Cerberus
|
| (addict) |
| 04/05/08 01:08 PM |
|
Removals
|
Darke's storied history of removals is long, but we rarely have any documentation on why they happen. I'm sure everyone's experienced at least a little of this, since I don't believe any guild has escaped the chopping block in the last 10 years, but my question is of everlastings.
What was the reason stated for everlastings being replaced with nethergeists?
| Muod |
| (member) |
| 04/05/08 01:36 PM |
|
|
Re: Removals
|
Well I know nethers were put in a couple years after evers were removed to fill in a high level pet gap. They do not hold a stone to evers however, in my view dracos are better then nethers. Personally I'm for reintroducing Evers as they are good but take a lot of work to make.
| carmy |
| (member) |
| 04/06/08 05:49 PM |
|
Re: Removals
|
If evers are put in, maybe Risla's Freedom could be put back in with a little balance added.
| Muod |
| (member) |
| 04/06/08 06:16 PM |
|
|
|
Re: Removals
|
I have to agree with that, maybe just make it not effect things in stalker realm with instadeath but massive damage? since i think it was removed due to ability to easily kill things there.
|
Cerberus
|
| (addict) |
| 04/06/08 09:04 PM |
|
|
|
Re: Removals
|
I believe Risla's Freedom, like Power Word, Kill, was removed because Darke does not support instant-kill spells. At least, that was the sentiment I recall, and it's one I happen to agree with.
| carmy |
| (member) |
| 04/06/08 11:49 PM |
|
Re: Removals
|
As it stands, Risla's Freedom was the only spell that clerics had that were 'cleric-like'. Clerics have nothing that identify them as a guild, they are simply a compilation of relatively crappy spells from other guilds, that, when you reach a certain level are actually quite decent.
Risla's freedom is a spell that everyone knows was way too powerful, but if everlastings are anything like what was in Mog's castle before, I think they're also very powerful. Risla's freedom is a spell that could have been reworked in such a way as to not affect players first off, and secondly, so that it wouldn't instantly kill anything. It could sever limbs, cause damage over time, it could be a slightly stronger harm spell for undead only. I could think of many ideas for it, but removing it completely was a band-aid solution.
If evers are put back in, I don't see why clerics shouldn't get something that they can identify with, and also something to allow them a chance agains evers.
| Charon |
| (enthusiast) |
| 04/07/08 10:04 AM |
|
|
Re: Removals
|
IIRC holy weapons did a nice number on evers.
Also at the time of "mog's castle" which btw was a really stupid thing, the power level of the mud was a bit lower in terms of overall level, weapon ability, upgraded armour..etc
I don't think they would be as good as people remember.
| carmy |
| (member) |
| 04/08/08 12:36 AM |
|
Re: Removals
|
My cleric was like 50+ overall and I had perfect armour at the time and a plasma PK weapon. The only way I could touch them was pwk undead. Risla's wrath didn't even touch them at all.
I also would never say Mog's castle was a good idea
| Charon |
| (enthusiast) |
| 04/08/08 05:20 AM |
|
|
|
Re: Removals
|
except now armour is even better and locks are 70% higher for starters.
I don't think people realize how significant the extra lock activation is. It used to be. A typical "pk" weapon was 149 wield, however over 50 of that was TW. We're basically talking weapons with 165% wield dedicated to WC intead of 99%.
That is sortof like having 1.6 of the older weapons. Of course for different guilds this means different things but I'm talking guilds without blade spells.
| Charon |
| (enthusiast) |
| 04/08/08 05:31 AM |
|
|
|
Re: Removals
|
Of course, we COULD always adjust them if they are too buff.
|
Cerberus
|
| (addict) |
| 04/08/08 09:23 AM |
|
|
|
Re: Removals
|
Guild balance issues are still in the distant future, but it's wonderful having these conversations start early. I'm against reinstatement of instant-removal spells of any kind, and especially against the sorts that destroy pets, armour, weapons, and anything players spend many real hours making.
I think of it this way, but maybe you disagree - if you spend 3 hours to make a tinkered breastplate with full runes, and an elementalist comes along with a "rust" spell to destroy it, that spell should take 3 hours minimum to cause its destruction. Since there is no viable way to make a destructive spell that is both useful and takes 3 hours to complete (silent distance spells not withstanding) the concept is creative space that is best left untapped.
While 10 seconds of combat is sometimes enough to cause the death of pets that take 3 hours real time to make, that's more of an issue with the viability of pets versus players than combat's ability to kill them. So back on the topic of everlastings, I really enjoyed the flavor of these. I'm for seeing them again in some capacity or another.
| Minstrel |
| (journeyman) |
| 04/08/08 03:40 PM |
|
|
Re: Removals
|
Originally Posted By: Harold
So back on the topic of everlastings, I really enjoyed the flavor of these.
