Economy Changes - Objects, Crafts and Gold {DRAFT, REV 2} — Tests and Trials

★ Arch-Caretaker

Mar 13, 2005 · 11:50 #1

See below for my notes on fixing the economy. Most of the coinage bits are already coded and is being finetuned, all the proposed craft changes havent been implemented yet. Don't go beserk just yet, i'm inviting you guys to rationally discuss these changes.

I wont be dunking them in tomorrow.

---- REVISION 2

Fixing the broken Economy:

A MUD is based mainly on a functioning economy. DL's economy, isn't. People are either very rich or very poor. Prices are erratic, making money a hard thing to spend. A huge hoard of objects and gold is kept inside the player economy, and never spent. Mining hasn't helped. (sorry!

)

Goals:
- Draining gold from the economy, by balancing prices and implementing new things to buy.
- Draining objects out of the economy, without forcing players to loose their favorite objects due to deathtraps, corpse loss or item damage.
- Allowing people to keep their wealth. (no people suddenly becoming 'poor' because of this patch).
- Introduce coins of value.
- Adjust object prices.
- Balance Crafting fairly for crafters.

Items split into types:

Abundant: Pops all the time, easy obtainable, low value
Common: Pops less, but is still encountered a lot. mediocre value
Rare: Pops rarely, high value.
Extremely Rare: Pops very rarely, very valuable
Artifact: Possibly only one of each in existance, extremely valuable.

New coinage:

1 white shard = 100 emeralite coins
1 emeralite coin = 100 adamantium coins
1 adamantium coin = 100 platinum coins
1 platinum coin = 100 gold coins
1 gold coin = 100 silver coins
1 silver coin = 100 copper coins
1 copper coin = 10 copper bits
Note: Resources are not equal to coins, there is no relation between ingot price and coin value

See below for a description:
'obtainable by' describes who will be able to obtain this coinage with considerable effort. So for example, level 30 players will generally be able to collect several gold coins with considerable effort.
'abundant item price' describes at which level abundant items will start to cost the coinage type.
'buys' gives an idea what the coinage is worth.

Copper Bits:
obtainable by: Beggars
abundant item price for: lvl 1+ items
Buys:
- 5 bits - a ripped shirt
- 5 bits - components for 1+ complexity spell prism.
- 5 bits - learn a level 1 skill.
Commonly dropped by:
- Level 1+ mobs
- Mining treasure chest: Underground depth 1
- Sacrificing copper+ priced items
Rarely dropped by:

Copper Coins:
obtainable by: Lower-class commoners, lvl 1+ players
abundant item price for: lvl 2+ items
Buys:
- 10 copper - a common cloth shirt
- 1 copper - Stable level 1+ pet
- 1 copper - place item in shop identify price (merchant pact)
- 5 copper - components for 5+ complexity spell prism.
- 10 copper - components for 10+ complexity spell prism.
- 1 copper - Learn a level 5+ skill
- 10 copper - Learn a level 10+ skill
Commonly dropped by:
- Level 5+ mobs
- Level 1+ boss mobs
- Mining treasure chest: Underground depth 5-7
- Sacrificing silver+ priced items
Rarely dropped by:
- Level 1+ mobs
- Mining treasure chest: Underground depth 1-4

Silver Coins:
obtainable by: Middle-class commoners, lvl 10/15+ players
abundant item price for: lvl 10/15+ items
Buys:
- 5 silver - a slightly magical cloth shirt
- 1 silver - Stable level 25+ pet
- 1 silver - Set structure friend
- 5 silver - claim one mining patch
- 1 silver - components for 15+ complexity spell prism.
- 25 silver - components for 20+ complexity spell prism.
- 50 silver - components for 25+ complexity spell prism.
- 1 silver - Learn a level 15+ skill
- 25 silver - Learn a level 20+ skill
- 50 silver - Learn a level 25+ skill
Commonly dropped by:
- Level 25+ mobs
- Level 10+ boss mobs
- Mining treasure chest: Underground depth 8
- Sacrificing gold+ priced items
Rarely dropped by:
- Level 10+ mobs
- Level 5+ boss mobs
- Mining treasure chest: Underground depth 5-7

Gold Coins:
obtainable by: Upper-class commoners, lvl 25/30+ players
abundant item price for: lvl 25/30+ items
Buys:
- good quality items, A magical embroidered silk shirt
- 1 gold - Add family member
- 1 gold - Stable level 50+ pet
- 1 gold - Set structure owner or guild-friend
- 1 gold - components for 30+ complexity spell prism.
- 50 gold - components for 40+ complexity spell prism.
- 1 gold - Learn a level 30+ skill
- 25 gold - Learn a level 35+ skill
- 50 gold - Learn a level 40+ skill
- 75 gold - Learn a level 45+ skill
Commonly dropped by:
- Level 50+ boss mobs
Rarely dropped by:
- Level 50+ mobs
- Level 25+ boss mobs
- Mining treasure chest: Underground depth 8

Platinum Coins:
obtainable by: Lords, lvl 50+/epic players
abundant item price for: lvl 50+/epic items
Buys:
- high quality items, A highly magical embroidered silk shirt
- 1 Platinum - A family name (after completing quest)
- 10 Platinum - A shop
- 1 Platinum - Engrave one item
- 5 Platinum - Increase structure size by 1.
- 1 Platinum - Learn a level 50+ skill
- 20 Platinum - Player Cottage (Max 2 rooms)
- 45 Platinum - Player Residence (Max 5 rooms)
- 90 Platinum - Player Mansion (Max 10 rooms)
Commonly dropped by:
- nothing!
Rarely dropped by:
- Level 50+ boss mobs

Adamantium Coins:
obtainable by: Kings, Guildmasters, persistant epic players
Buys:
- 10 Adamantium - A guild
- 40 Adamantium - Player Castle (Max 20 rooms)
Commonly dropped by:
- nothing!
Rarely dropped by:
- nothing!

Emeralite Coins:
obtainable by: Large countries, insanely persistant epic players
Buys:
- 1 Emeralite - Player Citadel (Max 40 rooms)
Commonly dropped by:
- nothing!
Rarely dropped by:
- nothing!

White Shard:
obtainable by: Deities, RL lacking epic players
Buys: Practically anything.
Commonly dropped by:
- nothing!
Rarely dropped by:
- nothing!

Specials:
- Treasure map chests: Drop coins equal to an equal level Boss mob.
- Monster pop-chests: Drops 4 times the normal amount of coins for that monster.
- Quest reward: Rewards 4 times the normal amount of coins for an equal level monster.
- Repairing: Repairing a fully damaged item costs 1/10th of the full item value, but never more than 1 gold.

Item classes:

- Abundant: normal price (see below)
- Common: price * 10 (1 Platinum->10 Platinum)
- Rare: one coin type higher (1 Platinum->1 Adamantium)
- Extremely Rare: two coin types higher (1 Platinum->1 Emeralite)
- Artifact: three coin types higher (1 Platinum->1 White Shard)

Old gold conversion:

No decision yet, but we are going to use the richest players as a base. Players are considered to have a small fortune above 1 million and have a big fortune above 10+ million.

1 Emeralite is comparable to a big fortune, 1 Adamantium to a small fortune.

10.000.000 = 1 Emeralite
1.000.000 = 1 Adamantium
100.000 = 1 Platinum
10.000 = 1 Gold
1.000 = 1 Silver
100 = 10 copper
10 = 1 copper
1 = 1 copper bit

Item binding:

Common to Rare class Items bind to the player on equipping, making them unusuable by others. This prevents poluting the player economy with old items, while still allowing people to gift items to others. Quest rewards, Extremely Rare and Artifact items bind when they are touched.

Selling items:

Since object prices will be re-adjusted (which generally means a sharp rise in value), object sell values will be adjusted. Depending on your charisma, objects sell from 5% to 10% of their full price.
Note that NPC's will never pay more than 1 platinum for any item, whatever the worth.

Crafting and the Economy:
A hard egg to crack. Enchanting sits at the core of our problem. Stacking enchantments has absolutely ruined gameplay, with the low cost for high level enchantments (just enchant a low level item ten times). Combine that with the over the top quality of crafted gear there is no reason to even wear game equipment. I have got some ideas, but I do not want to drive any established players away from the game, so they need to be reviewed. Leather and bone armor has no use, and I think foraging is just a tad silly for its fixed list of items to forage.

Generic Crafting changes:
- Allow crafting of ANY Abundant and Common class items that are available in game.
- Players can buy or quest for the recipies required for item crafting. They can reverse-engineer Abundant and Common items that are easy for them to craft anyway.
- When a player is skilled enough to craft an item, and pays the resources for them, he will always succeed.
- All crafting items require 50% of the objects normal price in coins, the rest is supplied by resources, and possibly, quested or looted reagents.
- Creating Rare and Extremely Rare pops that can be combined with the rarer resources into Rare and Extremely Rare crafted equipment. Since a rare craft-component pop comes in place of a normal rare object pop, this is a fair exchange and doesn't pollute the player economy, while still giving crafters the ability to make 'Uber' items.
- Item resource type is defined by its original recipy.

Reforging:
- Reforging is removed. Instead, people can use their crafts to perform 'Upgrade' and 'Salvage'.

Upgrading:
- Upgrading costs 400% of the items value in coins, and two times the normal crafting resources. (but not additional reagents).
- Materials are split into levels. You can only upgrade an item from its original material to a material one level higher (copper->bronze).

Salvaging:
- Depending on the item salvaged, may jields one (or more) of its original resource type.

Enchanting changes:
- An enchanter requires enchanting tokens to enchant an object. These tokens must be of equal or greater level of the item needed to enchant.
- An enchanter can gather enchanting tokens of a certain level by destroying items of that level.
- Depending on the item class, an item may jield anywere between one or five tokens.
- An enchantment can be selected from a list, each priced at a certain amount of tokens.
- Like Rare and Extremely Rare pops for common crafts, special enchantment tokens can be found that allow special enchantments. All 'uber power' enchantments will be put under this list.
- Enchanting a new enchantment costs 10% of the items value in coins.

Tri-Avatar

Mar 13, 2005 · 13:36 #2

Celeborn, will you have my children?

★ Arch-Caretaker

Mar 13, 2005 · 13:43 #3

weems wrote:
Celeborn, will you have my children?

Could you stop saying that, your freeking me out

Tri-Avatar

Mar 13, 2005 · 13:48 #4

Okay, now for my real post.

The only thing that worries me is this:
- Upgrading costs 400% of the items value in coins, and two times the normal crafting resources. (but not additional reagents).

Just make sure they can't upgrade into emeralite eh?

Hehe, I really like pretty much every part of this though. It's very bold. I will definetly stick around on DL to see how it works out, and give you as much constructive criticism as I can. Do you mind if we brainstorm more ideas for useful things that can be added in that can be bought with the new currencies?

