For craft's sake!

[Maso]

I was going to tag this on to the QoL thread, but actually I think it's a bigger discussion.

From what I can see, there is no downside to making it a bit easier for people to figure out some crafting recipes. As it stands, it's possible to get mega rich with fairly basic recipes if that's your bag. Access to the more interesting recipes just means it's more fun, more opportunity for interesting items and recipes, more opportunity for engaging hunters for more random ingredients and less 'lost recipes' sat gathering dust in the database. I can't see any harm....only benefits? Although potentially some work.

It's something often complained about here and the GDB...all the time so.


1. Reinstate different echoes for failure to analyse (actually, as per the old days and the helpfile basically!) each of the following ought to have a different echos:

• It has no recipe
• You don't have the required skill
• You have the required skill, but it's not high enough
• It's gated behind a clan or similar

2. You can make something out of that...

You have a high skill:

Code Select Expand



> craft pole

You could make...
   1) a really nice polished pole from that. [polemaking, manageable]

You think you could also make a bone-headed prodding stick from that if you had a piece of bone and a scrap of leather.



Low skill:

Code Select Expand



> craft pole

You could make...
   1) a really nice polished pole from that. [polemaking, manageable]

You think you could also make a bone-headed prodding stick from that but you're missing something.




3. In the shops...ingredients

Code Select Expand



> view branch

This is a very nice branch. It looks really branchy.
You assess a branch...
...it is primarily made of branchyness.

You think you could make something from this.




4. In the shops...craftable goods..

Low skill and higher level, higher value crafts:

Code Select Expand



> view pole

This is probably the best pole you've ever seen.

You assess a pole...
...it is primarily made of wood.

You think you could make this.



Master skill, only for low level and basic crafts:

Code Select Expand



> view pole

This is probably the best pole you've ever seen.

You assess a pole...
...it is primarily made of wood.

You think you could make this from a piece of wood and a polished sapphire.



---

Curious to discuss. Obviously hopeful.

[Marauder Moe]

Agreed on all points.

Though I might suggest explicit >craft command wildcards for a more database-friendly implementation.  Probably limit to one wildcard at a time, maybe more with high/master skill.

[creeper386]

I would love to have some hints that indicate that my character knows more about what they are doing then I actually do.

Maybe making it a separate command for those that don't want it.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

I like this quite a bit, Maso. Quite a bit.

[Shaydee]

Yes to all of this. 

[Barsook]

Can we have this, pleeeeeeese?

[Brokkr]

One issue is:  a piece of bone

This idea might work for an item that has a couple of alternate recipes.  How do you handle 200+ alternate recipes?

[mansa]

Suggestion 1: Agree
Suggestion 2: I'll talk about this later in the post.
Suggestion 3: I feel this would be a super heavy and clock cycle intensive call.   I'm not sure if this is necessary, and I think it will cause database lookups to delay the game.
Suggestion 4: Agree

...
2. You can make something out of that...

You have a high skill:

Code Select Expand


> craft pole

You could make...
   1) a really nice polished pole from that. [polemaking, manageable]

You think you could also make a bone-headed prodding stick from that if you had a piece of bone and a scrap of leather.

Low skill:

Code Select Expand


> craft pole

You could make...
   1) a really nice polished pole from that. [polemaking, manageable]

You think you could also make a bone-headed prodding stick from that but you're missing something.
...

I feel this would also be a super huge database call.

