asgnny

Can agree with the 'not repairable' bit, although I do think that in that case: why not slightly increase breakrates in general?From what radu said earlier, he doesn't necessarily want NMTs to leave the game, but he does want the unbreakable item gone. Why not stimulate other skills in the process by making the cloak repairable, while also upping all breakrates by a small percentage. Anyways.. it's fine by me either way, I'll just neg to get the perk anyways Would love to see brod removed from the game for all the reasons you named. If NMT's don't leave the game (assuming saving stones are used for mixing), and are repairable, unless there is accelerated growth in the number of new players, there will be more and more NMT's entering the game than exiting. A few more saving stones would be used up, but there would never be a need for a player with an NMT to buy a newly dropped one. The quantity demanded would be dictated by the number of new players who can afford a NMT cape, rather than that same number plus players who have broken theirs. What about repairing other cloaks (such as mirror) instead? (would require the mirror cape degrading to e.g. a black cloak without the mirror skin perk). Another thing to keep in mind: If the NMT cloak is breakable, I'd imagine more players will want tailors to convert their NMT cloaks into NMW. Not a reliable way to level, but something for tailors to strive for level-wise, nonetheless.

There have been a lot of good points raised thus far. Overall, I agree that the NMT should be breakable. If unbreakable NMT's keep entering the game, and so few are removed (acid rain, brod, or inactive storages), the market will become increasingly saturated. The end result is a 75% lower break rate for too many players, which in turn leads to far too few items leaving the game. I think it is reasonable to expect that lower level creatures are meant to be fought by lower level players, in lower level armor. Gargoyles should be fought by a player in upper 20s or 30s a/d, maybe in leather armor, rather than someone in full steel armor and a CoL. The same goes for Ogres, which I have seen trained by players in dragon armor and a CoL. The players using level-inappropriate armor (and NMT) can farm those monsters, train for longer, and may spend less overall on armor than another player using augmented leather, or a titanium chain mail, without an NMT. If NMT's are repairable, virtually none of them would leave the game - just a few extra saving stones. If the goal is to remove some of the capes, with a side benefit of stimulating demand of training armor, let them (eventually) break. The suggestion to remove the branch of destruction may be a reasonable offset for the NMT becoming breakable. Some players would be able to use NMT in PK, and still be at a disadvantage to those using perk cloaks (e.g. BP, Mirror), as well as the mana burn rings, bone of death, etc. A cape of the unbreakable would still be important for PK, but not necessarily be the end-all be-all PK cape. PK used to be less of a hateful quest for vengeance, and more of a fun "You killed me, I'll train up and beat you next time" environment. The incessant PK-driven flames and outright disgusting attitudes do not reflect well upon EL. Furthermore, what new player would want to enter PK when he has to be warned "watch out if you decide to enter PK - some rich player might try to destroy all of your hard-earned stuff". As has been mentioned previously on the subject of game development, other successful games should be looked at to see what works. I have not heard of any other (similar) game in which players can deliberately and permanently destroy items of another player. To sum up: NMT should be breakable, as proposed. Not repairable. Suggestion: eliminate BroD to improve player environment.

For skill levels 90 and above, it takes 50% more exp for a skill to have a 7% increase in skill level. Many of the suggestions of where caps should be are oddly similar to the levels of those suggesting the caps. If some players want to spend 50% more training time for a 7% advantage... let them. As I understand it, while there are caps earlier on in some other games, there is also gear which makes a player significantly stronger. For those who play WoW (or similar games with caps), does someone who just reached level 80 (or whatever the cap is) stand a chance against someone who has reached the cap and continued to play for a year more? Wouldn't the difference in their gear create an insurmountable gap? While these players are both technically level 80, If the answer to my previous question is "yes", it would essentially become level 80 + equipment level 1 through level 80 + equipment level 50. The point is, players are rewarded for their efforts with fighting ability. Not to ignore the mixers, if a player has mixed 50% more stuff than you, is it fair to want their levels removed? There are still chances to fail. If players want to spend 50% more time to prevent a fraction of a percentage of failures, let them. Nobody is forcing anyone to eternally grind out levels.