Tri-Avatar

Mar 13, 2005 · 13:48 #5

Celeborn wrote:
weems wrote:
Celeborn, will you have my children?
Could you stop saying that, your freeking me out

Actually this is the first time I have said it. You are thinking of Quintos

★ Arch-Caretaker

Mar 13, 2005 · 13:55 #6

weems wrote:
Okay, now for my real post.

The only thing that worries me is this:
- Upgrading costs 400% of the items value in coins, and two times the normal crafting resources. (but not additional reagents).

Just make sure they can't upgrade into emeralite eh?

I might have stated that incorrectly. You do need two times the normally required resources (so an item that costs 50 meteorite to make, would cost 100 emeralite to upgrade), but you wont need any special recipy reagents to make that item, that you would need otherwise.

Quote:
Hehe, I really like pretty much every part of this though. It's very bold. I will definetly stick around on DL to see how it works out, and give you as much constructive criticism as I can. Do you mind if we brainstorm more ideas for useful things that can be added in that can be bought with the new currencies?

I'm particulary looking for really insanely expensive things to serve players with, like 10 emeralite for a special race label.

★ Arch-Caretaker

Mar 13, 2005 · 14:16 #7

On people who are considering reforging/crafting/enchanting and want to know when to do it (pre-aft patch):

My suggestion is, wait until I open up codeport for testing. You'll be able to try out the new crafts/economy on there for about a week, thus having plenty of time to reforge/craft/enchant pre-patch.

During that period I will be announcing what items will fall under what item class, so you can distribute bind-on-touch items amongst your friends/shops/whatever before they bind. Also, during that time you might want to empty your shops and citadels of items, since values will shift considerably. I will give plenty of warnings about this.

Tri-Avatar

Mar 13, 2005 · 14:21 #8

75 Emeralite coins: Add one socket to a crafted item. So if the crafted item had 3 sockets before, it can now have four.

Retired Caretaker

Mar 13, 2005 · 15:13 #9

it's important to keep something in mind here..

asking for things like adding extra infinite sockets will eventually result in sockets/runes being made much less powerful.

right now, sockets are powerful, and in my estimation should remain that way. Leaving sockets as a random byproduct of a critically successful build is something i consider a good idea.

ideas for the setbody/epicbuy upgrade might be like

2 white shards - choice of one race in a predefined list of race names, separated by categories - dragon, griffin, slime, undead, giant

1 white shard - customizing your pet - purchasing a rare pet

Tri-Avatar

Mar 13, 2005 · 15:15 #10

Uh Isabelle...Do you have any idea how expensive 75 Emeralite coins is?

If it ever gets to the point where you can afford 'infinite sockets', then the entire system is already broken ANYWAY.

Dual-Avatar

Mar 13, 2005 · 15:54 #11

The different coin types look cool. I've always preferred systems like that, with various types of coins instead of just gold, and it gives the game a more medieval feel. Depending on how the system works, you might want to take some precaution to ensure that high-level coins can't be sacced by accident(I've lost quite a few valuable items already to the new inventory system...I'd hate to sacrifice a coin worth 10 mil because of it)

I think that items binding is a bad idea, both in concept(I touched this item, now you magically can't use it!) and in effect. In a game where you pretty much have to have a bunch of characters, and players commonly make "new" main characters, eq should be transferrable(not only for that reason, of course). Also, does this mean that crafted eq will bind? I find that to be a horrible idea. If you consider an item too powerful to be used by everyone, give it a high level requirement; don't set a magical flag preventing all but one person from using it that can NEVER be bypassed by any means(with a few exceptions, but once you've put a lot of glory in an item, further enchanting it is risky, and changing the binding on an item is probably considered a bug). As for preventing a flood of "old" items polluting the game...don't implement a long-term problem like binding to fix a short-term problem. You could, instead, temporarily give players the ability to salvage items for more resources than they will normally get, or something of that nature.

By "stacking enchantments", I assume you mean enchanting the same property repeatedly(1 damage roll, .5 ar, etc). I don't see how this has ruined gameplay. Could you clarify on that, please?

I think making it harder to upgrade items is good. From what I understood, players will only be able to forge items from low-quality materials, then will have to upgrade the item through every higher material until they reach the one they want, and pay a lot of coins to do so. That sounds like a good idea to me.

Retired Caretaker

Mar 13, 2005 · 15:55 #12

my message was directed at anyone who is going to possibly post things like 'lets spend x emeralite for extra limbs, and extra attacks per round, or, lets spend x emeralite to do something equally disruptive to balance.

if a bug occurs, and people /do/ manage to get 75 emeralite easily, i'm sure you would agree with me, anything existing that could imbalance the game, should not be there.

have infinite sockets i consider imbalance, i believe you and i share a common belief of retaining balance at all costs. I'm only giving you a scenario in which having such an ability anywhere in game, could potentially be disruptive.

The idea here, is that eventually, regardless of what you do, or have, there will always be a balance.

And while large sums of money will make life easier for the player, and stronger, they will never reach a state where they are 'untouchable' to players, or monsters at an equal level to them.

Retired Caretaker

Mar 13, 2005 · 15:59 #13

binding will not always be a 'you touch it, now you cant use it'

binding will be more like this:

you wear a magical item - its bound to you forever, you may destroy it for its materials, or scrap it, or sell it to an npc shop

you complete a quest - the reward is bound to you instantly, no picking up an item from a corpse, no potential ability to cheat and sell the item to someone else. You do the quest, you get the reward, period.

touching items will not make them bind to you, as enchanters and crafters would then be out of business

Tri-Avatar

Mar 13, 2005 · 16:01 #14

I don't think it's such a good idea to implement things with the idea that there will be a bug that causes everybody to get 93792057409235790 of every coin.

Unless everything expensive is purely cosmetic, theres no way to avoid players getting an advantage from exploiting bugs and imbalances. And purely cosmetic things aren't even worth working for. They are *BORING*. The best way to keep an eye on this kind of thing is to be attentive, set rules, and /CRACK DOWN/. People on this mud get away with ANYTHING. It's simply incredible. So much exploitation.

Dual-Avatar

Mar 13, 2005 · 16:01 #15

I don't think he meant "infinite sockets". I think you should be able to add sockets, up to the maximum(or maybe one less) that the item could normally have popped. Obviously, this should be expensive.

As for "keeping balance at all costs"...no. Which do you think has more players, a fun game or a balanced game? Balance is important, but is secondary to the fun of the game. It's a game, there to let people have fun; don't let the mechanics of the game let you lose site of its purpose.

Retired Caretaker

Mar 13, 2005 · 16:03 #16

as for enchants on items, ignore everything you know about the combat up to this point.

It will work out to be a fair fight, we will see to it.

One thing to keep in mind as well, by changing enchantments significantly, it also opens up the door to make class specific skills/abilities more powerful. So abilities you once considered to be pretty much useless, but potentially cool in theory, can now be that way

Tri-Avatar

Mar 13, 2005 · 16:06 #17

Isabelle wrote:
And while large sums of money will make life easier for the player, and stronger, they will never reach a state where they are 'untouchable' to players, or monsters at an equal level to them.

I DO agree without about maintaining balance at all costs...But this one is unacceptable to me. In every game I have ever played, if you are rich enough and powerful enough, monsters of your level can no longer touch you. Thats the whole point of getting strong, moving BEYOND what you are normally capable of.

Dual-Avatar

Mar 13, 2005 · 16:07 #18

I agree with Weems 100% on that. That's the point of becoming powerful.

Tri-Avatar

Mar 13, 2005 · 16:08 #19

It's just that the problem these days is that its *EASY* to get strong enough to go beyond what you are normally capable of. Heck, you could even argue that people are NORMALLY CAPABLE of taking on things HIGHER than your level.

So I guess I do agree with you, just as long as a character can scale up beyond their level, I'm happy. I have no problems with it taking work.

Dual-Avatar

Mar 13, 2005 · 16:12 #20

"binding will not always be a 'you touch it, now you cant use it'

binding will be more like this:

you wear a magical item - its bound to you forever, you may destroy it for its materials, or scrap it, or sell it to an npc shop

you complete a quest - the reward is bound to you instantly, no picking up an item from a corpse, no potential ability to cheat and sell the item to someone else. You do the quest, you get the reward, period.

touching items will not make them bind to you, as enchanters and crafters would then be out of business :)"

Touch it/Wear it, same thing. Binding is a bad idea. What is the point of every item in the game only being usable by one person? It's annoying, it makes items worthless once you've put them on, and it's unrealistic. It's fine for quest items; you did a quest and the "gods" granted you a special reward that only you can use. That's fine. However, every sword you buy shouldn't magically become inescapably bound to you and never be usable by anyone else again.

Retired Caretaker

Mar 13, 2005 · 16:19 #21

its ok, i think we're on the same wavelength, its just a matter of explaining it properly to show you what we have planned.

or rather, showing you will be the easiest way.

you will be able to be powerful, BUT, we will try to ensure there is no one way for it to be abused to a point where gameplay becomes imbalanced.

It's the idea, where sure, having a bajillion gold, will make you stronger than another player at a similar class and level to you, but not to the point where you are WAY more powerful than them.

So, fighting knowledge, luck, other variables could/might still spell the downfall of a seriously equipped/powerful player.

Retired Caretaker

Mar 13, 2005 · 16:24 #22

it makes crafters much more in demand

you can still sell, salvage for components bound items you no longer need

It's just a different idea than we have had, once players get used to it, it will be a painless change.

I'm not sure if celeborn mentioned it in his note, but we will also be making NPC shops that sell weapons and amour more common/important. So players will never have to worry about not having appropriate gear to fight in. That will never be a problem (if thats what your concern is)

★ Arch-Caretaker

Mar 13, 2005 · 16:29 #23

Nuitari wrote:
"binding will not always be a 'you touch it, now you cant use it'

binding will be more like this:

you wear a magical item - its bound to you forever, you may destroy it for its materials, or scrap it, or sell it to an npc shop

you complete a quest - the reward is bound to you instantly, no picking up an item from a corpse, no potential ability to cheat and sell the item to someone else. You do the quest, you get the reward, period.

touching items will not make them bind to you, as enchanters and crafters would then be out of business "

Touch it/Wear it, same thing. Binding is a bad idea. What is the point of every item in the game only being usable by one person? It's annoying, it makes items worthless once you've put them on, and it's unrealistic. It's fine for quest items; you did a quest and the "gods" granted you a special reward that only you can use. That's fine. However, every sword you buy shouldn't magically become inescapably bound to you and never be usable by anyone else again.

Realism is not my goal. A good gaming experience is. Let me clarify the difference on both types of binding, and my reasons behind them:

Bind-on-touch (yes, this also includes all fill/empty/stand on one leg while hopping tricks)

This is for quest items, and certain boss-mob items. Items like hat we think players should have at least participated in getting by themselves.

