Pre Build 13 weapon availability

irR4tiOn4L · Jul 23, 2006

Hook while your tips are very worthwhile, i was more posing a rhetorical question.

I dont 'powergame' or do things that ruin my game. I just like to take it slow, and delight in trying to keep up to the progressively better equipment of my enemies; i like to have a bit of time with each sword and ship.

However, i dont feel i should HAVE to restrict myself, and i also dont want to KNOW what surprises and equipment lay ahead before its available to me. I dont want to 'salivate' for the best sword in the game - i would prefer to look forward to the 'next sword up'

Unfortunately, i find that the 'money' obstacle is worse then the 'level' obstacle for weapnons for three reasons;

1 - money is much easier to acquire then levels. Thats because its hard to control how much a player can make.

2 - the best thing about a level based system is that its got an element of surprise and exploration;it makes you treasure almost EVERY sword during the game as your own. You have a stint with each one, grow to appreciate it, before enemies are beginning to overtake you again and you must upgrade. The new system doesnt.

3 - and most importantly - ENEMIES DO NOT GET THE BEST SWORD WHEN YOU ARE LEVEL 4. They progressively 'improve' their equipment, and that was designed to match YOUR progressive improvements. But now, you can SKIP RIGHT AHEAD to the best stuff, and NOT FIND A FIGHT DIFFICULT AGAIN untill your enemies have 'caught up'

It feels NATURAL and just plain RIGHT to have to keep upping the stakes, and its very rewarding to keep getting the surprise of a new weapon well into the higher levels.

If anything, i would INCREASE the minimum levels before something appears, so that you get to enjoy each weapon longer.

Thats a part of the adventure, the exploration, to not KNOW theres a better sword out there, and to value the one you have. The problem is, if you get the Altwood F100 that early - no enemy will every prove a serious challenge again! Then you really DO have to ask "Where to from here?"

The build, i find, is a very good step FORWARD in making it difficult to board serious warships with your rag tag little boat, but a step BACK in terms of challenging you with better swordsmen; largely because you can buy a good sword so early.

On an UNRELATED NOTE - That means

WARNING - TOTALLY IRRELEVANT STUFF AHEAD,

i have noticed that lately that in games like POTC and Oblivion the choice here is:

1 - Do you maintain a strictly realistic system where there are seemingly no unrealistic restrictions, but likewise, youll have to make sure that the swordfighting system and AI is realistically tough, and that the weapons dont range from 10 to 100 damage (totally stupid) or that you dont range from 10 to 1000 health.

2 - Do you maintain a strict scaling approach where the world constantly adapts to the players level, and everything is dynamic (and irritating as oblivion and POTC smuggling runs proved)

2 - Or do you maintain the middle of the road approach, that while the world MUST seem coherent and realistic, especially in say what you encounter, it must also be scaled and restricted somewhat to maintain the sense of adventure, surprise and progress, and yet not bog down the player in having to fight an uber swordsman for the umpteenth time, and not have to fight the same crappy tartane for the upmteenth time.

You see, neither the approaches of REALISM or SCALING will, by themselves, give you a satisfactory result. You cant see this from Oblivion and Morrowind compared. In the end, the two must be balanced with a view to what this is really about - challenge and hierarchy.

You see, the gameplay is a CHALLENGE to rise UP the HIERARCHY - even if you dont succeed. But you cant be strictly realistic - you always have to give a player the CHANCE, no matter if its somewhat remote, to beat a better opponent. That gives the feeling of adventure, of challenge, of fighting out of your league, of going through hell and succeeding. This is so the player always feels it was THEM who failed, not the game who SET THEM UP. People are ego centric after all, and no harm in indulging that in a game.

Now the hierarchy should not stay the same, or keep changing arbitrarily, outside of the players or key actors positions; You should not see everyone suddenly in Manowars if they werent in them before, and you shouldnt likewise see the player relegated to being 'worse than guards, better than rats, equal with goblins' as in oblivion; by a scaling system that always maintains the gap.

Instead, you should allow the player space to improve and rise up, continually introduce newer and more unique challenges, and have some key characters and actors (ranging from stars like danielle, villains like the governor, and whole countries like England) seeming to move up with the player, in a kind of 'rivalry', to maintain a clear focus and challenge for the player.

But you should not see the entire world change just because the player did - at least not in an obvious way.

This is for a simple reason and logic in our minds; the bigger and older something is, the less prone to sudden change it should seem. So an entire WORLD of people, AGELESS and HUGE, should not SUDDENLY be prone to have everyone becoming a fleet captain. The world should MAINTAIN an impression of something UNCHANGING, a BACKDROP, which is only FORCED TO CHANGE, SEEMINGLY AGAINST ITS WILL, by IRRESISTABLE forces, such as the will of a nation, and even then SLOWLY, or through DECISIVE CLASHES, or the players gigantic EGO, eer i mean willpower. Thats why most games get progressively more EPIC as they progress; the logic goes that - "The faster or more something changes, the more epic should be the cause".

Anyway, thats the logic that makes the game fun. Its not fun to have it crossed, and have the world suddenly change.

But its also true that players dont like facing paltry threats, no matter how realistic, if they are repeated over and over and boring. In real life, the life of a first rate captain must have been uninspired for the most part; but a player isnt playing a game to experience that.

The player also doesnt like to run into a point where its impossibly difficult to progress - people dont like to come to the same 'glass ceilings' as they so often do in real life (ever tried to be a sports star?) - they must be able to do something to even the odds, no matter how lengthy or tough, or how far they are behind. Thats a challenge. They must have a chance for victory, whether that means winning outright or fleeing to come back another day. Overwhelming odds and roadblocks are OK, as long as they are not of the 'instadeath' type (like having your sloop being spawned from an encounter you couldnt skip right next to a manowar) and impossible to bypass.

Do note - that does not mean a sloop destroying a manowar - 'WIN' is subjective and dependant on the situation - so a sloop 'getting away' from a squadron of warships can be considered an achievement.

So here comes the trick - As a game designer, you must present a coherent and realistic world (one that follows its own, seemingly set, laws of operation) but at the same time you cant expose the player to either extreme - extreme ease or extreme difficulty - but must COVERTLY KEEP STACKING THE ODDS in a way that generates a seemingly dynamic but in reality constant challenge - and its up to the player to beat that challenge. The key word here is 'covertly'.

That means you DONT mess with things in a very obvious and noticeable way, especially not the hierarchy - eg what ships or weapons everyone is using - but start introducing and removing these things slowly - have guns be introduced gently, but become more and more common - in a seamless way. Have tartane's removed slowly, but never completely dissapearing. Have manowars introduced slowly, but never seeming prevalent.

In a sense, YOUVE GOT TO KEEP WORKING IN THE 'CORNER' OF THE PLAYER'S VISION. Your changes might be noticeable, but must not come to the fore. This is to maintain the coherence of the world.

Also, you must make it seem that the player is not repeating the same challenge over and over, but in fact facing a 'DIFFERENT' challenge - for example, as a manowar captain, you dont have EVERYONE have manowars, but the player is now dispatched on challenges (aka missions) suitable for a manowar captain.

