robotbob
-
Content count
626 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by robotbob
-
-
What about harvesters/mixers about 50 a/d that can afford armor like icy...they cant wear? All they can do is mix now? Doesn't seem fair...thought thats why we had nexus's. Restrictions would really just cause complaints...enough of those already right?
Please reread the_piper's suggestion, they can still wear it. But they take a risk of increased breakage because
their -skill- level isn't high enough to -master- it. No 50 A/D needs or should be fighting monsters their level in
full Ice Dragon Armor. They also should not be anyone at the <60 arena in full ice dragon armor.
-
The fighters with maxed p/c are overpowered! Let's think... Someone with 80's a/d (or even lower. That was just an example) and maxed p/c can easily kill 140's a/d person who has 4/4 p/c. Let's decrease the effect of p/c and make the a/d more important in fights!I fully agree with dugur.
I totally agree with this, I recently reset and its startling how important the attributes are
VS the actual Attack and Defense levels. If attack and defense levels mattered more, then PP buying
would not have such a profound effect.
Absouluty correct! Spot on
I agree... in fact, i suggested it (for a/d anyways) like a year ago
Perhaps increasing the value of attack and defense levels within the hit and dodge combat roll calculations is a suggestion more to your liking.Sadly it wasn't more to Radu's liking then, but i wish you guys the best of luck trying to convince him of it now
{Disclaimer: this isn't another PP buying is evil post, its to why someone would spend 1 Million Gc per point}
Well we have hijack'd this one now, but anyway maybe a new thread
Lately we have had some positive discussion about changes, maybe this is the time.
Well every other skill is dependent on the actual level of the skill for successful mixing, fails, etc
I found (been a long while since my last reset) I cannot hit anything my level or <20 defense levels lower than me.
Attack and Defense should be the primary number in calculating a successful hit or dodge and not a collection of
attributes that can be purchased. IMHO by dexterity and reaction (Might for damage makes sense) pick points overpowering
the attack and defense skills, its equal to a NPC that sells AD levels.
We wouldn't want an NPC selling attack and defense levels, so why do we have an indirect method for the same thing?
Alter the effect dex\reaction has on chance to dodge or hit, and you successfully solve all the damage Pick Point buying has
caused without the headache of removing it.
When nexus removals came into being, I assumed using the nexus NPC & using a removal stone was a bug\exploit.
Was this the original intention or is this a pandora box kinda thing?
...OK hijack over, we really need to be another thread.
-
The fighters with maxed p/c are overpowered! Let's think... Someone with 80's a/d (or even lower. That was just an example) and maxed p/c can easily kill 140's a/d person who has 4/4 p/c. Let's decrease the effect of p/c and make the a/d more important in fights!I fully agree with dugur.
I totally agree with this, I recently reset and its startling how important the attributes are
VS the actual Attack and Defense levels. If attack and defense levels mattered more, then PP buying
would not have such a profound effect.
-
I don't consider smby with 50-60 magic and full will/reasoning a mage....how could he be with such a relatively low magic level?It's a piece of cake to pump will/rationality...but getting a high magic lvl...training the skill... is much harder, time consuming and costly.
Imo the potency of your magic skills should be much more dependant of your actual magic lvl.
When i quit i had 88 magic lvl, full reasoning and some will. I harmed for 80-90.
In comparison: some "newb" with 60 magic and full reasoning/will harms for 150-160...
I always found this a weird concept...
Because you are a Fighter|Mage hybrid build and he was a pure mage build.
Could he kill yetis+ like you could easily? Nope.
If its purely based on magic level and there isn't a PP commitment, we have
Strong 140ad fighters, harming for 120+, now that would be problematic.
-
I am all for making the game greatly easier for noobs.
Really once a player has reached 40+ in whatever skill they like, they
will be "hooked" to play onward. If it wasn't for the market being dynamic when
I started, I would have quit facing hours of selling lilacs to an a npc.