Bind-on-wear means you can either make a player-profit of it, OR you can wear it. All items bind-on-wear, except abundant and common items, as their economy pollution is minimal. Other used gear will no longer be re-introduced into the system, keeping the object economy healthy. I have seen it work perfectly, and it seems to me to be a preferred alternative to corpse loss/deathtraps/eq destruction.

Dual-Avatar

Mar 13, 2005 · 16:55 #24

That doesn't make for a "good gaming experience". Quite the opposite, in fact.

Making everything bind is far worse than having deathtraps purge eq. You can avoid deathtraps by being careful, there's no such way to mitigate binding.

If you are worried about items "flooding the market", then your problem is that you have made them easier to get than you intended. Making everything bind won't fix that.

I'm probably not conveying my point properly, I find it difficult to express how incredibly bad I find the idea of making everything bind without being insulting and offensive, which I have no desire to be. Under no circumstances should non-quest crafted equipment be made to bind. It is one of those "solutions" that will create more problems than it fixes.

If you disagree with me, then stop doing what you are doing, and spend a thousand or so hours playing DL. Take the time to triav. Then spend a few hundred hours getting some emeralite from Vogar or some other player who actually sells it. Now make yourself some level 50 emeralite weapons with that emeralite. Then spend hundreds of hours epicing to epic level 500. Guess what? Now you get to turn those weapons that represent hundreds of hours of your time into 1 emeralite ingot! Too bad you can't give them to one of your other level 50 characters, since they're magically bound to you and can't ever be used by anyone else, huh? (think that's improbable? I'm going to have that EXACT problem when you make everything bind)

Newbie

Mar 13, 2005 · 17:31 #25

Crafted items should, if they will eb affected by this bind rule, only bind on wear, because lets face it, if its bind on touch, then everything the crafter makes only he will be able to use.

I dont see this being beneficial to crafters though, this bind rule. Kind of more a pain, but do what you must.

About item socketing, how about making it so we can increase the amount of sockets on the item by no more than 2 than it's original, or that we can define(within reasonable limits) the amount of sockets the item will have while being crafted. The more sockets you ask for, the more of a chance of ruining the item, because when you gauge holes into something, you are more bound to screw up the item.

Or have socketing a seperate craft altogether, where the person sockets the item and can place a set value of sockets, or lower than the maximum, and being able to fill sockets would be nice to have as well...

Now, on a side note of that, I think this is a good idea, but how about implinting the ability to smelt ingots into coins?

you could set a time-limitation on the amount, like only permitted to smelt 10 coins per IRL month, and have it be against the law to smelt more of that, if you do then you have a % chance of someone telling the JC, and being jailed.

I dont even know, im just throwing ideas out there, because if the set up is gonna be like this, i can see myself becoming porrer and poorer as it is.

Retired Caretaker

Mar 13, 2005 · 17:40 #26

as previously stated, unless its a super rare item from a boss mob or quest, it will not be bind on pick up/touch

to recap: some common items not binding, uncommon bind on wear, rare+ depending on variables bind on touch

but ok, for zach, weems, etc, per zachs idea - thats fine with the sockets, you may attempt to create a socket, dependant upon your skill, and randomness, you may either succeed or fail, with failure resulting in item destruction. No more than X sockets added to an item, determinate upon items level and other variable. (like, maybe sockets /cannot/ be added to type rare+ items, but /can/ be added to type common-uncommon items.
(helps to keep one single item from being overpowered)

★ Arch-Caretaker

Mar 13, 2005 · 17:45 #27

Nuitari wrote:
That doesn't make for a "good gaming experience". Quite the opposite, in fact.

actually, it does.

Nuitari wrote:
Making everything bind is far worse than having deathtraps purge eq. You can avoid deathtraps by being careful, there's no such way to mitigate binding.

Its a choice between always keeping your prized possessions but not being able to give them to someone else when you replace them vs. loosing them due to deathtrap, corpseloss, lava, etc.

Nuitari wrote:
If you are worried about items "flooding the market", then your problem is that you have made them easier to get than you intended. Making everything bind won't fix that.

1. Our economy is already broken, so no 'should have' will fix that.
2. I would have to slow item generation to an insanely low amount, or create an unfair way to get things out of the game. Each multiplayer game has many faucets, ways to get items into a game, and many drains, to get them back out of the game. Regardless what the faucet speed is, I will need an equal drain speed to get them out again, or the economy will overflow. Since the economy is ALREADY insanely filled, I should either drastically cut down on faucets (ie: no item creation for a while), or I should perform an EQ purge

Nuitari wrote:
If you disagree with me, then stop doing what you are doing, and spend a thousand or so hours playing DL. Take the time to triav. Then spend a few hundred hours getting some emeralite from Vogar or some other player who actually sells it. Now make yourself some level 50 emeralite weapons with that emeralite. Then spend hundreds of hours epicing to epic level 500. Guess what? Now you get to turn those weapons that represent hundreds of hours of your time into 1 emeralite ingot! Too bad you can't give them to one of your other level 50 characters, since they're magically bound to you and can't ever be used by anyone else, huh? (think that's improbable? I'm going to have that EXACT problem when you make everything bind)

I see your concern, since the pre-game situation creates an unfair situation for players who have commited an ultra-rare component in the understanding they can re-distribute it. I will consider higher material returns (80%?) for salvaging Emeralite. As stated before, I will allow people to redistribute items before the patch comes in, so you will have the opportunity to salvage as much effort as possible and sell any valuables you have laying around.

After the patch i'm not sure what i'll do to emeralite, as you will be able to anticipate what the changes will cause to your equipment.

★ Arch-Caretaker

Mar 13, 2005 · 17:59 #28

Zach wrote:
Crafted items should, if they will eb affected by this bind rule, only bind on wear, because lets face it, if its bind on touch, then everything the crafter makes only he will be able to use.

Bind on touch is for items that we consider a player should have gathered themselves, ie: quest or special boss-pop items. Crafted items will be bind-on-wear, except for the ultra-common items which have a small impact on the economy.

Zach wrote:
I dont see this being beneficial to crafters though, this bind rule. Kind of more a pain, but do what you must.

Imagine you crafting a level 50 broadsword for Timmy.
Timmy moves on to epic, gives the broadsword to Tommy.
Tommy moves on to epic, gives the broadsword to Tummy,
etc.

Each person who gets that sword, has no reason to buy a new sword from you. Now that isn't so important with just one sword, but imagine a whole economy filled with crafted items made by the best crafters. Thats the issue with the practically once-in always-in system as it is now.

Quote:
About item socketing, how about making it so we can increase the amount of sockets on the item by no more than 2 than it's original, or that we can define(within reasonable limits) the amount of sockets the item will have while being crafted. The more sockets you ask for, the more of a chance of ruining the item, because when you gauge holes into something, you are more bound to screw up the item.

Or have socketing a seperate craft altogether, where the person sockets the item and can place a set value of sockets, or lower than the maximum, and being able to fill sockets would be nice to have as well...

With the new economy in place, I think there will be room for an relatively expensive procedure that adds sockets, up to the weapons max sockets. Not sure if it will fall under enchanting or crafting yet though.

Quote:
Now, on a side note of that, I think this is a good idea, but how about implinting the ability to smelt ingots into coins? you could set a time-limitation on the amount, like only permitted to smelt 10 coins per IRL month, and have it be against the law to smelt more of that, if you do then you have a % chance of someone telling the JC, and being jailed.

I would like to avoid flooding the economy with fake coins, esp emeralite ones.

That said, I will put coin values on all resources, so you can sell them for some coinage.

Quote:
I dont even know, im just throwing ideas out there, because if the set up is gonna be like this, i can see myself becoming porrer and poorer as it is.

Actually, all those items you've got stored up (?

just guessing) combined with the fact mobiles are able to spawn more gold than before, it'll be a little bit more on both. (You get more coins, you spend more coins).

I plan on giving every character some free coins based on their level at the time of patch, to even out the poorer people.

Dual-Avatar

Mar 13, 2005 · 19:13 #29

Celeborn, one thing that I'm wondering...I see how a citadel is going to be worth 400 times that of a guild. I'm wondering if I could maybe trade in a citadel for anything...It ma be nice to get some open plots...oh yeah, and for me to create an evil empire of guilds hellbent on domination of the known world! Just kidding, but what will we do about all the citadels in existance? It seems that there are a bit too many for them to really be worth that much more than guilds. Will anything be done to make them worth more?

Dual-Avatar

Mar 13, 2005 · 20:09 #30

Celeborn wrote:
Imagine you crafting a level 50 broadsword for Timmy.
Timmy moves on to epic, gives the broadsword to Tommy.
Tommy moves on to epic, gives the broadsword to Tummy,
etc.

Each person who gets that sword, has no reason to buy a new sword from you. Now that isn't so important with just one sword, but imagine a whole economy filled with crafted items made by the best crafters. Thats the issue with the practically once-in always-in system as it is now.

I agree with you on that, to an extent. There are better solutions, for example a warrior could sacrifice his weapon once he outgrows it to gain some bonus xp(maybe about as much as an experience boon, the weapon has to be glorified to at least 85% of its max enchant, the weapon must be at least level 30, must be exceptional quality, must be a weapon that the character is "specialized" with, the weapon must be lower level than the character, can't be used by epic characters or for epic weapons). For level 50+ weapons, give them a value commensurate with material, quality, % of space enchanted, and level, so that they can be sacrificed towards crowning.

You could also enable players to use a lower-level weapon as part of the material requirement for forging a new weapon or upgrading another one; perhaps your level 50 adamantite longsword counts as 50 of the ingots required to reforge your e100 longsword to adamantite, destroying the level 50 sword in the process.

You're also forgetting the fact that most equipment is user-specific; certain classes only use certain weapons, most players are picky about their enchantments(especially stats), and holy avenger/radiance narrow it down further. Crafted equipment sells for a ton, anyways.

My main concern with this patch is not common equipment; having that bind would be unrealistic and somewhat annoying, but I can see how it could be overall beneficial. My concern is with powerful, rare items, like high level jade, diamond, or blue diamond jewellery, and meteorite and emeralite weapons. These items don't flood the market(there's far more demand than supply for all of these) and it's unlikely they will any time soon, and it is a huge loss for one of these to become useless because you outgrew it and can't give it to an alt. Even if you salvage an emeralite item for 80% of its ingots, that is a MASSIVE loss, plus you probably won't have the ingots to make a new item even if you get 80% back. I've sat on 140+ emeralite ingots for months, never being able to get the last few to reforge an item.

Another possibility, if you absolutely insist on making items bind(and it is stil a bad idea), you could have them bind by account, deity, or something else that allows you to transfer powerful items such as emeralite equipment to your alts once your main character outgrows them.