I hope this dissertation on scaling vs realism has gotten something across - its a basic thing ive wanted to point out from what ive observed of Oblivion. Its actually got little to do with POTC, but i thought it might be useful to someone anyway.

irR4tiOn4L · Jul 23, 2006

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Den Dee @ Jul 23 2006, 03:09 PM) [snapback]155030[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'>
Hmm, to balance this would not be easy. This is a game, it is supposed to be enjoyable. A real pirates life was not that enjoyable at all. Most importantly, it was much shorter than we have in the game. Most pirates would complete some 10 successful raids on ships or colonies, before meeting their end at the hands of the military or their colleagues. But we want to play a fairy-tale pirate, who lived a long prosperous life. How to tie this up with the reality of 17th century piracy, I have no idea.

Pirates plunder was usually sugar or grain or rum. Something cheap and bulky. And of course they did not have a chance to sell it to a reputable merchant at a good market price. They would offload it to some lowlife merchants in small towns, for a fraction of the market price. Sabbatini (I'm not saying he was completely realistic in his books, but he made an attemt at it) once mentions an unlucky pirate who captured a shipload of cocoa and had great troubles selling it - noone needed the darn thing and he ended up hauling that cocoa all over the Caribbean for months on end. Same thing goes about captured ships.

Boarding parties were a very risky business, and pirates tried to avoid this kind of action if possible. If the opponents crew was about the same size as theirs, they would think twice befor the abordage. If there were military on the ship, they would never have the courage to board at all.

The morale on a pirates ship never reached the level of military-trained navies. Though the usual income of a navy sailor was much smaller than a pirates, the discipline was much more harsh and punishments more severe.

And those navies were out there to get them, too. Navy patrols were all around and never passed up a chance of persuing a pirate ship and either sinking it or persuading it to surrender or boarding it, after which it was the gallows.
------------------------------------------

So there. So far i can suggest a few things to make our life harder:

Precious cargoes are few and far between. Most of the time you'll find ships loaded with cheap trash. And then you'll have a hell of a time trying to sell it. And then when you do find whom to sell it to, you'll have to sell it for no more than half its market price. And of course no more gems in chests on decks. Maybe one in the captains cabin, if you are lucky and if the ship owner was rich enough.

You can't sell ships for more than 1/10th of their market value.

Ships crewed by the military always have good morale and boarding those is hard as hell. More often than not you'd need three times the sezi of the enemy crew, to stand some chance of success. After boarding such a ship, you will plunder a small ammount of money (regiments coffer), some weapons/ammo and that would be it. After that, the navy of that country will actively hunt you down.
--------------------------------------------

I still think this is not enough to make the game challenging, but this is all I could come up with for today <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/poet.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":hmm" border="0" alt="poet.gif" />
</div>

Now have a heart for those who dont indulge in piracy, like me. I HATE the whole "cant sell ship for market price" thing - what if i buy myself a ship, use it and keep it in good condition, and want to upgrade, suddenly i cant sell it for more than a tenth? Come on!

Perhaps introduce papers of ownership? A deed or something to a ship? You have to prove how you got it off its previous owner? (impossible to do if they arent available as a witness). It probably isnt realistic, but heck.

Even then, 50% of the price is way too little even for a black market ship.

Surely the answer lies in the tactics and situations a pirate like yourself must overcome to take the ship in the first place - that means -

realistic boardings where there are 20 people at least, and height advantages, swivels, etc all factor into how many each side has.

Realistic decisions by merchants, where well protected ships like Galleons are in the open seas, ussually in groups, and generally keep a formation when threatened that allows them to fire upon you at all times, and poorly protected ships, like yachts, try to stay in patrolled sea lanes, with escorts, or in convoys.

And then of course, you must have AI that is much smarter at sea - it tries to point its broadsides, it keeps the wind for advantage, it chooses tactics based on what ship you have, and it tries to immobilise you if it cant run.

I think if the more benine merchants, like those in yachts, carried less expensive goods, but those with galleons were much better protected and carried expensive goods, then it would be more difficult to make money - sure you can capture a lowly yacht, but its probably not worth the HEAT it would cause with the authorities. But a galleon - well thats another league.

On another Note, i noticed this in the internalsettings.h file:

#define IT_USE_MINLEVEL 0 // Default 0: if 1, traders will not be given an item if minlevel < player level (stock behavior). If 0, the default, then the trader will be given the item but will not _show_ it to the player.

Now it should not be showing me the item either way, but perhaps if i put this to 1, it might do the trick?

irR4tiOn4L · Jul 23, 2006

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(irR4tiOn4L @ Jul 23 2006, 07:52 PM) [snapback]155039[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'>
On another Note, i noticed this in the internalsettings.h file:

#define IT_USE_MINLEVEL 0 // Default 0: if 1, traders will not be given an item if minlevel < player level (stock behavior). If 0, the default, then the trader will be given the item but will not _show_ it to the player.

Now it should not be showing me the item either way, but perhaps if i put this to 1, it might do the trick?
</div>

After changing the setting above, combined with turning off the weaponsmod, blacksmith mod and weaponsdamage mod, no matter where i went, the best equipment available at level 1 was the schiavona, yataghan, maltese knights sword and cheap armor.

Now interestingly, the three swords cost the same, yet the yataghan was vastly inferior. The prices are off, as is the balance somewhat. But hell! I finally found how to get rid of the myriad of high level stuff.

So the conclusions are:
A - the internalsettings.h setting "#define IT_USE_MINLEVEL" really should be in the buildsettings.h file, and should have a description - "Use player or merchant level when determining when high level iterms will appear"

When set to 0, the merchant level is used to determine whether an item appears, not the player's. When set to 1, the player's level is used to meet the minlevel requirement.

B - some other mod that IS NOT toggleable has added some of the new weapons/items, such as armor and braces of pistols. The internalsettings.h setting is probably from the same mod, and that mod also seems to have changed stats, prices and minlevel settings, though i am unsure of this. Either way, the swords are somewhat unbalanced right off the bat - as far as i remember, a schiavona was not available straight away in stock POTC, and neither was a maltese knight sword. Also, the yataghan, maltese knights sword, and schiavona should not be the same price.

This aspect needs tweaking

C - The weaponsmod, while adding great variation to the weapons, doesnt seem to have set up min levels for these variations, and as a result renders the internalsettings.h setting irrelevant.

It would be good if this area was completely retweaked, following closely the balancing used in the original POTC, adjusting and tweaking where necessary, and then the various quality levels and new weapons were given their own min levels, based on what other weapons might be available.

That would no doubt make the early game a fair bit more difficult too - no more overpowering opponents by equiping yourself and all your boarders with solingen rapiers. As a result, boarding would be considerably more stacked against you winning alone, and most people would probably find a reason to play much longer. This is because they couldnt buy the top ships, and they couldnt capture them easily either.

I also propose that an option is made that limits shipyards far more severely in what ships they will sell to the player - in my opinion, class 2 ships are FAR too powerful for a nation to allow them to be sold to just anyone.