(which is THE way for noobs to make any money, (was also the blue lups) )
--
I'll +1 a stock market, exchange system, commodities exchange. Real life capitalist economies
are dependent on them, why not el, since its 'free market'.
---
Maybe a "entrance poll" to real newbs to see "what was fun, what was tedious, what made them stay"
no real way to get a "exit poll".
--
I 2nd the_pipers "newb island return" and more freebies from the Tutorial NPC, suggestion.
I recommend a 'unlimited freebies, based on skill level of that particular freebie.
-
Having required levels to wear stuff is nice, but then the posers will complain, that they can't wear their nice looking stuff..How is this idea:
In other games, mostly pen&paper ones, you must learn to use stuff, or you will get a malus or you break that stuff very easy.
An example:
The level is calculated (a+d)/2=level
Titanium plate armor is level 60
Player's level is 1-10 below required level: a/d - 10, break rate +10
Player's level is 11-20 below required level: a/d - 20, break rate +20
Player's level is 21-30 below required level: a/d - 40, break rate +50
Player's level is 31-999 below required level: a/d - 999, break rate +100
This way ppl can still wear their stuff to look nice, but should think twice to use it in combat.
So not every noob will own the arenas, or, if he does and buys stuff from the shop to break it, good for radu's brick collection.
Piper
OUTSTANDING idea
(gota love the pen&paper for tested ideas)I think its perfect. Its solves it completely and leaves the posers happy
-
I don't like item restrictions (well it is kinda like my barbarian perk idea, can do massive damagebut massive -defense and cannot wear plate armors)
...but I do think (as many many people do)
there should be item level requirements. Such as "Kill a dragon to wear dragon armor"
Must have 60 defense to wear titanium plate, 45 defense to wear steel plate, etc.
So that means noone besides the high a/d lvls will be able to wear a dragon armor, dragon armor gives low lvls a nice advantage in pk, so giving it a lvl requirement it would pretty much kill pk, since tit is getting pretty useless in pk especially when ur pretty low on a/d..
The idea is to stop a <40ad, or <60ad person from using dragon armors to totally shut down the DPa arenas. From observation there
is a IDA person at <40AD DP arena, and not a single 'real' noob would ever kill "mr unkillable". Just change the requirement to 80 Defense
and problem solved. No beginner should be sportin' IDA & therm.
I think having a cap on what u can max wear is pretty interesting, only when it's invasion time this restrictions are removed, just like all mobs have drops only on ndd they drop nothing..Let it be emu based, so when u start to wear it, u will get back the emu of the armor, but it has a certain amount of points and this has (just like emu) a cap, u can wear maximum of 50 points, so u have to think on what to wear, a full dragon is possible, but u can only wear a tit long with it..
But u can wear drag plate, tit cuisse and steel greave and a special weapon..
This will give an extra dimension on going into PK, since it will become unable to go into pk, with id set, tit thermal..
If ya wanna wear tit thermal u will have to drop a piece of ur armor..
- So if its EMU based, only people with MAX P\C will get an advantage too? Or is this another system like emu?
- So does everyone get the same amount of points? If not how does this solve anything?
- Full dragon and a tit long = a bunch of people that cannot hurt each other.
- This would only make El look like patch work armor, since no one could wear anything 'full' as it was intended to be.
- So if its EMU based, only people with MAX P\C will get an advantage too? Or is this another system like emu?
-
While I like that idea, unfortunately I don't believe it wouldn't end up working that way. If I understand correctly, your idea is that some PKers will read some books, and others will read different ones, meaning more variables in PK. However because you can read all the books, the better PKers will read all the books, .Easy................ just cap how many books can be read.
If thats is joined to Radu's modifier idea you could have the following (at a very basic level)
Combat Mastery:
Each player can only read one of the following and Reading the book would half the negative modifier for PvP and maybe give a plus modifier of say 5% for PvE
Book of Great swords (would not include bronze swords,this will always recieve the full negative modifier for PvP)
Book of Armour mastery
Book of Elemental Sword mastery ( therm/ice/fire serp/s2e etc )
Book of Magic Swords ( Jsoc/Osmn etc)
Book of Specials ( Som, Bod, Dragonblade etc ).
