Jump to content
Eternal Lands Official Forums


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About TuDaeFadda

  • Rank
  • Birthday 08/18/1989

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Durgapur, India
  1. Raising Attribute Cap to 60!

    Extreme necropost alert. Nope. This is how it will turn out: - 1. Old P2Ws come back, farm instances and invasions which drop the highest numbers of the costliest drops. This continues till there is a significant fall in drop prices. 2. Since these drops are the same drops which are awarded in smaller quantities in lower ranges--while the price for dying and/or degrading items at any range remains the same--all lower ranges suffer a drought. 3. Rise in toughness reduces average breakrate throughout the server, because most of the PvE combat is being performed by a huge influx of P2Ws. Radu adjusts the break rate to normalise against the higher average toughness. He calls this "I feel that I have to reward the people who have put points in toughness", a la 2012 w/ Korrode. Rise in reaction and rationality reduce player death hazard in multicombat. Radu adjusts mobs to hit oftener and harder. Consequently non-P2Ws suffer through unplayable events. If events are nerfed to allow non P2Ws to participate with some modicum of safety, any P2Ws in that same range enter and completely milk said events. 4. P2Ws get bored, again, with the lack of new ideas, get tired of paying for infinitesimal advantages and leave, what remains is a ruin. We've seen this before. Combat is not adjusted, the game just becomes permanently even more unbalanced. The only way this works to the population's benefit is if a cap is implemented for total attributes and for sanity's sake that cap should be at 6*48 or even lower.
  2. Scammed Asclepius char issue.

  3. Rule #5, multiplaying

    Hmm. I haven't played actively in a while, however... PKing two or more of one's own characters against one another with one winning and the other(s) losing constitutes what is known as win-trading. In any MMOG (of those I have played) which provides rewards for PvP kills, wintrading is illegal and bannable. However, helping your own alts with items or gold, or helping them level through difficult quests and zones by multiboxing, that is not illegal. Let's see which way the administration finds suitable for EL.
  4. **** guild is recruiting

    Ah Orick, what a change from our yesteryears' gameplay. All the best to Epic Events and to you, on and off EL. TC Tankypoo.
  5. bmoc55 : A scamming alt

    Forehead, keyboard, whack, whack, WHACK@~~!
  6. http://users.ece.cmu.edu/~andrew5/cute/tolkien.html I wish you peace, and a sound recovery.
  7. God Please save PK

    Read the first 3 pages... May I say, let's try to help the topic first and argue individual posts later? The greatest problem I see with EL's reward rolls (damage dealt, damage absorbed, size of restore, size of harm, XP gained per usage of skill) versus its obligations (in terms of XP, cost, time invested) is that the former are mostly arithmetic functions whereas the latter are exponential. This forces the developer to code the reward rolls as {Base+ (index*multiplier)/level} where the selection of the base is a tricky job. It frequently results in a skill being either massively overpowered in comparison to A/D or being massively underpowered. Looking a little more deeply, the ratio of base to index may cause a skill to be biased towards low or very high levels. My submission would be to slowly try to shift to a model which calculates reward rolls (including XP gained while in combat, casting spells, manufacturing items) based on a decaying formula which is however exponential. Finding the balance will be a hell of a mathematical task, but if achieved, the OP/UP problem will get dealt with. ---EDIT: this is me talking about magnitude rolls only, not chance rolls. And yes I understand that mating an arithmetical magnitude roll with an exponential chance roll works to an extent.--- The second thing that prohibits an extent of skill coming into play in PK is the way movement and combat engagement work in EL. IMHO melee engagement should be a function of distance, and there should be no engagement lock as there currently exists. If movement skills could be made to come into play, placing bombs on static tiles or standing still and shooting a player dead would become nearly impossible. I am a bit hazy on this, though, and it would require too big a jump in terms of how the game plays out, so I can't insist that this be considered. The last thing (at least for now) concerns the time of character development in EL. To make a fully developed character, in terms of attribs, levels, equipment and perks it takes years and years. This is one factor that encourages the character market: it is so time consuming to level a character that players try taking the easy way out to find out how enjoyable the game is at the highest levels. Like piles on like till we have a relatively small number of characters which have been spammed by various owners a huge number of times, hence exacerbating the difference in gameplay satisfaction between a self-made character and a repeatedly purchased and sold one. It's a vicious cycle. Only constructive comments welcome.
  8. Boss for the 80-100 Invance

    ! Hooray for Giants ! (not quite MB drops, but still nice for the challenge ) ... let's just see how it goes - if to many ppl die, maybe we should revert back to Frost Trolls or something Asked for a mob stronger than Yeti. Let's check that list, shall we...ACW, Trice, Giant, Drags. Asked for high HP mobs so AC/trice out. The only invance that has instance-like bosses is the 120+, and there's a reason for this: not everyone can tank the last 800hp off a MB and claim the bag after others have done the hard work. So the MB is a more airtight mob than a Laba would be. However this is entirely possible to do with other instance bosses, so what boss did you expect? EDIT: In fact I find Isnipes' recommendation about adding more Yetis to be a much better solution. In fact while we're at it, we could shift the average level of the mobs closer to 100 than it is now, by increasing the fraction of stronger mobs while lowering the fraction of the weak mobs.
  9. Boss for the 80-100 Invance

    Excuse me, what is this? You Gwaew will go as a ranger, and for your 'challenge' and satisfaction, 80-100 A/D fighters will have to contend with giants on the field? Ever tanked one for a ranger? Ever meleed one without a ranger close by? You propose to change it later if too many bricks poof, and this experiment with other players' bricks is undertaken without their consent. Fantastic.
  10. Any 100+ a/d gap?

    Troll now in game. Thank you, Radu
  11. lom!

    Naah, removing old ties to side with TURK and L.A. Transparent.
  12. Any 100+ a/d gap?

    There is a lack of trainable creatures at both these A/D ranges. Whereas people stagnate 20 levels, 25 levels past optimum at FCW stage because of the large attrib jump required, people above 140-145 find their XP rate dwindling away because of the lack of a strong enough trainable. Both ends require and deserve a trainable mob. This said, in terms of the ratio of player numbers to trainable spawns available, the ~120 A/D range is more crippled, simply because of the significantly larger number of players in this band. Though I myself am in the ~120 A/D bracket, I would consider it fair for the Frost Troll to be located at either of these A/D bands, but from the sole point of view of number of players inconvenienced, my vote would be for it to be specced at ~120 A/D, with good toughness but low might and a lower damage crit roll than the Yeti.
  13. Storage Slots - A suggestion

    Nono...say he used up each of the 400. AND THEN reset. Those extra 100 slots had things in them. where will they go?
  14. New instance change

    My point is this: see those low-gc-no-rare Cocas? I believe their incidence has been increased of late. Together with the stricture for ~4 man teams and the resources consumed, armour degraded and bricks burnt, I believe this is pushing players towards loss-making instances whether they take small teams (more resources consumed) or larger ones (smaller share). Especially if instance cooldown reduction has been performed.