But neither is restricting shipyards to sell just class 3 adequate.

This really should be dependent either on reputation, or on rank with the respective nation. It could be done the simple way - the higher your rank with that nation, the higher class of ship they will sell (perhaps starting with being restricted to a lowly class 6 at wary status, class 5 at neutral, and up from there).

Or it could be done on a ship by ship basis - where i would seperate these categories based on threat:

1 - small, slow and negligible - Tartanes, yachts, barges
2 - small but quite fast, and somewhat well armed, and thus more dangerous - cutters, luggers, galeoths
3 - large, but relatively slow and unmeanouvrable trade ships - fleuts, pinnace
4 - small, fast, larger crew, relatively well armed - quite dangerous ships, but generally not seen as piracy ships - small schooners, small sloops
5 - still small and fast, but with larger crews, somewhat better armement, and importantly - a construction that obviously favours speed, armament and low draft over cargo capacity - ships primarily associated with smugglers and pirates or navy - xebecs, larger sloops, brigs, large cutters
6 - larger merchant ships that are slow but very well armed, but also powerful economic agents - galleons, caravels
7 - counter hunter category - similar to 4, but with an extra edge that the country reserves for its own agents, such as anti piracy, coastguard and patrol units - larger xebecs, larger schooners, larger brigs and larger sloops
8 - Militarised large merchant ships - well armed, but also slow and unmeanouvrable - fleuts, pinnaces, galleons etc which have been modified to fit many more guns
9 - Independent duty warships - the largest ships the navies use for independent duties - corvettes, frigates
10 - Ships of the line - Manowars, Battleships and their ilk.

Now you can argue based on what occured in the period how this should be organised, but i would say that what the normal individual can buy should not go beyond category 6.

Categories 7, 8, 9 and 10 are what the navies have started to restrict for their own purposes.

Category 8 might be made available to the large trade companies to use as escorts for their trade fleets, considering the influence those companies had, and category 7 might be made available to privateers of higher standing or low ranked navy captains.

Category 9 might be available for only the most respected of privateers, and even then it would be hard to imagine this entailing more than a very limited sale of these ships. The class would be available to mid and higher ranked navy captains

Category 10 would only be available to high ranking navy captains, period, or those crafty enough to steal one.

All captains with 'wary' relations can use ships of class 1 or 2,
All with 'neutral' can use class 3 and 4
You would need 'friend' (maybe higher?) relations or a letter of marque to use class 5
You would need 'friend' (maybe higher?) relations to use class 6

Class 8 would be for very well respected merchants, or higher ranking navy captains.
Class 7 would be for respected privateers, or low navy captains
class 9 would be for medium to high ranked navy captains, and occasionaly for the best privateers.
class 10 would be only for high ranking navy.

Bit harsh i guess. But still. Shipyards that sell civilians class 2 ships? Weird, but editable. But the current system cant restrict all the other ships that would have been restricted - large merchant ships, counter hunter ships, and militarised merchants.

What annoys me though is how good most of the ships in encounters are. Especially for pirates.

I mean many encounters are warships, with pirates often combining a good xebec - i dont know, but i think it would have been somewhat difficult to acquire - with a pinnace of all things.

Often the pirates will have militarised merchant ships.

It wasnt easy to buy a pinnace you know. It was expensive. And not many pirates could make enough to buy one. It was primarily a ship owned by merchants. Besides, if a pirate could afford such a ship - theyd probably go into trade.

It seems to me like the pirates, if they have more than one ship, should really have a barge, or a yacht, or a lugger. Something small.

IncredibleHat · Jul 23, 2006

I already said the "IT_USE_MINLEVEL" does not work. It is unused, only exists in the settings file.

Den Dee: I don't care about a history lesson... only thing I care about is gameplay.

Adding more challenge to the game would not be difficult. Just a few key points are what are the problems

I think its a good idea to make 'stolen' ships sell for less. From a GAMEPOINT perspective (ignore realism guys), simply put: you take a ship at sea, you cannot sell it for very much. You BUY a ship in port, you can turn around and sell it for almost markey price. PERIOD.... there is no other calculations involved, no other variables to consider, no deeds, no paperwork, no bullshit to screw the game over with.

That would help greatly with the "just go capture a few pirate ships, sell them off and sit on a couple million in just the first half hour of play!"

Small towns/port should not even allow the sale/purchase of certain class ships. They are not a harbor, just a simple dock. Each time I go into oxbay, and see 80 ships for sale, I just shake my head in disgust. Maybe in REDMOND... but NOT OXBAY FOR CRYING OUT LOUD!

Merchants should NOT SHOW high level items to low level people PERIOD. Also, they should "NEVER" carry any item that has a rarity number beyond a certain set number. That would be easy enough to figure/set by looking at the items init files.

These two adjustments should be simple. They are partially done, the rest just needs to be added. I can do that easily.

Looting bodies was the worst addition in terms to inflation. So, you can loot so many dead guys now, and get so much junk, and sell it for such high prices, someone decided to raise the prices of other things to 'compensate'... tsk tsk.

I like the ideas of reducing goods on ships to crud for smaller ships. But what is crud? Every good in the game has a good price for it SOMEWHERE on the map <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="

" border="0" alt="smile.gif" />

I think this is where the 'gold and silver' goods should come into play better. A big merchant ship with escort, should have some gold and silver on it. Gold and silver should not be "SOLD" or "BOUGHT" ... they ARE money. You capture a ship with 10 gold cargo... it adds 10,000 gold to your party money. 10 silver would be 5,000. But FINDING gold and silver on a ship should be rare.

Along those lines, the amount of loot and money you get off all the dead guys from boarding, is also insane inflation.

Be interesting to have a rare encounter with a small pirate ship just filled to the brim with gold and silver (like a small lugger). Many players wouldn't even bother chasing down that fast pirate (or be able too!), so, having a chance encounter like that could be fun.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>What annoys me though is how good most of the ships in encounters are. Especially for pirates.

I mean many encounters are warships, with pirates often combining a good xebec - i dont know, but i think it would have been somewhat difficult to acquire - with a pinnace of all things.

Often the pirates will have militarised merchant ships.

It wasnt easy to buy a pinnace you know. It was expensive. And not many pirates could make enough to buy one. It was primarily a ship owned by merchants. Besides, if a pirate could afford such a ship - theyd probably go into trade.

It seems to me like the pirates, if they have more than one ship, should really have a barge, or a yacht, or a lugger. Something small.
</div>

Uhm <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="

" border="0" alt="biggrin.gif" />

You overlooked one BIG thing there... *cough* "Pirates Dont Buy Stuff" *cough* ... do the math <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="

" border="0" alt="wink.gif" />

dendee · Jul 23, 2006

Uhh, where to begin...

Irrational is right. Hat is right. Heck, I am right too.

Hat, I KNOW you don't care about realism. You've told me that already. More than once I think. I take that into account. Can I go on now? Thanks.

Gameplay gameplay gameplay. Yes, it is the main consideration. But chasing gameplay only will result in an arcade sailshooter with a pirate name and graphics. Is that where you are heading? Don't you think that would be a waste of a perfectly good engine? Besides, we already have that. Sid Meiers pirates, for one. Probably a few others as well, haven't tried those.

