I think Armageddon would be in a better place, if the rate of your advancement in certain Combat and Weapon related skills, was predicated more on the raw lethality of your opponent, and rather less on their quickness.
By which I mean, fundamentally, we would all be better served if skill advancement was more of a risk vs reward scenario, such as say, benefiting more from tackling a salt worm as opposed to a 'insert something weaker yet quicker than a salt worm'.
I am not referring to Off/Def.
Why?
Why should anyone care about this topic? Well. Because Armageddon is a harsh world, where death owing to a variety of factors (PK, critters, lag, bugs, unfairness) is always just around the corner - and no one gives a shit if you eat it. No one will resurrect you if you accidentally walk through the Nak city gates with a tube of spice you didn't realize someone gave you while semi-idle, and then got butchered. And since it takes a colossal amount of time compared to a gicker, to create a mundane that can defend themselves when those crazy situations crop up, people will always have an incentive to figure out the most efficient ways of skilling themselves.
Unfortunately, Armageddon's combat system doesn't really have an 'efficient but twinky' vs 'inefficient but good' route to mastery. It very quickly reaches a glass ceiling where the only possibility of progression requires a...somewhat creative understanding of game mechanics. Additionally, you have incentives to appreciate those mechanics, if you want to keep playing your character over the longer term. At least if that character is in a combat-exposed role.
What I'd like to see is a philosophy that is as simple and elegant as the magicker side of things. A newbie magicker has an equal chance of fully maxing and branching their character as a veteran, given even the slightest clue. It'd be great if mundanes were in a similar place: Hey man, fight dangerous stuff, get more dangerous!. Not, 'Hey man, fight <this specific critter>, get more dangerous.'
It'd just make indie spam hunters even more lethal, esp when compared to city-bound characters that are ostensibly being trained to be lethal.
Quote from: BadSkeelz on June 04, 2015, 07:31:27 PM
It'd just make indie spam hunters even more lethal, esp when compared to city-bound characters that are ostensibly being trained to be lethal.
That philosophy is certainly how we've gotten to the present incarnation of requiring ludicrous means of keeping people below advanced. But I'd hazard a suggestion that you're actually better off forcing indie hunters to tackle more lethal creatures, and that it would actually have the reverse effect that you're implying.
It takes teamwork - the kind of teamwork you can only find in established clans - to tackle the really dangerous stuff in the game.
What makes indie hunters both powerful and viable, is that they are typically played by vets that know where to find the relatively harmless critters they can reach mastery on, while avoiding the dangerous ones. The solution isn't removing these critters, as they're currently the only means of advancement. Otherwise, everyone would just play gickers. The solution is changing the incentive to something more realistic - fighting more dangerous creatures.
I imagine the Legion with their kryl-hunting patrols would have been much better served than some indie dwarf trying to do as such.
There's one simple fix to this, and I'm sure the Staff are aware of it. It's a "problem" that's been griped about for at least a decade, and if it hasn't been changed yet, I doubt it ever will be. The admins basically don't want sparring alone to be a viable option for achieving mastery in weapon and wield skills.
Once you get beyond that basic fix and the fundamental premise behind it, every other proposal is just moving the cheese around to another location that will piss off a different subset of players.
(I'm not going to elaborate on the nature of the fix, or the problem behind it, because it basically gives away the strategy for gaming the current system.)
Synthesis is probably right in saying that if people really wanted this fixed, it could have been done a while ago. What remains is meta reasons to keep combat as it is.
And although I trust the playerbase enough to think that it wouldn't be too big a deal, well.. I kiiiiiinda can see why staff would want to be apprehensive about the thought of maxed warriors/rangers running about everywhere. Merchants may well go extinct if that were to ever happen.
Quote from: Patuk on June 04, 2015, 08:27:21 PM
Synthesis is probably right in saying that if people really wanted this fixed, it could have been done a while ago. What remains is meta reasons to keep combat as it is.
And although I trust the playerbase enough to think that it wouldn't be too big a deal, well.. I kiiiiiinda can see why staff would want to be apprehensive about the thought of maxed warriors/rangers running about everywhere. Merchants may well go extinct if that were to ever happen.
It's a good point, but I just don't see it as a logical conclusion from the 'fight more dangerous stuff to be dangerous' thrust of my suggestion. But even if that were the case, I'd rather see people get there from fighting rantarri, meks and kryl, than from say...something much weaker and quicker.
There's also no reason why it couldn't be tweaked in such a way as to remain the same soul-crushing grind, and to safely assure newbies won't get that far. (Another reason why the first thing a newbie should do is spec app a gemmer if they really want to get plugged into a playerbase that often only values you if you bring something valuable to the table).
The problem is: how do you translate "more dangerous" into code. I'm assuming what you mean is "if something hits you a lot" or "if something hits you hard" then it's "dangerous." So you have to set a threshold for what constitutes a skillable hit.
All you've done is set up a new metagame. Now people will go out and fight and spar mostly unarmored to make sure they hit the damage threshold for skilling up. Dwarf sparring partners will be the best, instead of elf. People will ride out to dangerous things just to get hit by them a few times before they flee. Agile PCs will be at a disadvantage because they take less damage fewer times. Etc. etc. etc. It's just moving the cheese. It's not really even more dangerous, unless you set the bar at "you have to be reeled to generate a skillup," and then it would be so dangerous that we'd get epic-level bitching and moaning as soon as the reality of the situation set in amongst the playerbase.
(If you think I'm joking or overreacting...before the defense nerf, and before the reel code, "intentionally getting pinched by a bahamet" was a fairly common metagame tactic.)
Current system isn't perfect, but a new system won't be either.
If it ain't terribly horribly broken, don't fix it. I don't think Arm's is terribly horribly broken...so....
Quote from: Synthesis on June 04, 2015, 08:44:07 PM
The problem is: how do you translate "more dangerous" into code. I'm assuming what you mean is "if something hits you a lot" or "if something hits you hard" then it's "dangerous." So you have to set a threshold for what constitutes a skillable hit.
All you've done is set up a new metagame. Now people will go out and fight and spar mostly unarmored to make sure they hit the damage threshold for skilling up. Dwarf sparring partners will be the best, instead of elf. People will ride out to dangerous things just to get hit by them a few times before they flee. Agile PCs will be at a disadvantage because they take less damage fewer times. Etc. etc. etc. It's just moving the cheese. It's not really even more dangerous, unless you set the bar at "you have to be reeled to generate a skillup," and then it would be so dangerous that we'd get epic-level bitching and moaning as soon as the reality of the situation set in amongst the playerbase.
(If you think I'm joking or overreacting...before the defense nerf, and before the reel code, "intentionally getting pinched by a bahamet" was a fairly common metagame tactic.)
I don't see anything you've said here as a joke or a overreaction. But I'd rather have the metagame cheese revolve around something that instinctively makes sense, as opposed to revolving around something that only really benefits those 'in the know'.
Again, I use the gicker system as an example. That makes perfect sense, and even a newbie can quickly grasp it.
"Practicing hitting something that is hard to hit makes me better at hitting things" makes a whole lot of intuitive sense, especially in the context of how every other skillup mechanic in the game works (except one, maybe, but I don't have an exact working knowledge of that).
I guess a workaround would be to re-jigger the stats and combat skills on critters such that new-butthole-tearing efficiency always scales with evasiveness (not necessarily vice-versa). That way, every critter that could potentially give you a skillup at advanced or master level would also be able to seriously fuck you up. That would be a pretty massive undertaking, though...a bunch of things would have to disappear, or suddenly get seriously roided out.
Also, there is a serious problem with this, in that at least 3 classes have to basically maximize their offense before they become really defensively capable. It would turn the game into a warrior's playground, because only warriors (and extended subguild protectors) would be able to scale their defense up to cope with the critters they'd need to fight to scale their offense. Alternatively, the only thing you could do is have a warrior tank for you while you swing away at something that would otherwise be melting your face.
Quote from: Synthesis on June 04, 2015, 10:51:07 PM
"Practicing hitting something that is hard to hit makes me better at hitting things" makes a whole lot of intuitive sense, especially in the context of how every other skillup mechanic in the game works (except one, maybe, but I don't have an exact working knowledge of that).
I guess a workaround would be to re-jigger the stats and combat skills on critters such that new-butthole-tearing efficiency always scales with evasiveness (not necessarily vice-versa). That way, every critter that could potentially give you a skillup at advanced or master level would also be able to seriously fuck you up. That would be a pretty massive undertaking, though...a bunch of things would have to disappear, or suddenly get seriously roided out.
Also, there is a serious problem with this, in that at least 3 classes have to basically maximize their offense before they become really defensively capable. It would turn the game into a warrior's playground, because only warriors (and extended subguild protectors) would be able to scale their defense up to cope with the critters they'd need to fight to scale their offense. Alternatively, the only thing you could do is have a warrior tank for you while you swing away at something that would otherwise be melting your face.
SO what you are saying is you find party for a healer and dps so you can tank away at the level 30 deadmines raid?
I'd just sort of like it if I didn't feel capped at journeyman with a many days played warrior.
Quote from: aeglaeca on June 04, 2015, 10:55:06 PM
I'd just sort of like it if I didn't feel capped at journeyman with a many days played warrior.
The differences between a 20 day warrior and a 50 day warrior is how fast you store.
Quote from: Synthesis on June 04, 2015, 10:51:07 PM
Alternatively, the only thing you could do is have a warrior tank for you while you swing away at something that would otherwise be melting your face.
It would certainly encourage indie hunters to join clans where they might find a warrior willing and able enough to protect them in battle.
What if some mobiles had a large penalty if they weren't being engaged by a group or at least an equally formidable opponent
Quote from: Clearsighted on June 04, 2015, 11:10:31 PM
Quote from: Synthesis on June 04, 2015, 10:51:07 PM
Alternatively, the only thing you could do is have a warrior tank for you while you swing away at something that would otherwise be melting your face.
It would certainly encourage indie hunters to join clans where they might find a warrior willing and able enough to protect them in battle.
Or encourage them to find an indie warrior to protect them in battle. I'm not sure if that's the goal, to encourage loners to group up, or to join clans.
Quote from: aeglaeca on June 04, 2015, 10:55:06 PM
I'd just sort of like it if I didn't feel capped at journeyman with a many days played warrior.
Ugh, this. Definitely this. I don't really care how it's done, it just feels like weapon skills were singled out for some reason to grind to a screeching halt.
Thirded. If I have one weakness of a player it's that I DO like watching my skills go up. Weapon and combat skills are just painful to get up (unless you're a vet with 200 characters and a firm grasp of the code).
Desire to see skills go up doesn't seem like a worthy reason to change anything. Have more skill ranks might be an easy solution so people at least see some progress more often. I dunno.", just doesn't seem like a thing to prioritize over other coding activities.
Quote from: wizturbo on June 05, 2015, 12:49:17 AM
Desire to see skills go up doesn't seem like a worthy reason to change anything. Have more skill ranks might be an easy solution so people at least see some progress more often. I dunno.", just doesn't seem like a thing to prioritize over other coding activities.
Didn't read anything except the last three posts, but it's more just that you have to do exceedingly stupid and unrealistic things to ever see your weapon skill ever crest above jman that it's kind of ridiculous. I think if they changed it so that sparring PC's automatically gave you a couple of points to your skills above what you'd get off say, fighting stilt-lizard #220 it would go a long way to fixing this.
At one point I had a pretty serious abuse of code, that got me to a master level in a weapon skill, AND almost Jman in a secondary skill. Of course, it was a pretty serious abuse of code so that had to stop and once that happened, I kind felt... eh.
I've branched on 3 warriors in over 10 years of playing, and none of them has killed a single PC.
Quote from: aeglaeca on June 04, 2015, 10:55:06 PM
I'd just sort of like it if I didn't feel capped at journeyman with a many days played warrior.
Same here.
I would be fine with combat skills continuing to go up just as slowly, so long as you could do normal things and hunt normal things, and fight/spar against people normally, and still have incremental progress.
I'd rather have that, than be able to skill up by fighting a bunch've silly, weak, yet extremely fast critters.
I just wish characters that specialized in combat skills were given the same incentives to play normally as those that have magick abilities. There are many times where I wished I was attracted to playing magickers, because you can really just not care about coded advancement at all, and be assured that provided you RP realistically, and go about your life, you will eventually get there.
That can't be said for mundanes. It's not that mundanes slow down - they hit an absolute wall where further advancement is impossible without killing your soul.
Sure, you can RP normally. But most know how fun it is to play the Sergeant/soldier that spends all day RPing and actually being a professional who has fought many terrible and dangerous enemies, that gets plastered by the indie dwarf that just hunted verrin hawks instead.
Maybe not being able to branch weapon skills practically is intended and that the only people who would have them (warriors in their 50s) is the way staff want it to be to signify old masters having to teach new students but being much less useful despite all their cool advanced wepons
alternatively the code is spaghetti and they don't want to break everything trying to make it better
Quote from: MeTekillot on June 05, 2015, 02:22:00 AM
alternatively the code is spaghetti and they don't want to break everything trying to make it better
You could just change weapon skills to scale similarly on the pass/fail routine that two_handed and dual_wield work on. Just slow down how fast you progress but make the "fail" criteria consistent. You'll fix the city-bound clan problems and put them on even footing with indie hunters. Indie hunters will get their fails no matter what, believe me.
edit:
That would be the easiest, simplistic code solution that I can think of with very little work from the other admins. The fact that you can't consistently get "dodges" in military clans is downright silly because it's the only way to progress your weapon skills. And realistically, military clans should be producing the best warriors. Not Stilt Lizard Academy.
A more dynamic, desirable solution would be to scale the failure/skill progression to work as follows...
Unclanned: 1.0 skill gain on fail
Hunting Clan: 1.1 skill gain on fail
Military Clan: 1.3 skill gain on fail
I think all clans should get a tregil spawn in their sparring hall. That would be the simplest, least effort the staff could make.
I appreciate why combat skills are slower to raise, but I think they need to be tweaked to make them easier to raise for the average player.
Certain skills just promote spamming and bad form due to the way they raise, forcing a player to choose between sucking at it for an inordinately long amount time (or perhaps forever, if they're particularly unlucky or unused to how the code works), or resorting to extreme danger or questionable measures, i.e. specific creatures or circumstances.
Skills aren't the end all be all of Armageddon, but they ARE important - this is an RPI, not a MUSH.
It's a fun challenge to ignore skills, but you can't expect that to work for every concept.
I suppose the question I have is what is the staff perspective on this issue. It's pretty much a fact if you want to reach the upper echelons of fighting skills you have to do one of two things:
1. Fight specific critters under somewhat silly conditions.
2. Beg the staff for skill gains.
This system just seems for counter-intuitive for a number of reasons. A hardened battle guy who spends day in and day out fighting with other tough battle guys should logically be better at fighting people than the indie dunehopper who only fights obscure critters.
There are plenty of non-indie warriors and rangers who train by the same methods. My uber-warrior was technically clanned for probably 99.9% of his time in game. Byn, Salarr, Oash. Mastered and branched from every basic weapon skill except piercing.
Yeah, but you're Synthesis.
Still no match for fire kanks.
Well, really, wouldn't it just make more sense to also learn from success? A rather reduced chance, but still, a chance.
A chance to learn from success would be great and pretty much solve every problem with everything.
Having to fail to progress, while amusing on a meta level, gets downright silly.
The "simple" fix would be to change the definition of what constitutes a failure for these skills. It maintains the "fail-to-learn" mechanic, and fixes the "sparring doesn't work" problem.
So, a block or parry should count as much as a dodge? Because I don't see a reason to be coy about that. And I'd agree!
Still, I think success should give a small chance of a raise across the board. It isn't just combat that suffers from this fail mechanism.
I'm sure the coders could figure out a logarithmic skill progression for any given underlying mechanic. The question is whether they care to or not.
I don't know about coding or its implementation:
When I see threads where people are like: Ten plus years of not fixing this... or that...
The staff are just people with lives. How hard is it to literally MAKE this change yourself and then just send the script or know-how to the staffers and be like ; "Look compadres, I fixed it. Let me know if your implementing it so I can spec app first"
--> I like failing is already a factor. We could add a few in for the aforementioned 'journeyman':
- Small fractional increase for successful parry.
-Add a one or two second delay somehow for solid shield-blocks (This successful shield block is rare but would also add a fractional increase)
-Maybe we could actually reward people for enduring fights, also. Maybe if the combat goes through so many cycles there are milestones where skills are rolled for a potential increase. (Say you have each parried or dodges each other 30+ times each in one match) you get some sort of fractional increase.
This is my 5 minute 2 sids addition.
Well you can't just separately code something and add it in.. that's not how it works.
I'm sure that working with Armageddon's code is a gnarly endeavor much like diffusing a bomb. Some things are easier than others.
Coders also have real lives that get interrupted.
We can still speculate, suggest, and dream, but it'll take a coder with the time and know-how to do it.
Quote from: Delirium on June 05, 2015, 12:32:35 PM
a coder with the time and know-how to do it.
I have one of these things.
You all speak of a glass ceiling, and I get that, but I had thought I was hitting a very real ceiling when it came to sparring with sparring weapons.
A change would be nice. PCs in a military clan following a strict sparring schedule will (most likely) never reach the level of capability that these wandering dwarves do when they're swinging at jozhals and stilt lizards, or, if so, definitely not on the same speed. That is, unless they're twinking themselves.
The argument is that characters locked safely in their clan halls shouldn't be able to get as powerful as a character out there risking their lives. This is a "feelings" argument. I feel that if a player puts the time into a clan and brings it to life, they should be rewarded with the competency that comes along with it.
Quote from: Asanadas on June 05, 2015, 02:39:13 PM
I feel that if a player puts the time into a clan and brings it to life, they should be rewarded with the competency that comes along with it.
A million times this. The current system goes as far as to discourage you from involving others on your hunt, as you might give up precious dodges. In a game where we constantly ask players to involve others in their plots, our coded system should reflect that ethos.
I just wish the code for skill progression would be as fun as it is intuitive and realistic. Right now I think it's lacking in all three departments.
Quote from: KankWhisperer on December 11, 2013, 02:07:55 AM
(http://i396.photobucket.com/albums/pp46/antiwhipped/ragecomic.png)
You can get around these problems, by and large, if you have a leader in your clan who knows what the deal is, and lets people train appropriately. E.g. instead of group-ganking that mob, let people take turns soloing it. Great time to practice rescue, as well. If someone's facerolling it, tell them to back off and let someone else have a go. Have your defensive guy tank it and let the noobs play with the pinata. Etc. etc.
Quote from: Synthesis on June 05, 2015, 03:41:03 PM
You can get around these problems, by and large, if you have a leader in your clan who knows what the deal is, and lets people train appropriately. E.g. instead of group-ganking that mob, let people take turns soloing it. Great time to practice rescue, as well. If someone's facerolling it, tell them to back off and let someone else have a go. Have your defensive guy tank it and let the noobs play with the pinata. Etc. etc.
This is exactly the type behavior that I hate in the game. Treating the wilds like a training grounds instead of a place with real danger where anything could happen. I hate hate HATE that the code rewards this type of behavior.
Quote from: Ender on June 05, 2015, 04:12:56 PM
Quote from: Synthesis on June 05, 2015, 03:41:03 PM
You can get around these problems, by and large, if you have a leader in your clan who knows what the deal is, and lets people train appropriately. E.g. instead of group-ganking that mob, let people take turns soloing it. Great time to practice rescue, as well. If someone's facerolling it, tell them to back off and let someone else have a go. Have your defensive guy tank it and let the noobs play with the pinata. Etc. etc.
This is exactly the type behavior that I hate in the game. Treating the wilds like a training grounds instead of a place with real danger where anything could happen. I hate hate HATE that the code rewards this type of behavior.
+1
Quote from: Delirium on June 05, 2015, 10:25:35 AM
I appreciate why combat skills are slower to raise, but I think they need to be tweaked to make them easier to raise for the average player.
Certain skills just promote spamming and bad form due to the way they raise, forcing a player to choose between sucking at it for an inordinately long amount time (or perhaps forever, if they're particularly unlucky or unused to how the code works), or resorting to extreme danger or questionable measures, i.e. specific creatures or circumstances.
Exactly.
Also. I hate feeling like a fucking twink, just because I've been playing long enough to know that there are only 2-3 specific circumstances where I can expect to get a miss (after a certain point), and I hate knowing that. At the same time, because Armageddon is a harsh world and death does come suddenly, swiftly and without remorse, I feel compelled to take necessary precautions by skilling myself up.
It would be bliss if I could go about my IC job with the knowledge that provided I put myself into increasingly challenging circumstances, I could achieve at least partial, incremental progress. Such as if weapon skills racked up tiny partial failures for not critting. I would not care if it took twenty such partials to equal one fail. At least there would be some forward momentum.
If this were the case, I wouldn't care if I could get to mastery in 15 days on hawks, but took 45 days otherwise. I'd never fight another hawk again. It'd be like playing a magicker almost (except for the 45 days vs 5 days thing).
Quote from: Asanadas on June 05, 2015, 02:39:13 PM
The argument is that characters locked safely in their clan halls shouldn't be able to get as powerful as a character out there risking their lives. This is a "feelings" argument. I feel that if a player puts the time into a clan and brings it to life, they should be rewarded with the competency that comes along with it.
Ironically, clan characters face a LOT more danger, without getting a corresponding benefit. That indie dwarf can pick and choose his battles (and a high percentage of those 'battles' will be with small, weak and exceedingly quick critters), whereas Legionary Amos had to follow his templar on another kryl hunt and hope he doesn't get paralyzed and raped. It's the same for other clans, like the Militia, Salarr, Kurac, Byn, etc. Gee, Sarge, we're going mek hunting? Couldn't we just hunt jozhal this one time, please? Then we'd get really good at killing stuff!
Quote from: Synthesis on June 05, 2015, 03:41:03 PM
You can get around these problems, by and large, if you have a leader in your clan who knows what the deal is, and lets people train appropriately. E.g. instead of group-ganking that mob, let people take turns soloing it. Great time to practice rescue, as well. If someone's facerolling it, tell them to back off and let someone else have a go. Have your defensive guy tank it and let the noobs play with the pinata. Etc. etc.
Perfect example of how the current system favors those with years of metaknowledge. I am one of those guys. And I have been that leader in the past. But I hate it. I hate it so much. It makes me feel dirty. At the same time, I'd rather be dirty than dead.
None of these concerns are anything magickers have to deal with. If you're not outright abusing your powers as a gicker (summoning multiple people into the silt sea on a whim) you basically can't 'twink'.
Quote from: Ender on June 05, 2015, 04:12:56 PM
Quote from: Synthesis on June 05, 2015, 03:41:03 PM
You can get around these problems, by and large, if you have a leader in your clan who knows what the deal is, and lets people train appropriately. E.g. instead of group-ganking that mob, let people take turns soloing it. Great time to practice rescue, as well. If someone's facerolling it, tell them to back off and let someone else have a go. Have your defensive guy tank it and let the noobs play with the pinata. Etc. etc.
This is exactly the type behavior that I hate in the game. Treating the wilds like a training grounds instead of a place with real danger where anything could happen. I hate hate HATE that the code rewards this type of behavior.
Eh, well. In a skill-based RPI, everywhere is a training ground, and nowhere is. If you can't invent plausible reasons to get into circumstances where you would become more skilled, then I guess your character shouldn't be skilled.
I kind of like the fact that you have to go out into the wilderness, because contrary to popular belief in this thread, it -is- vastly more dangerous than training in a stupid sparring hall. There's no amount of witty banter and juvenile sex jokes that can thrill more than nearly getting steamrolled by a carru or having a tembo go all Terminator on your ass across the Known World. For my 2 fucking amazing combat PCs, I have 81 dead ones that really weren't shit.
Everyone's claiming "roleplay" and "realism," but the fact of the matter is that the real driving force is folks want it to be easier to be a legitimate badass. If you cared so much about roleplay, you wouldn't give a shit what your skill level said.
Quote from: Synthesis on June 05, 2015, 06:00:13 PM
Quote from: Ender on June 05, 2015, 04:12:56 PM
Quote from: Synthesis on June 05, 2015, 03:41:03 PM
You can get around these problems, by and large, if you have a leader in your clan who knows what the deal is, and lets people train appropriately. E.g. instead of group-ganking that mob, let people take turns soloing it. Great time to practice rescue, as well. If someone's facerolling it, tell them to back off and let someone else have a go. Have your defensive guy tank it and let the noobs play with the pinata. Etc. etc.
This is exactly the type behavior that I hate in the game. Treating the wilds like a training grounds instead of a place with real danger where anything could happen. I hate hate HATE that the code rewards this type of behavior.
Eh, well. In a skill-based RPI, everywhere is a training ground, and nowhere is. If you can't invent plausible reasons to get into circumstances where you would become more skilled, then I guess your character shouldn't be skilled.
I kind of like the fact that you have to go out into the wilderness, because contrary to popular belief in this thread, it -is- vastly more dangerous than training in a stupid sparring hall. There's no amount of witty banter and juvenile sex jokes that can thrill more than nearly getting steamrolled by a carru or having a tembo go all Terminator on your ass across the Known World. For my 2 fucking amazing combat PCs, I have 81 dead ones that really weren't shit.
Everyone's claiming "roleplay" and "realism," but the fact of the matter is that the real driving force is folks want it to be easier to be a legitimate badass. If you cared so much about roleplay, you wouldn't give a shit what your skill level said.
I don't think anyone would contest that sparring hall training is more dangerous. But clans that have sparring halls do often find themselves
going into more dangerous situations than your average indie hunter. This isn't always the case, and I'm not a proponent of sparring becoming superior to real life or death situations.
But I think the best training
should be life or death situations. And let's be real. It is more dangerous sparring than fighting the tiny handful of quick, weak critters that indie vets skill up on the most.
No one is skilling up on carru.
In Soviet Gol Krathu, carru skill up on you.
Synthesis, I believe you are so in-grained into the current process of combat skill acquisition that you are unable to see how it is legitimately flawed. The excuses you are making are logical fallacies and projection onto myself and the others in this thread in an attempt to invalidate our feedback.
Your opinion of what's "good" for the game is different from ours. Can you leave it at that, instead of insisting we are incompetent roleplayers compared to yourself?
I know exactly how it's flawed. I know the arguments. I really don't like the grind. I think the alternatives are worse. I think the stated arguments in favor of change are really based on frustrated desire to be badass, not on legitimately roleplay-detracting bugs.
I don't think it's unreasonable to expect your skill sheet to reflect your 80 days played. I also don't think it's a frustrated desire to be badass if your PC can solo a bahamet into submission but can't get past jman weapon skill because of lack of stilt lizard hunting.
If you can solo a bahamet, why the fuck are you so concerned about "sucking?"
I'm not particularly concerned about it, but I feel that the current system is very counterintuitive and completely understand the frustration of not seeing anything on your skill sheet tick after the initial month you spend playing the game. I think that seems to be the consensus overall.
Quote from: Synthesis on June 05, 2015, 06:46:30 PM
I think the stated arguments in favor of change are really based on frustrated desire to be badass, not on legitimately roleplay-detracting bugs.
That's hilarious, given I've taken advantage of the current situation to have extremely powerful combatty characters for years, while no one else knew what to do or get past journeyman, and I made the fricken thread.
Frustration doesn't necessarily equal failure.
Quote from: Synthesis on June 05, 2015, 07:07:23 PM
Frustration doesn't necessarily equal failure.
You've gone from making thoughtful points, to making completely illegitimate accusations, aimed not on the logic or validity of my posts or concerns, but aimed at me as a player, that I don't find it easy enough to get TEH BADASS.
That's so completely missing the mark, it's not even funny. It really lessens my respect for your input as well.
What's wrong with letting mundanes have a system that is intuitive, rather than counter-intuitive? So long as we're projecting unfounded accusations at each other, I could just as easily say that you're defending the status quo because it benefits those who have spent years of working the system and knowing where it is illogical.
The current system benefits me at the expense of other players. I dislike it, regardless of how it benefits me, because I'm tired of the same artificial methods over the last ten years. If you can't wrap your mind around that, then just stop trolling the thread.
I already stated that "improvement by failure" is intuitive.
I've offered at least 2? 3? different solutions for fixing the perceived problem.
I've also stated that I don't really care whether it gets fixed or not.
I'm sorry you're getting so butt-hurt about it, but really...almost nobody is going to pile on and say, "Yeah, I think the grind is alright. Actually, I think it should be worse!" There's not really a polite way to say, "I think you're just being a baby about it," which is more or less my opinion.
I have other reasons why I think the weapon skill grind should be hard as nails, but I'm not going to get into it, because it would just be speculating on perhaps non-obvious code-type things.
Wanting to roleplay a badass is still roleplaying. Trying to roleplay a badass in the southern Arm is annoying when you know the surest route to badassitude is riding north to combat the Verrin Hawk and Stilt Lizard menace. I'd wager that most people don't want to do that because its ridiculous, so we're forced to settle for the artificial plateau created by sparring halls and local wildlife that our characters have reasonable excuses to be fighting.
QuoteYou can get around these problems, by and large, if you have a leader in your clan who knows what the deal is, and lets people train appropriately. E.g. instead of group-ganking that mob, let people take turns soloing it. Great time to practice rescue, as well. If someone's facerolling it, tell them to back off and let someone else have a go. Have your defensive guy tank it and let the noobs play with the pinata. Etc. etc.
This statement is also completely at odds with your stated desire for the wilderness to be dangerous and terrifying. If the wilderness is dangerous, wouldn't you WANT to not show any mercy to whatever's charged up on you? Every second you let Runner Amos wrestle that skeet is another second something much worse could surprise you all and ruin your days.
Quote from: aeglaeca on June 05, 2015, 06:52:36 PM
I don't think it's unreasonable to expect your skill sheet to reflect your 80 days played. I also don't think it's a frustrated desire to be badass if your PC can solo a bahamet into submission but can't get past jman weapon skill because of lack of stilt lizard hunting.
The one saving grace of a long-lived and active combat character* is that your hidden states of offense and defense are pretty damn high compared to most. We might not branch weapon skills (3/4s of which are kind of stupid anyway) but we can at least lay the hurt and defend reasonably well, even if we're nominally journeymen.
*Edit: That's played by someone who doesn't know the location of particular monsters or the length of the skill timer or the other coding quirks, which is most of us newbies.
Quote from: Synthesis on June 05, 2015, 07:15:59 PM
I already stated that "improvement by failure" is intuitive.
I've offered at least 2? 3? different solutions for fixing the perceived problem.
I've also stated that I don't really care whether it gets fixed or not.
I'm sorry you're getting so butt-hurt about it, but really...almost nobody is going to pile on and say, "Yeah, I think the grind is alright. Actually, I think it should be worse!" There's not really a polite way to say, "I think you're just being a baby about it," which is more or less my opinion.
I have other reasons why I think the weapon skill grind should be hard as nails, but I'm not going to get into it, because it would just be speculating on perhaps non-obvious code-type things.
If it makes you feel better to peddle some fantasy about the only reason people might have of disagreeing with the current system is that they can't be TEH BADASS like you, and aren't as hardcore as you, so be it. Sorry to prick your ego, but knowing the location of the two or three mobs in the game to get easy misses on, does not make you hardcore. Because that's how you're coming off right now.
Anyways. It's not particularly 'hard as nails' either. Any vet, if they really want to, can get to mastery in ~15 days played in perfect safety. The sad thing is that, those methods are the only way to reach mastery.
Quote from: BadSkeelz on June 05, 2015, 07:17:53 PM
Wanting to roleplay a badass is still roleplaying. Trying to roleplay a badass in the southern Arm is annoying when you know the surest route to badassitude is riding north to combat the Verrin Hawk and Stilt Lizard menace. I'd wager that most people don't want to do that because its ridiculous, so we're forced to settle for the artificial plateau created by sparring halls and local wildlife that our characters have reasonable excuses to be fighting.
QuoteYou can get around these problems, by and large, if you have a leader in your clan who knows what the deal is, and lets people train appropriately. E.g. instead of group-ganking that mob, let people take turns soloing it. Great time to practice rescue, as well. If someone's facerolling it, tell them to back off and let someone else have a go. Have your defensive guy tank it and let the noobs play with the pinata. Etc. etc.
This statement is also completely at odds with your stated desire for the wilderness to be dangerous and terrifying. If the wilderness is dangerous, wouldn't you WANT to not show any mercy to whatever's charged up on you? Every second you let Runner Amos wrestle that skeet is another second something much worse could surprise you all and ruin your days.
Everything is risk vs. benefit.
There are at least 2 things around 'nak you can get to mastery on, and they're super dangerous, too! You don't even have to pretend.
Quote from: Synthesis on June 05, 2015, 07:23:46 PM
Quote from: BadSkeelz on June 05, 2015, 07:17:53 PM
Wanting to roleplay a badass is still roleplaying. Trying to roleplay a badass in the southern Arm is annoying when you know the surest route to badassitude is riding north to combat the Verrin Hawk and Stilt Lizard menace. I'd wager that most people don't want to do that because its ridiculous, so we're forced to settle for the artificial plateau created by sparring halls and local wildlife that our characters have reasonable excuses to be fighting.
QuoteYou can get around these problems, by and large, if you have a leader in your clan who knows what the deal is, and lets people train appropriately. E.g. instead of group-ganking that mob, let people take turns soloing it. Great time to practice rescue, as well. If someone's facerolling it, tell them to back off and let someone else have a go. Have your defensive guy tank it and let the noobs play with the pinata. Etc. etc.
This statement is also completely at odds with your stated desire for the wilderness to be dangerous and terrifying. If the wilderness is dangerous, wouldn't you WANT to not show any mercy to whatever's charged up on you? Every second you let Runner Amos wrestle that skeet is another second something much worse could surprise you all and ruin your days.
Everything is risk vs. benefit.
There are at least 2 things around 'nak you can get to mastery on, and they're super dangerous, too! You don't even have to pretend.
Maybe while drunk and with a bag full of stones on you.
Quote from: Clearsighted on June 05, 2015, 07:23:39 PM
Quote from: Synthesis on June 05, 2015, 07:15:59 PM
I already stated that "improvement by failure" is intuitive.
I've offered at least 2? 3? different solutions for fixing the perceived problem.
I've also stated that I don't really care whether it gets fixed or not.
I'm sorry you're getting so butt-hurt about it, but really...almost nobody is going to pile on and say, "Yeah, I think the grind is alright. Actually, I think it should be worse!" There's not really a polite way to say, "I think you're just being a baby about it," which is more or less my opinion.
I have other reasons why I think the weapon skill grind should be hard as nails, but I'm not going to get into it, because it would just be speculating on perhaps non-obvious code-type things.
If it makes you feel better to peddle some fantasy about the only reason people might have of disagreeing with the current system is that they can't be TEH BADASS like you, and aren't as hardcore as you, so be it. Sorry to prick your ego, but knowing the location of the two or three mobs in the game to get easy misses on, does not make you hardcore. Because that's how you're coming off right now.
Anyways. It's not particularly 'hard as nails' anyways. Any vet, if they really want to, can get to mastery in ~15 days played in perfect safety. The sad thing is that, those methods are the only way to reach mastery.
You're cherry-picking my one irrelevant aside, man. Let it go. Fine, you're a fucking saint who just loves purist RP so much that you can't stand the injustice of training. I believe you. Really, I do.
Quote from: Synthesis on June 05, 2015, 07:25:08 PM
Quote from: Clearsighted on June 05, 2015, 07:23:39 PM
Quote from: Synthesis on June 05, 2015, 07:15:59 PM
I already stated that "improvement by failure" is intuitive.
I've offered at least 2? 3? different solutions for fixing the perceived problem.
I've also stated that I don't really care whether it gets fixed or not.
I'm sorry you're getting so butt-hurt about it, but really...almost nobody is going to pile on and say, "Yeah, I think the grind is alright. Actually, I think it should be worse!" There's not really a polite way to say, "I think you're just being a baby about it," which is more or less my opinion.
I have other reasons why I think the weapon skill grind should be hard as nails, but I'm not going to get into it, because it would just be speculating on perhaps non-obvious code-type things.
If it makes you feel better to peddle some fantasy about the only reason people might have of disagreeing with the current system is that they can't be TEH BADASS like you, and aren't as hardcore as you, so be it. Sorry to prick your ego, but knowing the location of the two or three mobs in the game to get easy misses on, does not make you hardcore. Because that's how you're coming off right now.
Anyways. It's not particularly 'hard as nails' anyways. Any vet, if they really want to, can get to mastery in ~15 days played in perfect safety. The sad thing is that, those methods are the only way to reach mastery.
You're cherry-picking my one irrelevant aside, man. Let it go. Fine, you're a fucking saint who just loves purist RP so much that you can't stand the injustice of training. I believe you. Really, I do.
Well, I'm glad we finally agree on something! Now where's my kudos?
Quote from: Clearsighted on June 05, 2015, 07:24:59 PM
Quote from: Synthesis on June 05, 2015, 07:23:46 PM
Quote from: BadSkeelz on June 05, 2015, 07:17:53 PM
Wanting to roleplay a badass is still roleplaying. Trying to roleplay a badass in the southern Arm is annoying when you know the surest route to badassitude is riding north to combat the Verrin Hawk and Stilt Lizard menace. I'd wager that most people don't want to do that because its ridiculous, so we're forced to settle for the artificial plateau created by sparring halls and local wildlife that our characters have reasonable excuses to be fighting.
QuoteYou can get around these problems, by and large, if you have a leader in your clan who knows what the deal is, and lets people train appropriately. E.g. instead of group-ganking that mob, let people take turns soloing it. Great time to practice rescue, as well. If someone's facerolling it, tell them to back off and let someone else have a go. Have your defensive guy tank it and let the noobs play with the pinata. Etc. etc.
This statement is also completely at odds with your stated desire for the wilderness to be dangerous and terrifying. If the wilderness is dangerous, wouldn't you WANT to not show any mercy to whatever's charged up on you? Every second you let Runner Amos wrestle that skeet is another second something much worse could surprise you all and ruin your days.
Everything is risk vs. benefit.
There are at least 2 things around 'nak you can get to mastery on, and they're super dangerous, too! You don't even have to pretend.
Maybe while drunk and with a bag full of stones on you.
Lol, okay. I almost died at least a dozen times with my badass, some even after day 40. Hell, one time even a scrab nailed me for 90% of my hp when I was trying to train up polearms. X-D and Majikal (I presume) very nearly PK'ed me at least twice. And I never did the drunken stones thing, because that's too lame even for me.
The fact that something is safe -most- of the time is meaningless when you gotta get out there every damn day to do work.
Quote from: Synthesis on June 05, 2015, 07:31:09 PM
Quote from: Clearsighted on June 05, 2015, 07:24:59 PM
Quote from: Synthesis on June 05, 2015, 07:23:46 PM
Quote from: BadSkeelz on June 05, 2015, 07:17:53 PM
Wanting to roleplay a badass is still roleplaying. Trying to roleplay a badass in the southern Arm is annoying when you know the surest route to badassitude is riding north to combat the Verrin Hawk and Stilt Lizard menace. I'd wager that most people don't want to do that because its ridiculous, so we're forced to settle for the artificial plateau created by sparring halls and local wildlife that our characters have reasonable excuses to be fighting.
QuoteYou can get around these problems, by and large, if you have a leader in your clan who knows what the deal is, and lets people train appropriately. E.g. instead of group-ganking that mob, let people take turns soloing it. Great time to practice rescue, as well. If someone's facerolling it, tell them to back off and let someone else have a go. Have your defensive guy tank it and let the noobs play with the pinata. Etc. etc.
This statement is also completely at odds with your stated desire for the wilderness to be dangerous and terrifying. If the wilderness is dangerous, wouldn't you WANT to not show any mercy to whatever's charged up on you? Every second you let Runner Amos wrestle that skeet is another second something much worse could surprise you all and ruin your days.
Everything is risk vs. benefit.
There are at least 2 things around 'nak you can get to mastery on, and they're super dangerous, too! You don't even have to pretend.
Maybe while drunk and with a bag full of stones on you.
Lol, okay. I almost died at least a dozen times with my badass, some even after day 40. Hell, one time even a scrab nailed me for 90% of my hp when I was trying to train up polearms. X-D and Majikal (I presume) very nearly PK'ed me at least twice. And I never did the drunken stones thing, because that's too lame even for me.
The fact that something is safe -most- of the time is meaningless when you gotta get out there every damn day to do work.
We should all be forced to reach mastery by skilling up on X-D and Majikal.
Give me the ability to set custom attack emotes and make my self a JOJO character and the system is fine.
That is all that is needed.
On another note warrior grinding seems meh.
I'm on the "who cares" bandwagon. Mostly because none of my combat PCs has lasted long enough for me to hit whatever ceiling you're all talking about.
lol how is it the same people on the GDB are always pushing buttons and nobody ever catches on
Quote from: Synthesis on June 05, 2015, 06:46:30 PM
I know exactly how it's flawed. I know the arguments. I really don't like the grind. I think the alternatives are worse. I think the stated arguments in favor of change are really based on frustrated desire to be badass, not on legitimately roleplay-detracting bugs.
If everyone should stay stuck at journeyman (which seems to be what you want), then why not change the skill cap to that and be done with it?
Oh, is it because certain people (like you?) have figured out tricks to progress beyond it, and don't want to lose the advantage?
Easy to sling accusations, isn't it.
...and yet again...why I liked the skills better when people -couldn't- see what level they were at.
As stated...you will improve when it is IC to do so. Naturally. Because you will be fighting things you need to improve to do well against. If you're already doing well, you won't improve, because you're already playing the badass regardless of what your skills say. Just because there are 'tricks' to getting better doesn't mean that people who have played the game for 10 years and entered numerous debates and gone through numerous changes to code enough times to know what the trick is doesn't mean they are using advantages. I haven't had a PC get past apprentice weapon skills since you were able to see skill levels. I don't think.
The objective is not for everyone to reach master. The objective is not to find a safe way to train things up until every fight is safe. Stop it.
Quote from: Armaddict on June 06, 2015, 03:48:25 AM
...and yet again...why I liked the skills better when people -couldn't- see what level they were at.
As stated...you will improve when it is IC to do so. Naturally. Because you will be fighting things you need to improve to do well against. If you're already doing well, you won't improve, because you're already playing the badass regardless of what your skills say. Just because there are 'tricks' to getting better doesn't mean that people who have played the game for 10 years and entered numerous debates and gone through numerous changes to code enough times to know what the trick is doesn't mean they are using advantages. I haven't had a PC get past apprentice weapon skills since you were able to see skill levels. I don't think.
The objective is not for everyone to reach master. The objective is not to find a safe way to train things up until every fight is safe. Stop it.
I also preferred it when we couldn't see what our skills were. But at the same time, I think you're being very misleading here. The objective is to reach master and branch an advanced weapon, as much as it is for every gicker you have played to branch their top-tier spells, once they got going. Somehow, I don't think you ever went out of your way to avoid doing that.
In fact, there isn't a single skill or category of skills in the entire game that people look down upon, or treat with the same condescension, as those who want to master weapon skills. No one bats an eye about stealth, riding, barrier or fireball.
I don't see how making players ignorant of the fact that they can't continue improving their skills by sparring solves the problem that it doesn't make sense that they can't continue improving their skill by sparring.
I really like the visible skill levels. It makes perfect sense that after trying to do something a few times, you wouldn't be sure if you're getting better at it, but over a long period of time your improvement becomes noticeable. That is something that makes perfect sense to happen and recognize ICly.
It's perfectly IC for characters to notice that at some point, it feels like sparring is no longer improving their skills. Good riddance to the days where newbies had no way of figuring this out until they saw some gruff obvi-veteran come into sparring with 1000 stone in rocks in his pack, or they got the inside scoop via AIM.
Quote from: Clearsighted on June 06, 2015, 04:31:21 AM
Quote from: Armaddict on June 06, 2015, 03:48:25 AM
...and yet again...why I liked the skills better when people -couldn't- see what level they were at.
As stated...you will improve when it is IC to do so. Naturally. Because you will be fighting things you need to improve to do well against. If you're already doing well, you won't improve, because you're already playing the badass regardless of what your skills say. Just because there are 'tricks' to getting better doesn't mean that people who have played the game for 10 years and entered numerous debates and gone through numerous changes to code enough times to know what the trick is doesn't mean they are using advantages. I haven't had a PC get past apprentice weapon skills since you were able to see skill levels. I don't think.
The objective is not for everyone to reach master. The objective is not to find a safe way to train things up until every fight is safe. Stop it.
I also preferred it when we couldn't see what our skills were. But at the same time, I think you're being very misleading here. The objective is to reach master and branch an advanced weapon, as much as it is for every gicker you have played to branch their top-tier spells, once they got going. Somehow, I don't think you ever went out of your way to avoid doing that.
In fact, there isn't a single skill or category of skills in the entire game that people look down upon, or treat with the same condescension, as those who want to master weapon skills. No one bats an eye about stealth, riding, barrier or fireball.
...you're literally spewing the opposite of what I just said under the statement that I'm being misleading. Stealth skills, I use them to be stealthy, and when they start succeeding, I'm stealthy. Riding, I use to travel, and when I succeed, I travel. Barrier, I use to block my mind, and when I'm blocking my mind, it's blocked. Likewise, someone who fights, fights until they're winning, and then they're winning. The objective is not to get the advanced weapon skill, it's to win their fights. The advanced weapon skills, when they were put in, were, if I recall correctly, said to be intentionally placed so that they would be hard to attain, and the mark of a truly developed and active warrior with untold amounts of victory.
The weapon skills follow the same platform as almost every other skill in the game, but it is the one that is focused on for -grinding- the most. What you're proposing is that everyone should be able to get to weapon mastery, which has long been the 'holy grail' of the game for a warrior, not the expectation. I don't think every person who chooses the warrior class is -entitled- to the right of becoming a legendary weaponsmaster, which is essentially what you become at the point that you're reaching those levels. Changing the way it works under that pretense that every warrior is expected to reach that level is the misleading concept here, not the other way around (note that this affects the other classes that get high caps on weapon skills as well, but nowhere near the same prowess).
To put this in a different light: On a PvP front, which is ultimately the only place where this truly makes a change due to it already being noted that warriors get to the point in the -current- system that they're doing ridiculously insane combat situations without even attaining mastery, all these stealth skills other methods are really the other classes way of dealing with the warrior. A twenty day warrior who went through most of their play time in the Byn is -already- incredibly scary to deal with, even with those alternative methods. To have warriors suddenly hitting that mastery level much more quickly is an incredibly frightening prospect. It changes from 'this is very risky, things needs to go right' to 'If he draws a weapon, we're -going- to die'...on what is a relatively short lived warrior. So when you say...
QuoteIn fact, there isn't a single skill or category of skills in the entire game that people look down upon, or treat with the same condescension, as those who want to master weapon skills.
...you're ignoring the very basic fundamentals of why that is. Weapon skills are the single most important combat oriented skills there are. When I see someone spam climbing, I chuckle. It's obvious. When I see someone wandering through rarely-commuted streets stealing, I snicker. Why? Because it's someone finding a reason to use their skills, but in a way that their skills -would- be used. When I see a guy going and picking fights, gathering up npc's so that he's fighting five versus one when he could have killed each alone, or two at a time, I say...'What fighter would ever do this?' It isn't the development of weapon skills that is looked down upon, it is the IC measures people go through to further an OOC end. Those measures are very drastic in comparison, which is your original argument, which is answered by the first thing above. They're not supposed to be reached by everyone. They're a special mark. It's not the same as a poisoner who doesn't fail coating, or a rider who never falls when he charges, or a pickpocket who can rob you blind. Every movement they make in combat with mastery is a masterful death stroke (not literally one shotting, but you ain't gonna be able to stand and fight this guy) to all but the most skilled opponents. Those opponents are going to be other warriors. Everyone else is tiptoeing around trying to avoid that fight.
Basically, much the same as Synthesis, I see and understand the flaws, but the changes that have been presented about it up to date leave much more glaring repercussions than you're letting on.
If it's all about the advanced weapon skills (which I know very little about, I only know how scary effective high weapon skills actually are, particularly against those who -aren't- engaging in that insane behavior to twink out their combat effectiveness), then the better fix is not a quicker way to mastery, but a lower point where the advanced skill is branched. However, again, I believe that such is counter-intuitive to the purpose that those skills were originally put in place for, which is the mark of a long-lived, truly almost-legendary fighter. If that's inaccurate, I apologize. I'm going solely off of memory here. It's also late, and I'm a little rambly.
And as a sidenote...I rarely play mages. The ones I have played did not branch some spells, because I was more concerned with getting the ones I had to full fruition, then only using them as needed. Sooo...if you meant that jab at me personally, it's wrong.
Edited to add:
Basically...the way things 'are' as is equal for all people who 'fight well', i.e. Have high weapon skill caps. Warriors are the only ones that have something at the end of it though, and everything that counteracts those mastery levels are higher on the warrior, which puts them in the ultimo position there. Making weapon skills skyrocket faster when it is essentially only other PC's who you will need those higher levels for is going to hurt. A lot. The most common classes will become an army of death machines, rather than it being the mark of the seasoned veteran. While I can understand the frustration of having skills that do not often branch...those branches are not really the concern to me so much as the power of their predecessing skills at high levels anyway. So again...I think the 'objective=weapons skill branch' rather than 'objective=I'm a badass in a fight' is the source of that frustration.
--I also think that the downward trend in reckless pvp harms this scenario. Where the 'norm' has finally become what people wanted, which is people safely staying in cities and sparring versus being raiders and raided constantly...you're running into a lot less scenarios where skills can improve because you've got a bunch of people stuck with each other with wooden sticks rather than events of single, life-threatening combat with no holds barred.
Quote from: hyzhenhok on June 06, 2015, 05:20:05 AM
I don't see how making players ignorant of the fact that they can't continue improving their skills by sparring solves the problem that it doesn't make sense that they can't continue improving their skill by sparring.
I really like the visible skill levels. It makes perfect sense that after trying to do something a few times, you wouldn't be sure if you're getting better at it, but over a long period of time your improvement becomes noticeable. That is something that makes perfect sense to happen and recognize ICly.
It's perfectly IC for characters to notice that at some point, it feels like sparring is no longer improving their skills. Good riddance to the days where newbies had no way of figuring this out until they saw some gruff obvi-veteran come into sparring with 1000 stone in rocks in his pack, or they got the inside scoop via AIM.
To clarify, the only reason that comment was there was not as a jab, but because I think it is in actuality contributing to the very problem at hand. Prior to seeing it, you'd hit that point, and you'd realize it, over time the same way you do now, but you didn't have a standard readout telling you that you're not -actually- as badass as you think you are. So you'd start rolling around like the badass that you are, but would run across another badass that you didn't anticipate, and...if you survived...become more badass. With the readout, it seems to foster this idea that you need to max out safely, which results in less risk taking, which results in less skill ups. It's changed the level that people feel badass at, despite all IC information telling you the opposite.
If you're in the Byn, even with a journeyman weapon skill, and you're smashing everyone in the ring? You're a badass. You're going to smash most people in a real fight. However, there is now a driving need to continue to find ways surpass journeyman despite the fact that you have reached the badass state as is, and will only get -more- badass with every other badass you encounter.
Interesting post, Armaddict. I agree with the general sentiment: We use skills to not fail, not to see <advanced> or <master> besides them. But at the same time...weapon skills have a uniquely low ceiling. It would be logical for people to assume that by fighting more dangerous creatures, they would become better with those weapons. This is not the case. Still, it is a very respectable defense of the status quo, and I do not find your reasoning as flippant as I initially assumed. So there's that.
I'm going to cherry pick your one comment that I do take a meaningful exception to:
Quote from: Armaddict on June 06, 2015, 05:28:48 AM
The weapon skills follow the same platform as almost every other skill in the game, but it is the one that is focused on for -grinding- the most. What you're proposing is that everyone should be able to get to weapon mastery, which has long been the 'holy grail' of the game for a warrior, not the expectation. I don't think every person who chooses the warrior class is -entitled- to the right of becoming a legendary weaponsmaster, which is essentially what you become at the point that you're reaching those levels.
I have two significant problems with this statement.
1) I don't think everyone should be entitled to become a legendary weaponmaster. I don't even think the grind should be lessened. But I'd like to see a scenario, where someone could eventually continue to make incremental progress, without having even partial and incremental advancement be completely impossible, without fighting a select two or three critters. It might be that incremental progress would take thirty or forty-five days played-time to master. That's fine. But at least there will be progress.
And just so noone forgets...I am not a proponent of the 'reaching mastery via sparring safely in the city' faction. I think sparring is basically fine for what it is. But I do think you should be rewarded by tackling significantly dangerous creatures. That you should learn more from fighting a mek or an elite gith than a verrin hawk.
Instead, I favor a risk vs reward system that is parallel to the risk vs reward for every other skill in the game. Right now, it's no risk/all reward vs all risk/no reward, except for a very brief and fleeting time in a character's development.2) By your same logic, 'legendary magickers' who are maxed and branched in all of their magick skills, should be just as rare as warriors who have been able to branch an advanced weapon. I also find it curious that the definition of a 'legendary warrior' is one that manages to pick up a polearm or a pike.
There's nothing inherently faulty with your logic (legendary sorts being rare). But it should apply equally. It doesn't make sense to have say, 'Flaming Meteors of Death' branch after a few days of nil casting in some safe little location, without even actually having to use the spell in question in a dangerous scenario, but expect warriors that can use pikes to be incredibly rare. Everyone seems to be okay with legendary backstabbers, archers and crafters.
What I'm looking for, Armaddict, is consistency. I think one of the few valid reasons for changing the status quo is when serious inconsistency is identified. That it has been identified for ten years (As Synthesis noted) and nothing has been done about it, does not discourage me. I wanted Tuluk to be shut down for the last ten years as well, and that eventually happened, so positive change is possible. Also, I don't think staff is as enamored with the status quo as some players project onto them. I think there's a lot they'd like to do differently, given the time and resources, and discussions like these can help provoke ideas.
Not to beat Tuluk's corpse, but I saw some noted posters on this board fervently defend that city's existence for years, then flip on a dime when its surprise closure was announced, and discover all the reasons why doing so made sense. I think combat revamping would go much smoother than even that.
Quote from: hyzhenhok on June 06, 2015, 05:20:05 AM
I don't see how making players ignorant of the fact that they can't continue improving their skills by sparring solves the problem that it doesn't make sense that they can't continue improving their skill by sparring.
I really like the visible skill levels. It makes perfect sense that after trying to do something a few times, you wouldn't be sure if you're getting better at it, but over a long period of time your improvement becomes noticeable. That is something that makes perfect sense to happen and recognize ICly.
It's perfectly IC for characters to notice that at some point, it feels like sparring is no longer improving their skills. Good riddance to the days where newbies had no way of figuring this out until they saw some gruff obvi-veteran come into sparring with 1000 stone in rocks in his pack, or they got the inside scoop via AIM.
You're right of course. Albeit, it was fun in the old days to know that, when few others were aware of the limits of sparring, to build a complete wrecking ball of a character that could solo a unit of Byn. Nowadays most everyone knows, because everyone sees themselves stuck at journeyman. Hell, it wasn't so long ago that there were long-time vets of the game that barely knew advanced weapons existed. Now I'm seeing training razors and such, everywhere. People were much more overconfident (often to their detriment).
EDIT: Also, skill bumps. There's a good reason why razors and polearms are more common than they used to be...
I think the system is a bit broken. My most badass character was only a month played, even my later combat characters that have had about 3 months played with awesome stats and better skills haven't been able to do the shit she did :( There's something wrong when there's such inconsistency, the character in question was able to kill kryl and mantis, (which she eventually died to when she met a large group of them, but that's besides the point) yet another character with a longer time played had skills miles better and stats also greater, but wasn't even able to kill carru.
Edit: I exagerrated a little bit about the three month bit. On reflection it was probably closer to one and a half, but it's still inconsistant.
I don't think warriors are the problem when it comes to weapon skills. I think a bunch of assassins running around with piercing and bludgeoning maxed out would be much, much scarier...to the point of being legitimately game-breaking. Maybe warrior/slipknife combos, but I've never played the slipknife sub, so I don't know what the max potential there is.
We are all blessed by the good fortune that there are very, very few assassins that ever reach instagib potential...and it's not because -backstab- is difficult to master.
I think that the mundane skill sets need to be completely restructured. surely replacing the class/subclass system is an unfeasible nightmare, but re-writing the skill trees for mundane classes is within the realm of possibility.
there's some serious weirdness with regards to who gets what, in my opinion. some of the differences between burglar, pickpocket and assassin don't make sense to me. the way certain classes branch parry seems like it encourages a monumental and un-fun grind, given how crucial parrying can be to being a combat PC. warriors' 'special goodies' come too late, are often not even that sweet, and as pointed out in this thread, can be difficult to earn without powergaming. and the existence of extended subguilds is also, I think, symptomatic of the system being screwed up; a healthy class/subclass system shouldn't need to patch its holes with even more special-er subguilds.
my suggestion is that staff strike a committee to come up with a new set of proposed skill trees. that committee could reach out privately to some of our more heinous powergamers for input, since people can't have much of a detailed conversation here due to having to avoid revealing code details.
personally I would prefer it if mundanes were very very simplified, maybe even down to just like three base classes, and then the subguilds were designed carefully such that they unlock characteristic skills within the branching tree.
the present system seems like just a pile of bandages applied to other bandages applied to other bandages, you know? it should be re-designed holistically.
I hear a bunch of whining and noobs tired of seeing others reap the coded benefits
If you can't resist the temptation to flame people and post nothing constructive perhaps consider not posting in a given thread at all ;)
Quote from: Aruven on June 07, 2015, 01:08:45 PM
I hear a bunch of whining and noobs tired of seeing others reap the coded benefits
I don't think they're whining. I think they're frustrated.
I've never gotten a weapon skill anywhere near mastery that I know of. I think they're working under the assumption that other people are hitting mastery often through coded knowledge (though as noted, I know -how-, but that doesn't mean I'm out there twinking it out with my pcs), and they're working under the desire to hit truly 'maxxed' levels...even though those levels are hard to hit for everyone. And for good reason. Mastered weapon skills are scary. Like Synthesis said...-anyone- who hits those levels are just...incredibly scary, and so those skills are intentionally made difficult to reach. I honed in on the warrior because advanced weapon skills were used to reference my first post, and because warriors are the only ones actually built to be able to deal with someone with mastered weapon skills, aside from extreme slyness and/or magick, which makes making mastery 'easier' a much bigger deal than it was portrayed as.
Essentially, compared to all other skills...a person getting hide, sneak, disarm, bash, a magick spell, contact, barrier or any other skill from 70% up to 80% actually has an effect on a very minimal amount of circumstances. Getting a weapon skill up from 70% to 80% has a -big effect- on every instance of combat they're ever in, and it continues to be a big effect all the way until mastery, which -is- unlike every other type of skill in the game.
One thing I'd like to see (perhaps implicit in some posts above) is for there to be skills progression after your first IG year (or maybe 2nd). I haven't played too many PCs, and I certainly don't know tricks, but I've noticed the skills max out / plateau roughly around then. Perhaps slower skill progression all around, or the ability to pick up new skills...
I don't agree that weapons skills are unique or unlike anything else combat-wise in the game. Know what also has a big effect on combat? Poisons. Backstab. Sap. Disarm. Archery. Flee. Hide. There's nothing special about a warrior being able to do what they already do, only even better. Advanced+ weapon skills are great, sure. They no more great defensively than high parry/shield use or offensively than a maxed backstab or even just two-handed. Weapon skills certainly aren't so powerful that they should be kept around journeyman baring questionable skill grinding in order to "balance" warriors. (not sure if that's what you were saying, Armaddict, but it sounded like it.)
A warrior with journeyman weapons skills and and mastered parry/shield-use or advanced etwo/dualwield is going to destroy any other class in single combat. Them getting up to Master Slashing isn't going to change anything except for add more range in the skill levels of other warriors they face. You might actually have an appreciable difference between a 15 day warrior and a 30 day warrior.
Yes, it does change things. Drastically.
Journeyman to master is the difference between you escaping after a couple of hits versus being reel-locked and 3-shotted by back-to-back-to-back head and neck shots. By a dude with average strength.
I don't know if America is raising 'sensitive wussies' but I feel like the GDB is. My comment was a joke: I've been seeing discussions like this for over a decade now. I am traditionally not opposed to this discussion.
The more I read into though, the more I am on the side of not touching it at all. I'm seeing a lot of people (and this is a general trend more and more accepted as I see it) really just worried about code and their ability to boost it. Why? What roleplay comes from that?
At what point have you played a character in armageddon, that deserved a higher proficiency than you had so much it affected your RP? Even as a Jihaen I wasn't hitting max stats and I probably spent 60-70% of my time sparring in a tower. There have already been characters in game that it takes an HRPT or some 'staff animation' to kill down because they are bad ass. It is not like staff will not review special cases and work with you already.
You think a year or two IG is a long time? No. You think your character is mastering something in that time? That's not remotely realistic. I think it's unrealistic to be mastering things within 1-2 years IG.
What assumption are you working off of that makes you think there are only a couple players reaching this point quickly and constantly? Do you think if this was a trend staff might become involved with that player exploiting their knowledge?
I am not concerned with the fact that my character will probably never master a skill 100%, i'm not playing Skyrim.
Quote from: Aruven on June 07, 2015, 03:23:12 PM
I don't know if America is raising 'sensitive wussies' but I feel like the GDB is. My comment was a joke: I've been seeing discussions like this for over a decade now. I am traditionally not opposed to this discussion.
The more I read into though, the more I am on the side of not touching it at all. I'm seeing a lot of people (and this is a general trend more and more accepted as I see it) really just worried about code and their ability to boost it. Why? What roleplay comes from that?
At what point have you played a character in armageddon, that deserved a higher proficiency than you had so much it affected your RP? Even as a Jihaen I wasn't hitting max stats and I probably spent 60-70% of my time sparring in a tower. There have already been characters in game that it takes an HRPT or some 'staff animation' to kill down because they are bad ass. It is not like staff will not review special cases and work with you already.
You think a year or two IG is a long time? No. You think your character is mastering something in that time? That's not remotely realistic. I think it's unrealistic to be mastering things within 1-2 years IG.
What assumption are you working off of that makes you think there are only a couple players reaching this point quickly and constantly? Do you think if this was a trend staff might become involved with that player exploiting their knowledge?
I am not concerned with the fact that my character will probably never master a skill 100%, i'm not playing Skyrim.
That was my original point. If you're not getting any more badass because you're a badass...*does the meh shrug*.
Quote from: Armaddict on June 07, 2015, 03:27:48 PM
Quote from: Aruven on June 07, 2015, 03:23:12 PM
I don't know if America is raising 'sensitive wussies' but I feel like the GDB is. My comment was a joke: I've been seeing discussions like this for over a decade now. I am traditionally not opposed to this discussion.
The more I read into though, the more I am on the side of not touching it at all. I'm seeing a lot of people (and this is a general trend more and more accepted as I see it) really just worried about code and their ability to boost it. Why? What roleplay comes from that?
At what point have you played a character in armageddon, that deserved a higher proficiency than you had so much it affected your RP? Even as a Jihaen I wasn't hitting max stats and I probably spent 60-70% of my time sparring in a tower. There have already been characters in game that it takes an HRPT or some 'staff animation' to kill down because they are bad ass. It is not like staff will not review special cases and work with you already.
You think a year or two IG is a long time? No. You think your character is mastering something in that time? That's not remotely realistic. I think it's unrealistic to be mastering things within 1-2 years IG.
What assumption are you working off of that makes you think there are only a couple players reaching this point quickly and constantly? Do you think if this was a trend staff might become involved with that player exploiting their knowledge?
I am not concerned with the fact that my character will probably never master a skill 100%, i'm not playing Skyrim.
That was my original point. If you're not getting any more badass because you're a badass...*does the meh shrug*.
With you bud.
I'm not sure where the sudden focus on code in this game came from but I remember not even being able to see your skills.
It's a MUD, not a MUSH.
Quote from: Is Friday on June 07, 2015, 03:30:14 PM
It's a MUD, not a MUSH.
Which essentially says it's less freeform and more coded. I'm not sure what that's supposed to mean.
Quote from: Synthesis on June 07, 2015, 03:17:37 PM
Yes, it does change things. Drastically.
Journeyman to master is the difference between you escaping after a couple of hits versus being reel-locked and 3-shotted by back-to-back-to-back head and neck shots. By a dude with average strength.
To say the difference in 2/5ths of a single skills progression is to suddenly go from landing high dmg head/neck shots every once in a while to consistently getting them back to back sounds like hyperbole. I'm pretty sure both offense and weapon style as well as stats affect that quite a bit.
Even still my point was that that the warrior should be destroying melee competition regardless of a 20% boost to one skill.
Also, this mush/mud, realism/playability, wussies/badasses debate is stupid as hell. If you don't like the discussion go bury your head in the sand.
Quote from: Aruven on June 07, 2015, 03:23:12 PM
I don't know if America is raising 'sensitive wussies' but I feel like the GDB is. My comment was a joke: I've been seeing discussions like this for over a decade now. I am traditionally not opposed to this discussion.
The more I read into though, the more I am on the side of not touching it at all. I'm seeing a lot of people (and this is a general trend more and more accepted as I see it) really just worried about code and their ability to boost it. Why? What roleplay comes from that?
At what point have you played a character in armageddon, that deserved a higher proficiency than you had so much it affected your RP? Even as a Jihaen I wasn't hitting max stats and I probably spent 60-70% of my time sparring in a tower. There have already been characters in game that it takes an HRPT or some 'staff animation' to kill down because they are bad ass. It is not like staff will not review special cases and work with you already.