For example:

Code Select Expand


> craft bone

You could make...
   1) a bone knife from that. [knifemaking, easy]
   1) a sharp bone knife from that. [knifemaking, manageable]
   1) a brittle bone knife from that. [knifemaking, easy]
   1) a slender bone knife from that. [knifemaking, manageable]

You think you could also make [item1] from that if you had a piece of bone and item xyz [knifemaking]
You think you could also make [item2] from that if you had a piece of bone and item xyz [knifemaking]
You think you could also make [item3] from that if you had a piece of bone and item xyz [swordmaking]
You think you could also make [item4] from that if you had a piece of bone and item abc [knifemaking]
You think you could also make [item5] from that if you had a piece of bone and item abc [knifemaking]
You think you could also make [item6] from that if you had a piece of bone and item abc [swordmaking]
You think you could also make [item7] from that if you had a piece of bone and item abc [axemaking]
You think you could also make [item8] from that if you had a piece of bone and item hij [knifemaking]
You think you could also make [item9] from that if you had a piece of bone and item hij [swordmaking]
You think you could also make [item10] from that if you had a piece of bone and item hij [swordmaking]
You think you could also make [item11] from that if you had a piece of bone and item hij [axemaking]
You think you could also make [item12] from that if you had a piece of bone and item klmno [knifemaking]
You think you could also make [item13] from that if you had a piece of bone and item klmno [swordmaking]
You think you could also make [item14] from that if you had a piece of bone and item klmno [axemaking]
You think you could also make [item15] from that if you had a piece of bone and item klmno [lockpick making]


Which really is just a reiteration of Brokkr's point, sorry.

[Maso]

Fair point...what about the 'low skill' version? Where it just returns that you could make something? But doesn't say what, or what you're missing.

Additionally, it could just limit...and give you 1 or 2 options with the missing ingredients?

The system now is just....irksome. It basically encourages hoarding and requires insane systematic testing of items to try and figure stuff out, and anything past two ingredients is most likely just lost to any bar those who already know it or have managed to analyse something. It would be great to know if that random piece of X you found might be useful or if you should just sell it/bin it.

[Ulga]

Maso, your post makes a lot of sense to me, and would be a huge help to noobs. As a noob, I have a heck of a time trying to make sense of what I can make and what I cant, even if my character would know. For instance, I can make an x out of a small y, but I cant make anything out of a big y. Its pretty confusing, and doesnt make a ton of sense. Or, how do I know what precise 2 items to put together to make an x, when the ingredient is something super random?
your idea about showing the missing ingredients, or showing that you could make /something/ with an ingredient is great. I totally get the point Brokkr made about the insanely long list (I never knew you could craft so much in this game. Very exciting.), so maybe not list all of the things you could make, but a guide would be great to have.

[mansa]

Fair point...what about the 'low skill' version? Where it just returns that you could make something? But doesn't say what, or what you're missing.

Additionally, it could just limit...and give you 1 or 2 options with the missing ingredients?

The system now is just....irksome. It basically encourages hoarding and requires insane systematic testing of items to try and figure stuff out, and anything past two ingredients is most likely just lost to any bar those who already know it or have managed to analyse something. It would be great to know if that random piece of X you found might be useful or if you should just sell it/bin it.

I think allowing the 'view' command at NPC shops to give the analyze results of the item would solve some of that.  Isn't that you're suggestion #4  

[triste]

Allowing people to analyze things in shops wouldn't be an improvement, it would be a detriment and would just cause shops to get chock full of replicated goods. It removes interesting roleplay around acquiring rare items and requesting to view them, etc.

I like all the suggested crafting improvements, but so far they've all made me chuckle as a coder. Even the proposed aesthetic improvements -- I'd rather not ask our game's coders to fiddle with left padding and right padding all day.

FWIW, staff do put effort into this pain point in an interesting way, so far as I have heard -- they will sometimes sell rare craftable items in shops, such that they can be bought and inspected. I think they do it this way because it drives roleplay.

[Maso]

Fair point...what about the 'low skill' version? Where it just returns that you could make something? But doesn't say what, or what you're missing.

Additionally, it could just limit...and give you 1 or 2 options with the missing ingredients?

The system now is just....irksome. It basically encourages hoarding and requires insane systematic testing of items to try and figure stuff out, and anything past two ingredients is most likely just lost to any bar those who already know it or have managed to analyse something. It would be great to know if that random piece of X you found might be useful or if you should just sell it/bin it.