-----------------------------------------

As Irrational said, the introduction of numerous unbalanced weapons, goods and ships toppled the balance. Thank god we didn't get uber ships, armed like a manowar with the size and handling of a sloop (though I wouldn't be surprised), but we did get some pretty uber weapons. Pierce 75% Block 95%? Please...

The suggestions you two present will indeed help the situation. Without going into too much detail:

-- Stolen ships sell for less.

-- Small towns/port should not even allow the sale/purchase of certain class ships.

-- Stuff available to the player is tied in with player level.
Maybe not only tie it in with the players level, but also make the finest weapons very rare? Just simply very rare. You want a Solingen? Comb the entire archipelago for it. Maybe you'll find ONE. Maybe you won't find one at all. No Hat, this won't make the game "less fun". Just don't go combing the archipelago for it. If you encounter one, don't miss the chance.
Same should be done about the ships too, only not according to level, but to military rank. And then maybe one shouldn't buy those frigates/manowars/other high-end ships, but rather receive them from governors with the new rank. And they definitely shouldn't cost 300.000 Guess 30.000.000 would be more like it. Or rather, let them be untradeable at all. Captured one? Excellent, bring it in, go to the governor and receive a medal, 5.000 and possibly a new rank.

-- Looting... Hmm, guess I could go into a bit of a detail with this.
When the random encounters mod appeared for Morrowind, it screwed the balance up completely. I remember walking out into the street in one of those towns, and lo and behold: thre was a complete suit of glass armor strolling down the street! Glass armor! There were only 1.5 suits of that in the <i>whole </i>original game. To get it required a titanical effort. You didn't even consider trying to get it before you were past half the game...
So I strolled down to the fella, promptly knocked him out and got me that suit. Then quit the game, disabled the mod and lived happily ever after.

So... how do we handle looting? Let's see how it is handled in real life (Yes yes Hat, and don't wince). You simply don't walk around knocking people on their heads left and right. If you try to, soon the entire archipelago will be out for your head. Maybe the reputation system needs some tweaking? Commit a crime against some English fella, and next time you are around, the english guards will be happy to see you... and jail you. And hang you. Or run you through right on the spot. So to remedy the situation, you will have to hide from them, bribe the governor etc.

Same goes about sea crimes (piracy). Why does our standing with the countries depend on the piece of cloth hanging on our mast? Hoist the French flag! "French:neutral" Oh yeah, sure. Maybe the better way would be "French: think you are french"?

Maybe it would be better to completely separate your standings with the nations from the flag you are flying? And leave the flags purely for identification/fooling opponents? I understand it is much easier to implement this just by modifying ones standing with the nation depending on the flag, but it messes up the bigger picture a lot. IMHO. Also, why do we have to be on good terms with a nation to hoist its flag? It is just a piece of cloth in your chest. Pull it out and hoist it.

-- Insignificant ships should have crud for cargo. What IS crud? I told you... but you don't care for history lessons. And no, you cannot make a fortune by selling rum. Anywhere on the map. The price bracket is still too low for that (I am talking the original pricing, not the ridiculous ones we have after these mods).

-- Gold/silver: well, they weren't all money. There was incan gold in artefacts, mined silver that was transported in bars and so on. Not sure what's wrong with the idea of having gold and silver as trade goods.

-- A small chance of random encounter with an insignificant ship bursting with gold. I like this idea a lot. We already have something of a kind: random pirate ships can be very rich. This just needs to be fine-tuned.

-----------------------------------------------
That's it, just trying to sum up what Hat and Irrational said in the last few posts, adding my opinion here and there.

Excellent essay on general challenge strategy Irrational <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="

" border="0" alt="smile.gif" /> I especially liked the point about players place in the hierarchy and the dynamics of world change. Thumbs up!

Izzie · Jul 23, 2006

Somewhere along the way something got lost to many of the modders. To me this is sad. It's also very hard to get them to hear it so maybe this will help. WE ALL DON'T PLAY A PIRATE!!!!.

Spare me the line " But it's called Pirates of the Caribbean" please. It only got that name as a shameless plug for a Disney movie. The main story line in the game is about being sucked into being a Privateer.

I think it's great that the game was modded to include the options to play a pirate, privateer ( for nation of your choice ), or merchant, or any combo of those. But more and more I see options for choices being removed. And I feel I am now being told HOW I should being playing the game.

Any time you do the same thing the same way for to long it gets dull. Sure I have played a pirate - sacker of cities - sourge of the high seas. But it's also fun to play the hired gun from the highest bidder. I can't say I could stick to playing a straight merchant ( I like the smuggling part too ) but to limit the game to being only for pirates is stifling.

I agree with the idea that Hat had about how some ships just shouldn't be availiable in those "dock" islands.
However I do need to remind you that the reason I want ALL ship classes availiable to larger ports is we can't remodle ships IN GAME. This was a common practice for pirates and they were pretty good at it. The best the game can offer right now is player made ships that would be suitable to pirates OR smugglers. Many ships that merchants/ smugglers used had secret storage areas for contraband. I really don't want to sail all over taking ships until I luck across the ship I just put in the game to use.

Den Dee the reason that those "cheap crap" cargos was so common is simple. That IS what those islands biggest exports were. How gold and silver as exports got in I don't know. Gold and silver came from South and Central America not the caribbean. You can't really export stuff off and island that your not producing there unless it was first an import. The game doesn't handle that very well. I tried it once. I do like having a mixed varity of goods though.

I also agree with the comment that you can't solve the economy problem by just making stuff more expensive to buy. I hear this alot. "It should cost alot" " Make it cost more " You can't really solve problems just by throwing money at it. The reason we all end up rich is because we make more money then we can spend. Yes on the surface it sounds like making things cost more would fix it but it doesn't. To be honest I have never played a game yet that I don't end up stinking rich at the end.

As far as making things more rare you have to keep in mind that the game somehow ties the rare numbers to the price. I tested this myself. I left the rare numbers alone and just lower the price and what do ya know it started showing up more. I have no idea what the codes are that run this but I did learn that much. It's a balance between the two.

Hook is right that you can't please everybody but the best mods have always been those that ADD possibilities
WITHOUT adversly effecting normal game play. I just don't see this happening anymore. To many are breaking codes and toggles aren't functioning. I know this is fairly common and it's complicated to fix. But some are never really addressed.

If I have somehow hurt the feelings of any modders I really am sorry. That wasn't my intention. I just sometimes get the feeling that STYLE of play isn't being thought about that often.

LarryHookins · Jul 23, 2006

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Den Dee @ Jul 23 2006, 03:06 AM) [snapback]155034[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'>
Just brainstorming here. I agree our golden goal is balancing playability and realism.
</div>
You know, this line almost inspired me to write a novel about "realism" in games. But I figured it wasn't really the time or the place. I see it inspired some other people as well. And we got some great comments on it; many thanks to everyone who contributed.