Now if the system wanted to be Deeper, reading the book could open up other books to read along the chosen path
ie:
Armour Mastery Path
Pre-Req : Reading Book of Armour mastery
Book of Red Dragon Armour
Book of Ice Dragon Armour
Book of Steel Plate
Book of Shields (non magical types)
Book of life drain shield
Book of Tit plate of Freezing
Book of Uber def greaves
etc etc etc
Players would also be capped on how many books within a certain path they could read (eg can only read 2 books)
Imo Mastery Paths + Radu's proposed idea + maybe new Mastery path perks would help do away with the standard cookie cutter PK builds and items and make each players set up more varied
@Knowledge Class Book Idea:
Yeah classes
see players do really want character directions You can still call it class-less, if perks and books have removal options, but not having set classes
still does not make a game "class-less". (Mixer\Fighter\Mage\Ranger\Summoner\healer\IP AFK PRO)
This system should include Ranger Mage and Summoner (engineer?) or another combat problem is created.
(Combat disciplines, from warrior to barbarian to knight, so on)
This system is almost straight out of d&d ish things, like the game Shadowbane.
Its in the grand daddy of RPGs because it works, people like to play it, and many games take from it.
It has a proven track record, it exists in many paper based RPGs for a very good reason.
However since in EL you cannot make a new 'toon' and level it to R75 in 2 weeks or spend
1k per point to remove mastery points at a 'refiner'. The books should clear on a reset (imho resets
shouldn't be destructive anyway, but another thread, one of el's flaws imho, you can't change your mind
without a year of recovery. A very terrible plan for a game, another thread again
)@groomsh
Only issue I see is, pkers will just restore far more often and when the damage drops too low, it will be
totally negated by toughness.
I personally still like the idea of variable weapon speeds, it to me solves Bronze sword issues, by making it 2-3 turns per swing, with
the same damage. OS would be slower than Rapier and so on, but the PvE/PvP weapons and armors multiplier, reaches the same
result with a different method.
-
I don't like item restrictions (well it is kinda like my barbarian perk idea, can do massive damage
but massive -defense and cannot wear plate armors)
...but I do think (as many many people do)
there should be item level requirements. Such as "Kill a dragon to wear dragon armor"
Must have 60 defense to wear titanium plate, 45 defense to wear steel plate, etc.
Hi Jack -
I love the idea (Entropy's Original).
The idea that some weapons could have bonuses or negatives based on
what it is facing, makes perfect sense, great for PvE (PvP). When I started playing, I thought
(before I bought one) that an Orc Slayer would have bonuses to kill Orcs faster. This is obviously
wrong but with a system like this, this could be true.
In another game, now long gone, but being D&D like, slashing weapons failed against plate armor, but
piercing weapons would tear through it, and so on. It created a wonderful tactical planning about what weapon
you should use against what armor\defense.
Obviously to make the >> Dragon Blade << the weapon it should be, it should have bonuses against Dragon based Armors.
And so on, sounds like a wonderful idea, I'm glad it got a '2nd chance'.
(Hell even a bonus against dragons themselves, cut a diamond with diamonds kinda thing.)
-
Would just make some fighters lvl summon and = :More expensive PK'ing and now make it who can click summons stones the fastest, gg.
A real good suggestion is make stones NOT summonable in combat and make real summoning (Manu window type) summonable in combat, this way summoning can be a actual combat related skill like a/d, range and mage.
- So some fighters leveling summons, removing items from the game, improving the market for LES, and buying noobs animal stuff is bad?
- So its NOT? who can click the most summons already? (been that way since they have been implemented, I've personally spammed
something close to 20-30 bears in one large fight, but with this change I would have only managed 10-20) - How will fewer stones used in PK make it more expensive?