I think allowing the 'view' command at NPC shops to give the analyze results of the item would solve some of that.  Isn't that you're suggestion #4  

Ehh kind of. But it doesn't really tackle the huge database of mostly-lost crafts that aren't in regular circulation through shops or the odd items you can't find a craft for. If there was an automated effort to randomly distribute random stuff into shops from the depths of the item database that would be a step in the right direction. But let's say I have a few random items (ingredients) sat in a chest that I can't find a craft for...but looking at them...it seems obvious they would be good for the type of things I can craft...what are the odds of coming across that one obscure item in a shop that there's a recipe for? Pretty slim.

Even if it just returned a random max 2-3 recipes within my skillset for an item...that would be a huge improvement, it doesn't need to be the whole list.

[Maso]

Allowing people to analyze things in shops wouldn't be an improvement, it would be a detriment and would just cause shops to get chock full of replicated goods. It removes interesting roleplay around acquiring rare items and requesting to view them, etc.

I like all the suggested crafting improvements, but so far they've all made me chuckle as a coder. Even the proposed aesthetic improvements -- I'd rather not ask our game's coders to fiddle with left padding and right padding all day.

FWIW, staff do put effort into this pain point in an interesting way, so far as I have heard -- they will sometimes sell rare craftable items in shops, such that they can be bought and inspected. I think they do it this way because it drives roleplay.

The suggestion re. analysing in shops was that common, basic items would give a recipe. For rare, expensive or difficult items it would just tell you that you would be able to craft it. If you care to bust 7 small buying it maybe you can de-engineer it.

[triste]

If simple to craft items are cheap and easy to craft, just buy them. It's more coin to that other merchant starting out.

Agreed a "You can craft this" in shops is short and sweet, worth a one line post in the Quality of Life thread. The rest just kills roleplay.

[triste]

And sorry, just to explain my "Kills roleplay" shorthand to any new players, what I am saying is this: If you wish to be a great crafter, find and roleplay with a great crafter in game. If you want to be a great burglar find a great burglar. If you want to be a great mercenary...

This is what the game is about. If you have to struggle in isolation, roleplay it out, maybe submit a request, but above all, try to find that outcome through roleplaying since it is the point of the game.

While I like the idea of a crafting system like this because I know people cheat and share stuff about this OOCly, gamifying crafting would obliterate so much great roleplaying. I don't think we should compromise the theme of the game just because other people choose to value gameplay more than roleplay.

[Fernandezj]

I like anything that reveals more hidden crafts.
Several players have alluded to the fact that some items from 10+ years ago are just not in game because no one knows how to make them.

[triste]

Staff have been trying to cycle those items back in game so that they can be discovered so far as I have heard. I have noticed and had fun with it but I guess not everyone is good at finding easter eggs.

Perhaps automatically / randomly cycling items in can help. In favor of seeing if things are craftable through view (but don't kill trade and interaction by going whole hog please).

[creeper386]

My two biggest things to help. Let view tell if an item is craftable, though I'd prefer if it told me if my character could possibly craft it. Even if it doesn't tell me how to craft it.


Second, fix analyze. I think it's currently near worthless. I think others have mentioned it, but if it's not craftable, just give me that OOC message. Then some variation of, you don't have the skill, you don't have the tools and here's how it's made. I do think clan locked crafts should just have their own separate thing too.

[Maso]

And sorry, just to explain my "Kills roleplay" shorthand to any new players, what I am saying is this: If you wish to be a great crafter, find and roleplay with a great crafter in game. If you want to be a great burglar find a great burglar. If you want to be a great mercenary...

This is what the game is about. If you have to struggle in isolation, roleplay it out, maybe submit a request, but above all, try to find that outcome through roleplaying since it is the point of the game.

