Page 9 of 15
Re: What should a guild have for it's type?
Posted: 11 Sep 2018 18:49
by Draugor
Kvator wrote:Draugor wrote:
Kinda hard not to when people keep harping on laymanguilds having good magic when they have been around for ages and the same people crying havent said a word?

Imho ppl that cried A LOT when the issue was smaller and not crying at all when half of the mud is affected are way more intriguing.
Or it's just business as usual: personal affiliations are more important than overall guild-balance in the game?
Read it again

The people that are crying now, as in you for instance
People arent bitching now since now its even, and thats when you start? Especially at a guild that has the setting on all spells lower than the other guilds with similar spells?

The second someone else gets it, it needs to be shut down cause its apparently not good that others have the same acces without all the bullshit surrounding EW
Re: What should a guild have for it's type?
Posted: 11 Sep 2018 20:02
by Kvator
Draugor wrote:Kvator wrote:Draugor wrote:
Kinda hard not to when people keep harping on laymanguilds having good magic when they have been around for ages and the same people crying havent said a word?

Imho ppl that cried A LOT when the issue was smaller and not crying at all when half of the mud is affected are way more intriguing.
Or it's just business as usual: personal affiliations are more important than overall guild-balance in the game?
Read it again

The people that are crying now, as in you for instance
People arent bitching now since now its even, and thats when you start? Especially at a guild that has the setting on all spells lower than the other guilds with similar spells?

The second someone else gets it, it needs to be shut down cause its apparently not good that others have the same acces without all the bullshit surrounding EW
History of my POV in short:
- EW are OP. "It's crappy, especially considering the fact that this power is limited to those that are cool not only with EW themselves but with members of other guild - but HEY so many ppl are bitching about it (more ppl bitching about EW than ppl playing in EW basically) that my input is not required.
- EW issue is 'remediated' with introduction of Warlocks who are basically the same power-wise (OP). "HEY now half of the mud population is 'broken' and almost noone is bitching about it - wtf! Maybe it's time to write my thoughts about it on forums!"
Clear enough?
Ohh - and if you think that there's some kind of personal agenda behind my 'bitching' then please acknowledge that I left EW waaaaay before 'recode' (where I was basically the only active member

). Well I also wanted to reverse the change that allowed joining EW in Knights (which was done during my 2-3 weeks absence), but sadly the vote I started was unsuccessful

.
Limiting some kind of OP-power to a group of friends is always crap. Repairing it via making this OP-power global is not the way to go in my opinion (would you be happy if Vamps were 'repaired' that way years ago?

)
Re: What should a guild have for it's type?
Posted: 11 Sep 2018 20:58
by Draugor
Balanced according to the doc, personally I advocated OP'ness cause I did not even alittle trust the AoB at the time, the current one I trust when it comes to technical balance. (I question him on some design choices in some areas on the other hand) And according to him and the document they are apparently balanced. So thats a dead issue imo, and again, since its now on both sides, it doesent matter, even tho warlocks are slightly weaker