You've tasted them? Undead flesh is something even French cuisine wouldn't touch...
|
Cerberus
|
| (addict) |
| 04/08/08 04:30 PM |
|
|
|
Re: Removals
|
nod. They taste a lot like something a necromancer would make. Taking the usually unpalatable skeleton, zombie, ghoul, ghast, and vampire, seasoning with a healthy dose of death knight, lich, and demilich, then mixing them with the renouned herb dracolich you come up with a doughy everlasting body in just two hours! A mere eight hours of baking later and there's a tasty everlasting ready to serve to friends and enemies alike.
Yes, flavor is important, and everlastings went a good way toward that end for me. Perhaps I'm biased though.
| Minstrel |
| (journeyman) |
| 04/08/08 04:43 PM |
|
|
|
Re: Removals
|
Originally Posted By: Harold
Yes, flavor is important, and everlastings went a good way toward that end for me.
I agree. In fact, I think pets would be a good way to add flavour to the game, except that they're so weak in relation to players. Dragons, undead or otherwise, should be something of an obstacle.
As for necromancers, being a pet guild, I think they aren't as interesting as they could be. Basically, all their pets are nothing more then pre-requisites for bigger pets. There is some slight use for liches and demiliches, but largely, once necromancers get dracoliches and nethergeists, that's all they'll want to make. There's no further point to making smaller pets like vampires or ghasts.
It would be interesting if different pets had different powers. Not necessarily great combat powers, but perhaps one type of undead could carry things, another type of undead could allow its owner to fly with it (think mounted steed in terms of image, even if there's no literal mounts in Darke), etc.
Of course, I'd also like enchanter pets (especially dragon engines) to be overhauled, too. I think pets in general are underutilized by the game. All they are mostly good for is bad combat, lending mana or carrying things. That's a fairly small variety of use.
|
Cerberus
|
| (addict) |
| 04/08/08 04:50 PM |
|
|
|
Re: Removals
|
Sounds like a new thread to me. Ideas are always welcome - who's applying to be a wizard next?
|
Cerberus
|
| (addict) |
| 05/20/08 12:53 PM |
|
|
|
Re: Removals
|
A long, long time ago... in a galaxy far away... we had guild stat modifiers. This meant that when you joined any guild you gained and/or lost stats based on that guild's preferred stats (from the help file). While I'm not really a fan of flat modifiers like this, the idea strikes me as one that could have been done really well.
To outline: If every Xth level gained there was a chance of raising and/or lowering your stats, based on the presumed actions of your guild it would simulate aging to some degree. So for instance, if it were determined that tinkers use dexterity and strength primarily to the detriment of reactions and intelligence a tinker gaining X levels would have a chance to gain some small amount of strength and/or dexterity, and the same chance of losing some small amount of reactions and/or intelligence.
Just a random thought based on a mighty old system that no longer exists. I think it might be interesting and enjoyable. Anyone have any thoughts on it?
| Kim |
| (enthusiast) |
| 05/20/08 02:24 PM |
|
|
Re: Removals
|
Hmmm.. With something like stats, having permanent modifiers be random I am not sure I like. Even less so about the loss. To just use your example as an example: Losing reactions could be quite detrimental to a tinker that likes fighting, and not idling. How about... Every 8 S-levels, a tinker get either a str or a dex increase. Keeps a randomness to it, but assures that at level 40s, all tinkers have gained as many stat points overall. Losing stat points I quite vehemently disagree with
Getting slightly sidetracked.. What about every X levels, a tinker gets tinker points, which can be used for whatever. Either for dex/str, at the creation cost, or some other tiny abilities of varying cost. Preferably not very powerful abilities, but some small yet still neat things.
|
Cerberus
|
| (addict) |
| 05/20/08 03:27 PM |
|
|
|
Re: Removals
|
Without loss as well as gains there's no balance. That inherantly improves the higher levels over lower levels further than the abilities they train, and I wouldn't agree with moving in that direction.
The point about what stats are lost is important; however, I think an amicable tie could be found. In the instance of tinkers, if X dexterity is gained, X intelligence is lost. If X strength is gained, X reactions is lost. So we're clear as to what I'm thinking, X should be 0, 1, 2, or at the high end, 3. Assuming 10 levels per check for loss, at level 60 overall you could've lost nearly 18 to one stat (at the very most, assuming the same stats are modified and the maximum change is given) and gained the same 18 to some other stat. I don't think that would border on "detrimental" personally, but maybe the neat factor is not worth the potential danger for players bent on optimized play.
| Minstrel |
| (journeyman) |
| 05/21/08 12:46 AM |
|
|
|
Re: Removals
|
Originally Posted By: Harold
maybe the neat factor is not worth the potential danger for players bent on optimized play.
