Jump to content
Eternal Lands Official Forums

Gilrain

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    252

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Gilrain

  2. Posted · Report reply

    1) everyone saying pinning dragons is easy should pls come to RD lair or invasions and show it to me. I lost some rostos practicing it and still its risky in the open field. Only some ppl are very good at it. Ofc there are 'easy' pinnings like cliffs or forts, but those are rare enough.

    Removing pinning possibilities at normal (dragon) spawns to prevent overfarming? yes pls! (but how to do that in hulda)

     

    2) i never (never!) come out even when ranging on bethel cliffs. Even with training bolts i always lose gc there, i see it primarily as a way of training and thats an important part for training this skill imho.

     

    3) who do you define as ranger? i am allrounder, still ranging fair enough with level 32, but no AP yet, because they are expensive.

     

    4) my answer to the theories of dugur:

    the problem is AP and pk arrows. So just remove AP benefit and make pk arrows more expensive from NPC: problem solved!

    It would even encourage making pk arrows instead of just buying them. High level archers like dugur do too much damage, its not the pinning thats wrong, we had pinning before without such effects on the market.

  6. Posted · Report reply

    Rofl you noob,return to cave and learn anything about pk... :P :P :icon4:

     

    in case you didnt notice, this post isnt about changes to pk , but primarily about changes to MI (which ofc is currently important in pk).

    In other fantasy games back to D&D magic shields nearly always also had an impact on the magic of the caster. Maybe preventing spells altogether is a bit much here, but other influences are also thinkable (no offensive spells, weaker effect...)

    The bear mana drain problem isnt really a problem: if you MD a bear, you dont need MI. Thats only needed if you serp bears/white tigers for the furs.

     

    In summary, thx for your input Paul and Korrode.

    The other answers are merely an argument against pk'ing too much or letting ppl who do decide on anything around.....

    ;)

  7. Posted · Report reply

    i dont count LMAO or OMFG as valid arguments, sry.

    Ofc it might be that other stuff has to be balanced as well, but since the game is in constant changing anyway, i think it worthwhile to think about it.

     

    The argument that fights will probably be shorter was already mentioned by me, the question is, if this could be rebalanced or if this is really so horrible etc.

     

    The choice about how you die in a fight was also mentioned by me already, but how is this different from now? Which choice do you have now, when you fight someone with much higher levels and attributes ? (and how long does that last ??)

     

    further input ?

  8. Posted · Report reply

    I'm currently thinking of how the gameplay and fighting (also pk) would change, if MI spells wouldnt only make immune to magic that are cast on to a player, but also would prevent that this player would cast further magic himself.

     

    The background thoughts are well known: if you dont cast MI, then overpowered mages can kill you with two spells, while when you have MI on, noone can hurt you at all with magic.

    The other 'problem' i have in mind is the fact, that some pk fights really consist only of 2 players casting restore and drinking SRs until one of them runs out of resources.

     

    Now what if the MI spell would prevent you from casting spells? First of all: you cant cast restore for that time!

    In a single combat arena, this has the possibility imho to make fights more interesting. If you fight against a mage, you still can cast MI, then have to kill that mage with weapons before you can let your MI wear off.

    If you fight with two fighters, you have to choose if you do MI and not restore, or rather restore and are open to magic attacks.

     

    The only imbalance might occur in multi pk fights, where probably most ppl would renounce having MI on because they need to restore much and thus the OP mages would be favored. But on the other hand, you still have the possibility to use BR and GHPs (which are underused currently) and still have MI on.

    Overall i'd expect that we'd have less fights that are only a boring SR consumption.

     

    now what do you think ?

     

    :medieval:

  9. Posted · Report reply

    Although this all looks well and good on paper, can anyone give me an example of a situation where the phoenix would actually be useful to transform into? (other than for looks/posing)

     

    no cooldown can be very handy, e.g. use 6 ROPs in a row in PK.

  11. Posted · Report reply

    The reason is/was because I literally couldn't find a free spawn because people were sitting at SEVERAL spawns who weren't even there, ALL on the same day...

    I'm not a competitive player, I don't care if other people advance fast, I just want to occupy my time. And I'm selfish. I think spawns shouldn't be taken up by people that are out having lunch when I'm on my lunch break looking for a spawn...

     

    to ME a defense penalty after 5 min seems a lot like the mini-harv event fix for AFK harving.

     

    AFK fighting could still be easily done, just not to extremes. Like AFK harving now with a medallion, basically you have to at least be NEAR your computer...

     

    get real.

    If you find a spawn where someone is obviously afk, then take it.

    Where is your problem.....

  12. Posted · Report reply

    hey radu

     

    i ask if u can remove Monster Magnetism removal from pro instances PLS? becouse its wortless (10kgc ) now and hard to sell and its hard to buy token (20k)+rosto (32k) every instances and we get drop 10kgc ..

     

     

    thanks

     

    cant believe that you really ask for this :omg:

  13. Posted · Edited by Gilrain · Report reply

    No way in Underworld this is gonna happen. Pay to remove pretty much every negative aspect of the game, seriously asking for too much here.

     

    Yes, it would drastically change EL. I don't think you comprehend just how much of an effect those things have on the economy.

