0 registered
and 14 anonymous users online.
|
|
|
#856 - 12/15/07 12:58 PM
Re: Pwipe Vote: Please vote on the options below
[Re: Kim]
|
Gabe
stranger
Registered: 10/14/07
Posts: 18
|
People already have the option of doing things besides xping. Nobody is forced to xp (using xp as a verb here). It sounds like you're in favor of forcing people to not xp, via the agency of the limiting buffer. At this time, i'm not in favor of limiting options.
In regard to the main point above, i'm hearing that, in short, you don't want people to be able to level as fast as they are able to right now. I don't see high levels as a problem... levels are more-or-less relative anyway, but *if* that opinion is shared by administration, there seems to be a simple solution to slow down levelling while making minimal changes within the game: simply double or triple the base xp required to level. Existing characters get a same-race, same-guild reincarn, and wind up at a lower level. That is... if high levels are really seen as a problem. I don't see them as a problem beyond lack of challenging content, as i said before.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#858 - 12/15/07 01:06 PM
Re: Pwipe Vote: Please vote on the options below
[Re: sabu]
|
Kim
enthusiast
Registered: 10/11/07
Posts: 204
Loc: Europe
|
"People already have the option of doing things besides xping. Nobody is forced to xp (using xp as a verb here)."
I never said so, did I?
" I don't see high levels as a problem... levels are more-or-less relative anyway, but *if* that opinion is shared by administration, there seems to be a simple solution to slow down levelling while making minimal changes within the game: simply double or triple the base xp required to level. "
Way to completely ignore the MAIN point of some guilds gaining tripple the XP of others, or double.
And that you want levels to be fast and easy is your view. I can't honestly say I respect it, but then again, I do want a bit of a challenge... Not just, create char and be highmortal in a week or two.
"I would rather see the exp tables changed per guild. Or maybe certain guilds would get a negative modifier."
Yes, that would work to balance out XP, I guess.
Of course, that would also quite need a pwipe, unless the option was to make fighter or paladin combat XP the baseline.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#867 - 12/15/07 03:36 PM
Re: Pwipe Vote: Please vote on the options below
[Re: Llygoden]
|
Cerberus
addict
Registered: 11/28/07
Posts: 608
Loc: Arlee, MT, USA
|
Since we've gotten into a lot of back and forth about a very few number of ideas, I'm going to try and succinctly state what the arguments for and against a pwipe thus far have been.
Everyone seems to be in agreement with this statement:
Pwipe requires a lot of change to be justified.
Some things that have been stated as justifications warranting a pwipe include:- xp rates unified
- crafter guild implemented
- enchanter/tinker guild changed/removed
- buffer return
The implication here is that if the way players interact with the system in terms of experience gain is significantly altered there should be a reset of players in order to establish a baseline for all players to begin experience gain again. By this reasoning, a baseline is only important once it has been established that there is an accepted system of advancement from baseline to any given point.
The arguments against a pwipe include that those who play enough to advance in an untimely fashion will advance faster than others anyway, returning Darke to the unhappy-but-familiar state of equilibrium it currently inhabits. This reasoning begs the question "What is an acceptable rate of ascent?" The administration needs player input on this topic to make any reasonable estimate, as it is the players who spend the most time playing the game.
To all of those who are against a pwipe currently: Would you be amicable to a pwipe AFTER a new rate of xp advancement has been established AND tested AND implemented along with any other major changes, just so they can be experienced for a while? Or is there something intrisically flawed about resetting the playing field period?
If there is something that leaves a bad taste in your mouth about the word pwipe alone, regardless of circumstances, what is that something? Is it that time and effort will be lost, or that players who have leveled in obsolete systems are so few that they make no difference to the playerbase on the whole, or that drastic change isn't what's needed if we have a steady influx of newness? Or something else entirely?
This topic is extremely helpful to us as we work toward making Darke a better place - thank you all for keeping the fires burning.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#869 - 12/15/07 04:08 PM
Re: Pwipe Vote: Please vote on the options below
[Re: Cerberus]
|
Minstrel
journeyman
Registered: 12/14/07
Posts: 90
|
Nice summation, Harold.
To all of those who are against a pwipe currently: Would you be amicable to a pwipe AFTER a new rate of xp advancement has been established AND tested AND implemented along with any other major changes, just so they can be experienced for a while?
This is my position exactly. If a proper overhaul of guild balance is done, please, pwipe away and let's begin the healing.
But short of that, and short of current guilds being deprecated, I don't think there's a compelling reason for a pwipe. A pwipe IS a drastic step, I think. Even though I've cided large characters, it was by choice. Deleting the work of others forcibly can be necessary but should be regarded as a last resort, not a first resort for the sake of "shaking things up."
Right now, I don't think there's anything that warrants a pwipe. Enchanters/tinkers being removed and replaced (not an idea I favour, but that's a different topic) or xp rates changed on a large scale would be compelling, but right now at least, neither seems hugely likely.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#870 - 12/15/07 06:51 PM
Re: Pwipe Vote: Please vote on the options below
[Re: Minstrel]
|
carmy
member
Registered: 10/14/07
Posts: 164
Loc: South Korea
|
As it is, this MUD isn't really designed from a player's standpoint to be a high-end game in the least, but at the same time, there is no content for players that aren't high-end... Does that even make sense, it doesn't make sense as I say it, but it seems to be the reality. It seems like, if you're not HM, there's very little you can do, if you are HM, you run out of things to do other than level some more. I sincerely feel that if there is a limit to exp gain, that in some way would equalize guilds, but the time input by players was awarded with equal gain in the end would be a great change. But, if we're doing this, one must realize that there needs to be some mid level content other than hack and slash.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
|
83 Members
33 Forums
335 Topics
2543 Posts
Max Online: 277 @ 01/07/23 02:30 AM
|
|
|
