Archery stam drain..Huh?

[X-D]

First, I have to say that over all, I'm happy about the improvements and push for more realism.

BUT

Are there no real life archers out there?

I hunt with a bow IRL, I've been doing so for a good 20 years now.

I also go out and practice with my 70lbs longbow, my 50lbs recurve and my 100lbs compound at least once a week for the two months before hunting season.

Now, first I suppose its best if I say a little something about archery technique.

When you use a bow, you do not stand there for minutes on end with the bow drawn back. You notch your arrow, you lift bow while drawing back, aim, hold, release.

When I'm practicing, I fire about every 45 seconds. I could go much faster, but hey, that just means its that much sooner I have to walk to the target and recover the arrows.

On a normal practice session I will shoot for an hour or two, firing 45-70 times. And you know what, I've never felt tired or drained.

Oh sure, in the beginning, specialy with the longbow, My draw arm bicept was a little sore and my other arm bruised from the string, but that was years ago and I quickly got past it.

And I am not a zalanthan who makes a living with a bow.

If I was, I assure you I could fire several hundred arrows in an hour or so and not break a sweat.

I also strongly disagree with this stam cost being flat across the board and is unrealistic in every way.

Now, a delf with the correct strength bow can fire MANY more arrows then a dwarf with the correct str bow or even a weak one...WHAT?

Archery is NOT this large physical manuver, you do not throw your body about and it is not sustained activity. It is not draining to even a novice, let alone a an expert or master.

Also, the most draining archery weapon is the what..CROSSBOW...Why then does it not have the drain?

You ever draw a 100-150lbs crossbow? Its hard, thats why they have a place to put your foot to hold it down and why you draw the string with two hands. Load and fire a 150lbs crossbow 10 times as fast as you can, you WILL be tired and sweating.

Well, thats my post.

Summery.

Current stam drains pertaining to archery, bows and crossbows, backwards and extremely unrealistic. BIG thumbs down to this less then thought out addition.

[Delirium]

I don't know how this stamina drain currently works..

But if it isn't implimented, I would like to see an increase in skill mean a decrease in the stamina penalty.

I as well shoot a bow (compound) IRL and the difference between the arrows I could shoot when I first started out to the number I can shoot now that my muscles are more conditioned to it - very marked.

However.. I don't disagree with the stamina penalty.  In fact I like the idea of it.

I just hope it gets less as your skill with the bow gets more.

[Jakahri]

I've hunted deer with compounds for awhile.

Depending on the amount of let-off you have in the bow, you can literally have the arrow nocked all day.

An 80% let-off, for instance, is nothing.

In Zalanthas, recurves are the usual type of bows used in the wilds, I think.  Recurves are generally not too hard to pull back. Also, once you are set and have the arrow set, it's not too difficult to hold in place for a time.

I like Delirium's suggestion of lowering the drain cost in relation to the skill of the shooter. This would make sense, as those who have good form IRL will not tire as fast as an inexperienced archer who is merely jerking the string back.

Give it a week or two. Morg might get some good feedback and tweak accordingly.

[Angela Christine]

Also, the most draining archery weapon is the what..CROSSBOW...Why then does it not have the drain?

You ever draw a 100-150lbs crossbow? Its hard, thats why they have a place to put your foot to hold it down and why you draw the string with two hands. Load and fire a 150lbs crossbow 10 times as fast as you can, you WILL be tired and sweating.

Cross-bows probably should have a stamina drain, but it should kick in when loading the bow, not when firing it.  

That way a wealthy bowman who doesn't want to work up a sweat can pay someone else to load his crossbows for him.  


Angela Christine

[Bebop]

I don't like it either.  It's not very realistic, I guess it's just trying to force people to RP accordingly but all it's going to do is result in people having to rest constantly and with combat clans like the Byn and others, it's going to be a pain during RPTs for these kinds of things.

I can only hope it will lower spam hunting/over hunting.  But it probably won't people will just rest and then go at it again if they are doing such a thing in the first place.

[FightClub]

Oh yeah, now you rangers are kickin the dust when you get picked on.  Yeah I bet you loved in when the warriors were getting it, now you're cryin like babies.  HAHA.

[Bebop]

Oh yeah, now you rangers are kickin the dust when you get picked on.  Yeah I bet you loved in when the warriors were getting it, now you're cryin like babies.  HAHA.

That also in some strange way ^_^ heh, makes a point.  Archery is similiar to a ranger's abilities with animals.  They may not be the best fighters, especially starting out though they have the potential to do well with combat, but archery is a main way of defense and already extremely expensive for commoners, which in itself is a deterent to use arrows.

Now this *sigh*

[Nao]

Oh yeah, now you rangers are kickin the dust when you get picked on.  Yeah I bet you loved in when the warriors were getting it, now you're cryin like babies.  HAHA.

Unlike in the warrior discussion where people weer BRAGGING, I don't see anyone doing that here yet.

Still, I shoot bows in RL, too, and if there is a stamina drain at all (haven't had a chance to try it yet so I can't tell how large it is), it should be considerable less than for doing a skin kick or backing someone - and while I've never seen a ranger twink out on shooting arrows all day agains plenty of twinking warriors (maybe just because arrows are hard to get and expensive).
This won't bother me too much because I'll run out of arrows before I run out of stamina or even get very tired either way.

EDIT cause I can't use my shift key.

[Bebop]

Part of the reason people don't twink this is because arrows damn good amount of money.

[John]

Bebop's right.

I'd say get some links (as reputable as possible) together that support your case for removing ranged combat stamina, and e-mail it to the mud account.

[Hymwen]

Oh yeah, now you rangers are kickin the dust when you get picked on.  Yeah I bet you loved in when the warriors were getting it, now you're cryin like babies.  HAHA.

Yeah, but warriors are only meant to use their special abilities like a few times per fight. Archery is one of the ranger's main assets and something you're supposed to rely completely on in many situations. Imagine if it cost your warrior 5 stamina every round of combat Edit: which would actually be more realistic than the archery stamina drain, but for playability reasons I don't see it getting implemented. Also, I think the archery drain is more of a balance thing than a realism thing.

[Cale_Knight]

Also, I think the archery drain is more of a balance thing than a realism thing.

So was the warrior thing.

The imms said multiple time that warrior skill drain wasn't put in because of realism, it was put in to limit twinking.

I mean, if you want an IC justification for this stamina drain, you could say that the drain doesn't represent the actual act of shooting the bow so much as the virtual manuevering you have to do because the animal is virtually running around like crazy while it's being peppered with arrows.

[Nao]

I think it's a consitency thing - because warriors got it, rangers have to get one, too - I've never seen twinkery there as much of a problem since you usually just don't have as many arrows and if you got them, they were expensive.

And I don't see how they -could- twink out either way, cause it IS realistic to shoot 30 arrows or so.

[Ghost]

And I don't see how they -could- twink out either way, cause it IS realistic to shoot 30 arrows or so.

Yes I would agree to that.  But then the animal does not turn around and start charging to the shooter or run away after the first arrow. I guess that should be the realistic part of making the animal auto charge or autoflee when shot with an arrow, but that is more complicated for coding, so instead the drain was put in.

Nobody is on the criminal side.  The same drain is put for backstab/sap as well, though it is not that much of a realism issue, since why would you get tired for aiming at the heart or the eye of your target?  But it is put for a balance issue, and I find it fine.  Since warriors had it, criminal elements should have it too.

[Hot_Dancer]

...Good ranger pc's disable targets in three shots or less (unless the target has a shield).. which probably comes out to a very minimal total of stamina drain..

The desert elf vs the dwarf scenario: The desert elf can't hop on a kank and leave the area via spending no stamina.

I havn't had any trouble with the updates yet, but I don't spend 20 arrows a target.

Hot Dancer

[Hymwen]

Hymwen wrote:
Also, I think the archery drain is more of a balance thing than a realism thing.

So was the warrior thing.

Yeah, but most of the above posts were discussions about realism

Nobody is on the criminal side. The same drain is put for backstab/sap as well, though it is not that much of a realism issue, since why would you get tired for aiming at the heart or the eye of your target? But it is put for a balance issue, and I find it fine. Since warriors had it, criminal elements should have it too.

You generally only backstab or sap once per fight, and if you're an assassin, you're probably not going to fight that often compared to a ranger who is out hunting or a warrior in the Byn/local city guard/arena champion etc. I personally think that the stamina drain for backstab and sap were put in to appease the angry masses (read: warriors) who felt unfairly treated I don't know how much the drain on backstab/sap is, but if it's something similar to that of archery and warrior skills, I doubt any assassin is going to feel hindered by it the way rangers might when it can take more than 10 shots to bring down a beast.

[Majikal]

Though I'm unaware at the seriousness of the stamina drain  I don't beleive it is an extreme inconvenience. Perhaps if you feel this is detering your experience with fighting with a bow then you should be shooting it alot less. As stated earlier a skilled bowman can disable a target with around 3 good shots. Less if they're an extremely nice archer, I've had two characters die to bow shots and it was a very surprising ammount of damage. Shoot less. As for d-elves vs. dwarfs I can say this.. d-elves can spare the stamina, dwarves can hop on their mount. It all balances out.

[moab]

I have to agree with X-D on this one.

I used to shoot archery quite a bit (and earned a few local awards, go me!) and a stamina drain for archery doesn't really make sense.