In all my dealings with professional game developers (I worked for a game company for 8 months, and have helped online with several other games, getting my name in the credits), I don't think I ever heard any professional developer use the word "realism." That's a word used by the players, not the developers. You might say it's what separates the two groups.

Professional game developers aren't striving for "realistic." They're striving for "reasonable." Does some way of handling a situation work within the mechanics of the game, and is it reasonable? Will it improve the gaming experience? Will it be fun?

Before you start thinking that I'm totally against what gamers are calling "realism," keep in mind that one of the games I worked on was Steel Beasts, a modern tank sim that's close enough to actual tanks that many countries are using it as a training aid. This means real people's lives are at stake. Is that enough "realism" for you? And no one on that development team ever used the word "realistic."

And "playable" doesn't mean "arcadish." Steel Beasts was quite playable. And fun, even. And good enough that real life armies use it for training.

Now, on to Pirates of the Caribbean.

In the stock game, the trade goods were priced so low that the most profitable trade run you could possible do wouldn't pay for the upgrade to your spyglass. That was one of the first things I changed in the game, before I discovered the build mods here. And even with goods at 5 times their original game value (which coincidentally is what the mods ended up with), trying to play trader just wasn't worth it. You could make more money by looting chests in houses.

The problem with the uber-swords isn't that they're available early on, it's that they've been added to the game at all. Same with the super powered guns. Taking these back out of the game would do a lot towards balancing the game again. I'm not saying I don't like the new swords, my favorite is the Solingen Rapier. But if game balance is such a concern, then the new weapons should be removed entirely.

Same goes with armor. And do we *really* need 15 different versions of the cheap armor, with slightly different stats on each? I've never considered the cheap armor as anything but loot. The better armor ends up affecting the game balance.

Then there's the Toughness perk. If you've never tried it, it's as if you were constantly using health potions. And while you regain health at the rate of 0.1 all the time, and a potion causes you to regain health at the rate of 5, Toughness makes you retain health at the rate of 8. It's seriously out of balance. I use it anyway, along with the Solingen Rapier and Golden Armor. And I *still* got killed recently during a nasty boarding, while testing my new boarding code.

If all these things were removed, I wouldn't be able to play the game the way I do. And I find plenty of challenge, even with all the help from the high level stuff. If I had to go back to using a cutlass, I'd find the game quite boring. While looting chests in houses was fun when I was a beginning player, it would be about like having to find pistol bullets now.

And speaking of pistol bullets. While you might buy gunpowder in 1690, you'd be making your own bullets with a bullet mold. Just one of those cases where people's idea of "realism" just doesn't fit with reality. Which is why professional game developers deal with "realism" issues the way they do.

I saw a game company go out of business in the 70's because they tried to cater to gamers' constant demands for more detail, more complexity, more "realism." Their biggest game took 1200 man-hours to play. Gawd knows how many man-hours to develop. But it had to be sold for the same price as a game that only took an hour to play to completion, and a small fraction of the time to develop.

If people are going to be concerned about "realism," then they should be even more concerned about keeping realistic expectations. The game should be playable, challenging and fun. Whenever "realism" gets in the way of these, it needs to be avoided.

Hook

Jason · Jul 23, 2006

I just want to make one point here. It seems like a month or six weeks ago the community was focused on getting Build 13 ready to release and there seemed to be a consensus about fixing things that were currently in the build, but not working.

I am not cerain, but a lot of this discussion seems to be going beyond that and in some cases way beyond that. There have been at least three attempts to close a Build 13 before and those have fallen away as we all continued to search for the "perfect at the expense of the good."

Now I am concerned again. Let's get the build done, before the summer is over. And I am sure I am not the only one who thinks we need someway to close on what goes in and what doesn't.

One more thing as we do that we need to maintain an amiable, collaborative and civil tone.

Just a thought.

IncredibleHat · Jul 23, 2006

The problem I see is ... not enough people are even play testing the current updates so that we CAN find and fix the REALLY BAD bugs. Everyone is sitting around waiting for the stable release...

LarryHookins · Jul 23, 2006

I don't know about the others, but I'm not suggesting any changes; I'm discussing game design philosophy. I just want some bugs fixed. The things I mentioned aren't bugs.

I'm quite happy with the way the game works now as regards weapons availibility, and I don't really want to see that changed.

Of course, saying that doesn't necessarily fit with "an amiable, collaborative and civil tone," so without your comment I wouldn't have mentioned it. No offense intended.

Hook

Izzie · Jul 23, 2006

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Jason @ Jul 24 2006, 06:02 AM) [snapback]155077[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'>

One more thing as we do that we need to maintain an amiable, collaborative and civil tone.

Just a thought.
</div>

Whoosh Dude where did that comment come from? I didn't read anything that wasn't at least civil. As far as the other things you said. Yes getting the build finished would be very nice but I don't think I am the only one concerned about the things that are being added.

Some of the things added today come back to bite my butt later. I can think of 2 that already in play now. The food off mod and the quest officers are good examples. At one time having that effect moral would have been harmless since it didn't play that big a deal in normal game play. But it does now. As for the quest officers, that started to break a year more ago when the Moral/ HP mod was added. Perhaps tweaking that is what made the situation worse. But a year is a very long time to leave something broken.

Something going on in the dungeons is what effects the drop in rep for your officers. It isn't important now since that doesn't effect you. I'm not even sure anybody knows why it does. At one time it did effect your rep as well but that was somehow fixed. Perhaps it has something to do with when NPC's replaced skeletons. Who knows. But if later on somebody places in a mod where their rep has an effect on you, suddenly it becomes important. You see what I mean?

LarryHookins · Jul 23, 2006

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Izzie @ Jul 23 2006, 04:14 PM) [snapback]155088[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'>
Something going on in the dungeons is what effects the drop in rep for your officers. It isn't important now since that doesn't effect you. I'm not even sure anybody knows why it does. At one time it did effect your rep as well but that was somehow fixed. Perhaps it has something to do with when NPC's replaced skeletons. Who knows. But if later on somebody places in a mod where their rep has an effect on you, suddenly it becomes important. You see what I mean?
</div>
If an enemy's sword breaks, they're counted as unarmed, but they still fight, and your officers still kill them. This is where the drop in repuation comes from.

Eventually I'm gonna sneak some code in so that your officer's rep can increase or decrease as yours does.

Hook

Jason · Jul 23, 2006

Izzie,

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>Whoosh Dude where did that comment come from? I didn't read anything that wasn't at least civil.</div>

That comment has its roots in series of posts a couple weeks ago primarily between, two people and couple of comments over the weekend that I have seen that from time demean or put down the work past and present of others. I mention it because as someone who has been on the board for over three years, I have noticed a change in tone over the last two or three months and I am concerned about it.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>Something going on in the dungeons is what effects the drop in rep for your officers. It isn't important now since that doesn't effect you. I'm not even sure anybody knows why it does. </div>

I hadn't noticed that before today but I don't think it is just dungeons since I never go there. I think it might be when enemies blades break on ship and since they keep fighting with fists, they are killed unarmed. About a month ago, the death of those people would give you a rep hit but that I think has been fixed.

