Previous
I dunno why you seem to have such a problem with me - but in the interest of trying to keep the moderators happy... we'll move this dance to the conflicts folder instead since this seems to be more about you having a problem with me then the whole bow idea.
>>If the only thing you know about Barbarian abilities is from the one statement Dartenian made about Dragon, then you need to learn more before making comments such as these. If you don't understand why us already having such a thing can be a problem, then take my suggestion.
No, I know a lot more about barbarian abilities then Dart's quote. It's in my sig because it amuses me. That's frequently why things reside in sigs. You know nothing about my past experiences (or lack thereof) of barbarians. So please don't assume my default state is "ignorance" until I demonstrate it is so.
Also what does dragon dance have to do with me being aware you have bow boosting skills? You do, it's a fact. And it doesn't matter to me one way or another that you do. You're barbarians. +weapon skills seem reasonable enough to me.
>>Who cares? We asked for an ability. If it comes in the form we want it, or in another form (weapon skill booster) then so be it.
See... here's where we differ. The forums are a tool for communication. If someone tosses out an idea in a public forum, the idea is to discuss it. See if people like it, if someone has a better idea, identify potential concerns. If you wish to float an idea to the GMs without it being a public discussion might I suggest a more private form of communication such as email?
I happen to read every folder of the DR boards (Really they don't get that much traffic all things considered). This is why I frequently crop up in random guild discussions other then moon mages - because I care about the rest of the game beyond the narrow slice I partake in most frequently.
A suggestion was made, I offered feed back on it. If you don't like my feedback... ignore it. If you feel I'm somehow in violation of the rules of the forums by doing so... take it up with a board mod. That's what they do (And I admit, I've certainly made out of line posts before unthinkingly).
>>Now you're concern is mechanics? For your info, the GMs have always told us to make suggestions and not worry about the mechanics. So I'm not sure why you're doing it other than to stomp on ideas. Also, there are plenty of abilities that can potentially get around global caps in a round about way. Do some research.
All I did was point out that there may be a more elegant and balanced solution to arrive at more or less the same ends you want, which is to be able to hit things with an arrow with less time between typing "aim" and "fire".
(As a tangent, this entire discussion would have been more or less avoided if DR separated the concepts of damage and accuracy... /end tangent)
As for there being plenty of abilities that get around the global caps - That's incredibly true, and I'm likely more aware of it then you know seeing as I frequently deal with multiple systems with do some of the more egregious violations of it. That doesn't mean they're good game design or that they shouldn't be fixed. That's the entire reason Dart is being forced to take the hamhanded approach while rewriting combat for it to just say "If effective skill is > Cap, = cap".
>>Whether the GMs allow it or not is up to them. If they do, then why do you care? If they don't, then it makes no difference?
What you're missing is I don't have a horse in this argument. If they allow it - fine - someone decided it was balanced and to tackle it. Again, I was just offering a refinement to a suggestion. I'm not trying to stop down creativity, and if I came off that way I apologize.
>>Post some ideas of your own. If you're going to shoot down ideas then at least have a good reason other than 'it's a roundabout way!!!'
Again, I wasn't trying to shoot it down, and I did have better reasons then it's roundabout (Though I cannot make you agree or understand them) and it's not worth going through and reposting them all again. Skim up in the thread if you're interested.
As for posting suggestions of my own... I frequently do. For Moon mages. For the game as a whole (See that Tag! threa for example). Oh yeah... and for barbarians too. For example I talked about using passive IF level as an enhancement to offensive ability that could be spent to spike your abilities higher through dances/zerks etc (Crudely like the cleric Devotion system). That seemed to meet with some interest.
Dartenian says, "The thing that makes Dragon Dance king is that it pretty much bonuses every single that can possibly be buffed for combat. Including at least two things that don't even exist."
LORD-RAHL
VEE-REX
Re: Vinjince
09/24/2009 01:35 AM CDT
Conflict, yay. I admit the hardest conflicts are against people who are ignorant of the discussion and lack comprehension of game balance.
Also, more people have a problem with you (your posting habits actually) than you realize. But it doesn't bother me, I enjoy conflict.
>>No, I know a lot more about barbarian abilities then Dart's quote. It's in my sig because it amuses me. That's frequently why things reside in sigs. You know nothing about my past experiences (or lack thereof) of barbarians. So please don't assume my default state is "ignorance" until I demonstrate it is so.
I have only your posts to judge by. You made it to seem like you were against having another bow booster just because we have a couple already. I was informing you that assuming it would be considered a bow booster (it doesn't even happen to be that strong), it's still something that can be useful if it was in another system such as meditations.
Oh, and I view meditations for both utility and combat utility if you want to be specific.
>>See... here's where we differ. The forums are a tool for communication. If someone tosses out an idea in a public forum, the idea is to discuss it. See if people like it, if someone has a better idea, identify potential concerns. If you wish to float an idea to the GMs without it being a public discussion might I suggest a more private form of communication such as email?
I'm fine with discussion. It's when people make idiotic comments such as "It's a roundabout way to break global caps!"
To that I said, if the GMs allow roundabout ways to get past global caps, then the ability is fine. If they don't, then it won't do anything in those regards. Can you address the last two sentences I made and then tell me why you made the entire roundabout thing in your post? Do that for me.
>>I happen to read every folder of the DR boards (Really they don't get that much traffic all things considered). This is why I frequently crop up in random guild discussions other then moon mages - because I care about the rest of the game beyond the narrow slice I partake in most frequently.
LOL, I actually heard about that in IMs from someone. Said they're tired of you poking in every single topic and trying to have a say in everything.
>>A suggestion was made, I offered feed back on it. If you don't like my feedback... ignore it. If you feel I'm somehow in violation of the rules of the forums by doing so... take it up with a board mod. That's what they do (And I admit, I've certainly made out of line posts before unthinkingly).
Pot meet kettle. This comment makes you look silly in the entire Tag! thread. You got some issues, bud.
>>All I did was point out that there may be a more elegant and balanced solution to arrive at more or less the same ends you want, which is to be able to hit things with an arrow with less time between typing "aim" and "fire".
Variety works for a lot of abilities. Like I said, if we went with a more elegant and balanced solution (there are other % based abilities) then we could cut out a lot of things. You're not making any sense at all.
>>As for there being plenty of abilities that get around the global caps - That's incredibly true, and I'm likely more aware of it then you know seeing as I frequently deal with multiple systems with do some of the more egregious violations of it. That doesn't mean they're good game design or that they shouldn't be fixed. That's the entire reason Dart is being forced to take the hamhanded approach while rewriting combat for it to just say "If effective skill is > Cap, = cap".
If I recall correctly, it has yet to be determined if these would be fixed. Dart explicitly said that the caps will be in place for straight boosts to one particular skill. So that means, evasion buff A and evasion buff B (if both are above half the cap) will not work together. He was questioned on different abilities that indirectly affected the same skill (stat buffs, different bonuses, to-hit buffs, etc..) and I believe he didn't give an answer.
>>What you're missing is I don't have a horse in this argument. If they allow it - fine - someone decided it was balanced and to tackle it. Again, I was just offering a refinement to a suggestion. I'm not trying to stop down creativity, and if I came off that way I apologize.
Well, that's how you came across to me, not sure about to others. I do see others posting in this thread (Cop) for example, and they seem more... steady. But hey, you made the conflict so I'll say you come across as stupid. Probably a book smart guy without common sense.
>>As for posting suggestions of my own... I frequently do. For Moon mages. For the game as a whole (See that Tag! threa for example). Oh yeah... and for barbarians too. For example I talked about using passive IF level as an enhancement to offensive ability that could be spent to spike your abilities higher through dances/zerks etc (Crudely like the cleric Devotion system). That seemed to meet with some interest.
I'll give you that lone one. Still doesn't change my opinion about you (and a few others who haven't posted anything), but maybe you'll show otherwise.
Protip: Not everyone is going to bow to your comments or suggestions. Sometimes it's best to move on. Remember when I posted the mechanical crossbow idea in the combat folder? You questioned what is was powered by and I just let it go from there. I've posted a long suggestion in this folder that didn't seem to be well liked, and I let it go.
Vinjince Rexem'lor
Also, more people have a problem with you (your posting habits actually) than you realize. But it doesn't bother me, I enjoy conflict.
>>No, I know a lot more about barbarian abilities then Dart's quote. It's in my sig because it amuses me. That's frequently why things reside in sigs. You know nothing about my past experiences (or lack thereof) of barbarians. So please don't assume my default state is "ignorance" until I demonstrate it is so.
I have only your posts to judge by. You made it to seem like you were against having another bow booster just because we have a couple already. I was informing you that assuming it would be considered a bow booster (it doesn't even happen to be that strong), it's still something that can be useful if it was in another system such as meditations.
