Originally posted by Myrdynn

Originally posted by Cuathon

Originally posted by Myrdynn

so you need to make Asheron's Call with deeper crafting

thats how the economy became, gold was worthless, (pyreals) different objects were currency, it was so much better

 

I would like the economy to be based on a stable money supply. Money is being used as a store of  value, medium of exchange, and unit of account. If the money supply constantly increases it can cause a big problem. In any case I would like to see how a closed gold system works for a while and then I will decide to keep it or not.

true but with a player based economy, gold becomes not as valuable, items such as rare materials become great trade values, especially in a non AH game

and I think this is a good thing

The thing about a stable currency is that is allows an exhange between players where you only need a supply of an item. Without money you have to trade things that both people need. So the goal of a closed gold system relative to the size of the player base is to provide a stable medium of exchange. The reason people switch to items is currency devaluation due to inflation, but in my game there is no currency devaluation because the currency supply, and this is totally covered by flavor, is directly tied to the size of the player base. In fact my currency is both immune to inflation and deflation. Now it is fiat money because there are no npcs who only accept money for trade goods, players can trade what they want. The use of items for trade in other games is a direct result of NOT having a stable currency due to faucet drain economics with regards to loot drops by monsters and npc purchases. I'm not saying its a perfect system but there is no reason for players to create a currency from an item. Sure you can trade items directly in my game if you both have a demand and a surplus which coincide, but that is relatively rare in economic systems.

I don't really want to go into the numbers, but I think I understand Mendels point. I believe there's two things missing from the examples.

First if the best blacksmith always makes the same item, then the market will get flooded with that item. People can simply give the raw ingredients to the blacksmith and ask him to craft 1000 of them. I believe Mendel pointed this out as well. However, if there's a random number in the math then people will be less inclined to give raw materials, since those will not always produce the best items. People will just be interested in the best items, instead of more interested in the raw materials. The best raw materials and best crafter will not always equal the best product. Adding something random to the formula I think is important to the economy.

A second thing I like to point out is there may be a bit too much focus on the raw stats. In a system with quite a hefty item wear/decay, the durability of an item is just as important. I would apply the formulas to both the stats and the durability of the item. Especially on tools the durability is more important than stats.

Originally posted by Mightyking

I don't really want to go into the numbers, but I think I understand Mendels point. I believe there's two things missing from the examples.

First if the best blacksmith always makes the same item, then the market will get flooded with that item. People can simply give the raw ingredients to the blacksmith and ask him to craft 1000 of them. I believe Mendel pointed this out as well. However, if there's a random number in the math then people will be less inclined to give raw materials, since those will not always produce the best items. People will just be interested in the best items, instead of more interested in the raw materials. The best raw materials and best crafter will not always equal the best product. Adding something random to the formula I think is important to the economy.

A second thing I like to point out is there may be a bit too much focus on the raw stats. In a system with quite a hefty item wear/decay, the durability of an item is just as important. I would apply the formulas to both the stats and the durability of the item. Especially on tools the durability is more important than stats.

Well we are just simplifying to damage as an example of the math. Its not possible for a top crafter to knock out hundreds of high end items super fast. In the system in case I forgot to explain it, total quality is what is put in the equations for all the stats.

There is no best blacksmith per say, since its better to be even more specialized than that. In any case a single crafter in a single item category can only supply a given number of players even if all the mats were provided for him. You can't just flood the market with top tier items. Crafting takes time and multiple processes. Even if you farmed out all the processing prior to the crafting of the item itself the main crafting would still take enough time so that items would be breaking fast enough among a small group of customers to keep the crafter busy. The market is not going to be flooded.

So there are big timers on the crafting process? And people can do other things while those timers are running?

Well since the initial version will be text based there will be timers. The final version if I ever get that far will be slightly different. And no you cannot do other things. How are you gonna do something else while you are hammering on a sword? Also there will be breaks between steps I think, so when the item is done, if its metal, you have to wait for cooldown of the metal and crap. I might just use those for the time blocks since you can do other stuff while that happens. I will try to work out a better method when I get to that stage of coding.

I am saving this here in case it is moved or deleted from the pub:

I have been working on the design document and coding of a game, which I have posted about here, for a while. Now you could claim that this thread belongs in game concepts, but really, who reads that? And I have some more general questions about MMORPGs in general.

