Quote:
Originally Posted by Secrets
I agree with the define option, though I would rather see rules to define them instead of defines. That way rules can be set for Win32 pre-compiled servers and ServerOPs are not in a mess if they use precompiled code. I personally had to remove it on Raid Addicts when I helped them upgrade it, simply because all the existing content was balanced torwards the previous combat changes. When you have a level cap above 75, things get wonky with the code (and in general!) and stuff messes up. Not everyone uses PEQ as their database either. I would MUCH rather see a rule for the new combat changes, while still keeping in the old combat changes as a separate rule.
I use the combat changes on my own personal server and they work great; though, I balanced my server around PoTimeB-level of characters. I had to tweak a few things, but in the end they worked out great. I think a lot of the issue is ServerOPs tweak NPC stats without looking at the formulas and end up having overpowered players & NPCs. When you make both overpowered and the only thing that is stopping them is HP, that's when it gets a bit hard to balance with new combat changes. Sure, the combat changes are great, I just don't think they are for every server out there, especially people who throw stats on NPCs at random, or tweak the cap on stats, etc.
I'll see if I can get this coded later, it should be fairly easy to implement. Whether you want it is up to you.
|
Under further investigation, I think we need a define for this. Would basically have to copy the whole code twice to get a rule to work, heh, unless the way it was handled was reworked.
The only problem I see in a define is for novice server ops to 1) compile, and 2) get the correct rule_values set for combat depending on what they use. I sure didn't know what the heck to do when I first started. But typically most ServerOPs I see starting out use PEQ anyway, so it's not that bad in the end. More experienced ServerOPs should know how to look at svn revisions and remove the code if they balanced it around the old code.
So, I guess we're kind of in a mess here. :<