Oh, and I view meditations for both utility and combat utility if you want to be specific.
>>See... here's where we differ. The forums are a tool for communication. If someone tosses out an idea in a public forum, the idea is to discuss it. See if people like it, if someone has a better idea, identify potential concerns. If you wish to float an idea to the GMs without it being a public discussion might I suggest a more private form of communication such as email?
I'm fine with discussion. It's when people make idiotic comments such as "It's a roundabout way to break global caps!"
To that I said, if the GMs allow roundabout ways to get past global caps, then the ability is fine. If they don't, then it won't do anything in those regards. Can you address the last two sentences I made and then tell me why you made the entire roundabout thing in your post? Do that for me.
>>I happen to read every folder of the DR boards (Really they don't get that much traffic all things considered). This is why I frequently crop up in random guild discussions other then moon mages - because I care about the rest of the game beyond the narrow slice I partake in most frequently.
LOL, I actually heard about that in IMs from someone. Said they're tired of you poking in every single topic and trying to have a say in everything.
>>A suggestion was made, I offered feed back on it. If you don't like my feedback... ignore it. If you feel I'm somehow in violation of the rules of the forums by doing so... take it up with a board mod. That's what they do (And I admit, I've certainly made out of line posts before unthinkingly).
Pot meet kettle. This comment makes you look silly in the entire Tag! thread. You got some issues, bud.
>>All I did was point out that there may be a more elegant and balanced solution to arrive at more or less the same ends you want, which is to be able to hit things with an arrow with less time between typing "aim" and "fire".
Variety works for a lot of abilities. Like I said, if we went with a more elegant and balanced solution (there are other % based abilities) then we could cut out a lot of things. You're not making any sense at all.
>>As for there being plenty of abilities that get around the global caps - That's incredibly true, and I'm likely more aware of it then you know seeing as I frequently deal with multiple systems with do some of the more egregious violations of it. That doesn't mean they're good game design or that they shouldn't be fixed. That's the entire reason Dart is being forced to take the hamhanded approach while rewriting combat for it to just say "If effective skill is > Cap, = cap".
If I recall correctly, it has yet to be determined if these would be fixed. Dart explicitly said that the caps will be in place for straight boosts to one particular skill. So that means, evasion buff A and evasion buff B (if both are above half the cap) will not work together. He was questioned on different abilities that indirectly affected the same skill (stat buffs, different bonuses, to-hit buffs, etc..) and I believe he didn't give an answer.
>>What you're missing is I don't have a horse in this argument. If they allow it - fine - someone decided it was balanced and to tackle it. Again, I was just offering a refinement to a suggestion. I'm not trying to stop down creativity, and if I came off that way I apologize.
Well, that's how you came across to me, not sure about to others. I do see others posting in this thread (Cop) for example, and they seem more... steady. But hey, you made the conflict so I'll say you come across as stupid. Probably a book smart guy without common sense.
>>As for posting suggestions of my own... I frequently do. For Moon mages. For the game as a whole (See that Tag! threa for example). Oh yeah... and for barbarians too. For example I talked about using passive IF level as an enhancement to offensive ability that could be spent to spike your abilities higher through dances/zerks etc (Crudely like the cleric Devotion system). That seemed to meet with some interest.
I'll give you that lone one. Still doesn't change my opinion about you (and a few others who haven't posted anything), but maybe you'll show otherwise.
Protip: Not everyone is going to bow to your comments or suggestions. Sometimes it's best to move on. Remember when I posted the mechanical crossbow idea in the combat folder? You questioned what is was powered by and I just let it go from there. I've posted a long suggestion in this folder that didn't seem to be well liked, and I let it go.
Vinjince Rexem'lor
LORD-RAHL
Re: Vinjince
09/24/2009 02:08 AM CDT
>>You made it to seem like you were against having another bow booster just because we have a couple already.
Naw, useless barbarian abilities don't effect me. I think they're bad game design however. And multiple redundant abilities are useless as either they stack (which is going away) or they don't (in which case you use the best and ignore the rest 99% of the time).
>>To that I said, if the GMs allow roundabout ways to get past global caps, then the ability is fine.
No. It's not fine. That's just the point. That's why global caps are the mess they are today. Both because things unintentionally allow bypassing of caps and because they've been applied incredibly unevenly. Something like this sends a red flag up for me as an easy way to end up bypassing global caps that could easily slip by because it's not done as a flat +skill booster (Anything that's % based tends to get very scary with global caps... see invisibility, range/thief bonuses, inaccuracy of TKS back in the day... I'm sure you can provide plenty of examples of your own).
>>Can you address the last two sentences I made and then tell me why you made the entire roundabout thing in your post? Do that for me.
I believe I just did.
>>LOL, I actually heard about that in IMs from someone. Said they're tired of you poking in every single topic and trying to have a say in everything.
'k. Tell them to bring it up with me then. Game design is a topic that fascinates me, and thus it only makes sense to try and look at the game holistically instead of just through the lens of one guild.
>>Pot meet kettle. This comment makes you look silly in the entire Tag! thread. You got some issues, bud.
No, the difference is in that thread you were frequently demonstrating a fundamental misunderstanding of how the experience system works and thus I was trying to correct that to see if you'd view the suggestion in another light and to try and prevent you from confusing other people with misinformation. If you'd just posted "you know what, I don't like this" or "I'm concerned about this, this and this and why not do this instead?" as opposed to spouting off fallacious numbers, we wouldn't have had that thread. Of course in retrospect I shouldn't have bothered since trying to educate people on how the new experience system works when they don't wish to be isn't that fun (Hint: If you forget about old exp, it's actually a very simple system, and VERY easy to collect data on for relative learning rates - something you clearly demonstrated in that thread you hadn't done).
>>Variety works for a lot of abilities. Like I said, if we went with a more elegant and balanced solution (there are other % based abilities) then we could cut out a lot of things. You're not making any sense at all.
There's a lot to be said for elegance and simplicity as opposed to convolution. Of course it's possible to go too far (I'm certainly not an advocate of just having a "weapon" skill for example but I also feel we have too many weapon skills in the game currently. Finding that balance point is the trick).
DR is an incredibly complex and convoluted game that has been cobbled together for well over a decade by people with a wide variety of coding skills and styles which leads us to a dramatic lack of consistency, which is in general only a bad thing for DR. It makes things not work or very hard to update and is, I suspect, a large part of why you see the slow development cycle or what seem to be minor bugs stick around forever.
>>Protip: Not everyone is going to bow to your comments or suggestions.
Nor should they. I'm far from perfect (Far, far from it) and if everyone agreed with me we'd be in for an awful lot of dull discussions without nearly the breadth of experience and perspectives needed to flesh out ideas.
Dartenian says, "The thing that makes Dragon Dance king is that it pretty much bonuses every single that can possibly be buffed for combat. Including at least two things that don't even exist."
Naw, useless barbarian abilities don't effect me. I think they're bad game design however. And multiple redundant abilities are useless as either they stack (which is going away) or they don't (in which case you use the best and ignore the rest 99% of the time).
>>To that I said, if the GMs allow roundabout ways to get past global caps, then the ability is fine.
No. It's not fine. That's just the point. That's why global caps are the mess they are today. Both because things unintentionally allow bypassing of caps and because they've been applied incredibly unevenly. Something like this sends a red flag up for me as an easy way to end up bypassing global caps that could easily slip by because it's not done as a flat +skill booster (Anything that's % based tends to get very scary with global caps... see invisibility, range/thief bonuses, inaccuracy of TKS back in the day... I'm sure you can provide plenty of examples of your own).
>>Can you address the last two sentences I made and then tell me why you made the entire roundabout thing in your post? Do that for me.
I believe I just did.
>>LOL, I actually heard about that in IMs from someone. Said they're tired of you poking in every single topic and trying to have a say in everything.
'k. Tell them to bring it up with me then. Game design is a topic that fascinates me, and thus it only makes sense to try and look at the game holistically instead of just through the lens of one guild.
>>Pot meet kettle. This comment makes you look silly in the entire Tag! thread. You got some issues, bud.
No, the difference is in that thread you were frequently demonstrating a fundamental misunderstanding of how the experience system works and thus I was trying to correct that to see if you'd view the suggestion in another light and to try and prevent you from confusing other people with misinformation. If you'd just posted "you know what, I don't like this" or "I'm concerned about this, this and this and why not do this instead?" as opposed to spouting off fallacious numbers, we wouldn't have had that thread. Of course in retrospect I shouldn't have bothered since trying to educate people on how the new experience system works when they don't wish to be isn't that fun (Hint: If you forget about old exp, it's actually a very simple system, and VERY easy to collect data on for relative learning rates - something you clearly demonstrated in that thread you hadn't done).
>>Variety works for a lot of abilities. Like I said, if we went with a more elegant and balanced solution (there are other % based abilities) then we could cut out a lot of things. You're not making any sense at all.
There's a lot to be said for elegance and simplicity as opposed to convolution. Of course it's possible to go too far (I'm certainly not an advocate of just having a "weapon" skill for example but I also feel we have too many weapon skills in the game currently. Finding that balance point is the trick).
DR is an incredibly complex and convoluted game that has been cobbled together for well over a decade by people with a wide variety of coding skills and styles which leads us to a dramatic lack of consistency, which is in general only a bad thing for DR. It makes things not work or very hard to update and is, I suspect, a large part of why you see the slow development cycle or what seem to be minor bugs stick around forever.
>>Protip: Not everyone is going to bow to your comments or suggestions.
Nor should they. I'm far from perfect (Far, far from it) and if everyone agreed with me we'd be in for an awful lot of dull discussions without nearly the breadth of experience and perspectives needed to flesh out ideas.
Dartenian says, "The thing that makes Dragon Dance king is that it pretty much bonuses every single that can possibly be buffed for combat. Including at least two things that don't even exist."
VEE-REX
Re: Vinjince
09/24/2009 02:35 AM CDT
>>Naw, useless barbarian abilities don't effect me. I think they're bad game design however. And multiple redundant abilities are useless as either they stack (which is going away) or they don't (in which case you use the best and ignore the rest 99% of the time).
And this is why I say you don't know much about Barbarians (or at least have not experienced our frustrations). The current dance and roar systems are ancient. We can't use any boost we want in any form. We must take the entire package. When I activate Dragon dance, I can't get a perception boost from anything at all. I can't get a stealth boost from anything at all.
So if I want a Ranged boost and a hiding boost, it's literally impossible for a Barbarian. If I want a melee boost to go along with a perception boost, it's literally impossible So from an ignorant outsider such as yourself, it may look like it's redundant and useless. For me (and others), it wouldn't be. Having such a meditation would allow me to better pick which abilities I want since we weren't yet informed on how the new dance/form system would be. That's why sometimes you shouldn't open the mouth when you don't understand much.
>>No. It's not fine. That's just the point. That's why global caps are the mess they are today. Both because things unintentionally allow bypassing of caps and because they've been applied incredibly unevenly. Something like this sends a red flag up for me as an easy way to end up bypassing global caps that could easily slip by because it's not done as a flat +skill booster (Anything that's % based tends to get very scary with global caps... see invisibility, range/thief bonuses, inaccuracy of TKS back in the day... I'm sure you can provide plenty of examples of your own).
The problem with this is: How will Ranger bonus ever be effective? How will certain abilities ever work together? I believe this is the main reason we haven't heard about any of the global cap changes since Dart made them - it will affect so many abilities I'm not sure if the know how to go about it yet. IMO, roundabout ways (such as boosting stats) should be fine, as long as it's not as powerful as direct boosts. Perhaps boost after boost should get smaller and smaller.
>>'k. Tell them to bring it up with me then. Game design is a topic that fascinates me, and thus it only makes sense to try and look at the game holistically instead of just through the lens of one guild.
I could, though perhaps a slight change of posting habits would go a long way. I just took a glance at the Moon Mage guild - I feel sorry for those guys. Chain posting in so many threads, it's no wonder why some think you are goofy. Granted, you do post useful information.
>>No, the difference is in that thread you were frequently demonstrating a fundamental misunderstanding of how the experience system works and thus I was trying to correct that to see if you'd view the suggestion in another light and to try and prevent you from confusing other people with misinformation.
What you stated was the obvious. Your entire point was based off the training style of people, which was poor. The fact that most people DO NOT put in the exact same amount of time to each skill completely wiped out your stupid rants. You were just reaching, and nothing I mentioned was false information if two people aren't spending the exact same amount of time to each skill (that's sad).
>>If you'd just posted "you know what, I don't like this" or "I'm concerned about this, this and this and why not do this instead?" as opposed to spouting off fallacious numbers, we wouldn't have had that thread. Of course in retrospect I shouldn't have bothered since trying to educate people on how the new experience system works when they don't wish to be isn't that fun
And that's the same uptight attitude that makes you look stupid. Only this time it came back to bite you.
>>There's a lot to be said for elegance and simplicity as opposed to convolution. Of course it's possible to go too far (I'm certainly not an advocate of just having a "weapon" skill for example but I also feel we have too many weapon skills in the game currently. Finding that balance point is the trick).
>>DR is an incredibly complex and convoluted game that has been cobbled together for well over a decade by people with a wide variety of coding skills and styles which leads us to a dramatic lack of consistency, which is in general only a bad thing for DR. It makes things not work or very hard to update and is, I suspect, a large part of why you see the slow development cycle or what seem to be minor bugs stick around forever.
And you are educating me on this? Sometimes you need to stop yapping over forums.
>>Nor should they. I'm far from perfect (Far, far from it) and if everyone agreed with me we'd be in for an awful lot of dull discussions without nearly the breadth of experience and perspectives needed to flesh out ideas.
I was looking for a word: Rejection. You have a hard time dealing with folks that reject your ideas or comments. You make a stupid idea and argue it into the ground for an entire thread then someone comes around and makes a short post with a much better idea. Ideas are fine except when people are overly-defensive of them. What a failure.
Vinjince Rexem'lor
And this is why I say you don't know much about Barbarians (or at least have not experienced our frustrations). The current dance and roar systems are ancient. We can't use any boost we want in any form. We must take the entire package. When I activate Dragon dance, I can't get a perception boost from anything at all. I can't get a stealth boost from anything at all.
So if I want a Ranged boost and a hiding boost, it's literally impossible for a Barbarian. If I want a melee boost to go along with a perception boost, it's literally impossible So from an ignorant outsider such as yourself, it may look like it's redundant and useless. For me (and others), it wouldn't be. Having such a meditation would allow me to better pick which abilities I want since we weren't yet informed on how the new dance/form system would be. That's why sometimes you shouldn't open the mouth when you don't understand much.
>>No. It's not fine. That's just the point. That's why global caps are the mess they are today. Both because things unintentionally allow bypassing of caps and because they've been applied incredibly unevenly. Something like this sends a red flag up for me as an easy way to end up bypassing global caps that could easily slip by because it's not done as a flat +skill booster (Anything that's % based tends to get very scary with global caps... see invisibility, range/thief bonuses, inaccuracy of TKS back in the day... I'm sure you can provide plenty of examples of your own).
The problem with this is: How will Ranger bonus ever be effective? How will certain abilities ever work together? I believe this is the main reason we haven't heard about any of the global cap changes since Dart made them - it will affect so many abilities I'm not sure if the know how to go about it yet. IMO, roundabout ways (such as boosting stats) should be fine, as long as it's not as powerful as direct boosts. Perhaps boost after boost should get smaller and smaller.
>>'k. Tell them to bring it up with me then. Game design is a topic that fascinates me, and thus it only makes sense to try and look at the game holistically instead of just through the lens of one guild.
I could, though perhaps a slight change of posting habits would go a long way. I just took a glance at the Moon Mage guild - I feel sorry for those guys. Chain posting in so many threads, it's no wonder why some think you are goofy. Granted, you do post useful information.
>>No, the difference is in that thread you were frequently demonstrating a fundamental misunderstanding of how the experience system works and thus I was trying to correct that to see if you'd view the suggestion in another light and to try and prevent you from confusing other people with misinformation.
What you stated was the obvious. Your entire point was based off the training style of people, which was poor. The fact that most people DO NOT put in the exact same amount of time to each skill completely wiped out your stupid rants. You were just reaching, and nothing I mentioned was false information if two people aren't spending the exact same amount of time to each skill (that's sad).
>>If you'd just posted "you know what, I don't like this" or "I'm concerned about this, this and this and why not do this instead?" as opposed to spouting off fallacious numbers, we wouldn't have had that thread. Of course in retrospect I shouldn't have bothered since trying to educate people on how the new experience system works when they don't wish to be isn't that fun
And that's the same uptight attitude that makes you look stupid. Only this time it came back to bite you.
>>There's a lot to be said for elegance and simplicity as opposed to convolution. Of course it's possible to go too far (I'm certainly not an advocate of just having a "weapon" skill for example but I also feel we have too many weapon skills in the game currently. Finding that balance point is the trick).
>>DR is an incredibly complex and convoluted game that has been cobbled together for well over a decade by people with a wide variety of coding skills and styles which leads us to a dramatic lack of consistency, which is in general only a bad thing for DR. It makes things not work or very hard to update and is, I suspect, a large part of why you see the slow development cycle or what seem to be minor bugs stick around forever.
And you are educating me on this? Sometimes you need to stop yapping over forums.
