Had a thought about getting items of a body from combat.

There should be a chance of damage of the items on body that is hit with a bomb, grenade, full auto fire, etc.
As compared to a single shot to the head (or body) that knocks out or kills the body.

If there is no such thing as damage to items then, there should be a smaller chance of usable items on the body if attacked with a grenade, bomb, full auto fire, etc.

If just out right attacking another body (body means NPC or PC) means that you will get less 'loot' or items then it might just encourage more trading, stealing or skill at shot placement to kill/knock out a body.

Just a thought.

Dave Chase

great idea.

Only problem I see is the server load to track and calculate all this and keep it on the server until we respawn.
Especially in crowded pvp with 30 plus players all shooting and hacking and dying. MMO's... MMO's never change...

Actually there would not be any need for tracking until respawn. You are thinking about equipment left on your body after you come back, which is a different issue.

The code only has to keep track of how much damage and how that damage was dealt to determine once there is a lootable body, how much and/or how good the items are (condition wise.)

The basic concept is a bit of reality thrown in with attempting to keep kill-looters from just jamming on a person. If they (the killers) want lots of loot and in good condition, then they will have to be more careful in how they take down the body.

Dave Chase

please leave item damage to bashing crates and blowing away doors with C4/Dynamite. Last thing I want is a wrecked stealth boy because my mini-gun shot it 250 times. Anyways I liked what Borderlands did with their weapons: they had it so when someone died their weapon would fly/fall off their bodies along with misc. weapons, then a little light beam came out of the gun straight up. The light would be white for normal guns/items/ammo, red for healing items and green/blue/purple/orange/cyan for rarer weapons/armor. Well I guess we're just a couple of problem solvers

Actually, I like the chance that the equipment might be ruined. It makes a player think before they act since each act will have possible bad results.
But, each to their own. That's what this forum is all about.



Sounds like magic to me.

Unless I can figure out what anther is carrying via, seeing it on their character (assuming it shows up on the visual figure), see them use it (by knowing what different items do, observing buying it or someone giving it to them, or by attempting to steal from a character, I would like the fact that one would not know what items/loot a person has until they actually look at the dead/knocked out body.

Dave Chase

in this moment i thik weapons for this scenario in 3 Karegoris
a)small damage 10% - 40% (1-4 random items of 10 items are destroyed)

b)medium damage 50% - 70%

c)havy damage 80%-100% --> yeah i don′t think u have a big change to get somethink out a enemy u kill whit a rocketlauncher

IMO, items should have a chance to be destroyed that should be affected by the weapons used on it. A rocket launcher should do a lot more damage, and therefore have a higher chance to ruin something than say, a spear.

I also think that looted armor should have to be fitted to a player by someone with a high enough repair and/or science skill. There should also be penalties applied if drastic changes need to be made; power armor crafted for a super mutant (similar to Horrigan's from FO2) which is modified to fit a human should be a lot less effective than regular power armor. In some situations, the cost to refit an armor could make it unfeasable to do so unless the player has the necisary requirements to do so. This can also add a lot more flavor, and a way skills can be expressed in character appearance; only a character with a high enough repair skill will be wearing armor that is bound to them on a drop and that they need to repair to use.

Items' degradation is one of the major conditions for a real player-dependent economics. Excuse my bad English... I am a Russian bear, it's hard to type with claws.

All these ideas seem to focus around a stronger PvP element. The idea of item decay is a good addition for overall realism, but to have items "destroyed" or degrade to a state beyond repair seems a bit restrictive. For instance if the game is to have serious end-game content it would become frustrating to acquire an item which took hundreds of hours of investment only to have it unusable. Conversly if you make select items immune from permanent detruction it would only serve to make upkeep tedious for the remainder.

I think a balanced approach would be nice. Allow item decay for everything which is reflected by a decrease in the item stats, but have a bottom limit for maximum levels of decay. Acrimitis post about making drastic changes to an item is very interesting. Science/repair skill dependance for item modification has the potential for an interesting game experience.

+1

For independent player economy and crafting to work properly items need to be able to get destroyed, otherwise the market would just flood after a while and no one would buy anything else but ammo and medical supplies (yes I'm gonna do it again, eve's economy/game-mechanics is a really great example of what I mean).

One other negative to doing this...Im sure like most mmos there will be character classes. In the case of V13 there will probably be some supermutant big weapon user class or some other classes that focus on explosives or large weapons. So if using these classes raises the risk of people damaging the loot that they'd find then people will most likely avoid these classes. Then everyone will just run around playing snipers and shoot people in the head so it doesn't hurt the loot.
Just a thought.