- So its a bad idea because you would have to earn the privilege of spamming stones?
Its not like I'm suggesting a major difference, between the current rate and ~5-10 seconds per for someone with zero summon level.
But if someone is 60+ summons and 130+ ad, didn't they earn the ability?
- So some fighters leveling summons, removing items from the game, improving the market for LES, and buying noobs animal stuff is bad?
-
Answering to korrode:I think one of the reasons Bronze Sword are overpowered is to "help the economy". I mean, Bronze Sword probably is a main way of gc out of the game.
My humble suggestion: remove Bronze Swords, lower monster drops. Less gc enter the economy and pk fights get longer. The non-pk fighters surely will complain, but oh well, nothing in life is perfect.
My humble reply
(currently sugar ray retired from pking): We asked for monster drops (gc) to be raised for quite a long time, and pleasedon't start with suggestions to change it again. No reason to alter the PvE system in order to make 20% of the games population happy. If you want
to remove gold coin from the game, make dragon armor fragile "surely pkers will complain, but oh well, nothing in life is perfect"
-
gentle bump since the votes stopped.
it may have run its course.
-
Cool, thanks again, I'll stick with phys/vit for now thenThought of getting evanescence too but I heard from Dushan that those dodges don't count for def XP so makes it a bit less useful for a non-PKer like me who only cares about leveling.
I figure since this thread is necro'd Id post a recent link that answers this directly. Because the
speculation about it in this thread is wrong.
-
Yes but not from attack and defense, but from mixing\harvesting. Not nearly as easy as the OA exp you wouldget from attack and defense leveling.
from what I heard, though getting no a/d exp. you still get the oa exp. aka if you used to get 150k att, 150k def exp while train, after you hit 100/100. you still get 300k oa, but no a/d.
Can we get some confirmation on this, because the questions I posed 1 yr-ish ago was
replied as "don't reset, no exp from AD leveling post 100ad, but you can alch for oas".
(Don't misunderstand, trying to promote the pk server. (No mini harvest events too)
The pk servers design covers many peoples reasons why "el could be better" but they wont play the pk server
for some other reason.
-
I think that the idea of capping a/d ONLY at 100 is the best idea ever for this game as it is now.Please Ent
Little fyi: On the capped server (100ad), you receive no attack or defense expeirence after you hit the cap.
So a player like me, who recently reset and is waaay over 100ad, is offically screwed. I only want to
fight giants etc. Make it dynamic in PK only and not a 'whole' game effect, or say bye bye to PvEs
that do not pk. (anymore
)Really FFS go to the pk server, its capped at 100ad, you can pk most anywhere. They need more people
(8 people online as of this post) $5 dollars for life per account and you can multiplay! Why isn't this server (pk) packed?
The horseshit about "starting over" is insane, its a 100ad cap. You can mix with fruit due to no cooldown. For those that
do not like "no cooldown" I'm certain the game will never meet these peoples standards, ever.
For those of you who didn't know, you STILL get OA exp even after you hit the a/d cap. that is, if you're max a/d, and reset, it's not a big deal to get your OA back up and running.
[...]
Yes but not from attack and defense, but from mixing\harvesting. Not nearly as easy as the OA exp you would
get from attack and defense leveling.
-
For the sake of curiosity, will this (possible) change affect both stone-summons and pure summons?I figure for stone-summons, the summoning level of the user, not the crafter, will determine smite and heal?
It would be the same whether the summons originated from a stone or the mix window.
It would also be the summon level of the person casting Smite Or Heal and not the level of the original stone maker.
Items in EL do not have unique IDs, and there would be no way to (directly through code) to track who made the stone.
If EL's item database ever changed to unique IDs, then you have items with individual durability, etc.
(its the same for engineering items, its the level of the user, not the mines creator)
-
Robot-kk didin't know that. But I bet ent could take an hour and re program so then the xp goes to ur OA and not a/d...
