Jump to content
Eternal Lands Official Forums

Ryuu

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    432

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Ryuu

  1. Posted · Edited by Ryuu · Report reply

    I voted "Yes it is against our community rules," but I don't agree with "community rules," I just think that it's a mean thing to do.

     

     

    Edit: By that I mean that if anything should be considered dispute worthy, or if there are to be community rules, then this should definitely be a part of them. However, I disagree with many other aspects of "community rules," including the idea of them. Democratic justice just leads to mob mentality, and the lynching of innocence.

  2. Posted · Report reply

    It is the role of parents and society to keep them informed id rather the gourvement spent money protecting and educating the vulnerable elements of society than spending all that money on a hammer or new carpets for thier office, or so they can pay thier second mortgage...

    "The state must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people. As long as the government is perceived as working for the benefit of the children, the people will happily endure almost any curtailment of liberty and almost any deprivation" -Adolf Hitler

     

    Ill also like to say if someone thinks the safety of children isnt important, or that the efforts of those trying to stop the countless deaths/kidnaps/and cases of molestation that is ripe with in our society doesnt need to be addressed or that it is a waste of time becasue they are dumb assed kids then i have to think there is something wrong with that person.

    Ripe within society? Are you kidding? It's extremely rare, it's just that almost every case is posted on the news. It gives a distorted view of a the truth. Imagine if every murder was posted on the news, it would make the world look like a pretty grim place indeed.

     

    While it wouldnt hurt to have a full page pop up banner on the EL webpage that says '' This game isn't for children under 10 or peadophiles '' or something a little less obvious .....

    Why? I see no reason why those people should be told they can't play EL.

  3. Posted · Edited by Ryuu · Report reply

    I voted Yes selling gc for $ should be ALLOWED.

    Why would anyone want to spend countless hours creating and supporting a game where the very players who enjoy it so much are the ones underselling its creator, taking sales right out of his pocket?

    [snip]

    Most players who farm and sell gc (outside of in-game transfers for EL shop purchases) are effectively stealing income from Radu.

    It is, of course, up to the creators if they wish to continue the game development, or allow/disallow various game practices. However, that being said, this poll was directed towards the players, presumably to determine the community's stance on gold farming.

     

    In regards to the effects of gold farming on the official shop's income, I would contend that shifting focus to a more (unique) service oriented business model would help to alleviate any problems that may or may not exist. This is basically what Radu suggested in the other thread with the Gold Member proposal.

     

    EL is offered to all of us at no cost. To turn around, screw over the game owners and selfishly turn a profit from the generosity of another is simply despicable.

     

    I would think of it more as practical than despicable. And, at any rate, with the current gc drop and conversion rates it's hardly possible to make decent income from this method. Previously, it had been posible to make 20-25k/hour and sell for 4-5k/$ yielding an estimated $5-6 per hour. Now, at an exchange rate of 6-8/$1, and after all the drops reductions, you would be lucky to make $2 an hour.

     

    Perhaps, if the gold farmers made a union, similar to the manu union that was proposed in the other thread, the gold prices may stabilize a bit and people could get rostos again for cheaper prices, Radu would still have improved income from the shop and gold farmers would make better $/hour.

     

     

    And again, I don't see how this could remotely qualify as stealing money in any reasonable sense. It would be akin to saying that not participating in invasions or other money sinks is stealing money, and therefore "despicable."

  4. Posted · Report reply

    I voted Yes selling gc for $ should be ALLOWED. But the poll options were kind of confusing, first it says "should it be banned?" then the poll option right beneath it says "should selling gc for $ be allowed?" with Yes/No option. People could get confused and think they are voting "no it should not be banned" or "yes it should be banned" instead of what the poll option actually says, because of the text that proceeds it.

  5. Posted · Report reply

    Sell SoP, SoM, BoD, BroD at shop ONLY. <--- dont remember who suggested this, but I think this and several similar ideas are worth the most attention.

    This is a good suggestion, but I also think adding in the ability for items to be bound would help a lot. For instance there could be cheaper bound rostos (say $2-3 each) and then normal tradeable ones, or just remove the tradeable ones all together.