>>Nor should they. I'm far from perfect (Far, far from it) and if everyone agreed with me we'd be in for an awful lot of dull discussions without nearly the breadth of experience and perspectives needed to flesh out ideas.
I was looking for a word: Rejection. You have a hard time dealing with folks that reject your ideas or comments. You make a stupid idea and argue it into the ground for an entire thread then someone comes around and makes a short post with a much better idea. Ideas are fine except when people are overly-defensive of them. What a failure.
Vinjince Rexem'lor
LORD-RAHL
Re: Vinjince
09/24/2009 03:02 AM CDT
>>Everything about dances etc
... I'm perfectly aware of all that. Which is why all the systems are due for rewrites. It's a significant problem with your systems (Also that you tend to get to a point where you don't use many of your abilities because other then narrow circumstances there's "just the best one" which is re: my comment about redundancy).
You assume ignorance on my part of the issues, when I actually understand them just fine and was expressing my concerns assuming we're talking long term planning.
I'm a fan of a khri like system, but we'll see what they end up with.
>>The problem with this is: How will Ranger bonus ever be effective? etc
The ranger bonus would be just fine within global caps (However I'm not a fan of it going negative in city instead of just going to zero...). Currently it can blow them away. That's a problem.
And yes, it's going to be a giant hairy mess to untangle. It should have been done years ago when the concept of global caps was first being put forth - it wasn't entirely enforced, and here we are.
As for stacking boosts IMHO you should be able to get your global cap on a skill, and on a stat both. That's fine (Though I do have some issues with how stats roll into skills... but again but I don't really care to go off on that tangent atm).
>>re: the Tag! thread
Uh... no. Most non combat skills (Which is what I had in mind primary when I wrote the suggestion) are not regularly trained well past locked. Combat skills tend to have that happen since they're so interlaced with each other (Like defenses). If you're training mech lore... you don't keep smashing on it once you pass locked generally speaking unless you're actually crafting something as opposed to just training. You may not even train it to locked, and just weave it in between other actions (I know for example I'll fold origami while waiting for my mana to recover. Mech lore is one of the main skills I train but it never sees mind lock, or even many high mind states, it just constantly stays around 1-10. Putting mech to primary for me for example would not increase my rate of mech learning).
My point was that you wouldn't magically learn mech (for example) faster, it'd enable you to invest more time into a skill if you wished (which would in turn let you learn it faster, but you'd be spending more time doing mech instead of training in combat or whatever). And it would do that.
As for your information being wrong was the part with numbers. Like this for example:
>>I think you dramatically overestimate the difference in skillsets right now.
Which I quickly showed was in fact a roughly 50% increase in pulse size between primary and secondary. If you don't consider that a fairly significant difference I don't know what to say to you.
... but this is conflicts in the barbarian folders, and I already declared myself done with responding to you in that thread, and I don't intended to just pick it back up here again. You've missed my point, I tried to fix it, you still missed it... I give up on trying to explain it to you.
>>The rest of your post.
... Not really anything worth responding to in there. Maybe if you had a point or something.
Dartenian says, "The thing that makes Dragon Dance king is that it pretty much bonuses every single that can possibly be buffed for combat. Including at least two things that don't even exist."
... I'm perfectly aware of all that. Which is why all the systems are due for rewrites. It's a significant problem with your systems (Also that you tend to get to a point where you don't use many of your abilities because other then narrow circumstances there's "just the best one" which is re: my comment about redundancy).
You assume ignorance on my part of the issues, when I actually understand them just fine and was expressing my concerns assuming we're talking long term planning.
I'm a fan of a khri like system, but we'll see what they end up with.
>>The problem with this is: How will Ranger bonus ever be effective? etc
The ranger bonus would be just fine within global caps (However I'm not a fan of it going negative in city instead of just going to zero...). Currently it can blow them away. That's a problem.
And yes, it's going to be a giant hairy mess to untangle. It should have been done years ago when the concept of global caps was first being put forth - it wasn't entirely enforced, and here we are.
As for stacking boosts IMHO you should be able to get your global cap on a skill, and on a stat both. That's fine (Though I do have some issues with how stats roll into skills... but again but I don't really care to go off on that tangent atm).
>>re: the Tag! thread
Uh... no. Most non combat skills (Which is what I had in mind primary when I wrote the suggestion) are not regularly trained well past locked. Combat skills tend to have that happen since they're so interlaced with each other (Like defenses). If you're training mech lore... you don't keep smashing on it once you pass locked generally speaking unless you're actually crafting something as opposed to just training. You may not even train it to locked, and just weave it in between other actions (I know for example I'll fold origami while waiting for my mana to recover. Mech lore is one of the main skills I train but it never sees mind lock, or even many high mind states, it just constantly stays around 1-10. Putting mech to primary for me for example would not increase my rate of mech learning).
My point was that you wouldn't magically learn mech (for example) faster, it'd enable you to invest more time into a skill if you wished (which would in turn let you learn it faster, but you'd be spending more time doing mech instead of training in combat or whatever). And it would do that.
As for your information being wrong was the part with numbers. Like this for example:
>>I think you dramatically overestimate the difference in skillsets right now.
Which I quickly showed was in fact a roughly 50% increase in pulse size between primary and secondary. If you don't consider that a fairly significant difference I don't know what to say to you.
... but this is conflicts in the barbarian folders, and I already declared myself done with responding to you in that thread, and I don't intended to just pick it back up here again. You've missed my point, I tried to fix it, you still missed it... I give up on trying to explain it to you.
>>The rest of your post.
... Not really anything worth responding to in there. Maybe if you had a point or something.
Dartenian says, "The thing that makes Dragon Dance king is that it pretty much bonuses every single that can possibly be buffed for combat. Including at least two things that don't even exist."
VEE-REX
Re: Vinjince
09/24/2009 03:18 AM CDT
>>... I'm perfectly aware of all that. Which is why all the systems are due for rewrites. It's a significant problem with your systems (Also that you tend to get to a point where you don't use many of your abilities because other then narrow circumstances there's "just the best one" which is re: my comment about redundancy).
Rewrites of what magnitude? Are you aware of that? Were you at the last Barbarian meeting?
What I got from that meeting was that Dances were going to change to Forms, and that Aurdun pretty much like them the way they are. However, everything is still up in the air. Until some final decision is made and revealed to us, we should make suggestions for how it is now.
Again, you don't know nor are you aware of as much as you think. Trying to backtrack and claim it makes you foolish since it doesn't reflect in your earlier posts.
>>The ranger bonus would be just fine within global caps (However I'm not a fan of it going negative in city instead of just going to zero...). Currently it can blow them away. That's a problem.
You missed the entire point I made. Even within the caps, how will it work with their hiding booster? For guilds with more than just one way to boost a skill, will they have to adjust every single one of those abilities? How do they make a 'tanking' feature for Paladins fit within global caps with their other abilities? What about Thieves and Confidence? Night-time bonus since you are supposedly correct with your assumptions.
Everything would have to be made weaker across the board. THAT is what I think they are trying to figure out. I think it could be a lot easier for them if they set a cap for one particular spell, and then one for a multitude of spells (Think 100 for a single, 150 for multiple). Or, diminishing returns.
>>Uh... no. Most non combat skills (Which is what I had in mind primary when I wrote the suggestion) are not regularly trained well past locked. Combat skills tend to have that happen since they're so interlaced with each other (Like defenses). If you're training mech lore... you don't keep smashing on it once you pass locked generally speaking unless you're actually crafting something as opposed to just training. You may not even train it to locked, and just weave it in between other actions (I know for example I'll fold origami while waiting for my mana to recover. Mech lore is one of the main skills I train but it never sees mind lock, or even many high mind states, it just constantly stays around 1-10. Putting mech to primary for me for example would not increase my rate of mech learning).
LOL now non-combat? You are the most backpedaling person on here. What about if I decide to give my swimming some training today, then move to an area that doesn't train swimming and work on other non-combat skills? People do not invest the exact same amount of time into every skill, which makes all of your whining about new exp inaccurate.
You complain about me disliking Moon Mages. Then you QQ about me having something against you. Then you whine about having to educating people. If you get sooooo tired of educating and instructing people like a pompous retard, then do us all a favor and L2shut up.
>>Not really anything worth responding to in there. Maybe if you had a point or something.
You made the conflict, dude. Either put up or shut up.
Vinjince Rexem'lor
Rewrites of what magnitude? Are you aware of that? Were you at the last Barbarian meeting?
What I got from that meeting was that Dances were going to change to Forms, and that Aurdun pretty much like them the way they are. However, everything is still up in the air. Until some final decision is made and revealed to us, we should make suggestions for how it is now.
Again, you don't know nor are you aware of as much as you think. Trying to backtrack and claim it makes you foolish since it doesn't reflect in your earlier posts.