[Pale Horse]

I'd have to agree with the common consensus about the RL aspect of archery.  I am a complete novice when it comes to the sport, only having shot a bow(longbow, recurve and compound) about 4 or 5 times in my life.  In all of the said situations, my arms did become tired, but that was after something like 40 or more arrows in just under 15 min(compound bow, people..tough pull).  As it was, I still could have continued for quite some time more, but I, being the utter novice, neglected to bring a brace for my arm, so by the end of half an a hour, my forearm looked and had the feel of raw hamburger :oops:

[Morgenes]

All of the concerns expressed so far have been handled by the stamina drain code.  It's possible to get to the point where the stamina drain is extremely minimal.  

As for crossbows, have you tried one in game?  Try before posting how they 'should' be, please.

[amoeba]

I've tried the archery code. The stamina drain is pretty reasonable, and the seriously cool thing is you can use a bow that normally you couldn't.  I am quite pleased with the change.

[jhunter]

I still think that the stamina drain for some things(at max drain) is about the same amount for the character to walk an entire outdoor room, kinda unrealistic. I think the max drain for these things should be dropped down a bit.

A single, disarm, kick, bash, or whatever = walking an entire outdoor room?

Nah, I don't think so.

[Tamarin]

I went out and tested archery and throw, and I have to say, I like this change.  The drain rates were slightly different, I presume because of my character's skill levels.  Now, hunting -feels- more realistic, because it slowly drains your energy so that you actually have to rest when you come back to the city.

[Morgenes]

I still think that the stamina drain for some things(at max drain) is about the same amount for the character to walk an entire outdoor room, kinda unrealistic. I think the max drain for these things should be dropped down a bit.

A single, disarm, kick, bash, or whatever = walking an entire outdoor room?

Nah, I don't think so.

Don't get me started on realistic and outdoor rooms.  If a room really represents a league in distance, how are you firing arrows up to 9 miles away.  Not to mention being able to clearly make out who a person is from that distance.  Imagine if instead of 'very far', 'far' and 'near' it more accurately said:

> look north
9 miles away you see:
  Your best friend Bob
6 miles away you see:
  Your most hated enemy Jeff
3 miles away you see:
  A funny looking little bird.

There's lots of places where we cut corners for realism.  The code that calculates how much stamina is lost per room of movement isn't the most complicated code in the world.  

We look at trying to balance things and making them fun in both use and seeing how your character improves over time.  That's why stamina drain is where it's at.

[Tamarin]

Morg, why don't we expand everyone's endurance by 50%, then?

Then, keep combat stamina penalties as they currently are (ie the same number), but increase room movement penalty (ie the same percentage relative to max stamina).

This would balance it better between movement and combat penalties.

[Morgenes]

Morg, why don't we expand everyone's endurance by 50%, then?

Then, keep combat stamina penalties as they currently are (ie the same number), but increase room movement penalty (ie the same percentage relative to max stamina).

This would balance it better between movement and combat penalties.

Because we think it's balanced as is.

[Tamarin]

Okee doke.  Just checking.

[ibusoe]

There seems to be a lot of debate back and forth about wether the stamina drain needs to be adjusted up or down.

I haven't tested it much, so I'm going to stay out of the debate.

I must say that, overall, I'm glad to see --SOME-- amount of stamina drain associated with combat activities.

Here's why -- In the past it was really possible for me to go out and hunt down about five or six dangerous monsters in the course of a game day.  I questioned whether it was realistic for me to do this, and was forced to use a lot of judgement and discretion on how many monsters to kill, without much guidance from the game code.  

After extensive modifications to both animal behavior and the combat skills, now I can pretty much only get about two animals, even on a good day.  

I don't mind trying for three, because if I get it, I've earned it.

The penalties from things like kick are small, but they add up if I try to pwn more than two monsters in a day.  Likewise, this serves as kind of a check + balance system on my PK attempts....I know that I shouldn't feel guilty throwing a few kicks at someone as long as I have the stamina to do so.

I hope that the coders and testers (players?) are able to agree on what the exact levels of stamina drain should be, but they help my playability alot.

[EvilRoeSlade]

At first I supported the stamina drain, but now I think that it's too small to have any real impact on non desert elves.

I think that all stamina drains should be removed and replaced with a timer (except archery), so that if you try to disarm someone then you get a message saying "The maneuver has become too obvious, you must wait" if you try to disarm anyone again within the next 30 seconds.

[Morgenes]

At first I supported the stamina drain, but now I think that it's too small to have any real impact on non desert elves.

We still aren't done with the stamina drain.  I'd wait before declaring it to be too small.

[Natron]

After having used the MUD to share a grievance on this subject and spent some time talking about it with people who have more experience than me, I must side with those who say that warriors/rangers should start off with a stamina penalty for kick/bash/disarm and shoot, but that the drain should go down as skills increase.

A one day warrior or ranger would probably get tired pretty easily from doing warrior/ranger stuff.  A five day ranger or warrior would get less tired.  A twenty or thirty day warrior or ranger could fight and kill all day and be alright, especially when people in Zalanthas are physically tougher than people in RL.  

Also, if someone has been twinking their skills for 20 days (480 hours of play time,) an IMM along the way should have noticed and that person should have been warned, and after being warned, punished for being a twink.

A second popular idea I've heard, though I don't necessarily agree with it, is that all fighting should have a stamina penalty so that warriors aren't punished for what makes the guild special.

So mark one vote for a stamina drain that starts big and lessens over time.

-Natron

[Tamarin]

How do you know it doesn't already work this way?

[Natron]

I don't, but if it doesn't work this way I think it should.  

-Natron

[Bakha]

I don't, but if it doesn't work this way I think it should.  

-Natron

Here, Morgenes seems to say that it does work that way:

All of the concerns expressed so far have been handled by the stamina drain code.  It's possible to get to the point where the stamina drain is extremely minimal.  

[Bebop]

I would just like to remark that I thought it was funny that everyone supported this and suggested this until it happened for the sake of realism and this and that.  And now that it's been proven it's not realistic, and newb rangers are going to get nerfed having to struggle to buy arrows and then get exhausted shooting them:  everyone else is saying oh well it's not for realism it's for this and that.

So yay, we are basically doing this for what reason?  Just to even it out between warriors and rangers, even though the skills are pretty much nothing akin?  Zalanthas:  all people created equal now?  This just doesn't make sense to me at all.

[Bakha]

So yay, we are basically doing this for what reason?  Just to even it out between warriors and rangers, even though the skills are pretty much nothing akin?  Zalanthas:  all people created equal now?  This just doesn't make sense to me at all.

All I'll say is that these changes, as they get tweaked and added to, are going to make combat much much more complex and full featured. I don't think that realistic is the appropriate word, as you've indicated. I do think that it's going to add coded backing to a lot of things that, in the past, were not supported by the code. As the changes continue to come down the pipes and as people actually explore the code (instead of having kneejerk reactions to it), I think people will begin to appreciate the method behind the apparent madness.

[amoeba]

So yay, we are basically doing this for what reason?  Just to even it out between warriors and rangers, even though the skills are pretty much nothing akin?  Zalanthas:  all people created equal now?  This just doesn't make sense to me at all.

My take on it. Strictly my take.

Shooting an arrow is very easy. Draw your bow, pull an arrow from the quiver, shoot the prey. Easy, in fact so easy, most clients can make shooting a quiver full of arrows as effective as having a machine gun. Boom.  The other downside, is that if a bow was overpowered for you, you couldn't use it period. It was dead wood.

We could roll out the RP mantra and say, Roleplay it. Don't let the twinks make it hard for me. A reasonable argument. Yet this is not a MUSH. We use code to create a consistently to the world, to create real consequences to your actions.  An argument could be made that code should back up the consequences of using a bow.  Prior to this, there were none, zero. You could shoot arrow after arrow, with the only problem being some arrows got consumed in the process.

Now what are reasonable ways to code in consequences?   You could code in a delay.  But this leads to other problems. There are times you want to rapid fire a few shots off. Say you were a raider, and trying to take someone down.  The delay approach would mean you would have to be a one shot wonder.  

The approach of your stamina being hit a little solves a number of problems. It allows someone to rapid fire some shots if they so desire, at the cost of some of their stamina points.  The way it was coded as well means you can use bows you normally could not use.  You could argue that being tired from shooting a bow, should not affect your ability to walk someplace. Perfectly reasonable argument, yet because we do not have a separate stamina for other actions taken other than movement. It gets lumped in.  Perhaps a separate stamina for 'other' actions, (i.e. kicking, archery, etc.) could be developed,but at this point we do not have it, so fatigue (imho a better word than stamina) gets affected.

On a more practical note, have you tried the code, or are you just guessing at the effects?  I've tried it. I used a bow too heavy for me and was comfortable with the hit to my stamina. I did not use the archery skill at all prior to doing this with this character, so in terms of archery, I was a newb ranger.  If you have ideas how to make the code better reflect the consequences of using a bow, by all means suggest them.  Provide realistic feedback to the IMMs as you use the code, but bandying about statements like "newb rangers are going to get nerfed" is quite frankly unfounded and pure conjecture

[Maybe42or54]

Now, a delf with the correct strength bow can fire MANY more arrows then a dwarf with the correct str bow or even a weak one...WHAT?