The problems associated with No Grief days previously include players using uber gear to farm some of the tougher monsters, e.g. dragons. Some equipment is very strong, but offset by high break rates. On a day of no grief, the balance is thrown off. I would much rather see a day of less grief, rather than no grief. That is to say chance to decay an item is decreased significantly (not sure of percentage, maybe 85%), but not eliminated entirely. This would be enjoyable to players, while promoting use of uber gear (cuisses of cooldown, cuisses of mana drain, uber def greaves, etc.) while still allowing some of them to eventually be removed from circulation, as opposed to eternal dust gathering in storage. The day of more grief could be reinstated as it was to offset this day. Some players will still idle in storages or mix in lieu of fighting. Others will risk an increased chance of breakage and continue with their normal activities. Open spawns for risk-takers on this day.

What I ment was more then just alch 50 or something to that effect. If we take the 7 different non-combat skills and then set a final mark at which harvest events become null it would look like this: Player A has these lvls= Manu 32, Eng. 24, Tailoring 10, Crafting 50, Pot 75, Alch 91, and Harvest 105 We set the goal at 700 (lvl 100 for each skill included, this is an example it could be any lvl or combination of lvls, tailoring being more difficult and all) so... 32+24+10+50+75+91+105=387 387/700=.55 So this person would get 55% less harvest events then normal and they have some fairly decent lvls. You could also set a mark where this formula starts say harvest lvl 50 or something. They have to get to that before this "discount" is even considered in game play. A "reasonably" lvled alt would have to have some very good lvl's to get to 0 mini events, at that point making the alt more of a secondary stand alone player then just a harvest alt because of the amount of time it would take to get there. And the neg. perks idea would fit into this by simply adding them to the formula in a way that they are negative. so if a person has godless they get -7 added meaning it takes slightly more lvling to compensate for taking a neg. perk but they can still eventually gain no mini event status to. Just thought I'd throw that in there since someone mentioned the possibility above and many harvesting alts max out neg. perks. If that makes sense to anyone but me I like the idea of such an effect being based off of the skills average. This could be a way to reward all-arounders (who would likely be the ones who need to harvest the most anyhow). I'd also love to just see a rule forbidding harvest alts, but I don't see that happening anytime soon

Is there a method for implementing that? There would not need to be much of a method. The mod team must already make the determination of whether two characters belong to e.g. two brothers, or one player and his ficus. If this idea were deemed acceptable by an overwhelming majority of the player base, AND it were know that attempts to bypass this rule would mean the risk of permanently losing both main character and alts, this could work. With this method, I'd imagine the number of resources entering the game would decrease by a decent margin and virtually eliminate farming alts, while simultaneously making the average player better able to harvest without as many dreaded mini events. Note: to head off the inevitable argument about whether this would mean more work for moderators, mods can decide this without any additional input on the subject. Please address only the points above.

Game theory would dictate your theory to be false, exactly for the reason you have given in your second sentence. For any gc/$ rate, the 'black market' gc sellers will simply undercut the EL shop. If the Shop rate is e.g. 5k gc/$, this sets the black market floor at (5k+risk)/{:content:}nbsp; note:("risk" being some increased factor for the chance of getting scammed). For any gc/$ rate from the shop, there will be black market sellers undercutting this rate. The only way to stop this problem is to cut off the supply of gc for sale. This idea could be a start, but what happens when someone obtains an army of reasonably leveled alts for harvesting? I would prefer a solution which would not allow significant abuse by the same people who are currently undercutting the EL shop as it is. If a level requirement is imposted (e.g. alch 50) to enable a character to harvest with fewer mini events, the existing farming alts will just earn alch 50. It's not that tough to do while already afk-harvesting masses of ingredients - just a minor setback. I would much rather see a policy where each actual player (note: not household or IP) is allowed to use (only) one character at a time. This, meaning that if someone wants to use an alt, s/he would have to log off the main character. With that said, this idea has been previously rejected.

sure, 15k.

