Content: Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble
Background: Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble
Pattern: Blank Waves Notes Sharp Wood Rockface Leather Honey Vertical Triangles
Welcome to TerraFirmaCraft Forums

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.

  • Announcements

    • Dries007

      ATTENTION Forum Database Breach   03/04/2019

      There has been a breach of our database. Please make sure you change your password (use a password manager, like Lastpass).
      If you used this password anywhere else, change that too! The passwords themselves are stored hashed, but may old accounts still had old, insecure (by today's standards) hashes from back when they where created. This means they can be "cracked" more easily. Other leaked information includes: email, IP, account name.
      I'm trying my best to find out more and keep everyone up to date. Discord (http://invite.gg/TerraFirmaCraft) is the best option for up to date news and questions. I'm sorry for this, but the damage has been done. All I can do is try to make sure it doesn't happen again.
    • Claycorp

      This forum is now READ ONLY!   01/20/2020

      As of this post and forever into the future this forum has been put into READ ONLY MODE. There will be no new posts! A replacement is coming SoonTM . If you wish to stay up-to-date on whats going on or post your content. Please use the Discord or Sub-Reddit until the new forums are running.

      Any questions or comments can be directed to Claycorp on either platform.
Miner239

Regional Difficulty

57 posts in this topic

You guys are reading waaaaay too far into the few words that Bioxx has said. Don't get so ahead of yourself and assume something like you won't be able to break or place blocks when none of the devs have said that was how "be impossible" would be implemented.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kitty is right, you guys are reading into my words a ton lol. That said, you've hit the nail on the head, you will likely not be allowed to build or destroy blocks until an island has been pacified. Think about what you're asking for with letting this happen. Building dirt huts for protection and towers of planks to shoot from up high. That is probably the single most cheaty way of handling combat in minecraft without actual cheats and is something which no mod has ever been able to solve. Don't take this as an attack, but if you're saying that is your preferred method of combat, then you're saying that you don't want to actually fight anything at all. When 1.9 comes out, hopefully the new combat system will be interesting enough to make combat less of a spam fest (which I'm counting on).

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think one way to counter that is to add block-destroyer mobs, like what MITE has. Or maybe just add an explosive arrow that can destroy lower tier blocks.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do plan to have mobs that are capable of destroying blocks for sure. I see islands operating in 3 phases. Arrive, Pacify, Sustain. 

 

Arrive- When you first get to an island, the mob count will be high. You'll need to explore and figure out where the mobs are emanating from. It may be a Fortress up high, or on the coast, or maybe deep underground. Once you've conquered this objective, the curse on the island will be lifted and building/destroying will become available.

Pacify- At this point, you'll be able to build a defensible location and start doing what you need to do. As you kill mobs, you'll begin weakening the random mob spawns on the island. this means less of them overall will probably less gear available to them. 

Sustain- From time to time, if an island is inhabited by players, mobs may attack the location of the players base. So having a good defense will be ideal. (This will probably have to be toggleable)

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

<snip>

Sustain- From time to time, if an island is inhabited by players, mobs may attack the location of the players base. So having a good defense will be ideal. (This will probably have to be toggleable)

 

I think if this it to operate in single player mode, toggling will be a must - or you'll go off exploring somewhere and when you get back your "home" is overrun by hostiles :)(unless some part of the "defence" of your "home" can be physical - *really*  high walls or a moat/drawbridge, for instance)

Edited by ChunkHunter
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The mob siege would not occur unless there were loaded chunks due to player presence so that's a non-issue.

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 (This will probably have to be toggleable)

 

When you say that this will probably be toggleable, do you mean that the no-build/no-break mechanic?

 

That is probably the single most cheaty way of handling combat in minecraft without actual cheats and is something which no mod has ever been able to solve. Don't take this as an attack, but if you're saying that is your preferred method of combat, then you're saying that you don't want to actually fight anything at all. 

 

 

"Don't take this as an attack but your favorite way to play that game you like so much is wrong and you're cheating."

 

I obviously disagree.  I still die to mob attacks.  I still fight mobs.  A lot actually.  Even in vanilla minecraft if you want to build up a defensive position it takes time, and during that time you're going to be attacked.  In TFCraft it takes years, literally years in game, to build up a base to the point where the enemy cannot get in.  I think it's pretty unfair to call a style of play which incorporates a more creative way to facing your opponents "cheaty."

 

Placing and destroying blocks to create a tactical advantage is far from peaceful mode.  It'd make just as much sense to say that wearing armor and creating a better weapon in order to gain a tactical advantage is cheating.  A person who enjoys melee combat might call someone who fights with a bow a cheater as well.

 

I guess I refer to them a lot but the Super Hostile Vechs maps are really hard.  If you tackle them by altering the terrain... they're still nearly impossible to beat.  You still end up fighting countless mobs.  One thing that really makes them fun, aside from the fact that Vechs is a genius when it comes to creatively torturing the player, is that there are no holds barred concerning play style.  That's a huge difference between those maps and the maps where one of the rules is that you cannot place or destroy any blocks.