How so? A dwarf will ride in on his kank and 120 Stamina or whatever, and be using less stamina when firing a weaker bow.
Whereas a D-elf will have to run, shoot, run, shoot, run, shoot. This is another disadvantage to Warrior D-elves, but hey, don't say it is worse to a mounted rider than can be dead tired and still ride half way across the known world before he needs to rest, and that is only because his kank needs the rest.

Hell, mounted Rangers can still ride all day long and shoot bows all day long with 120 stamina or so.

Archery is NOT this large physical manuver, you do not throw your body about and it is not sustained activity. It is not draining to even a novice, let alone a an expert or master.

Disarming someone takes less real effort than shooting a bow a hundred times or so, but there is drain for that.

If I didn't respond to other parts of your post, is because I either had no opinion, I have no idea, or you are right on.

[Angela Christine]

Though I'm unaware at the seriousness of the stamina drain  I don't beleive it is an extreme inconvenience. Perhaps if you feel this is detering your experience with fighting with a bow then you should be shooting it alot less. As stated earlier a skilled bowman can disable a target with around 3 good shots.

The problem is that even weak creatures can take a silly amount of bow hits.  I think they may have an unholy regen rate.

A while back, a couple years at least, my newbie Tuluk archer went out hunting vestric.  It took her 10-12 HITS with an arrow to kill the vestric, that doesn't count the arrows that missed.  The vestric, a small feathered rodent, was still walking around with 10+ arrows sticking out of it.  It appeared that the vestric simply regenerated faster than I was firing.

With a southern archer it once took an INFINTE amount of arrows to kill a jozhal.  I had a couple quivers of arrows, so I had somewhere around 20-30 arrows in total.  I fired all of my arrows at the jozhal.  I walked into the room, the jozhal ran away, and I picked up all the arrows that had missed the jozhal.  Then I fired them all toward the jozhal, there were fewer since the first time some of the arrows had hit and stuck to the jozhal.  Again I moved into the room and picked up my missed arrows as the jozhal fled, then fired them.  Still the jozhal was not dead.  I moved into the jozhal's room, and picked up the few remaining arrows.  Then I got on my kank and chased the jozhal around until it was too tired to run away.  Since we were finally in the same room I was able to assess it, and it wasn't even badly hurt, so I killed it with my melee weapons -- I had to, it was the only way to get some of my arrows back.   :roll:   Again it appeared that the creature was able to regenerate faster than my archer was able to shoot.

Obviously it isn't always as bad as that, but attempting to become a bow hunter is a slow road.  It seems much less silly to attempt to shoot game from a distance than to walk up to the animals and poke 'em with a sword, but it turns out that sword hunting is both easier and much cheaper than bow hunting.  A newbie can probably take down small game if he manages to get in 10 pricks with his daggers, but 10 pricks with his arrows often doesn't do the trick.  


Using stamina to limit unrealistic PC activities is good.  But perhaps since PCs are more limited now, the regen rates of NPCs should be reevaluated.  They seem to regenerate very quickly while just standing around, to the point that it is difficult for PCs to compete.  I'm not sure that even with a tent a PC can come close to an NPC's regen rate.


Angela Christine

[jcarter]

I just had some experience with this earlier.

Everyone is complaining over absolutely, positively nothing. The stamina drain is not that bad, and I had fired over 10 arrows at one point. If stamina is really such a big issue with you, then start wearing extra gear to give you more mv points.

[Manhattan]

Everyone is complaining over absolutely, positively nothing. The stamina drain is not that bad, and I had fired over 10 arrows at one point. If stamina is really such a big issue with you, then start wearing extra gear to give you more mv points.

you know what this means?
this means that morgenes' attempt to hinder twinking has failed.

[jmordetsky]

I think AC's post is probably the most noteworthy of this thread.

I don't mind the stam drain at all, but I would like to see some evening done to the archery skill in general.

[jcarter]

Everyone is complaining over absolutely, positively nothing. The stamina drain is not that bad, and I had fired over 10 arrows at one point. If stamina is really such a big issue with you, then start wearing extra gear to give you more mv points.

you know what this means?
this means that morgenes' attempt to hinder twinking has failed.

Why don't you post us a thread with the proper guidelines on how to use archery?

[InsertCleverNameHere]

Okay, before I add my opinion, which isn't worth that much.. I haven't had the opportunity to try out any of the new stam drain coding, for warrior or ranger types. So I haven't formed an opinion on that. Yet.

My opinion, or.. observation is more along the lines of peoples attitudes toward the changes. Not everybody who'se posted has been hostile or rude of course, and I won't point fingers. But some people are getting downright biligerant about the new changes. We push the IMMs to impliment our ideas, do this, that and tie our shoes. And lately, they've really done it. They have new codes pouring out their ears, in their sleep. But if they put in an idea that isn't something the majority of the players were screaming for, people get their hackles up and start snarling. I'm sure the IMMs have their reasons for what they do, and most of the time we're privy to that information. It's not as if they don't try to make the game even more enjoyable for us. So, y'know. Lay off a bit.   :roll:  Express your opinion without implying they're tossing stuff in because they had free time when they were drunk off their asses (or ate too many wino brainz), not because it's useful to the game in some way. :roll:

So yeah. I'm done about this, until I have any actual experience with the new code.

[Bebop]

Okay, before I add my opinion, which isn't worth that much.. I haven't had the opportunity to try out any of the new stam drain coding, for warrior or ranger types. So I haven't formed an opinion on that. Yet.

My opinion, or.. observation is more along the lines of peoples attitudes toward the changes. Not everybody who'se posted has been hostile or rude of course, and I won't point fingers. But some people are getting downright biligerant about the new changes. We push the IMMs to impliment our ideas, do this, that and tie our shoes. And lately, they've really done it. They have new codes pouring out their ears, in their sleep. But if they put in an idea that isn't something the majority of the players were screaming for, people get their hackles up and start snarling. I'm sure the IMMs have their reasons for what they do, and most of the time we're privy to that information. It's not as if they don't try to make the game even more enjoyable for us. So, y'know. Lay off a bit.   :roll:  Express your opinion without implying they're tossing stuff in because they had free time when they were drunk off their asses (or ate too many wino brainz), not because it's useful to the game in some way. :roll:

So yeah. I'm done about this, until I have any actual experience with the new code.

Dude, I haven't seen anyone post anything like that people are just saying what they feel.

The point is, if the change isn't good, or isn't liked, well it's a forum.

forum

n 1: a public meeting or assembly for open discussion 2: a public facility to meet for open discussion.

This is a place for people to express their opinions and talk about their ideals.  If the players, the people that play the game, the people these changes are going to effect have issues with changes, then they have the right to express their opinions.  Whether the IMMs listen to them or not is their decision.  People have expressed on multiple occasions their appriecation and just because a few changes that are implemented aren't liked by everyone doesn't take away the fact that I and the majority of people here appriecate the IMMs fully even if all of our opinions don't coincide.  So stop taking away from this thread by making it a pity party.

Just because there are alot of changes doesn't mean all of them are going to be awesome/good changes or that everyone is going to like them.  And not everyone has to.  This is a place people should be able to voice their opinions.  Even if people don't like the IMMs this isn't a personal attack against them.

IMMS if you don't know it.  I <3 you, and so do many of the players.  (Even if I don't agree with some of your decision it doesn't mean I don't appriecate the work behind them.)

----

As far as AC's post, I think she's dead on and that was the point I was trying to also make about if stamina was added to combat.  I think these changes are an easier step then changing combat, just adding on stamina penalty (it's going to be alot easier then reworking skills entirely).  But I still think these changes are a step ahead on realism as far as skills go.  Sometimes you HAVE to fire your bow alot, sometimes you just can not kill some one or something in less then one quiver of arrows.  Skills have to be built up, and arrows are already very expensive.  This is taking a huge step of attempted realism or control, way ahead of the realism of the actual skill itself.  Now personally I don't think there was anything wrong with archery before.  I liked how it worked, and yeah, the reason you have to shoot things alot at first or just sometimes give up is because it's a GAME it's not real and so skills have to be given time before you can reach that point of killing things in two/three hits.  I don't see any need for this stamina penalty, and the excuse of "realism" has already been disproved.  People don't shoot alot because they're twinking, they shoot alot because it's a game and sometimes neccessary.

To kind of sum it up:  I don't think any changes need to be made.  I understand that it is a game, and sometimes you are going to have to fight a skeet for ten minutes RL time because of the code.  I understand it's a game and sometimes even after you've shot ten arrows you're going to have to give up because codedly you suck, and it's a game and you're going to have to take time to get better.  It's a GAME and taking away stamina doesn't make it anymore "real" it just looks like some kind of leash/control for players to not be able to use their freaking skills all of the sudden.  I have never seen any major problems with a playerbase as a whole twinking or over using them, and now the skills quiet dier to each guild, backstab/warrior combat skills and a ranger's archery are being forced into quantities by stamina penalty.  What's next stamina drain for merchants?  Yes! I think it would be very hard work tanning and scraping hides and working over an oven to boil soap!  Let's force everyone to rest because it's more fair that way.  Soon we can force people to lose stun as they go along so they are forced to sleep instead of play.  I'm not trying to be scarcastic, I'm just trying to make a point.

To me this takes away from the game, I want to be the one in control of my RP not fighting someone thinking about numbers.  Or having to rest constantly because heaven forbid I'm actually using my skills.

[X-D]

My problem at times is I miss posts, probly do to sheer volume.

Missed Morgs first post on archery stamina drain and that it includes loading crossbows. Sorry Morg. So, strike my crossbow comments.


Also, Though I do have a char with archery capabilities, I have yet to use them since the stam drain code went in and very little before that.

And if the stam drain for shooting is 50 points or one, I don't care, thats not the point for me at all but the fact it is there at all. I would not like it even if it cost my char 1 stam for every 10 arrows fired.

Realism aside.

Archery, unlike ALL the other skills with stam drain already has self limiting factors. First, like all the skills, there is a timer to advancement.
Second, arrows are Expensive to a newbie char and a drain on even experianced PC's who might have good pay. Third, unlike any of the other skills including throw, Arrows get destroyed, and do so at a VERY high rate. So, yet another hit to that skill...joy.

So you can use heavier bows now...really, big deal. Actually, I don't like it.
You have always been able to use heavier bows, it just cost you money and a bit preperation. Now, it does not...blah. Rather unrealistic again IMO.
IRL if a bow is too strong for me to pull then its too strong for me to pull, period. My wife cannot pull any of my bows long enough to shoot them, She can't even get the compound bow past the let off.

It has been mentioned that there might be a method to the apparent madness....shrug, never assumed there was not.

And I only hope it all comes together in the end because right now it all looks rather pointless. Specialy since it is obviouse that it is not being done to enhance realism and only a little to slow twinking on some things.

Bebop posted ahead of me dammit, but I feel the same so I'm putting this here to be at the top of this page.

To kind of sum it up: I don't think any changes need to be made. I understand that it is a game, and sometimes you are going to have to fight a skeet for ten minutes RL time because of the code. I understand it's a game and sometimes even after you've shot ten arrows you're going to have to give up because codedly you suck, and it's a game and you're going to have to take time to get better. It's a GAME and taking away stamina doesn't make it anymore "real" it just looks like some kind of leash/control for players to not be able to use their freaking skills all of the sudden. I have never seen any major problems with a playerbase as a whole twinking or over using them, and now the skills quiet dier to each guild, backstab/warrior combat skills and a ranger's archery are being forced into quantities by stamina penalty. What's next stamina drain for merchants? Yes! I think it would be very hard work tanning and scraping hides and working over an oven to boil soap! Let's force everyone to rest because it's more fair that way. Soon we can force people to lose stun as they go along so they are forced to sleep instead of play. I'm not trying to be scarcastic, I'm just trying to make a point.

To me this takes away from the game, I want to be the one in control of my RP not fighting someone thinking about numbers. Or having to rest constantly because heaven forbid I'm actually using my skills.

Ditto.

[Nao]

Everyone is complaining over absolutely, positively nothing. The stamina drain is not that bad, and I had fired over 10 arrows at one point. If stamina is really such a big issue with you, then start wearing extra gear to give you more mv points.

you know what this means?
this means that morgenes' attempt to hinder twinking has failed.

So you're saying that shooting 10 arrows at a target is twinkish? *grin*

Besides, the archery drain wasn't put in because of twinkery, as far as I know.

[FightClub]

*cheers for rangers getting beat down*

I'm just glad that someone, finally put rangers a step back.  And yeah this hurts delves more than anyone, just like the melee code hurt delves more than anyone.  And anyone that's played a delf before knows that pretty much the only sudden death move is to run out of stamina.

Heck it's how mine died.

As far as supporting it, yeah, not like we -technically- have any say in it.  Sure we push for this or that, they may listen, but heck, it's their mud they'll make us teletubbies if they want and we really can't say shit.

That and well, this mud is free, we've no invested stock in here,  it's a privlidge to play here, and well we're not knocking warriors in this thread, so hah, I'm not gonna complain.

Lol maybe we should incorporate FOCUS points. Rofl.  you have to gain focus through combat to make attacks raw! Just like a good old hack n' slash.

[marko]

I am in agreement with InsertCleverNameHere about the way people are posting.  A lot of these posts contain belligerent attitudes that are disrespectful and are being written by people who haven't experienced the code changes.

There are a lot of knee-jerk reactions with people ranting before knowing exactly what's happening.  I could pull up example after example but there is no point.

Please, when discussing code changes, post informed opinions and not guesswork.  Even then, it is probably better to log everything, take a look at the logs after a bit of time, and then submit some thoughts directly to the coders based on how things went down in the logs.  

The coders have clearly stated that these changes are being tweaked and altered depending on the experiences of the PCs and how it affects the game.  They aren't being tweaked by how loud people complain without having fully experienced them.  If you want to have an impact on how the code is finalized then post informed opinions without rancour.

What is exciting about all these changes is that the combat code is being worked on.  That means a lot of possibilities may be far (months or years) on the horizon (stuff like stances, fighting styles, changes to mounted combat, etc etc).  Why?  Because there will be at least one coder who is intimate with how the code is working.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

To be honest, although I agree that twinking might have been a factor in the past, I don't think all the changes to combat and its facats are because of twinking any more. I think, and hope, that realism is much more of a goal these days. And I hope, and firmly believe that, after a rocky period, it will be refined to the point that it will be called a masterpeice.

As a novice coder, I'll tell you now that changing everything out at once is a really, really bad idea. The way that Morgenes is going about it, in slow, testing-status steps, is the right way to go. So things might be unbalanced for a while. Who cares? The end result will be a better combat simulation. And I really think that this is the point of a lot of this changing this and that, no matter what guise it wears for now. A funner, better, more realistic, more stratagic combat code.

I, for one, am elated.

[Bakha]

To be honest, although I agree that twinking might have been a factor in the past, I don't think all the changes to combat and its facats are because of twinking any more. I think, and hope, that realism is much more of a goal these days. And I hope, and firmly believe that, after a rocky period, it will be refined to the point that it will be called a masterpeice.

As a novice coder, I'll tell you now that changing everything out at once is a really, really bad idea. The way that Morgenes is going about it, in slow, testing-status steps, is the right way to go. So things might be unbalanced for a while. Who cares? The end result will be a better combat simulation. And I really think that this is the point of a lot of this changing this and that, no matter what guise it wears for now. A funner, better, more realistic, more stratagic combat code.

I, for one, am elated.

Good post. I think you have a pretty good idea of what's going on here. People aren't seeing the forest for the trees.

[jhunter]

To be honest, although I agree that twinking might have been a factor in the past, I don't think all the changes to combat and its facats are because of twinking any more. I think, and hope, that realism is much more of a goal these days. And I hope, and firmly believe that, after a rocky period, it will be refined to the point that it will be called a masterpeice.

As a novice coder, I'll tell you now that changing everything out at once is a really, really bad idea. The way that Morgenes is going about it, in slow, testing-status steps, is the right way to go. So things might be unbalanced for a while. Who cares? The end result will be a better combat simulation. And I really think that this is the point of a lot of this changing this and that, no matter what guise it wears for now. A funner, better, more realistic, more stratagic combat code.

I, for one, am elated.

Good post. I think you have a pretty good idea of what's going on here. People aren't seeing the forest for the trees.

I think I'm seeing things perfectly clear. I'm giving my personal feedback and opinions on the changes that -are- in. I'm also repeatedly trying to hammer home what I'd like to see as the -end- result.
Just because I don't like the way it is -currently- sitting, doesn't mean I don't understand. I does mean that I will continue to speak up in the hopes of having even the slightest influence on the end result. It also means that I'm not going to sit back and pretend to be happy about the current state of things while it's going through the process of the changes. Complacency is just going to aid bringing about what I fear happening with this addition of stamina drain.
I've said before that it is not the changes in and of themselves necessarily that I think are a bad thing, my point that they should be realistically balanced between those of -any- guild. Currently, while this process is in the works an unrealistic unbalancing in interaction with the gameworld physics exists between guilds (mainly when it comes to combat).
This means that I should sit back and give no feedback about it? Or that if I do and I'm currently unhappy with the status of things, I should keep my mouth shut, else I "can't see the forest for the trees"? What would that accomplish?
I see this attitude from those that would be perfectly happy if the process stopped -as is- of: "You guys who don't like it, just shut the fuck up."
What does this accomplish?

[RunningMountain]

Don't compare shooting a modern plastic and metal compound bow to a bone and ritikki gut bow. I doubt it's the same and you don't know how easy or hard it could be to pull back the string on a zalanthan bow.

[amoeba]

I am in agreement with InsertCleverNameHere about the way people are posting.  A lot of these posts contain belligerent attitudes that are disrespectful and are being written by people who haven't experienced the code changes.

There are a lot of knee-jerk reactions with people ranting before knowing exactly what's happening.  I could pull up example after example but there is no point.

I will also chime in agreement with InsertCleverNameHere. What she posted was a comment not about -discussion- but about the -pissy tone- of much of the comments.  In truth it does not relate to just this thread. The staff put in a lot of free time, their only reward is that feeling they get when they put in something they feel is of value.  They are not out there to ruin your day.  

Some of the posters remind me of some old folks I see at a restaurant.  They bitch and complain at the waitress, send back food because it's too hot of too cold, gripe and complain that the prices are too high, and why is there not a senior discount.  Then they leave a ten cent tip.