Another thing that is happening that should be looked at is that disarmed enemies fighting with fists against blades are having a lot of impact on the people they are fighting, knocking a lot of them out. What should happen is they should be killed in short order by the blades without landing a meaningul blow. When Pieter gets back off his holiday, maybe he can take a look at this.

The las thing that is going on is once all the enemies are dead. your crew keeps trying to kill the stunned people even if they are yours.

Hat, do you think I should put this on the bug tracker?

IncredibleHat · Jul 23, 2006

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>The las thing that is going on is once all the enemies are dead. your crew keeps trying to kill the stunned people even if they are yours.

Hat, do you think I should put this on the bug tracker?</div>
You can put it on the tracker. Put anything that comes up on the tracker. if its an issue, its an issue.

However, regarding that one, I've not seen it. I had a few of my crew go 'stary' and sit down, and my crew left him alone. I walked up to him after all the enemy was dead, and gave him a potion. He woke up, it increased my rep, and I proceeded to the next deck.

Never seen my men kill their own. I have seen them beating on a senseless enemy... but heck, thats ok, as you cannot progress with boarding until all enemy are dead on the deck you are on.

Jason · Jul 23, 2006

I will put it on late tonight or tommorrow.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>] had a few of my crew go 'stary' and sit down, and my crew left him alone. I walked up to him after all the enemy was dead, and gave him a potion. He woke up, it increased my rep, and I proceeded to the next deck</div>

I have had it work that way too, but then they just start swinging indescrimantly at evey thing and everyone.

<img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/danse1.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=" :dance

" border="0" alt="danse1.gif" />

irR4tiOn4L · Jul 24, 2006

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(IncredibleHat @ Jul 23 2006, 10:45 PM) [snapback]155050[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'>
I already said the "IT_USE_MINLEVEL" does not work. It is unused, only exists in the settings file.

Den Dee: I don't care about a history lesson... only thing I care about is gameplay.

Adding more challenge to the game would not be difficult. Just a few key points are what are the problems

I think its a good idea to make 'stolen' ships sell for less. From a GAMEPOINT perspective (ignore realism guys), simply put: you take a ship at sea, you cannot sell it for very much. You BUY a ship in port, you can turn around and sell it for almost markey price. PERIOD.... there is no other calculations involved, no other variables to consider, no deeds, no paperwork, no bullshit to screw the game over with.

That would help greatly with the "just go capture a few pirate ships, sell them off and sit on a couple million in just the first half hour of play!"

Small towns/port should not even allow the sale/purchase of certain class ships. They are not a harbor, just a simple dock. Each time I go into oxbay, and see 80 ships for sale, I just shake my head in disgust. Maybe in REDMOND... but NOT OXBAY FOR CRYING OUT LOUD!

Merchants should NOT SHOW high level items to low level people PERIOD. Also, they should "NEVER" carry any item that has a rarity number beyond a certain set number. That would be easy enough to figure/set by looking at the items init files.

These two adjustments should be simple. They are partially done, the rest just needs to be added. I can do that easily.

Looting bodies was the worst addition in terms to inflation. So, you can loot so many dead guys now, and get so much junk, and sell it for such high prices, someone decided to raise the prices of other things to 'compensate'... tsk tsk.

I like the ideas of reducing goods on ships to crud for smaller ships. But what is crud? Every good in the game has a good price for it SOMEWHERE on the map <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="

" border="0" alt="smile.gif" />

I think this is where the 'gold and silver' goods should come into play better. A big merchant ship with escort, should have some gold and silver on it. Gold and silver should not be "SOLD" or "BOUGHT" ... they ARE money. You capture a ship with 10 gold cargo... it adds 10,000 gold to your party money. 10 silver would be 5,000. But FINDING gold and silver on a ship should be rare.

Along those lines, the amount of loot and money you get off all the dead guys from boarding, is also insane inflation.

Be interesting to have a rare encounter with a small pirate ship just filled to the brim with gold and silver (like a small lugger). Many players wouldn't even bother chasing down that fast pirate (or be able too!), so, having a chance encounter like that could be fun.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>What annoys me though is how good most of the ships in encounters are. Especially for pirates.

I mean many encounters are warships, with pirates often combining a good xebec - i dont know, but i think it would have been somewhat difficult to acquire - with a pinnace of all things.

Often the pirates will have militarised merchant ships.

It wasnt easy to buy a pinnace you know. It was expensive. And not many pirates could make enough to buy one. It was primarily a ship owned by merchants. Besides, if a pirate could afford such a ship - theyd probably go into trade.

It seems to me like the pirates, if they have more than one ship, should really have a barge, or a yacht, or a lugger. Something small.
</div>

Uhm <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="

" border="0" alt="biggrin.gif" />

You overlooked one BIG thing there... *cough* "Pirates Dont Buy Stuff" *cough* ... do the math <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="

" border="0" alt="wink.gif" />
</div>

I did take that into acocunt

I think the proportion of 'no hoper' pirates in a lugger to those ACTUALLY CAPABLE of capturing something must have been amazing. The ratio of wannabe pirates to actual experienced ones im talking about.

So how is every pirate in the game successful enough to have a Xebec and a FRIGGIN PINNACE?>!

Also, a wise pirate captain would simply DUMP his pirate ways and start trading upon acquiring such a ship. He certainly wouldnt lug it around as a big slow target.

Just look at the size of that thing - it wouldnt be easy to capture for a begginer at all. Where the hell are the begginer pirates?

On the "IT_USE_MINLEVEL" thing - It DOES work! It determines whether YOUR level or the MERCHANTS is used. However, if you have the weaponsmod on, which has no minlevels set properly, then its pointless - the original blades are removed anyway.

irR4tiOn4L · Jul 24, 2006

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Hook @ Jul 24 2006, 02:42 AM) [snapback]155072[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Den Dee @ Jul 23 2006, 03:06 AM) [snapback]155034[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'>
Just brainstorming here. I agree our golden goal is balancing playability and realism.
</div>
You know, this line almost inspired me to write a novel about "realism" in games. But I figured it wasn't really the time or the place. I see it inspired some other people as well. And we got some great comments on it; many thanks to everyone who contributed.

In all my dealings with professional game developers (I worked for a game company for 8 months, and have helped online with several other games, getting my name in the credits), I don't think I ever heard any professional developer use the word "realism." That's a word used by the players, not the developers. You might say it's what separates the two groups.

Professional game developers aren't striving for "realistic." They're striving for "reasonable." Does some way of handling a situation work within the mechanics of the game, and is it reasonable? Will it improve the gaming experience? Will it be fun?

Before you start thinking that I'm totally against what gamers are calling "realism," keep in mind that one of the games I worked on was Steel Beasts, a modern tank sim that's close enough to actual tanks that many countries are using it as a training aid. This means real people's lives are at stake. Is that enough "realism" for you? And no one on that development team ever used the word "realistic."

And "playable" doesn't mean "arcadish." Steel Beasts was quite playable. And fun, even. And good enough that real life armies use it for training.

Now, on to Pirates of the Caribbean.