I'm not convinced that there is a "neat" factor. It seems arbitrary and emphasizing "guild concept" over individual character concept. The problem with that is not everyone has the same gulld concept. If the coder in charge of this has the concept that tinkers are strong, dumb and ponderous, the stat gain/loss will be detrimental to someone who wants to play a quick, smart elven tinker (an artisan, rather than a big hammerer), for example.
I think that's quite detrimental to a game where personal concept for character is basically the primary fun.
|
Cerberus
|
| (addict) |
| 05/27/08 10:10 AM |
|
|
|
Re: Removals
|
Why were elemental instabilities removed? I remember hating these fully as a low level player, and in the attacker-is-invincible-and-does-auto-crits-not-protected-by-armour era to boot. However, they were one of the cooler concepts elementalists had by my account. Maybe they seemed more in the realm of the Chaotic-Lord, but I think with some fine-tuning elemental instabilities could come back. Maybe as low level uncontrolable pets that do low level crits until they explode, some random time later?
| Muod |
| (member) |
| 05/27/08 04:28 PM |
|
|
|
Re: Removals
|
removed to abuse, i think some elem got pissed and well made akkad a death trap. multikillings all around. monks have a spell that makes a low level uncontrollable pet that wanders around for a while then blows up.
| Charon |
| (enthusiast) |
| 05/28/08 07:05 AM |
|
|
|
Re: Removals
|
I can recall two issues.
1. People were using them to kill shopkeepers after they were made immune to regular attacks. I'm pretty sure this doesn't work anymore though.
2. The massive killings in akkad.
I think the pbase is mature enough to handle a situation like that by itself however.
|
Cerberus
|
| (addict) |
| 06/21/08 10:41 AM |
|
|
|
Re: Removals
|
Why were pets summoned through holy crits removed? They were lousy pets, and they cluttered up places, but they were kinda fun... sorta. Not that I miss them, but does anyone remember why they're gone?
| Muod |
| (member) |
| 06/21/08 12:45 PM |
|
|
|
Re: Removals
|
they were removed when all pet summons were removed, i believe people abused them by getting say 40 and kill perm pets quickly that way
| Charon |
| (enthusiast) |
| 06/23/08 01:46 PM |
|
|
|
Re: Removals
|
I think the only ones that are still in are infernal. But since it's hard to get infernal crits (unless you spam fop a bit) it doesn't happen very often.
|
Cerberus
|
| (addict) |
| 12/05/08 06:54 PM |
|
|
|
Re: Removals
|
Originally Posted By: Byakko
Finally, this is _yet another_ example of why the xp buffers should not have been removed. Now you have to deal with the existence of characters who are way higher than they should be. (the same way removing the buffer destroyed the balance of power in the thief guild) As yet, I have not seen any valid arguments for their removal, apart from pandering to players who like to power-level far beyond the intended rate.
| Muod |
| (member) |
| 12/05/08 07:12 PM |
|
|
|
Re: Removals
|
personally i am for reinstating buffers but if they do get back we would need a pwipe. It wouldn't be fair or balanced at all if there wasn't a pwipe.
| carmy |
| (member) |
| 12/05/08 09:18 PM |
|
Re: Removals
|
I don't want to sound particularly pessimistic, or that I'm for the removal of buffers, but one thing to consider is that people are used to this system now. When you reinstate buffers, many players are going to find the game extremely slow paced again and that may affect their willingness to play. Maybe I'm wrong, but something like this happened when we had WAR up and running, there weren't many people who came back to playing just regular Darke (yes, I realize there were other factors too). If buffers are put back in, making the lower levels slightly easier might not be a terrible idea, since simply cycling 5 spells every so often isn't exactly enjoyable, or running to kill 3 goblins, sit for 2 minutes, run and kill more goblins, sit...
| Lorthag |
| (stranger) |
| 12/31/08 09:49 PM |
|
Re: Removals
|
Exp Buffers made the game horridly slow at mid levels, and never even bothered higher levels because of not having that many high level areas.
FPS stinks, but that is just my opinion. IT SHOULD go up with levels. Just like HPS and MPS do. Endurance is something trained, it should not be a born stat. No one is born with high endurance. They are born with more intelligence, beauty, strength.
Lorthag
|
Cerberus
|
| (addict) |
| 01/02/09 08:15 AM |
|
|
|
Re: Removals
|
I've always thought that buffers should've been to choke ultra-high levels down, and not really bother low/mid level players. The rationale I've used to get to this point is that as a child you can absorb information at a fantastic rate and aging reduces this capacity.
Not sure this is the right thread for an FP discussion since they're not removed.