose we accept our differences on this PvP topic, and move on to discussing other features. I, for one, am not interested in continuing the argument and trashing up this post with annoyances. No, I'm not trying to get the final word, I'm trying to maintain all of our sanity. After all, this is a proffesional class forum. It's no place for mindless blather. However, I may feel compelled to argue if anyone argues with me(as you probably already want to) so... we'll see how this goes. Thanks.

Well, I guess my point is this: We've never seen this type of game before. As far as we know this could be awesome, or it could totally suck. By having a closed mind about these things, we really prevent all forms of gaming evolution. Perhaps even with PvP, players will still ignore there opponents. Perhaps there will be so much PvP that it will demonstrate real war. Perhaps there will be too much PvP. Anyway it goes, we can't know until it does.

As far as being able to not fight in a war, were talking medieval ages here. If somebody goes to your house and attacks you, youw ill fight back. So in that case, you are fighting in war, whether you like it or not. But this is unimprtant, the imprtant thing is to see how it goes before you complaing about it.

Sure, constant PvP is annoying, but were talking level forty here. Also, the way the world is set up, you won't get gang killed unless on enemy borders, or in enemy territory. Basically, it's pretty easy to avoid PvP. Think WoW, it's that basic set up.
And also,

Did you know that an overwhelming majority of MMO players don't join guilds?  Or play with other players at all?

Where did you get that information? I did some research into it, but could't find anything. But nevertheless this game is made for community, as opposed to individualism. It's not supposed to be an individual player game, with some interaction, it's meant to be a multiplayer game, with some division. Obviously it has not been released yet, so these things cannot be tested. However, if it isn't a good solution then players will complain and the game will change.

Jragy: I used to get that error, and I don't know what happened, but since then I have added second options to all of the features on the options menu and I don't get it anyomore. I'm not sure if they're related, but I doubt it. Nonetheless, if you don't have a second option in any of the features and try to change them, you get an error. I'm not really sure what the error is called, but it should be pretty easy to reproduce.

Sorry for any confusion... this is not as much as you all seem to think. I just used the "Water-01" Animation Graphic, the one that is included with RPG XP.

It's not an image, unless you want a screenshot? It's a simple rpgmaker xp animation.

Here's an animation resource I made for those particularly emotional cutscenes in your game. It's a simple crying animation with the water graphic that took far longer than I would have liked to make. It took me like half an hour just to line it up with the sprites eyes. You can find it here:
http://www.mediafire.com/?znna205cscxwj1l
(It's in the form of a game, but doesn't have any maps. I just didn't have any other way to package it.)
This is for use in a map, not a battle.

Thanks 

Thanks, I added that in. It was a tad different then  originally thought, but I got it sorted out.

Oh yeah, I plan on adding a lot more. Anybody know what the damage rate thing is?

Forewarning: The tutorial you are oh so close to reading is... *whispers* disorganized . *Thunder Strikes* *Somebody screams "AHH THE POWER OF A THOUSAND BURNING SUNS IS EATING AWAY AT MY SOUL!" * I'll fix it later, I'm a little close cut for time now.

Introduction
When making a game, the designer tries to attain a fun difficulty. For most games, this means that monsters have to be set with a system that leaves the player almost dead after accomplishing his/her goals. For some it means keeping the game going, while creating battles and making death possible. But in order to do any of that, we must first understand how battling works. I'm going to create an overview of everything involved in fighting while using (Deep announcer voice) THE DEFAULT BATTLE SYSTEM.
And so, without further ado, here is my tutorial.

Tutorial

Perhaps the most important part of the system is it's parameters. These are shown in the following database tabs: Actors, Skills, Weapons, Armors, Enemies, and States. The parameters are used in the battle formulas for everything, as they are the stats of players, enemies, weapons, armors, etc.

Parameters

Spoiler: ShowHide

MAXHP The maximum hitpoints of a player or enemy. Maximum damage to be taken.

MAXSP The maximum skill points of a player or enemy. Maximum points to be used in skills.

INT(Intellegence) A power modifier for magic based skills.

STR(Strength) A power modifier for normal attacks, a power modifier for strength based skills.