This is definitely an issue with PP buying as it currently stands. If there were a way to increase the number of hydro bars (or other cost) for a successive "bought" pickpoint, this would implement a built-in soft cap for pickpoint buying; one which is more in line with the 5% extra exp per level (past level 89) we have now for the skills. If each successive bought pickpoint required more hydro bars, eventually each ebul pickpoint buyer would either find a breaking point, or simply channel out even more gc worth of hydro bars. Another option could be e.g. 50 hydro plus some gc per additional nexus bought from the npc. I don't know how easy it would be to program, but if the NPC (I forget the name) charged 50 hydro + 50k additional gc per successive bought pickpoint*, eventually this cost would be unbearable, or just an awesome gc sink . * Edit: I mean it would be 50 hydro for the first bought nexus, 50hydro+50k gc for #2, 50hydro+100kgc for #3, etc.

Quite simply, I propose modifying the price for sigils to gradually increase, making magic more friendly to new players who often find the 1.1k for increase & health to be quite a burden, and a bit of a barrier to entry/ gc sink for more advance players. Harvesting 2200 lilacs (or 3000 to include the global sigil) is boring for someone who will likely have low carrying capacity. To offset the decrease in npc revenue from the less expensive first sigils, create a minor barrier to entry for "mage" types, and yes, a gc sink, I propose the following: Note: I have not yet considered a cost for every sigil along the way, but the following are nonetheless within scale of what I have in mind. Increase: 50gc Health: 50gc Global: 100gc .. . Temporary: 600gc Decrease: 600gc Life: 600gc (these three sigils are for the poison spell - a bit more expensive because they are "negative" spells, so a bit of a barrier to entry for the "mage" type) ... Move: 500 Change: 500 Local: 500 Space: 500 (teleport to range) ... Create: 500gc Matter: 500gc Protection: 500gc (shield spell, often used to level magic) ... Remove: 1500gc (used with harm & life drain, along with other previously purchased sigils) ... Restore: 800gc (used with life for restoration) ... Magic: 2500gc (used with move & change for mana drain) ... Knowledge: 8000gc (used for advanced spells, such as invisibility)

Was Dumbledor your only character? If not, who were the others? Which (if any) belonged to your brother?

If item restrictions went into effect, the playing field would be leveled a bit as far as players under X a/d having approximately similar gear. As it stands, a player at 49 a/d in Whitestone (during an invasion in which WS is limited to players <50 a/d) with a thermal serp and Ice Dragon armor can likely take out an entire invasion's worth of monsters with relative ease. If it were known that all players below that same 50 a/d cap had only iron plate or aug leather from which to choose, the invasions could be spawned more fairly for more players in a given a/d range. The numbers I suggested for dragon armors (though obviously not set in stone) are such that for a global invasion someone with a/d high enough to withstand a yeti or higher (without mirroring it to death) can very likely equip red dragon armor (or better). Against strong invasion monsters such as yeti, red dragon armor is equivalent to black or ice. This means that a player who can take on a yeti in melee is no worse off by the restrictions. If a mixer wants to sit in storage or walk around in shiny gear, Piper's suggestion is still a viable option. I see level requirements as (positive) motivation to achieve a given level, much moreso than a (negative) restriction. Instead of automatically jumping from Tutorial NPC leather, right to dragon made from drops of the toughest naturally occuring creatures in the game, it would feel more like a personal quest of sorts, to be able to equip the next piece of armor, or weapon. The level minimums for the magic skill encourage players to learn various spells along the way, interact with other players (looking for targets for remote heal), and to seek advice from more experienced players on what to work on next. This all happens in the journey to 21 magic, after which a player can cast restoration. Another similar goal is set to reach 40 magic for mana drain, all along the way for no-fail restoration at 49 magic. The level minimums for magic encourage players to keep pushing forward, with goals in little steps along the way. A common question among new players is "Okay, I did the Tutorial NPC quest. Now what?" If it is seen that e.g. a player needs 8 attack to equip an iron broad sword, the player would be encouraged to kill some small creatures, and have a sense of goals and rewards, rather than meaningless grinding. If the same player sees that e.g. def 10 is needed to equip an enhanced wood shield, maybe s/he would train a bit more...