 

I was careful to avoid using descriptive terms like 'lame' in speaking about play styles I don't enjoy while typing this up.  I've mentioned this before but I think we all tend to view our preferred play style as the "right" way of playing and other play styles we enjoy less (or not at all) as "wrong" in some way.  I have an eleven year old sister who plays minecraft in creative mode and just stacks blocks on top of one another in a haphazard fashion.  She spawns in tons of neutral mobs, all the while talking about how she made them a home.  I could NEVER enjoy that kind of play style... but she loves it.  She's having a good time.  Who am I to say she shouldn't play that way?

 

Gamers are largely nerds.  Nerds are passionate about their interests.  Passionate people tend to be elitists about the object of their passion.  Minecrafters are usually elitists and TFCrafters more so.  Maybe it's inescapable that most folks are going to look at someone else's preferred way to play the game and decide they're doing it wrong.  I dunno.

 

And, at the end of the day you, Bioxx, are calling the shots.  It's your baby.  You're the one who had the idea and labored over it.  I don't think that it's unfair to say that anyone who doesn't recognize and respect that shouldn't be on this forum.

 

Having said that, I hope you will consider acknowledging folks with play styles such as mine as legitimate players and make room for us in TFCraft 2.

 

I did say that I was holding out judgment until I actually try to play TFCraft 2, I really want to like it.  But if that mechanic is mandatory, I don't have high hopes.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I respect your opinion. I do. However, I cant see offensively building as a legit playstyle. In my opinion, it really limits the possibilities for types of mobs with more advanced behaviour that running into you like zombies do. If I have to design every mob to be able to destroy blocks, or climb walls, or whatever, just to make sure that the player cant easily build a 3 block tall tower and operate with impunity, then whats the point of having differing types of mobs that do different things? It just seems a waste and I personally deem that style as incredibly cheaty. It is, in my mind, one of the more detrimental aspects of voxel type games. That said, I understand you like that style. That's up to you, and I'm not trying to change your mind here.

 

If nothing else, this is a good exchange that others can look to in the future to see both sides. 

 

As for what I meant about toggling, that was in regards to the siege aspect as its not really a core feature in my mind.

 

*Also note that if I came across as being aggravated or anything, I'm totally not.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking of difficulty, I once read about moving unbelievable mobs to caves/lower Y values.

Is this planned for TFC2?

The way Bioxx speaks of monsters "emanating" from different areas has me intrigued and hopeful to see new mobs.

I'm a bit worried about increasing the difficulty on the X axis. It means there will be much less chance of finding the perfect spot to build a super awesome base at a desired temperature range early in the game.

However, it could be fun and rewarding to work and aim to conquer THE perfect island for my evil schemes, so I'll wait and see how it goes.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought 3 block tall tower builders can be thwarted just by adding a ranged attack? Knock them off and they're done.

 

I really hope we could magically spawn minions that help us conquer islands.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there any chance there will be a more 'traditional' mode, where the minerals or what-have-you will not be X-limited?  One of the things I love about current TFC is that each world is a total unknown - it could be a veritable utopia with all ores close by, graphite within 200 blocks of spawn (happened once in a play test seed) lots of animals and fruit, or it could be a dry climate wasteland of Diorite.  It all has a feel of mystery and wonder, where anything is possible and you just don't know what you're going to get.

.

But TFC2 seems like current thinking is it will be very much more structured - patterned island layout, critical tech ores always a minimum of x-thousand blocks away, not being able to place blocks on new islands.  It will make for a more structured combat oriented and exciting game to be sure.  But it sounds like it will feel...artificial, and deaden the mystery a bit

 

Instead of wondering 'where's copper, where's graphite, they could be anywhere!', it sounds like we'll be saying 'ok, cassiterite is 1 island away, graphite is 3 islands away, I don't want to put serious effort into my base until I'm at least on the iron island.'  There won't be the same thrill of finding exposed graphite, or garnierite nuggets, because we'll already know to expect them on that island (or at least, one of the islands in that x-range) or more precisely, to NOT expect them earlier.  And the islands we know they're *not* on will be kind of ho-hum, looking for the very defined mineral set that we know this x range encompasses.  If x-0 isn't even copper, what will it have, just useless minerals?  And the island after that just copper + useless minerals?  Instead of the fresh-seed excitement, it kind of seems like there will be a get-out-of-jail feeling to the first one or two islands.  And I say that knowing not a lot about what else is in store behind the scenes, I realize.  But...it's just kind of how it seems so far.

 

It seems like it might be nice to have an option for a play mode where the minerals aren't x limited, but everything else stays, including mob difficulty scaling.  For people that don't want to necessarily make a B-line east or west, but a more natural and random feel.

Edited by Darmo
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll have to consider alternate game modes. I'm sure Kitty will be the one to talk me into it at some point. But for now its not in the cards, at least at any point early probably. I'll need to get the basics of my vision working properly and then I can look at alternate bits that require much more than a simple config toggle.