PK server is wack. No cooldown is anoying for actuall pking and such there...
So would it help the pk server people to request SRs\EMPs to have cooldowns added?
I assume it must be the only reason, because I can't believe anyone would prefer using FPs
over IEDP-like fruit.
"And such" can you elaborate on this?I assume if there is a glaring reason why their populations isn't increasing,
the people on the pk server would gladly encourage the change.
(I know this thread isn't about the PK server, but its is in fact an alternative eternal lands, so I think its related.)
-
Think atm only invasion acws have ts.umm nope, only ACs that DOESNT have TS is Summoned ones...
Stupid question.....Doesn't casting a spell or fighting make you visible?if the invis person "clicks" on someone and ATTACKs them then that makes u visible.. other wise ur invisble.
if someone attacks u and ur invisible.. u stay invisible unless ur the one who "enaged" the combat.
To requote Entropy:
Nevermind, I just looked at the code and only the invaded ACs have it.Now I guess it's up to the players if they want ALL the ACs to have it.
I do recall from attacking invisible markusweck, if he didn't cast restore before he diss\tele'd no one saw him.
Its been a while but is this still the case (sounds like a test for me later, unless someone has a does\doesn't list that is current)
-
@ conavarOn your list, I think his complaint is: He doesn't want to be a Fighter\Summoner hybrid in order to be a Summoner in pk.
its underbalanced if you need everything from another combat discipline to survive. Even pure mages that have reasonably high
Attack\Defense levels, are still never equal to a pure fighter of the same AD. They (mages) aren't dependant on AD, so neither
should summoners.
I do understand that but any changes should be made to the Summoner not the summons (like the suggestion in my edited post above ) or make the summons see what the summoner does, if the summoner uses Ts and see's a mage then the summons do, its then down to player skill and tactics, not just summoning 8 TSed ACW, going to make a coffee, coming back and counting the death msgs (extreme example )
Ah yes I see your point. With (preloaded) TS it does make it 'automated', perhaps your suggestion of:
or make the summons see what the summoner does, if the summoner uses Ts and see's a mage then the summons do, its then down to player skill and tactics, not just summoning 8 TSed ACW, going to make a coffee, coming back and counting the death msgs (extreme example )Is more in line with tactic<->counter tactic, than ACWs with TS. Would this just work with all summons? Or only only ACWs?
I think "TS on summons creation based on master's TS" is easier than casting a buff on a summon with the current ID design (assumption based on
Entropy's statements) Because with the summoner perk, and MI bypass, etc its already there, just waiting for one more line.
-
Hmm, you are absolutely correct sir. The only thing they would do, is die and dropa bag at the mages location.Although a swarm of them attacking an invisible something would
be a funny sight to see.
Maybe that would be helpful by itself.But its use in hunting invis rats could lead to an unexpected side effect.
They don't drop bags, they are hollow on the inside
However I think knowing a mage is there is enough. You can always alert people or quaff a ts pot and go slain the foe the old way.
Hard days ahead for invi rats
Oops, I was probably imagining invasion birdies.
Perhaps a invisible player is visible while in combat, but if they can flee combat, they return to invisible state (at the point they left it, time wise)
----
On ACWs with TS, they are suppose to be a tough creature, if they can ignore monster magnetism, why not invisibility as well?
It not like the request is: make all summons ignore invisibility, since they ALL ignore monster magnetism.
One question: Are the no votes on ACWs Ts because "AC summoned in Pk" or the fact ACWs with ts, would make assassinating hulda
trainers a bit more difficult ?
Spell to give summons ts would be fun too i think.Yep, make spells cast-able on other people, like remote heal. Tada you have a healer type mage.
Should be 2 types of mages, ones that do harm, and priest-like ones that heal and buff. (bard maybe?)