     

    Now, at first, with the tradeable rostos gone, there might be decreased profits from less people buying for a $->rosto->gc carry trade, BUT, once the current supplies of rostos dry up, people would start buying the bound rostos for own use. Or, a player who offers gc->$ conversion would sell them rostos, but the $ would still be guaranteed to go to the shop.

     

    Another solution is just to make rostos shop-only items

  6. Posted · Report reply

    I voted no to both options, since I won't buy it and don't really agree with the idea. *But*, upon reconsideration, if this can help to keep goldfarming in game, then I will support it.

     

    After thinking about it, I believe that there should also be some shop items that have nothing to do with the player's wealth, but which give small advantages. Like un-tradeable armor with stats that are around that of tit, for a price that's cheaper than what one would get if thet bought rostos and sold for gc.

  10. Posted · Edited by Ryuu · Report reply

    Selling:

     

    - Steel Greaves of Ubber Defense

     

    - Steel Cuisses of Mana Drain

     

    - Titanium Cuisses of Cooldown Removal

     

    - Orc Slayer of Mana Nullification - Sold (private arrangement)

     

    - Cutlass of the Mage

     

     

    offer ;)

     

     

    Post offers here please, do NOT send me a forum PM. Thank you. (I won't check forum PMs right now, my inbox is full.)

     

    Edit: Alternatively you may contact me in-game, my IGN is Senia. I won't be online a lot though, so if you want me to see your offers it may be better to post here.

  11. Posted · Report reply

    Hmm.. Well, while I think that if the spawns were not designed (intentionally or not) to be multitrainable and the exp per single mob is decent, then spawn sharing isn't really a bad thing. But they should still ask the other party who was there politely if it's ok.

     

     

    Now, on the other hand if it's a double spawn that is only good exp with both mobs, and someone comes over and starts attacking one of the mobs on the spawn (even if they dont attack the mob you are fighting), then I feel the trainer who was there first would be perfectly justified to pull out their best weap and serp the spawns of the spawn stealer indefinitely. Infact, if this ever comes up, and if I'm playing, let me know, I'll help serp the spawn stealer. :confused:

     

     

    I don't think that the "nobody owns a spawn" thing can be used with a double standard, atleast in so far as a 'community rule' goes. That is, if it's ok to steal a spawn, then it's just as ok to serp it. Therefore, if someone steals your spawn, serp them!

     

    :)

     

     

    -Senia

  19. Posted · Edited by Ryuu · Report reply

    Yes, if you have CoL+MoL and 48 phys (and because you already maxed will for rationality) that will be 420hp.

     

    You must be fighting rats if you restore when you are less than 30 points away from being dead.

    Well, if you know how much damage your opponent does, then yes, you may restore from less than that from time to time, but that was an extreme example (48will/48reason/100magic). I suppose only pure mages are supposed to get close to a full restore then, because battle mages may need some instinct.

     

    Edit: and if there is a way to remove magic immunity then people may want to restore sooner, to avoid being finished off by hit+harm :confused:

  20. Posted · Report reply

    OK, when I said hard, it should have read impossible. Even with maxing your rationality attributes and magic level 100, you wouldn't be able to have a full restore.

     

    You must have a lot of HP if 100*1.5+48*5 (which equals 150+240=390) is not enough for you.

    Yes, if you have CoL+MoL and 48 phys (and because you already maxed will for rationality) that will be 420hp.

  21. Posted · Report reply

    Well, since most of the people are in favour for this idea, there is no point in having a vote on it.

    I guess the restoration will be magic*1.5+rationality*5, which means magic is even more important, but rationality is a good attribute to have.

    The formula for the other spells is satisfactory I hope?

     

    It's not like they cannot be tweaked if needed, right? I would say let's try it and if something needs changes it may be done with time. We will never know unless we try.

    Yes, that's true. but maybe magic*1+rationality*10 would be nice for restoration spell, because if it's only rationality*5 it will be very hard to max out restore for your HP if you go for a build with a lot of will.

