Messages

1

Suggestions Corner / Re: Heirloom +3 personal naming

« on: February 26, 2012, 06:35:34 pm »

As far as I am aware, the name of an item is an integral part of it's definition in item_kinds.  You couldn't simply 'rename' your +3 weapon, it would require an entirely new addition in itemkinds.  An addition which would have to be loaded by everyone.  Consider the number of players with a +3 item, or multiple, and you'd have that number of new items.

It actually is.

From what I know of the game engine, items with custom names require to add entries to text files like the item_kinds.txt

So named items would mean you need to patch the mod each time someone adds a named item into the game.

Pretty much this.

2

General Off Topic / Re: Mass Effect 3

« on: February 18, 2012, 04:10:35 pm »

What is this singleplayer you speak of? I've already spent like 5+ hours on the MP and haven't even touched that thing yet.

lol 5 hours.  LvL 20 Infiltrator here, with a LvL 14 soldier alt.  Bloody lightweights.

3

General Off Topic / Re: Mass Effect 3

« on: February 17, 2012, 11:29:59 pm »

I do hope this isn't an example of the final product.  The singleplayer intro is poorly paced, badly written and lacking any sort of aesthetic polish.  It has that bitter taste of unfinished.  Frankly it's immensely disappointing, a nosedive from the dramatically sound intro of the second game.

4

Suggestions Corner / Re: Idea for Foot Heirlooms

« on: February 16, 2012, 06:30:02 pm »

Much of the game makes little sense. Do you have a compelling reason why foot armor heirlooms must make more sense than the rest?

The Argument For
"Here is an example of a current feature that does not make sense. Because this does not make sense; it justifies the addition of another feature which also does not make sense."

If you were to extrapolate on this pretzel logic; you could justify the myriad of other suggestions in this thread.  For - so long as it does not make sense, anything is game.  For example, gloves which boost power draw are as ludicrous as metal greaves which boost athleticism.  Yet in this logic, their implementation is justified.

5

Suggestions Corner / Re: Idea for Foot Heirlooms

« on: February 16, 2012, 01:06:17 am »

But increased run speed cannot in any way relate to a better made boot?

This is a computer game we are talking about. Heirlooms themselves do not make sense if we're talking realism. A sword is not like wine. It does not get better with age.

Nor do you spontaneously give birth to a clone of yourself every 40 years.  The retirement system in its entirety does not make sense, it was never intended to.  It was built so serve a function and did not have to be justified in a role-playing or 'realistic' capacity.  To use it as an example is ineffective.

I'm sure the foot armor is of a different thickness than say the breastplate though. My point stands.. Practicality and lightness must have been a quality even then.

I should think so.  But a naked man did not adorn a pair of iron greaves and suddenly run faster than he did barefoot, regardless of their quality.

6

Suggestions Corner / Re: Idea for Foot Heirlooms

« on: February 15, 2012, 08:31:20 pm »

I don't think it's an unreasonable suggestion at all.  If you have some dumpy clogs you'll run much slower than if you have some comfy designer running shoes.

Leg armor is currently the lowest on the food chain as far as armor looms go, most people don't even bother.

This is pure fantasy.  This is medieval footwear we are talking about, not fucking air pocketed, micro-fibre Addidas'.  Until the 1800's, shoemakers didn't even differentiate between the left and right foot.

It's no more ridiculous than heirloomed weapons increasing attack speed, or heirloomed horses running faster.

Incorrect.  The current heirloom system does not increase the base stats of the player character, also, each increase is justifiable without delving into the realm of fantasy.  For example, it is easier to swing a balanced weapon than an unbalanced one, thus you can attack quicker with it.  Increased damage relates to the quality of the steel/iron.  A faster horse relates to the quality of the breed, and it's training.

7

Suggestions Corner / Re: Idea for Foot Heirlooms

« on: February 15, 2012, 08:01:15 pm »

This is just ... what ...

I'd like some fire bolts for my crossbow.

8

Game Balance Discussion / Re: [STATS] Ranged Damage Should be Increased? (poll)

« on: February 01, 2012, 06:18:31 pm »

Crossbow damage was fine last patch.  With arbalests, Heavier helms were capable of protecting against one hit kill headshots, and anything above mail virtually guaranteed a 2 shot kill.  Light armour coupled with ironflesh could also protect the player from one shot kills at all but point blank ranges.

Now, with a masterwork arbalest, it can take 4 or more chest hits to kill someone with 50+ body armour.  It's just plain daft.  The damage is not a valid return on, the cost, the slot size, nor the reload time of the weapon.

9

Realism Discussion / Re: Katana and long sword/bastard(s)

« on: January 31, 2012, 06:36:22 pm »

Also, ban the ninja clan for historical inaccuracy.  Ninjas wore dark blue, not black.

10

Game Balance Discussion / Re: Let's Agree On Ranged Damage

« on: January 28, 2012, 03:46:37 pm »

Crossbow damage was fine last patch.  With arbalests, Heavier helms were capable of protecting against one hit kill headshots, and anything above mail virtually guaranteed a 2 shot kill.  Light armour coupled with ironflesh could also protect the player from one shot kills at all but point blank ranges.

Now, with a masterwork arbalest, it can take 4 or more chest hits to kill someone with 50+ body armour.  It's just plain daft.  The damage is not a valid return on, the cost, the slot size, nor the reload time of the weapon.

If damage was truly an issue, revert the damage model and remove the damage bonus from heirlooming bolts, give quantity instead.

11

Game Balance Discussion / Re: Petition to revert the ranged nerf

« on: January 26, 2012, 08:28:31 pm »

Strat without ranged spam? Sounds good to me.

Agincourt without ranged spam? Sounds good to me.

12

Game Balance Discussion / Re: Petition to revert the ranged nerf

« on: January 25, 2012, 07:17:23 pm »

4 point blank shots to kill Phyrex with a masterwork arbalest.  I can't even imagine how many a light crossbow would require.  Crossbows have lost their balls.

13

Suggestions Corner / Re: CHEST HAIR

« on: January 24, 2012, 08:11:30 pm »

Looks like his treasure trail grew backwards.

14

General Discussion / Re: The decrease of diversity of units on the battlefield.

« on: January 23, 2012, 11:14:25 pm »

RIP Crossbowman.

15

Suggestions Corner / Re: Mini Crossbow

« on: January 23, 2012, 06:22:18 pm »

Due to the ranged change, a Hunting crossbow (the least powerful crossbow) currently does approximately 24p to a naked chest (37p * 0.67), which is roughly the same damage as a level one peasant poking you with a pitchfork.

This hypothetical mini crossbow, would certainly have to do less.  It would be like firing cocktail sticks with a flaccid rubber band.  Anyone wearing more than a lacy bra would simply be tickled.