View Issue Details
| ID | Project | Category | Date Submitted | Last Update | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0007600 | Valley 1 | Suggestion - UI Ideas | May 6, 2012 11:28 am | May 8, 2012 12:45 am | |
| Reporter | Aphantas | Assigned To | |||
| Status | closed | Resolution | won't fix | ||
| Summary | 0007600: Town Stash for Spellgems and Enchants and Limited inventory | ||||
| Description | After playing through Continent 1 I was surprised that a town stash for Spellgems and Enchants was no-where to found. This would be a feature that allows a player to place enchants/spellgems that they do not wish to use into a settlement stash. While items are in the town stash the player cannot access the items unless they go back to the settlement. This should alleviate the inventory clutter that occurs after many hours of play. Such a system would also mean that the ever expanding personal inventory, which can hard to search, can be replaced with a limited inventory. A limited Inventory will add a little more tactics into game play as well since you will be forced to plan ahead for each area you wish to visit. decisions such as whether one will take an Elusion scroll or the extra elemental spell will occur from time to time during the game. As it is right now you can completely change your line-up of spells at any time, making resistances more of a nuisance then an actual threat after you get the basic spells. | ||||
| Tags | No tags attached. | ||||
| Internal Weight | Feature Suggestion | ||||
|
|
I think the unlimited inventory is one of those immutable design goals of the game. In http://www.arcengames.com/forums/index.php/topic,9524.0.html it is explicitly stated that they do not want the players to be forced to return to town because of things like running out of inventory space. The game already gives you ways to reduce your inventory clutter anyway. Spellgems you don't want can be freely dropped, and unneeded enchants can be easily recycled. |
|
|
I like the idea of a stash in AVWW, but I don't really see a purpose to it. It's just one of those concepts that I never see a reason NOT to have it, but in this game, I can't see any circumstances that I would use it. I don't like the idea of having a small inventory, especially if it's only a reason to add a stash. This would just cause me to use even LESS spells than I already do, which isn't a good thing. |
|
|
This idea is kinda linked to the suggestion for Tile Specific Environmental Hazards, which I created as a separate suggestion since the title would become horrendously long otherwise. You would not need to go back to town at any point. If you come across a enchant that is better then one which you already have then you can leave the old one on the ground and recycle (didn't know about recycling, maybe I missed that tutorial part). New enchants you would need to leave some space for, unless it gives you the option of placing them in the settlement stash or your personal stash which might be a better solution. I am suggesting this because you never need to prepare for the conditions you are likely to meet in an area. Since you can have every enchant and spellgem at your fingertips you can very easily completely change your character as you travel. Resistances are not a worry when I have every spell of every element at my fingertips at all times, and this holds true for any obstacle. |
|
|
Well, you might have every spell available to you, but they aren't all going to be leveled up, typically. After you progress through the tiers, it's generally best to have really only level 2 or 3 spells, due to the increasingly high costs of upgrading. Of course, you CAN level up every spell if you really want, it just requires a lot of time and resource gathering. |
|
|
it just seems that it sits badly with elemental resistances and hazards. Hazards only work if the you don't have the ability to hold every solution at once. Single resistance monsters only really work if you have some restrictions on what elements you are able to use at one time. |
|
|
I can see the point of having a stash for dropping unused stuff, but limiting inventory space doesn't sit right with me. If you've ever played Diablo 2 with a group of people who don't understand how to ignore crap loot, it takes forever to get through anything because after 2 minutes everyone town portals back to sell things. It's a lot like that. Who wants to run back to drop their crates in the settlement so they have enough space to pick up that Transmogrify Bat scroll they found. |
|
|
The problem with this is that it will greatly increase the need to backtrak, which is bad bad bad. |
|
|
OK well how about enabling access to your inventory only at a warp gate? The assumption is that once you get to a warp gate, you can easily get back to your settlement. So instead of demanding backtracking, you can simply apply a shortcut with the warp gates. So the warp gates will be not only for travelling, but also for accessing inventory items and enchants in multiple locations. |
|
|
Here's the thing though, the only reason I've ever heard in favor of something like this is that it forces you to plan ahead. Normally, this is fine, except, in AVWW, you CAN'T plan ahead. How will you know what things the boss is resistant to? What if he's weak to ice, but you didn't bring any ice spells? There would be no way to know ahead of time that you needed ice spells, and that would lead to all kinds of frustration. |
|
|