Speaking of difficulty, I once read about moving unbelievable mobs to caves/lower Y values.
Is this planned for TFC2?

That's all TFC1 talk which has no bearing on TFC2. There are going to generally be more direct influences on how and why monsters spawn than just light/dark and y level.

 

 

I'm a bit worried about increasing the difficulty on the X axis. It means there will be much less chance of finding the perfect spot to build a super awesome base at a desired temperature range early in the game.

Keep in mind that there are 9 islands on the Y axis, so there are at least 2 with a potential of 6 islands at a desired X range. And as you move east/west, those numbers double because if east doesn't have what you want, you can check west as well. The reason why it could be 2-6(if you want temperate), and this is going off topic, is because there is some small variation with Y climate. It looks like this

  • Polar
  • Sub-Polar/Temperate
  • Temperate
  • Sub-tropical/Temperate
  • Tropical - Equator
  • Sub-tropical/Temperate
  • Temperate
  • Sub-Polar/Temperate
  • Polar
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What if...rather than making ores be the tech gates, and so having to limit their spawn, instead something else becomes the tech gate.  For instance perhaps each metal requires it's own special flux.  And the special thing to make the special flux, is only found in the fortresses.  So in fortress treasure chests on the tier 1 islands, you can find 'fairy wings', or whatever, and combine those with normal flux, to make the tier 1 flux to weld copper.  The tier 2 island fortress chests can contain fairy wings, but also 'human bones' or something, which is the tier 2 flux admixture.  Whatever they are, these special admixtures can only be found in fortresses.   Each higher tier of fortress can contain their own tier of admixtures, plus all lower tiers as well, to keep the player supplied. 

It could even be a 2-part thing, so the player needs 2 admixtures.  In the 3x3 crafting grid, the normal flux would be center, then four of one, and four of the other.  One of them could be a quantity limited, and always the same through all tiers.  The other admixture would be what specifies the tier.  So maybe human bones are required through all tiers.  In this way the quantity of human bones ever found would limit the number of times the player could make flux.  The tiered admixture could be given in greater quantity.  This limits the number of welds a player gets, but allows them a lot of leeway in choosing which tier they use it on.  Obviously the first tier recipe would have to involve only 4 squares, so it'd be a bit different.

Different game difficulties could alter not only the mob stats, but also the amount of admixtures that appear.

 

With this system, I think all ores and stone layers could be allowed to spawn wherever, in a totally random fashion, hopefully obviating the need for a different world-gen algorithm.  In the 'regular' game the player could hoard all ores and make ingots with them any time (well, subject to normal process block limitations i.e. pit kiln, crucible, bloomery, BF), but wouldn't be able to weld ingots to make anything useful until they got the admixtures from the forts.  Blast furnaces could probably be left to use normal flux.  The tiered fluxes could be just required for welding.

BUT, if the player wasn't interested in the progressive-island playstyle, they could just spawn in the admixtures via console, and have an experience more like TFC1.  The forts would still be there, still have admixtures, and still increase in difficulty - world gen doesn't change. But the player is not forced to go to them, except if they just happen to need ores there by chance.  But if the player can find all they want or need on the x-0 islands, they can just stay there.

Or maybe there's a config option that makes a spawn chest near the player that contains a bunch of flux admixtures.  Or a config option that activates new recipes which just require 'useless ore' admixtures rather than fort-only stuff.  Or simply a config option that makes regular flux work for all metals, as it does now.

I think this would allow the world gen to always be the same, and yet allow players to skip the tiered island hopping if they're not into that, all hopefully within the scope of a config option, rather than more complicated stuff.

 

As a side note, if human bones were one of the admixtures, it would give a good reason to have set piece crypts, with bones inside. It would even give a sort of 'origin story'  - the player(s) is the last of their tribe, who have been killed by the invading mobs (which is why they have the bones) -as opposed to the more typical 'shipwrecked' story.  You could even have the player start in the charred ruins of a village (and if they chose 'easy mode' then there's some human bones laying around)

 

Another side note, if this admixture thing were implemented, I think Borax should have a special quality where you combine the admixtures with the raw borax ore, and get like, 4-6 of the special flux.  This would make borax 4-6 times (or however many) more efficient with the admixtures as opposed to stone derived flux.  Borax just doesn't get enough love currently, for being found in only one stone type.

Edited by Darmo
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless there is some way that the additives "respawn" this is a good way or *really*  limiting the amount of stuff one can make - once you've used up your 50 pieces of copper additive, no more copper stuff...

Not the way I would like things to go.

Edited by ChunkHunter
2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless there is some way that the additives "respawn" this is a good way or *really*  limiting the amount of stuff one can make - once you've used up your 50 pieces of copper additive, no more copper stuff...

Not the way I would like things to go.