AGI(Agility) Controls who attacks first, Prevents enemy from hitting critically, Controls whether or not
player can escape, a power modifier for agility based skills.

DEX(Dexterity) Allows player to hit critically, Increases player chance of hitting enemy, a power modifier
for dexterity based skills.

EVA(Evasion)(Enemies and armors only) Prevents player from hitting enemy

ATK(Attack Power)(Enemies and weapons only) Directly sets damage dealt by weapon or enemy.

PDEF(Physical Defense)(Enemies, weapons, and armors only) Defense against physical based attacks.

MDEF(Magical Defense)(Enemies, weapons, and armors only) Defense against magical based attacks.

Formulas
Next on the important list is the battle formulas. These calculate effects and damage amounts, along with numerous other factors of battle.

Terminology:

Spoiler: ShowHide

A- User
B- Target
Power- Base Damage
Rate- Parameter based damage increase
Force- Effect Power
Variance- Maximum Random Amount More or Less of the Base Value
Parameters(STR, INT, Etc.) Face Value

Here is a basic overview of each formula (WIP)

Damage Calculation:

Normal attacks:

Spoiler: ShowHide

Power = A's attack power - (B's physical defense ÷ 2)

This means, "Final Attack Power is equal to Player's Attack power minus 1 half enemies defense power."
It can be simplified down to be "ATK is Players attack minus 1 half enemies defense."
Example: Players ATK is 100. Enemies PDEF is 50. ATK (75) = A's ATK (100) - PDEF/2 (25)

Rate = 20 + A's strength

Rate is a confusing system. I'm not sure if this is correct, but from the code I think it devises the actual damage from the formula atk*(20+Strength)/20. So for example: If the final value from the previous formula is 75, we multiply by (20+Strength(50))/20. (20+50)/20 or 70/20 which is 3.5. 3.5*75 is 262.2. That is the damage dealt without variance
Here is the line of code by the way. "Self.damage = atk * (20 + attacker.str) / 20"
Variance = 15

This is the amount of change possible either above or below the damage calculation.

Minimum force: 0

This simply means that you can not heal your opponent with an attack.

Skills:

Skill's force is positive:

Spoiler: ShowHide

The skill hurts the opponent.

Force = Skill's force
+ (A's attack power × skill's attack power F ÷ 100) Example: (140*100)/100=140
- (B's physical defense × skill's physical defense F ÷ 200)
- (B's magic defense × skill's magic defense F ÷ 200)

Alright, this is a confusing one. The damage that the skill does is the skill's power plus the attack power of the user's weapon (or if an enemy, just the user) multiplied by the skill's attack power and divided by 100. Example: The skill "Leg Sweep" has an ATK-F(or attack power F) of 100. A character equipped with an iron sword has the ATK(attack power) of 140. (140*100)Divided by 100 is 140. You then add that to the skills power, 20.
Minimum force: 0

Skill's force is negative:

Spoiler: ShowHide

Force = Skill's force
Rate = 20
+ (A's strength × skill's strength F ÷ 100)
+ (A's dexterity × skill's dexterity F ÷ 100)
+ (A's agility × skill's agility F ÷ 100)
+ (A's intelligence × skill's intelligence F ÷ 100)
Variance = Skill's variance

TBC

Blizzard...lolz.
As for any other onlooker, here is a note.
This event requires external events maps to do the following (When changing music set):
1. Change the location variable.
2. Fade out the current song.
3. Change the wait variable to 0.
(This should be done with conditional events and placed in every map that connects to a map with a different music set)

Great, I'll plug that in. Thanks.

So I created a simple common event to allow multiple BGMs to play in a certain area.

And I reached a problem. That is: Whenever the map changes, so does the music. I want to override whichever feature runs common events when you enter a map, or find some way around it. Any ideas?

Request - Title Screen
Font - Medieval
Words - Lord Ithric
Backround - A Castle
Colors of preferance - Royal Colors (Red, Blue, Purple)
General Theme - Elegant, Royal

Some of these details may be a little less than desired, but I thought I'd fill in the best I can. Hope for your help, but the completion of this isn't priority, as the game is ages from being done.
Thanks, and nice work so far.