mya Posted April 29, 2009 Report Share Posted April 29, 2009 I remember a very old post of someone complaining that someone was hording the Mithril Tide. And that it was unfair because it was the bane of Drows.... Funny times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tassinvegeta Posted April 29, 2009 Report Share Posted April 29, 2009 I hate it that dwarves can hold water weapons and can hoard that tempest trident. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aulian Posted April 30, 2009 Report Share Posted April 30, 2009 or illithids can hold the lance of imbalance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malchaeius Posted April 30, 2009 Report Share Posted April 30, 2009 We got momentarily side tracked with other projects. However: ************************** ************************** *** Demon Stamp of Approval *** ************************** ************************** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aulian Posted April 30, 2009 Report Share Posted April 30, 2009 We got momentarily side tracked with other projects. However: ************************** ************************** *** Demon Stamp of Approval *** ************************** ************************** What does that mean? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudder Posted April 30, 2009 Report Share Posted April 30, 2009 It means we will be implementing the two tiered PK system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aulian Posted April 30, 2009 Report Share Posted April 30, 2009 Just one thing... Some classes can achieve huge power with only a couple of rares. Aka - invoker with a fully charged staff. They would only need a few items that boost hp and mana, and I can think of MANY that are not rare, and still be completely formiddable? aka - well played shaman I've seen these take people down with a shield and a mace before. not having more then 10 rares wont be a problem, just give them one "soul reavers fangs" or even "ring of ultimate evil" and they will be beastly. Added Idea: Maybe we should also limit the LEVEL of the item that they can have also... Some of the most top end rares are over level 50 so maybe allow them only to carry rares under level 53 or something? It'd have to be checked but I can imagine this helping somewhat. cause I can imagine an evil invoker with ultimate evil, sphere of annihilation, spell absorp, nimbus, , iggies bracelets and rings (9 rares total) and being a complete maniac to the pbase. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mmm Coffee Posted April 30, 2009 Report Share Posted April 30, 2009 I'm highly opposed to this change...and in fact, I think it will have the reverse effect on player retention for older players. I'd rather see an entirely different IP:port used for the non-HC players call it Princess Lands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudder Posted April 30, 2009 Report Share Posted April 30, 2009 I'm pretty sure if we see players wrecking the pbase they will automatically be moved into the HC category. Remember, softcore is not for experienced PKers. It is to help unexperienced ones learn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raargant Posted April 30, 2009 Author Report Share Posted April 30, 2009 Just one thing... Some classes can achieve huge power with only a couple of rares. Aka - invoker with a fully charged staff. They would only need a few items that boost hp and mana, and I can think of MANY that are not rare, and still be completely formiddable? aka - well played shaman I've seen these take people down with a shield and a mace before. not having more then 10 rares wont be a problem, just give them one "soul reavers fangs" or even "ring of ultimate evil" and they will be beastly. Added Idea: Maybe we should also limit the LEVEL of the item that they can have also... Some of the most top end rares are over level 50 so maybe allow them only to carry rares under level 53 or something? It'd have to be checked but I can imagine this helping somewhat. cause I can imagine an evil invoker with ultimate evil, sphere of annihilation, spell absorp, nimbus, , iggies bracelets and rings (9 rares total) and being a complete maniac to the pbase. They would be more of a complete maniac as an HC. For more experienced/competitive players, there really is not much point to going SC, because despite however good they do, they still won't get the better cabal advancement, or be able to meaningfully loot the decked HC they kill, etc. etc. Basically, they would have to put in more effort for less reward, with the main benefit being that they 'bounce back' from being PK'd more quickly. The system is very beneficial for those who suck, and not very beneficial for those who rock. Remember, SC is not supposed to be completely uncompetitive or totally gimped. They're just a 'tamer', 'gentler' PK level, for people who like the game that way. Also, invokers and what not will be more limited in their number of rares than, say, warriors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raargant Posted April 30, 2009 Author Report Share Posted April 30, 2009 Help me think of sexier names for 'standard' and 'hardcore', all. What do you think of calling the divisions, 'normal' (standard) and 'ruthless' (hardcore)? With the RP of it being that people who are 'ruthless' who ask little protection and show little mercy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudder Posted April 30, 2009 Report Share Posted April 30, 2009 I am against softcore ever being called normal. It makes our MUD all of a sudden a sissy MUD with options to be a full PK MUD. Newbie Mode and Normal Mode would be better, but obviously still not sexy. I'll give it some more thought. EDIT: With this change, what if we cut the lives of the HC people in 1/2 ? People live so long these days, no one even condeaths. We've gotten too good at survival. Normally this change would be bad because it would really hurt newbies. But this two tiered system easily picks the newbies out from the others so we can add this relatively needed change. You can still do a con-quest if you want to go past 30 lives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raargant Posted April 30, 2009 Author Report Share Posted April 30, 2009 I am against softcore ever being called normal. It makes our MUD all of a sudden a sissy MUD with options to be a full PK MUD. Newbie