![[de]](/mwf/flags/de.png "Germany")
We do not have any instable material except snow yet. Instable materials are like the old FlyAshes or FlySand of Clonk Rage, which start to crumble once you dig some corner of them. I'd like to build a scenario like the old LavaCaverace. However, having instable materials right next to big lava veins is essential to the difficulty of that scenario. And I can't use snow for obvious reasons.I would like to change Ashes to be instable. The texture is pretty bright, so it already looks a lot like snow, which might make it easier for players to infer the behavior. I also don't like adding a new material, because newbies used to have a lot of trouble discerning all the similarly-looking materials in Clonk Rage. What do you think of that change?
I'm all for keeping the number of similar materials low.Also I never got why there was non-fly ash, so I vote for only FlyAshes and no Ashes.
>We do not have any instable material except snow yet
I think Mt. Brame has fly sand in it
Anyways, I'd like to put an idea in here: Clay, wich you can produce from the fly material. You could then make terraforming like with the loam bridges. Only that the clay bridges are made of fly material, too. It should be easy to gather in bigger amounts, for more terraforming.
So the player has the option of using the stable, but expensive loam bridges, OR the cheap clay bridges, wich can break away easily.
And I think I have to disagree with the opinion of keeping a low amount of different materials. I think there's more to discover and to experiment with, if you have more materials. They aren't really hard to distinguish once you figured out what it is and what it can be used for. (Just another idea:CTRL + Click brings up info about material (name, density, usage/products). Maybe indicated by little icons, like a shovel for diggable, dynamite/pickaxe for hard stuff, skull for toxic stuff, fire for lava, etc.) Just mining the same 5 materials over and over again could get boring quickly.
> And I think I have to disagree with the opinion of keeping a low amount of different materials. I think there's more to discover and to experiment with, if you have more materials.
Only if different materials actually have different behavior (which is not the case for ashes at the moment). That's even more reason we shouldn't waste precious slots on several materials that do the same.
> Maybe indicated by little icons, like a shovel for diggable, dynamite/pickaxe for hard stuff, skull for toxic stuff, fire for lava, etc.)
Good idea. Maybe even show the actual material name. But I guess there needs to be an option to turn off this help for people who have discovered all material types.
I always liked those fly materials. They make the game more random and less predictable. But in OC I do not like the white ashes texture. I wanted to use fly ashes (or plain ashes) in the scenario "Minor Melee" but that bright white ashes does not fit in there.I would recommend to add not too many materials. In Terraria (100 hours playing time) I still can't differ lot of blocks.
Never played minecraft, but their wiki says they have 53 materials - we have how many? 5?I think we are not yet close to overdoing it :)
That's just b/c torches, doors, traintracks, placed explosives, mushrooms, flowers, leaves and more are materials in minecraft ;)
I think you mean Terraria, not minecraft. But of course you are right. I am not against some new materials - although some more textures would be sufficient most times.
It's fine for me, please check how other scenarios use the material. On the top of my mind is only Krakatoa, for which the change is fine.
Thanks for the feedback. I couldn't find any other scenarios besides Krakatoa using ashes, so I changed them to instable in the master branch now.I've also made a new single/cooperative race scenario ("Escape the volcano") in Experimental.ocf, where you can try it out. Be careful though, as there is no respawn and lava is deadly.
Doesn't no respawning just always lead to the players rejoining themselves? :)
![[nl]](/mwf/flags/nl.png "Netherlands")
Not if you cover the spawn point with lava after some playing time :)
I thought about blocking that as well (SetMaxPlayer after game start). But I figured if the player really wants to cheat, he should be free to do so.The idea of not giving respawns is not to penalize the player somehow or make the scenario artificially hard. It's just that when we test played it with endless relaunches, we ended up just digging through the lava and forcing respawns, because that's much faster than thinking about how to reroute the lava lakes to make your way up. So effectively, it takes away all the fun and challenge of the round.
Also, rejoins won't be possible once we have a settlement league :)
Okay, I guess I have nothing against not respawning to encourage thinking..but please, please don't abuse MaxPlayer.
IMO we should only use MaxPlayer if the scenario breaks otherwise (tutorial/adventure). But please do not use it as a replacement for "recommended player count". You want to play Rock Bottom with five players? Sure, why not.
From my experience only rarely did authors in CR set a sensible MaxPlayer count. And every other game the host had to increase the value manually. That's just plain stupid and we shouldn't encourage that by setting arbitrary MaxPlayer entries.
/rant
I agree that unjust max player settings are annoying. But SetMaxPlayer(0) is not used to enforce a recommended player count. It's just a replacement for InitializePlayer(...) { if (FrameCounter() > x) EliminatePlayer(...); } - and a better replacement at that, because it also hides the player join menu.We still have const int32_t C4S_MaxPlayerDefault = 12 by the way. I sometimes set MaxPlayer=50 just to make sure that in theory, more players can join (we sometimes have 15 players in floor fight in CR). Maybe someone could change it to LONG_MAX? :)
>Maybe someone could change it to LONG_MAX? :)
Yes, please :)
I get what you mean with SetMaxPlayer(0). But I still don't think it's a good idea
Powered by mwForum 2.29.7 © 1999-2015 Markus Wichitill