That could easily be done.  Some fortresses perhaps have a process block that allows the player to make the stuff.  They bring back that block, then they can make all they want.  The process block could even use currently 'useless' ores, to help give them a use.  But if you do that, what with islands being planned to have a uniform top layer, there is a somewhat significant risk that the player could not find the correct useless ore in the x:0 realm.  The further east-west they travel though, the more options they could have.  I would think at x:1 or x:-1 they're almost guaranteed to have found a sedimentary top layer.  Or, maybe islands can have more top layers, if ores are not the tech-gate.

 

But, the quantities found could also be varied.  Just do some stats on what is needed welded at different tiers and provide for that much and more.  It seems like the idea is to encourage armor and weapons at each tier (as opposed to currently, where I think a lot of people skip copper gear, and probably iron too).  So 7 flux to make an anvil, 7 for a breastplate, 3 for a helmet, 4 for leggings, 3 for boots, 1 each for mace and sword.  So 26 total flux to gear up at each tier.  Of course bronze tier needs more for bloomery, iron tier lots more for blast furnace, and of course yet more for the ingot making in tier 5 and up.  But if a fort gave admixtures enough for 64 flux at tiers 1 and 2 for instance, that sounds like it'd be plenty for all you'd need.  The amount given could even be a config setting. I'm not totally clear on if there's 1 fort per island, or multiple, but if multiple, spreading it out amongst forts would give further impetus to go after more forts.  The player could get just enough, and then push on to the next tier of islands, or spend more time and hit most of the forts in their current x postion and have tons and tons of extra.  Or maybe rather than a generator for each level, there's just a couple.  The first one generates tier 1-3 fluxes, and is found in a tier 3 fort, and the other generates tier 4-6, and is found in a tier 6 fort.  So the player deals with a bit of scarcity for awhile, but then gets a process block to generate all they need as a 'big-ticket' reward.   In any case, I think the we can get by fine without special generators.

 

It's a very easy thing to adapt to player needs, I think.  The whole idea is to allow both the island-hopping playstyle, and a more sedentary TFC1-like playstyle, using the same world gen algorithms. What I got from Bioxx's comment above was that if the ores themselves are the tech-gate, there'd have to be two different world generation algorithms if TFC2 is to also support sedentary TFC1-like play: one that doesn't generate certain ores in certain x positions, and one that generates them anywhere randomly. 

The precise details could be different, but the overall idea is to make the tech gate something other than ores.  Flux seemed the logical choice, since it's still directly required to make all useful metal items.  In theory a player could even make stacks of bronze ingots never leaving x:0 in island-hopping mode, but that's fine because they won't be able to do anything useful with them till they have the flux.

Edited by Darmo
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion, if you have to resort to using blocks and altering the terrain in order to progress then you are playing something that is above your skill level, or the area and expected combat is poorly designed. I watch a lot of CTM let's plays and I can say that there is a huge distinction in the level of entertainment of watching someone actually fight their way through and conquer something, versus someone who does nothing bug dig through the walls, or pillar up out of reach.

 

For an example, I'm currently watching Ragecraft 2 being played by both the GOB team, and by Zisteau. GOB is constantly tunneling through the edges of the map, just avoiding combat in hopes to get the wool. To me, completely avoiding the combat and terrain that a map maker has painstakingly designed and balanced with difficult areas, custom mobs, custom gear, etc is really disrespectful. If an area has a big tower with custom mobs all the way and specially designed staircases and such with the wool at the top, and the player just pillars straight up outside the tower to the top, grabs the wool and then leaves without every actually encountering any of the combat in the tower, to me that is essentially cheating. Why bother even playing the map if you aren't going to at least try to experience it in the way that the map maker had imagined? I've played CTMs myself as well, and I will admit that I've done the tunneling and I've done the towering and at the end of the day, there's really no sense of accomplishment, because you didn't actually defeat anything.

 

Watching Zisteau on the other hand, the map is played like it was intended to be played. He's running through and torching things up and breaking spawners to completely neutralize the area. He explores everything, and very rarely ends up having to use blocks to get some sort of an advantage. The blocks he does place are done very strategically, and he really only does it because at that point in the map, it might as well be impossible to defeat that area otherwise, because grinding through and killing hundreds of mobs that just keep funneling through an area that you need to progress through does not make for good video. When he does get the wool, it's like this huge sense of accomplishment because he has actually truly conquered the area and defeated all the obstacles that he was meant to defeat. He earned that wool.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion, if you have to resort to using blocks and altering the terrain in order to progress then you are playing something that is above your skill level, or the area and expected combat is poorly designed. I watch a lot of CTM let's plays and I can say that there is a huge distinction in the level of entertainment of watching someone actually fight their way through and conquer something, versus someone who does nothing bug dig through the walls, or pillar up out of reach.

 

For an example, I'm currently watching Ragecraft 2 being played by both the GOB team, and by Zisteau. GOB is constantly tunneling through the edges of the map, just avoiding combat in hopes to get the wool. To me, completely avoiding the combat and terrain that a map maker has painstakingly designed and balanced with difficult areas, custom mobs, custom gear, etc is really disrespectful. If an area has a big tower with custom mobs all the way and specially designed staircases and such with the wool at the top, and the player just pillars straight up outside the tower to the top, grabs the wool and then leaves without every actually encountering any of the combat in the tower, to me that is essentially cheating. Why bother even playing the map if you aren't going to at least try to experience it in the way that the map maker had imagined? I've played CTMs myself as well, and I will admit that I've done the tunneling and I've done the towering and at the end of the day, there's really no sense of accomplishment, because you didn't actually defeat anything.

