Pali Posted July 28, 2008 Report Share Posted July 28, 2008 I do like the idea of making hardcore status a consequence of joining a cabal. I very strongly do not, because it would create the very strong temptation to be a standard char until you're caballed simply for protection... after all, once you're caballed, you get all the hardcore bonuses/risks back anyways, so you may as well go the easier route until then. If this is done, I agree with Raar that changing between the two tiers should be a VERY rare thing (on the scale of conquests/align changes)... for the most part, it should be that whatever tier you choose you are stuck with until char death. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudder Posted July 28, 2008 Report Share Posted July 28, 2008 I agree with Pali 100%. This is an alternative option, not "protection for the time being while you train." Basically, this change should not affect vets in any way shape or form. Though it will help newbs a lot. Or, if the vets just want an RP character, this can be their Herald option Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pali Posted July 28, 2008 Report Share Posted July 28, 2008 Or' date=' if the vets just want an RP character, this can be their Herald option [/quote'] Screw that. I ever make a Herald, I promise he'll be full looting anyone who attacks him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ex-D&Der Posted July 29, 2008 Report Share Posted July 29, 2008 I think another issue with this is that there might be an even smaller p-base of hardcore characters, although it could through recruitment and retention increase that p-base instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anoneemus Posted July 29, 2008 Report Share Posted July 29, 2008 Based on what I am hearing at this meeting, the "second cataclysm", it sounds like there might need to be a pwipe after all. If that's the case, I am 100% against this idea and would probably quit. I love my character too much right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anoneemus Posted July 29, 2008 Report Share Posted July 29, 2008 Mmkay, I must have misunderstood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evangelion Posted July 29, 2008 Report Share Posted July 29, 2008 Need, maybe. Desire? Strongly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ex-D&Der Posted August 10, 2008 Report Share Posted August 10, 2008 Shouldn't this be in the Ideas section? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raargant Posted April 27, 2009 Author Report Share Posted April 27, 2009 Just wanted to give this a quick bump. Wanted to get things moving again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghrundor Posted April 27, 2009 Report Share Posted April 27, 2009 I think something should be done for the people who die and lose equipment that the other person could not touch because they sacrificed it all. For example: A DK kills a Pally and full loots, but drops all the mithril because he cannot touch it. Then he sacrifices it so the Pally has to waste his time to gather all the armor again. IMO it should be changed so that if you cannot touch the armor at all then you should not be able to grab it from the corpse. Just another suggestion I'm throwing out there for all the newbies, if any, come to play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aeva Posted April 27, 2009 Report Share Posted April 27, 2009 I think something should be done for the people who die and lose equipment that the other person could not touch because they sacrificed it all. For example: A DK kills a Pally and full loots' date=' but drops all the mithril because he cannot touch it. Then he sacrifices it so the Pally has to waste his time to gather all the armor again. IMO it should be changed so that if you cannot touch the armor at all then you should not be able to grab it from the corpse. Just another suggestion I'm throwing out there for all the newbies, if any, come to play.[/quote'] this would even further lower the chances of ultra-awesome-rare-unique pieces of eq changing hands, i would think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pali Posted April 27, 2009 Report Share Posted April 27, 2009 this would even further lower the chances of ultra-awesome-rare-unique pieces of eq changing hands' date=' i would think.[/quote'] Agreed, considering how much of it is align-specific. EDIT: On the flipside, if there's still an EQ rework in progress, implementing this could grant a lot more value to align-specific eq without being too strong. Lots of work though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ali_gmud Posted April 27, 2009 Report Share Posted April 27, 2009 Any untouchable item from a certain, race/alignment shouldn't leave the corpse, therefore shouldn't be able to be destroyed IMO duno if that will fly far Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudder Posted April 27, 2009 Report Share Posted April 27, 2009 It used to be the case that if it would zap you, then you were unable to take it out of a container/corpse. For some reason it was changed back. *shrug* This was like 1.0 or something. When Viri was still in charge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cephirus Posted April 27, 2009 Report Share Posted April 27, 2009 It used to be the case that if it would zap you, then you were unable to take it out of a container/corpse. For some reason it was changed back. *shrug* This was like 1.0 or something. When Viri was still in charge. Yeah, but when you touched it, it would zap you and drop on the ground. You could still sac it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudder Posted April 27, 2009 Report Share Posted April 27, 2009 Yeah' date=' but when you touched it, it would zap you and drop on the ground. You could still sac it.