★ Arch-Caretaker

Mar 13, 2005 · 20:17 #31

Nuitari wrote:
Another possibility, if you absolutely insist on making items bind(and it is stil a bad idea), you could have them bind by account, deity, or something else that allows you to transfer powerful items such as emeralite equipment to your alts once your main character outgrows them.

I'll consider it. I think you've made your opinion clear.

Avatar

Mar 14, 2005 · 03:06 #32

My only concern is the proposal of changes to the current crafting/enchanting/upgrading system. I am still am trying to figure out how this will benefit crafters - it all appears complicated. But as I am open-minded, I will wait until the test port it opened to experiment. I am not unhappy with the current crafting/enchanting system, only I would like to see the roll of making a master piece item increased, but that's minor, and makes the game more challengable anyway.

Everything else sounds awesome.

Retired Caretaker

Mar 14, 2005 · 03:35 #33

not to worry, it will make things simpler

you will be able to craft faster and easier than before, i believe what celeborn is intending is that once you learn to make masterpiece crafted equipment, you will always succeed in creating one in all future attempts.

i could be mistaken on that, but i think that was his plan

formulas will be introduced to make crafting simpler. (kind of like the old blueprint system, sorta)

Dual-Avatar

Mar 14, 2005 · 08:26 #34

i kinda stop reading after celeborn's post, but one thing caught my eyes.

"When a player is skilled enough to craft an item, and pays the resources for them, he will always succeed. "

WOW. i should have saved all those blue diamonds!!!

btw, i'm really glad that DL is attempting to fix the economy.

I am excited to see what will happen to warfare/nations in DL.

★ Arch-Caretaker

Mar 14, 2005 · 14:52 #35

Just an addition, people asked me if these changes affect ownership of citadel, shops, etc.

Simple answer, no.

Wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!

Tri-Avatar

Mar 14, 2005 · 23:28 #36

Isabelle wrote:
asking for things like adding extra infinite sockets will eventually result in sockets/runes being made much less powerful.

Ok about the infinite sockets there should be a max sockets 5 only

Quote:
1 white shard - customizing your pet - purchasing a rare pet

i do like the idea to purchase a rare pet other then gryphons

Dual-Avatar

Mar 14, 2005 · 23:33 #37

zidane wrote:
i do like the idea to purchase a rare pet other then gryphons

Are you implying that gryphons are rare? Also, the point of it is that pretty much no one should be able to get a white shard...if put in properly, i dont think many people will be able to purchase rare pets...just in case, make it 10 white shards!

Avatar

Mar 14, 2005 · 23:55 #38

Hey, I still sell grpyhon eggs for 50k on many occasions. I think gryphons ARE still rare as long people don't hand the eggs out like candy

Tri-Avatar

Mar 15, 2005 · 00:48 #39

Nellwyn wrote:
Hey, I still sell grpyhon eggs for 50k on many occasions. I think gryphons ARE still rare as long people don't hand the eggs out like candy

This is what im talking about if you find a pet and type pet score and its under Creature: Gryphon, Group: Rare, its rare maybe not as rare as dragons.

There an old saying "If it looks like a rabbit and hop like a rabbit then guess what kid it is a Rabbit." Now i know there other animal that hop around but you get the picture. If the Group: has "Rare" on it. Its rare

Avatar

Mar 15, 2005 · 08:43 #40

Shows what you know...the grouping Rare with Gryphons and Dragons has nothing to do with its rarity per se. A Warhorse = rare, but its part of the Horse group, a Fire Lizard = rare, part of the Reptile group, a Bat = rare, but is part of the Weird group. The original suppositiion was that any pet in the Rare group was going to be rare, but as we can see with Gryphons this isnt the case but thats because of breeding. Im not disputing the fact that granite eggs are rare since they are, but any "rare" pet doesnt get grouped in the Rare group unless it came from a granite egg, they could have just called the group Awesome or Granite, but theres no common theme among the pets of the Granite egg like there is with the Feline group etc. So i guess they chose Rare.

Tri-Avatar

Mar 16, 2005 · 19:56 #41

Silvanos wrote:
Shows what you know...the grouping Rare with Gryphons and Dragons has nothing to do with its rarity per se. A Warhorse = rare, but its part of the Horse group

My point is instead of having a regular house you have a Warhouse which is in a rare group

Silvano-ego wrote:
Shows what you know

Someone need to hug

(the person you love to ignore) maybe celeborn or another caretaker can clear this up in facts

and if im wrong then i love to learn more

because i know silvano is not teaching or helping

⚔ Caretaker

Mar 16, 2005 · 20:37 #42

Silv just taught you about rare pets

Avatar

Mar 18, 2005 · 07:30 #43

Alright. First... Cele, I'm loving the fact you're upfront with players now, discussing things. I've always had disdain toward developers who refuse to respond and work with those around him. Good to see you speaking up when you used to be so quiet.

Second... Loving the ideas. I just wonder how you're going to try and pull all this off. Good luck, mate. You're going to need it.

Now, for my idealist opinions:

I still stand behind item durability or similar. Seperate from AC reduction. You can only repair something so many times before there's nothing left but duct tape. It'll keep the economy healthy for crafters (make it not just a select service, but a profession- and constant need for resources!) and screams for more guild runs (yay)!

I know you're not going for realism. I can't argue realism is the way to go. But some very real truths could help even in a fantasy setting.

When recieving tokens from destroyed items: PLEASE make it choose a random affect, and PLEASE sometimes simply destroy with no reward (success based off skill?). Speaking of which, the entire MUD's euipment list needs a serious overhaul. There are some very whacked items out there. Why spell up when you can just remove all and wear all? Sigh.

To be continued.

Retired Caretaker

Mar 18, 2005 · 19:16 #44

I believe the desired effect when salvaging items/disenchanting them is that there is X percent chance of getting [item1] and x percent chance of getting [item2] and maybe a real low x percent chance of getting [item3]

something like that, and the quantity of the items received will also be a variable.

But, that may or may not happen right away, it may be a thing we work towards.

Avatar

Mar 19, 2005 · 07:50 #45

I wouldn't wanna do it. Too much work.

Newbie

Mar 19, 2005 · 18:29 #46

i just have a few questions.
first what will happen to current crafters?
What will happen to auction?
Last of all how will current eq be affected?

Retired Caretaker

Mar 19, 2005 · 18:41 #47

crafters will not be affected except that they will be able to use items to get resources from them.

enchanters will be affected as we are changing how enchanting works

auction will not be affected

current equipment we have not decided upon how we will handle it.
My personal preference would be to wave a magic wand, and remove all enchantments, allowing everyone to join the new system, at once.
That may not be possible, so giving players a /reason/ to disenchant/salvage their current gear would be the way to handle it.

Dual-Avatar

Mar 19, 2005 · 23:17 #48

What about eq that we've dumped glory in? I have tens of thousands of glory in my current eq, much of it used to put enchantments on mob eq. Is that just going to be wiped out?

Retired Caretaker

Mar 20, 2005 · 02:00 #49

i realize you dont really read my posts here, but let me repeat, again..
i will attempt to highlight parts that you /should/ read if you wish to.

*current equipment we have not decided upon how we will handle it.*

*My personal preference would be to wave a magic wand, and remove all enchantments, allowing everyone to join the new system, at once.*

***That may not be possible, so giving players a /reason/ to disenchant/salvage their current gear would be the way to handle it.***

is that helpful?

I know, as you have stated to me, there is a deep philosophical reason for not having balance, balance is bad, the only real muds are the imbalanced ones, which give players a purpose and reason to overcome the obvious setbacks that are against them.

Avatar

Mar 20, 2005 · 06:25 #50

One of the MAIN reasons for my retirement was the removal of anti-align flags and the addition of (Ancient) tags on equipment, ultimately making 2 1/2 years worth of work completely useless. I was devout with completely pumped items (which, by today's standards are obsolete).

I worked hard for my stuff, only to find that after JADE my character became lame and laughable.

I was NEVER offered any compensation (not to say I should have) and NO one... I repeat, NO ONE had as much as I did to lose at the time. I was on Top 10 lists all over the place (#1 HIGH HP was mine for the longest time), only to log one day to find my main about as powerful as a goldfish outta water. All that time and work for nothing. It still pisses me off.

With the advent of Epics, which I still to this day claim to be completely FUBAR. Honestly, epics have ruined the entire latter portion of the game. Simply because anyone with lots of time can easily widdle away day-in and day-out in epics, beefing their character to insane heights.

Back in the day 100 glory was almost unheard of to the common player. It took forever to get close to that amount through quests.

Now? Everyone can obtain enough epic xp to boost their character to almost no end with little work... just time.

Retired Caretaker

Mar 20, 2005 · 07:44 #51

yes, work.. that was hard work to get people to abuse glory pools and give others a thousand glory at a time, so that they could enchant their gear.

thats why we made ancient flags, because things we put in game were abused. PVP glory, abused. Glory Pools abused. OoOoo, look a +5000 hp titan tattoo, sweet, that doesnt imbalance anything..

The game will always continue to evolve as Celeborn wills it, and as we find better ways to handle the game mechanics.

We will undoubtedly add things which may or may not work out as intended, it's part of the process. Dark Legacy is a work in progress, and always will be.

Dual-Avatar

Mar 20, 2005 · 09:54 #52

to Jor

jor wrote:

CODE · MUD Output

With the advent of Epics, which I still to this day claim to be completely FUBAR. Honestly, epics have ruined the entire latter portion of the game. Simply because anyone with lots of time can easily widdle away day-in and day-out in epics, beefing their character to insane heights.

if beefing up one's character is not measured by time and effort then what should it be measured by? Doesnt it make sense that the more you play (spend time on line leveling) the more powerful you should become?

Avatar

Mar 20, 2005 · 23:47 #53

Once upon a time, it took manpower to overcome a boss mob. One had to coordinate a group of people to get a nice item to boost their char in even the slightest way. In other words, it took MORE than just time, but teamwork. And even if you had all the best mob items in the game, you still couldn't solo anything. Even my character (who was uber at one point) couldn't accomplish much alone. I had to have help. We once depended on each other. No longer.

I remember a cross-guild run, BR and Amazons, some 12 of us total, running Exe's brother... and we still suffered deaths. NONE of that happens these days.

Sorry, but 'lets go epic' doesn't appeal to me in the least. There's no imagination left after 50/50/50. The mobs are nearly identical, the levels in the dungeons unimaginative... and you can do it by yourself (albeit slower than with a group).

You're not on a quest to venture across the world and slay the mighty dragon with friends at your side, hoping to come back with something wonderful... it's just garbage. Plain, repetitive garbage.

Using Mario to jump on the 100-man turtle takes time, utterly no skill, just time. And even then, Mario had a time limit so you couldn't keep doing it forever.