So now both sides can go bananas.
The main issue is that the EW have been controlled by the same few for ages, and its an OCC guild that controlls it, wich is stupid. And yes this deffo goes for AA and also monks even tho noone goes layman monk. The nepotism is quite extreme. And in all due honesty, hardcore rules and joining demands for laymans, council and other annoying crap for a fecking layman is just silly.
Knights not going EW was a thematic shitfest, not a balance issue. And in all fairness, just remove speed from the game, its always going to be a stupidly powerfull tool and if its not available to everyone without leaving their main guild its just horrible for the game aint it?
The issue of the last incarnation of vamps where the players and the wizard in charge of them, would I want vamps to have been properly balanced from todays standards? Gladly. There are alot more balancing tools and counters in the game today. And I'd be even happier to see bloodguards to todays balance standards as a neutral (alltho serving but free to join it just had an extra tier) layman guild that is pure combat would be damn nice. Especially since they didnt require a specific weapon.
Re: What should a guild have for it's type?
Posted: 11 Sep 2018 21:07
by Alisa
wasn't bloodguard controlled by vampires?
Re: What should a guild have for it's type?
Posted: 11 Sep 2018 21:17
by Amberlee
Alisa wrote:wasn't bloodguard controlled by vampires?
Which was also a horrible idea.
Re: What should a guild have for it's type?
Posted: 11 Sep 2018 21:22
by Draugor
Alisa wrote:wasn't bloodguard controlled by vampires?
Yes and no, only the "blooded" ones or whatever they where called, and like I said, no laymans should be, but you could join with no issue but not get the "boost" it was mainly an RP bond with a slight increase in power if I recall the benefits. Kinda like Templars of Takhisis used to be and still are but they also have an in game council, but you can walk up and join, special title if "upgraded" but I dont think they have any actual benefit anymore from it, they used to tho (also controlled by a OCC btw wich is bullshit). OCC guilds should not have actual mechanics to influence layman guilds. At all. RP "controll" And they should be Free to join, at worst for the ones that has a set theme for it, sure, but spending over a month to get into a ******* layman is just stupid.
Re: What should a guild have for it's type?
Posted: 11 Sep 2018 21:29
by Kvator
Alisa wrote:wasn't bloodguard controlled by vampires?
Almost sure it was free to join (I was there and don't remember any 'application' process)
Druagor wrote:The main issue is that the EW have been controlled by the same few for ages, and its an OCC guild that controlls it, wich is stupid.
Yes - that's kind of stupid. SCOPs should serve as their 'elder brothers' with mutual respect etc - but no dealing with application process etc. (hell - at some point even Calians demanded number of SCOP approvals in their application process which is even more silly

)
When I was councilior in EW it was definately not the case (no dependency on SCOPs whatsover) - but also EW were pretty crappy back then and almost noone wanted to go through any application process to join one of the weakest layman guilds anyway

Re: What should a guild have for it's type?
Posted: 11 Sep 2018 21:32
by Draugor
Kvator wrote:Alisa wrote:wasn't bloodguard controlled by vampires?
Almost sure it was free to join (I was there and don't remember any 'application' process)
Druagor wrote:The main issue is that the EW have been controlled by the same few for ages, and its an OCC guild that controlls it, wich is stupid.
Yes - that's kind of stupid. SCOPs should serve as their 'elder brothers' with mutual respect etc - but no dealing with application process etc. (hell - at some point even Calians demanded number of SCOP approvals in their application process which is even more silly

)
When I was councilior in EW it was definately not the case (no dependency on SCOPs whatsover) - but also EW were pretty crappy back then and almost noone wanted to go through any application process to join one of the weakest layman guilds anyway

First part, 2 tiers, those that had a vamp "sire" and those that didnt, minor advantages to having one but you just ran up and joined no issue no guild fuss or stuff at all.
Second part
Guild wanting recs from allied guilds is a different matter, the occ is not in direct controll atleast wich is the stupid part.
Re: What should a guild have for it's type?
Posted: 11 Sep 2018 22:19
by Syrk
Greneth wrote:There have been many many many evil EW who have had no problems following these simple rules. There are several other things to point out the holes at but their neutrality isn't one of them. Just because Syrk couldn't behave doesn't mean the whole guild hates evils and none are allowed.
I tried to keep low profile but there is no need anymore as the level of my influece on things in genesis has been revealed.
A brand new overpowered magic layman guild has been created just for me to cater to my personal need for such one, after i blew things with EW. All other players had absolutely no need for it as EW was great for them.
Now you know you should not cross me or you will have your guild nerfed, alts deleted, ip banned and worse.
Re: What should a guild have for it's type?
Posted: 11 Sep 2018 22:53
by Amberlee
Syrk wrote:Greneth wrote:There have been many many many evil EW who have had no problems following these simple rules. There are several other things to point out the holes at but their neutrality isn't one of them. Just because Syrk couldn't behave doesn't mean the whole guild hates evils and none are allowed.
I tried to keep low profile but there is no need anymore as the level of my influece on things in genesis has been revealed.
A brand new magic layman guild has been created just for me to cater to my personal need for such one, after i blew things with EW. All other players had absolutely no need for it as EW was great for them.
Now you know you should not cross me or you will have your guild nerfed, alts deleted, ip banned and worse.
*sniffs the air*
I love the smell of sarcasm in the evening