In the stock game, the trade goods were priced so low that the most profitable trade run you could possible do wouldn't pay for the upgrade to your spyglass. That was one of the first things I changed in the game, before I discovered the build mods here. And even with goods at 5 times their original game value (which coincidentally is what the mods ended up with), trying to play trader just wasn't worth it. You could make more money by looting chests in houses.

The problem with the uber-swords isn't that they're available early on, it's that they've been added to the game at all. Same with the super powered guns. Taking these back out of the game would do a lot towards balancing the game again. I'm not saying I don't like the new swords, my favorite is the Solingen Rapier. But if game balance is such a concern, then the new weapons should be removed entirely.

Same goes with armor. And do we *really* need 15 different versions of the cheap armor, with slightly different stats on each? I've never considered the cheap armor as anything but loot. The better armor ends up affecting the game balance.

Then there's the Toughness perk. If you've never tried it, it's as if you were constantly using health potions. And while you regain health at the rate of 0.1 all the time, and a potion causes you to regain health at the rate of 5, Toughness makes you retain health at the rate of 8. It's seriously out of balance. I use it anyway, along with the Solingen Rapier and Golden Armor. And I *still* got killed recently during a nasty boarding, while testing my new boarding code.

If all these things were removed, I wouldn't be able to play the game the way I do. And I find plenty of challenge, even with all the help from the high level stuff. If I had to go back to using a cutlass, I'd find the game quite boring. While looting chests in houses was fun when I was a beginning player, it would be about like having to find pistol bullets now.

And speaking of pistol bullets. While you might buy gunpowder in 1690, you'd be making your own bullets with a bullet mold. Just one of those cases where people's idea of "realism" just doesn't fit with reality. Which is why professional game developers deal with "realism" issues the way they do.

I saw a game company go out of business in the 70's because they tried to cater to gamers' constant demands for more detail, more complexity, more "realism." Their biggest game took 1200 man-hours to play. Gawd knows how many man-hours to develop. But it had to be sold for the same price as a game that only took an hour to play to completion, and a small fraction of the time to develop.

If people are going to be concerned about "realism," then they should be even more concerned about keeping realistic expectations. The game should be playable, challenging and fun. Whenever "realism" gets in the way of these, it needs to be avoided.

Hook
</div>

Some great insights into the development process there, thanks!

I dont agree with you about the swords though - its like a new toy to play with each time really. Its fun to get something new. Also, to balance those swords is REALLY EASY if you limit it by level, and have enemies USE the same swords based on player level. That way, sure, you might have the best sword, but many enemies will use a competitive one as well. Unrealistic, but balanced, and fun - with one exception - you cannot let people loot that sword off them. Thats what would ruin it.

Finally, there should be different STYLES and CATEGORIES, in balancing terms, of swords. So for example, a saber, a cutlass and a rapier should all be the same cost and CATEGORY, but have different styles of use - one might be better on attack but bad on defence, another the opposite, another the middle ground. Then, you go up a category, and you get to the Schiavona, the Yataghan, and the maltese knight sword. Again, same thing - yataghan great attack, bad defence. Schiavona great defence, poor attack. Maltese knights sword in the middle.

Now you dont ALWAYS line three equal swords up, you sometimes skip a few, so you might have a choice of just 2 of the styles at some points, sometimes even just 1, until the next swords up appear, but in general, that should be the way these swords are balanced. A kind of triangular competing relationship.

The toughness perk and the armors i havent really had a chance to try much. May i point out that they are an excellent way of keeping your OFFICERS alive, which was something that was screwed in stock POTC.

But i think thats just dodging the problem. In the end its an AI problem - they dont block enough. The chance that the AI will choose to block an attack should be really high the better the person's melee skill is - i mean it makes sense. The better a swordsman you are, the better you are at blocking incoming blows. You only attack in between the enemy's blows. That makes sense. Thats what should be happening.

Interestingly, i played a merchant in the stock game - i dont really agree that the profit margins were too low - maybe a little compared to real life, but not in terms of gameplay. See, i dont think a lugger is a good tradeship. Neither did traders back then. Why do you think they often didnt have enough crew to man all their guns? Because they were just greedy for a bit more profit? Surely not, when you risk losing everything. Its because their expenses almost matched their income. Trading isnt all that easy.

I had a fleet of three pinnaces and a fleut at one point, and the profit margins were SIGNIFICANT there, as you would expect. A lugger isnt a trade ship.

However. The problem in the stock game was that EVERY island ran out of the goods they were exporting, and you had NOTHING TO TRADE. That was the real problem. Thats why i had to do contraband every now and then, and ended up using two frigates and a pinnace instead. That problem has been solved now. I dont think the prices themselves were problematic before - i wouldnt expect a small ship to be very profitable. Most would be trading mail or something.

As long as a lugger can trade in the more luxury goods and make enough income to cover the expenses it could generally be expected to incur, with some profit on top, i dont see the problem. If you want more profit from such an inefficient ship (the cargo space to crew expense ratio is not very advantageous), then dabble in contra.

On another note, contraband skews the economy a LOT. In my simple yacht i just did a linen run (costing 9000) to Douwesen - netting 40 000. Thats HUGE profit. Thats what i used to make off contraband in a pinnace in stock. I dont know if thats realistic or not, but the risk involved seems very small - theres no navy patrols that check cargo, and even if you fight the coastguard, you dont lose reputation or ranking with the country.

Im not saying i want an unreasonable solution, but it seems too easy and rewarding.

However, by far, the biggest unbalancing factor is the looting. In stock game, boarding was enticing because all those barrels would give you jewels and potions you could sell. But that was about the only place that continually gave you expensive items for free. Most others, like taverns, just didnt respawn. Everything else was hard to get, including swords and guns.

You certainly couldnt make a profit off the dungeons - the items didnt respawn, unlike the enemies, and you couldnt loot those. In a way it was annoying, and i would like those items to respawn, but looting an endless stream of enemies - you wonder why people are rich.

IncredibleHat · Jul 24, 2006

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>On the "IT_USE_MINLEVEL" thing - It DOES work! It determines whether YOUR level or the MERCHANTS is used. However, if you have the weaponsmod on, which has no minlevels set properly, then its pointless - the original blades are removed anyway.</div>
Uhm... no it does "not" work.

Do a full search on the entire code base on that variable. You will find one instance of it. And that is where you set it in IS.h. I guess your machine is set to magic... last I checked, my machine is set to logic. That must be why it does not work for me.

What you may be thinking makes it work, is that it is using the 'rarity' values of items. When you have weaponsmod off, the rarity values are based off what is set in the inits per item. Not a variable-dynamically chosen value based on quality, price, morale, the kitchen sink, and anything else.

