I was reminiscing the other day about some old zones that used to be in UD and are no longer. Some of them are no longer in for a good reason: they suck. But UD does still have some craptacular stock zones.

Now, having more areas is generally better. Having more GOOD areas is even better! If we ever want to expand the game, rearrange the world, or add new levels, we need more areas. We [the imm staff] have a number of unique areas in the works. Such areas take a long time to build, check, balance, and incorporate into the game. We also have the option of building semi-random zones (for instance the forests immediately to the north and south of town) that add more gamespace without much uniqueness; we call them wilderness zones. We can also dig back into the archives and get some of the old stock and semi-stock areas, modify them somewhat, and put them into UD. This way we get OK quality (we wouldn't take the shit zones, like smurf village) quite quickly.

How should we work on expanding the game? Share your opinion:

#OptionCount
1 Only work on unique areas, please. 0
2 Work on unique areas and wilderness. 4
3 Work on unique areas, but throw some good stock in 4
4 Put in all three! 12
5 I fear change! 2
Votes cast: 22

Comments: Post New Refresh Comments

Firich Post Reply
I've been tinkering with some new unique areas lately, but frankly I can't find a Muse to help me get some decent work done. Frankly my descriptions seem too forced, but just thought I'd let you all know I /am/ working. I'm just hiding at the same time.,

sidisen Post Reply
i know i'm relatively new here still, but i have noticed a lack of areas (maybe i just haven't found too many, but i've been to most all on the maps) i was a builder on a mud i used to play so i know that unique areas take a while to build, but some modified stock areas would be nice, maybe to the north and south, those areas seem somewhat small. i know whatever the imms decide on will be good though.

Phil Post Reply
This is the last time I'll say it, cause certain imms get testy when they hear it's name, but here it is: EMOTION, so the area sucks, why? I always thought that is was a good idea, I just may need some tweaking.
The game has changed quite a bit sence the emotion area was in, why not change it, maybe make it a lower level area to get some eq in the game for those mid-20 - mid-30 levels where the eq seems all the same.

      Kheldar Post Reply
      heh heh...it was a terrible idea ;)

Osake Post Reply
I'd prefer not having wilderness, plus seeing some of the old stocks would be really cool. Plus new areas are always fun. The point is, I'm for everything, except wilderness.

      Kheldar Post Reply
      Why not wilderness? Because something like the Fens count as wilderness. And other wilderness areas could have smaller "lairs" akin to the Snake Fortress embedded in them.

            Demi Post Reply
            I voted option '4' but I agree that wilderness is the "what is in-between" stuff that can link the major areas. Besides, lowbies IMHO just love the "woods" (to a point :).

[Also, I think that mini embeds, via room discription changes can add a suprize room (with an item or hidden items) here and there should be easy to incorporate quickly as the mood strikes, and still satisfy an urge to explore.

Perhaps a look can be given to making a string of different items repop in these rooms randomly. Giving more "life" to a known room.]

Dramikar Post Reply
Space is nice (wilderness). Meat is nice (decent stock). Unique is obviously much better.

Risika Post Reply
Wilderness, while prividing a good stock o' herbs, is boring. Stock areas, however, can be amusing in the crappiness and can be fixed up, and/or taken out as new unique and better areas get stuck in. Obviously, unique areas are good because ... they are. Unless they're big and we have to find quest items in them. :P (Kidding, of course ...)