While I like the idea of a crafting system like this because I know people cheat and share stuff about this OOCly, gamifying crafting would obliterate so much great roleplaying. I don't think we should compromise the theme of the game just because other people choose to value gameplay more than roleplay.

I'm not talking about merchants becoming great merchants. There's a difference between not being able to craft expensive, difficult and high value items and not being able to craft something that is fairly cheap and should be common but just isn't because it was master crafted with an obscure recipe.

Then there is the issue of weird craftable ingredients...e.g. the pointy shard of plastic - has 6 recipes vs the shardy shard of plastic - has no recipes, no matter what you try and craft it with you can't find a dang recipe. That feels to me like an OOC construct and an OOC frustration which, when solved, would not be ruining anyone's RP. In fact, the time saved for crafters would probably open them up for more RP. Unfortunately, the natural response to the above scenario is to make a damn mastercraft recipe for the shardy shard of plastic because it's been annoying the hell out of you, and adding yet another soon-to-be-lost mastercraft recipe to the pool, possibly almost identical to one someone else has made...because you couldn't figure it out.

Even the proposed aesthetic improvements -- I'd rather not ask our game's coders to fiddle with left padding and right padding all day.

"You will sit there and fiddle with that damn padding until it's krathdamn perfect. No, almost the same is not good enough." - wrangling coders, story of my life

[triste]

"You will sit there and fiddle with that damn padding until it's krathdamn perfect. No, almost the same is not good enough." - wrangling coders, story of my life

You can't quite wrangle volunteer coders. Beggars can't be choosers.

Seeing if something might be craftable to you upon using the `view` command? A low effort quality of life improvement.

Getting a bunch of recipes for free upon view without paying a coin (or a second of time roleplaying)... unequivocally kills trade and roleplaying.

I like ergonomic code, trade, and roleplaying. Code that kills trade and roleplaying (because people want to be lazy [in a roleplay sense] lazy power gamers) is very eh. Yeah don't "wrangle" our coders into killing roleplay to satisfy people who don't want to make connections in game. There are plenty of great merchants to learn from who play off peak if that's the problem.

[Maso]

Again, you're not quite getting the point. Nor am I look for anything that 'kills roleplay'. The system is perfectly fine, as it is, for 'power gamers', since you can get unbelievably rich with the easily available recipes. Opening up more of the interesting crafts (read: not valuable, expensive or rare...but OOC'ly interesting) can only be a good thing.

[triste]

Add "You break it you buy it" code then. Kidding and not kidding.

If you want perks with zero roleplay or interaction, introduce some realistic costs.

Or just continue to go with... interaction and roleplay as the very mechanism by which you learn. I prefer the latter.

[Maso]

Honestly, points 1 & 2 of my original post cover the main bulk of my concerns...the viewing in shops stuff is more of a nice to have, but it makes sense.

You seem to assume that I don't roleplay or interact with others and that all my woes could be solved by exploring this avenue of the game that has been mysteriously closed off to me for 15 years. 

[triste]

If you read my posts I have been very respectful about one of your ideas and very clear that the other hurts roleplay (which you appear to now concede). Please don't take it personally <3

[Maso]

(which you appear to now concede).

I don't. :p

[triste]

(which you appear to now concede).

I don't. :p

You concede it's "Nice to have" but at least we agree it's completely unnecessary.

[triste]

Let me just reiterate for new players.

If you want to be a great merchant find and learn from a great merchant.

If you want to be a great thief find and learn from a great thief.

If you want to be a great warrior find and learn from a great warrior.

It's literally what the game is about: roleplaying.

[triste]

And yes this is on topic. For craft's sake don't ruin crafting roleplay!

I will post in this thread all day to fight for that.

[triste]

The second someone explains how a mechanism that totally bypasses interaction, trade and roleplaying helps roleplaying is the second I stop posting here but going to let this sit until someone explains how a mechanism that totally bypasses interaction, trade and roleplaying helps roleplaying.

