Cantr II Discussion Forum

I seem to have come in for a lot of criticism recently for displaying my view on certain topics. Whether this is the result of people not understanding my views, that I didn’t make myself clear, that I accidentally contradicted myself or people just don’t bother to actually read what I say… I want to clarify my position so people can criticise my actual position. So, this is my view on many of the changes in recent and not-so-recent times.

In no particular order:
Item Rot
I said a lot about this at the time of implementation, and I am still unconvinced by it. The fact that it has been months since it was implemented and it still doesn’t work smoothly… makes me wish that things weren’t implemented until they were actually infallible. When repair was implemented I had reservations, and I still have them. I don’t think the current way this is implemented is good for Cantr in any way.
Surly’s View: FAIL

Combat Skills
Firstly, I would like to separate skills from combat skills. I’ll address that as a separate change. Combat skills is a bad idea. That simple. Especially the way you can apparently ‘level up’ your combat skill by just attacking. This is a huge danger of degrading Cantr to a simple hack’n’slash rpg. My suggestion is, if we have to have combat skills, that improving is done as the result of a training project, rather than random attacking. That might be able to salvage some of Cantr’s uniqueness in this area.
Surly’s View: FAIL

Skills
This is the ability to be good at gathering or producing and somesuch. I think this is a good idea… the bad are still as good as they might have been before the change, the good just much better. I still don’t like the fact that some characters might be bad at everything, and that some characters skill might be gathering, for example, gathering wood on an island with no wood… doesn’t seem fair really, or a good plan. But this is a positive change.
Surly’s View: PASS

Maximum Resource Gatherers.
The recent cap on how many people can gather resources. I like this idea in principle, but I think it could be better implemented. I think it would be better to have individual values as it could potentially change the value of resources (if only one person can gather stone at any given time…) but time will tell.
Surly’s View: PASS

Modular production
Love this idea. Assuming that this is balanced when it is stretched to boats… great idea. One of the few ways to counter the ridiculous item rot… great idea, balance is the key.
Surly’s View: PASS with HONOURS

Dynamic Naming
Not sure how much needs to be said… great idea. When it is stretched to keys, and signs are eventually introduced, this idea will be complete.
Surly’s View: PASS with HONOURS

The Recent Smelting change
Finally, finally, some balance for the hematite change. It has taken long enough… but it has finally arrived. Good work, Jos!
Surly’s View: PASS with HONOURS

Tiredness
I’m still unconvinced about this… yes, it is useful. Provides some balance to the much maligned (by me) combat system. I suppose there is a use for it.
Surly’s View: PASS

Missing with a weapon/ineffective shields
Combined with tiredness, I think this created all the balance the combat system needed. I hate what has since transpired, and combined with those changes, the miss/ineffective change has bcome more of a hindrance than a benefit to combat. But… still a good change. It’s not this changes fault that the awful combat changes have screwed it.
Surly’s View: PASS with MERIT

The Lack of natural healing
Is there any excuse for this? Staff are missing a glaring open goal by not linking beds to healing, and the fact that a character can carry 5% damage around for 20 years without it healing? Very strange…
Surly’s View: FAIL

Well, there we go. Am I still so surly? Any questions, I will try and answer. Feel free to discuss what I said, and if you flame me… at least it is for things I actually said.

This is the Surly Cantrian… logging off… (I love Cantr radio…)

I LOVE YOU SURLY!

Pie wrote:I LOVE YOU SURLY!

YOU STOLE MY LINE!!!!!!

Pie wrote:I LOVE YOU SURLY!

Om*g he spelled Love right . Yes surly perhaps people did "misunderstand" you or take your complaints .... to negatively I supose. And Im one of them adn sincerely sorry for bitching so much about you bitching so much but I believe Cantr staff deserves more credit.
WE ALL LOVE YOU SURLY!! Omg I think im high on something >.>
WT*? and it aint herb right now om*g!!

CD EDIT: no * in OM*G or WT* please

Ovault wrote:

Pie wrote:I LOVE YOU SURLY!

Om*g he spelled Love right . Yes surly perhaps people did "misunderstand" you or take your complaints .... to negatively I supose. And Im one of them adn sincerely sorry for bitching so much about you bitching so much but I believe Cantr staff deserves more credit.
WE ALL LOVE YOU SURLY!! Omg I think im high on something >.>
WT*? and it aint herb right now om*g!!

CD EDIT: no * in OM*G or WT* please

Yep, thats it, add to the stereotype

Without trying to kiss Surlys arse more than necassary, i have to say the the staff should pay more attention to him, i agree with 99% with what he says, the only thing i disagree with is combat skills, i think this is a good idea, but needs to be tweaked a little, to stop cantr from becoming a hack 'n' slash style game

I'd like to hear what the problem with item rot is. It seems to me to be perfectly fine.

It means that the more equipment you use, the more labor to keep up that equipment you need. Unfortunately certain important forms of equipment (vehicles and machines) are currently exempt, but for what it works on it seems almost perfect.