Dual-Avatar

Mar 21, 2005 · 00:07 #54

The "venture across the world and slay the mighty dragon" occurs in quests, which under the upcoming quest system should be at least as common as 12-player supermob runs in the pre-epic days of DL.

If you want challenge on a daily basis, fight other players. Duel in the arena. Enter guild wars. Fight supermobs.

Avatar

Mar 21, 2005 · 00:47 #55

PvP on DL has been far from interesting. If I wanted to PvP, I'd PvP on a MUD that plays for keeps. Peaceful vs. peaceful is a complete waste of time.

Guild wars? HAHAHAHA. Read above.

Upcoming quest code? I'm talking NOW. Not in the future. I could claim everything will be ok in the future too, but it doesn't mean it will be. And Exe's brother is a supermob.

Dual-Avatar

Mar 21, 2005 · 00:56 #56

If you think DL is so bad, go to another mud.

I like epicing, and I enjoy PvP on DL. Guild wars aren't frequent enough, true, but that's our fault, not the Immortals'. They try their best; in fact, Kelryne is holding a free-for-all guild war tournament sometime soon, which should be a lot like good 'ole pvp. If not enough people participate to make the tournament fun....that's our fault, not the Immortals'.

Basically, if you think DL is so bad, go to another Mud. I, and many players, like DL how it is. If you think it sucks, why are you here?

Avatar

Mar 21, 2005 · 01:00 #57

Isabelle wrote:
yes, work.. that was hard work to get people to abuse glory pools and give others a thousand glory at a time, so that they could enchant their gear.

thats why we made ancient flags, because things we put in game were abused. PVP glory, abused. Glory Pools abused. OoOoo, look a +5000 hp titan tattoo, sweet, that doesnt imbalance anything..

Yeah, forget the fact it took a lotta work to get those. Everyone in the guild worked toward them, and all benefitted. Secondly, you couldn't put more than 100 HP on a lvl 50 item without it possibly going *poof* on you.

Thirdly, crafted items are far more insane, coupled with epic glory which... oooh, let's remove ONE system and put in an even more messed up replacement... all the while taking away from established players.

Sorry, Isa, but I gotta disagree with you on this one. Players these days have nearly 2k more HP than I did, nearly +50% (probably more these days) the DAMROLL, HITROLL, and up to 50 for each stat. Facts speak for themselves.

Dual-Avatar

Mar 21, 2005 · 01:07 #58

Jorelani wrote:
Isabelle wrote:
yes, work.. that was hard work to get people to abuse glory pools and give others a thousand glory at a time, so that they could enchant their gear.

thats why we made ancient flags, because things we put in game were abused. PVP glory, abused. Glory Pools abused. OoOoo, look a +5000 hp titan tattoo, sweet, that doesnt imbalance anything.. :P
Yeah, forget the fact it took a lotta work to get those. Everyone in the guild worked toward them, and all benefitted. Secondly, you couldn't put more than 100 HP on a lvl 50 item without it possibly going *poof* on you.

Thirdly, crafted items are far more insane, coupled with epic glory which... oooh, let's remove ONE system and put in an even more messed up replacement... all the while taking away from established players.

Sorry, Isa, but I gotta disagree with you on this one. Players these days have nearly 2k more HP than I did, nearly +50% (probably more these days) the DAMROLL, HITROLL, and up to 50 for each stat. Facts speak for themselves.

Do you have any idea how hard it is to get high epic levels, or high epic level equipment? Now, you work for everything, wheras before you sat on your ass and hoped for a quest or a group to run a supermob with.

Avatar

Mar 21, 2005 · 01:07 #59

Nuitari wrote:
If you think DL is so bad, go to another mud.

I like epicing, and I enjoy PvP on DL. Guild wars aren't frequent enough, true, but that's our fault, not the Immortals'. They try their best; in fact, Kelryne is holding a free-for-all guild war tournament sometime soon, which should be a lot like good 'ole pvp. If not enough people participate to make the tournament fun....that's our fault, not the Immortals'.

Basically, if you think DL is so bad, go to another Mud. I, and many players, like DL how it is. If you think it sucks, why are you here?

I don't play DL anymore, which I've already stated. Because of imbalances within the system, which is the topic of discussion here.

I don't kiss butt. I don't respect those who do. I'll say what I want, when I want, how I want.

You like epic-ing because it's easy for you to accomplish. It panders to the lazy player, which is why the IQ average of the playerbase has gone down over the past couple of years.

I don't think DL is bad. It's simply skewed. The game itself has much potential which isn't being reached. Also, I never said I think it sucks. Learn to pay attention.

Nuitari wrote:
Do you have any idea how hard it is to get high epic levels, or high epic level equipment? Now, you work for everything, wheras before you sat on your ass and hoped for a quest or a group to run a supermob with.

Epic isn't hard. Period. It's FAR easier to be successful in this game than it was back in the day... GAMES AREN'T SUPPOSED TO BE EASY.

Dual-Avatar

Mar 21, 2005 · 01:08 #60

*cough*

And we thought Lingolas was the biggest troll around.

Avatar

Mar 21, 2005 · 01:11 #61

Nuitari wrote:
*cough*

And we thought Lingolas was the biggest troll around.

Not only do you pick a fight with me, which I wasn't even addressing you in the first place (rude) and now you have to say something negative about another as well.

⚔ Caretaker

Mar 21, 2005 · 01:25 #62

Jorelani wrote:
I don't play DL anymore, which I've already stated. Because of imbalances within the system, which is the topic of discussion here.

If you dont play, then how the hell would you have a balanced opinion on the system? The notes on the forums dont explain everything.

Jorelani wrote:
Epic isn't hard. Period. It's FAR easier to be successful in this game than it was back in the day... GAMES AREN'T SUPPOSED TO BE EASY.

If a game is too hard, some people will just give up heh

Avatar

Mar 21, 2005 · 01:41 #63

kiasyn wrote:
If you dont play, then how the hell would you have a balanced opinion on the system? The notes on the forums dont explain everything.

If a game is too hard, some people will just give up heh

First point: You're right, how can I? Simple. It's conceptual. One only needs to know the basics in order to know if something works in the end. It's mechanics, not specifics. I don't have to remain active to know something's not right.

Second point: True. But then again I no longer play because it did become too easy. As did a LOT of other players, not just myself. But I rather have a challenge. If I wanted to level grind or some other mundane activity... I'd give up games entirely and play 'real life'. What's the point of a game if you can't be challenged?

⚔ Caretaker

Mar 21, 2005 · 01:49 #64

Jorelani wrote:
First point: You're right, how can I? Simple. It's conceptual. One only needs to know the basics in order to know if something works in the end. It's mechanics, not specifics. I don't have to remain active to know something's not right.

Who says you even know the basics?

Jorelani wrote:
Second point: True. But then again I no longer play because it did become too easy. As did a LOT of other players, not just myself. But I rather have a challenge. If I wanted to level grind or some other mundane activity... I'd give up games entirely and play 'real life'. What's the point of a game if you can't be challenged?

Yeah, but it has to be a balance between too easy and too hard, heh.

Avatar

Mar 21, 2005 · 02:01 #65

kiasyn wrote:
Who says you even know the basics?

Yeah, but it has to be a balance between too easy and too hard, heh.

1. Ha.
2. Duh.

⚔ Caretaker

Mar 21, 2005 · 02:13 #66

3. Cheese
4. Bacon

Avatar

Mar 23, 2005 · 05:13 #67

I'm not sure I understand completley.

In order to enchant something you need a token. You get this token from sacrificing something of the same level..... does that include crafted eq? If it doesn't, and I want to enchant an e500 piece of eq..... how would I go about doing so? Perhaps the eq in the goblin epic? Somethign like that? *confused*

Tri-Avatar

Mar 25, 2005 · 05:53 #68

Nuitari wrote:
I like epicing, and I enjoy PvP on DL. Guild wars aren't frequent enough, true, but that's our fault, not the Immortals'. They try their best; in fact, Kelryne is holding a free-for-all guild war tournament sometime soon, which should be a lot like good 'ole pvp. If not enough people participate to make the tournament fun....that's our fault, not the Immortals'.

i have to agree too i like epiccing and some mining for raw orez and gems to improve a character it may take a long time then again if you play alot you can improve your character in no time at all

Tri-Avatar

Mar 25, 2005 · 06:13 #69

Celeborn wrote:
During that period I will be announcing what items will fall under what item class, so you can distribute bind-on-touch items amongst your friends/shops/whatever before they bind. Also, during that time you might want to empty your shops and citadels of items, since values will shift considerably. I will give plenty of warnings about this.

When are you going to open the bport and announing in the game on the tarsonis noteboard?

Dual-Avatar

Mar 28, 2005 · 08:27 #70

With all due respect to EVERYONE involved.... that whole topic listed was hijacked by Isabelle.

With all do respect to Isabelle, she is the kind of person who would make a voider pixie mage permadeath, and insist on only fighting with her hands. She is ultimate hardcore person.

In general, her concepts will make a challenging game. They will make a very challenging game. A game so challenging it will scare a lot of people. Scare them so much they lose interest. Atleast, thats if they are not tempered in concept slightly.

Most if not all benefits of binding can be created by either putting a destruction timer on a weapon, by limiting the length of a binding, and/or both.

Once again, all due respect is intended to all involved.

Sorry if this post seems out of place here, it was from another topic.

★ Arch-Caretaker

Mar 28, 2005 · 08:39 #71

Vogar Eol wrote:
With all due respect to EVERYONE involved.... that whole topic listed was hijacked by Isabelle.

With all do respect to Isabelle, she is the kind of person who would make a voider pixie mage permadeath, and insist on only fighting with her hands. She is ultimate hardcore person.

In general, her concepts will make a challenging game. They will make a very challenging game. A game so challenging it will scare a lot of people. Scare them so much they lose interest. Atleast, thats if they are not tempered in concept slightly.

Most if not all benefits of binding can be created by either putting a destruction timer on a weapon, by limiting the length of a binding, and/or both.

Once again, all due respect is intended to all involved.

Sorry if this post seems out of place here, it was from another topic.

Thanks for the repost.

Isa doesn't make coding policy, her opinion is weighed just like everybody elses. I usually discuss these things with her as she gives me a good gauge on how to do things build wise. Plus she's a very hard worker when I need some help.

Binding isn't Isa's idea. It isn't mine either. But its one of those ideas that, when you've seen it in action, solves such a wide range of issues you just have to utter 'DOH, why didn't I think of that'.

You do not have to worry about accidental binding, as the game refuses to equip unbinded bind-on-wear items when you havent typed 'wear item sure' on first wear. Also, i've been pondering a middleman trade between player option, so players can examine items fully before completing the trade.