[Cordon]

 There has been some pretty extensive use of most types hand tools in my life, have a small collection of 'old' tools as well. Willing to offer advice for RPing to any in a bind for RP material with tools they may have never seen before Arm.

Looking to help with crafting RP, can share things that only someone that has worn out tools might know.

[triste]

There has been some pretty extensive use of most types hand tools in my life, have a small collection of 'old' tools as well. Willing to offer advice for RPing to any in a bind for RP material with tools they may have never seen before Arm.

Looking to help with crafting RP, can share things that only someone that has worn out tools might know.

See -- I love it when people share and learn from this roleplay in game.

Let my last dorky caring-too-much-about-this post be a paean to great merchants past. Who has had the privilege of roleplaying, in the last fifteen years or so, with Tasok Salarr? Merchant Ita of Salarr? Sinjinn of the Akai Sjirr. Merchant Raymond of House Salarr.

Now imagine just suddenly losing every scene where you might have interacted with characters like these and others. That is exactly what will happen if every merchant is suddenly capable of becoming a money making silo without the need to interact, learn and teach.

I want a game where you are rewarded for roleplay, and roleplay is it's own reward.

[triste]

When I get some sleep and finish work today, I'll look for a log of when my character randomly learned how to craft "Grebber's Delight" from a random hunter two IRL years ago. It was actually one of the scenes that got me back into Armageddon two years ago. I would hate for scenes like that to be replaced with "ooc Ya i already knew that it pops up when you type `craft saclike`"

[Maso]

Now imagine just suddenly losing every scene where you might have interacted with characters like these and others. That is exactly what will happen if every merchant is suddenly capable of becoming a money making silo without the need to interact, learn and teach.

Every merchant is already capable of becoming a money making silo without any interaction at all....it's extremely easy for those that want to do it, and it's extremely boring. That is not at all what I am looking for. None of the ideas here would contribute further to that, because it's already so easy to achieve that it cannot be made easier if power gaming and getting rich is the end game for a player.

Trying to force roleplay out of not knowing what to do with a 'slightly-different-shaped-lump-of-stone-than-the-other-one' is an awkward OOC construct that nobody wants to deal with, I can see the occasional RP opportunity, but not something that wouldn't get old fast. And none of this has anything to do with becoming a 'great merchant', which is a whole other level in itself. There is a much broader range of crafting classes now, many of which may apply to characters without any such aspirations.

When I get some sleep and finish work today, I'll look for a log of when my character randomly learned how to craft "Grebber's Delight" from a random hunter two IRL years ago. It was actually one of the scenes that got me back into Armageddon two years ago. I would hate for scenes like that to be replaced with "ooc Ya i already knew that it pops up when you type `craft saclike`"

Agreed, it would be sad to lose all opportunities for moments like that. Those interactions however, are quite rare however much they are yearned for. Giving some options for a crafting ingredient, rather than all options for a crafting ingredient would negate that possibility somewhat.

[triste]

When I get some sleep and finish work today, I'll look for a log of when my character randomly learned how to craft "Grebber's Delight" from a random hunter two IRL years ago. It was actually one of the scenes that got me back into Armageddon two years ago. I would hate for scenes like that to be replaced with "ooc Ya i already knew that it pops up when you type `craft saclike`"

Agreed, it would be sad to lose all opportunities for moments like that. Those interactions however, are quite rare however much they are yearned for. Giving some options for a crafting ingredient, rather than all options for a crafting ingredient would negate that possibility somewhat.

Alright I still can't sleep, but roleplay like this is only as rare as we make it. After learning how to make Grebber's Delight I taught maybe six other players how to make it. One of those players was a new player who kudosed me for showing him how to enjoy the game or some such.

Why talk about expensive relational database queries to pull up recipes so people can grind coin without roleplay when the much more beautiful relational phenomenon is the networked nature of learning in the system we have today.

Sorry to wax poetic while also understanding code, it is kind of why I play this game.