     

    Yes -- exactly why it shouldn't be rationality*10. If players will all of a sudden have 400+ material points to restore, it should take more pickpoints to restore all of it. Also, high will builds will have tons of mana. If someone wants to have high material points as well as high mana, it is reasonable to restore less health per cast with lower rationality.

     

    I do like to see the magic skill level actually counting towards restoration. Something like 2x magic (plus a smaller rationality bonus) would look great for me...though I am of course biased in that respect. :omg:

    With that said, will provides material points, ethereal points, and rationality, which makes it the perfect mage attribute. Maybe this would prove to be too strong, if maxed out? (edit: too strong with a 5x rationality multiplier in the restoration formula, I mean)

    OK, when I said hard, it should have read impossible. Even with maxing your rationality attributes and magic level 100, you wouldn't be able to have a full restore.

  22. Posted · Report reply

    Well, since most of the people are in favour for this idea, there is no point in having a vote on it.

    I guess the restoration will be magic*1.5+rationality*5, which means magic is even more important, but rationality is a good attribute to have.

    The formula for the other spells is satisfactory I hope?

     

    It's not like they cannot be tweaked if needed, right? I would say let's try it and if something needs changes it may be done with time. We will never know unless we try.

    Yes, that's true. but maybe magic*1+rationality*10 would be nice for restoration spell, because if it's only rationality*5 it will be very hard to max out restore for your HP if you go for a build with a lot of will.

  23. Posted · Report reply

    At anyrate, if mages are to be useful, there needs to be a solution for the Magic Immunity spell, but Ent probably already has an idea for that. :)

     

    Another spell could be to remove the magic immunity, which would also be dependent on your rationality and magic level (as well as the rationality and magic level of the target).

     

    he;s got ideas :)

    ;) I need to read slower lol

  24. Posted · Edited by Ryuu · Report reply

    i think it's a good idea but maybe add magic defence in somewhere aswell

    this could be done by perception say not like a major block against it but say...

     

    person casting harm 30 magic + 10 rationality would hit for bout 40-50 if new system was 1-1.5 extra damage

     

    then if the defending person was 30 magic and 10 perception he defend about 20 (sorry cant be to bothered with calculations atm kinda tired)

    making the total damage 20-30 this would give us a way of defending the damage kinda like toughness does

     

    anything would be if this does come in it's going to very costly for mid lvl players to restore at about 60-100 per time so maybe drop the ess needed for some spells

     

    another problem would be for some1 who wants to become a full time mage of even power to a fighter. as they will be paying 3-4x the amount just to train and then cast in the long run as magic takes alot longer to lvl.

     

    but i do look forward to it as it might add another great new twist to pk and gameplay in general :) might even go for full time mage myself

    There are already items that give magic resistences ingame, which are basically like a magic defense. It would be nice if higher magic levels provided more magic def though. And about my idea before, I think there could be difficulties with mana drain for instance, where your (20) mana would be used to cast the spell and nothing would be drained... <Edit>

  25. Posted · Edited by Ryuu · Report reply

    I like the idea a lot! :)

    However, I'm not sure that's a good idea to link the magic to rationality or reasoning because as asgnny stated, top fighters would certainly want to put a lot of pick points in reasoning to increase their dexterity. And in this case, they will be better mages as ppl who want to concentrate only on magic.

    So, I think that if you want to bind it to something, bind it to will because this attribute seems less important for fighters.

    Will is very important to fighters as it adds health and mana, also reaction is much better for training than dexterity (and with high accuracy swords, perhaps even PK).

     

     

    Now, in my opinion, having stats to affect the magical abilities to make the mage class build more effective is a good idea. However, I do not think it should affect Restoration, which I believe should continue to "restore" all your HP.

     

    Also in regard to Magic Immunity, perhaps there can be a Diminishing Returns modifier on it, so for instance, if you have 90 seconds to go, and you resist a spell it could reduce the remaining time by 15 seconds. Of course, it would require other modifications to help balance it, such as the magic level/rationality affecting the amount of immunity you lose per resist, and/or the amount of DR from casting an offensive spell on someone. (e.g. the power of the spell would cause more or less time to be removed from the MI effect).

     

    my 2 cents :)

×