Do any such people exist? Would be nice to have the name & health of giants clearly visible and identifiable while fighting more than one at a time in invasions.

770k. (my posts would seem so much more substantial if I could figure out how to use bold text

750k (375k ea)

The lack of HE's on market has more to do with the higher profitability of steel bars over HE/AE's than z0mg 80 emu, imo. If mixers had 80 more emu, this would be used to carry 80 more emu worth of steel bar ingredients, not pretty flowers for HE's.

600k (300k each).

More people farming for gold and items= better economy inflation, and decreased shop sales. More people using up supplies, without overproduction (i.e. balanced supply & demand) = better economy. Why would PKers need more essences? If gc were more easily obtained by farming for gold, why would there be more mixers? Your arguments make no economic sense.

Not sure where you're getting your info, but it doesn't seem to be from instances or invasions. Maybe you were in the range arena? It's not always easy to find a team of fighters who want to go kill an ice dragon, or invaded mare bulangiu...(I dislike fighting them, personally) but to say "never" is taking it a bit too far. Try potting up with all of the skill & attribute pots you like, and fight these same creatures solo. Somehow, I don't think +4 to attributes will be a magic cure-all to what you perceive to be a problem. If you want to take the glow in the dark perk, this will allow you to do more damage to a mare bulangiu than would +4 to all attributes. Don't forget your lead undies.

I could be wrong, but afaik, you will not be tele'd to IP automatically while there is an open bag left in the instance. (Please feel to correct me if anybody knows otherwise)

17k

Based on a traceroute, it looks like a routing problem (not the server itself crashing). Fear not, the monsters are very likely still pounding all of us, without any exp loss/rollback/etc.

I like the idea of level-based item restrictions, both for fairness in the level-limited arenas, as well as training and instances. As an example the 60-80 instance could be tweaked, knowing that the players entering will not be fully clad in dragon armor. As far as a basis for the restrictions, why not make them in line with the level-limited PK arenas, to promote their use? e.g. >40 a/d: iron plate >60 a/d: steel plate >65 a/d: titanium plate (bronze somewhere in here, maybe?) >80 a/d: red dragon >90 a/d: black dragon > 100 a/d: ice dragon My thought process in separating the dragon armors is mostly to promote players buying e.g. a red set once the appropriate levels are reached, then maybe working toward a black set over the next levels. If this would impose too great a differential in uncapped PK maps, all types can be included at the same minimum level.

If every new player had a chance at the lottery, it would make existing players not want to participate. Lottery tickets are a luxury item, not a necessity for newer players. Sounds good. Unless it's an involved quest, this sounds like it could flood the player base with excavator cloaks. If new players are not hard pressed for a relative ton of gc for other requirements, the immediate need for an excavator cloak would be diminished.

To make the beginning game a bit less tedious for new players, I have previously suggested modifying the price scale for sigils. If Increase and Health were e.g. 100gc each, global at 150gc, maybe working up to Knowledge at 10k gc, more overall gc would be sunk, but fewer new players would be sitting, mindlessly harvesting lilacs for hours on end. As far as gc to $, this could be accomplished with another previously suggested (conavar?) idea of $-tokens. A player could buy these tokens from the EL shop, and they would be redeemable for EL shop goods & services, and/or maybe to an npc which sells some common shop purchased items, such as EFE, EME, Rostogols, etc.