As far as damaging beyond repair and unbinding-after-time are concerned, they do not fit my reasons. Any sufficient alternative would have to prevent an item from re-entering the economy after an item has been used, whilst still allowing people to keep using their item as long as they like.

Dual-Avatar

Mar 28, 2005 · 08:54 #72

This is purely harmful to players, it accomplishes little, and it is not wanted by the people it supposedly benefits(us).

The binding change will affect only players, not immortals, who don't play(making the occasional void mage permadeath that never makes it high epic level doesn't count). Not only are we players the only ones who will be affected, and hurt, by this, we are the ones who actually play DL and have a good idea of how this will affect the game. You(Celeborn) programmed DL and know how you designed things to work, you may watch DL and see how things appear to work, but we *play* DL and know how things DO work.

Making everything bind is not just a small, annoying change. It is a crippling one that will make DL a lot less fun, will makg a lot of people unhappy, and will waste a lot of time that we have already invested in the game. Many of the players you hurt with this patch will likely leave, and the rest of us(including me) who stay will be at the very least unhappy and quite possibly angry at you. Many alternatives have been suggested, I'm sure one of them will let you accomplish whatever goal you are after without causing such problems. Why do you insist on binding, and refuse to reconsider?

Dual-Avatar

Mar 28, 2005 · 09:01 #73

By the way, I dug this link up from an old forum post here

http://www.memorableplaces.com/mudwimping.html

Remember that?

Dual-Avatar

Mar 28, 2005 · 09:05 #74

Yet a bound item can be sold to a shop? If not, then its value is effectively zero? If bound why would it sell to an npc if no one would buy it? NPC's buying useless junk really degrades the game. You should ONLY be able to sell weapons to a weapon merchant, not any shopkeeper you find...

Binding like this will kill legends and artifacts. I for one have some weapons and armours I have had many owners and a lot of history. Years from now there will be no stories talking about a mighty weapon and how it changed hands. There won't be tales of swords like Vorpal, or Defender and the many characters that wielded them and the eventual loss of the items.

Kindness to a newbie will be harder to come by. You can't just give them old gear you don't have a use for. You have to give them brand new gear. I hate to say it, but people aren't that generous.

Dual-Avatar

Mar 28, 2005 · 09:07 #75

Vogar Eol wrote:
Yet a bound item can be sold to a shop? If not, then its value is effectively zero? If bound why would it sell to an npc if no one would buy it? NPC's buying useless junk really degrades the game. You should ONLY be able to sell weapons to a weapon merchant, not any shopkeeper you find...

I think you'll be able to "salvage" items for a pitifully small amount of resources. Personally, I think salvaging is a good idea, and if it is balanced and made to give fair returns, it would be a much better solution to the problems that binding supposedly fixes, with none of the drawbacks.

★ Arch-Caretaker

Mar 28, 2005 · 09:14 #76

Nuitari wrote:
This is purely harmful to players, it accomplishes little, and it is not wanted by the people it supposedly benefits(us).

The binding change will affect only players, not immortals, who don't play(making the occasional void mage permadeath that never makes it high epic level doesn't count). Not only are we players the only ones who will be affected, and hurt, by this, we are the ones who actually play DL and have a good idea of how this will affect the game. You(Celeborn) programmed DL and know how you designed things to work, you may watch DL and see how things appear to work, but we *play* DL and know how things DO work. Making everything bind is not just a small, annoying change. It is a crippling one that will make DL a lot less fun, will makg a lot of people unhappy, and will waste a lot of time that we have already invested in the game. Many of the players you hurt with this patch will likely leave, and the rest of us(including me) who stay will be at the very least unhappy and quite possibly angry at you. Many alternatives have been suggested, I'm sure one of them will let you accomplish whatever goal you are after without causing such problems. Why do you insist on binding, and refuse to reconsider?

If you really want to your entitled to sprout your opinion, but this post doesn't actually contain any rational or insightful arguments to make me change my mind.

★ Arch-Caretaker

Mar 28, 2005 · 09:23 #77

Vogar Eol wrote:
Yet a bound item can be sold to a shop? If not, then its value is effectively zero? If bound why would it sell to an npc if no one would buy it?

Bound items can be bound to a shop. NPC shopkeepers only pay up to 1 Mitrill (if I remember correctly) so you get /some/ return.

An item which is sufficiently priced will probably have components that are worth more than that that one Mitrill in salvage value, so NPC's have a valid return for their money.

Vogar Eol wrote:
You should ONLY be able to sell weapons to a weapon merchant, not any shopkeeper you find...

Realistic but not very practical in my opinion.

Vogar Eol wrote:
Binding like this will kill legends and artifacts. I for one have some weapons and armours I have had many owners and a lot of history. Years from now there will be no stories talking about a mighty weapon and how it changed hands. There won't be tales of swords like Vorpal, or Defender and the many characters that wielded them and the eventual loss of the items.

If you can provide me with the story of ten of those items (actual stories, not made up ones) I'll provide a limited amount of unbinding items in te he game.

Vogar Eol wrote:
Kindness to a newbie will be harder to come by. You can't just give them old gear you don't have a use for. You have to give them brand new gear. I hate to say it, but people aren't that generous.

There will be enough room for kindness to newbies. Common gear is easy to get, a silver coin worthless to a level 50 char buys a full newbie gear, and you simply cant use all the items you find as a char anyway.

Retired Caretaker

Mar 28, 2005 · 13:47 #78

It's important to note here Vogar, we have fully planned on changing equipment, especially for lower level characters so that NPC run shop equipment will be beneficial to all lower level characters, and will be more readily available to them.

Newbies will be fine, and will care less about some avatars sweaty old gear.

Costs will increase per level, to make it harder? no, to make it even, you will gain more coin from opponents per level. So it should theoretically balance out.

I think either you, or you and nuitari have asked on more than one occassion, 'why can't we have salvage' .. if the person who asked this would look, they would see, this is already planned, mentioned, designed.

You will /WANT/ to salvage your old eq for its properties, not because we are forcing you to, not because there isnt anything left for you to do with it (you can keep, or sell the item to a shop). You will /WANT/ to, because it will be preferred.

You won't be forced into anything.

Dual-Avatar

Mar 29, 2005 · 09:48 #79

We will want to salvage because something as simple as a name change via ridicule will destroy all our items' usefulness as anything but scrap

I am not against anything I have heard EXCEPT for binding. To me binding is like making your Kool-aid with Everclear. Sure, it looks like Koo-laid, heck it even tastes like Koolaid. However, it has a lot more kick then Kool-aid needs, and would you give it to small children?

Perment binding is a bad thing. My concept of timers was that if I removed a sword, it stayed bound to me for two weeks, and then it could become bound to the next person to wear it, ect.... I am not talking about bind once, then the binding purges completely after two weeks. I like to think of binding as dirt in the air, and the timer as a good ole rainstorm. It keeps things clean and healthy.

Celeborn, if you want me to write up some lore on ten items, that would be quite simple.

1. Sardonyx, current owner of a mitrill claw. Claw was forged by Vogar under the old magic, was carried in battle by Oogh the first voider in a tourney Isabelle held where one level 47 voider killed 9 tri-avs grouped against him.

2. Vorpal Blade, the first emeralite greatsword to ever be made. It had 17attack, and about 100 damage roll. It was given three Ser runes to increase wounding. This sword was wielded by Oogh, Fezzik and Trizona as well as several of his alliase in various arena competitions. In all cases the wielder won. The item was destroyed when Trizona then a void vampire lost his full corpse through blood-hunger.

3. Defender, the mate of Vorpal. Forged at the same time and under the same magic, this blade was instead given sanc and about 20 mobility. It changed hands as a loner, various times and eventually was destroyed when Autumn one of the last Half-Celestrials was fighting Lord of Mourning.

4 & 5. Twin emeralite talons made in the same magical furnace as Defender and Vorpal. One was gifted three Man runes, and the other gifted three Moo runes. Both were enchanted to about +12 attack and +50 damage. These changed hands many times in many arena battles and were a weapon of choice for speed. Drynath Syndicate felt their pain more often then not. Destroyed in a major shop crash.

6 & 7. Bracers of might, a match pair of ironwood bracers that give a large boost in strength and mobility. Have passed to many many trusted CoS members to use to level. Constructed by Autumn. Was used by Oogh in his tourney against 9 tri-avs.

8 & 9. Blue-handled and Black-handled iron longswords. One forged with anchient magic to make it cast Spiral Blast, the other with defensive magic of recall. Their powers were short lived, but they made their name while they lasted. The items still exist as very decent ordinary blades.

10. Vogar's silk shirt. Crafted by Rikku for Vogar and enchanted by Vogar. It was given some powerful enchantments, and loaned out to many. Gwen championed in her day wearing this garment.

11. Cuirass of Mystics, one of the best lowbie items still in existance. A simple ironwood cuirass which grants powerful aide to the wear's aim. Has been used by many of CoS at one time or another. Crafted by Autumn

12. Wood-beaded necklaces. Vogar origionally had saved 12 of these from days of old. They passed ammong the greatest of magic users in the game as they gave incredible boosts to INT and WIS as well as granting scry and other effects. They were worn by Darkwhispers, Dwain, and others who I have since forgotten. Destroyed when many other craft items of the old system were removed.

13. Vogar's Magic Visor. Was the only magic visor vogar made before the old craft code was changed. Eventually was gifted to Angelus and was worn from then till the death-traps that caused him to leave the game.

14. Dwarven Crown, was the last of the "King's Crown" from the old craft code. Was worn by Vogar for a long time. Finally was gifted to Darkwhispers in friendship. Died with many craft items of the old code.

15. A Midian cloaks that have changed hands a dozen and a half times and been reforged mitrill, finially becoming bound to one character in recent history.

16. Vogar's personal mitrill shortswords. Both were created using impossible to obtain ruins "Ead" and gifted with powerful enchant weapon, holy avenger, and mundane enchantments. Neither could ever be replaced and are likely the only true "Holy Avengers" in the game. They have been wielded by various Paladins of mitrill, but have passed back to Vogar's personal collection.

17. The first witchhunter. Shortly after some clues given by Celeborn, Cyrus and Vogar sat around in a dark nock of the old citadel of Vogar's Circle in the days before his guild. A multi-socket sparring sword was laying before them, and Cyrus had volunteered to sacrifice an ultra rune to the test. The runeword worked, and the weapon was tested in combat and used extensively. It was eventually loaned to a player (note should still be on the contract board) who lost it in one way or another.

And these are just a few items that I have had some involvement in. Any one of them I could write a decently sized story on. These don't even begin to delve into items such as the first Metaltearer. There are many stories out there of many items and how they changed hands and changed the world of Alora. Quite a few stories and interactions would not have happened had those items been bound.