Toggling IT_USE_MINLEVEL does absolutly nothing.

irR4tiOn4L · Jul 24, 2006

I think it might be worthwhile for me, as a player who has come back after two or so years, to point out what mods ive disabled, as i found them overcomplicating my gameplay. Perhaps i can be some sort of guage or something on how complicated the mod is -

Mods Disabled -

Food and Drink mod (having to keep your crew fed)

Hangun ammo mod (having to stock up on powder and bullets)

Weapons mod (different levels of quality for the weapons - i like it, but i dont like having all weapons available at game start)

Blacksmith mod (again, i would like to use it, but its pointless without weapons mod)

Bladedamage mod (no offense, but i dont agree that if you can get blacksmiths to IMPROVE weapons, they must necessarily also DEGRADE - i think its enough that poor weapons are for sale somewhere, as the only available example of a very rare weapon, and you have to seek a blacksmith to get it useable - i find it annoying and superflous to have to repair or even THINK about the condition of your weapons)

Theft from the vice city mod (I do NOT want to keep checking how much money i have every time someone walks up to me, nor do i want to keep checking if the text up the top says "enlightened" or "lightened")

"IT_USE_MINLEVEL" from InternalSettings.h (A mod buried in the middle of nowhere with a bad description, that actually determines whether the merchant's level or your own determines when something is available)

Cannot reload while fighting mod (I dont care if its realistic, i dont like it)

Auto Hire Crew on change ship (nothing wrong with a mod that saves time, but i prefer to handle crew myself, as i can get good morale that way)

Looting the dead (i leave on just the interface based looting for now, but i dont know - i will probably soon disable it, as it unbalances gameplay)

Opening locks mod, Hurting yourself while trying, and booby trapped chests (i always found these stupid and annoying. Lockpicking is very easy - i know how to do it - and theres no way youd hurt yourself trying. Booby traps are stupid when were talking about the majority of chests - for example on a ship)

Precharged weapons mod (An example of a partial toggle - i preffered the old system where a newly equipped weapon had to be reloaded, so i left this off. However, i have had to turn it back on, as EVERY time i even entered my inventory, my gun would start being reloaded - this is an example of partial support for an alternate style of play, not to lay the blame or anything - its probably because of the autoequip system, which is fair enough - a minor flaw)

Weather update at sea mod (a great idea - but in its current implementation, the wind changes too quickly - maybe every 10 minutes - and the change is too abrupt and large - wind might go from gale to breeze, and do a 180)

I think that about covers it. There are some other annoying things i cant disable, but by and far the toggles are for the appropriately contentious mods. By and far, i really really like the work done here - its just plain brilliant.

But the tendency to get bogged down in details is evident just from that list i gave - just go through, and think about how EACH one of those mods does nothing more than force you to keep THINKING and checking your back. Its not fun to keep having to devote your mind to minor annoyances and issues - like "did he just steal from me?" (and squint at whether that said "enlightened" or "lightened") or "will this chest in boarding blow up in my face, and force me to sit around waiting for him to heal, or consume a potion?", or "i have to save before i check if there is a high morale crew available here, as even asking takes till nightfall", or "does my officer have enough powder and bullets to fire his pistol?" or "how many slashes has my sword done, when will it break again?", or "do i have enough rum and wheat onboard to last the unloading/repairing wait?".

I know some people like many or all of these, but really - the addition of so many of them is so irritating and superflous, that they can hardly be described as 'adding' to the gameplay. Of course, that doesnt mean they shouldnt be there - i love the fact i CAN turn any one of them on - but it can mean hours of messing with the buildsettings.h file, despite how well set out it is. I guess thats just the sacrifice for choice.

To end on a positive note, and to show how much I APPRECIATE the mod and the hard work of those who made it, i recently tried the VML Lugger - BEAUTIFUL! Perhaps the texturing is a little bland and doesnt look like wood, but we truly need more ships like that!

Even though it doesnt fit into the lower quality ships in the game, i really wish EVERY ship in the game had such detail.

Kudos to that model! Any others like it?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(IncredibleHat @ Jul 24 2006, 09:34 AM) [snapback]155103[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>On the "IT_USE_MINLEVEL" thing - It DOES work! It determines whether YOUR level or the MERCHANTS is used. However, if you have the weaponsmod on, which has no minlevels set properly, then its pointless - the original blades are removed anyway.</div>
Uhm... no it does "not" work.

Do a full search on the entire code base on that variable. You will find one instance of it. And that is where you set it in IS.h. I guess your machine is set to magic... last I checked, my machine is set to logic. That must be why it does not work for me.

What you may be thinking makes it work, is that it is using the 'rarity' values of items. When you have weaponsmod off, the rarity values are based off what is set in the inits per item. Not a variable-dynamically chosen value based on quality, price, morale, the kitchen sink, and anything else.

Toggling IT_USE_MINLEVEL does absolutly nothing.
</div>

Well, i have seen otherwise, it certainly does SOMETHING - maybe not what i was thinking, but the results are clear - I started at least FIVE times in different locations to test what was initially available, and each time, with weaponsmod off, and this setting set to 1, the best available was -

A schiavona, a yataghan, a maltese knigts sword and cheap armor

Every store, every time.

With that setting set to 0, a street merchant would have the items above, but a store merchant might have highlanders and better!

With the weaponsmod, no matter whether that was 0 or 1, there were many different items always available

So while i could be wrong in WHAT it does, I know it does SOMETHING good.

irR4tiOn4L · Jul 24, 2006

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(fudge dragon @ Jul 22 2006, 07:42 PM) [snapback]154915[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'>
Well I can help you with 2 of your issues
to change the availability of swords go to your pirates of the caribbean Directory and go to PROGRAM\ITEMS\ and open initItems.c with a text editor (notepad'll do)

next search for <div class='codetop'>CODE</div><div class='codemain'>// ccc special weapon assembly kit --></div>
the objects under here can (I think) have the <div class='codetop'>CODE</div><div class='codemain'> itm.minlevel = X;</div> added to them (where x is the level you want to get CCC's special weapons at. when you finish the special weapons search for <div class='codetop'>CODE</div><div class='codemain'>//WEAPONS</div> and set the minimum level on those (they already have the variable) when you get to a table ignore it (its for the weapon-mod) and scroll down to vassal's weapons you can set it for those, if you keep going you can set it for armour and spy glasses too

for the menu pictures go to RESOURCE\Textures\INTERFACES\BACKGROUND and rename build2.tga.tx to something like build2old.tga.tx and copy build1.tga.tx and rename this copied file to build2.tga.tx

hope that helps (I think thats all right)
</div>

Look, i had a look where fudge dragon suggested, and i found that -

Schiavona, yataghan and maltese knights sword - all have itm.minlevel set at 2 - which i presume i had when i was testing by starting a new game.

Now if you have a look though, a lot of items in Program/Items/initItems.c dont have an itm.minlevel set above 0.

Also, i dont think the original game had the schiavona, yataghan and maltese knights sword available at level 2 - something screwed around with it.

But certainly, please point out why this doesnt match what ive found! (after all, it could be down to rarity or something i dont know about)

Pre Build 13 weapon availability

Landlubber

Landlubber

Landlubber

Landlubber

Landlubber

Landlubber

Buccaneer

Buccaneer

Landlubber

Buccaneer

Landlubber

Buccaneer

Buccaneer

Landlubber

Buccaneer

Landlubber

Landlubber

Landlubber

Landlubber

Landlubber