Skip to main content

Recent Posts

1
I'd start with a simple packmule:
* two times carry capacity of regular racial mount
* can't sprint




Could even temporarily use the same model of regular racial mount

Exactly, something, anything. There needs to be SOME way to carry stone for instance... or swordfish!
2
General Discussion / Re: Ub3rgames - Status
Last post by Ivar_theBoneless -
Please, I urge everyone interested in the bind stone quest to read this. I'm also urging any senior or experienced programmer and even @Ub3rgames to refute this. I'm quite comfortable with what I've said here so just someone, please prove me wrong. I'm not saying that as a cocky statement, I really wish that I am wrong somehow. I just can't see how. Please someone fucking prove me wrong. Please, please, please.

Yeah, the reason to why I am asking is quite simple. This feature, in any normal development platform, should not take more than 80 hours to implement. It is simple as fuck. Having access to the source, with some horrible copy pasting code, it should be doable in 40h with testing included. Why is it simple? If you tie the below things that already exists together, you have the hollow bindstone quest that has been mentioned here.

  • You have the ability to create quests (think of quest classes probably). Meaning text, rewards, objectives
  • You have "event" for triggering quest dialog on NPCs.
  • You have an "event" for pressing a bindstone (you see the text).
  • You have the ability to get close by mobs, so you can assign them to the quest. (think global map filters)

If they only have access to some kind of obscure scripting system, the estimate becomes a lot harder cause the scripting system might be complicated and limited as fuck. The estimate is very much depended on the inner workings of the API that they are in control of or have access too. If the things they have control over is shit, then I cannot give any estimate.

I'm just saying, on any NORMAL, and even somewhat obscure API (access to the system), this should not take longer than 80 hours. If it is even possible, and if it doesn't require memory/DLL injection, I have a hard time seeing that that a good senior programmer that has never looked at the system or their code would not be able to implement it in 120h from knowing nothing.

So this is what makes me a little bit more frustrated than the rest of the community. I understand and know how things SHOULD work and I have never seen a logical reason to why they do not work that way. If this feature takes a long time to implement and they have full control over the source, then they are utterly bad programmers. If this features takes a long time to implement cause of the scripting or API they have control over is shit, then every simple feature will take a long amount of time to implement. So in either situation, "we" are fucked.

If it takes long time to implement because their ambitions are a lot higher than the "skeleton-quest" we have talked about here, then you have problems in the development process, cost/benefit analysis and prioritization. Seems the simple hollow skeleton-quest is desired by and would benefit the players. If they have aimed to mke it so much more fun and advanced than described in this thread, I applaud them. If they however are not releasing the quest in small incremental updates, then the problems I mentioned above in this paragraph exist. They should have release the feature as a simple hollow quest, and then added onto the implementation. This way people would at least have gotten something while the big feature is implemented and they would have seen that they are working.

/m

hey bro i didn't read more than 10% of your post because you're 17 years old and think 6 months programming experience makes you good

sorry just thought you might want to know since apparently you care a lot about looking smart on the internet

^ this right here from my previous interactions with this guy

@makaveli 80 hours?

Quests and the framework for them is one of the longest development phases in man hours easily. It's what I started in because it gets paid the least amount and always done by the new kids. It's why they were phased out slowly but surely to today's era of zero quests/back story or just clip and paste in MMO's. They also tend to be highly buggy if you have any static objects part of a quest.

I wish they would just pull the trigger on the free-to-play model and get this show on the road
3
General Discussion / Re: Ub3rgames - Status
Last post by Pallist Horror -
@ub3rgames buyorders in next patch???
Definitely not next patch.

2.2 will be minor update
4
General Discussion / Re: Ub3rgames - Status
Last post by SuperKrej -
@ub3rgames buyorders in next patch???
5
General Discussion / Re: Ub3rgames - Status
Last post by trashsmasher -
Please, I urge everyone interested in the bind stone quest to read this. I'm also urging any senior or experienced programmer and even @Ub3rgames to refute this. I'm quite comfortable with what I've said here so just someone, please prove me wrong. I'm not saying that as a cocky statement, I really wish that I am wrong somehow. I just can't see how. Please someone fucking prove me wrong. Please, please, please.

Yeah, the reason to why I am asking is quite simple. This feature, in any normal development platform, should not take more than 80 hours to implement. It is simple as fuck. Having access to the source, with some horrible copy pasting code, it should be doable in 40h with testing included. Why is it simple? If you tie the below things that already exists together, you have the hollow bindstone quest that has been mentioned here.

  • You have the ability to create quests (think of quest classes probably). Meaning text, rewards, objectives
  • You have "event" for triggering quest dialog on NPCs.
  • You have an "event" for pressing a bindstone (you see the text).
  • You have the ability to get close by mobs, so you can assign them to the quest. (think global map filters)

If they only have access to some kind of obscure scripting system, the estimate becomes a lot harder cause the scripting system might be complicated and limited as fuck. The estimate is very much depended on the inner workings of the API that they are in control of or have access too. If the things they have control over is shit, then I cannot give any estimate.

I'm just saying, on any NORMAL, and even somewhat obscure API (access to the system), this should not take longer than 80 hours. If it is even possible, and if it doesn't require memory/DLL injection, I have a hard time seeing that that a good senior programmer that has never looked at the system or their code would not be able to implement it in 120h from knowing nothing.