     

    (Heading off the "economy is already bad" whiners ... implement these things and you'll think the economy was great now in comparison.)

     

    yes, but this would be solved by

     

    Economy P2P - $x/year Yearly "unaffected by wrecked economy"

     

    scnr

     

    (PS: i'm not saying its wrecked)

  14. Posted · Report reply

    sorry to make another suggestion, but since this one might help newbies, it might be interesting for Entropy.

     

    We all know that its quiet hard to have low emu in this game. After the first steps of a newbie, he will for example need to harvest sulfur in CC for making FE (i remember doing this with 80 emu).

    Now imagine there was a bridge there, that would make the path from the sto to the mine a little bit shorter than its now, but this bridge would only be walkable with a load of say 200 filled emu.

    It could for example be a slender log.

    That way we'd have a small favor for newer players without making it easier for advanced players (or harvest alts).

    Such 'shortcuts' could exist in some different places where they fit.

    Another advantage might be, that newer players wouldnt make the 'fault' to put all their first free PPs in physique before they know better....

     

    regards

  16. Posted · Edited by Gilrain · Report reply

    ...I know a number of people have alts that they play....and some of those at the same time as their main....

    You can use the existing servers.lst file to allow different config directories for alts etc.

    very interesting, didnt know that possibility, thx :)

     

    for the whole redirection, would a command line option be a smart and possible solution ?

  18. Posted · Edited by Gilrain · Report reply

    as mentioned in the other thread (http://www.eternal-lands.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=52143), it would be possible to make it a command line option instead.

     

    EDIT: yes, nathan already mentioned command line option as solution.

     

    additionally, symlinks are working in Windows (as junctions), but most Windows user dont know the concept and would be mislead. Also the concept isnt as common and as nicely implemented as in linux imho...

  19. Posted · Report reply

    ...

    ok, seems i found it in elpathwrapper.c

    Looks like its hardcoded there to try HOME with some fallback (to the program dir ??).

    I'll suggest introducing a 'user_dir' to the INI...

    How will the client know where find the el.ini file if the location to look is specified in that same file? This is why it is hard(ish) wired.

     

    good point :), didnt think of that.

     

    with the current concept, that could maybe done with a command line option to specify user path or ini-file location. Then we'd ofc not need the entry at the INI file.

     

    Or another possibility would be to store the INI-file under "%APPDATA%\Eternal Lands\" and the whole rest of the (nonconfig) user data then in the user folder like now. But this way makes it more complicate, so i wouldnt recommend that, even if thats the official Microsoft way to store such things in windows afaik.

  20. Posted · Report reply

    Hi,

     

    i'd like to suggest to make the user-directory also configurable with a setting in the INI-file, like its currently implemented for the program-directory.

    So this would be similar to the data_dir option, e.g.:

     

    This option allows you to specify a directory other than the current directory to load data from.

    This needs to be set to where you want your user data stored.

    For Windows users, the default is "My Documents\Eternal Lands\".

    #user_dir = "C:\other\Eternal Lands\"

     

    This would (afaik) require to add a passage to elpathwrapper.c, where you could check for the existence of this variable, then prefer it over the other options.

     

    The benefit is that this directory can be chosen freely, which might also help with making it easier to circumvent OS-specific problems when determining this path.

     

    regards

  21. Posted · Edited by Gilrain · Report reply

    Hi,

     

    the INI file already has an option to specify the program path (program files), but i cannot find such an option for the user data.

    How does EL determine where to generate/find the user data? (standard seems My Documents\Eternal Lands)

     

    Is it possible to specify or redirect this location?

     

    regards,

     

     

    UPDATE:

    ok, seems i found it in elpathwrapper.c

    Looks like its hardcoded there to try HOME with some fallback (to the program dir ??).

    I'll suggest introducing a 'user_dir' to the INI...

  22. Posted · Report reply

    While I do use map-walking, I think it hurts the game in the long run. But, this isn't about removing the map-walking. What I think people need to do is look for ways they can use & enjoy the game as it is, instead of complaining about a minor issue and trying to change the game just to make it simpler.

    hehe, yes, maybe MM should have a path thats only passable by one char at a time on the way from sto to silver cave :).

    But seriously, the path from NC to WS cave was made more important by some recent changes to the game, for example with respect to coal harvesting (Arius, WS...). So just take this as a suggestion that accompanies the ever ongoing changes that are made to the game, not as a complaint. Comments and suggestions are a positive sign that ppl do still care. If there ever are no more comments or suggestions (or what you call 'complaints'), then you can be sure that the game is dead.

     

    regards

  23. Posted · Edited by Gilrain · Report reply

    sorry to say that, Aislinn, but in this point you are just wrong ;)

    In an MMORPG near a store and on a path you need to go often, this is just one of the unnecessary inconveniences.

    You always argue, that there is inconveniences that are nice and should stay, i agree, but this one is not one of those.

    Pls lets make the path have one more tile, dont defend this buggy case.

    For the other argument: this path is too narrow even if i dont mapwalk. The fact that you dont like mapwalking has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that players cant pass through this narrow path, but often need to.

     

    regards

×