RE: [MUD-Dev] Optimized Object Storage

["Ian Macintosh" <iman#issystems,co.nz>]

    > Michael Sellers wrote:
    >
    > > Ian wrote:
    > > Having a piece of metal armor, kept in a presumed
    > > oiled condition, in
    > > a dry environment, and then getting 'a pile of rust'
    > > or the even more
    > > generic 'crumbles into dust', is OOC to my mind
    > > because it is not
    > > realistic.
    >
    > Okay, but this seems OOC because it's extreme.  First,
    > you're *assuming*
    > that the character is keeping the armor in a nicely
    > maintained (oiled, etc.)
    > state, without requiring any effort or cost on their
    > part -- a missed
    > opportunity for a money-drain, IMO.  Second, if you
    > *did* have a maintenance
    > requirement, you could make the "crumbles to dust"
    > option generally
    > avoidable, though the armor's utility would drop
    > gradually, slowed by
    > maintenance and speeded up by use/damage/etc.  In this
    > way, the player would
    > stop using the armor as soon as it was of little
    > utility (and this decrease
    > need not be linear) without having to endure the
    > surprising "crumbles to
    > dust" messages.

I don't understand your viewpoint there Michael.  I can see you have a
preference for that way of doing things, and I don't.  It's probably
personal.  I think your method is micro-management oriented, and you
feel mine is contrived.  I doubt we'll reach concensus on the subject.

Viva la difference :-)

Regards,

Ian.




_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev maillist  -  MUD-Dev#kanga,nu
http://www.kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev