Archery stam drain..Huh?

[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. ^__^