You think a year or two IG is a long time? No. You think your character is mastering something in that time? That's not remotely realistic. I think it's unrealistic to be mastering things within 1-2 years IG.
What assumption are you working off of that makes you think there are only a couple players reaching this point quickly and constantly? Do you think if this was a trend staff might become involved with that player exploiting their knowledge?
I am not concerned with the fact that my character will probably never master a skill 100%, i'm not playing Skyrim.
Personally, I am starting to get bored of the fact that people only trot out this highly elaborate reasoning where weapon skills are concerned, and don't care about how easy is to max/branch other, far more powerful skills in the game.
It's also interesting that so many people would rather keep tiny, weak, fast creatures as the best critters to become better fighters against, but think the game would somehow break or overtly benefit newbies if say, fighting rantarri or kryl was more beneficial.
That tells me right away they are probably less concerned about balance (which is a complete red herring, as combat skill advancement can still be tweaked to unfairly benefit veterans while being more logical at the same time), and more concerned about themselves having to fight appropriately threatening critters on the risk/reward scale.
Quote from: Armaddict on June 07, 2015, 03:32:31 PM
Quote from: Is Friday on June 07, 2015, 03:30:14 PM
It's a MUD, not a MUSH.
Which essentially says it's less freeform and more coded. I'm not sure what that's supposed to mean.
"More Coded" meaning that a huge majority of the things you do are coded actions, and the determined "winner" is by a set of skills and dice rolls. If it were a MUSH then it would make sense to just "emote is awesome at slashing skills!". While I don't think there is much that needs to change, I do admit that having a set of "Advanced" skills that are nigh impossible to reach, and when you DO reach them they are (relatively) useless to you, then I think there is a problem.
I don't have a problem with being badass, I have a problem with "I want to be a guy that uses a single knife-weapon in Close Quarters Combat, but to do that I need to master swordsmanship, and then I won't -ever- be a master in CQC Knife weapons because of code". There ARE legitimate reasons to want the code a little easier, more than "I want to be a badass".
The 'highly elaborate reason' that this game emphasizes roleplay as opposed to coded skills?
Why not try requesting a skill bump when you feel you have leveled out and your roleplay merits a boost to those skills? Maybe your roleplay that your superiors just weren't the best when they trained you. Maybe you roleplay that its particularly difficult to learn something: Because it probably is.
I guess I haven't ever played a character long enough to really have a serious complaint, because if I needed it the avenues to get what I needed already exist.
Also, I am not above discussing ways to improve the code. I am above discussing ways to make power-gaming easier by exploiting the code.
Stabbing weapons aren't knives?
Having played a warrior with advanced/master skills, if someone told me I needed to go fight a rantarri to skill up I would have cried.
The wildlife at the high end of the threat spectrum might be complete pushovers until RNG rolls in their favor and the one single hit they land is the one that hits your head for 80 damage and reels you.
You shouldn't have to roll the dice like that to improve your skills. "Oh boy, I might maybe possible skill up, or I might get reel locked and die! Appealing choice!"
With that in mind, I agree that skilling up at higher levels of combat becomes counter-intuitive and could probably be handled better, but I need to think about how.
I think primarily the issue is "people cannot realistically improve" past a glass ceiling that exists only for city-bound characters as opposed to indie rangers. Which is inherently dumb.
Quote from: Aruven on June 07, 2015, 04:21:17 PM
Why not try requesting a skill bump when you feel you have leveled out and your roleplay merits a boost to those skills? Maybe your roleplay that your superiors just weren't the best when they trained you. Maybe you roleplay that its particularly difficult to learn something: Because it probably is.
lol
Okay. Apparently, learning how to use a polearm in Arm is more rigorous and taxing to learn, than how to cast flaming meteors from the sky.
But no, you can spam cast nil for a couple days in perfect safety and be master of the heavens.
Quote from: Armaddict on June 07, 2015, 04:21:35 PM
Stabbing weapons aren't knives?
That's a whole other problem. That there's a knife-weapons branch at all is silly.
Quote from: Aruven on June 07, 2015, 04:21:17 PM
The 'highly elaborate reason' that this game emphasizes roleplay as opposed to coded skills?
Why not try requesting a skill bump when you feel you have leveled out and your roleplay merits a boost to those skills? Maybe your roleplay that your superiors just weren't the best when they trained you. Maybe you roleplay that its particularly difficult to learn something: Because it probably is.
I guess I haven't ever played a character long enough to really have a serious complaint, because if I needed it the avenues to get what I needed already exist.
The "highly elaborate reasons" he was talking about were in relation to thinking Weapons skills should require some weird-fuck twinkery, or staff intervention in order to advance but other, more powerful skills don't.
Quote
Also, I am not above discussing ways to improve the code. I am above discussing ways to make power-gaming easier by exploiting the code.
Nobody is doing that. Nobody here is discussion ways to make power-gaming easier.
Quote from: Clearsighted on June 07, 2015, 04:26:17 PM
Quote from: Aruven on June 07, 2015, 04:21:17 PM
Why not try requesting a skill bump when you feel you have leveled out and your roleplay merits a boost to those skills? Maybe your roleplay that your superiors just weren't the best when they trained you. Maybe you roleplay that its particularly difficult to learn something: Because it probably is.
lol
Okay. Apparently, learning how to use a polearm in Arm is more rigorous and taxing to learn, than how to cast flaming meteors from the sky.
But no, you can spam cast nil for a couple days in perfect safety and be master of the heavens.
Sure, it sounds like you have some beef with the magick code. I personally don't think magick roles should be stuffed into a quarter where that's all they have to do, but hey: Lets talk one issue at a time.
Quote from: Aruven on June 07, 2015, 04:29:01 PM
Quote from: Clearsighted on June 07, 2015, 04:26:17 PM
Quote from: Aruven on June 07, 2015, 04:21:17 PM
Why not try requesting a skill bump when you feel you have leveled out and your roleplay merits a boost to those skills? Maybe your roleplay that your superiors just weren't the best when they trained you. Maybe you roleplay that its particularly difficult to learn something: Because it probably is.
lol
Okay. Apparently, learning how to use a polearm in Arm is more rigorous and taxing to learn, than how to cast flaming meteors from the sky.
But no, you can spam cast nil for a couple days in perfect safety and be master of the heavens.
Sure, it sounds like you have some beef with the magick code. I personally don't think magick roles should be stuffed into a quarter where that's all they have to do, but hey: Lets talk one issue at a time.
I don't have a beef with magick code. What I do have difficulty with is someone (that's already admitted trolling the thread once) who can suggest putting in skill bump requests as an alternative to combat reform, while apparently being a tiny bit defensive over the status quo.
Not all gickers are gemmers. And guess what? It is the same issue. It's perfectly valid to point to other areas of the game where more powerful skills are raised more quickly, easily and in perfect safety, compared to others.
i think things might be a bit easier if there were more young characters in military clans with good fighting skills, and obviously very good agility. That would help a lot. Diversity is always a good thing.
The problem is, being very agile, young, and weak doesn't really give that player many advantages. being prime age allows for good strength, good wisdom, good endurance. Playing a young character isn't everybody's playstyle. For those who are in the mood to do it though, they are a great help to others to have around.
You also have elves, but the only clan you can spar with elves in for most folks is the Byn, and not everybody will want to join the Byn. Then, there are ways of making elves your enemy... but good luck with that shit.
Basically, there's no perfect solution with the current code for everybody to be able to achieve mastery, and I think that's what was intended. If you're a veteran enough player to understand the code and how skill progression works, then you can plan a character concept who will be able to achieve what you feel is needed for the concept, or to special app for the appropriate skill bumps to get what you want. The system isn't perfect, and any system will have flaws. I enjoy things as they are myself, and think a lot of it is in the playerbase's hands -- there should likely be more weapon skill lessons in military clans, there should be diversity in the players joining those clans and more leeway given to players in coming up with drills so that they can leave the sparring session feeling happy that they have advanced a little, which we all agree is a nice feeling that comes with the game. What I want isn't a total revamp, but more variety in how fighting works, but I'm not going to cry about anything as it is. I wouldn't mind a bit more variety of fast AND dangerous creatures without going into the ridiculously deadly territory, also... something between a rantarri and a stilt lizard.
Between a Rantarri and a stilt lizard? Big tarantulas.
Quote from: Clearsighted on June 07, 2015, 04:32:53 PM
I don't have a beef with magick code. What I do have difficulty with is someone (that's already admitted trolling the thread once) who can suggest putting in skill bump requests as an alternative to combat reform, while apparently being a tiny bit defensive over the status quo.
I'm not suggesting putting in a skill bump request, that's been around for a long time and is already in effect. You can actually do that right now.
I'm also not being defensive about the status quo, i'm playing devils advocate. You're obviously not reading my posts where I am asking you questions about how the code as is is actually a detriment to your roleplay IG (Or you're just choosing not to respond). That would be a productive discussion if you maybe could point out those specifics. I've seen some interesting discussion throughout this, maybe the staff will pick it up.
I like what Harmless said about it, and I feel that's where it somewhat stands. When someone has an awesome idea to mend the flaws, i'll be all about it.
QuoteI like what Harmless said about it, and I feel that's where it somewhat stands. When someone has an awesome idea to mend the flaws, i'll be all about it.
Pretty much. I don't think anyone has said the current system is without flaws. My standpoint is that the flaw is at this point reasonable, and changes that have been proposed throw things pretty quickly into worse ground than it is right now, game wise.
Quote from: HavokBlue on June 07, 2015, 04:23:46 PM
Having played a warrior with advanced/master skills, if someone told me I needed to go fight a rantarri to skill up I would have cried.
The wildlife at the high end of the threat spectrum might be complete pushovers until RNG rolls in their favor and the one single hit they land is the one that hits your head for 80 damage and reels you.
You shouldn't have to roll the dice like that to improve your skills. "Oh boy, I might maybe possible skill up, or I might get reel locked and die! Appealing choice!"
With that in mind, I agree that skilling up at higher levels of combat becomes counter-intuitive and could probably be handled better, but I need to think about how.
As a note, this is what I was talking about. People are trying to get there with a sense of risk-aversion. You don't become a master fighter in a couple years with risk aversion. With risk aversion, you can realistically look at doing it over the course of a much longer scale of time, by plucking proportionate partners who can help you without trying to kill you. You learn faster by actually going out and tackling those bad beasties. By searching for the good fight, and the victory. Even the frowned on 'gather up npc's for pack combat' is not very effective and just looks strange...as long as you are in a comfort zone, you're not learning much.
But the idea that everyone should get to mastery by staying safe in their training hall for a couple years? That's why my tone has been perhaps coming across as more unfriendly than I intend it to be. Because I find that idea very short-sighted.
Quote from: Armaddict on June 07, 2015, 05:04:34 PM
As a note, this is what I was talking about. People are trying to get there with a sense of risk-aversion. You don't become a master fighter in a couple years with risk aversion. With risk aversion, you can realistically look at doing it over the course of a much longer scale of time, by plucking proportionate partners who can help you without trying to kill you. You learn faster by actually going out and tackling those bad beasties. By searching for the good fight, and the victory. Even the frowned on 'gather up npc's for pack combat' is not very effective and just looks strange...as long as you are in a comfort zone, you're not learning much.
But the idea that everyone should get to mastery by staying safe in their training hall for a couple years? That's why my tone has been perhaps coming across as more unfriendly than I intend it to be. Because I find that idea very short-sighted.
I agree with you in principle, Armaddict.
The problem is the way high-risk wildlife functions.
I don't think the risk-reward exchange should be reduced to encounters with enemies who any skilled warrior will generally trounce, unless luck is against them and they get smashed for a big chunk of HP, or burned down by a script that ignores combat code. That's rolling the dice or flipping a coin where one side is a skillup and the other is the mantis head and let's be honest. Amos the Hunter dying alone in the woods to something nasty because he wanted master chopping and couldn't get those last few ticks doesn't really enhance anyone's fun, from a gameplay perspective.
In the interest of not handicapping city characters like soldiers or long-lived templars/nobles, it would be neat if there was a way to train yourself at high levels that was accessible to those characters. Even if the spaghetti pile that is the code were modified to reward hunting dangerous things instead of the current optimal targets, it doesn't solve the issue of city characters getting the short end of the stick, like Is Friday pointed out.
Quote from: HavokBlue on June 07, 2015, 05:13:56 PM
Quote from: Armaddict on June 07, 2015, 05:04:34 PM
As a note, this is what I was talking about. People are trying to get there with a sense of risk-aversion. You don't become a master fighter in a couple years with risk aversion. With risk aversion, you can realistically look at doing it over the course of a much longer scale of time, by plucking proportionate partners who can help you without trying to kill you. You learn faster by actually going out and tackling those bad beasties. By searching for the good fight, and the victory. Even the frowned on 'gather up npc's for pack combat' is not very effective and just looks strange...as long as you are in a comfort zone, you're not learning much.
But the idea that everyone should get to mastery by staying safe in their training hall for a couple years? That's why my tone has been perhaps coming across as more unfriendly than I intend it to be. Because I find that idea very short-sighted.
I agree with you in principle, Armaddict.
The problem is the way high-risk wildlife functions.