Mode and Normal Mode would be better, but obviously still not sexy. I'll give it some more thought. How about 'civilian' and 'ruthless'? Although, just as a reminder, This is an alternate tier, NOT a feeder tier or a newbie tier. If there are players who are not interested in ever being 'hardcore', then they can stay in 'standard' for their characters for as long as they want. The reason why is listed below: As I mentioned in a post some time ago, this is not meant to be an 'inferior' tier, but an 'alternate' tier in addition to being a 'newbie' tier. Let me postulate a hypothetical person, who may never be interested in multikilling and full-loots, but who otherwise enjoys this MUD. However, these two often-complained about issues are killing his or her enjoyment of this MUD, and eventually drives said person to leave. Here is my question. Under the current situation, his choices are to either 'suck it up'/'harden up', or to leave. He isn't interested in the degree of hardcore, and so he leaves. Is this beneficial to the MUD? Did he bring so little to the MUD that his leaving would not be a detriment? Is he really so unimportant that we should not address his concerns and ameliorate the issues which are ruining his fun? My answer to all of these questions is a resounding, 'no'. That type of player does bring value, richness, and depth to the MUD even if he doesn't enjoy the 'hardcore'ness of the PK aspect, and I want to create a system where both he, and more 'hardcore' players, both can by and large enjoy the game in the style which they prefer. Such a system is not credible if it totally excludes them from caballed life, which represents such a large part of the life of the average character at level 50. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudder Posted April 30, 2009 Report Share Posted April 30, 2009 I suppose at char creation we could simply ask. "There are those who are more ruthless than most. As such they are able to attain the greatest heights of power. Would you consider yourself ruthless? (Y/N)" Then when you answer yes or no you are given a helpfile on what it means. "You do not lack mercy and because of this you will be barred from the heights of control in organizations. To lead one must be able to do anything necessary. This means you cannot proceed past (V) in any Cabal. Blah blah blah" This would not directly name the softcore path at all. Simply referring to the others as ruthless or HC. But ruthless is better since it is already an RP term that can be told to others. I still resist calling SC normal because I'm a cranky old man that is resisting change. So not naming it would keep cranky old men happy but still not discourage others from selecting SC. EDIT: We could simply call it Merciful and Ruthless I guess. Though it is maybe too similar to the perk name. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raargant Posted April 30, 2009 Author Report Share Posted April 30, 2009 I like it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudder Posted April 30, 2009 Report Share Posted April 30, 2009 What about the only 30 lives for Ruthless suggestion? Also, since we have an EQ rebalance operation going, this tiered system would quite possibly change things. Since rare items would have to be better than non-rare by an amount that makes being Ruthless more worth it. I'm not sure what the philosophy is during the eq rebalance though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reccum Posted April 30, 2009 Report Share Posted April 30, 2009 Are you asking the player if they are ruthless or is this a character trait? Either way, I'm not sure Ruthless is the best word.... It comes down to one's taste for PK intensity and risk factor. Since FL is an enforced RP/PK mud why not let that be the choice? RPer or PKer - Like Yin and Yang each contains the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samag08 Posted April 30, 2009 Report Share Posted April 30, 2009 For hard : Merciless, Brutal, Hostile, Unsympathetic, Difficult modes For easy : Merciful, Mild, Elementary, Comfortable, Moderate modes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudder Posted April 30, 2009 Report Share Posted April 30, 2009 We already have two modes. Any more and it just complicates an otherwise simple system. You are asking the player. Not the character. It will be at char creation, all questions are directed at the player. It simply has an RPish feel to it for obvious reasons. You don't ask them for RP or PK because this MUD is both RP/PK enforced. Not one or the other. EVERYONE should be RPing. And the PK aspect of it is player enforced, since we WILL come looking for you no matter what. EDIT: Otherwise you will just get tons of silent PKers saying, "Well hell, I thought I didn't have to RP? I chose PK, not stupid RP!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twinblades713 Posted April 30, 2009 Report Share Posted April 30, 2009 I hate roleplaying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samag08 Posted April 30, 2009 Report Share Posted April 30, 2009 Help me think of sexier names for 'standard' and 'hardcore'' date=' all. What do you think of calling the divisions, 'normal' (standard) and 'ruthless' (hardcore)? With the RP of it being that people who are 'ruthless' who ask little protection and show little mercy.[/quote'] Was just in response Mudder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ex-D&Der Posted April 30, 2009 Report Share Posted April 30, 2009 The system is very beneficial for those who suck' date=' and not very beneficial for those who rock.[/quote'] Why not just use those names for the two tiers? "Those who Suck" and "Those who Rock"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a-guitarist Posted April 30, 2009 Report Share Posted April 30, 2009 "Mommy Hugged Them Too Much" and "Internet Sex Studs"? unless it's celerity, then, "We're not sure she really is a girl... but who are we kidding? We'd chance it" a-g Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iusedtobesomebody Posted April 30, 2009 Report Share Posted April 30, 2009 "New school" vs. "Old school"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malchaeius Posted April 30, 2009 Report Share Posted April 30, 2009 Since it will appear on the character creation screen, I am partial to: Novice/Apprentice and Standard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.