But anyway, I have had enough. Fought the "good fight" for much to long. Its time I leave Alora for good to find the lands where other forgotten heros have gone before. May they welcome me in their midst.

★ Arch-Caretaker

Mar 29, 2005 · 10:07 #80

Vogar Eol wrote:
We will want to salvage because something as simple as a name change via ridicule will destroy all our items' usefulness as anything but scrap

Rename converts all your worn gear to the new name. Also, items are linked to both char name and account name, so if any established player accidently gets renamed its easily fixed.

Vogar Eol wrote:
1. Sardonyx, current owner of a mitrill claw. Claw was forged by Vogar under the old magic, was carried in battle by Oogh the first voider in a tourney Isabelle held where one level 47 voider killed 9 tri-avs grouped against him.

2. Vorpal Blade, the first emeralite greatsword to ever be made. It had 17attack, and about 100 damage roll. It was given three Ser runes to increase wounding. This sword was wielded by Oogh, Fezzik and Trizona as well as several of his alliase in various arena competitions. In all cases the wielder won. The item was destroyed when Trizona then a void vampire lost his full corpse through blood-hunger.

3. Defender, the mate of Vorpal. Forged at the same time and under the same magic, this blade was instead given sanc and about 20 mobility. It changed hands as a loner, various times and eventually was destroyed when Autumn one of the last Half-Celestrials was fighting Lord of Mourning.

4 & 5. Twin emeralite talons made in the same magical furnace as Defender and Vorpal. One was gifted three Man runes, and the other gifted three Moo runes. Both were enchanted to about +12 attack and +50 damage. These changed hands many times in many arena battles and were a weapon of choice for speed. Drynath Syndicate felt their pain more often then not. Destroyed in a major shop crash.

6 & 7. Bracers of might, a match pair of ironwood bracers that give a large boost in strength and mobility. Have passed to many many trusted CoS members to use to level. Constructed by Autumn. Was used by Oogh in his tourney against 9 tri-avs.

8 & 9. Blue-handled and Black-handled iron longswords. One forged with anchient magic to make it cast Spiral Blast, the other with defensive magic of recall. Their powers were short lived, but they made their name while they lasted. The items still exist as very decent ordinary blades.

10. Vogar's silk shirt. Crafted by Rikku for Vogar and enchanted by Vogar. It was given some powerful enchantments, and loaned out to many. Gwen championed in her day wearing this garment.

11. Cuirass of Mystics, one of the best lowbie items still in existance. A simple ironwood cuirass which grants powerful aide to the wear's aim. Has been used by many of CoS at one time or another. Crafted by Autumn

12. Wood-beaded necklaces. Vogar origionally had saved 12 of these from days of old. They passed ammong the greatest of magic users in the game as they gave incredible boosts to INT and WIS as well as granting scry and other effects. They were worn by Darkwhispers, Dwain, and others who I have since forgotten. Destroyed when many other craft items of the old system were removed.

13. Vogar's Magic Visor. Was the only magic visor vogar made before the old craft code was changed. Eventually was gifted to Angelus and was worn from then till the death-traps that caused him to leave the game.

14. Dwarven Crown, was the last of the "King's Crown" from the old craft code. Was worn by Vogar for a long time. Finally was gifted to Darkwhispers in friendship. Died with many craft items of the old code.

15. A Midian cloaks that have changed hands a dozen and a half times and been reforged mitrill, finially becoming bound to one character in recent history.

16. Vogar's personal mitrill shortswords. Both were created using impossible to obtain ruins "Ead" and gifted with powerful enchant weapon, holy avenger, and mundane enchantments. Neither could ever be replaced and are likely the only true "Holy Avengers" in the game. They have been wielded by various Paladins of mitrill, but have passed back to Vogar's personal collection.

17. The first witchhunter. Shortly after some clues given by Celeborn, Cyrus and Vogar sat around in a dark nock of the old citadel of Vogar's Circle in the days before his guild. A multi-socket sparring sword was laying before them, and Cyrus had volunteered to sacrifice an ultra rune to the test. The runeword worked, and the weapon was tested in combat and used extensively. It was eventually loaned to a player (note should still be on the contract board) who lost it in one way or another.

Wheee! You convinced me.

I'll implement something that'll suit this perfectly. I'll post more on it later.

Quote:
But anyway, I have had enough. Fought the "good fight" for much to long. Its time I leave Alora for good to find the lands where other forgotten heros have gone before. May they welcome me in their midst.

It was fun mr. Dwarf!

Dual-Avatar

Mar 31, 2005 · 08:12 #81

Isabelle wrote:
You will /WANT/ to salvage your old eq for its properties, not because we are forcing you to, not because there isnt anything left for you to do with it (you can keep, or sell the item to a shop). You will /WANT/ to, because it will be preferred.

If we will /WANT/ to salvage our old eq, and will do it anyways, why make it bind to us? The only reason to do that is if we will NOT want to salvage it, binding would be unneccessary if we WANTED to salvage our eqipment.

Isabelle wrote:
You won't be forced into anything.

What exactly do you think binding does? FORCING a player to salvage everything, whether they want to or not, is exactly what binding does.

Celeborn wrote:
If you really want to your entitled to sprout your opinion, but this post doesn't actually contain any rational or insightful arguments to make me change my mind.

Of course it's not insightful; most of what I'm saying is self-evident. That link was not about me, either. I also do not presume to belong to any group described therein; I'm not quite foolish enough to try to judge myself or to assume that I am somehow noble or wise. I apologize if my opinion is annoying to you, but this is my only way of opposing a change that will directly and very negatively affect me. I am not trying to annoy you, keep you from changing DL(the rest of the patch looks awesome!), or anything like that; I am simply trying to keep all of the time I have invested in my character and equipment from being ruined, and to ensure that DL continues to be as fun as it is now and has been in the past(yes, the binding change is THAT bad). I am also not the only person to oppose this, and I have yet to see a single player support the idea of binding.

Isabelle wrote:
i realize you dont really read my posts here, but let me repeat, again..

I have read every post here, thank you. Please forgive me if I am not satisfied with the fact that losing my radiant items and wiping all 28,000 or so glory enchanted in my equipment "may not be possible".

Isabelle wrote:
I know, as you have stated to me, there is a deep philosophical reason for not having balance, balance is bad, the only real muds are the imbalanced ones, which give players a purpose and reason to overcome the obvious setbacks that are against them.

I am not opposed to balance, but you interpret the word very liberally. I was trying to help you realize that, without angering you and suddenly finding myself banned again for "harassment".

Is all-encompasing, permanent binding supposed to stay in the game forever, with no hope in sight, or is it a temporary measure to force players to get rid of items they have now and to stem the creation of new items? If the latter, then it's not really a problem and I have no objection to it. If it is the former, shouldn't we at least try out the rest of the economy changes, including salvaging, and see if they remedy the problem before *forcing* us to use them? That way, you can also tweak salvaging/selling to shops to find appropriate rates for them, to get players to salvage items at the rate you desire(if no one's salvaging, the returns are too low, if players are trying to mug each other for scrap items, it's too high). If you do this, there's nothing stopping binding from being introduced in the future, if neccessary. However, changes are almost never undone, no matter how bad they are, so once introduced it is irreversible. At the very least, doing this will accomplish your stated goal from the original post of "not driving away any established players" (or at least, not any more than this has already).

If you(Celeborn) still think I'm just being annoying and don't care what I think, I'll desist; I don't care enough anymore to argue any further than I have. I have some old emeralite artifacts that have been passed down to many characters, that I would like to remain unbinding, if possible. I'll leave their descriptions out of this post, as it's long enough already.

Dual-Avatar

Mar 31, 2005 · 08:24 #82

I still read here when I am bored, and I have finished chastising the ignorant people on my art-metal forums. (one knuckle-head actually thought you can't safely weld magnesium....)

Anyway, would like to hear that idea/concept you said you would post more info on, Celeborn.

Dual-Avatar

Apr 01, 2005 · 17:28 #83

Some other ideas I was thinking about in refrence to binding.

1. What if bindings worked such that anyone in the same family could use the items freely?

2. What if anyone could use a bound item, but suffered penalties for it? -1 critical modifier if in the same family; -2 critical modifier if not in the same family?

3. What if items are all unbound, put a new enchantment spell binds the item to next person to wield it? The item would be more powerful, and for rp purposes it would act the way it did because of a magical spell cast on the item.

4. No matter what form of binding remains in game, could we have some RP special effects added to wearing or trying to wear the items? Something that explains why it can't be worn by X, and that shows something neat when Y wear it?

A emeralite cuirass sparks and sputters as it fits itself to Y's exact form.

A emeralite cuirass zaps X, preventing him from wearing it.

I would still like to hear your idea, Celeborn.

Retired Caretaker

Apr 01, 2005 · 17:47 #84

an RP explanation might be like 'the object is magically crafted to the specific dimensions of the player when it is first worn, after it is worn, the magical properties dissipate, and can no longer fit someone else properly.
Without the proper fit of the item, all magical bonuses are nullified. (and the magic properties of form fitting can never be placed upon a previously bound item)

i understand the unwillingness to try something which is extreme, but if you start saying, well lets let it be worn by anyone of the same group, then players will just join and leave a guild at their whim, if you say you want a magical spell to unbind items, you might as well not have binding items in the first place, which means you will never truly know if the plan would have worked. You will be trapped in old never moving forward dark legacy, forever.

Now, your idea of 'family' may have merit, and if Celeborn does give in, and makes some form of weakened binding happen, the 'family' is what i would endorse. BUT ONLY as long as its not abusable. If marrying and divorcing to become part of a family starts happening just for the sake of selling an item to someone.. that would be depressing.

Dual-Avatar

Apr 01, 2005 · 18:15 #85

Isabelle wrote:
If marrying and divorcing to become part of a family starts happening just for the sake of selling an item to someone.. that would be depressing.

No, binding itself is depressing. If no one wants it, and players are willing to go to extreme measures like this to bypass it...why are you putting it in? Really, we don't secretly want binding and just pretend to oppose it. We don't just oppose radical change, we oppose BAD change.

Dual-Avatar

Apr 01, 2005 · 18:18 #86

I said FAMILIES not GUILDS, nowhere did I mentions guilds or groups other then familes.

Nowhere did I mention a spell to remove then binding of an item. I did however suggest that all items be unbound, but that powerful spells such as enchant weapon cause the item to be bound upon wear of the item.

Players marrying and divorcing? Since when do players have any real control over those two commands? Last I checked, Caretakers completely controlled that. If they a Caretaker isn't screening those actions propperly, don't blame players for abuse. I personally would require more money, and a very descriptive story. I would require 5 times as much cash, and a better story for a divorce.

In short, I think my post was grossly misread. Also, it was intended to be bounced off Celeborn, and not everyone out there.