[Maso]

I don't have the time for this. 

[triste]

Sounds like a lack of a rebuttal.

I said I should be sleeping an hour ago so good night <3

[Maso]

Sounds like a lack of a rebuttal.

I mean, looking at our last few back and forths...you keep saying the same thing...and I keep saying the same thing...which you then ignore...and say the same thing. I'm not looking to get stuck in an endless loop. Especially since it's the middle of the work day and I have software to design.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

Well, Triste's point isn't invalid, but what happens when those great merchants, two of which I was lucky enough to play under, no longer have the knowledge to give you? When they are gone, and, because of how player-concentration ebbs and flows, there's a lull between merchants which allows recipes to get lost? Both Tasok and Ita retired while I played Agron, but Agron was an armorcrafter, and didn't have (nor care about having since he was a dwarf who only really really cared about making armor) access to knowledge about crafting weapons.

Maso's argument is that it would be nice if recipes weren't lost. Triste's argument is for mercantile RP. So ... perhaps a reconciliation would be along the lines of "great merchants" having access to all of those recipes, so that someone has the ability to learn of them. Obviously, that knowledge could be couched in books and the like, so that the foremost holders of knowledge are the blooded Merchants of the GMHs.

But Maso's point remains: we shouldn't lose access to recipes unless staff literally decides that those recipes are no longer part of the world. And that will happen, even to great merchants, without some sort of mechanism to keep it from happening.

[zealus]

Gonna have to agree with 7DV above.
And also, it's nice and all if your leader PC has time for that, but in my (very fun) kuraci run, I didn't have time to learn craft recipes a lot.
Because my agent was teaching me things about the nature of merchanting, yaknow, in an RP scene.
So I'd not say that learning crafting recipes is the only singular purpose of GMH leader -> crafter interaction. In the slightest.

[SpyGuy]

From some requests I've put in and things I've learned I suspect it's not even easy for staff to find recipes using specific materials right now.  So not sure how feasible it would be to get some of these in game but I'm down, within limits.

Personally I like the feeling of finding new crafts in game and then sharing them with others.  It's fun to learn a new cooking recipe and then wow another player with it.  That said, it's also an ongoing source of frustration for people.   Yes, learning how to craft from a great crafter is the best way to do it but said crafters may not exist in game, may not like your face or may just be busy with other stuff. 

My ideal system might be something that gives you a hint if you're one component off.  Let's say scrab shell and chalton hide make nothing.  But add a packet of purple dye and they make a sweet breastplate.  So when you try 'craft scrab chalton' it returns 'You think you could make something if you had some purple dye'.  It'd still keep some of the mystery but be much more lenient when finding recipes through experimentation.

[triste]

From some requests I've put in and things I've learned I suspect it's not even easy for staff to find recipes using specific materials right now.  So not sure how feasible it would be to get some of these in game but I'm down, within limits.

Personally I like the feeling of finding new crafts in game and then sharing them with others.  It's fun to learn a new cooking recipe and then wow another player with it.  That said, it's also an ongoing source of frustration for people.   Yes, learning how to craft from a great crafter is the best way to do it but said crafters may not exist in game, may not like your face or may just be busy with other stuff. 

My ideal system might be something that gives you a hint if you're one component off.  Let's say scrab shell and chalton hide make nothing.  But add a packet of purple dye and they make a sweet breastplate.  So when you try 'craft scrab chalton' it returns 'You think you could make something if you had some purple dye'.  It'd still keep some of the mystery but be much more for finding recipes through experimentation.

Yes, we could arrive at a compromise like this for people who "like the feeling of finding new crafts in game and then sharing them with others" which was the point I was making which "isn't invalid" according to 7DV (you could have been grammatically nice and stated my point was "valid" rather than going for the double negative).

The proposed compromises are sadly even harder to code than the original roleplay killing "Gimme all the recipes like this is an MMORPG" solution. The only idea that continues to seem worth lifting off the ground is the simple "You might be able to craft this" echo upon view.