>>The ranger bonus would be just fine within global caps (However I'm not a fan of it going negative in city instead of just going to zero...). Currently it can blow them away. That's a problem.
You missed the entire point I made. Even within the caps, how will it work with their hiding booster? For guilds with more than just one way to boost a skill, will they have to adjust every single one of those abilities? How do they make a 'tanking' feature for Paladins fit within global caps with their other abilities? What about Thieves and Confidence? Night-time bonus since you are supposedly correct with your assumptions.
Everything would have to be made weaker across the board. THAT is what I think they are trying to figure out. I think it could be a lot easier for them if they set a cap for one particular spell, and then one for a multitude of spells (Think 100 for a single, 150 for multiple). Or, diminishing returns.
>>Uh... no. Most non combat skills (Which is what I had in mind primary when I wrote the suggestion) are not regularly trained well past locked. Combat skills tend to have that happen since they're so interlaced with each other (Like defenses). If you're training mech lore... you don't keep smashing on it once you pass locked generally speaking unless you're actually crafting something as opposed to just training. You may not even train it to locked, and just weave it in between other actions (I know for example I'll fold origami while waiting for my mana to recover. Mech lore is one of the main skills I train but it never sees mind lock, or even many high mind states, it just constantly stays around 1-10. Putting mech to primary for me for example would not increase my rate of mech learning).
LOL now non-combat? You are the most backpedaling person on here. What about if I decide to give my swimming some training today, then move to an area that doesn't train swimming and work on other non-combat skills? People do not invest the exact same amount of time into every skill, which makes all of your whining about new exp inaccurate.
You complain about me disliking Moon Mages. Then you QQ about me having something against you. Then you whine about having to educating people. If you get sooooo tired of educating and instructing people like a pompous retard, then do us all a favor and L2shut up.
>>Not really anything worth responding to in there. Maybe if you had a point or something.
You made the conflict, dude. Either put up or shut up.
Vinjince Rexem'lor
LORD-RAHL
Re: Vinjince
09/24/2009 03:36 AM CDT
>>Re: Barbarian rewrites
I wasn't at the meeting, but as I mentioned I follow the boards. I've read the the GM comments and the log of the meeting.
Basically all the systems sound to be up for a major rewrite, the exact scope and shape overall to be determined. That's not a lot of info to go on.
Though if you think dances are going to survive in their current form with just a new name and IF model... you're going to be sadly disappointed. Dragon dance for example simply won't exist in a single ability, even if you still have the ability to boost like that (Which I doubt will happen - but who knows).
At this point other then "Most if it is seriously out dated and needs major rewrites" we're just dealing with conjecture.
>>Caps
Yes, those are topics that need to be addressed. Personally I dislike how caps are currently set up (Generally 30% of skill, bonuses seem to dislike going above about 100, 150 on the outside though there are currently exceptions).
Flat bonuses are overpowered at low levels and underpowered at high levels. At 30% you'll hit the "hard cap" of 100 ranks at less then 1/4th of the total skill range. But 30% of 2000 ranks is +600 ranks...
% based bonuses are underpowered at low levels and overpowered at high levels.
Thankfully I'm not the one who has to untangle that quagmire, though I feel it's really important to do so (And that's part of why I loath the current state of CJs...)
>>People do not invest the exact same amount of time into every skill
Ah hah! I've discovered (I think) why we can't seem to communicate on this.
I never claimed people spend the exact same time training each skill (that's absurd). All I was saying is if someone spends 15 minutes training a skill now without ever hitting mind lock before they go do something else (Which is true in many cases, though again, more for non combat skills) bumping up the skill set wouldn't increase learning unless that same person then spent more time training that skill (and implicitly not training other skills).
>>You made the conflict, dude. Either put up or shut up.
Oh, I'm sorry. Lesse.
You're dumb, ugly, narrow minded and frequently incoherent.
You also forged a sword and when you were told it was a bastard sword you married your greatsword out of shame.
Dartenian says, "The thing that makes Dragon Dance king is that it pretty much bonuses every single that can possibly be buffed for combat. Including at least two things that don't even exist."
I wasn't at the meeting, but as I mentioned I follow the boards. I've read the the GM comments and the log of the meeting.
Basically all the systems sound to be up for a major rewrite, the exact scope and shape overall to be determined. That's not a lot of info to go on.
Though if you think dances are going to survive in their current form with just a new name and IF model... you're going to be sadly disappointed. Dragon dance for example simply won't exist in a single ability, even if you still have the ability to boost like that (Which I doubt will happen - but who knows).
At this point other then "Most if it is seriously out dated and needs major rewrites" we're just dealing with conjecture.
>>Caps
Yes, those are topics that need to be addressed. Personally I dislike how caps are currently set up (Generally 30% of skill, bonuses seem to dislike going above about 100, 150 on the outside though there are currently exceptions).
Flat bonuses are overpowered at low levels and underpowered at high levels. At 30% you'll hit the "hard cap" of 100 ranks at less then 1/4th of the total skill range. But 30% of 2000 ranks is +600 ranks...
% based bonuses are underpowered at low levels and overpowered at high levels.
Thankfully I'm not the one who has to untangle that quagmire, though I feel it's really important to do so (And that's part of why I loath the current state of CJs...)
>>People do not invest the exact same amount of time into every skill
Ah hah! I've discovered (I think) why we can't seem to communicate on this.
I never claimed people spend the exact same time training each skill (that's absurd). All I was saying is if someone spends 15 minutes training a skill now without ever hitting mind lock before they go do something else (Which is true in many cases, though again, more for non combat skills) bumping up the skill set wouldn't increase learning unless that same person then spent more time training that skill (and implicitly not training other skills).
>>You made the conflict, dude. Either put up or shut up.
Oh, I'm sorry. Lesse.
You're dumb, ugly, narrow minded and frequently incoherent.
You also forged a sword and when you were told it was a bastard sword you married your greatsword out of shame.
Dartenian says, "The thing that makes Dragon Dance king is that it pretty much bonuses every single that can possibly be buffed for combat. Including at least two things that don't even exist."
VEE-REX
Re: Vinjince
09/24/2009 03:48 AM CDT
>>I wasn't at the meeting, but as I mentioned I follow the boards. I've read the the GM comments and the log of the meeting.
That wasn't a log of the entire meeting. But WAIT. Lemme guess... you read the whole one too, right? Must we continue with this?
>>Though if you think dances are going to survive in their current form with just a new name and IF model... you're going to be sadly disappointed.
Quite the contrary, I'm excited.
>>Dragon dance for example simply won't exist in a single ability, even if you still have the ability to boost like that (Which I doubt will happen - but who knows).
I know that. However, that has nothing to do with redoing the ENTIRE structure of dances. Aurdun mentioned adding a few dances. And even if it's completely done, we have no idea how flexible it will be. Meditations are going to come out, we have that.
>>Yes, those are topics that need to be addressed. Personally I dislike how caps are currently set up (Generally 30% of skill, bonuses seem to dislike going above about 100, 150 on the outside though there are currently exceptions).
>>Flat bonuses are overpowered at low levels and underpowered at high levels. At 30% you'll hit the "hard cap" of 100 ranks at less then 1/4th of the total skill range. But 30% of 2000 ranks is +600 ranks...
>>% based bonuses are underpowered at low levels and overpowered at high levels.
>>Thankfully I'm not the one who has to untangle that quagmire, though I feel it's really important to do so (And that's part of why I loath the current state of CJs...)
Can't you just say "Agreed" instead of yapping? I was hoping this would be a learning experience for you but apparently not.
>>I never claimed people spend the exact same time training each skill (that's absurd). All I was saying is if someone spends 15 minutes training a skill now without ever hitting mind lock before they go do something else (Which is true in many cases, though again, more for non combat skills) bumping up the skill set wouldn't increase learning unless that same person then spent more time training that skill (and implicitly not training other skills).
Right, and you still don't see how silly that is given that the scenario you mentioned (in a lot of cases) probably don't happen? You argued and claimed people can't understand new exp because of this?
>>Oh, I'm sorry. Lesse.
>>You're dumb, ugly, narrow minded and frequently incoherent.
>>You also forged a sword and when you were told it was a bastard sword you married your greatsword out of shame.
Great effort. Intentionally being obvious is really smart there, chief.
I figured you were the type that's better off crying for mods to come end the thread instead. This confirms it. ;)
Vinjince Rexem'lor
That wasn't a log of the entire meeting. But WAIT. Lemme guess... you read the whole one too, right? Must we continue with this?
>>Though if you think dances are going to survive in their current form with just a new name and IF model... you're going to be sadly disappointed.
Quite the contrary, I'm excited.
>>Dragon dance for example simply won't exist in a single ability, even if you still have the ability to boost like that (Which I doubt will happen - but who knows).
