| From: | Sean Matheis <sean@****.NET> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: VR 2.0 |
| Date: | Thu, 28 May 1998 16:26:19 -0700 |
> I've been working on a rules system to allow this, but I'm wondering what
> people on the list feel should be important considerations. For example,
> when should upgrading a program be a losing proposition as opposed to
> rewriting from scratch? Which options should be the most difficult to add?
> For example, transforming a one-shot program into a full utility should be
> very difficult; the one-shot option has a tremendous amount of
> optimization and little tricks which allow it to fit in the smaller memory
> space. Additionally, if it were not difficult, software houses couldn't
> offer one-shot test programs. Upgrading a program to have an Area option
> should be much more difficult than upgrading the Area to a higher rating.
One idea is to limit the upgradability of a program based on
either its rating, or its size. Something like you cannot
upgrade a program to more than 1.5* its initial rating. That
Attack-6M can now only go to Attack-9M before it is considered
incapable of being upgraded any further. Adding options would
reduce this multiplier. I don't have VR2 w/ me, and I don't
regularly play a decker, but you should be able to get a general
idea for this. (Perhaps: 1.5* is the max, reduce by one level
for each goodie you add to it)
-Sean (dba. Fieran, Elven PhysAd)
