[MUD-Dev] A new game paradigm (was: Star Wars Galaxies)

Thomas Tomiczek t.tomiczek at thona-consulting.com
Wed Feb 19 10:07:18 New Zealand Daylight Time 2003

Scott Miller wrote:

> While I understand the need for a "progression" through a game, I
> do agree that "leveling" is not the way to do it. What is stopping
> a game from completely removing leveling all together and use a
> little of the EQ model, where your equipment is your progression
> indicator?  I know that isn't a perfect solution, but is much
> better than forcing everyone of your players to go out and bash
> bunnies for hours on end. It could also cater to your non fighting
> players who enjoy crafting better.

Very well said.

ACTUALLY I think a lot of the problem, though (there is nothing wrong
with levels as a "measurement of progress", maybe through titles etc.)
is that this all goes back historically to D&D - and there levels ARE
too strong.

A linear OR logarithmic curve would be better. Have for example levels
1-20 (just a number).

A level 10 fighter would always win against a level 1 fighter - but -
damanged. Maybe 5-10 level 1's one after another could take him out, 5
at the same time are a problem. Three lvl 10 fighters would take out a
lvl 20 fighter.

I was playing DAOC some time ago, and I went up to lvl 15 - now, hunting
with a group pf people of lvl 19 was impossible. It was not that I was
not the main person - I did nearly NO DAMAGE at all. This means - I can
not go to holiday for a week. Nice.

The result is: we need a slower progression leveling system - something
where higher levels give you less and less return. On top of this add
equipment, fame and all the other stuff - but the "progression" needs to
be rebalanced, and MOST games are TERRIBLE in this.


Thomas Tomiczek
THONA Consulting Ltd.
(Microsoft MVP C#/.NET)
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nu

More information about the MUD-Dev mailing list