[lostinspace]

I always like the idea of having NPCs sell random craftables to merchants.

Seems like a good way for long lost recipes to be filtered back into the game in a logical way. If you want to learn new weapon recipes, watch the weapon shops and buy any that look promising to analyze.

[triste]

I always like the idea of having NPCs sell random craftables to merchants.

Seems like a good way for long lost recipes to be filtered back into the game in a logical way. If you want to learn new weapon recipes, watch the weapon shops and buy any that look promising to analyze.

This is exactly what staff / Shabago mentioned doing about a year ago (cycling these sorts of items into markets). It's a good approach, agreed. If anything automating and increasing the number of items cycled in is desirable.

[creeper386]

Couple points. Maybe evening PST isn't a good time to play. I personally don't think the player base is super supportive of, "Just fine a PC to learn from," but forcing PC interaction for a system that doesn't work well because of OOC constraints isn't that helpful.

Not to mention, say a new playing joins this game. I've seen lots of reviews that talk about crafting being great in Arm. They are going to try the system. Probably get no where. Find help files that are out of date and me personally would think this game is an absolute shit show if crafting was my first introduction.

Personally I think fixing analyze to work like the helpfiles say ... As well as at least having view tell you if it's craftable. Not how to craft it, but if it's something even worth buying. Because in a perfect world, everything would be craftable. Heck in a perfect system, I could make all sorts of stuff with materials that the only restriction is the OOC construct that it's not coded.

Overall though, I think adjusting some things about crafting ... Is in no way going reduce role play. If anything, the system how it is now, as a crafter if I DON'T know a good amount of recipes I have, the system leads it's way to just poking about on recipes.

[Veselka]

Crafting in ArmagedonMUD absolutely blows. I'm sorry. Played a few other RPI's that absolutely get it right, and the system here is very antiquated.

Love the game! Hate crafting.

[Dar]

Crafting in ArmagedonMUD absolutely blows. I'm sorry. Played a few other RPI's that absolutely get it right, and the system here is very antiquated.

Love the game! Hate crafting.

There are a lot of muds that have features that are very awesome and that Arm will never have. Mostly newer code bases. It is just a fact of life, Arm is a 30 year old code base. The code of the game is good enough for what it otherwise offers. And our coders do work to make it better as much as the codebase allows.

[Alesan]

For a game that isn't showing any signs of stopping for the forseeable future, it's a shame that it would be a massive undertaking and way too much work to move the game to a more modern codebase so things aren't as limited as they are.

[triste]

For a game that isn't showing any signs of stopping for the forseeable future, it's a shame that it would be a massive undertaking and way too much work to move the game to a more modern codebase so things aren't as limited as they are.

+1, but what what would we call it, the name "Armageddon 2.0" is already taken

[Alesan]

For a game that isn't showing any signs of stopping for the forseeable future, it's a shame that it would be a massive undertaking and way too much work to move the game to a more modern codebase so things aren't as limited as they are.

+1, but what what would we call it, the name "Armageddon 2.0" is already taken

I don't know... Armageddon? Why does it have to be retitled? It'd be the same game on an updated codebase. Not a new, separate game.

[Malken]

Armageddon Remasteresurrected

[Maso]

Armageddon Remasteresurrected

Roll a character, you. 

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

For a game that isn't showing any signs of stopping for the forseeable future, it's a shame that it would be a massive undertaking and way too much work to move the game to a more modern codebase so things aren't as limited as they are.

Well, it would be a massive project, but, the real problem last time came from building an entirely new world, honestly, while also building a custom mud code. If we used an established, more modern codebase, and transposed the world we have now onto that code, in theory, it would be much easier. And there are a ton of newer codebases out there, with a ton of various features.