I don't think the risk-reward exchange should be reduced to encounters with enemies who any skilled warrior will generally trounce, unless luck is against them and they get smashed for a big chunk of HP, or burned down by a script that ignores combat code. That's rolling the dice or flipping a coin where one side is a skillup and the other is the mantis head and let's be honest. Amos the Hunter dying alone in the woods to something nasty because he wanted master chopping and couldn't get those last few ticks doesn't really enhance anyone's fun, from a gameplay perspective.
In the interest of not handicapping city characters like soldiers or long-lived templars/nobles, it would be neat if there was a way to train yourself at high levels that was accessible to those characters. Even if the spaghetti pile that is the code were modified to reward hunting dangerous things instead of the current optimal targets, it doesn't solve the issue of city characters getting the short end of the stick, like Is Friday pointed out.
TOR ACADEMY, WHERE ARE YOU.
I think the best way to fix it (this is a pie-in-the-sky idea):
1. Split offense capability into 6 categories: a) base offense; b) style (single vs dual vs etwo); c) weapon skill; d) random element; e) species-specific modifier. Relative contribution would be 50% from the species-specific modifier and 10% from each other category.
2. Split defense capability into 7 categories: a) base defense; b) style (single vs. dual vs etwo); c) weapon skill; d) parry skill; d) shield use skill (if shield is equipped); e) species-specific modifier; f) random element. Relative contribution would be 50% from species-specific modifier, 10% from each category, plus another 10% from shield use if you choose to use a shield.
Base defense, offense, weapon skills, wield skills, parry, shield use all max out fairly quickly...on par with how fast parry rises at the moment. However, the downside is that they only contribute about 50% of your potential badass-itude.
In your playerfile is a list of hidden species-specific combat modifiers...for every type of critter in the game (you could lump all the humanoids together as 'humanoid,' I suppose). Every time you fight a critter type, your species-specific modifier for that critter-type increases. These would go up slowly. You could split offense and defense, or use the same variable for both calculations. (I'd go for the split route, so that you could have differential subguild effects for protector vs. aggressor.)
Each class would have hard caps on various critter type modifiers. E.g. assassins would have a high humanoid cap, low carru cap...warriors would have a high humanoid cap, with moderate remainder caps, rangers would have a moderate humanoid cap with high carru caps...etc. etc. etc. Certain subguilds (aggressor, outdoorsman, protector, etc.) would increase the hidden species-specific caps.
You'd still have the problem of very dangerous PKillers arising by simply sparring, but APPARENTLY, people are willing to accept this (until it gets entirely out of hand...then everyone will be begging for the good old days). Just to maybe change some minds, though, if you've never been instagibbed, this is how bad it sucks:
The Main Bazaar [NESW]
The clamor, tumult, and melange of smells that make up the bewildering
chaos of Allanak's main bazaar fill the air. Crowds jostle each other on
every side, in a constant jumble of shouts, arguments, and conversations.
Merchants from both Allanak and afar trade goods and services, throughout
the day and night. Tents and stalls are scattered throughout the bazaar,
vendors and beggars vying fiercely for prime spots. The dry air is filled
with the red dust kicked up into the air by the constant movement of the
crowds, as well as the mingled smell of cooking foods, perfumes, spilled
wines and attars, the reek of tanning and dyeing vats, and unwashed bodies
to every side.
A small stand has been erected here, with small fruits hanging off it.
The chestnut-haired, elderly woman sits here, cutting some cloth.
89/89, 108/115, 86/86, walking, early afternoon> °
89/89, 108/115, 86/86, walking, early afternoon> Your vision goes black.
_______ ___
/\\_____//~-_ _-~\\__
(~) ~-_ ~-_ _-~ _-~
(~) ~-_ ~-_ _-~ /-~
Welcome to Armageddon! (~) `~-_ ~_======_--~~ __~
You need to ask yourself if you -really- want -every- assassin who spars regularly to reach that kind of Fuck All Y'all level. Where you can be standing in the middle of the bazaar, in the middle of the day, minding your own business...and then you're rolling a new PC.
Quote from: Armaddict on June 07, 2015, 05:04:34 PM
But the idea that everyone should get to mastery by staying safe in their training hall for a couple years? That's why my tone has been perhaps coming across as more unfriendly than I intend it to be. Because I find that idea very short-sighted.
For the record, I completely agree. I do not advocate changing the nature of sparring at all.I think that clans which have routine sparring are already well positioned to get the most out of a possible combat reform, since they can more easily and safely (in numbers) tackle dangerous creatures.
So the GMHs, Miltia and Byn will be fine. The house guards of various noble houses might still be screwed...But let's be honest. Your first job as a character shouldn't be 'Bodyguard to Lady Borsail'. That *should* be, like the end result of a long and distinguished career in other institutions. Like a retirement package for master warriors.
What I would like to seeA system which takes into account the danger of a critter (possibly vis a vis referring to its offensive rating), and depending on how high it is, give you a 'partial failure' for failing to crit it. Similarly to when you fail to hit the neck when shooting a bow. Or a partial failure for being parried (not for being shield blocked! Parry works similarly to dodging, shielding is entirely different).
I'd be fine if it took twenty of these partial failures to equal one failure. And in fact, I'd be in favor of balancing them, such that you could not possibly master a weapon faster, than you can currently. But it does mean you will be able to belong to the Militia, GMH or whatever, and get some partial, incremental advancement now and then, which over the course of forty-fifty days playtime, would inevitably add up.
I have no problem whatsoever with 40 day warriors getting to use their advanced weapons without ever having once dueled a stilt lizard.
In your scenario, why are city state military organizations hunting extremely dangerous wildlife?
Quote from: HavokBlue on June 07, 2015, 06:38:46 PM
In your scenario, why are city state military organizations hunting extremely dangerous wildlife?
Maybe Armageddon has changed a lot since I last played, but as I recall, the Militia of both city-states would often go on patrols. They might as well, since they have so many outposts in bat-shit faraway locations. The Legion did the kryl thing.
If the Militia is just mudsexing and sparring in the barracks, then fuck em. They can all stay at journeyman. Point is, sparring clans typically have RPTs or patrols and such, where they encounter more dangerous scenarios than your average indie hunter is willing to tolerate.
QuoteMaybe Armageddon has changed a lot since I last played, but as I recall, the Militia of both city-states would often go on patrols. They might as well, since they have so many outposts in bat-shit faraway locations. The Legion did the kryl thing.
Only a prevalent practice for short periods of time.
The majority of the time, militias are for war, expansion, and in-city business...not for policing the wilds and keeping them safe for hunters.
Edited to add:
I should clarify, that's for the south. I think the north was more liberal in sending troops outside the gates.
A bit of a belated warning, but... keep it civil, or I will lock this thread. It's possible to disagree with people without resorting to name-calling, personal attacks, etc.
Quote from: Armaddict on June 07, 2015, 07:44:36 PM
QuoteMaybe Armageddon has changed a lot since I last played, but as I recall, the Militia of both city-states would often go on patrols. They might as well, since they have so many outposts in bat-shit faraway locations. The Legion did the kryl thing.
Only a prevalent practice for short periods of time.
The majority of the time, militias are for war, expansion, and in-city business...not for policing the wilds and keeping them safe for hunters.
Edited to add:
I should clarify, that's for the south. I think the north was more liberal in sending troops outside the gates.
Well. Screw the Militia then. They get plenty of coded benefits to staying in the city, anyways. If they don't want to 'police' the wilds though, then maybe they should bring home their distant outposts. Although, I'd be hard pressed to find the logic in any city-state not having an interest in patrolling its own territory. Not to make it safe for hunters, but to enforce their own rule. If I was a Sergeant in the Nakki Militia, I would at the very least, ride out to one of our outposts and back again, now and then.
I'd still keep sparring as it is, and I'd still change it so you could get partial successes for combat skills, based on the danger of what you were confronting. And I'd be fine with the accrual of partial successes being adjusted to take however long people think is necessary.
It will still be a better alternative than the current 'all risk/no reward vs no risk/all reward' model.
Zalanthan states are not modern ones, and patrols outside the city make a lot less sense in how a city of either such size would be run.
Quote from: Patuk on June 07, 2015, 08:20:33 PM
Zalanthan states are not modern ones, and patrols outside the city make a lot less sense in how a city of either such size would be run.
::)
I'm not talking about modern concepts. You can go back to any era in human history with a human government that was advanced enough to maintain a standing military and control territory, or wage war, and they will have an interest in patrolling their territory. Even if it's just a few assholes riding around on kanks to see if there are any rogue magickers or gith warbands about.
If the current PCs of the Militia are no longer patrolling, then fine. I could really care less. That's just poor leadership and lack of imagination or realism. It doesn't affect combat.
But Allanak at one time, had outposts from the Tablelands to the Red Desert. They still have outposts and militia NPCs in weird locations. They do not grow them like mushrooms and then magically teleport them there. A staffer has already posted to the effect that magic is not a substitute for a military's logistic concerns.
If it's really the Allanaki Militia's policy to not occasionally ride out and patrol between where the city-state is and its various outposts to safeguard the supply lines, then those outposts should be removed.
Quote from: Aruven on June 07, 2015, 03:23:12 PM
I don't know if America is raising 'sensitive wussies' but I feel like the GDB is.
I don't know about sensitives wussies, but I've little doubt it's raising arrogant cretins.
Or maybe you enjoy being dragged through a daily sparring schedule your character can't possibly significantly benefit from and call that "RP".
Quote from: valeria on June 07, 2015, 07:47:49 PM
A bit of a belated warning, but... keep it civil, or I will lock this thread. It's possible to disagree with people without resorting to name-calling, personal attacks, etc.
Sorry guys, you're done.
Edit to add: the thread is in time out until an admin can look at it and issue some talikings to if necessary, it's probably not locked forever, please be patient.
The trolling that was going on here is being looked into, so I'm going to go ahead and unlock this thread. Feel free to resume your civil, trolling-free discussion.
I kinda wish that players had access to a test server where we could test code modifications rather than just theory craft about them. I'd have to err on the side of caution in ideas like this a lot less and be able to say 'Let's try it out!'.
Quote from: Armaddict on June 08, 2015, 06:57:13 PM
I kinda wish that players had access to a test server where we could test code modifications rather than just theory craft about them. I'd have to err on the side of caution in ideas like this a lot less and be able to say 'Let's try it out!'.
Hell, I kinda wish that even staff could do that. As far as I know though, they don't have something like that set up for them to experiment in.
Quote from: Armaddict on June 08, 2015, 06:57:13 PM
I kinda wish that players had access to a test server where we could test code modifications rather than just theory craft about them. I'd have to err on the side of caution in ideas like this a lot less and be able to say 'Let's try it out!'.
Achaea does this. It helps their coders out.
With that being said, it's a pain in the ass to implement.
Quote from: Clearsighted on June 08, 2015, 07:01:28 PM
Quote from: Armaddict on June 08, 2015, 06:57:13 PM
I kinda wish that players had access to a test server where we could test code modifications rather than just theory craft about them. I'd have to err on the side of caution in ideas like this a lot less and be able to say 'Let's try it out!'.
Hell, I kinda wish that even staff could do that. As far as I know though, they don't have something like that set up for them to experiment in.
You mean our test port?
Quote from: Nyr on June 08, 2015, 07:31:05 PM
Quote from: Clearsighted on June 08, 2015, 07:01:28 PM
Quote from: Armaddict on June 08, 2015, 06:57:13 PM
I kinda wish that players had access to a test server where we could test code modifications rather than just theory craft about them. I'd have to err on the side of caution in ideas like this a lot less and be able to say 'Let's try it out!'.
Hell, I kinda wish that even staff could do that. As far as I know though, they don't have something like that set up for them to experiment in.
You mean our test port?
That's pretty cool if staff has a separate hosting of the game they can run through and try things out with. For some reason, I remembered hearing otherwise.
Yeah, I knew they had a test port, but I meant something for players to be able to feel out things on experimental code to see if we liked it or not.
I'm extremely tentative about things like this, because when it comes to code...small things can make a tremendous difference in unforeseen ways.
I'm cautiously optimistic that a select few players with high karma that can be "trusted" not to spread ye ol' secrets of the code can be utilized to assist coders fix systems like the economy and combat. Is this an idea that has been explored before, Nyr?
Quote from: Is Friday on June 08, 2015, 08:18:55 PM
I'm cautiously optimistic that a select few players with high karma that can be "trusted" not to spread ye ol' secrets of the code can be utilized to assist coders fix systems like the economy and combat. Is this an idea that has been explored before, Nyr?
Yeah, it's planned afaik. I've spoken to staff about helping on some design work without being a staff member.
I doubt the focus would be on "fixing" combat/economy, probably catchup maintenance and bug fixes, which I have a good handle on. (derail: I would also argue there's no such thing as a MUD/game economy much different from what we have).
A test port for players to try out experimental code though? That'd be pointless. Players barely seem to understand what already exists! Limited perspective gamer/player understandings do not a programmer or system designer make.
Quote from: Is Friday on June 08, 2015, 08:18:55 PM
I'm cautiously optimistic that a select few players with high karma that can be "trusted" not to spread ye ol' secrets of the code can be utilized to assist coders fix systems like the economy and combat. Is this an idea that has been explored before, Nyr?