I know that. However, that has nothing to do with redoing the ENTIRE structure of dances. Aurdun mentioned adding a few dances. And even if it's completely done, we have no idea how flexible it will be. Meditations are going to come out, we have that.
>>Yes, those are topics that need to be addressed. Personally I dislike how caps are currently set up (Generally 30% of skill, bonuses seem to dislike going above about 100, 150 on the outside though there are currently exceptions).
>>Flat bonuses are overpowered at low levels and underpowered at high levels. At 30% you'll hit the "hard cap" of 100 ranks at less then 1/4th of the total skill range. But 30% of 2000 ranks is +600 ranks...
>>% based bonuses are underpowered at low levels and overpowered at high levels.
>>Thankfully I'm not the one who has to untangle that quagmire, though I feel it's really important to do so (And that's part of why I loath the current state of CJs...)
Can't you just say "Agreed" instead of yapping? I was hoping this would be a learning experience for you but apparently not.
>>I never claimed people spend the exact same time training each skill (that's absurd). All I was saying is if someone spends 15 minutes training a skill now without ever hitting mind lock before they go do something else (Which is true in many cases, though again, more for non combat skills) bumping up the skill set wouldn't increase learning unless that same person then spent more time training that skill (and implicitly not training other skills).
Right, and you still don't see how silly that is given that the scenario you mentioned (in a lot of cases) probably don't happen? You argued and claimed people can't understand new exp because of this?
>>Oh, I'm sorry. Lesse.
>>You're dumb, ugly, narrow minded and frequently incoherent.
>>You also forged a sword and when you were told it was a bastard sword you married your greatsword out of shame.
Great effort. Intentionally being obvious is really smart there, chief.
I figured you were the type that's better off crying for mods to come end the thread instead. This confirms it. ;)
Vinjince Rexem'lor
LORD-RAHL
Re: Vinjince
09/24/2009 03:55 AM CDT
...Yes. I'm clearly crying for a mod to end this thread.
PLEASE MODS, SAVE ME FROM THIS MORONIC BARBARIAN.
Srsly.
Dartenian says, "The thing that makes Dragon Dance king is that it pretty much bonuses every single that can possibly be buffed for combat. Including at least two things that don't even exist."
PLEASE MODS, SAVE ME FROM THIS MORONIC BARBARIAN.
Srsly.
Dartenian says, "The thing that makes Dragon Dance king is that it pretty much bonuses every single that can possibly be buffed for combat. Including at least two things that don't even exist."
VEE-REX
Re: Vinjince
09/24/2009 03:59 AM CDT
You can't conflict that's for sure.
I can tell you got a big mouth too. I called TM a 'weapon' and you went on a tantrem and provided 'data' on skillsets. Pathetic, lol.
Vinjince Rexem'lor
I can tell you got a big mouth too. I called TM a 'weapon' and you went on a tantrem and provided 'data' on skillsets. Pathetic, lol.
Vinjince Rexem'lor
LORD-RAHL
Re: Vinjince
09/24/2009 04:05 AM CDT
Oh no doubt TM is a weapon.
But having TM primary is vastly different then being weapon primary and you know it.
Dartenian says, "The thing that makes Dragon Dance king is that it pretty much bonuses every single that can possibly be buffed for combat. Including at least two things that don't even exist."
But having TM primary is vastly different then being weapon primary and you know it.
Dartenian says, "The thing that makes Dragon Dance king is that it pretty much bonuses every single that can possibly be buffed for combat. Including at least two things that don't even exist."
VEE-REX
Re: Vinjince
09/24/2009 04:10 AM CDT
I hope you realize that calling TM a weapon and calling TM a 'weapon' indicates something different. Guess that shows which of us is the moron.
I'm starting to think you didn't mean to conflict. Had to be a misclick or something.
Vinjince Rexem'lor
I'm starting to think you didn't mean to conflict. Had to be a misclick or something.
Vinjince Rexem'lor
LORD-RAHL
Re: Vinjince
09/24/2009 04:13 AM CDT
If it was a weapon when I type exp weapon 0 it'd show up.
It doesn't. That makes it a 'weapon'.
Dartenian says, "The thing that makes Dragon Dance king is that it pretty much bonuses every single that can possibly be buffed for combat. Including at least two things that don't even exist."
It doesn't. That makes it a 'weapon'.
Dartenian says, "The thing that makes Dragon Dance king is that it pretty much bonuses every single that can possibly be buffed for combat. Including at least two things that don't even exist."
CLYNLYN
Re: Vinjince
09/24/2009 07:18 AM CDT
Please keep the long paragraphs going. I need ways of killing 30-60 minutes at a time on my iphone at work.
MATTSMOMMA
Re: Vinjince
09/24/2009 08:59 AM CDT
>>I admit the hardest conflicts are against people who are ignorant of the discussion
This statement amused me so very very much
~Arwinia
http://www.llbbl.com/data/RPG-motivational/target262.html
This statement amused me so very very much
~Arwinia
http://www.llbbl.com/data/RPG-motivational/target262.html
JULIAN
Re: Vinjince
09/24/2009 09:12 AM CDT
VAHLISSA
DWARB-POWER
Re: Vinjince
09/24/2009 09:44 AM CDT
<<You know nothing about my past experiences (or lack thereof) of barbarians. So please don't assume my default state is "ignorance" until I demonstrate it is so.>>
You have stated in the past month or so that you do not participate in combat much and then continue to post about combat oriented ideas. While I cannot comment on your knowledge of the Barbarian guild, I can comment on saying you are ignorant when it comes to comment as per your own acknowledgment of not participating in combat to an extent.
<<See... here's where we differ. The forums are a tool for communication. If someone tosses out an idea in a public forum, the idea is to discuss it. See if people like it, if someone has a better idea, identify potential concerns. If you wish to float an idea to the GMs without it being a public discussion might I suggest a more private form of communication such as email?>>
Yes, but the intent is to foster ideas in a folder named "Suggestions." Not to bicker back and forth or pose questions about weapon effectiveness. Similar to how it is necessary to dance eagle in order to dual load arrows, it could be necessary to dance eagle or dance dragon (both are capable of ranged boosting).
Your reply suggested that AIM would go over the caps and somehow this suggestion would break the caps. You are wrong. AIM is available for all guilds (even Empaths) when using short bow, long bow, composite bow, light crossbow, heavy crossbow, slings and staff slings. The only thing I am suggesting in the SUGGESTIONS folder is to reduce the duration it takes to achieve full aim from something that is a static figure, to something that can be reduced considerably (something like half the duration) in order to receive full aim.
Not a single character would lose out on anything with this suggestion since we can all utilize AIM with the weapons I mentioned above.
This makes your suggested reasoning of breaking the caps by reducing the duration to achieve full aim to be unfound.
The idea seems to fit with the genre of the Barbarian guild being efficient with weaponry and combat. There's nothing more to read into it then that.
<<If they allow it - fine - someone decided it was balanced and to tackle it. Again, I was just offering a refinement to a suggestion. I'm not trying to stop down creativity, and if I came off that way I apologize.>>
You are a good guy, Mozzik, and I enjoy reading most of your posts. I do appreciate your apology, Mozzik, and hope you can learn from the experience in the future so that it is not repeated.
- Simon
You have stated in the past month or so that you do not participate in combat much and then continue to post about combat oriented ideas. While I cannot comment on your knowledge of the Barbarian guild, I can comment on saying you are ignorant when it comes to comment as per your own acknowledgment of not participating in combat to an extent.
<<See... here's where we differ. The forums are a tool for communication. If someone tosses out an idea in a public forum, the idea is to discuss it. See if people like it, if someone has a better idea, identify potential concerns. If you wish to float an idea to the GMs without it being a public discussion might I suggest a more private form of communication such as email?>>
Yes, but the intent is to foster ideas in a folder named "Suggestions." Not to bicker back and forth or pose questions about weapon effectiveness. Similar to how it is necessary to dance eagle in order to dual load arrows, it could be necessary to dance eagle or dance dragon (both are capable of ranged boosting).
Your reply suggested that AIM would go over the caps and somehow this suggestion would break the caps. You are wrong. AIM is available for all guilds (even Empaths) when using short bow, long bow, composite bow, light crossbow, heavy crossbow, slings and staff slings. The only thing I am suggesting in the SUGGESTIONS folder is to reduce the duration it takes to achieve full aim from something that is a static figure, to something that can be reduced considerably (something like half the duration) in order to receive full aim.
Not a single character would lose out on anything with this suggestion since we can all utilize AIM with the weapons I mentioned above.
This makes your suggested reasoning of breaking the caps by reducing the duration to achieve full aim to be unfound.
The idea seems to fit with the genre of the Barbarian guild being efficient with weaponry and combat. There's nothing more to read into it then that.