The Industriallist wrote:I'd like to hear what the problem with item rot is. It seems to me to be perfectly fine.

It means that the more equipment you use, the more labor to keep up that equipment you need. Unfortunately certain important forms of equipment (vehicles and machines) are currently exempt, but for what it works on it seems almost perfect.

Woah, where ya been?! Item Rot is HORRID! And I'm fixing it. This shouldn't be a problem too much longer.

I'd have to agree with you on item rot, things fall apart way too fast. If something isn't used then no wear and tear should occur, or if so, it is very minimal. Things shouldn't last forever, but it's also not right to have to repair anything once a year to keep it from falling apart.

Combat skills were needed, in my opinion, or rather skills in general, I don't divide skills and 'combat' skills. I think the only thing wrong is possibly that the skill may increase too quickly (and chars who are completly tired shouldn't be able to increase any skill until they are rested but that's just a minor detail), but relagating the increase to "training" isn't the answer. People get better at things because they do them repeatedly. Training really just maintains a skill level in RL, it doesn't do much to make anyone more proficent at anything. About the only thing training can do is teach the bare basics, after that it's all up to the person how far they want to go. With the skills the way they are now, the shields also fall in this catigory.

The lack of natural healing is a pet peeve of my own, but I'm expecting the return of the 1% a day sometime in the near future. No natural healing, no matter how little, just doesn't make sense and I think more people should be speaking up about this.

Tiredness is another thing I really don't like, but that's because I don't think hitting a char should be any more tiring then going after an animal. A middle point should be found so that tiredness holds multiple attacks in check, yet allows a realistic number of swings/shots with a weapon.

And that's really it, these are the only things I see any point in being concerned with, everything else is just details.

Ephiroll wrote:Tiredness is another thing I really don't like, but that's because I don't think hitting a char should be any more tiring then going after an animal.

I agree with that, although in practice, making hitting an animal as hard as hitting a charector wouldn't be a sensible move, unless hitting a charector was made less tiring

ephiroll wrote:I don't divide skills and 'combat' skills.

There is one key difference... with skills, the bottom end of skill is 45% of the old values. With combat, that is 0%.

As for training, my suggestion is an attempt to allow improvement without degrading Cantr to hack'n'slash. Combat is important, but I think the current system is horribly unbalanced.

As for you, Industriallist... I am fully aware that it was your complaining that led to item rot being implemented in the first place. But my problem with it has been summed up by Ephiroll. His view mirrors mine.

And Anthony... I'm glad to hear it. If it is sorted properly, then you deserve praise for it. Time will tell...

ephiroll wrote:I'd have to agree with you on item rot, things fall apart way too fast. If something isn't used then no wear and tear should occur, or if so, it is very minimal. Things shouldn't last forever, but it's also not right to have to repair anything once a year to keep it from falling apart.

Wear and tear only on tools used doesn't seem to have any useful effects at all. If that's how it should be, why not just take it out completely, or never have put it in? Aside from the few tools that will be used until they break, it will be exactly like making every tool-using project a small percentage slower.

If that's all that was intended, I would think a lot of programmer's time could have been saved.

Anthony Roberts wrote:

The Industriallist wrote:I'd like to hear what the problem with item rot is. It seems to me to be perfectly fine.

It means that the more equipment you use, the more labor to keep up that equipment you need. Unfortunately certain important forms of equipment (vehicles and machines) are currently exempt, but for what it works on it seems almost perfect.

Woah, where ya been?! Item Rot is HORRID! And I'm fixing it. This shouldn't be a problem too much longer.

I hate item rot it sucks -.-

The Surly Cantrian wrote:

ephiroll wrote:I don't divide skills and 'combat' skills.

There is one key difference... with skills, the bottom end of skill is 45% of the old values. With combat, that is 0%.

Good point, maybe with combat the low end of the ladder should be 45% also.

The Industriallist wrote:Wear and tear only on tools used doesn't seem to have any useful effects at all. If that's how it should be, why not just take it out completely, or never have put it in? Aside from the few tools that will be used until they break, it will be exactly like making every tool-using project a small percentage slower.

I'm not sure what you mean by making tool-using projects a small percentage slower. Otherwise, wear and tear only on tools used would serve the purpose of keeping the same tool from being used forever. But tools don't just wear out by sitting around, especially steel, iron, and stone tools. I could see those kinds of tools falling apart over the span of a few years due to rust, termites, whatever the implied reason is, but to have a solid iron screwdriver degrade from "brand new" to "used" in less then a year is nuts.

With repair, the effect of degredation coming from use is essentially as I described, unless the tool is never repaired (absurd for most items). You use it for a certain amount of time, then repair it for some fraction of that much time.

If repair were removed, it would have the effect you say...but with repair, I feel confident that most items will be repaired frequently, rather than allowing them to wear down.

Items don't rot too fast.
They take too long to repair.