I'm not sure karma has much, if anything to do, with the harshest and hardest aspects of codes. In fact, the surest way to reach
high karma is basically to stay away from such things, such as chopping stuff with bone swords in the wastes.
There used to be a huge emphasis on magickers, even though magickers are pretty much the easiest to play and with the least temptation to twink. Provided you have even a modicum of knowledge about the game world, can RP coherently, and don't get caught massively abusing your abilities...once upon a time, you could pretty much ride the elementalist ladder. You'd special app a krathi or a whiran, prove you didn't abuse that (so many karma 4 whirans did), then special app an elkrosi, then special app a Nilazi, and be relatively long lived with each.
It's not like playing a mundane or a Bynner, where depending on what an observing staffer had for breakfast that morning, you might get a bad account note about sparring, or what you're fighting, or how you're fighting it, or whether you're carrying a bag of rocks, or drinking, or if you happened across a gicker and didn't behave as fearfully as they thought you should. There's a lot of stuff to trip you up, even with the best of intentions. Maybe you skinned a few critters a bit too fast when lagging or bored.
If you liked magickers, like social RP, and had a certain tolerance for solo emoting, it was much easier. The Conclave's existence basically owed itself to this fact.
I'm not making any claims about how it is currently.
Karma != understanding of code, rather it is a level of trust for players learning about the code to not abuse knowing how it works. Hence, high karma players would probably be the test kids.
Quote from: Is Friday on June 08, 2015, 08:18:55 PM
I'm cautiously optimistic that a select few players with high karma that can be "trusted" not to spread ye ol' secrets of the code can be utilized to assist coders fix systems like the economy and combat. Is this an idea that has been explored before, Nyr?
It is not, at least not anything like you are describing.
We occasionally do ask for player assistance in testing specific systems out
when they are close to implementation and when they do require player input, feedback, and assistance prior to implementation. This helps us identify and find bugs for things we would not have discovered otherwise. It gives us ideas for prompts and the like. Staff testing can also be pretty rigorous but may not approach the level that a player would, since staff members see things from a different perspective. (Staff have a ton of commands and settings with which to view things, but players are limited in both areas.)
In the above cases, we already have a vision for a change and it
is being implemented--it just needs finessing and testing from some players. Sometimes we do not need that extra testing because it is a simple enough fix or can be entirely tested by staff members.
Quote from: Nyr on June 09, 2015, 08:49:04 AM
In the above cases, we already have a vision for a change and it is being implemented--it just needs finessing and testing from some players. Sometimes we do not need that extra testing because it is a simple enough fix or can be entirely tested by staff members.
Wait, does this mean there's something in the works to fix the old broken skill progression system?
(http://i3.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/facebook/000/203/685/conspiracy-keanu.jpg)
Quote from: Ender on June 09, 2015, 10:13:18 AM
Quote from: Nyr on June 09, 2015, 08:49:04 AM
In the above cases, we already have a vision for a change and it is being implemented--it just needs finessing and testing from some players. Sometimes we do not need that extra testing because it is a simple enough fix or can be entirely tested by staff members.
Wait, does this mean there's something in the works to fix the old broken skill progression system?
Based on what he said, no. He said "in the above cases" meaning "the cases in which they ask for player input, they already have a vision for change". Not currently.
Quote from: Riev on June 09, 2015, 10:26:23 AM
Based on what he said, no. He said "in the above cases" meaning "the cases in which they ask for player input, they already have a vision for change". Not currently.
Oh, ok.
(http://gifatron.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/arrested-developmen-george-michael-sad-walk.gif)
Quote from: Riev on June 09, 2015, 10:26:23 AM
Quote from: Ender on June 09, 2015, 10:13:18 AM
Quote from: Nyr on June 09, 2015, 08:49:04 AM
In the above cases, we already have a vision for a change and it is being implemented--it just needs finessing and testing from some players. Sometimes we do not need that extra testing because it is a simple enough fix or can be entirely tested by staff members.
Wait, does this mean there's something in the works to fix the old broken skill progression system?
Based on what he said, no. He said "in the above cases" meaning "the cases in which they ask for player input, they already have a vision for change". Not currently.
Correct!
No plans in place to assess the skill progression system, at least at this time.
Quote from: Nyr on June 09, 2015, 08:49:04 AM
In the above cases, we already have a vision for a change and it is being implemented--it just needs finessing and testing from some players. Sometimes we do not need that extra testing because it is a simple enough fix or can be entirely tested by staff members.
It's good to hear that staff is always working on stuff. It's what I've always believed. But some issues are farther down on the priority list than others. In those cases, one can only hope that if it provokes enough interest or discussion, it might get shuffled up a notch.
Quote from: Clearsighted on June 09, 2015, 10:58:23 AM
Quote from: Nyr on June 09, 2015, 08:49:04 AM
In the above cases, we already have a vision for a change and it is being implemented--it just needs finessing and testing from some players. Sometimes we do not need that extra testing because it is a simple enough fix or can be entirely tested by staff members.
It's good to hear that staff is always working on stuff. It's what I've always believed. But some issues are farther down on the priority list than others. In those cases, one can only hope that if it provokes enough interest or discussion, it might get shuffled up a notch.
There are definitely always priorities. I mean, think where the Arm Economy would be without Poop code?
Zing!
Personally, I like the way things are now. There should be a plateau where advancing in combat skills becomes extremely difficult if all you're doing is sparring.
What I don't like is a lack of options for breaking past this plateau for city based characters. For instance, specialized training should be able to nudge your combat skills higher. This training can be done virtually, without requiring PC's to spend time sparring during their play sessions, but instead may require them to achieve other IC goals to unlock the training resource (i.e. getting promoted to a certain level in a clan, convincing a noble to provide their training, etc.) These IC goals will help create content for the rest of the game, as these players have their characters scheme their way into a position to receive this advanced training. It also gives a nice shiny carrot to nobles and clan leaders, giving them some rewards/incentives they can provide to allies/clan members for helping them achieve their own goals.
Picture this scenario: You're a journeyman bludgeoner with aspirations of becoming a master. Well, there's a Borsail noble that has an ex-gladiator slave whose a renown master warrior. You could try and convince Lady Borsail to have her slave train you. Naturally, the slave can only train one person at a time because they spend most of their time boffing pleasure slaves and living the good life having 'won' the Arena. You can expect some competition when it comes to getting this valuable training. Of course, Lady Borsail has her own goals to achieve, what are you willing to do to get this training from her? :) In this scenario, a little M.C.B. is required to get this skill mastery as a city character, and that sounds way more interesting than sparring, or twinking out as an indie hunter. I also like the idea that if someone achieves Master in a weapon skill, they can train others just like the slave example I had above. The training becomes a plot device and an opportunity for conflict and role-play, rather than a skill grind.
Of course, if this Master chooses to train the wrong student, they might find themselves meeting this guy:
(http://s2.quickmeme.com/img/b5/b57109f707a17ac4e8f63ac603f67c5a397e0efc87bf57f9e0cca2caaf3282d3.jpg)
I also think that participating in combat intensive RPTs should give the survivors a bit of a skill bump, just to support how hardened they are after the experience, so another way to get good at combat is to show up to crazy RPTs and almost die a few dozen times :)
TLDR: Turn high level skill advancement into a plot, instead of a grind. Do so by adding limited training capabilities to master-level PCs, or adding NPC trainers as resources for nobles and/or combat oriented clans.
Quote from: wizturbo on June 09, 2015, 05:44:30 PM
Turn high level skill advancement into a plot, instead of a grind. Do so by adding limited training capabilities to master-level PCs, or adding NPC trainers as resources for nobles and/or combat oriented clans.
Did you just give an incentive back to actually achieving a rank in a clan as well as an awesome potential alternative?
Quote from: Aruven on June 09, 2015, 06:31:41 PM
Did you just give an incentive back to actually achieving a rank in a clan as well as an awesome potential alternative?
Sort of. Clan rank might be one of the ways of getting advanced training in some clans. Alternatively, advancing to a high level in a clan might put
you in a position to decide who gets that training. It gives you something other people want. Whose more powerful, the master warrior, or the guy who commands the master warrior? :)
The idea is that advanced training could be a bargaining chip. A plot device, to stir things up.
Let's say the Tor Academy can provide this training, and has one spot for a PC every 2 IC years. Making buddies with a Tor noble might get you access to that spot. Pissing off Tor might restrict you from ever getting that spot. Alternatively, making buddies with an Oashi, who has something that Tor wants, might be the best way of getting that training instead... See where I'm going with this? It becomes a plot on who gets the training. There's potential for murder, corruption and betrayal to get these scarce training opportunities...instead of grinding.
That seems like a really good way to generate butt-hurt about cliques and favoritism (real or imagined).
Quote from: Synthesis on June 09, 2015, 06:48:24 PM
That seems like a really good way to generate butt-hurt about cliques and favoritism (real or imagined).
I see more potential for characters to get ICly butt-hurt about IC cliques and IC favoritism. The kind of IC response that creates a breeding ground for conflict (i.e. fun). If a character gets repeatedly turned down for advanced training, they should ICly get angry about it. They should ICly take the gloves off, and start to play hardball to get what they want... Murder, corrupt, and betray to get the training or die trying, that's the Zalanthian way.
That's how this kind of thing happens in real life too, to be honest. People get into Harvard because their dad donated millions. They get the kick ass job because their uncle is a VP at the company, ectera. The key is to make these cases of favoritism be for IC reasons, not OOC reasons.
Quote from: Synthesis on June 09, 2015, 06:48:24 PM
That seems like a really good way to generate butt-hurt about cliques and favoritism (real or imagined).
Yup, always this danger. I do think city-based characters specifically had some qualms with the code as is, so I believe at least for them this is an awesome concept. Totally allows for the RP to reward solid players with the needed ways to get to that next level.
Quote from: wizturbo on June 09, 2015, 06:59:37 PM
Quote from: Synthesis on June 09, 2015, 06:48:24 PM
That seems like a really good way to generate butt-hurt about cliques and favoritism (real or imagined).
I see more potential for characters to get ICly butt-hurt about IC cliques and IC favoritism. The kind of IC response that creates a breeding ground for conflict (i.e. fun). If a character gets repeatedly turned down for advanced training, they should ICly get angry about it. They should ICly take the gloves off, and start to play hardball to get what they want... Murder, corrupt, and betray to get the training or die trying, that's the Zalanthian way.
That's how this kind of thing happens in real life too, to be honest. People get into Harvard because their dad donated millions. They get the kick ass job because their uncle is a VP at the company, ectera. The key is to make these cases of favoritism be for IC reasons, not OOC reasons.
Heh, well. If you want to look at that ungraciously...we've gone from "I don't want to kill critters to skill up" to "I WILL FUCKING MURDER YOUR FACE TO SKILL UP!"
This actually seems like a great employment plan for assassins. If I were running the training shop, I'd also run the assassin shop: charge mid-range warriors to join the training club, then get the other mid-range warriors to pay to have him killed. Rinse. Repeat.
Quote from: Synthesis on June 09, 2015, 08:06:30 PM
Heh, well. If you want to look at that ungraciously...we've gone from "I don't want to kill critters to skill up" to "I WILL FUCKING MURDER YOUR FACE TO SKILL UP!"
This actually seems like a great employment plan for assassins. If I were running the training shop, I'd also run the assassin shop: charge mid-range warriors to join the training club, then get the other mid-range warriors to pay to have him killed. Rinse. Repeat.
Seems much more fun to me :)
Frankly though, murder probably isn't the only lever to pull here. You don't need to kill your opponents to get them out of the way, you can always:
- Ruin their reputation with their supporters
- Blackmail them
- Intimidate them, or their loved ones
- Offer them something else they want
- Bribe/Coerce their supporters into supporting you instead
- Other things I haven't considered in the three minutes I spent thinking about this
So many more possibilities than just simple murder, and all so much more fun than sparring.
Quote from: Synthesis on June 09, 2015, 06:48:24 PM
That seems like a really good way to generate butt-hurt about cliques and favoritism (real or imagined).
Virtual training is an interesting concept, but I pretty much have to agree with this. Also, I think it's a bit too elaborate a system for what basically only applies to combat skills.
I think the only thing combat skills needs is to have partial failures implemented (and then tweaked accordingly based on what circumstances allow for a partial failure, and how many it takes to equal a conventional failure).
This would keep it within the current paradigm of all other skills in the game.
I agree that if this is considered a real problem that needs fixing, the best way to fix it would be to change what counts as a failure for the skills in question. Everything else is varying degrees of contrived.
I think revamping the idea of failure and what that is is absolutely the best and simplest idea, but I'd absolutely love for military clans to impart something on their members. For crafters, joining the Great Houses allows you to make things that you'd not have the knowledge/tools/resources to build otherwise via clan-only recipes.
The Byn gets Sand Kick, which blinds you. Tor Scorpions get Double-Parry, a passive second chance on all parry attempts. Oashi Elites get the mage-killer tactic Fore Strike, a backstab usable in combat. Fale Whatsits gets the feint skill Dazzle, putting their humanoid target off balance. Borsail Wyverns get the capture skill Hamstring, which keeps their target from moving. The Militia get Low Blow, a skill which allows them to make a strike which dazes their humanoid target.
Of course these are contrived, but the idea? I like it a lot.
Blegh, the unique-clan-craftables thing is stupid in the first place. I'd rather not see that paradigm extended.