----
@ conavar
On your list, I think his complaint is: He doesn't want to be a Fighter\Summoner hybrid in order to be a Summoner in pk.
its underbalanced if you need everything from another combat discipline to survive. Even pure mages that have reasonably high
Attack\Defense levels, are still never equal to a pure fighter of the same AD. They (mages) aren't dependant on AD, so neither
should summoners.
-
I think that the idea of capping a/d ONLY at 100 is the best idea ever for this game as it is now.Please Ent
Little fyi: On the capped server (100ad), you receive no attack or defense expeirence after you hit the cap.
So a player like me, who recently reset and is waaay over 100ad, is offically screwed. I only want to
fight giants etc. Make it dynamic in PK only and not a 'whole' game effect, or say bye bye to PvEs
that do not pk. (anymore
)Really FFS go to the pk server, its capped at 100ad, you can pk most anywhere. They need more people
(8 people online as of this post) $5 dollars for life per account and you can multiplay! Why isn't this server (pk) packed?
The horseshit about "starting over" is insane, its a 100ad cap. You can mix with fruit due to no cooldown. For those that
do not like "no cooldown" I'm certain the game will never meet these peoples standards, ever.
-
True, but if falcons get ts, two smites and they're gone anyway? As you've said earlier, invisibility isn't removed when you are attacked but merely when they attack. Though I suppose it would be useful to "see" if there are any invisible without wasting a potion before hand.On the other hand, ts'ed falcons would make it easier to hunt invisi rats.
Hmm, you are absolutely correct sir. The only thing they would do, is die and drop
a bag at the mages location.Although a swarm of them attacking an invisible something would
be a funny sight to see.
Maybe that would be helpful by itself.But its use in hunting invis rats could lead to an unexpected side effect.
-
Yes. Who cares if they're alts are not. Some mages aren't actually alts. (I refuse to believe but can not reliably prove that all mages are not alts).How else would a mage kill a summon? Should they not be able to?
With harm, one at a time, like everyone else. Imagine if harm was an AoE
(Area of Effect)Or level summon to earn the ability to splatter them all in 5 seconds. Its the fact the current
smite\heal gives that ability for free without being equal in effort. (Effort in reaching the level
to summon ACWs for instance)
Original issue was 60 damage per summons, per smite in a 16x16 square, 1 second per spell out of combat, ACWs have 300 hp
equals 8? dead ACWs in ~5 seconds. With summon levels required for such a massive AoE, it balances the effort required for both
(To make ACWs, and to flat out destroy them in seconds) As makes summoner vs summoner battles a real possiblity.
I still say that charm be used as a modifier, not many people would have 48v/i except summoners then.. Charm could be a modifier to the summons magic resistace. in so as far rationailty is needed for the mage for magic to be of any use.
Any mage with 48 rationality can summon rats for a few weeks and get a decent summon level. I summon once in a while for fun, and have made 35 summon with animal nexus zero. Though a mage with full r/w will have low charm, because hey, we need some emu, and there are only so many pp to go around.
But I guess the summoners will say, but if I need high level charm then I can be strong mele fighter ..
Also I think falcons/hawks would be nice to have true sight, and maybe lose only 1 hp/min to make them very tatical/usefull
Only only issue I have with using charm instead of the pure summon levels is, you can buy pps for
vit\inst and just bypass any effort for balance. Without PP buying this would work, but instead it could just reward pp buying.
You can't buy summon levels. (Granted I know it would\could take a shitload of vit\inst to possibly be effective, but its happened.
Recently I saw someone (I won't name him) "Buying: 20 nexus removal stones"... So the possibility is there.
And birds with true sight makes perfect sense, "flying high, with a keen eye.."
person blue on minimap though it is not on my buddylist
in Bug Reports
Posted · Report reply
New bug, old issue was around case-insensitive this one is about string length.
is_in_buddylist() (buddylist.c)
Currently is: (changed to strncasecmp, from strncmp)
But the strncasecmp in this case will check up to "length of buddy_list.name" So:
Bernie
BernieMadoff
Will return equal because only the length of "Bernie" was compared.
So:
To: