Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Joker86

Pages: 1 ... 141 142 [143]
2131
Well, to be honest I didn't really want retiring to be gone, I just thought it would be obsolete. But if people liked it I don't see any reason why it couldn't fit to my suggestion. Prhaps there could be other advantages we didn't even think of yet?  :D

2132
Game Balance Discussion / Re: Why Cavalry Isn't Overpowered
« on: January 06, 2011, 10:57:47 pm »
Just make armoured horses far more expensive. It wouldn't hurt the purchase of a horse itself (as saving some money is easy now), but it WOULD hurt the upkeep.

2133
Announcements / Re: Version 0.201 Released
« on: January 06, 2011, 10:36:01 pm »
Buy a pike. Solved.

Lol  :lol:

This myth is really unkillable. Pike beating horsemen. Really.  :rolleyes:

2134
Announcements / Re: Version 0.201 Released
« on: January 06, 2011, 06:47:48 pm »
it's not the whine that was the reason for it. People on the losing side started to wear nothing and just wait for the end of the round. I couldn't think of anything that fixes it, other than that.

However, the most important thing now is the multiplicator, which doesn't sound that bad, does it? The problem before was you were punished twice (less multiplicator, pay maintenance). I think there was no reason for this.

I think you just completely forgot matters of motivation. On long term there will be no motivation playing cRPG, as more money doesn't help anything, because you can't afford more expensive items, unless you run around naked for a while. Getting higher levels is only fun until lvl 30, then it gets back to the grind you didn't want.

Basically your only motivation for winning a round is getting a higher multiplier for things you don't really need...

Did you also take in concern that you can't just suppose a 50/50 win/loss-ratio? If you win, lose, win, lose and so on you will have less money after ten rounds with 5 wins and 5 losses alternating, than with 5 losses and 3 wins in a row.  :?  :?:

2135
Oh and I forgot to write: basically, in theory, you could even make every character start with max level and some amount of gold, it wouldn't break the game. This would probably satisfy th grind-haters, but of course disappoint the grind-lovers. Just wanted to mention that even this would be possible to make without breaking balance (but motivation perhaps).

2136
Announcements / Re: Version 0.201 Released
« on: January 06, 2011, 06:22:31 pm »
Thx for that reply  :D

2137
Announcements / Re: Version 0.201 Released
« on: January 06, 2011, 06:10:25 pm »
As there is a chance your items can break even if you win a round: does this happen only to dead people or to anyone?

Is it death based? (Hope not)

2138
Well, I didn't think about sieges yet, this needs another system, of course.

If everything is balanced properly, it doesn't really meatter if you are well skilled and poorly euqipped, a balanced build or poorly skilled but well equipped, the effectivity of each character should be more or less the same, so that finally personal player skill decides, as it should be!

Weapon Master doesn't increase exponentially.

WM itself not, but the WPP you get.  :wink:

2139
Game Balance Discussion / Re: Why Cavalry Isn't Overpowered
« on: January 06, 2011, 05:45:58 pm »
A forewarning to those of you apes who are incapable of rational thinking, have the attention span of the arse end of a camel or have nothing useful to add to this world: this post requires you to follow my reasoning and see why I think cavalry isn't overpowered.

System vs. Behaviour

Firstly, I will define this model I will use to describe this perceived problem.

"System" can be defined as the mechanical aspects of CRPG relating to cavalry; such as cavalry weapons, anti-cavalry weaponry, horse statistics, etc.
"Behaviour" can be defined as the habits, tactics, methods of coping with or defeating cavalry players use against them, etc.

Secondly, there is an important practical distinction between something be overpowered because of  the mechanics of the system and something being 'overpowered' due to the (bad) behaviour of people. I will paraphrase a conclusion relating to health and safety law that I think is a useful paradigm in this case. 'Systems don't make mistakes, people do'.

So additional hitpoints (protected by armour), additional speed, additional bump damage and additional hit speed are balanced by gameplaymechanics by spending 4 or 5 skill points? And only behaviour breaks this balance? Really?


Thus, in order to make this argument, I will have to discuss why I think the System of cavalry in CRPG is innately balanced.

Countering Cavalry

I'll address plated chargers mainly: if the argument applies to them, it applies to other warhorses.

Players don't like the durability of the plated charger. Nor do they like its ability to take chunks out of a players health bar by riding into them. These are poor arguments against the plate charger because of reasons (mainly poor tactics) I will describe further below when I discuss Behaviour. But for now, I will make an observation. A great many players who complain about the plated charger attempt to defeat it using the wrong type of weapon. These same players may also fail to acknowledge that their builds have to have weaknesses. In the end of the day, if one player invests as a cavalry character, and you invest as a foot based character, you would be an idiot to not have acknowledged the threat against you from the cavalry. To that end, the polearms weapon set is a versatile weapon tree that includes many weapons that, if you had been built to counter cavalry properly, you would have no problem with.

The Only Proper Cavalry Counter (As In Reality) Is A Pike

So everyone without horse is supposed to run around with a pike? You also miss one important point: a pike is only a (not really convincing) PROTECTION against cavalry, it's no counter, as a counter would get cavalry killed.

Also you can't suppose all infantry players want to skill into polearm. What about people who want to use 2hd or 1hd+shield?

Consider the Long Awlpike. It's a long weapon that can stop a horse attacking you at a 45 degree angle (a tactic used by cavalry players to give the infantry fighter minimum chance to hit). It can also be used with a shield; thus you have some protection against ranged attacks. It does 32 piercing damage and thus will penetrate the heavy armour of the plated charger effectively. No other melee weapon does such significant piercing damage at such distance. Consider also the Pike, its an extremely long weapon that is the ultimate cavalry stopper. It may not kill the cavalry outright, but no weapon should unless the cavalry player rides into it without guard up.

Wrong. Horse gives incredible additional benefits, which should be made up by severe weaknesses. Like "Horse stopped by pike = dead".


As for characters not built to be defensible against cavalry; it is a poor argument to be surpised when your two handed sword is not reliable weapon against a heavy horse galloping at you at full speed. Or when your bow doesn't little damage to the horse. Good armour would defeat arrows and histrically, a longbow was only effective against mail at about 20m. With a pike, or long awlpike, you would deter that cavalry and defeat it if it was stupid enough to repeatedly attack you. it is an equally poor argument to claim cavalry is overpowered when being attacked by multiple horseman. The fact of the matter is, it doesn't matter if your fighting cavalry or infantry: if you're being hit by multiple enemies you are at a disadvantage (and rightly so). As such, there is no Systematic problem, only a Behavioural one. Wrong weapon, wrong place, wrong expectations.

So infantry has to skill accordingly to the cavalry threat, end eventually accept hitbacks concerning the euqipment they want to use. (E.g. crossbow and shield+axe... where is there room for a pike?), but where are the hitbacks cavalry has to take against other classes? There are no, you can use whatever you want, in most cases a shield and a lance is enough.

Other Misperceptions

Poor situation awareness is a common Behavioural reason why cavalry is perceived as overpowered. Consider this: for every cavalry player in CRPG there are usually more capable pike users. That means the cavalry cannot simply ride you over; a common perception by many is that a player on a plated charger (like TheFinn) rides over the enemy team because his horse is impregable. This is nonsense, more often than not the enemy horseman rides over a team because half of them are staring at a wall, leeching, mistime their pike attacks, do not have pikes ready, or expecting that their simple spear will stop the armoured horse. All it takes is one pike out of the entire team to stop a cavalry player. Note also, that a spear will stop an unarmoured horse. Poor situation awareness and team incompetance does not make cavalry overpowered.

This is nonsense. You don't have to be aware even of archers as much as of cavalry. Which other class forces you to constantly turn around that fast that you could start to feel sick?

Infantry also have mobility that a cavalryman doesn't have in that cavalry is terrain dependent. It is a poor observation to say cavalry is overpowered when standing in the open being flanked by horsemen. You will notice decent players stay near walls, jumping out the way of a charge, evading attacks at the last moment, and detering the cavalry with ready stab attack. Considering that a good archer can do massive damage by headshotting a charging horse, cavalry are actually very limited in what they can do if not armoured. The armoured horses themselves can be stopped a weapon like the awlpike.

Stopped, not killed. And the whole mobility thing is bullshit. In worst case a cavalryman can dismount and voila! You've got an infantryman! Cavalry = infantry + more awesome.

Horse Archery

Mechanically, for a horse archer to be a more powerful shot they must invest in Power Draw and thus Strength. For a horse archer to invest in horse archery skills like riding and horse archery, they must invest in Agility. This mitigates the nightmare scenario of a plated charger mounted horse archer. Horse archers are also unable to use a shield when shooting. Once again, I believe there is nothing Systematically wrong with horse archers, but Behaviourally players are frustrated by horse archers but instead of commiting ranged attacks all at once towards the horseman or horse, they get seperated, singled out, shot and killed. No horse archer is impregable to arrows. They cannot wear heavy armour and they cannot equip a shield.

And what do you do if you have no ranged weapon? Then you have the choice of either being trampled or being shot and trampled. I don't know any other class being able to take out other players with 0% of own risk.

The Onyl Real Problem With Cavalry

In my opinion, the forcefield shield effect on cavalry is the only real overpowered matter on cavalry. The shield is too maneuverable and too effective on horseback with high shield skill. Fixing this is a matter of balance, but all the other situations describe above relate mainly to examples not involving a shield. Sometimes, a pikeman will end up hitting the shield instead of the horse despite aiming for the horse. In the wider dynamics of the game, this is not a major problem as multiple pikemen can and should be employed anyway, as described below.

The Real Problem Is Teamwork

The ultimate contributing factor to the effectiveness of cavalry is the way people play. Cavalry is effectively when ranks are broken, enemies are in disarray, and self-interest is greater than teamwork. Consider that most CRPG players do not use pikes effectively to protect their team or have an expectation that their messy barbarian horde team should be cavalry proof when it exactly those types of rag tag formations cavalry is made to destroy.

In practice, a good team will be able to deter cavalry from their team using pikes, good use of terrain, and having a stake in your teammates surivival rather than your individual kills. There is no decent cavalry player stupid enough to charge into a bristle of pikes. With the addition of friendly horse bumping in the latest patch; cavalry are further limited in who they can attack when looking for openings.

So all other players have to rely on teamwork. So does caval...? Ah, no! No need for cavalryplayers to care for any tactics.  :rolleyes:

If teams got in the habit of using a mixture of pikes and other weapons when moving across open terrain and stay tight enough to protect each other but not so tight such that weapons start bouncing off people, then it makes it very difficult for cavalry to attack. If once the infantry enters combat and simply 'forgets' about the enemy cavalry: do not be suprised when you get a lance up your arse.

Again: what has cavalry to be aware of? Pikes? OMG this is really hard!  :rolleyes:

And there is absolutely no chance in being aware of cav while fighting in meele. The problem is: you can turn around only each few seconds, 5-10 maybe, but cavalry needs 2 sec- to reach you and another 2 to ride away again.


I am cavalry player myself. Cavalry is easymode, all horses above courser need 25-50% less hitpoints and armour, and 0 bump damage at all.

2140
I want to elaborate the history, the presence and the possible future for cRPG here, as I think the actual state of matter is just depressing! I don't think that you should give the patch some time, as some of the most severe issues (especially running around naked with all the consequences for both teams and the overall gameplay) are obvious and won't disappear after people got used to the patch.

(WARNING! I will quote myself a lot from previous posts in the last months, as some of the stuff is still valid, so expect to read stuff you already read somewhere else. I just worked it over, comprehended it and corrected a few mistakes  :? )


Edit: added a REALLY short summary at the end of the post, for lazy readers.
:P

Character development

The old cRPG had a big problem: character development was not limited enough, which made more and more tincans, knights and plated horse archers appearing on the servers, kind of spoiling the game. After some time all player would have been using only the best equipment. The upkeep system tried to fix this, but failed in my eyes.

Let me explain why:

We have two aspects of character creation: the equipment and the character development, as I showed here:

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

With the old cRPG system, the potential looked like this:

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

Equipment was hardcapped, as sooner or later you would have all the best of the best equipment. Levels were softcapped at about 36 I would say, every level more needed big effort, but it was doable. A player could reach any point on this graphic, representing his choice between equipment and skills. All possible points are coloured in sky blue, creating a square within the two cap bounds, but crossing the level cap (as it's soft).

With this potential, the actual character development on the servers looked like this:

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

As you can see, all (okay, most, of course, but I try to make statements representing the "common behaviour") players (= the coloured squares) tried to develop in both equipment and skill as far as possible, as it's only a matter of time. Take a look at the right side of the graphic: as you can see, the last few players reached the hard cap of equipment, and the only differences between them are their levels, which is only a matter of time. If you would show their development by an arrow it would start from (0|0), go up in about a 45° angle until it reaches the hard equipment cap, and then it would move horizontically, parallely along the "skill"-axis.

By the way: those sqares not reaching the caps always represents lower level players during their development!

Now do you know where my problem is?

The upkeep system only lowers the equipment hard cap by about 50%, making it a (really hard) soft cap (which in fact is no difference to a real hard cap), but basically it would look the same. Yes, the really hard soft cap concerning levels would somehow limit the movement towards the right, but ultimatively the movement would go again the same way. (There are no penalties if you cross the soft level cap, unlike the soft equipment cap)

Take a look how the upkeep system limits look like:

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

Again the sky blue box is (about) the potential the players can use.

Concerning this potential, look how the players develop:

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

Basically the same like before. Again the last movement is towards the right side, but much slower than before. But it's still the same! Players still don't have to make decision, they can use everything in between those two caps. They would all reach the first cap (equipment) and then move along this line towards or even over the level cap.

Upkeep system issues


And there are even more issues, as the intended idea of limiting the equipment players use failed. Let’s see the actual effects of the upkeep system:

- Worries are added to the game. You will be afraid of losing something, and you will have this feeling all the time. CRPG is lacking real motivation! It needs a reward system, not a punishment system! (A reward is if you have more than before, and not being allowed to keep what’s already yours! Of course the gold and XP is a good reward system, but it’s getting more than neutralized by the punishment system. You know, people tend to estimate good things as understood, but bad things as totally unfair and undeserved ;) )

- The upkeep system was meant to reward good players, but no matter how good a player is, he won’t be able to decide rounds on his own again and again, to be able to sustain more than other players. Finally autobalance will decide what you can afford, and assumed that autobalance is working properly, everyone will have a 50/50 win/loss-ratio (after some time). So your skills and knowledge don’t matter, luck decides. Another point of demotivation.

- People will keep on using the same equipment like before, but only half the time. If they are in the winning team, they will put on full plate and ride a charger, if they are losing they will run around naked. Which is a disadvantage for all players, I think!

- This also leads to more 5:0 maps, as once the winning and the losing teams are determined after round 1 the winning team will consist of heavily armoured players, the losing team will run around naked. There will be no thrill in the rounds after the first one, as the winner is already known. If you are unlucky autobalance puts you in the losing tam, which means you will have to run around naked for the next 15-20 minutes, not being able to turn the course of the battle. All this time you will have no fun at all. Another point of demotivation.

- We will have insane amounts of people running around naked. A farming factor has been added to the game, respectively increased, as with the previous version farming was only fighting and thus quite some fun anyway, but now it got worse, as you have no equipment at all while doing so. I think this is overall less fun.

- Due to the soft level cap, lowered WPF and higher armour penalties strength builds will become more effective, which will mean more overhead spamming with blockcrushing weapons. Which is a bad thing imo, as those kills require no skill at all, it’s like horsebumping.

- The increasing money and XP amount per minute encourages people to hide and run away

- Also does the missing area infect, and rounds last longer, as the teams scatter more over the map. The game turns to a stringing together of small duels. This also lowers the effectivity of using tactics (before the patch you could "force" people to hillcamp or whatever, as they needed the area bonus). Which means, that the naive theory, good players (= players also using their head and setting up tactics) could afford more equipment than bad players, recedes into the distance even more!

- This leads to people spending more time in spectator screen instead of actually playing!

- The patch was supposed to lower the amount of archers, but the highly increased amount of lightly armoured or even naked players makes it much more attractive, and cutting damage and slower animations can’t change this. Same thing concerning crossbows and throwing. Ranged fighting will pay more, we will have more shit flying through the air.

- Less armour means horsebumps becoming more effective, we will have more naked people riding around on a horse holding up a shield than before.

- Also, if people don't run around naked, but actually try to keep up some stuff continuously (as it was intended), many of them will decide to keep some slots free. Shielders will run around without body armour, 2hd/polearm players will run around without shoes/gloves/helmet, and so on. The game will look more ugly. (Than it already did :lol: )

I think most of those points can’t be denied, so it’s obvious the upkeep system is only an inferior solution to the problems of old cRPG.


Alternative System


Instead of just criticizing I will now present an alternative suggestion, chadz should be able to remember: the item value system, from now on being only called as “my” system :mrgreen:

The basic ideas are:

- Separation between item value and item price. The item price is what you need to pay to purchase an item on the cRPG-page. The value is the item’s actual value on the battlefield. It’s the value shown in the buy menu like in native. cRPG already had some items which had a certain price on the page, but were shown as “default items” ingame. So technically it’s possible.

- Implementation of another character “attribute”:  wealth. It determines  the maximum item value a character can be equipped with. Every level you gain a few points more automatically, so that you can use better items. Let's assume you start out with 20 points, and every additional level gives 5 points more.

- Implementation of an attribute-less skill called “prosperity” (we can argue about the name :mrgreen: ). This skill point can be levelled as high as your current character level, there is no limitation. It increases your wealth attribute by quite a bit, not too much, but also not too little. I don’t know if it should increase exponentially, like weapon master does, but this can only be tested during a beta, I think. Probably something between 10 and 50 points.

- Then we have to introduce a maximum level, but I would be generous and set it up at 32-40, to increase the RPG-aspect, with quite some time of motivation by gaining levels. So at level 40 a players has 220 value points. Let's assume a tunic costs 10 value points, a leather armour 50, a chainmail 80 and plate 120 points. So if you buy yourself a plate armour at level 40, you immediately lose more than 50% of your value points! If you consider that a flamberg would possibly cost 150 value points, you've got a problem with your current build.

- The system works like this: your wealth value, determined by your level and your prosperity skill value, is shown ingame in the buy menu, it’s the native denar budget. Of course it doesn’t change from round to round like in Native, but except of this it works exactly like in native: if you equip stuff being worth more than this value, the numbers turn red and you won’t start with all of it!

- With a max level retiring became needless, so it’s gone for good! You can still improve items at the “smith’s” on the webside. I don’t know if this is possible or not (due to the effort) but you could even make the player decide which aspect of a weapon to increase: speed, damage or reach (increase model size by a modifier). Armour can gain protection or be made lighter.

- Of course you can reskill your character again by paying some gold, you are not stuck with your skills ;). There is no need to level him up again. If you want to start from a peasant another time just create a new character!

- Implementation of reputation points. Whenever a player wins a round he gets some reputation points, whenever he loses a round he loses a smaller number of reputation points (e.g. win: +2 points, loss: -1 point. This is to create a little “motivation” (=punishment) to actually win a round and so to use tactics, without being too severe in its effects). Those points are spent for the smith (he is a busy man and serves only the most influential lords ;) ), next to the gold payment, of course. But you can also purchase exclusive items which can’t be paid with gold. Those are only slightly better than the “common” top items, but have a special look, making their player looking (almost) unique on the battlefield. Those items cost shitloads of reputation points!

- Reimplementation of the area based gold and xp income. This is to increase teamplay, which requires players actually being near to each other. A gold and xp income independent of this only encourages small skirmishes all over the map, hiding, running away and so on. The final round bonus is determined by two values:

a) the k/d ratio of the teams. The more players from the winning team survive, the better their round bonus. This hopefully encourages teamplay and makes players look for each other.

b) the time the round took. The faster the round has ended, the bigger the bonus for the winner. The longer it took, the better for the defenders. This has the disadvantage of encouraging the last survivors to hide or run away. But I think the effect would be lower than now, especially as with the upkeep system even the winner might want to prolong the round! This is supposed to encourage aggressive gameplay, making players stay less in spec mode.

- Some minor tweaks concerning horses, crossbows, blockcrushing weapons, etc.


Advantages


The central point of my suggestion is the following one: you pay superior equipment with skills, and vice versa. Together with a level cap this will achieve a balance between classes and between players. A level cap between 30 or 40 should be a good compromise between an attribute based RPG and a skill based game. The motivation is the same like in the “old” cRPG (which was really huge), without the demotivating things like losing your equipment only due to autobalance, having to run around naked for a few maps and totally boring rounds with predetermined winners/losers. Additional motivation for players having reached the max level comes from improving items and purchasing unique equipment, similar to games like World of Warcraft (which is the motivation reference par excellence, as it’s literally making addicted).

Any fear of losing something, and any temporally restriction of item usage would be gone!


Now let’s have a look how character development would look like with my suggestion:

Together with the hard level cap, and the hard equipment cap by spending all your skill points into the prosperity skill, players could never move away from (0|0) further than a fixed distance, probably the distance between (0|0) and the hard caps. Like this:


I MADE A MISTAKE! AT THE RIGHT SIDE, THE VERTICAL LINE, IT'S A HARD CAP, TOO, OF COURSE!

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

So the opportunities for players would look like this:

visitors can't see pics , please register or login
As you can see, if you want to get close to one cap you have to sheer off from the other cap. You pay equipment with fighting skills and vice versa. This way, players would be forced to actually meet decisions, instead of just waiting until time makes everything possible. As some players would prefer equipment, other skill, the builds would look differently. The characters in the game would look like this:

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

As you can see, we have different builds with more or less the same strength. (The strength is the surface area of the different player boxes. And as perfect squares offer the greatest surface area, probably balanced builds would be the strongest, but I can't say for sure. If you go only equipment I am sure the surface area would represent the effectivity: lowest possible. But if you would only go for skill I am sure this would be a rather good/decent build (as you get wealth points each level anyway – if you wouldn’t it would also be close to zero, of course).

Next to higher character varieties, more balanced builds, and a much easier balancing (as you don't have to consider "Nerd" builds with 24/24 or so ;) ), the system would lack one important thing: a punishment system, currently demotivating great parts of the community.


Comparison between the two systems


Now let’s have a look how things went with the release of the upkeep patch:

After some confusion (big tactical mistake, as this already makes players feel angry about the patch) the community downloaded the patch and joined the servers. First thing they probably realised was the ingame character page and the voice menu, which are great things, but also are not really related to the upkeep system itself. They lost a lot of level, but this was okay somehow. After a few rounds they saw, they are losing shitloads of money, so many of them took their items off and either bought/used cheaper equipment or ran around naked to farm enough money for being able to play with their most favourite equipment. This is already some kind of punishment, as it doesn’t only add a temporal limitation to the game (like “server only opens between 6 and 10 p.m….”), also grinding is needed (“… if you were in school/at work today! Otherwise: forget it!”). Tincans, cavalry and all the other annoying stuff didn’t disappear, you just have to be balanced into the losing team, and you would have to deal with exactly the same shit, but with way inferior equipment than before. Your game became luck dependant, really frustrating while in the losing team and not really exciting while in winning team. So many players went to the forums and started to criticize/whine/rage.

How would my suggestion feel like?

First of all I would insist on a topic telling the players exactly what is coming, what they will have to do and everything else, to prevent confusion und frustration. Once they downloaded the patch, they would see all their attribute and skill points being reset, but their levels would more or less stay the same. (The XP curve was fine in the old system, I think). As they knew about the value system, they would have a look at the items they want to use by all means, then compare it to the skills they want to have, and decide for their personal build. With this they would join the servers with the characters they decided for, and try out how their build performs. Perhaps they would even make different “presets” for different occasions? Of course there would be a lot of crying, because many people can’t create the build they want/they were used to. But I think the whineage would be way smaller, as many players would accept that things need to be balanced out. The system wouldn’t base so much on luck (autobalance), and there is no need in running around naked half of the time. There would be less tincans with flamberg, and even if there are some, you know they wouldn't be so dominating in meele ny more. I don't know if there would be less cavalry, but it would definitely NOT be so dominating any more, and there would be almost no heavy cavalry. Also plated horse archers would more or less disappear. On the other hand all players who want to play those classes can feel free to play them as long as they want to, they just have to accept they won't be as effective as they used to be. (This will sort out the "result oriented" players from the real class fanboys)

Players would be constantly rewarded by XP, gold and reputation, while any greater punishment than waiting in spectator mode and losing a small amount of reputation for being killed/losing the round would be missing, like it was in the old cRPG (which did pretty well concerning motivation).



Summary (for lazy readers  :P )



- the main issue of the old cRPG was that players didn't need to make decisions, and were rather unlimited in their choice of skills and equipment. This lead to an inflationary usage of top tier equipment, and lead to a strong imbalance between classes.

- the upkeep system meant to fix this, but on one hand it failed partially, on the other hand it created new problems. The main problem if the upkeep system are players running around naked, which has a lot of negative effects on the overall gameplay, for everyone.

- so my alternative suggestion was to balance skills and equipment. To equip superior equipment you would have to skill it. (NOT item requirements, you skill your overall inventory value). With a (high) hardcap, and a few minor changes, this could lead to a balanced AND motivating gameplay.

2141
Announcements / Re: Version 0.200 Released
« on: January 05, 2011, 03:40:59 am »
You know, we wouldn't have minded, if you waited with the release and instead prepared a nice, detailed info post, to prevent all the panicking, whining, the confusion, fear, anger and whatnot this "kind" of release caused now  :rolleyes:

Pages: 1 ... 141 142 [143]