A kind word here and there, actually trying out the code and class and giving constructive feedback, these things make it more rewarding for the person contributing their time.  Yes there were a lot of changes in at one time, discuss them, see how they -really- effect the game, and then take the time to produce more than knee-jerk off the cuff comments.  To pharaphrase the dissenters to InsertCleverNameHere's comments, if you think she was whining, all I have to say is she was not the one leaving the ten cent tip.

[Aldiel]

While shooting a bow may cause  fatigue on your muscles, I think this code change is important to stop all the l33ts from shooting 20+ arrows at a single target.  I have gone hunting with quite a few people who do this, and I always have to come up with some IC reason why we should move in and not keep shooting because, frankly, I think shooting an animal that many times is ridiculous.

[X-D]

Adiel, Shooting at an animal that many times IS rediculous, go back and read Bebops post. It is a Game, and that is the way this Game works.

Don't compare shooting a modern plastic and metal compound bow to a bone and ritikki gut bow. I doubt it's the same and you don't know how easy or hard it could be to pull back the string on a zalanthan bow

A bow is a bow is a bow, they all work exactly the same way no matter the materials Delerak. And if you had any knowledge on it at all, you would know that almost every decent hunting capable longbow, recurve shortbow, horsebow etc made today are made from traditional materials. IE mostly, WOOD.

I see some posting that seems maybe a bit...brisk. But really who cares?
I know the staff does a great job for no pay, but I also know that they have to have a slightly thick skin and doubt that they go "OMG look at that post!! It was -Almost- rude in tone!! Ban them or I quit...SOB!"

What is wrong exactly with somebodies post showing a bit of emotion anyway?

As to the rest, give it time, keep logs, yadda yadda yadda, Well of course you do that, I am.

But, like others, I'm also posting my opinion NOW. And on the post information of the staff, If you think that is posting while uninformed then maybe the staff posts should provide more information. Otherwise it is posting while perfectly informed.

[Nao]

Don't compare shooting a modern plastic and metal compound bow to a bone and ritikki gut bow. I doubt it's the same and you don't know how easy or hard it could be to pull back the string on a zalanthan bow.

Yea, there's no reason for that. I've shot a selfbow made from one piece of wood, and it doesn't make any difference at all - that one was ridiculously weak, too. A bow is a bow, if you can pull it, you won't get exhausted from shooting it. If you can't pull it - well, then you can't pull it.

[Bebop]

I agree with XD What would be the point of posting later, when the code is implemented and there is a thread on it seems like a pretty good time.  I'm starting to think some people are just going to agree with whatever the IMMs do without actually giving it any thought.

It's pretty sad whenever people are condeming the fact that people just have their opinions.  While some people can be rude I guess, I haven't seen anyone outright say anything like the IMMs suck ass or anything people are just posting their opinions which is only appropriate considering this is a FORUM.  I know the IMMs can do what they want, but I would hope that they would consider the player base.  Because there isn't much a game can do without one.  As players we contribute alot to this game, and it is something we really appriecate.  So on the flip side I think it's terribley rude and wrong to go out and talk crap against the players that are just stating their opinions.  And just because they disagree with things that are implemented does not mean that they are being rude or inapriecative or making an uneducated statement.  Likewise, some of the IMMs say they don't even get the chance to play as much, as players are back up is important because we know how the code is going to effect us the most.  That is DEFINITELY an educated decision.

I think I've stated most of what I think on the actual code change.  And like I said it's a GAME it's not real life, sometimes you have to shoot multiple times and you are going to feel it in your pocket because arrows don't come cheap, that alone is a penalty.  Adding stamina drain is a huge step infront of the code, and so I see it as a shortsighted change that should not be implemented.  And I would like to quit second guessing and have an IMM explain what it is being implemented if not for twinking, or realism sake.

[amoeba]

I agree with XD What would be the point of posting later, when the code is implemented and there is a thread on it seems like a pretty good time.  I'm starting to think some people are just going to agree with whatever the IMMs do without actually giving it any thought.

I don't know why I am beating this dead horse, but there are some misconceptions here.

1. Post by all means, not one soul here has said not to post. No one said post later, not once. The comment was to not base things on conjecture and use fairly discouraging remarks like accusing people of whining, and stating that newbie rangers have been nerfed.  

2. It is insulting to imply that people agreeing with a particular implementation are esentially suck ups, that thinking something is resonable is thoughtless capitulation.  Your statement could be turned just as easily to say that there are people who will disagree  with whatever the IMMs do without actually giving it any thought.  That also would be an unfair statement.

3. Just because the IMMs have a slightly thick skin does not give license to poke and prod all the time, testing their limits. And this is an importaint point, if someone feels that their work is unvalued, and generates disparaging remarks, then it is very probable that they would feel less inclinded to produce as much. Who needs the grief?

4. Yes this is a FORUM. It also gives me and others the opprotunity to state our opinions in an open, resonable and noninflamitory manner.  Even if the opinion stated is what was stated above, or do you think we should not be allowed to do as such?

5. There have been useful arguements made contrary to the code as well. AC made a good one, although I will state that I think her figures are a bit inflated.  The one thing I have yet to see the posters who absolutely hate this idea present are alternatives. All I hear is complaining that they don't like it.   It is easy to shoot an idea down, much harder to come up with a viable alternative.

[Bebop]

I agree with XD What would be the point of posting later, when the code is implemented and there is a thread on it seems like a pretty good time.  I'm starting to think some people are just going to agree with whatever the IMMs do without actually giving it any thought.

I don't know why I am beating this dead horse, but there are some misconceptions here.

1. Post by all means, not one soul here has said not to post. No one said post later, not once. The comment was to not base things on conjecture and use fairly discouraging remarks like accusing people of whining, and stating that newbie rangers have been nerfed.

The way that Morgenes is going about it, in slow, testing-status steps, is the right way to go. So things might be unbalanced for a while. Who cares?

That to me is saying wait to post, or don't post.  Not to mention your own post it's basically like saying if you don't agree don't post or send in a log.  That is how I take it.  And yes I'm going to say rangers are being nerfed because well:  I believe they are.  The majority of my characters have been rangers.  It is no secret that is the guild I love and have played most of.  I think my "conjecture" is pretty educated.

2. It is insulting to imply that people agreeing with a particular implementation are esentially suck ups, that thinking something is resonable is thoughtless capitulation.  Your statement could be turned just as easily to say that there are people who will disagree  with whatever the IMMs do without actually giving it any thought.  That also would be an unfair statement.

Suck ups?  Your words not mine.  Do I think there is a correlation between people agreeing with what the IMMs want to hear?  To be blatent.  Yes I do.  Especially when I see some people posting how they love to see what stats they have in hopes that this time it will be "the big one" and then I see the same player after an IMM posts that they lurve low stats, and infact prefer them.  Why yes, yes I do.  As far as IMM appriecation and making uneducated conjectures, perhaps you missed this:

IMMS if you don't know it. I <3 you, and so do many of the players. (Even if I don't agree with some of your decision it doesn't mean I don't appriecate the work behind them.)

3. Just because the IMMs have a slightly thick skin does not give license to poke and prod all the time, testing their limits. And this is an importaint point, if someone feels that their work is unvalued, and generates disparaging remarks, then it is very probable that they would feel less inclinded to produce as much. Who needs the grief?

See the above quote.  I appriecate the IMMs but I don't agree with everything they do.  And I have the right to say that.  My opinions are constructive and serious, and I have played this guild quiet enough to understand the relation between stamina drain and the archery skill to understand how it is going to effect a character.  Thusly I am posting my opinion, which happens to not coincide with the IMMs decision, no.  That doesn't mean I do no appriecate their work.

4. Yes this is a FORUM. It also gives me and others the opprotunity to state our opinions in an open, resonable and noninflamitory manner.  Even if the opinion stated is what was stated above, or do you think we should not be allowed to do as such?

I would ask you the same question since you're the one giving me five reasons I shouldn't be posting my opinion etc.  This is my opinion.  Why are you posting five reasons why it is wrong/should not be here.  And by starting to line by line me, I think you are taking away from/derailing the thread.  It's not about my post or if we have a right to post.  This thread is about stamina drain, and that's what my opinion was on.  I'm tired of debating with people how, when and where I should say what I feel. This is how I feel, I haven't been obsene now let me post my opinion that does not coincide with your own and we can agree to disagree and be done with it, and I'll stop defending myself from your five point plan.

5. There have been useful arguements made contrary to the code as well. AC made a good one, although I will state that I think her figures are a bit inflated.  The one thing I have yet to see the posters who absolutely hate this idea present are alternatives. All I hear is complaining that they don't like it.   It is easy to shoot an idea down, much harder to come up with a viable alternative.

Here is an alternative, ask the players how it will effect them before they do it.  If this is going to only effect the players then post a reason why the chang was implemented.  If it is do to players twinking find an alternative for twinking.  If it's for realism it's been proven it's not realistic.  Take the stamina drain away (I know that's not going to happen.) There is really no alternative the players can offer, because as it has been made perfectly clear it's not up to them.  I thought the perfect alternative would have been to leave it alone.  I may not be able to change the decision implemented but I can still say hey, I don't appriecate that because I think it will take away from the game.

It may or may not.  Not everyone may agree with me.  But I have the right to say it just the same.  And it disturbs me when players are targeted for their opinions and people try to make it out that people aren't appriecative to the IMMs just because they are sitting there cuddling them for implementing changes they don't agree with.  That's taking away from the topic to be scarcastic and post little  :roll: <<< this and thats berrating the players for posting their opinions and trying to take away from peoples posts to twist them in a light that they are unappriecative if they disagree and aren't kissing ass.  It's like calling protesters of the war unpatriotic when America was established by protest of the British. The players are important to the game and so are their opinions and I'm really tired of people down playing that.  Without a player base we don't have a game. That's basically another form of flaming when you tell someone they are unappriecative because they disagree or try to insinuate that which is why I said don't turn this thread into some pity party directed at this or that.  Stay on topic.  Armageddon may not be a democracy but it's just as much coming off topic to tell people that they shouldn't disagree as any other flame would be so yeah I'm going to say something against that.

If you can't tell I appriecate the IMMs but I do not agree with everything they have to say, so that being established why don't we get on with the topic, k?

[John]

then I see the same player after an IMM posts that they lurve low stats, and infact prefer them.

But I really do prefer low stats sometimes. If I've got the "under-developed man" with weak arms, weak chest, etc, and I get "absolutely incredible strength and endurance" I will reroll in an attempt to get suckier strength and endurance. Failing that I'll wish up to have my stats lowered to at least "below average" in those areas.

If this is going to only effect the players then post a reason why the chang was implemented.  If it is do to players twinking find an alternative for twinking.  If it's for realism it's been proven it's not realistic.

Have you (or anyone else) put together an informative (and non-condescending) e-mail with appropriate links to the mud account? I really doubt it to be honest.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

I agree with XD What would be the point of posting later, when the code is implemented and there is a thread on it seems like a pretty good time.  I'm starting to think some people are just going to agree with whatever the IMMs do without actually giving it any thought.

I don't know why I am beating this dead horse, but there are some misconceptions here.

1. Post by all means, not one soul here has said not to post. No one said post later, not once. The comment was to not base things on conjecture and use fairly discouraging remarks like accusing people of whining, and stating that newbie rangers have been nerfed.

The way that Morgenes is going about it, in slow, testing-status steps, is the right way to go. So things might be unbalanced for a while. Who cares?

That to me is saying wait to post, or don't post.  Not to mention your own post it's basically like saying if you don't agree don't post or send in a log.  That is how I take it.  And yes I'm going to say rangers are being nerfed because well:  I believe they are.  The majority of my characters have been rangers.  It is no secret that is the guild I love and have played most of.  I think my "conjecture" is pretty educated.

I'm somewhat confused about why I'm being included in this situation. At no time have I condemned anybody about any of their views. In fact, your quote of mine above is not even aimed at you, or anybody at all. It's a statement from a coder's point of view. That's really it.

Maybe you could lay off of whatever it is that's making you so irritant.

[RunningMountain]

A bow is a bow is a bow, they all work exactly the same way no matter the materials Delerak. And if you had any knowledge on it at all, you would know that almost every decent hunting capable longbow, recurve shortbow, horsebow etc made today are made from traditional materials. IE mostly, WOOD.

You're still assuming to know what it would be like to shoot under the conditions of zalanthas. With primitive weapons, and no matter how long a mdesc a primitive bow with primitive materials.  Even if you have shot an english yew longbow, big deal. These aren't english yew longbows. Find a mongolian horn bow and you'll get one step closer to zalanthas, but still archery is not the same in a fantasy world as it is here. Especially one where the heat averages 140 degrees a day.

[FightClub]

Adiel, Shooting at an animal that many times IS rediculous, go back and read Bebops post. It is a Game, and that is the way this Game works.

Don't compare shooting a modern plastic and metal compound bow to a bone and ritikki gut bow. I doubt it's the same and you don't know how easy or hard it could be to pull back the string on a zalanthan bow

A bow is a bow is a bow, they all work exactly the same way no matter the materials Delerak. And if you had any knowledge on it at all, you would know that almost every decent hunting capable longbow, recurve shortbow, horsebow etc made today are made from traditional materials. IE mostly, WOOD.

I see some posting that seems maybe a bit...brisk. But really who cares?
I know the staff does a great job for no pay, but I also know that they have to have a slightly thick skin and doubt that they go "OMG look at that post!! It was -Almost- rude in tone!! Ban them or I quit...SOB!"

What is wrong exactly with somebodies post showing a bit of emotion anyway?

As to the rest, give it time, keep logs, yadda yadda yadda, Well of course you do that, I am.

But, like others, I'm also posting my opinion NOW. And on the post information of the staff, If you think that is posting while uninformed then maybe the staff posts should provide more information. Otherwise it is posting while perfectly informed.

I don't necessarily agree with the a bow is a bow.  The materials are entirely different on zanthalas, modern day bows are selected for ease of use blah blah.  I mean another good way of looking at it would be well -- the greatsword.  The zalanthian greatsword -- well only half giants use it, that give the impression that it's really unwieldy, 20+ pounds.  While our greatswords, normally weighed under five pounds, and only ceremonial weapons exceeded that, reaching like 7-10 (and never got use in the field)  You all might say well my replica greatsword is twenty pounds...  That's because people have it in their heads that these weapons need to be heavy, that's the way they were, it isn't.  The newer manufacturers actually place additional weight on these weapons so people think of it as -more realistic- when it entirely wasn't.  But yes back to my point, zalanthas, and real life, have nothing in common.  It's a fantasy game, how dare you compare your fucking bow shooting with your high speed multi string, synthetic bow, fuck no.  And besides as it's been said twenty times over in this thread.  The code change wasn't for realism, it was to prevent twinking.  Jesus christ. Get off it.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

Listen, Fight Club. Not to be harsh, or anything, but you're simply wrong.

First of all, HGs are not the only race to use greatswords.

Secondly, there is no real reason that the concepts of bows here and in Zalanthas should be different. A bow is a bow is a bow. No matter the pulleys on today's more popular bows, there are still bows that are made of simple wood and cord. Tribals in Africa and other places still use these simple bows, and I highly doubt that the creators and current implementors of Armageddon see any difference.

Thirdly, the Staff has stated more than once that the changes in the game were not only to curb twinking, but also to improve realism. While creating a huge drain for normal bows might not be the answer, and will probably get taken out because of it, the drain for using a crossbow is realistic, if a tad excessive, and all of these things will be nerfed and amped as the staff spends time looking into it.

Finally, your tone is really bad. Honey catchs more flies than vinegar, and you're serving some pretty bad vinegar. It might be a good idea to calm down a little. You border on flamery.

[jcarter]

While creating a huge drain for normal bows might not be the answer, and will probably get taken out because

This is wrong. It is not a huge drain.

[Maybe42or54]

You know what would be nice though?
When you get -HIT- by arrows or thrown weapons, you actually lose stamina. That'd be realistic, I think, and kinda fun with the new changes.

[Majikal]

You know what would be nice though?
When you get -HIT- by arrows or thrown weapons, you actually lose stamina. That'd be realistic, I think, and kinda fun with the new changes.

You know, I kinda like that idea. Good thinking. [/derail]

[Vesperas]

Wow.. this topic... just.. wow.

I support the statements of the original poster.  I am an overweight, lazy-as-shit, no-endurance weakling, but when I practice with my 50-lb. recurve, I don't experience very much fatigue unless I'm holding it back (for whatever reason) for an extended period of time.  

On the other hand, I honestly doubt that I would EVER be able to load a crossbow.  I have a very weak back and weak arms... hell, I sit on a computer all day for Christ's sake.  If I managed to load a crossbow, I imagine firing the damn thing would be difficult as well -- they look heavy to me.  But that's not from experience.

If someone wants to volunteer to send in this supposed email with support and links, send me a PM and I'll add my little name to the bottom of the list of 'people with real-life experience', and maybe will find some links as well -- although, I'm not sure how many scientific studies have been done on the fatigue cost of bows and crossbows.

In all honesty, 'throwing' something that weighs less than 2 or 3 pounds fatigues me ten times more than pulling back on my recurve bow -- you're muscles are designed to pull, not push or sling.


Derail:
Ya'll play nice.  Its a good topic, with a good point to be made -- its not an opinion derived from 'OMFG, that nerfs my skillz!!!', its one derived from real-life experience.

[Cale_Knight]

When you get -HIT- by arrows or thrown weapons, you actually lose stamina. That'd be realistic, I think, and kinda fun with the new changes.

Why not piercing and slashing melee weapons too, then?

[TheGivingTree]

The ideology: 1 beats 2, 2 beats 3, 3 beats 4 doesn't quite seem to be the "perfect balence" that I have in mind. In my perspective, the perfect balence is achieved when all classes are equally powerful. When there's a way to overcome any obstacle given to the player if he/she plays out the cards correctly, then things will become quite challenging and fun.

I believe this is what the mods have in mind when they're depowering, repowering, and powering certain classes. It's a matter of trial and error. Someday, we'll get things right. I believe that discussions held about what is balencing and not balencing is all part of the developement. My friends, the finale will be grand. I cannot wait to see the end result.

Sorta reminds me of that old event about two groups were bickering what is right and wrong about democracy. An older man steps out from nowhere and declares, "My friends, this is democracy in action!" Ofcourse, they just stared at him as though he's an oddball.

Aye... don't stop debating. It makes the mud a better place for rp'ers in the long run.

When the scenario where a ranger can kick a warrior's arse and a warrior can do the same in return comes true; the awsomeness shall be fullfilled.

[John]

When there's a way to overcome any obstacle given to the player if he/she plays out the cards correctly, then things will become quite challenging and fun.

Guess what. There's a way to overome any obstacle given to a player if he/she plays out the cards correctly. Oh wait, did you mean overcoming obstacles purely by skills? Or doing it purely alone? If so. It aint possible. It should never be possible (IMO).

[TheGivingTree]

Ofcourse it's impossible... at this moment. But I do apologize for not being specific... the obstacles I wished to imply where speficially pc vs pc battles.

[John]

Oh, well no. I don't think they should be balanced in that manner. A pick-pocket shouldn't be able to win a battle against a veteran warrior unless they've got poisoned weapons or special armor or magick on them or something.

Pick-pockets have something else. The ability to steal items. Which can get them power, 'sid and influence (moreso then a warrior if done right IMO). They should deal with a warrior in this manner.

[TheGivingTree]

A pick-pocket shouldn't be able to win a battle against a veteran warrior unless they've got poisoned weapons or special armor or magick on them or something.

Yes! That's the perfect example of how nothing is impossible. That there are methods for a particular profession to defeat any other profession in combat. Ofcourse, if both were to have the same equipments and spellcraft, I'm sure the warrior would win unless the pickpocket has something else up his/her sleeve. Ofcourse, pickpockets were never made to be combat oriented, it would only be reasonable for the warrior to have the upper hand.

Perhaps the statement, "Where all classes are equally powerful." should be changed to, "Where all combat specialized classes are equally powerful." That would be much more logical.

I don't disagree with you or anyone. My friends, these types of discussions are truly enlightening. ^__^

[John]

Perhaps the statement, "Where all classes are equally powerful." should be changed to, "Where all combat specialized classes are equally powerful." That would be much more logical.

But there's only one class specialized in combat. Warriors. They'll always be more powerful then Rangers and Assassins (I'm leaving magickers out of it). Assassins specialize in killing people. Not in combat. An assassin who lets himself get into a fight is a poor assassin. Rangers specialize in.. well the closest thing I can say is hunting. But they don't really specialize in anything except staying alive out in the desert.

So yeah. There's only one combat specialized class. Assassins should stay out of combat (although can in a pinch fight) and rangers survive in the desert by carefully picking their battles, using the terrain to their advantage and using their other skills to avoid prolonged combat (perhaps instead making quick strikes).

[TheGivingTree]

Oh! That is true indeedy. Very ironic indeed. Well... for me that is. O.o Warriors being the only combat specialized class, but we shall see the results of this new implementation on the rangers sooner or later. If it becomes too unfavorable and chaotic. I'm sure the voice of the populace shall win-out in the end.

But man, what gratification! To be a profession of lesser combat-specifcations to win against a warrior; whether the weapon be poisonous or not. ^.^

Perhaps someone would disagree with the notion that warriors are the only class to be combat-specialized? O.o -pokie-

[Nao]

A BOW is a BOW - no matter what you use.

MAny of the bows in zalanthas are made of wood, like todays. Even if there are bows from other amterials, their pull has a similar range by code, so they've probably got a design that makes those horn or bone bows work like wooden bows.

The simplest design to make a bow is a selfbow. Once you've chosen the right wood and let it dry for months most of the work can be done in about a weekend (probably less when you're practiced). You cut a straight piece of wood from half a trunk, strip off the bark and maybe cut a few layers of wood off the back and carve a hande, from then on you only work the inside of the bow - flatten out the arms and put in a few notches to keep the string, simple as that. You can't build a bow more primitive than this, and this is what I imagine a zalanthan wooden bow to look like unless the description says otherwise. The difficult part of this is balancing the whole bow so it bends equally everywhere you want it to bend and has a decent accuracy.

It might be harder to hit something with a bow like that if it wasn't made at a very good quality, but it isn't tougher to pull or anything - it's pretty hard to even get a bow like that to have a decent pull.

So there's no reason why zalanthas would have monster-bows that make you completely exhausted from shooting - I buy the explanation that you have to run after an animal and that costs stamina, but saying that it must be something with the bow being incredibly hard to work is silly - the selfbow I've used is MORE easy to pull than those nice and modern recurves and compound bows that have fiberglass backings and all that.

[Tlaloc]

So yeah. There's only one combat specialized class. Assassins should stay out of combat (although can in a pinch fight) and rangers survive in the desert by carefully picking their battles, using the terrain to their advantage and using their other skills to avoid prolonged combat (perhaps instead making quick strikes).

I would dissagree with the notion that Assassins should stay out of a fight. Assassins, like other combat characters, are built to get into fights. However, like you mentioned with Rangers, they are more specialized and typically have to use their skills, wit, and terrain to their own advantages, to make up for the lack of overall combat robustness.

[Assassinish Kank]

But there's only one class specialized in combat. Warriors. They'll always be more powerful then Rangers and Assassins (I'm leaving magickers out of it).

I would dissagree with the notion that Assassins should stay out of a fight. Assassins, like other combat characters, are built to get into fights. However, like you mentioned with Rangers, they are more specialized and typically have to use their skills, wit, and terrain to their own advantages, to make up for the lack of overall combat robustness.

To the mantra, "skills matter more than stats," let me add another: skills matter more than guild.  An assassin who takes combat training seriously is perfectly capable of slugging it out toe-to-toe with a less-experienced warrior.

[Aldiel]

Adiel, Shooting at an animal that many times IS rediculous, go back and read Bebops post. It is a Game, and that is the way this Game works.

That's kind of what I'm saying X-D.  It is a game, that's why I think they're adding the stamina drain.  I'm not sure I follow what you're saying.   Are you agreeing with me that shooting an animal 20+ times is a bit ridiculous, or are you saying that it's ridiculous but it the way the game works.  I agree it's how the game works, and that's why I think adding the stamina drain might help to make it more realistic while working within the frameworks of the code.

[X-D]

Not agreeing at all.

It is unrealistic to begin with to have to shoot at something so many times, but adding another unrealistic thing to it simply makes it what, I suppose Doubly unrealistic.

I could live with the shooting 20 times to kill it, because that is the way the game worked, even if it was unrealistic. But to turn around and remove more of what little realism there was, whats up with that? And I see no way at all that it adds to play. Things that don't ride get the short end of the stick and things that do, well, it simply is going to go unnoticed for them.

Then add in that archery is already a hard skill to get better at.

#1 Arrows are expensive, so, PC's that start practicing archery are normaly already established and pretty set in the coin area. The stam drain is meaningless to them since they are most likley VERY good riders and better then average in melee.

#2 Archery has to have reasonable weather to practice, and it is the ONLY skill that needs that. if the wind is too high, well, so much for shooting anything.

Archery was already self limiting in the twink department.

Then lets add in the also unrealistic ability to now draw a bow that is too strong for you with simply a bit more effort...HUH?

Hey Joe, go lift that car, alright, Its too heavy boss! Try harder, Alright. Hey, I lifted it...bah.

And archery is already a stick and move deal when in PVP, you only get 1-2 shots before you have to ride away or in chase anyway, so again, stam drain is doing nothing for strategy there.

Oh, and lets not forget that archery damage has already been recently nerfed anyway, So, what #3 or #4 on limiting the usefulness of the skill?

[amoeba]

Then lets add in the also unrealistic ability to now draw a bow that is too strong for you with simply a bit more effort...HUH?

Hey Joe, go lift that car, alright, Its too heavy boss! Try harder, Alright. Hey, I lifted it...bah.

The analogy is weak.  A bow is not a boulder to lift, nor should it be an on/off switch.  I always was a bit irked by that code.  If a bow is too strong for you, it means you can not draw the string back to it's optimal position, meaning the bow is less effective for you.  How far from optimal is your pull? Depends, are you 90% to using a heavy bow or 10%? One can barely pull the string back, while another can almost get there.  Certianly more "realistic" than light, medium, heavy.  This way the coders could take into account this variability if they so desired.

And archery is already a stick and move deal when in PVP, you only get 1-2 shots before you have to ride away or in chase anyway, so again, stam drain is doing nothing for strategy there.

You have a point there, however probably not quite what you intended.  The stamina drain is so minimal in relation to everything, that someone playing it the way they should, would barely notice the effect.  However someone who stood 2 squares away from a duskhorn, and used it as a stationary practice dummy, thowing volley after volley of arrows at the critter, knowing oocly it won't move at all in response, is the one going to get "nerfed".  

It would seem that anything getting peppered continuously by painful sticks in the side would either try to run away from the threat, or move to eliminate it.  If the archery stamina hit was rolled back, I would -strongly- like to see this implemented.

Oh, and lets not forget that archery damage has already been recently nerfed anyway, So, what #3 or #4 on limiting the usefulness of the skill?

It did? Damn I missed the memo on this one.  

In all seriousness, and not discounting anyone's feelings on the "realism" of the change. This is a game in a fantasy setting.  Compromises with realism are made all the time.  We can keep raw meat in 140% heat in our packs for weeks on end without nary an ill effect from it.  Sometimes suspension of belief is essental.

[jcarter]

How many people in this thread have actually used archery since the changes have gone into place and really been effected by it?