 

Watching Zisteau on the other hand, the map is played like it was intended to be played. He's running through and torching things up and breaking spawners to completely neutralize the area. He explores everything, and very rarely ends up having to use blocks to get some sort of an advantage. The blocks he does place are done very strategically, and he really only does it because at that point in the map, it might as well be impossible to defeat that area otherwise, because grinding through and killing hundreds of mobs that just keep funneling through an area that you need to progress through does not make for good video. When he does get the wool, it's like this huge sense of accomplishment because he has actually truly conquered the area and defeated all the obstacles that he was meant to defeat. He earned that wool.

 

I've never played Ragecraft 2 or watched anyone play it so I can't speak with authority on that particular map/mod/thing, but have you ever played Vech's Super Hostile CTM maps?  I suspect they're made with tunneling in mind.  As a matter of fact, off the top of my head, I can think of a huge area in the sea of flame that you cannot get to without altering the terrain.

 

It's under the lava out in the sea, you have to discover it and then create a way through the lava in order to get to it.

 

 His maps are made to be played over the long haul.  That is, you don't just bee-line your way through, you conquer them and make them into a home.  In my opinion the man is a genius.

 

And there's a huge difference between enjoying watching someone play a game and enjoying it yourself.  I don't think I'd be terribly interested in watching myself play minecraft.  I take a LONG time to do anything.  I work on major builds.  It wouldn't be fun for someone to watch me play.  But I have a tremendous time playing the way I do.

 

Again, I'm going to push for respecting the way other people derive enjoyment from the game.  Talking about the way I play as though it's cheating or deserves to be looked down upon for whatever reason is a darn good way to alienate me.  I think it's disrespectful and rude.  You think I play minecraft wrong.  There goes the conversation.

 

Edit:

 

I want to add that it is a challenge for me not to look down on people who, in my view, foolishly rush right in instead of taking their time and "doing things right."  I see it as a waste.  Instead of taking their time to gain every advantage they can reasonably acquire, they run in, get killed over and over, and use up what little resources they have.  For me to watch someone play that way... well, it's similar to watching someone use their pick to dig dirt.  But if I looked down on folks for playing that way it would be wrong.  That is how they get their fun.  I've no right to demean them in the least.  It's a kind of enjoyment I cannot relate with but that doesn't make it wrong.

 

I also have to ask, if altering terrain to gain an advantage is distasteful to you, then do you not burrow in and wait for day ever?  There are some folks who see that as wimpy or cheaty, they want combat... that's what the game is about to them and any attempt to avoid combat is cheating.  Do you see?  We all play differently.

Edited by Shiphty
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a huge difference between tunneling in a map that was designed explicitly for tunneling, and tunneling in a map that was designed in such a way that they don't want players tunneling.

 

Here is a metaphor for essentially what I believe you are asking for:

 

You wish for the developers to spend months if not a year designing, coding, developing, testing, and balancing a tower. This tower has custom combat, and areas that already include spots where you might be able to parkour and get an advantage from high above, or something to briefly hide behind. The tower takes into consideration that players who rush in will likely die, and instead includes rooms where the player can recuperate in relative safety. The tower includes completely new custom mobs with new abilities, as well as new abilities and gear for the player to use. These abilities and gear would be designed in such a way that if used correctly the player should in theory easily be able to defeat the enemies, without making it a cakewalk. Perhaps the tower also contains puzzles or a small maze or other obstacles that would take strategy, and not just straight rushing to defeat. At the very tippy top of the tower is a thing that officially defeats the island, as well as some sort of awesome next tier loot that will greatly help you defeat future towers.

 

I want to make sure you are really imagining this awesome, epic tower that the developers spent a very long time working on and finally releasing to let players enjoy. Alright? You've got the most epic tower you could ever imagine pictured in your mind?

 

You are asking for us to then make it so a player can come up with a few stacks of plank blocks, and use them to pillar straight up to the top of the tower and collect the reward. The player never even entered the tower, or experienced any of the new gameplay the devs had worked so hard on. But they still get the awesome reward.

 

Does that really sound fair to you?

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a huge difference between tunneling in a map that was designed explicitly for tunneling, and tunneling in a map that was designed in such a way that they don't want players tunneling.