I say in theory. I have built a MUD world before, completely from scratch, and basically by myself. I've done it twice. And while, granted, I didn't know how to code back then, and while the worlds were somewhat small, I know it's doable. Our game world is relatively large, but a month of copy and paste by dedicated builders will get the room descriptions done (and that's honestly probably longer than needed, just for descriptions and room names and setting room types and stuff). The next five months could be given to pushing the more complex stuff forward to a playable point, and feasibly, I bet we could do a halfway decent port of the game in 6 months.

Obviously, the game would be different. But I think nearly everything could be brought over and with far more innovation possible in the future because of the enhanced code base.

But there certainly is no doubt it's a massive project. I think the question, "Is it worth it in the long run?" is the actual caveat. I think it would be, perhaps with a year's timeframe in mind or something, so that you have enough time to check and double check things.

[Delirium]

Considering Arm 2.0 nearly killed Arm 1.0 ... I don't think it's worth it. My two cents.

[triste]

I swear I will shut up but I think that's a solid opinion to have. Armageddon is an RPI above all, and people continue to talk about radical refactoring in the name of non-roleplay related features--now, I am not saying no new features ever, but we need to continue to run cost benefit analyses. I didn't see the Armageddon 2.0 drama first hand TBH but I appreciate this vet saying it nearly killed the game. "Game maybe dying" is definitely something to add to the cost column on the cost benefit analysis here. All arguments in favor need to be really damned well worth it if possible game death is in the other column. I also don't see "boon to roleplay" in the benefit column and I would like for anything that calls for tons of dev time to strengthen RP.

[Malken]

Switching codebase means trusting the code to someone else and I don't think that's going to happen.

Is anyone even allowed to touch Armageddon's code aside from nessalin and Nathvaan?

You'd also need to find someone who understands both C and whatever the language of the new codebase is as well.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

Considering Arm 2.0 nearly killed Arm 1.0 ... I don't think it's worth it. My two cents.

Yeah, that hurt a lot, but I feel like Arm 2.0 almost killed Arm 1.0 because of how different the setting was and because of trying to basically recreate the world in a different image. I think that if Arm 2.0 had been simply transplanting the existing world into a new, more robust codebase, it would have been way more well received, and we'd be playing in it now.

I swear I will shut up but I think that's a solid opinion to have. Armageddon is an RPI above all, and people continue to talk about radical refactoring in the name of non-roleplay related features--now, I am not saying no new features ever, but we need to continue to run cost benefit analyses. I didn't see the Armageddon 2.0 drama first hand TBH but I appreciate this vet saying it nearly killed the game. "Game maybe dying" is definitely something to add to the cost column on the cost benefit analysis here. All arguments in favor need to be really damned well worth it if possible game death is in the other column. I also don't see "boon to roleplay" in the benefit column and I would like for anything that calls for tons of dev time to strengthen RP.

What in God's name makes you think that anything we ever suggest is not for the sake of the roleplay in this game? I swear, you rant on and on about this  issue, but not a single thing I see suggested is intended to hinder roleplay. You keep acting as though this is a MUSH, and it's not. We need code to back roleplay. Everytime we suggest a code change, it's to iron out things about the code that hurt roleplay.

[creeper386]

I'd imagine if it was planned out to transplant the world over ... Could possibly automate recreating new rooms and areas from current rooms and areas. I've poked into a few different MUD code and often a lot of the structure isn't drastically different.

I don't think the world needs to change in my opinion. At least in any drastic ways. But I do think the old code base limits development, either new features not being plausible or slows dev time(I try to make no assumptions of what our codebase is like, but with only a few devs and over this length of time I can't help but imagine there is problems). Although I think a switch to a new codebase would take time and resources to try and keep the same Arm feel, it might be worth it, but I'm not sure it'd be doable with just one or two devs either. So I doubt it'll ever be done.


BUT, I still strongly thing some things need to be looked at and although I do think crafting could use a face lift ... in the least there could be tools to make it more manageable.