[Tamarin]

I've used it, and it's fine.  Honestly.  I really like the change of feel that it has forced into archery/throw hunting.

[FightClub]

Listen, Fight Club. Not to be harsh, or anything, but you're simply wrong.

First of all, HGs are not the only race to use greatswords.

Secondly, there is no real reason that the concepts of bows here and in Zalanthas should be different. A bow is a bow is a bow. No matter the pulleys on today's more popular bows, there are still bows that are made of simple wood and cord. Tribals in Africa and other places still use these simple bows, and I highly doubt that the creators and current implementors of Armageddon see any difference.

Thirdly, the Staff has stated more than once that the changes in the game were not only to curb twinking, but also to improve realism. While creating a huge drain for normal bows might not be the answer, and will probably get taken out because of it, the drain for using a crossbow is realistic, if a tad excessive, and all of these things will be nerfed and amped as the staff spends time looking into it.

Finally, your tone is really bad. Honey catchs more flies than vinegar, and you're serving some pretty bad vinegar. It might be a good idea to calm down a little. You border on flamery.

#1Alright let me put it this way, pick and dunk.  Only very-high strength characters can use a greatsword.  A five pound sword is not hard to swing.  Even if you can't hurl boulders fifty yards.  That means greatswords are considerably heavier on zalanthas, or that the weight given is wrong.  That was my point.  And if the sword is heavier on zalanthas, then other materials might be more unwieldy, hard to use as well.  I mean I've seen bows made out of horns, and antlers, and strung with grass -- We're working with entirely different things.  Try to string a bow with grass here it will break.  So no a bow is not a bow is not a bow.

#2 Alright?

#3 Wasn't angry, I was just trying to point out how long that thread is going, and how it's circled over 20 times with the same views, comments, whatever.  I believe that everything that could be said is said, and has been said twenty times now.  If I meant a derogatory tone you'd know it, and it wasn't.  So politely, get off my case.

[Majikal]

It's totally okay, hasn't really bothered me at all really. The stamina loss isn't that great of a number really.

[X-D]

The analogy is weak. A bow is not a boulder to lift, nor should it be an on/off switch. I always was a bit irked by that code. If a bow is too strong for you, it means you can not draw the string back to it's optimal position, meaning the bow is less effective for you. How far from optimal is your pull? Depends, are you 90% to using a heavy bow or 10%? One can barely pull the string back, while another can almost get there. Certianly more "realistic" than light, medium, heavy. This way the coders could take into account this variability if they so desired.

Your not into archery are you?

Less effective is not the correct term in the least.

Cept for todays compound bows, which have a letoff, Bows get harder the farther you pull them back, and the scale in which they do is not geometric.

But, lets see if I can explain this.

Alright, if I pick up a bow, any bow, say a 10 pound childs bow that I can pull easily.

I hold the bow in my left hand, I knock the arrow with my right and curl the first joints of my first 3 fingers around the string with my index above the arrow and the other two below, none of my fingers touching the arrow.
I then smoothly lift the bow with my left hand while pulling back with my right. When the arrow is level with my eyes my right hand thumb knuckle will be even with my temple. I then  sight target, hold and release.

This is the ONLY position that offers an even remote amount of steadyness. It does not matter if I have pulled the string back 10 inches or 30, as long as I can get to this position.

If you pick up a bow and you cannot get to this position, you will not hit your target...unless it is like 5 feet in front of you and even then you might not.

A bow, that is too strong for you, is just that, Too damm strong for you.

If you can pull it to the proper position and hold for the 1 second it takes to steady, then it is NOT too strong for you. And if you can do it once, you can do it 10 times.

Again, it is not a matter of drawing the string to the optimal position. There is none, Somebody 5 foot tall does not draw the string as far back as somebody 6 foot tall.

The arguement is not weak, it is correct.

and used it as a stationary practice dummy, thowing volley after volley of arrows at the critter, knowing oocly it won't move at all in response, is the one going to get "nerfed

To that, #1 there is a skill timer, I don't care if he shoots 210 arrows, the skill is not going up any more. So, I say let him, Thats a lot of arrows to toss at a duskhorn. And big deal, since it is not PVP then he will shoot them stam drain or not because he can simply rest then continue shooting.

As to damage being nerfed.
Morganes wrote:

First, a bug was found in how armor was calculated with missile weapons. It will now be more effective against missile weapons. (This could be bad news if you hunt things with bow/arrows that have naturally tough hides) HUNTERS BEWARE!

And Oh yes, so it was a bug, yes yes, but the last bug on armor that was fixed pretty much crippled kick, at least for a time, and even now, its usefullness is limited to using against things with like zero armor. Even light leathers on a PC stop it, well, cept from HG's and maybe very strong muls.

[amoeba]

The arguement is not weak, it is correct.

Eh. still not a good analogy, mechanics of archery aside.  Archery is not lifting a car. I'm not into that either, if I was, I would suspect it would have to be a light car (i.e. tonka) that would be in my lifting category.

To that, #1 there is a skill timer, I don't care if he shoots 210 arrows, the skill is not going up any more. So, I say let him, Thats a lot of arrows to toss at a duskhorn. And big deal, since it is not PVP then he will shoot them stam drain or not because he can simply rest then continue shooting.

Missing my point there. I really don't care if they get a skill boost or not. Not only that, the twink can't tell at the point where the skill cap wears off so the argument is moot. They will continue to do so anyway, -thinking- they are getting a boost.

The point I was making is that using animals as stationary practice dummies is not good play.  Yet it is a common practice. Imposing a consequense, that they -will- notice is helpfull.  I'm not entirely convinced that the penalty should be a stamina drain. It could be that the animal will bolt, and the person can't use them in this fashion, or they will become enraged and charge.  This is how it works against a PC currently. In addition, most resonable players will have little real effect by the stamina drain.  So in short, I do care if they shoot 210 arrows.  Unless I am selling him the arrows of course.

As to damage being nerfed.
Morganes wrote:

First, a bug was found in how armor was calculated with missile weapons. It will now be more effective against missile weapons. (This could be bad news if you hunt things with bow/arrows that have naturally tough hides) HUNTERS BEWARE!

And Oh yes, so it was a bug, yes yes, but the last bug on armor that was fixed pretty much crippled kick, at least for a time, and even now, its usefullness is limited to using against things with like zero armor. Even light leathers on a PC stop it, well, cept from HG's and maybe very strong muls.

I don't comment against code as I don't know, nor want to know the particulars.  Nor do I guess on it's effects. In practice, it seems as effective as always. That is from me looking at the damage reflected after using said weapon.  My comments are based on actually trying the code and looking at the results from said action.

[Aldiel]

Not agreeing at all.

It is unrealistic to begin with to have to shoot at something so many times, but adding another unrealistic thing to it simply makes it what, I suppose Doubly unrealistic.

I could live with the shooting 20 times to kill it, because that is the way the game worked, even if it was unrealistic. But to turn around and remove more of what little realism there was, whats up with that? And I see no way at all that it adds to play. Things that don't ride get the short end of the stick and things that do, well, it simply is going to go unnoticed for them.

Then add in that archery is already a hard skill to get better at.

#1 Arrows are expensive, so, PC's that start practicing archery are normaly already established and pretty set in the coin area. The stam drain is meaningless to them since they are most likley VERY good riders and better then average in melee.

#2 Archery has to have reasonable weather to practice, and it is the ONLY skill that needs that. if the wind is too high, well, so much for shooting anything.

Archery was already self limiting in the twink department.

Then lets add in the also unrealistic ability to now draw a bow that is too strong for you with simply a bit more effort...HUH?

Hey Joe, go lift that car, alright, Its too heavy boss! Try harder, Alright. Hey, I lifted it...bah.

And archery is already a stick and move deal when in PVP, you only get 1-2 shots before you have to ride away or in chase anyway, so again, stam drain is doing nothing for strategy there.

Oh, and lets not forget that archery damage has already been recently nerfed anyway, So, what #3 or #4 on limiting the usefulness of the skill?

Well, I suppose I'm not playing atm, so I haven't tried out this new stamina drain on archery.  I can't really say more than I would assume the reason I listed before might be the reason the imms decided to add this stamina drain. *shrug*

[Aldiel]

This is kind of a derail, but I think Kick is definitely fine the way it is.  A skilled kicker is way annoying to fight even with silt-horror on.

[X-D]

Your right amoeba, I've missed your point completly, to the point of well...I don't see one at all.

But my point(s) are these.

Overall, archery Was more realistic in game then it is now. Period.

The way it is now adds nothing to the game that -I- can see but does detract (Again, from what realism there was). It does nothing to stop twinking and only marginally makes it more difficult to practice at all. The staff has not stated the reasons for making these changes and at least one staff hints that it is part of a larger whole. I hope so. But at the same time, I really do not think I at least am going to be much impressed.


I liked the subtle strategy that the combat code held before to be honest.
I think that the direction being taken is going to take away from that and it makes me sad.

Keep in mind. With my playing style and the types of chars I play, these changes, almost all of them, from the stam drains in combat skills to even archery and throw if it has it. Will actually help, or make it easier for my chars to pvp...not that I want that.

Shrug, Though I started this thread, I think at this time, I am done with it...least untill more comes about from this "Grand (misguided IMO) Plan".