Graal Forums

Graal Forums (https://forums.graalonline.com/forums/index.php)
-   Classic Main Forum (https://forums.graalonline.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=175)
-   -   Classic Reset? (https://forums.graalonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=87181)

BlackSolider 07-31-2009 05:47 PM

Classic Reset?
 
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems that classic has been reset....and pretty significantly.

Here are the new dimensions of the server:
The NW corner is the tree line around dozers (or at least where dozers was.)
The NE corner is the church and the mountains/hills around it.
The SE corner is the area below the brother's house.
The SW corner is the mountains/hills below sister gertrudes.

It seems that all the houses/levels are from....well they're not the levels I'm used to. Perhaps they're from pre-npc server (someone confirm/deny this plz.)

Regardless, the profile is different (kills, deaths, HP, max hp, and AP.)

How long things will stay in this condition, I do now know. Is this a sign that change has finally come to Classic? Perhaps.

But anyways, other than seeing the changes, there's still nothing to do (there's currently no inside lvls either) so obviously there's still a long way to go.

MysticX2X 07-31-2009 06:12 PM

Yes, Classic has been reset, and most significant changes will happen in the days/weeks to come.

Also, the overworld you see now is just what is there to build upon. I'm sure the management can explain more specifics.

ffcmike 07-31-2009 06:19 PM

Yep, this is a preliminary step which will give us a clean slate in practise,
the overworld is definately planned to be expanded to a greater size in future regardless of content, and those levels while based off pre npcserver, are touched up here and there currently and subject to change.

Obviously still alot of work to go yet,
the movement + HD are currently Default,
all the misc systems (nicks, state, staff system etc) should be worked on first with scripted default-emulation being ported in later, this also means we have to be careful to script stuff in such a way that porting in a custom version won't cause bugs and require massive amounts of rescripting.

Unkownsoldier 07-31-2009 06:34 PM

Hmm.. Why are you going to make the overworld bigger, I felt that exploring classics overworld when I played was extremely boring because there was no one that really goes out there to do anything because there is nothing to do. Unless you plan on changing that.

ffcmike 07-31-2009 09:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Unkownsoldier (Post 1511923)
Hmm.. Why are you going to make the overworld bigger, I felt that exploring classics overworld when I played was extremely boring because there was no one that really goes out there to do anything because there is nothing to do. Unless you plan on changing that.

It's not going to be "bigger",
I agree this was one of the problems with the server,
and that one of the things we're focussing the overworld on is keeping up a high player/content density,
it's just that it will likely end up bigger than the current preliminary overworld.

There's a long way to go yet,
but i'm not ruling out expanding to something closer towards the former overworld, just it's important that every area that gets added has a purpose and has the most made out of it.

Crono 07-31-2009 09:35 PM

Size of overworld is overrated. Look at Classic's original map and then look at how much content it had packed in it compared to current maps.

DustyPorViva 07-31-2009 09:37 PM

However, it's silly to say "you have to have a small overworld because there is nothing to do" rather than actually putting stuff to do out there. You can't change where players are going to sit, but to make the server look full of content by sticking a bunch of stuff in a very small area seems like the lazy way out.

WhiteDragon 07-31-2009 10:27 PM

Content density is one of our major goals. We feel that this will foster a more tightly-knit community, one of the things that made Classic a great server back in its older days.

Mark Sir Link 08-01-2009 02:23 AM

something that should have been done years ago

-Ramirez- 08-01-2009 02:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ffcmike (Post 1511920)
with scripted default-emulation being ported in later

I might be interested in knocking off the default emulation scripts if I don't have to deal with anyone else's garbage scripts this time. That's probably already not the case, so nevermind.

DustyPorViva 08-01-2009 05:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WhiteDragon (Post 1511994)
Content density is one of our major goals. We feel that this will foster a more tightly-knit community, one of the things that made Classic a great server back in its older days.

People will always clutter in the same spot no matter how the overworld is.

WhiteDragon 08-01-2009 06:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DustyPorViva (Post 1512150)
People will always clutter in the same spot no matter how the overworld is.

Yes, but the idea is for that spot to be easily-accessible and won't require running for 5 minutes and taking a 2 minute boat ride. This way players can immediately gauge the activity on the server.

Also, with more content density, there is much more reason to go around and explore, because you know you're always going to find something interesting and interactive wherever you go.

Not to mention, with fewer levels, that means less development time, and higher quality levels.

Making the change did not take long, and there are many potential benefits to reap!

Nelm 08-01-2009 07:24 AM

Smaller OW = more player interaction = MORE FUN.

Unkownsoldier 08-01-2009 01:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nelm (Post 1512164)
Smaller OW = more player interaction = MORE FUN.

10 player= 2 flags= NO FUN!

50 players= 6 flags= MORE FUN!

Rufus 08-01-2009 01:41 PM

1 Attachment(s)
Why are all graphic uploads (heads, shields, swords, etc) removed? By the way, nice Angel Clan shadow LOL.


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 12:29 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright (C) 1998-2019 Toonslab All Rights Reserved.