Posts by Beta

The server was closed on April 2nd, 2023

    This is very likely to be introduced in parts. Probably with just bh29 and 39 introduced first. We could see how it works and how playable it is.

    Gates are controlled by a trigger. The trigger is enabled by default and the boss/gatekeeper in its AI is coded to disable the trigger on death. We don't have an editor for monster AI yet (Scripting for monster AI, special actions, etc), but I can make one-time changes to this manually. We have a lot of flexibility here.

    The shared and instanced versions should be separate - there will be changes in one that won't be in the other. I would like to keep the instanced version without any changes, although if there's significant deviation it might need some to make both versions feel similar. Or maybe bosses should respawn in both shared and instanced versions? Although 1h respawn time is definitely too much. You could run the entire shared dungeon with a group, casually killing monsters on your way, just to realize there was someone else before you and you have to wait up to ~50 minutes for the boss to respawn. That really sucks. Maybe 20 minutes respawn time at most? I probably wouldn't like to wait more. Since we're talking about monster AI I just remembered the one-shotting skills in TT or Lunar. We could bring it to other bosses, or just restore this mechanism from later versions where killing mobs makes the boss much weaker. Then you can try to camp the boss, but it's much harder and burns your charms. I will very likely prepare a poll later, but let's get even more ideas first.

    Ahh you're right about quest kill. Yes, I would need to check how hackable this is in the server files. There's high chance it is. You're right about pvp too - that could be interesting, could it also cause any problems? Accidental kills perhaps?

    1. How would they effect gated instances? Eg fb59: If someone is already inside killing Qianji, but you need Zimo, would you have to wait for them to kill all the other bosses first? Eg fb99: if the guards respawn do the gates also respawn?

    2. Boss camping. As some bosses drop nice molds and skill books, toxic competitiveness could be an issue if multiple people start camping bosses. This could also have an effect on gate mechanics.

    3. Log-in/Log-off mechanic inside open-intance dungeons - will the person remain in that spot if they been offline a long time? I believe current instances will boot your character out the dungeon when they are offline for >4 hours.

    4. Loot share. Currently, the highest damage dealing party or player receives all loot - this can lead to toxisity if remained, but could also lead to drama if loot is free for all. Players of the recommended level for the instance would struggle if a high level player was in the instance but not in their party.

    5. A nice server. We are for sure, a very kind and nice community, but the concept of the open-instances depends highly on the community remaining that way.

    Those are very good problems.

    The gates are indeed problematic. In FB59 we could get away with simply removing them as they're are not very useful. But if we remove them in let's say FB39 we inevitably change the game. And removing them in FB99 would be a complete disaster. We may exclude 99 from the shared instances list, or perhaps make all gates respawn after 1 hour. FB99 still needs special consideration though. I would need to take a closer look at it.

    People will camp bosses if it's easy reward. We might need a boot timer as currently there is none. Mobs, bosses, and gates respawn after 4h. If you have 4 characters in 4 different instances you can kill a boss every hour. That's something to be improved either way.

    I don't think loot sharing is a problem. The quest at the entrance I mentioned earlier makes sure everyone gets some reward for killing the boss. If you're outside of a party then you're slightly worse on loot and, well ... sucks to be you :) Either join that party, get an exclusive dungeon, or wait till the other group is finished. We don't need more, do we?

    mikoto Not sure how that helps. Yeah we can permanently add points, another tokens of love, or daily BH limits but it rewards everyone equally, solo or party. Nothing wrong with extra rewards, but it doesn't solve the loneliness problem :P As for helping - we do have FBs that reward higher level players and encourage group play. It's great, but extending it for any BH to the point where helping a friend with a lower level instance is comparably rewarding to doing a your-level instance makes a recipe for an alt army.

    About placing arbitrary barriers or limits in general - we're all here just for fun and being told to do this not that is no fun. We want to slightly bend the gameplay to make it better for everyone, not place concrete walls all over it.

    toonaddict Please suggest something else then. Saying no and basically making me flex to find a decent solution is not going to get us moving anywhere. And we've already discussed the fee is either 5k or nothing, so this change should be merely an extra addition to existing gameplay, making your point not valid.

    Delays as usual, I had a few iterations of config file structures but I finally settled on one that satisfies me:

    The code is in place, continuing on hotkey implementation now.

    In other words, treat the shared instance like an addition to the game without adding obstacles to the already existing content.

    I like that. The symbolic fee I though about was literally 5k coins just to suggest what's the preferred choice. But it can be free too.

    30/45 mins per wine is doable. So is removing it :) I wanted to hear the initial feedback and then we could set up a poll.
    We still need to figure out what exactly is that extra reward here.

    The poll results clearly say no to limiting the wines - so here's another idea that solves the same problem (solo play)

    As we are likely going to stay a low-population server I'm thinking to make the dungeon runs less lonely. By default you could be put into a shared instance that works just like Secret Passage. If you insist on having the instance exclusive to you, you could talk to an NPC to get it - after paying a small symbolic fee.

    This should bring people together, although it poses some technical difficulties

    1. The mobs need to respawn quickly (about 5 minutes)
    2. The bosses need to respawn (15 minutes?), but mustn't be abusable. Perhaps a special NPC with a quest at the beginning of the instance that asks you to kill the boss. The quest is good enough to the point where killing the boss without it is not so worth it.
    3. Asking for an exclusive dungeon should effectively reset it (no more resetting problems)
    4. Wining the shared instance has to work differently. (or does it? maybe just nerf it a little)

    It's too big and people find out they have to wait to download the rest after downloading ~70%. This sucks. The client can be shrinked in size as it contains a ton of unused/duplicated/invalid content.

    Some of the client can be also downloaded afterwards, at the time of first patching.

    Handling keyboard events is complicated, but implemented now:

    Saving and loading the configuration will come in the next two days.

    This might seem very minor and silly, but a good text editor could make the quest writing much more immersive. There need to be keyboard shortcuts, a palette of most common pw colors, etc.