With spellgems I agree with you. You could argue that it's more interesting if you don't happen to have an element that a boss is resistant to -- you'd have to vary your attacks and find different ways of attacking. Once you guys have more objects in the game, this could really make things more interesting. If you allow players to shuffle their inventory at will, things get boring -- every monster is just an inventory shuffle away from being killed, rather than being something that forces you to adapt your tactics. However, this doesn't work well if a boss can be truly invulnerable to an element. Then you could really be in a bind. It also doesn't work that well because players will just take every element with them all the time -- the space of options isn't big enough. I think this has far more potential with enchants though. Because enchants are generally not as critical as spell elements, and because enchants have far more attributes than the elements of spells, it's impossible to cover every single avenue, and that's ok. It means that you really have to specialize based on what you expect to find. If you're going to the ocean, you take acid gills -- and you don't have the opportunity to swap that out right away. If you're going to a specific mission type, you have to figure out what will be most useful for that mission. If you're going to take on a boss or three, you have to find a combination of enchants that should give you sufficient flexibility to deal with those bosses. The way things are now, you don't need that -- you have every option carried on your person. And if the boss surprises you and does something you didn't expect, you just open your enchant inventory and switch things around rather than having to adapt to the new boss tactics. Giving you limited enchant access encourages thought and tactics, thinking about the situations you're in, and improvising solutions to random problems -- problems that are serious, but not severe, because enchants aren't your main method of combat, they're just add-ons. I do agree that shlepping all the way back to town is a pain, which is why just going to a warp gate seems like a good compromise. |
|
|
Bluddy, You have expressed my idea far better then I have, and I believe in giving recognition where it is due, thanks. Using Warp points as stash access would also be a good safety net for unexpected events. However I do have a issue with the point that this idea will fail when faced with a boss who is truly invulnerable to an element. We already know that monster will only ever have 1 or 2 resistance types, and possibly 1 weakness. just because 1 of your 3 primary attacks (assuming you have middle mouse button) doesn't work, doesn't mean you are in a bind. Unless you have decided to stock 1 element exclusively, which is never a good idea in any game, you can still use your other 2 attacks to good effect. You end up fighting in a sub-optimal state, and this would encourage new tactics to be taken. In regards to a player just taking all elements with them, that is a balanced build and is just as valid as a 2 element character. With the quick-bar current inventory of 10 spells/items and 5 enchants, it is possible to carry 1 spell of every element, platforms and crates and still have 2 slots to use for whatever you desire. Those last two would specialise the build, with a advanced heat suit and gills you are prepared to be able to face almost any threat, but not at optimum performance, This is good for exploring unknown zones. Use the last 2 slots for damage enchants or maybe a elusion scroll, and you now have a set-up more suited for boss towers. but what if you only want to explore an Ice Age Zone? you know that most monsters will be resistant to ice, and vulnerable to air and fire, however you can't just pack air and fire because of monster migration. As such you could leave ice and another element at home and have 2 more slots for other enchants (say storm-dash and multi-jump). A boss can still appear with resistances to air or fire (not both), but even then you are not disabled because you still would have 3 more attacks at your disposal, and chances are it is vulnerable to 1 of them. If it isn't you can still deal damage to it at a normal rate or try a new cave in the area. You probably have noticed that in these builds there is no room for new enchants or items, which is true. But the run back to town can be avoided by giving players the choice to send an item straight to town stash when picking up an item/enchant while the inventory is full. So in AVWW, like any game it is possible to plan ahead to a large degree, and it is the unexpected that always creates the most vivid impressions in a randomised game. Planning does not mean that you know everything that is going to happen and thus are perfectly prepared, planning means being able to combat unexpected issues as they appear in a efficient manner. If someone knows exactly what will be encountered they are not planning, but reacting. This is because planning always concerns an uncertain future, while reacting relates to the present. Right now exploration in AVWW is not about planning but reacting since you do not need consider what you may encounter in your exploration. You instead react to what you are encountering at the present moment in your exploration. [EDIT: Made it nicer to read] |
| Date Modified | Username | Field | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 6, 2012 11:28 am | Aphantas | New Issue | |
| May 6, 2012 6:47 pm | GauHelldragon | Note Added: 0023645 | |
| May 6, 2012 6:55 pm | khadgar | Note Added: 0023647 | |
| May 6, 2012 10:28 pm | Aphantas | Note Added: 0023657 | |
| May 6, 2012 10:52 pm | GauHelldragon | Note Added: 0023658 | |
| May 6, 2012 11:34 pm | Aphantas | Note Added: 0023660 | |
| May 6, 2012 11:34 pm | Aphantas | Note Edited: 0023660 | |
| May 7, 2012 11:03 am | tigersfan | Internal Weight | => Feature Suggestion |
| May 7, 2012 11:03 am | tigersfan | Status | new => considering |
| May 7, 2012 11:12 am | MaxwellDemonic | Note Added: 0023690 | |
| May 7, 2012 12:04 pm | tigersfan | Note Added: 0023694 | |
| May 7, 2012 12:04 pm | tigersfan | Status | considering => closed |
| May 7, 2012 12:04 pm | tigersfan | Resolution | open => won't fix |
| May 7, 2012 2:36 pm | Bluddy | Note Added: 0023702 | |
| May 7, 2012 10:22 pm | tigersfan | Note Added: 0023719 | |
| May 7, 2012 10:38 pm | Bluddy | Note Added: 0023720 | |
| May 8, 2012 12:45 am | Aphantas | Note Added: 0023730 | |
| May 8, 2012 12:47 am | Aphantas | Note Edited: 0023730 |