All depends of numbers.

P.S. who said that WoW's items acquisition way is the only right?
Who said that you guaranteed need to spend hundreds of hours to get one high-end item and you guaranteed will get it if you'll spent hundreds of hours? High-end items acquisition process should be hard instead of long. Feel the difference. Excuse my bad English... I am a Russian bear, it's hard to type with claws.

To me, it's pretty much a must. The way I'd have it is there's far too much equipment unused by the dead to be easy transported by the survivors in all but the most one-sided encounters. If everything collected was in tip top condition if would just be utterly stupid. Just take the Roman nobles' rings and the occasional nice sword, leave the rest to annoy the carrion eaters. Why do games studios have to fight and die? War, war never changes : (

Actually, with my idea of an item being destroyed, i was referring more to looted gear, pvp and pve. That is, if you hit someone with a rocket launcher, to you thier armor will appear destroyed making it undesirable to loot, but to the original wearing it will be relatively fine, although still a bit damaged.

IMO though, FOOL needs to have some serious weight restrictions. It's completely unrealistic to be running around carrying 3 rifles, 2 pistols, 20 hand grenades, 5000 rounds of various caliber, 4 different suits of combat armor, 1 suit of power armor, 30 stimpacks, and 500 various pieces of vendor trash. But more importantly than realism, serious weight restrictions would discourage unnecisary looting of damage and/or destroyed equipment in a PvP setting. It also gives vehicles and/or pack animals more of a purpose in the game world (if i was a raider, i'd just shoot someone's brahmin and hide until they head off before i loot the corpse of whatever the other guy couldn't carry. It would also open late game up to builds with a focus on lighter, less protective armor which would enable the wearing to move faster and/or carry more.


Classes only in the sense that there will be certain prefered nook builds.

From my perspective I come from Everquest back in 2000 and that game was a notorious time investment. Not just for the fact that you did have to grind for XP to get to a high level, but in that every stage of the game almost all the items worth having required large multipart quests and a huge time investment. I would prefer a game that I could invest in for years, not just playable for brief instances. In EQ in order to get access to highend items you either needed to put in the time to develop your character to qualify for the areas where you could fight for the items or you had to invest in tradeskilling to craft great items. Both systems rewarded you based on the amount of work you put into them.

Part of the fun of large scale MMOs is having a central story arc with plenty of tangents which occupy you when you aren't focusing on the central theme of the game. Also part of a well planned game is one that is constantly evolving so you dont just get to an endgame phase and then wait for the game to catch up with you. There should always be sidequests to work on even when you aren't pursuing the game's central late stage objective.

It is important to remember a game without a well formulated story which focuses mainly on gameplay becomes tired. PvP multiplayer shooters are such an example. You can have the best engine and coolest items in the world, but without contextual substance they are an empty game experience.

Although a little tangential, I want to second this. The greatest raids I participated in my WoW days were always the most difficult, not the most time consuming. The idea of difficult is often lost on MMOs (opinion).

This is not entirely without reason. MMOs by definition are looking to not only grab a large player base, but also maintain that player base. If an MMO is exceedingly difficult, a huge number of subs will /quit. I am not a game designer, so I am not sure where the bar should be set in V13. Personally, I would like the game to be difficult - with the caveat that if there is a quest/enemy/group you can not defeat due to a lack of skill, you can move on anyway.

I would also like to play a game where devs made all decisions regarding class equality (assuming classes exist in this game) internally. Seriously, listening to people whine about nerfing/overpower is beyond intolerable. "What would your good do if evil didn't exist, and what would the earth look like if all the shadows disappeared?"

I would bet a year's salary that FOOL isn't going to have traditional classes. That said, yes it probably will have certain builds that will essentially be classes in that almost every min/maxer will be using one of X number of builds.

Now, that said, yes a system where certain weapons will do more damage to lootable equipment will cause people to shy away from certain weapons. However, this would be a feature IMO. If someone wants to use that uber rocket launcher for easier kills, fine, but the downside is that they are going to be handling the cost of those rockets almost entirely out of pocket because they'll hardly have anything to loot.

Also, keep in mind that depending on the weight restrictions in the game, it may not be that big of a hindrence. After all, what does it matter if you're using a weapon that destroys 3/4 of what you could loot, if only 1/10th of what is actually lootable is worth looting in the first place? It would still have an impact, but it would be much smaller.