So this is what makes me a little bit more frustrated than the rest of the community. I understand and know how things SHOULD work and I have never seen a logical reason to why they do not work that way. If this feature takes a long time to implement and they have full control over the source, then they are utterly bad programmers. If this features takes a long time to implement cause of the scripting or API they have control over is shit, then every simple feature will take a long amount of time to implement. So in either situation, "we" are fucked.

If it takes long time to implement because their ambitions are a lot higher than the "skeleton-quest" we have talked about here, then you have problems in the development process, cost/benefit analysis and prioritization. Seems the simple hollow skeleton-quest is desired by and would benefit the players. If they have aimed to mke it so much more fun and advanced than described in this thread, I applaud them. If they however are not releasing the quest in small incremental updates, then the problems I mentioned above in this paragraph exist. They should have release the feature as a simple hollow quest, and then added onto the implementation. This way people would at least have gotten something while the big feature is implemented and they would have seen that they are working.

/m

hey bro i didn't read more than 10% of your post because you're 17 years old and think 6 months programming experience makes you good

sorry just thought you might want to know since apparently you care a lot about looking smart on the internet
6
@wildNothing as far as I understand it, the 5+1 or 5+2 many are suggesting would be strictly up to 5 non crafting titles, and up to 1/2 non-combat titles
I'd be very much against 2 crafting + 5 any. That'd just boost altfall

Actually I am suggesting 5 Anything titles + 1 Industry only Title

That means you could go
- full crafting 6 titles
- 5 Combat titles and 1 crafting
or any combination you would like to a max of 5 combat titles and 6 titles total respectively

This means that any player can do some crafting without the perception of sacrificing a title slot.

This means players could run 5 combat title and keep 1 as a float - switching between lvl 1 - cooking, labour (woodcrafting/smelting), bowyer and taming for basic needs.

Or they could specialize in one craft or skinning, again without the perception they are sacrificing combat effectiveness.
7
You're over focused on the +number. This is just personal opinion strictly for the +craft idea. I'm open to +1 or +2. I also have other ideas for crafting and i also like other suggestions, all of which i feel would be an improvement. But I'lll explain my thought process to the +2.

Current system: 1 main with all combat and 2 alts with all crafting.
3 characters. Only 1 character actually leaves the city.
The other 2 hit nodes and craft while covering 10 crafting titles.
Other players interested in crafting but with the mindset of swapping a potential combat title will handicap them happily rely on these crafting alts.

5+2 system: it takes 5 characters to get to 10 crafting and anyone who doesn't want pvp handicap can also dip into the crafting for more depth to the game without paying an extra 10/mo.
I feel this removes the pressure to buy crafting alts.

This system is also a been done system in other games that I've personally experienced and enjoyed.

Also, as proper points out, even with these two available crafting titles not everyone would do it.

My personal mentality on this, if I could have had two crafting titles without pvp handicap, i would never have bought an alt. With 1 alt, i will now solo be more independent than 2.5 people with a 5+2 system.

----

Expanding in this with the play styles of Darkfall, there are no pve titles in the game. Making a weapon is not a play style, so why take away from both PvP and pve?

Crafting titles make you worse at BOTH PvP and pve.
So just make pve and or other gameplay beneficial titles.

Even further down the road, ub3r has mentioned adding more and more to the game. I'm assuming, all of which can be crafted. The 5+2 allows more people to cover crafting and overlap so if new crafting titles were introduced, people could use a free or duplicate crafting slot to grab what's new.

--

I'll close with this to really express where i stand.
The existing system has proven to encourage the purchase of alts for crafting. (Not that everyone does it, but the overwhelming amount of crafting alts is something that shouldn't be ignored).
I bring up this subject because any changes that reduce the advantages or pressure to buying alts is better. I don't know the best solution, +1, +2, other ideas... Idk. I just want something to happen.

Other benefits vary depending on what system would be chosen.
8
I'd start with a simple packmule:
* two times carry capacity of regular racial mount
* can't sprint

Could even temporarily use the same model of regular racial mount
9
IMO, they should've made Enchanting into a separate title AND do it like it is now.
So if you have Weaponsmithing title, you can craft and enchant weapons.
Or if you have Enchanting title, you can't make anything, but you can enchant everything.

@wildNothing as far as I understand it, the 5+1 or 5+2 many are suggesting would be strictly up to 5 non crafting titles, and up to 1/2 non-combat titles
I'd be very much against 2 crafting + 5 any. That'd just boost altfall
10
I'd totally be ok with the regular mounts dying of exhaustion eventually. Normal mounts in water should greatly increase stamina usage, and when they run out, they sink and drown. And it should go up dramatically by the amount of cargo they carry. But I still think a number of my ideas could compliment this. The taming skill just needs more to it. At least armored versions of the standard mount and a a large cargo option. Something that could effectively carry STONE for instance. Wagon can carry 10,000 kg for instance. Not that I don't want some of my other ideas included, I'd say there should be some other things at 25, 75 and 100.
Taming has so much more potential.

Maybe at 100 you can gt a standard speed mount that has a very short version of flame breath or something, but when killed explodes in a ball of flame.