[/quote'] No that is how it is now. I am saying there was a change to make it so you couldn't actually TAKE it from the corpse or container. It would say, "You cannot safely touch ." or something similar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reccum Posted April 27, 2009 Report Share Posted April 27, 2009 Seems alot of problems stem from EQ. Why do people rage delete? "I got killed and fulled" Why do newbies quit? "I got killed and fulled" "I don't know where to get competitive EQ" Why do people kill others? "Cuz they are my align enemy, my cabal enemy, and cuz they had EQ I wanted" Why do players want a better purge system? "So EQ is more accesible." I'm sure any of you could add more of these. I have heard many people refer to this EQ balancing project in a lot of posts. What's the deal with it? Is it happening? Is there any chance the Imms will ever implement a way for people to get right back into action after a death that is NOT life insurance? Will be see cabal selling full class specific nonrare sets for CP's? Will we se city vendors selling full class specific nonrare sets for Gold? Will wee see another EQ clan that takes initiative and provides the mud with an EQ rendering service? At the very least let's try it out. I'd like to see what the new complaints will sound like once people stop b****ing about not having EQ. At lest then newbies wont feel so naked and helpless, and those in Cabal Warfare will stay and fight whatever the odds cuz they know they can be back on their feet right after a death. While on the topic of EQ, let's please change life insurance. It is kinda unbalanced already as some Cabals get easer CP's than others, also it makes thieves in Cabals really nasty since steal can bypass this. Or if the thief buy LI then steals your crap and you kill him, he still keeps it all. Maybe make LI only applicable to cabal EQ, OR make it so you have to insure each individual item. Thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samag08 Posted April 28, 2009 Report Share Posted April 28, 2009 Reccum just gave me an idea. I have always though cabal equipment is great but underutilized. Most likely due to its high cost of CPs. I propose one of the two then: 1. Cabal equipment either be substantially lowered in cost. Or 2. Life-Insurance ONLY affects cabal equipment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudder Posted April 28, 2009 Report Share Posted April 28, 2009 That would be an awful change. Many classes can't even make use of cabal eq. If there were any change to LI, it would have to be lowered in cost because it's damn expensive! One normal change could be: When you die only worn eq is covered. Losing all consumables and anything in inventory. Or When you die it only insures 6(random) items that are worn. I will also state that I am against any Life Insurance changes. EDIT: Sorry, I shouldn't say awful change. I just disagree with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Totenkopf- Posted April 28, 2009 Report Share Posted April 28, 2009 IMHO, remove life insurance. People in this game don't fear dying, they fear losing their eq. Life insurance completely cheats any risk from the game. I've never used it. Ever.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samag08 Posted April 28, 2009 Report Share Posted April 28, 2009 I agree with Tot. I've never used it, and do not see the point. I think it's only real purpose is to preserve the status of the ultra premium sets that some chars can build up. That is where I see the most frustration with it also. I do like the random selection idea Mudder. Maybe something can be expanded on there. And I still would like to see cabal eq be cheaper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aulian Posted April 28, 2009 Report Share Posted April 28, 2009 I think something should be done for the people who die and lose equipment that the other person could not touch because they sacrificed it all. For example: A DK kills a Pally and full loots' date=' but drops all the mithril because he cannot touch it. Then he sacrifices it so the Pally has to waste his time to gather all the armor again. IMO it should be changed so that if you cannot touch the armor at all then you should not be able to grab it from the corpse. Just another suggestion I'm throwing out there for all the newbies, if any, come to play.[/quote'] This would be incredibly unbalanced. Some of the most advanced weapons and amror in the game cannot be touched by one side of the align, removing these items is often paramount to survival and this change wouldnt work at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pali Posted April 28, 2009 Report Share Posted April 28, 2009 IMHO' date=' remove life insurance. People in this game don't fear dying, they fear losing their eq. Life insurance completely cheats any risk from the game. I've never used it. Ever..[/quote'] The few times I did use it back in 1.0 I never died and it'd run out having been a waste of CPs. Never used it since. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archbishop Monk Posted April 28, 2009 Report Share Posted April 28, 2009 One thing. Just wondering on how malforms and certain qclass/qrace things will apply to this change? Will killing a SC have a lesser impact than killing a HC? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cephirus Posted April 29, 2009 Report Share Posted April 29, 2009 No that is how it is now. I am saying there was a change to make it so you couldn't actually TAKE it from the corpse or container. It would say' date=' "You cannot safely touch ." or something similar.[/quote'] Ok, back on AR you could take it, you just could not use it/wear it, Viri changed it so you could not pick it up even. The reason for this, is because you would have evils that would hoard the goods rares and vice-a-versa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.