Andor's Trail

oskarwiksten wrote: [*] Different types of attack instead of just one generic "attack". For example, "aimed attack", "defensive stance", "power attack" with different AP cost modifiers. Availability maybe driven by skill selection?

I'd still like to see a default attack which doesn't add any time through an attack selection menu, so you can run through low level areas without having finding 5hp rats incredibly annoying.

The way I'd like to see it would be something like this:
* Quick attack: (default if you don't select an attack from the ?attack menu? or however attacks will be selected) -5 AD -20% AC

Then selectable other attacks:
* Attack: standard AP, AD and AC.
* Aimed attack: +1AP +x% AC
* Strong attack: +1AP +y AD
...

or something along those lines, this way the quick attack option would save you time but at a cost, so you wouldn't use it in tough fight. I hate rpgs which force an animation before every fight and three clicks per attack, so when you are running back through a level 5 area at level 80 it takes 10 times longer than it needs to... (I love the the ability in this game to turn off attack animations, the loot display and the confirm attack)

this is an amazing post, even if it gets ignored...
i dont care if this changes the game - i kill weaklings in one hit no miss

but brainstorming always leads to better ideas...
and i am ALL FOR that!

TheFSM wrote:

oskarwiksten wrote: [*] Different types of attack instead of just one generic "attack". For example, "aimed attack", "defensive stance", "power attack" with different AP cost modifiers. Availability maybe driven by skill selection?

I'd still like to see a default attack which doesn't add any time through an attack selection menu, so you can run through low level areas without having finding 5hp rats incredibly annoying.

The way I'd like to see it would be something like this:* Quick attack: (default if you don't select an attack from the ?attack menu? or however attacks will be selected) -5 AD -20% AC
Then selectable other attacks:* Attack: standard AP, AD and AC.* Aimed attack: +1AP +x% AC* Strong attack: +1AP +y AD ...
or something along those lines, this way the quick attack option would save you time but at a cost, so you wouldn't use it in tough fight. I hate rpgs which force an animation before every fight and three clicks per attack, so when you are running back through a level 5area at level 80 it takes 10 times longer than it needs to... (I love the the ability in this game to turn off attack animations, the loot display and the confirm attack)

+1 really good point

Been thinking that there should be some reflection of the real tactical disadvantage to attacking multiple foes at once.
Something like "adjusted BC%= normal BC% - (20%*(N-1))" where "N" equals the number of foes you are currently engaging. 20% is arbitrary; I think it is right but it could stand to be slightly more, there would need to be more experimentation.

Also I think it would be nice to have the monsters decoupled from the maps. As far as I can tell each monster is a function of a defined area on the map file. This almost certainly makes the program smaller and/or quicker.
It does limit options for monster behavior.
I only investigated this when I had a crackpot idea for a series of small rectangular dungeons that you must pass through - Indiana Jones quest style. One of these test/feat rooms would have 10 - 15 normal looking rats; they were in fact "fission rats" like the old D&D fission slime. If you killed one without using a specific weapon or something two more would be spawned in the room AND those two would pursue and attack.

The BC% idea would be pretty easy.
I expect the monster handling idea would more likely be an overhaul.

I just can't get the idea of "fission rats" out of my head.

qTzal wrote:Been thinking that there should be some reflection of the real tactical disadvantage to attacking multiple foes at once.
Something like "adjusted BC%= normal BC% - (20%*(N-1))" where "N" equals the number of foes you are currently engaging. 20% is arbitrary; I think it is right but it could stand to be slightly more, there would need to be more experimentation.

Also I think it would be nice to have the monsters decoupled from the maps. As far as I can tell each monster is a function of a defined area on the map file. This almost certainly makes the program smaller and/or quicker.
It does limit options for monster behavior.
I only investigated this when I had a crackpot idea for a series of small rectangular dungeons that you must pass through - Indiana Jones quest style. One of these test/feat rooms would have 10 - 15 normal looking rats; they were in fact "fission rats" like the old D&D fission slime. If you killed one without using a specific weapon or something two more would be spawned in the room AND those two would pursue and attack.

The BC% idea would be pretty easy.
I expect the monster handling idea would more likely be an overhaul.

I just can't get the idea of "fission rats" out of my head.

I would LOVE a room that spawned two monsters for every one I killed... Unless you made them all worth zero experience, that would break the grinding game.

I have been looking at the files that Oskar recently checked into svn for the v0.6.11 release and I am really excited about the "Remgard" equipment. But where is the town of Remgard going to be? According to the map Oskar provided us in April (see Developed/stoutford), Remgard's location is not currently known.

AFAIK Remgard will be east of Loneford or east of the wooden bridges (north of loneford).

Samuel wrote:AFAIK Remgard will be behind Loneford or right of the wooden bridges.

OK, understood. Thanks.

tek wrote:

Samuel wrote:AFAIK Remgard will be behind Loneford or right of the wooden bridges.

So Remgard will be sandwiched by Feygard and Loneford?

Edited my post to clear it up.

Samuel wrote:AFAIK Remgard will be east of Loneford or east of the wooden bridges (north of loneford).

On Oscar's map, that location you describe is called Brimhaven. Did he change the name or is there 2 different cities in the same area?