<<If they allow it - fine - someone decided it was balanced and to tackle it. Again, I was just offering a refinement to a suggestion. I'm not trying to stop down creativity, and if I came off that way I apologize.>>
You are a good guy, Mozzik, and I enjoy reading most of your posts. I do appreciate your apology, Mozzik, and hope you can learn from the experience in the future so that it is not repeated.
- Simon
JMF90
Re: Vinjince
09/24/2009 11:02 AM CDT
>Your reply suggested that AIM would go over the caps and somehow this suggestion would break the caps. You are wrong.
I don't think that's an intellectually honest summary of what he was saying.
I don't think that's an intellectually honest summary of what he was saying.
DWARB-POWER
Re: Vinjince
09/24/2009 12:09 PM CDT
<<Your reply suggested that AIM would go over the caps and somehow this suggestion would break the caps. You are wrong.>>Simon
<<I don't think that's an intellectually honest summary of what he was saying.>> Copernicus
It is an honest intellectual summary of what he was saying. The following was posted by Mozzik.
<<Correct me if I'm wrong...>>Mozzik
<<But isn't the "reduction to full AIM time" called "having enough skill to not need it?">>Mozzik
The time to reach full AIM is an ability for any character right out of the character manager.
<<I mean all full aim is is "this is the largest multiplier to your skill you can get".>>
Again, this is possibly by any character. So far, none of this is out of balance with the game as a whole. The next two quotes are reasons as to why Mozzik is wrong (especially the last quote mentioned):
<<I'm asking how play wise what you're asking for (A reduction in aim time) would be different then just giving you another +weapon skill booster, since all aiming for longer does is give you more effective ranks of weapon skill.>>Mozzik
Wrong. It's completely different. A ranged weapon booster boosts ranged weapons - not every guild has access to these. Aiming is something every guild can do. Just like Primary Magic guilds get a perk for mana attunement, I am asking for the duration via AIM to reach full aim much more quickly then other guilds as a Weapon primary perk. It comes with a stipulation that you must use eagle dance or dragon dance.
<<I further expressed concern that not only would it be a lot trickier to make that ability work then to apply a skill bonus (those are easy and have been done tons as opposed to something that nothing currently does mechanically) and would very potentially get around the global caps because of the round about way it'd stack with other +skill boosters as opposed to a more straightforward way that is easier to apply a global cap to.>>Mozzik
Not at all, because they are two separate things altogether. Your intention that they would get around the global caps is mistaken because the amount of bonus is the exact same thing as what is currently in the game. I am not suggesting something that would offer more TO HIT or more DAMAGE then what we currently have in this game LIVE as of now. The only thing changed as per the suggestion is that the duration to achieve FULL AIM is decreased when using the stipulation of the Barbarian dancing eagle or dancing dragon.
So again, in reference to Mozzik: "Your reply suggested that AIM would go over the caps and somehow this suggestion would break the caps. You are wrong." - By Simon
- Simon
<<I don't think that's an intellectually honest summary of what he was saying.>> Copernicus
It is an honest intellectual summary of what he was saying. The following was posted by Mozzik.
<<Correct me if I'm wrong...>>Mozzik
<<But isn't the "reduction to full AIM time" called "having enough skill to not need it?">>Mozzik
The time to reach full AIM is an ability for any character right out of the character manager.
<<I mean all full aim is is "this is the largest multiplier to your skill you can get".>>
Again, this is possibly by any character. So far, none of this is out of balance with the game as a whole. The next two quotes are reasons as to why Mozzik is wrong (especially the last quote mentioned):
<<I'm asking how play wise what you're asking for (A reduction in aim time) would be different then just giving you another +weapon skill booster, since all aiming for longer does is give you more effective ranks of weapon skill.>>Mozzik
Wrong. It's completely different. A ranged weapon booster boosts ranged weapons - not every guild has access to these. Aiming is something every guild can do. Just like Primary Magic guilds get a perk for mana attunement, I am asking for the duration via AIM to reach full aim much more quickly then other guilds as a Weapon primary perk. It comes with a stipulation that you must use eagle dance or dragon dance.
<<I further expressed concern that not only would it be a lot trickier to make that ability work then to apply a skill bonus (those are easy and have been done tons as opposed to something that nothing currently does mechanically) and would very potentially get around the global caps because of the round about way it'd stack with other +skill boosters as opposed to a more straightforward way that is easier to apply a global cap to.>>Mozzik
Not at all, because they are two separate things altogether. Your intention that they would get around the global caps is mistaken because the amount of bonus is the exact same thing as what is currently in the game. I am not suggesting something that would offer more TO HIT or more DAMAGE then what we currently have in this game LIVE as of now. The only thing changed as per the suggestion is that the duration to achieve FULL AIM is decreased when using the stipulation of the Barbarian dancing eagle or dancing dragon.
So again, in reference to Mozzik: "Your reply suggested that AIM would go over the caps and somehow this suggestion would break the caps. You are wrong." - By Simon
- Simon
JMF90
Re: Vinjince
09/24/2009 01:23 PM CDT
Not going to argue semantics. I disagree, and I think you make several silly statements in there. Like pretending not to know what he means when he says you don't need to aim as much when your skill increases.
SUAVETERRORIST
Re: Vinjince
09/24/2009 01:30 PM CDT
Lol, Vinjince, I like you man, but are you really calling someone out on not being well versed in another guilds abilities, and yet being in that guilds folder talking about what abilities they should and shouldnt have? Seriously?
Eladrin
Eladrin
VEE-REX
Re: Vinjince
09/24/2009 01:56 PM CDT
>>Like pretending not to know what he means when he says you don't need to aim as much when your skill increases.
I think it's pretty silly that someone would say that with more skill you wouldn't need such an ability. That would apply for just about every buff.
I think Simon nailed it on the head.
>>Lol, Vinjince, I like you man, but are you really calling someone out on not being well versed in another guilds abilities, and yet being in that guilds folder talking about what abilities they should and shouldnt have? Seriously?
If this is about the Tingle thing... you should probably let that go. Plenty of people agreed that Tingle is not the best WM disabler, and I really only saw you and Avrii stuck together as usual.
I may claim that chain stuns are not good for the game.
Or that WMs shouldn't have an immunity ability or monthly auto-kill ability (hey both were suggested before).
Or that Ranger bonus is out of whack (at both ends).
All truthful.
It's just unfortunate that people take it badly. I don't whine when others come onto Barbarian folders, so I will continue to welcome you all to post to your heart's content.
Vinjince Rexem'lor
I think it's pretty silly that someone would say that with more skill you wouldn't need such an ability. That would apply for just about every buff.
I think Simon nailed it on the head.
>>Lol, Vinjince, I like you man, but are you really calling someone out on not being well versed in another guilds abilities, and yet being in that guilds folder talking about what abilities they should and shouldnt have? Seriously?
If this is about the Tingle thing... you should probably let that go. Plenty of people agreed that Tingle is not the best WM disabler, and I really only saw you and Avrii stuck together as usual.
I may claim that chain stuns are not good for the game.
Or that WMs shouldn't have an immunity ability or monthly auto-kill ability (hey both were suggested before).
Or that Ranger bonus is out of whack (at both ends).
All truthful.
It's just unfortunate that people take it badly. I don't whine when others come onto Barbarian folders, so I will continue to welcome you all to post to your heart's content.
Vinjince Rexem'lor
MATTSMOMMA
Re: Vinjince
09/24/2009 02:00 PM CDT
JULIAN
Re: Vinjince
09/24/2009 02:03 PM CDT
>>If this is about the Tingle thing... you should probably let that go. Plenty of people agreed that Tingle is not the best WM disabler, and I really only saw you and Avrii stuck together as usual.<<
Tingle's pretty high on the list.
Just saying.
- Mazrian
The Flying Company
http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d194/huldahspal/flyingcompany.png
Tingle's pretty high on the list.
Just saying.
- Mazrian
The Flying Company
http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d194/huldahspal/flyingcompany.png
MATTSMOMMA
Re: Vinjince
09/24/2009 02:07 PM CDT
VEE-REX
Re: Vinjince
09/24/2009 02:07 PM CDT
Ok let me put it like this.
I would rather for you to cast Tingle (and Tingle alone) on me than SD, or Shockwave, or Thunderclap, or Frostbite, or Vertigo, or Anther's Call. Tingle by itself won't allow many to touch me whereas a Frostbite will mess me up in more than just one way.
I think people get confused and believe I'm saying it's a horrible spell, which is not the case.
Vinjince Rexem'lor
I would rather for you to cast Tingle (and Tingle alone) on me than SD, or Shockwave, or Thunderclap, or Frostbite, or Vertigo, or Anther's Call. Tingle by itself won't allow many to touch me whereas a Frostbite will mess me up in more than just one way.
I think people get confused and believe I'm saying it's a horrible spell, which is not the case.
Vinjince Rexem'lor
MATTSMOMMA
Re: Vinjince
09/24/2009 02:09 PM CDT
>>I would rather for you to cast Tingle (and Tingle alone) on me than SD, or Shockwave, or Thunderclap, or Frostbite, or Vertigo, or Anther's Call. Tingle by itself won't allow many to touch me whereas a Frostbite will mess me up in more than just one way.
Frostbite - you turn around and walk out until you recover
Thunderclap - when we did the test YOU requested, most folks we hit with it were out of the stun before we were out of rt
blah blah blah you don't know what you're talking about, back to barb issues. At least now you know how it feels to have someone tell you you don't know anything about your own abilities. Maybe you'll keep that in mind in the future <3
~Arwinia
http://www.llbbl.com/data/RPG-motivational/target262.html
Frostbite - you turn around and walk out until you recover
Thunderclap - when we did the test YOU requested, most folks we hit with it were out of the stun before we were out of rt
blah blah blah you don't know what you're talking about, back to barb issues. At least now you know how it feels to have someone tell you you don't know anything about your own abilities. Maybe you'll keep that in mind in the future <3
~Arwinia
http://www.llbbl.com/data/RPG-motivational/target262.html
VEE-REX
Re: Vinjince
09/24/2009 02:14 PM CDT
>>blah blah blah you don't know what you're talking about, back to barb issues. At least now you know how it feels to have someone tell you you don't know anything about your own abilities. Maybe you'll keep that in mind in the future <3
Mozzik never said I didn't know anything about my own abilities. L2read, noob.
Also, I never whined and said all my disablers except one were useless. I hope I don't have to go back and pull it up for you.
Frostbite was an example, if I bring up another (such as shockwave) you'll QQ about having to be engaged. We already been down this road.
Vinjince Rexem'lor
Mozzik never said I didn't know anything about my own abilities. L2read, noob.
Also, I never whined and said all my disablers except one were useless. I hope I don't have to go back and pull it up for you.
Frostbite was an example, if I bring up another (such as shockwave) you'll QQ about having to be engaged. We already been down this road.
Vinjince Rexem'lor
MATTSMOMMA
Re: Vinjince
09/24/2009 02:20 PM CDT
You should work on your definition of QQ, there wasn't whining and complaining. There was a newb asking for opinions on spells and people responding - followed by a barb that knows nothing about the abilities barging in like a bull in a china shop telling everyone they're wrong and derailing the thread, making it impossible for newb to get any answers from people that actually do play wms.
You'll selectively ignore Mazrian's response to you though and continue to do so because it contradicts your feelings.
Basically you do it plenty, the fact that you're upset about someone else doing it is a real brainsplode.
The barbarian QQ duo loves to stampede through other guild folders passing judgement and telling people their suggestions are out of line. Glass houses and all that jazz.
~Arwinia
http://www.llbbl.com/data/RPG-motivational/target262.html
You'll selectively ignore Mazrian's response to you though and continue to do so because it contradicts your feelings.
Basically you do it plenty, the fact that you're upset about someone else doing it is a real brainsplode.
The barbarian QQ duo loves to stampede through other guild folders passing judgement and telling people their suggestions are out of line. Glass houses and all that jazz.
~Arwinia
http://www.llbbl.com/data/RPG-motivational/target262.html
VEE-REX
Re: Vinjince
09/24/2009 02:29 PM CDT
>>You should work on your definition of QQ, there wasn't whining and complaining. There was a newb asking for opinions on spells and people responding - followed by a barb that knows nothing about the abilities barging in like a bull in a china shop telling everyone they're wrong and derailing the thread, making it impossible for newb to get any answers from people that actually do play wms.
You, or Eladrin said every WM disabler but Tingle was useless. Do you believe that? Because I don't.
>>You'll selectively ignore Mazrian's response to you though and continue to do so because it contradicts your feelings.
Mazrian said it's in the top. He never said it was the best. He never claimed every other WM disabler was useless. Will you actually respond to that?
>>The barbarian QQ duo loves to stampede through other guild folders passing judgement and telling people their suggestions are out of line. Glass houses and all that jazz.
No one seem to take it as badly as you do. Calling you Mrs. Mordimer used to pinch a nerve like crazy. At least you learned not to rage as much.
Vinjince Rexem'lor
You, or Eladrin said every WM disabler but Tingle was useless. Do you believe that? Because I don't.
>>You'll selectively ignore Mazrian's response to you though and continue to do so because it contradicts your feelings.
Mazrian said it's in the top. He never said it was the best. He never claimed every other WM disabler was useless. Will you actually respond to that?
>>The barbarian QQ duo loves to stampede through other guild folders passing judgement and telling people their suggestions are out of line. Glass houses and all that jazz.
No one seem to take it as badly as you do. Calling you Mrs. Mordimer used to pinch a nerve like crazy. At least you learned not to rage as much.
Vinjince Rexem'lor
MATTSMOMMA
Re: Vinjince
09/24/2009 02:33 PM CDT
It's ok, I don't expect you to ever concede, you know everything about every ability for every single guild. I take it back, apparently you haven't learned anything about the old Glass Houses rule.
~Arwinia
http://www.llbbl.com/data/RPG-motivational/target262.html
~Arwinia
http://www.llbbl.com/data/RPG-motivational/target262.html
SUAVETERRORIST
Re: Vinjince
09/24/2009 02:35 PM CDT
I said i find tingle to be the most useful disabler we have, even though it isnt really supposed to be a disabler at all.
Its the only one i really use, and still is to this day, You can take that for whatever you like.
Point is, you really had no buisness charging into the conversation and telling us that WMs needed nerfed and you think we could still use a nerf or two but thats ok, and we have a ton of disablers bla bla bla, when you obviously are not that familiar with the abilities and spells the people talking about it have tested extensively and use on a daily basis, You can split the hairs of that discussion all you like, but thats what it comes down to. Much like you were complaining about someone else doing to you here.
Eladrin
Its the only one i really use, and still is to this day, You can take that for whatever you like.
Point is, you really had no buisness charging into the conversation and telling us that WMs needed nerfed and you think we could still use a nerf or two but thats ok, and we have a ton of disablers bla bla bla, when you obviously are not that familiar with the abilities and spells the people talking about it have tested extensively and use on a daily basis, You can split the hairs of that discussion all you like, but thats what it comes down to. Much like you were complaining about someone else doing to you here.
Eladrin
VEE-REX
Re: Vinjince
09/24/2009 02:40 PM CDT
LOL talk about selectively ignoring.
>>Tingle is currently our best, and imo, only useful disabler. Amusingly, its not supposed to be a disabler at all.
That took me less than a minute. Care to respond to that or will you continue to ignore it? Oh yeah, Maz said it's high on the list, not the best. I can play this game too.
Vinjince Rexem'lor
>>Tingle is currently our best, and imo, only useful disabler. Amusingly, its not supposed to be a disabler at all.
That took me less than a minute. Care to respond to that or will you continue to ignore it? Oh yeah, Maz said it's high on the list, not the best. I can play this game too.
Vinjince Rexem'lor
MATTSMOMMA
Re: Vinjince
09/24/2009 02:43 PM CDT
lol somebody's mad that he got pointed out for doing the same thing he accused someone else of doing
~Arwinia
http://www.llbbl.com/data/RPG-motivational/target262.html
~Arwinia
http://www.llbbl.com/data/RPG-motivational/target262.html
VEE-REX
Re: Vinjince
09/24/2009 02:46 PM CDT
>>lol somebody's mad that he got pointed out for doing the same thing he accused someone else of doing
lol somebody's upset and keeps ignoring parts after claiming I was.
I was against 2 WMs whining about every disabler except Tingle being useless (Even Maz and Mord are more honest about it). Worst WM QQ'ing ever.
Vinjince Rexem'lor
lol somebody's upset and keeps ignoring parts after claiming I was.
I was against 2 WMs whining about every disabler except Tingle being useless (Even Maz and Mord are more honest about it). Worst WM QQ'ing ever.
Vinjince Rexem'lor
MATTSMOMMA
Re: Vinjince
09/24/2009 02:49 PM CDT
JMF90
VEE-REX
Re: Vinjince
09/24/2009 02:55 PM CDT
Buttons HAD to have been pushed for the Tingle crap to be brought up again. Internet drama FTW.
Vinjince Rexem'lor
Vinjince Rexem'lor
JMF90
Re: Vinjince
09/24/2009 02:57 PM CDT
>Buttons HAD to have been pushed for the Tingle crap to be brought up again. Internet drama FTW.
Yes, mostly the POST button. I hit the PREVIEW button a few times too.
Yes, mostly the POST button. I hit the PREVIEW button a few times too.