Here is a post I made on GameDev. That is for the feasability and programming, this is about the appeal:

I have been thinking a lot about this topic in designing my game. I am making a virtual world for my game environment, or more properly, an infinite number of virtual worlds. I am creating a player driven economy with an emergent political system.
However, a big problem I have is with the environment. I can generate static factors like various resources. But its important for the game to have a good pve system as well. Now some games have tried a natural system and the players immediately came in and killed everything before it could kick in. Essentially it is necessary to use a fiat system. Natural systems won't work because the game isn't real. If you introduce consequences of player actions on the environment you are just going to have a crashed game because players can't possibly understand the real results of their actions. This is why creatures spawn from nowhere rather than somewhere.
I was thinking that given my multiworld system, a good way to generate monster spawns is by having rifts, no Rift jokes please, which are permanent and constantly generate monsters. Monsters spread out from the rifts based on their power. Stronger monsters take longer to spread from the rifts. The concentration of all creatures is greater at the rifts. A given world possesses a number of randomly placed rifts equal to the number of players. I will probably fiddle with the equation, maybe apply roots or division to the number because a world can't actually hold that number of rifts if the population gets too large and possibly the creature per area value will be too high to survive. Perhaps a rift forms as soon as one player arrives and each rift is worth 10 or 100 players and the power of its release grows with that number of players. And once it maxes out a new rift forms. I have also not decided whether the creatures from various rifts will fight or be on the same side.
I am thinking that varying kinds of walls can restrict some creatures. So smaller creatures can't pass dirt walls, and medium ones cant get past log palisades and what not. Large creatures need stone walls, very large need metal reinforced and huge creatures need enchanted defenses or whatnot. It will probably be a number based system actually, but generally their will be those tiers connected.
Now that is how the standard monster distribution will be set up. There may be a random chance that a monster will choose to nest somewhere and stop spreading out from the nexus. This may be based on if it likes caves forests rivers valleys mountains and so forth.
Now I also want some more random dynamic creature events. I suppose I could have temporary gates to other worlds. I might even be able to set it up so that a group of monsters from another world opens their own gate in a remote part of the world and begins bringing in troops for conquest or something. But I am trying to think of other methods.
Players are able to set up gates to new worlds as well for pvp and also just finding new resources, but that is crafting and pvp and not pve.
Aside from world gates I am trying to think up other automated dynamic events. Perhaps very high level creatures already in the world could do very things. Maybe creatures can evolve in a way. For instance over time as they age dragons could grow in stats and gain powers. They might be able to breed and spawn new dragons. Perhaps they gain intelligence or decide to attack the nearest settlement. Maybe they decide to enlist other high intelligence creatures or open a new rift. I would really like the game to generate its own such events of varied kinds and levels of danger.
In any case since my game is free form I would really like to get away from quests.
Now one issue I have with this system is that it may overwhelm a given world. Suppose that there are 1000 players in a world and 10 max level rifts. Suppose that some of them transfer through a gate to colonize a new world. Then suppose that an AI monster invasion sparks up. No one explores the area for a long time and the forces there build up. Maybe some demons or dragons already in the world become more powerful and start armies and attack players. Since there is no inherent safe zone, aside from perhaps the area directly around a gate terminus which may be "protected by a higher power" or "the laws of physics"(in which case the initial and later player made gates would be separate from the rift system for monster) it could be possible for players to "lose" a world, at least for a period of time until players create a sufficiently powerful group to reclaim said world. It is likely that players would react very poorly to being forced out of a world where they have a lot of investment due to pve forces.
Now in many cases it is possible that even with a lot of rifts players will be able to effectively "tame" a world from a pve standpoint. There will be a way to suppress a rift, although it is complex. But is that balancing enough considering the possibility of losing a world?

I have a few discussion questions to add:

What do you think of a sandbox system like that where the mobs are not placed specifically and always respawned in the same place?

How do you feel about the fact that mobs aren't spawned at all in the WoW sense?

What effect do you think the fact that even ignoring the dynamic events system, just talking about the basic rift system, the monster content of an area is constantly changing? Areas that previously had less dangerous creatures may suddenly have more powerful ones, and vice versa. Rifts are generated randomly as new players join although they will not spawn in walled in areas because that would just be unfun for players in my opinion. This is very unlike the static spawns and difficulties in standard mmo areas.

What do you feel about the possibility of a world becoming uninhabitable to some degree because players' got overrun by monsters?

Now, what about the dynamic event system? Dynamic events will generally correlate to the population of the world they happen in. So its unlikely that a really powerful creature army will pour into the world from a dynamic rift or a monster evolution and smash you without a chance to set up defenses. But if you let things go or a huge event happens in a far off place you may take some damage.

Do you feel like you could work together with large groups of players to fight off large pve attacks? If your settlement gets attacked can you work together with people you don't particularly like to solve the problem? What about your nation, your continent or your world?

Although I am aiming the game at sandboxers, for those of you who generally prefer themeparks, would you be up for this sort of thing? How do you guys feel about this sort of radical departure from standard mechanics?

Have you heard of Dwarf Fortress? Although the game concept is not quite as complex because the nature systems in dwarf fortress don't work in mmos due to players crushing everything, part of the inspiration does come from there.

More generally, do you think this game could work, or would players ruin it with hardcore griefing? Given that if you allow neighbors settlements to be overrun, you would probably be over run eventually, do you think players would be assholish enough to "crash" a world even if the consequences came down on them as well?