 

Here is a metaphor for essentially what I believe you are asking for:

 

You wish for the developers to spend months if not a year designing, coding, developing, testing, and balancing a tower. This tower has custom combat, and areas that already include spots where you might be able to parkour and get an advantage from high above, or something to briefly hide behind. The tower takes into consideration that players who rush in will likely die, and instead includes rooms where the player can recuperate in relative safety. The tower includes completely new custom mobs with new abilities, as well as new abilities and gear for the player to use. These abilities and gear would be designed in such a way that if used correctly the player should in theory easily be able to defeat the enemies, without making it a cakewalk. Perhaps the tower also contains puzzles or a small maze or other obstacles that would take strategy, and not just straight rushing to defeat. At the very tippy top of the tower is a thing that officially defeats the island, as well as some sort of awesome next tier loot that will greatly help you defeat future towers.

 

I want to make sure you are really imagining this awesome, epic tower that the developers spent a very long time working on and finally releasing to let players enjoy. Alright? You've got the most epic tower you could ever imagine pictured in your mind?

 

You are asking for us to then make it so a player can come up with a few stacks of plank blocks, and use them to pillar straight up to the top of the tower and collect the reward. The player never even entered the tower, or experienced any of the new gameplay the devs had worked so hard on. But they still get the awesome reward.

 

Does that really sound fair to you?

 

 

If you go back and re-read my response and re-read what you wrote, you will see that what was being discussed at this juncture is general play-styles.  What I took exception to was the suggestion that the way I play minecraft, in general, is somehow cheating, that it ought to be scoffed at, that it is some lesser form of playing the game.  If I can take the time and mental energy to remember that your way of playing minecraft is worthy of respect simply because it is your choice, you can do the same for me.  It is, as you say, a game after all.

 

In my family we've always improved and changed the rules of games.  We invented job classes and combat rules for monopoly and three dice charts for Jenga.  For someone to tell me that unless I approach a game the way they do I'm doing it wrong is offensive to me and I'm almost inclined to do things differently out of spite, even if I'd otherwise done things the same.

 

Tell me, will the creative option be gotten rid of as well?  What about those people who will fly to the top of the tower?  You think Bioxx will lose sleep over them?

 

One of the great things about gamers in general is that they find loopholes.  It can be hugely frustrating but it's actually a wonderful boon.  Their consistent ability to find ways around things that you didn't think of forces you to grow.  I'm not a coder, in case there was any doubt, but I have done some DMing for various RPGs and they've constantly kept me on my toes.  I think using a heavy-handed invisible wall is an easy way out.  And it's a shame.  It punishes everyone because some folks might abuse the system.

 

We saw this with the cave in mechanics.  Simply because some folks were throwing caution to the wind and not using tunnel supports cave ins became immensely harder to avoid.  I think it made the game less enjoyable, not because I didn't want to employ safety measures but, for one thing, afterward I could never come close to tunneling into a cave system without half the thing collapsing before I got there."There's a huge difference between tunneling in a map that was designed explicitly for tunneling, and tunneling in a map that was designed in such a way that they don't want players tunneling."

 

Thing is, I understood this forum to be a place where Bioxx gets feedback from folks who play TFCraft and who will want to play TFCraft 2, a place where he bounces ideas off of us and gets our opinions.  He obviously isn't bound to following our opinions, as I said a couple comments ago, it's his baby and anyone with half a brain will respect that.  However, since TFCraft certainly is a "map designed for tunneling" and one would assume that TFCraft 2 would be at least loosely based upon its namesake, I'd no previous reason to believe that the sequel will be a game which is not designed for tunneling as a default.  If Bioxx wants to go that way, it's his prerogative but I don't think any of us knew that before this conversation.  And so, as a first response to the idea "Hey guys, what do you think about making TFCraft 2 a mod where you can't tunnel at certain junctures" my response is that I don't care for the idea at all.I think if TFCraft 2 is made without the option to place and destroy blocks before you take towers, at least in the config files or game menu, you'll be narrowing the scope of players.  Though I do reserve the right to be wrong, I've said before that I want to like TFCraft 2 and I'm going to try it before I officially knock it.

 

I don't think written anything unintelligent or disrespectful in this entire discussion.  My major exception, as I wrote above, is that I find it demeaning for folks to talk down on the way that I play.

 

There's a huge difference between saying "I want to design a minecraft map/mod wherein players will not be able to break the blocks until they've done x." and "Players who build or destroy terrain during combat are cheating."  I've played maps where you weren't supposed to break the blocks and I didn't enjoy them very much (except one mystery map which had a pretty incredible plot so I actually played the whole thing through) so it's possible, maybe even likely, that folks like me won't be terribly interested in TFCraft 2 if that's the direction it goes in.One of the most lovely things about minecraft is that you can alter the terrain, it is one of minecraft's defining features.  How many other games have you played where you couldn't move or destroy or place something which, in real life, you ought to have been able to move or destroy or place?  When I first played minecraft one of my inward responses was "FINALLY!"

 

I'd also like to say that I think there could be other ways to solve this issue.  I remember playing an awesome map for vanilla minecraft a long time ago, it involved looting a pyramid.  The player started a good distance from a huge Egyptian tomb with a little treasure chest and a patch of grass or some such.  You had to survive and build up enough strength and resources to loot the tomb.  All of the blocks in the tomb that you weren't supposed to break were made of bedrock.  I loved that map.  I died quite a bit and always restarted because I wanted to leave the tomb with all the treasure and many of my deaths involved my stuff melting in lava.

