View Single Post
  #5  
Old 11-25-2007, 04:26 AM
Googi Googi is offline
A Serious Epidemic
Googi's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Canada
Posts: 18,866
Googi has much to be proud ofGoogi has much to be proud ofGoogi has much to be proud ofGoogi has much to be proud ofGoogi has much to be proud ofGoogi has much to be proud of
Send a message via AIM to Googi
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drakeero View Post
*poke poke* I disagree (hopefully in a constructive way) about your comment on the "depth" of things to do in the server. I personally find it about as narrow as it is shallow.
Depth is a relative term. It's developed in depth because it has a large amount of content in a few areas relative to the amount of content it has in other areas.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drakeero View Post
HH's, dungeons, things that involve stronger monsters
The only actual real barrier to the monsters we already have being able to give even the strongest players a tough time is their inability to break through armour. Monsters like bigworms can deal quite a bit of damage if it weren't getting nullified. Just give monsters the ability to break through armour and brutals instantly become very difficult. I strongly suspect that most people who say they want stronger/tougher/more monsters don't actually care about having stronger/tougher/more monsters, and what they really want is just a faster way to get exp.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drakeero View Post
3: Better develop kingdom islands themselves. Some DO need some sort of standard monsters running around. Not nearly as much on main, but pockets here and there. Mining of resources is really a chore as is. It may pose a challenge to beginners, but for the more advanced players it really is a huge chore. Add more convenience mines to the kingdom islands, and trade that convenience off with harder time consuming challenges of different types elsewhere.
Been suggested quite a few times before, and isn't a bad idea but doesn't improve the server's marketability.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drakeero View Post
3c: "Addon" flags, costing significantly more each time. Buy an addon flag for a HUGE sum of plat and have it automatically "sticky" to the side or back of a house when placed. Once approved, one must spend the resources to build a second houses, which has two indoor levels connected by a door. At maximum.
This is pretty much the same thing you can do with housing scrolls (is there really a difference between a second room connected by a door as opposed to a second room connected by stairs?) Plus housing scrolls let you make your own levels for your house. Although it's a feature I quite like, it doesn't seem to be something that interests very many people, and I can't really see an effective way of expanding it further.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drakeero View Post
4: Economy. The economy runs on diamonds, various scrolls, gold keys and event coins, various gems, and event items. It's more of a high-value barter system. The plat has been virtually phased out because there's so little to DO with it other then buy out stores to get rare spawns. As more and more content gets added to the game, store items and services need to become significantly more expensive to make it crippling to a player who -doesn't- have a lot of plat.
I don't see why the obsolescence of platinum as a currency for player-player transactions is regarded as some sort of problem. What makes it a better currency than diamonds?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drakeero View Post
4a: The excessive random spawns in shops are a bit heavy in some places. Some shops do need more static spawns. Trade off.... make'm tons more expensive.
Similar to the idea I and a few others have put forward of high-cost-high value craftables, it's not a bad idea and can give people a better incentive to work. I'm for this and have been for a while, but it's not a server-saving solution.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drakeero View Post
4b: Smaller shops, more of them. I love the atmosphere of the smaller potion shop underneath the big shop in Bogenera.
You're the only one. People don't hang out in levels because they enjoy the "atmosphere". Not for more than a few seconds anyways.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drakeero View Post
These higher level elitist shops should be the ones where the rare and powerful items occasionally show up in.
Not as good as high-cost-high-value craftables. This is just a different form of random item distribution.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drakeero View Post
5: More resource/production items. Give something for the packrats to dig up. Make some manual labor/gathering jobs for beginners to do.
Good idea if done right. Unfortunately doing it right requires making precise calculations that we aren't very good at making.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drakeero View Post
5a: Create MANY more craftable items
High-cost-high-value craftables. Already talked about this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drakeero View Post
7: Quest improvements. Once there's a lot more content (and believe it or not, more land), maybe some story/adventure type quests can be added like other online games.
As I've said before. Traditional quests are extremely inefficient. They take a ton of development time for something players do once.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drakeero View Post
For right now, I don't think that's as important. I'd recommend more quests similar to the "Kill x monster" or "Gather y item" quests. Repeatable, vary a lot, different types of rewards. Make these more or less difficult depending on the current content of the game, and you'll have a loose quest system that adjusts to suit gameplay.
Not very different from the haunted house and gold key quests we already have. Expand it? I'm not sure. Something being repeatable doesn't ensure that it will be repeated.

The primary problem is that most of your suggestions are just things you suggested because you like them without really thinking about what kind of target market they would have and how big it is. Even if an idea is good in that it isn't damaging or is mildly beneficial to the server, it has to be balanced against the development time it takes to implement it. The question is whether the most efficient use of development time is to put it towards targeting the market we're already targeting, or targeting new ones. I say it's targeting new ones.
__________________
Reply With Quote