Genesis Forums

For those of you who are attempting to stick up for the need of having 4 Runies I want an unedited log of your racks right now, then see a log of how many "Active" members are in your guild followed by the amount of times 3/4 of that eq has been removed from the rack since it was placed in there.

Not that I'm going to complain about it I can have 10 times more fun in game with items that everyone seems to believe sucks, but you cant tell me you need half of that crap. I've seen some of your racks, it gets a little bit silly and no true hoarder will ever admit they are one.

Personally other then the fact that it's yet another big thing to code, I don't see why Genesis doesn't just take a few pages from Diablo's book. The system works great and people have gone nuts over it since Diablo 2 came out. Yes yes this isn't Diablo this is Genesis... blah blah blah. Their system is better and ours has obvious problems.

For those who have no idea what Diablo is or how their system works...

*All items would become saving
*Level requirements introduced
*Set and random attributes on items

This allows for those who wish to eq hunt to be able to continue to do so attempting to get the best Runie, allows for the tons of unused items to finally make their comeback and for those who don't have time to eq hunt to be able to hop on and actually play without the need to use substandard eq at higher levels.

Other then the amount of work that would be needed to make the change, I see it as nothing but a plus. But then again I am biased as hell so...

gorboth wrote:[*]Removing the item limit on all items in the game.

I am all for removing the item limit. It seems to me that if you go to the trouble of killing an upper echelon NPC, you should get it's gear. That said, this would currently introduce a game-distorting amount of gear inflation, so a correction for that would need to be introduced...

I think I'd most like to see that addressed by introducing a framework that creates a point total for each magical item, tracking the state of each instance and then makes adjustments to things like potency, condition and NPC respawn when that item crosses it's various over-representation plateaus.

In this way, too many FBB's could mean that the nazgul doesn't respawn, while too many runies makes them all more fragile, and each gigantic steel makes them all progressively heavier or some such.

With a point system, hoarding against enemies could be more difficult, because racked versions would count less than carried, which in turn would count less than those recently used. It could also be tuned such that using something you helped gather would count less or using something "overpowered" for your size would count more.

It also could be done such that any non-configured magical item could receive an additional random penalty at each plateau (and perhaps lose it when the population drops back down), or follow a lore implied progression if a wizard so chooses.

In that case... Can I have the last GSB?

strider wrote:

gorboth wrote:[*]Removing the item limit on all items in the game.

I am all for removing the item limit. It seems to me that if you go to the trouble of killing an upper echelon NPC, you should get it's gear. That said, this would currently introduce a game-distorting amount of gear inflation, so a correction for that would need to be introduced...

I think I'd most like to see that addressed by introducing a framework that creates a point total for each magical item, tracking the state of each instance and then makes adjustments to things like potency, condition and NPC respawn when that item crosses it's various over-representation plateaus.

In this way, too many FBB's could mean that the nazgul doesn't respawn, while too many runies makes them all more fragile, and each gigantic steel makes them all progressively heavier or some such.

With a point system, hoarding against enemies could be more difficult, because racked versions would count less than carried, which in turn would count less than those recently used. It could also be tuned such that using something you helped gather would count less or using something "overpowered" for your size would count more.

It also could be done such that any non-configured magical item could receive an additional random penalty at each plateau (and perhaps lose it when the population drops back down), or follow a lore implied progression if a wizard so chooses.

At start I really liked your idea. But on second thought it will make elite EQ even less useful:
People will hoard runies/gigantics/etc. to make existing instances worse. So you will see a lot of Neidars hunting swords to make BDA to use worse EQ.

Or I didn't understand your idea.

zar wrote:So you will see a lot of Neidars hunting swords to make BDA to use worse EQ.

Or I didn't understand your idea.

do you see it now?

Laurel wrote:

zar wrote:So you will see a lot of Neidars hunting swords to make BDA to use worse EQ.

Or I didn't understand your idea.

do you see it now?

Considering the amount of swords that usually rot in the neidar racks... one can only specilate why they ninja them all

Because they can, I presume.

zar wrote:

strider wrote:

gorboth wrote:[*]Removing the item limit on all items in the game.

I am all for removing the item limit. [...] With a point system, hoarding against enemies could be more difficult, because racked versions would count less than carried, which in turn would count less than those recently used. It could also be tuned such that using something you helped gather would count less or using something "overpowered" for your size would count more.

At start I really liked your idea. But on second thought it will make elite EQ even less useful:
People will hoard runies/gigantics/etc. to make existing instances worse. So you will see a lot of Neidars hunting swords to make BDA to use worse EQ.

Or I didn't understand your idea.

Thanks.

I am not philosophically against such attempts to shift the balance of power (although I still don't think the game is well suited for character-level conflict).

That said, the point-system framework allows for tuning the utility of hoarding-based denigration-of-equipment attacks.

It would not be unreasonable to make racked versions count for little enough by default (most magic items) that someone would have to engage in an intensive and sustained campaign or stoop to carrying or even using their instances to have much effect against another group.

It might also not be unreasonable for a high-racked-instance percentage in the over-representation number to more often result in a loss of a percentage of racked instances.

I think I have a problem with using coding to interfer with in-game conflicts. Honestly I would rather see Sybarite made weapons and armours in the hands of union members then in the hands of Outlanders, to be used in the defense of Sybarus. If that means some of the items will not be used during all of armageddon then so be it. The reasoning can be extended to the KoS ensuring that any weapon of power doesn't fall into the hands of the Dragonarmies, because they could be used against the npcs of Krynn.

On a non-rp level I can see how this will torque a few people off, but lets be honest, that's normally because most people are looking to gear themselves out to grind and grow, not giving a second thought to the whole other aspect of the game, which is roleplaying.

I think this is a big double-edged sword that the current administration really needs to think in depth about, and with imbuements the "average" sword now becomes powerful when imbued right. I hate to use MM as an example and bring unwanted attention, but the whole flaming sword is a great concept as the Society can go grab a bunch of basket-hilted falchions and go on their unmerry way.

Hmmm, who will be there to counter MMs cleaning ME from eq?