On Mon, 29 Apr 1996, Sammy wrote: > > The way they do it is by ramdonly erasing parts of messages and > > substituting them with "x"'s, so "What radio station is this" Could be > > read as "Wxxxt xxdxo xtxtxon xs xxis" for someone that has no idea of > > the language (thus simulating in some way the way some languages can be > > partly understood) to something like "Whax radxo statxxn ix txis" for > > someone more versed (say, 90%) and to the full "What radio station is > > this" for a 100% knowledge of the language. This could apply to read and > > heard language. > > I've seen muds that do exactly that. The simple workaround that players > learn is to write mail or whatever like this: > > WWWWWhhhhhaaaaaattttt rrrrraaaaaadddddiiiiiooooo etc etc.. > And it'll send something like: WxWxWxxhhhaxxxaxatxxtx rxrrxaaaxaxdxddxiiixiooxoo How do I know it says "What radio"?! In extreme cases where they know very little of the language it's just: Wxxxxhhxxxaxxxxxatxxxt xxxxxaaxxxaxxxdxxiixxoxooo How do I know what the last word is? Look at this way, in any event, the players will look for a way to break the language system and use it to cheat and not bother with language skills. I personally don't know, but feel that players probably don't care so much about speaking some elven rune dialect as they do about being able to backstab someone. Overkill on encrypting languages is thus not far from most of the idealic solutions. > 4) Encourage bilingual players to come to your mud and use real languages Eh, why? That's not game mechanics; that's just making it so that people don't understand what other people are saying unless they actually bother to get off their fat ass and do something but MUD (oh, don't take offense, I use to power-MUD, so)... And then you have no logical segregration of race/continent/d.o.b. within the MUD to fit this. No offense intended, but enforcing rules in place of code is often a bad way of doing anything -- especially since it often makes you look stupid (to most MUD players who have never programmed in C before, you're incompitent if you can't/won't do something they requset [eg., preventing corpse looting with a rule instead of coding a prevention]). They often times don't realize that RULES make it more flexible than hard code, nor do they often realize the intricies of the code, they think because they can make an area with OLC and write stupid little programs in BASIC or PASCAL that they can make the most unbelievable MUD in the world, but, because they don't know the first thing about getting a MUD up and running, they complain to you. This reminds me of the player who got me kicked off my site and put up his own MUD on that site... Guess how many changes he made to his MUD in the month that he was allowed to stay there? NONE, he spent all his time trying to kiss up to me, appologizing for getting me thrown off my site... EH, anywho, I'm going off topic. The point is, in some places, rules don't substitute code and in other places, rules are better. In the case of languages, rules are far from suitable.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 12/18/00 PST