I am setting up a website at www.lordofthedawn.com which was my domain for my old space game. I am currently creating a network of pages to describe every aspect of the game in detail. I will be making a forum on one of those free forum sites because I don't want to set up a database and write my own forum code. I don't really expect people to use the forum, you can just read the site and comment here or in one of my other threads if you are interested enough to check out the site. The site will go into way more detail and have way more formatting than posts and threads here. Plus you will be able to read everything in one place, it will be more accesible. I don't expect too much but even one person commenting makes me feel successful :P

Just an update. I got my NVIDIA PhysX license today and I've blown through learning opengl and sharpening my C++.

I expect to have a semi playable alpha with the most basic features ready maybe next year? None of the ary stuff probably, and not many models, but all the code for crafting fighting building and magic and some standin art assets that will be pretty generic.

Are you going to let any of us test your prototype or just torture us? :p

It's a long and probably lonely road. Good luck on your journey Cuathon.

Once I get all these goddamn hundreds of headers from PhysX integrated with my other software I am going to focus on the game systems which are not very code/physics heavy. Crafting and magic and so forth. Then I'll set up my world generator.

There are some things that are really easy to do assuming PhysX has good collision and stuff.

If I do get a playable alpha I will allow everyone to test. I'll try to do some things to allow players to do some of the more interesting things.

I was thinking of setting up a premade scenario where you are evacuating a world and have a line of skyforts holding off an oncoming monster hoard. I dunno, I feel like some of the earlier stages will be really short on combat aspects of the game due to the way the rift system scales.

I really hope PhysX can support good fluid physics and collision. That will be critial to some of the coolest aspects of the game.

I've been following your work for some time now, and I have to say I'm all nostalgic reading the passion and intensity behind your posts, the way you welcome people "poking holes" in your design systems, and defend your logic. I was in the same position you are in now a few years ago (albeit I don't have the coding background you do; instead I had a business partner who met those requirements).

Unfortunately, a "series of unfortunate events" caused our project to take a back seat, and we've never really gotten back on track. Your ideas and desires are strikingly similar in complexity and scope to what our eminent goals were.

I wish you the best of luck; please keep us all posted.

Originally posted by Cuathon

Once I get all these goddamn hundreds of headers from PhysX integrated with my other software I am going to focus on the game systems which are not very code/physics heavy.

Have you considered doing a blog here or on your site about your experiences? So far you've come across several unique and challenging hurdles (like the one above) and how you overcome them or work around them would probably make for a really interesting journal.

Originally posted by Loktofeit

Originally posted by Cuathon

Once I get all these goddamn hundreds of headers from PhysX integrated with my other software I am going to focus on the game systems which are not very code/physics heavy.

Have you considered doing a blog here or on your site about your experiences? So far you've come across several unique and challenging hurdles (like the one above) and how you overcome them or work around them would probably make for a really interesting journal.

I do have a blog on my website, but it only has like 3 entries. I just get distracted with ideas and code stuff. I will try and blog more, but I doubt I'll get a decent following till the game actually comes out. I dunno. I may try to do more.

Good to see updates on this. Can't wait to give it a shot.

@ Cauthon

Some really intresting stuff on crafting. Didnt read all the thread, but didnt see anything on how the player interaction works. I hate to see great crafting systems wasted becuase the developers fail to understand or capture what makes/made crafting so great, and how it can tap into a much broader audience.

I'll try reading the rest of the thread so if this is answered, just ignore this post.

Also seems PVE heavy which is great, do players compete in any way over pve  via pvp or whatever?

Great stuff. Nice to see someone at least talking about new ideas, rather than repeating the "experts".

Would love to try anything you can get to function.

Originally posted by FikusIII

@ Cauthon

Some really intresting stuff on crafting. Didnt read all the thread, but didnt see anything on how the player interaction works. I hate to see great crafting systems wasted becuase the developers fail to understand or capture what makes/made crafting so great, and how it can tap into a much broader audience.

I'll try reading the rest of the thread so if this is answered, just ignore this post.

I have a lot of other threads on the site describing various parts of the game.

You can find a list at:

http://www.lordofthedawn.com/GameInsRef.php

Its understandable that you didn't read the whole thread or any of the others. I have like, 30000 words on the game on mmorpg plus some threads on other sites. Only the game dev ones are linked aside from the ones here.

Thanks brother, I'll read up.

Edit: Ok I read up a little and I'm still missing the greater goals and the potential to reach them that a deep crafting system will provide.

I guess what Im asking is what do you envision the goal of the individual crafter to be in your game? to craft obviously, but to what end? For what purpose?

Originally posted by FikusIII

Thanks brother, I'll read up.

Edit: Ok I read up a little and I'm still missing the greater goals and the potential to reach them that a deep crafting system will provide.

I guess what Im asking is what do you envision the goal of the individual crafter to be in your game? to craft obviously, but to what end? For what purpose?

Did you read the other threads in the link I posted? I think that the scope of the game is beyond what is described in this particular thread. I filled out a lot of ideas in later threads. There should be some on the list with crafting in the title, it might be helpful to read all of those?

The game focuses intensely on working as a group in various ways. It is not very solo friendly.