 

Anyway, couldn't these towers simply be made of an unbreakable block?  Or a temporarily unbreakable one?  That second option might be a tall order, I don't know.  Or what about making the blocks from which the towers are constructed out of a material which can only be broken by the metal tier which you will be gaining once you have taken the island?  I think that's a really good suggestion, I hope it's considered.

 

 It's one thing to try and stop folks from pillaring to the top and it's another thing to stop folks from placing a block here or there on their way up the tower to gain a tactical advantage or block off the area you've made safe from the area that you haven't.

 

I have been participating in this and other discussions on this forum because I want to help, albeit a little, to make TFCraft better.  Everything I've written thus far has either been with the aim of productive brainstorming or a defensive, yet civil, response to what I see as disrespectful comments or suggestions.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm, a debate. What I infer from your debate is that we don't want any tunneling, but in the same time be able to build offensively. I'll say please take a look at Ace of Spades classic. We can build to defend ourselves, but then the enemy can also destroy it, which is great for the enemy. That, I believe, is what you're all after. You can use natural objects that are already there as cover, too, right? But, the mobs shouldn't be able to destroy the natural objects, and you too, until you conquered the island. 

You are asking for us to then make it so a player can come up with a few stacks of plank blocks, and use them to pillar straight up to the top of the tower and collect the reward.

Kitty, put a roof on it. Or a barbed fence or something. Do mobs even guard the tower? Make them shoot the player from far enough. Edited by Miner239
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks like you might have completely missed the point of my argument, so let me rephrase. But first I want to reiterate Rule #1 of this forum: Remember that TFC2 is a 100% rewrite and re-conception of TerraFirmaCraft. It is a new mod entirely, and will be very different from what you are currently used to.

 

 

Tell me, will the creative option be gotten rid of as well?  What about those people who will fly to the top of the tower?  You think Bioxx will lose sleep over them?

 

Anyway, couldn't these towers simply be made of an unbreakable block?  Or a temporarily unbreakable one?  That second option might be a tall order, I don't know.  Or what about making the blocks from which the towers are constructed out of a material which can only be broken by the metal tier which you will be gaining once you have taken the island?  I think that's a really good suggestion, I hope it's considered.

 

 It's one thing to try and stop folks from pillaring to the top and it's another thing to stop folks from placing a block here or there on their way up the tower to gain a tactical advantage or block off the area you've made safe from the area that you haven't.

 

 

The stance on creative mode is the same as it has always been, TFC is not designed for creative mode, and there are actually a good chunk of bugs and crashes that players who use creative mode will experience, that are of absolutely no priority for us to fix. The systems are designed with survival mode in mind, and a common side-effect of that is that direct cheating such as creative mode will result in some very odd behavior, if not make your world almost entirely unsalvageable due to a bug or crash. If that is a risk the player is will to take, we don't care, as long as they don't come whining to us when everything is borked.

 

I fail to see how making areas out of essentially bedrock is any different from saying "you can't break blocks or tunnel through terrain." To me, they are one in the same. What you are missing here is that we realize that players are going to want to be able to set up some system of check points where they can have relative safety and not have to worry about losing progress. The fact is though, that we want to implement some sort of system to allow that which is not letting the player block it off themselves with blocks. You are missing the fact that we get that there are certain tactical strategies for combat, and we want to design our own system that allows for that. Placing blocks makes things too easy. We want to implement something that is harder to do, but still has the same general end result.

 

 

Kitty, put a roof on it. Or a barbed fence or something. Do mobs even guard the tower? Make them shoot the player from far enough.

 

It looks like my metaphor went right over your head. The whole point of it was to explain that as developers we put a lot of time and effort into a designing a new system, and there is nothing more frustrating than watching a player make all of that work for nothing by doing something as stupid as pillaring straight up with blocks. Every system is going to have some sort of flaw, and as developers we try our hardest to anticipate those flaws and prevent players from exploiting them. This can be a futile battle though, so at a certain point as a developer you likely have to take drastic measures. As a developer you have dream for something when you create it. You have an entire plan laid out in your head of how you want this to work, and you put in all of your effort and do your best to make something so it will work that way. When a user then comes along and blatantly exploits it in such a way that your work was really for nothing, it's a kick in the face.

 

As an aside, I'd like to point out that ranged combat in Minecraft is absolutely horrible. The current system with mob AI makes it unfeasible to create some sort of mob that would be able to shoot a player down at long range, that isn't a complete aim bot and impossible to defeat at short range.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What sounds like all parties want is for the player to be able to play the way the map is built, and the way the player wants. So, it seems reasonable to make these two things line up. The actual implementation that dictates how the player settles and pacifies the island is up to Bioxx, but this could be tweaked to fit what everybody wants in terms of playstyle.  