Retired Caretaker

Apr 01, 2005 · 20:24 #87

my post wasnt directed at your one post, if you look closer, you will see 'your post about families' was mentioned specifically, the other comments i made were to address other peoples 'ideas'

as i said, i like the idea, as long as it cant turn into 'well ok fred, i will sell you my e300 full set of gear, so lets get a caretaker to marry us, then you get the gear, and we can divorce afterwards' or some such thing

unless you are asking specifically for loopholes, then ok, sorry for raising that concern

Dual-Avatar

Apr 01, 2005 · 20:50 #88

Isabelle wrote:
as i said, i like the idea, as long as it cant turn into 'well ok fred, i will sell you my e300 full set of gear, so lets get a caretaker to marry us, then you get the gear, and we can divorce afterwards' or some such thing

Fred: "So, why do we have to get married in order for me to buy your sword and armor?"

Seller: "Because I wore them."

Fred: "and...?"

Seller: "Err...didn't you know that once one person wears something no one else can ever wear it again? Where HAVE you been?"

Fred: "Uhh...Yes I can....*wears the armor* see?"

Seller: "OMG IMBA NERFPLZ!"

Tri-Avatar

Apr 07, 2005 · 22:06 #89

I have been pondering this a while, thinking of things you could spend the money on, and this is what I have come up with:

60 Emeralite coins: Third eye. You have gained the wisdom of foresight, which you use to better dodge your attacks. Hard bonus of 13 to your upper mobility score. Can only be bought once.

20 Emeralite coins: Resets the enchants on any one crafted item. Doesn't change it's bind state. Increases its value by 50% (cumulative). So the more you do this to a single item, the more expensive it is to enchant.

85 Emeralite coins: Give an item an additional enchant slot. This can only be chosen once per item, and it increases the items value by 500% (making it more expensive to enchant).

15 White Shards: Never go above 'normal' appetite.

Dual-Avatar

Apr 24, 2005 · 20:47 #90

Celeborn wrote:
Reforging:
- Reforging is removed. Instead, people can use their crafts to perform 'Upgrade' and 'Salvage'.

Upgrading:
- Upgrading costs 400% of the items value in coins, and two times the normal crafting resources. (but not additional reagents).
- Materials are split into levels. You can only upgrade an item from its original material to a material one level higher (copper->bronze).

Salvaging:
- Depending on the item salvaged, may jields one (or more) of its original resource type.

So how will those that spent a lot of time addepting reforge be reimbursed? I personally feel a fair way would be to give a slight boost to their craft levels in their metalworking crafts. This would compensate for the time working metal that they spent.

How many levels? I think that should depend on their skill level in reforge. However, just removing the skill completely without covering the time and energy needed to addept wouldn't be very nice

Avatar

Apr 25, 2005 · 01:08 #91

No More Reforge!!!

If reforging is to be removed, I am not sure if there is a fair way to reimburse players for the time and material used in raising this skill. Vogar Eol suggested that a raise in metalworking skills might be an option.
This may work for some players, but not for mine, unless a score of 200% in metalworking is ok.
Perhaps some resources as a form of reimbursement may work, but it would be very hard to determine an amount. Besides the time spent, I used a vast amount of mitrill to reforge eq from newbie to 50th level for my character to multi-class in, most of which will be near worthless with the coming patch when compared to the items that can be made.
So I do not see a fair way to reimburse players for this, although any form of reimbursement would be welcome, even if it does not fully represent the effort and materials used in raising this skill

Dual-Avatar

Apr 25, 2005 · 01:15 #92

I do not believe that reforged items will be reverting to their original material. Vogar was addressing the fact that some people adepted the Expert>Reforge craft and are losing a craft. I do not believe that you will recieve any reimbursement for your reforged equipment.

Avatar

Apr 25, 2005 · 03:52 #93

Quintos, you missed my point.

That will teach me to make a short post while online. sorry I was not clear on my post.

I did not think that reforged items would revert to the original material, nor was I thinking about reimbursement for items, that would be silly. Vogar was suggesting that players be reimbursed for the effort put into raising the skill itself. I was pointing out that there does not seem to be any fair method to reimburse players for the time and materials spent in raising this skill.

As for the items I reforged becoming worthless let me explain. For example the silver facewrap, even one reforged in mithrill would be a poor substitute for one crafted under the coming craft system, due to the number of enchantments the new one could hold. The only use the old reforged one will be good for is to get a blueprint and an enchantment from, and an ingot or 2 of mitril. I can get a blueprint and the enchantments from a normal item. The meager amount of mitril. I would get does not come close to the cost in mitril used to reforge it. So a great deal of the work I have done for the last year will be for naught.

I am not upset that this time was wasted, as the coming craft system looks awesome. I was just pointing out that it would be hard, if not impossible, to come up with a fair means to reimburse players for the time, effort, and materials spent in raising this skill.

Arureal

High Lord of Lowbies

Dual-Avatar

Apr 25, 2005 · 12:14 #94

Its very simple to reimburse people for the time spent. Simple math can tell us how many reforgings need to be done to go from 0% reforge to 100% addept.

Now lets say you did an estimated one thousand reforgings (yes, I know thats too high an estimate). Since in the new craft patch your craft skill will be given a level (100% will equal about e300 in the craft), Celeborn could do a little simple calculation to see what your level would be with another 1000 items made. That would be added to your craft level in smithing. Hence instead of being e300, you would now be e320 in smithing.

As you can see, you are being compensated for the time spent in the smithing skill. Why is this fair? Because in the new system reforge will be a PART of smithing.

Avatar

Apr 25, 2005 · 18:45 #95

Vogar Eol

I did not have a clue as to how many tries it takes to raise a skill to 100%. I have never tried to calculate it, nor estimate it, so I will take your word that 1,000 is a high estimate.

I was also going to ask how current scores in crafting skills would be converted in the coming patch. If smithing can exceed the e300 that a current 100% is equal to, then your suggestion would be an appropriate way to reimburse players.

Arureal

High Lord of Lowbies

⚔ Caretaker

May 30, 2005 · 22:46 #96

moo

Tri-Avatar

Jun 01, 2005 · 05:27 #97

just want to understand the issue here about reforge. From what i readed here i think its bug because if you reforge and have a low percentage the items that trying to be reforge should break its that simple. the gain of this skill (expert>reforge) using less material to reforge at a higher % and lesser breaks. (problem find)
The Reforging is like a at 100% when you start with 0%. no breaking item. And i noticed that its always using close to 250 to 300 ingots (no more, no less) just a bugging ideas

Retired Caretaker

Jun 01, 2005 · 12:17 #98

it uses ingots based on the objects 'size'

note: size does not have anything to do with ingame object sizes, but more to do with objects in relation to each other (like cuirasses versus gauntlets) and i believe the level of the item also plays a role.

Dual-Avatar

Jun 01, 2005 · 21:01 #99

Crafted weapons and armors cost the same amount to reforge. This value does not change at all, like zidane noticed. This is a well known fact that I /know/ has been mentioned to immortals on multiple occasions, although I am unsure of their opinion. Although I have not personally tested crafted gauntlets, I would expect that they cost the same amount as the other weapons and armors that I have tried, which include helmets, cuirasses, and bracers.

Tri-Avatar

Jun 02, 2005 · 00:17 #100

Quintos wrote:
Crafted weapons and armors cost the same amount to reforge. This value does not change at all, like zidane noticed. This is a well known fact that I /know/ has been mentioned to immortals on multiple occasions, although I am unsure of their opinion. Although I have not personally tested crafted gauntlets, I would expect that they cost the same amount as the other weapons and armors that I have tried, which include helmets, cuirasses, and bracers.

Well, not quite true. They all CAP at 156 ingots, so in a way they cost the same...But if you get under that cap, thats when you see the variation.

Dual-Avatar

Jun 02, 2005 · 18:39 #101

weems wrote:
Quintos wrote:
Crafted weapons and armors cost the same amount to reforge. This value does not change at all, like zidane noticed. This is a well known fact that I /know/ has been mentioned to immortals on multiple occasions, although I am unsure of their opinion. Although I have not personally tested crafted gauntlets, I would expect that they cost the same amount as the other weapons and armors that I have tried, which include helmets, cuirasses, and bracers.
Well, not quite true. They all CAP at 156 ingots, so in a way they cost the same...But if you get under that cap, thats when you see the variation.

At what level do they cap? I believe even my level 1 quarterstaves used 156..although I could be mistaken.

Tri-Avatar

Jun 02, 2005 · 20:02 #102

Where they cap would depend not only on the level, but the 'size', as Isabelle mentioned. A level 1 staff I can't imagine using much more than 20 or so ingots. I remember reforging some 20ish axes to adamantite,and it only costed like 50 ingots.

Dual-Avatar

Jun 03, 2005 · 18:22 #103

Swords at level 17 reforge for about 15-30. I do not remember the exact ammount off hand. It might vary depending on short sword, long sword, or great sword.

Celeborn (#1)

weems (#2)

Celeborn (#3)

weems (#4)

weems (#5)

Celeborn (#6)

Celeborn (#7)

weems (#8)

Isabelle (#9)

weems (#10)

Nuitari (#11)

Isabelle (#12)

Isabelle (#13)

weems (#14)

Nuitari (#15)

Isabelle (#16)

weems (#17)

Nuitari (#18)

weems (#19)

Nuitari (#20)

Isabelle (#21)

Isabelle (#22)

Celeborn (#23)

Nuitari (#24)

Zach (#25)

Isabelle (#26)

Celeborn (#27)

Celeborn (#28)

Quintos (#29)

Nuitari (#30)

Celeborn (#31)

Nellwyn (#32)

Isabelle (#33)

lingolas (#34)

Celeborn (#35)

Zidane (#36)

Quintos (#37)

Nellwyn (#38)

Zidane (#39)

Silvanos (#40)

Zidane (#41)

Kiasyn (#42)

Jorelani (#43)

Isabelle (#44)

Jorelani (#45)

Gerret (#46)

Isabelle (#47)

Nuitari (#48)

Isabelle (#49)

Jorelani (#50)

Isabelle (#51)

lingolas (#52)

Jorelani (#53)

Nuitari (#54)

Jorelani (#55)

Nuitari (#56)

Jorelani (#57)

Nuitari (#58)

Jorelani (#59)

Nuitari (#60)

Jorelani (#61)

Kiasyn (#62)

Jorelani (#63)

Kiasyn (#64)

Jorelani (#65)

Kiasyn (#66)

Tuler (#67)

Zidane (#68)

Zidane (#69)

Vogar Eol (#70)

Celeborn (#71)

Nuitari (#72)

Nuitari (#73)

Vogar Eol (#74)

Nuitari (#75)

Celeborn (#76)

Celeborn (#77)

Isabelle (#78)

Vogar Eol (#79)

Celeborn (#80)