 

I personally like a range of challenges, like a multi stage process, (perhaps getting a toehold on the island in a D-Day style beach landing, then locating the tower/miniboss/objective, then taking down the mobs and settling the island), as well as a freedom to tackle these challenges the way I see fit. As TFC is still supposedly a tweak on minecraft, and minecraft is all about building to defeat challenges (building nether portal, building an enclosure for blazes to control them, building up to the healing beams in the end, and building a cage to keep the wither contained) it is perfectly believable and true to minecraft to say building, or manipulating the environment, is a legitimate playstyle. It could be incorporated into the fight to make building a part of the fight, or very difficult but necessary, but to say that players aren't allowed to play a certain way only shows that the devs have not thought of everything yet. 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole point of it was to explain that as developers we put a lot of time and effort into a designing a new system, and there is nothing more frustrating than watching a player make all of that work for nothing by doing something as stupid as pillaring straight up with blocks. Every system is going to have some sort of flaw, and as developers we try our hardest to anticipate those flaws and prevent players from exploiting them. This can be a futile battle though, so at a certain point as a developer you likely have to take drastic measures. As a developer you have dream for something when you create it. You have an entire plan laid out in your head of how you want this to work, and you put in all of your effort and do your best to make something so it will work that way. When a user then comes along and blatantly exploits it in such a way that your work was really for nothing, it's a kick in the face.

 

I'm going to chime in and point out that, in the CTM maps, at the end of the day all you're getting out of that tower (to use your metaphor) is a freaking piece of colored wool. In order for going through the tower to be worth it, the player has to get from it something of equal worth to their efforts. That's obviously not going to be the stupid piece of wool. That tower may be well-balanced from a gameplay perspective, liberally painted with elbow grease and craft, and all the custom mobs up the wazoo, and yet fail as a level because you forgot the Cardinal Rule of Gaming: Games should be fun. At the end of the day, your beautifully designed tower could still be judged by many players to be more tedious than actually fun for them, so of course they're going to cheese it by towering up — they're not deriving enough enjoyment from your tower challenge to justify going through it the hard way.

 

So does it sound fair that player gets an "awesome reward" by cheesing the level? As a player, my response is an unqualified, "Yes!" because I am not playing for the benefit of the designers, but my own.

 

If players are cheesing the level rather than playing straight, then maybe no matter how awesome you think that level's design is, the players don't think much of it. This is not a failing on their part. It's a failure on your part. You did not prepare the players adequately for tackling the level, or the player doesn't find the level engaging enough in its own right to be worth defeating straight, and you are instead depending on the awesomeness of the reward to get them to play the level. It works for other games because you can control the environment to the degree to make going through the hard way obligatory. That doesn't work in Minecraft because the game is designed from the ground up to be freely manipulated by the player. Furthermore, at least until 1.9, combat in Minecraft is pretty meh, so if you're depending on engaging combat to see you through you're going to have a tough time using Minecraft as a base.

 

Remember that in CTM maps, at the end of an area, all the players are going to be getting out of it is a colored piece of wool. Yet there are still plenty of players prepared to go through the trouble of going through the level legit (and at least in Vechs's CTM maps, tunneling is still explicitly legit) to get that measily piece of wool instead of cheesing it by crafting it out of string or coloring wool they've already collected. It is a testament to their level design that their levels are not just balanced and challenging, but fun as well.

 

It has been my opinion that the common problem running through all TFC1 was the tedium. Indeed, each decision by Bioxx et al seemed to be focused on extending the tedium. It seemed to me that not one single second was spent on considering how to make playing it engaging, not one moment spent on thinking of how a change would affect the player's experience of the game, and how to enrich that experience instead of being yet another chore the player has to deal with, not realizing that it is exactly that experience of the game is what TFC was going to be judged most harshly on. This stinks to me of a vanity project, not a game, and unless there's a big change in how TFC2 is approached, then it's just going to be another vanity project. There is an opportunity to make TFC2 a game that people will play, which is why I commented.

 

If you want TFC2 to be played straight, you have to make it so that the player wants to play TFC2 straight, because they're not playing for your benefit no matter how much effort you put into it. They play for theirs.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to agree with wyrmofvt. Personally I'm a survival lover, and I think tfc 1 was oriented in just survival. I understand that you want to make tfc 2 more action centered, but please, just dont ruin the fun of terrafirmacraft. I have played "Crash Landing" (A hardcore mod pack) a lot, and basically, my strategy is just avoid combat, because of the risk. I feel the same in tfc. Even if it is not hardcore, diying in the middle of a "tower" will be a instant quit for me. I have worked hard for that armor, that maze that sword. I have been cultivating and cooking to get the perfect food. Then I die. And lets start again. I will have to remake every single piece of equipment, and retake a path I already take. I enjoyed the "first ride" but I am not sure about the second. Maybe the third... Luckily, I could get back my things, but what is the point of having 2 bronze mazes when I'm going to get iron ones? I know that everying is in the air, nothing is set, but please, please don't make me quit tfc just because it is too punishing. 

Edited by lJuanGB
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites