|
|
|
TormakSaber
|
 Posted: Fri, Apr 23 2010, 10:39 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 16 Dec 2004
Location: Somewhere
|
|
He answered your question, now both of you stop it before the topic is broken like many are that Yurell decides to dig his heels into.
_________________
Davion Telemos - Monk of the Four Winds
Korthan Isharnos - Dragon Shaman of Thunder Spirit Zamasham
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Yurell
|
Posted: Fri, Apr 23 2010, 11:14 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 06 Jan 2008
Location: ANU, behind the coffee mug (+10 GMT)
|
TormakSaber wrote: He answered your question, now both of you stop it before the topic is broken like many are that Yurell decides to dig his heels into. Please expand upon your point. In PMs will be fine.
_________________
2009's Second Most Overall Contributing Player
يمكنني استخدام مترجم جوجل
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ummma
|
Posted: Fri, Apr 23 2010, 13:10 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Location: unknown
|
|
All this talk of destroying gold makes me sad, I have only just got over 50,000 - which will soon be used on new equipment/death/potions no doubt.
I guess after a few months of grinding with a high level it is easy enough to accumulate vast amounts of money. Don't do anything to stem the flow of gold to us less fortunates though!
_________________
Yay for Morphine!
Boo for having enough pain to have to use it..
|
|
|
|
|
|
Neso
|
Posted: Fri, Apr 23 2010, 13:46 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 03 Mar 2007
|
Ummma wrote: All this talk of destroying gold makes me sad, I have only just got over 50,000 - which will soon be used on new equipment/death/potions no doubt.
I guess after a few months of grinding with a high level it is easy enough to accumulate vast amounts of money. Don't do anything to stem the flow of gold to us less fortunates though! Has anyone even read my posts? Seriously... The effect on those with that little gold would be nigh to non-existing. Edit: What in the colourful hells... How did I get an avatar?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selvec Darkon
|
Posted: Fri, Apr 23 2010, 14:00 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 12 Oct 2005
Location: On a Disk, carried by four elephants, which stand on a gigantic turtle.
|
Neso wrote: Ummma wrote: All this talk of destroying gold makes me sad, I have only just got over 50,000 - which will soon be used on new equipment/death/potions no doubt.
I guess after a few months of grinding with a high level it is easy enough to accumulate vast amounts of money. Don't do anything to stem the flow of gold to us less fortunates though! Has anyone even read my posts? Seriously... The effect on those with that little gold would be nigh to non-existing. Edit: What in the colourful hells... How did I get an avatar? That would be Disco, I suggest you change it to a better one. But don't remove it, he'll replace it with something worse heh.
_________________
I keels u with my axe!
"Do ye know where the Holy-Flamin' Frost-brand Gronk-slayin' Vorpal Hammer o' woundin' an' returnin' an' Shootin'-Lightnin'-out-yer-bum is?"
|
|
|
|
|
|
Neso
|
Posted: Fri, Apr 23 2010, 14:07 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 03 Mar 2007
|
Selvec Darkon wrote: That would be Disco, I suggest you change it to a better one. But don't remove it, he'll replace it with something worse heh. You know what... ? I find the thought of an elephant jumping up and down on a rat strangely erotic. I think I will keep this arousing piece of art.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yurell
|
Posted: Fri, Apr 23 2010, 14:12 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 06 Jan 2008
Location: ANU, behind the coffee mug (+10 GMT)
|
Neso wrote: Ummma wrote: All this talk of destroying gold makes me sad, I have only just got over 50,000 - which will soon be used on new equipment/death/potions no doubt.
I guess after a few months of grinding with a high level it is easy enough to accumulate vast amounts of money. Don't do anything to stem the flow of gold to us less fortunates though! Has anyone even read my posts? Seriously... The effect on those with that little gold would be nigh to non-existing. Edit: What in the colourful hells... How did I get an avatar? We did indeed read your posts, but we disagree that a closed economy is a good approach to the situation. That basically results in a sealed caste system. Note: We being those that commented on it.
_________________
2009's Second Most Overall Contributing Player
يمكنني استخدام مترجم جوجل
|
|
|
|
|
|
Neso
|
Posted: Fri, Apr 23 2010, 14:20 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 03 Mar 2007
|
Yurell wrote: We did indeed read your posts, but we disagree that a closed economy is a good approach to the situation. That basically results in a sealed caste system.
Note: We being those that commented on it. Yes, I have gathered that you think it be a bad idea. What is a bit disheartening is that nobody is really elaborating on why it is a bad idea. I'm not one to cling on to something when proven that it is a bad idea. For an instance, right now, I'd like to know just HOW it results in a sealed caste system?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Geld Yaztran
|
Posted: Fri, Apr 23 2010, 14:37 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 05 Jul 2006
|
The economy problem(which really it isn't even a problem) affects more PC sold items than anything else. PCs can sell their items for however much they want. Other players can choose to work to get the item or not. Grinders get more money.....so what?...They spend their time grinding to get the money. If you want the nice player sold item...work for it. So...what exactly is the problem again? What? Non grinders want to have access to the same tools as someone who grinds and in essence "works" For what they get? I don't grind....at all....but I also don't complain about not being able to buy the wonderforged dagger from said player......frankly I didn't work for it...and if I wanted the item....I would work for it. *As MoshingChris talks about spell costs, a large rock flies at his head and almost caves in his forehead* 
|
|
|
|
|
|
ainjyll
|
Posted: Fri, Apr 23 2010, 14:40 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 14 Jun 2006
Location: wilmington, nc
|
Neso wrote: Yes, I have gathered that you think it be a bad idea. What is a bit disheartening is that nobody is really elaborating on why it is a bad idea. I'm not one to cling on to something when proven that it is a bad idea. For an instance, right now, I'd like to know just HOW it results in a sealed caste system? The big issue I have with your idea isn't the idea in and of itself, but what the effects of that idea would be. The server would have to track every piece of loot sold and then fire off a script to go and yank a certain % of gold from every player logged in, which would certainly do nothing to beat back the nasty monster of lag and may even feed him some tasty nomnom's. I also think that it would be unfairly biased towards those that play during peak times. Using completely arbitrary numbers here, let's say that at any given point in time 30% of the server is running around hunting and selling things while the other 70% is completely RP'ing in a static location. If you happen to play at a peak time (60 people on server), that could be about 20 people taking gold out of your pocket, but if you play at an off peak time (20 people on server), that means that it's 6 people. _________________  "I once took the high road and it took me straight to hell and I stood there all by myself." -Hank III
|
|
|
|
|
|
Neso
|
Posted: Fri, Apr 23 2010, 14:55 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 03 Mar 2007
|
ainjyll wrote: The big issue I have with your idea isn't the idea in and of itself, but what the effects of that idea would be. The server would have to track every piece of loot sold and then fire off a script to go and yank a certain % of gold from every player logged in, which would certainly do nothing to beat back the nasty monster of lag and may even feed him some tasty nomnom's.
I also think that it would be unfairly biased towards those that play during peak times. Using completely arbitrary numbers here, let's say that at any given point in time 30% of the server is running around hunting and selling things while the other 70% is completely RP'ing in a static location. If you happen to play at a peak time (60 people on server), that could be about 20 people taking gold out of your pocket, but if you play at an off peak time (20 people on server), that means that it's 6 people. Oh, well that is my fault for not saying exactly how I think the thing should work. Here is how: 1.) DMs decide on what amount of money there should be available. For an instance, if there are 400 active characters, and DMs feel the average wealth should be 100.000 gp per character, then that amount would be 40.000.000. 2.) Every 6th reset (24th hour), a script checks through all the active characters and gets the sum of all their gold. 3.) If the sum of all character held gold exceeds 40.000.000, it means that more items were sold than bought from NPCs, and the gold gets "taken" from the characters in the manner that I have described before. If the sum on the other hand is less than 40.000.000 (which it likely never will be), it means that more items were bought than sold from NPCs, and characters get reimbursed in the same way. I hope this clears your doubts up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ummma
|
Posted: Fri, Apr 23 2010, 14:57 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Location: unknown
|
Neso wrote: Has anyone even read my posts? Seriously... Was I even replying to one? Seriously... Ah well.
_________________
Yay for Morphine!
Boo for having enough pain to have to use it..
|
|
|
|
|
|
Neso
|
Posted: Fri, Apr 23 2010, 14:59 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 03 Mar 2007
|
Ummma wrote: All this talk of destroying gold makes me sad, I have only just got over 50,000 - which will soon be used on new equipment/death/potions no doubt.
I guess after a few months of grinding with a high level it is easy enough to accumulate vast amounts of money. Don't do anything to stem the flow of gold to us less fortunates though! I've spoken of destroying gold throughout this thread, so yes, you have replied to me, even if not directly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ummma
|
Posted: Fri, Apr 23 2010, 15:08 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Location: unknown
|
Neso wrote: 've spoken of destroying gold throughout this thread, so yes, you have replied to me, even if not directly. Hehe, ok. I'll remember to address all general statements direct to you next time.
_________________
Yay for Morphine!
Boo for having enough pain to have to use it..
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selmak
|
Posted: Sat, Apr 24 2010, 0:18 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 17 Dec 2004
|
MoshingChris wrote: I don't even care about Balancing the economy. All I care about, at this moment, is balancing the disparity between casters and non-casters in terms of the outflow of gold. Which has an easy fix of charging a gold cost per spell use representative of spell components etc.. What you could also do is to have buyable spell components, and a limit on how many you can carry at once. They don't need to use up weight or space, since for all intents and purposes they could simply be a persistent counter which gets checked by the spell hook, as long as they cost GP and have to be replenished. To avoid requiring loads of different spell components, it would just be the higher spell levels that would require these. To save you the hassle of picking out all the necessary components in a conversation, there would be a simple 'buy all' option with a price tag to fill you up completely. Then, although a WM may spend more GP on their run, they don't have to run back to a supplier to pick up fresh spell components, which means they spend more time gaining GP from loot drops and kills.
|
|
|
|
|
|
MoshingChris
|
Posted: Sat, Apr 24 2010, 0:26 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 04 Sep 2007
Location: Down South and Bent Edge
|
|
Oh that was what I said earlier btw when Yurell Misquoted me
The Nominal Answer would be more Reagents.
Or effectively one reagant bag per level, that costs x amount of gold.
Spells from level 1 - 3 don't have reagant bags.
4 - 9 do
Summons incur a gold cost to "Hire" "Feed" "Summon" whatever.
_________________
I play: Gage le Gris
Socially and recently politically Inept Knight of Xymor
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yurell
|
Posted: Sat, Apr 24 2010, 1:33 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 06 Jan 2008
Location: ANU, behind the coffee mug (+10 GMT)
|
|
So long as you don't mind mages buying as many reagent bags as they like.
Edit: Oh, and not a misquote, it was quote verbatim
_________________
2009's Second Most Overall Contributing Player
يمكنني استخدام مترجم جوجل
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selmak
|
Posted: Sat, Apr 24 2010, 2:07 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 17 Dec 2004
|
|
If they can buy as many bags as they like, there isn't much point since they will just stuff their inventory as full as it will go.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yurell
|
Posted: Sat, Apr 24 2010, 2:15 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 06 Jan 2008
Location: ANU, behind the coffee mug (+10 GMT)
|
Selmak wrote: If they can buy as many bags as they like, there isn't much point since they will just stuff their inventory as full as it will go. I thought the entire point was to drain money. They spend the same amount of money whether they buy one at a time or tenscore at a time.
_________________
2009's Second Most Overall Contributing Player
يمكنني استخدام مترجم جوجل
|
|
|
|
|
|
MoshingChris
|
Posted: Sat, Apr 24 2010, 2:33 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 04 Sep 2007
Location: Down South and Bent Edge
|
|
No the point was to balance the disparity. The economy can go eat its left nut, no one wants to change it so we've moved on.
Since Mages can purchase one component bag (or recharge it as the case would be, also known as fill her up), and then when they run out they need to refill the component bag it slows their income by forcing a wizard to recharge their bags/pouches/whatever taking them out of hunting areas. Selmaks got what I'm thinking down pat before even i did.
_________________
I play: Gage le Gris
Socially and recently politically Inept Knight of Xymor
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selmak
|
Posted: Sat, Apr 24 2010, 3:00 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 17 Dec 2004
|
|
Well I have no idea where it came from, unless it was that violent shooty game I was playing earlier on.
It will still be trivial for a caster to refill and go back to where they left off, if 'Back to where I ported from' is available, however.
|
|
|
|
|
|
MoshingChris
|
Posted: Sat, Apr 24 2010, 3:30 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 04 Sep 2007
Location: Down South and Bent Edge
|
|
True but it would encourage partying more because you just get a DPS-er and laugh along the merry way.
That by the way is the reason I say spell levels 1 - 3 don't incur a reagant bag/component pouch. Most of the buffs for party members are in the 1 - 3 range.
Its all theoretical anyway, until Jehran pokes his head in I have no idea if its possible.
_________________
I play: Gage le Gris
Socially and recently politically Inept Knight of Xymor
|
|
|
|
|
|
ainjyll
|
Posted: Sun, Apr 25 2010, 0:19 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 14 Jun 2006
Location: wilmington, nc
|
|
Well, I like the idea of reagent bags much more than I do a gp per spell cost. That allows a caster with a high appraise to get a better deal on his supplies. What about a widget like the trap widget that would open a convo when activated and would allow the mage to dump some gold into it whenever he wanted to without the need to leave an area to restock?
_________________ "I once took the high road and it took me straight to hell and I stood there all by myself." -Hank III
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selmak
|
Posted: Sun, Apr 25 2010, 1:58 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 17 Dec 2004
|
|
If the caster can simply beam the reagents straight into their pockets, then it doesn't really address the disparity in earning rate between casters and non-casters any more.
The idea is that casters remain quite capable of burning through mobs at a ferocious rate, but have to resupply most often of all the classes (if they're solo) and non-casters are capable of chewing things up at a decent rate and don't have to resupply so often, but still burn through potions/kits if they're soloing as they do now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
MoshingChris
|
Posted: Sun, Apr 25 2010, 2:25 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 04 Sep 2007
Location: Down South and Bent Edge
|
|
The easiest way i can see is a single component bag with a number of "Charges".
A level 4 spell consumes one component
A level 5 spell consumes two components
A level 6 spell consumes three components
A level 9 spell consumes six components.
Component bags can be replaced by purchasing from magic shops such as Hil'rash etc
10 components cost 1000 gold
90 components cost 9000 gold
Whilst I agree with Selmaks reasoning that if you force Wizards to abandon soloing it'll slow down levelling etc, I just don't like the fact that accidental lag deaths etc will mean punishment for them at the same time having to port in and out etc even when in a party.
_________________
I play: Gage le Gris
Socially and recently politically Inept Knight of Xymor
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yurell
|
Posted: Sun, Apr 25 2010, 3:18 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 06 Jan 2008
Location: ANU, behind the coffee mug (+10 GMT)
|
|
Will that still be balanced for low level casters? E.g. lvl 7 wizard has to spend 1000 gold just to cast his level four spells, and by the time you hit thirteen you barely get four spells out before you have to pay another thousand.
_________________
2009's Second Most Overall Contributing Player
يمكنني استخدام مترجم جوجل
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dwagin
|
Posted: Sun, Apr 25 2010, 3:54 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 08 Aug 2006
Location: The Land of Nod
|
|
Screw the bag. Just directly nick the cost of the gold. I do not want to play UO's magic system again.
Also keep in mind that 500,000+ GP or so cost for the initial purchase of scrolls for wizards to complete one's book.
This is also shifting the entire bucket of cost for party adventuring save healing potions to the buffers.
So not only are they going to be pigeon holed to this role in a group further, but to also be forced to bleed coin for it?
Or is my logic mistaken?
Are nukes going to be free?
'Making them go back' more often than Melee PC's also means its costing -even more- in the cost of charges, since Wizards will not be given a teleport spell.
_________________
Dwagin [Duh-wa-GIN] N. - 1a. Small and cute thingum, particularly fond of four legged scaled creatures of the metalic and chromatic varieties.
-Extraordinarily ordinary in the mostest of ways.
|
|
|
|
|
|
AlphaWaves
|
Posted: Sun, Apr 25 2010, 8:48 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 16 Jun 2006
Location: I'm pretty lost but I don't wanna be found.
|
MoshingChris wrote: If anything this doesn't deserve its own topic -again-, put forward your ideas in the Mo Money thread in General since this wont be an immediate fix. If you or anyone comes up with something reasonable it will be looked at. I was thinking that it'd best for the % chance of loot drop to be exponential. 1 party member having 1% chance of a drop 6 party members: 10% (as it is now) This will definitely mean soloing is less profitable than being in a party. My suggested progression would be 1.585 ^ (party members - 1) So this would be the result: soloing: 1.585 ^ 0 = 1%; 2 member party: 1.585 ^ 1 = 1.5%; (approx.) 3 member party: 1.585 ^ 2 = 2.5%; 4 member party: 1.585 ^ 3 = 4%; 5 member party: 1.585 ^ 4 = 6.3%; 6 member party: 1.585 ^ 5 = 10%. This will also have a MASSIVE effect on the economy. _________________ "The householder's disdain for the vagabond hides a hint of jealousy."
~ A hin proverb
|
|
|
|
|
|
Neso
|
Posted: Sun, Apr 25 2010, 8:57 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 03 Mar 2007
|
AlphaWaves wrote: MoshingChris wrote: If anything this doesn't deserve its own topic -again-, put forward your ideas in the Mo Money thread in General since this wont be an immediate fix. If you or anyone comes up with something reasonable it will be looked at. I was thinking that it'd best for the % chance of loot drop to be exponential. 1 party member having 1% chance of a drop 6 party members: 10% (as it is now) This will definitely mean soloing is less profitable than being in a party. My suggested progression would be 1.585 ^ (party members - 1) So this would be the result: soloing: 1.585 ^ 0 = 1%; 2 member party: 1.585 ^ 1 = 1.5%; (approx.) 3 member party: 1.585 ^ 2 = 2.5%; 4 member party: 1.585 ^ 3 = 4%; 5 member party: 1.585 ^ 4 = 6.3%; 6 member party: 1.585 ^ 5 = 10%. This will also have a MASSIVE effect on the economy. While it is no fix for the general economy, I agree that the above would have a massive effect on the gap between casters and other classes, and I think that would be a better way to do it than the spell cost. In a party of 6, nobody will need potions, because the mage usually buffs, so everybody spends about the same amount of gold and everybody gains the about the same amount of gold.
|
|
|
|
|
|
TormakSaber
|
Posted: Sun, Apr 25 2010, 9:08 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 16 Dec 2004
Location: Somewhere
|
|
Casters continue to solo and make money and meleers will get even less. You'll make the gap bigger and only make spellcasters richer.
_________________
Davion Telemos - Monk of the Four Winds
Korthan Isharnos - Dragon Shaman of Thunder Spirit Zamasham
|
|
|
|
|
|
Neso
|
Posted: Sun, Apr 25 2010, 9:19 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 03 Mar 2007
|
TormakSaber wrote: Casters continue to solo and make money and meleers will get even less. You'll make the gap bigger and only make spellcasters richer. It's not very profitable to solo when you get 1 item every 100th kill.
|
|
|
|
|
|
TormakSaber
|
Posted: Sun, Apr 25 2010, 9:22 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 16 Dec 2004
Location: Somewhere
|
|
It is when you're not costing yourself a dime. You cast your own buffs. Meleer is using potions.
Besides, if people are complaining that "I solo because parties don't make me money", that system ius terrible because it's nerfing loot from the current system lower for everything other than a 6 man party, which is the same.
_________________
Davion Telemos - Monk of the Four Winds
Korthan Isharnos - Dragon Shaman of Thunder Spirit Zamasham
|
|
|
|
|
|
Neso
|
Posted: Sun, Apr 25 2010, 9:26 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 03 Mar 2007
|
|
Alright, well I have another idea then. Give every higher level mob See Invisibility and watch them solo then.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mobile_Svensk
|
Posted: Sun, Apr 25 2010, 9:26 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 21 Jul 2005
Location: Awarded most Confused Git of 2014!
|
|
MOAHAHAHAH... I like that idea
_________________
Amia Minecraft Server Ip: vps1602.directvps.nl
NWN Damage Calculator: http://www.afterlifeguild.org/Thott/dnd/
NWN Build Calculator: http://nwvault.ign.com/View.php?view=Other.Detail&id=856
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weylyn_SotW
|
Posted: Sun, Apr 25 2010, 10:40 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 30 Mar 2010
Location: The Netherlands
|
Neso wrote: Alright, well I have another idea then. Give every higher level mob See Invisibility and watch them solo then. Then please do something about the spiders all over the place? Some of us like to explore, and with invisibility being as unreliable as it is, it's bad enough for those Drow that want to stay in character rather than just cutting through a throng of spiders because they happen to be in the way. I imagine there would be similar issues with other races as well, not everyone lives in Cordor... Yes, I am a caster. Yes, I solo. A lot. Also, it pisses me off to no end that people complain about soloing, when for a lot of us there is simply NO ALTERNATIVE. The Underdark on Bmia is desolate enough as is, between the low player count and the 5-level party limit adding to the pain there is more often than not simply no one to party with.
_________________
Shynt'iira, Ilharess d'lil Qu'ellar My'ana
|
|
|
|
|
|
AlphaWaves
|
Posted: Sun, Apr 25 2010, 11:38 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 16 Jun 2006
Location: I'm pretty lost but I don't wanna be found.
|
Weylyn_SotW wrote: Yes, I am a caster. Yes, I solo. A lot. Also, it pisses me off to no end that people complain about soloing, when for a lot of us there is simply NO ALTERNATIVE. The Underdark on Bmia is desolate enough as is, between the low player count and the 5-level party limit adding to the pain there is more often than not simply no one to party with. A few points about this. If this is the case, why play your drow or underdark character at those times? If there's nobody to RP with, why log in? It's an RP server. I don't mean that in a spiteful way, or to dig at you. What I mean is, if there's no RP going on, and it's clearly a problem for you. Can't you make/play a back-up character for these times when not many, if any, are around to play? The way I see it is that it's an RP server, and soloing to get whatever it is you're trying to get (be it it XP or GP or loot) goes against that. Detracting, if you will, from role play. Unless you're playing the role of a loner. And even if that is the case, surely a single player mod is more appropriate. XP and GP can be granted in quite a vast amount of ways now. Aside from soloing there is the job system and DC 'burning'. For loot, there are shops where people get rid of theirs. All in all, soloing is discouraged, and rightly so, in my mind. I solo, but I wish I didn't. After spending sometimes hours soloing I think firstly why was I even logged on? I could have been doing countless more productive things either "IRL" or in game. _________________ "The householder's disdain for the vagabond hides a hint of jealousy."
~ A hin proverb
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yurell
|
Posted: Sun, Apr 25 2010, 12:20 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 06 Jan 2008
Location: ANU, behind the coffee mug (+10 GMT)
|
AlphaWaves wrote: Weylyn_SotW wrote: Yes, I am a caster. Yes, I solo. A lot. Also, it pisses me off to no end that people complain about soloing, when for a lot of us there is simply NO ALTERNATIVE. The Underdark on Bmia is desolate enough as is, between the low player count and the 5-level party limit adding to the pain there is more often than not simply no one to party with. A few points about this. If this is the case, why play your drow or underdark character at those times? If there's nobody to RP with, why log in? It's an RP server. I don't mean that in a spiteful way, or to dig at you. What I mean is, if there's no RP going on, and it's clearly a problem for you. Can't you make/play a back-up character for these times when not many, if any, are around to play? The way I see it is that it's an RP server, and soloing to get whatever it is you're trying to get (be it it XP or GP or loot) goes against that. Detracting, if you will, from role play. Unless you're playing the role of a loner. And even if that is the case, surely a single player mod is more appropriate. XP and GP can be granted in quite a vast amount of ways now. Aside from soloing there is the job system and DC 'burning'. For loot, there are shops where people get rid of theirs. All in all, soloing is discouraged, and rightly so, in my mind. I solo, but I wish I didn't. After spending sometimes hours soloing I think firstly why was I even logged on? I could have been doing countless more productive things either "IRL" or in game. There probably are people to RP with, but he probably doesn't feel like being stuck at lvl 3 forever. And the sheer amount of time there are basically nobody in the UD is staggering - unless you manage US peak times, there are very few people on. So in short he has no choice but to solo.
_________________
2009's Second Most Overall Contributing Player
يمكنني استخدام مترجم جوجل
|
|
|
|
|
|
jameslocke
|
Posted: Sun, Apr 25 2010, 12:24 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 06 May 2006
Location: Circling the globe in my rocket coffin
|
|
No question that hunting with a party is preferable, but I see no reason why people who solo should be stigmatized. Sometimes there just aren't players around who line up with your pc's background. Weylyn has a good point. There aren't very many active Drow players on at any given time, and switching to an alt isn't going to help change that. If you want to solo level your character go for it, and when you do run across some other players, do what what you can to make the game more fun and interactive for them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
AlphaWaves
|
Posted: Sun, Apr 25 2010, 12:58 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 16 Jun 2006
Location: I'm pretty lost but I don't wanna be found.
|
|
Good points, definitely.
_________________ "The householder's disdain for the vagabond hides a hint of jealousy."
~ A hin proverb
|
|
|
|
|
|
Xaviera
|
Posted: Sun, Apr 25 2010, 13:24 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 07 Aug 2006
Location: Temple of Love
|
Neso wrote: Yes, I have gathered that you think it be a bad idea. What is a bit disheartening is that nobody is really elaborating on why it is a bad idea. I think one issue is that it took money from people who were not directly involved in the transaction. My own idea (suggested in several previous threads on this topic) was to tax players a percentage of their cash but also to give them a stipend based on their level, such that they would eventually (if they neither spent nor made money) reach an equilibrium (which I think was ~500K for a max level) after 6-12 RL months. Grinders would always have more money, naturally, but it would slowly drain away (intended to reflect the more lavish lifestyle that, in general, comes with having more cash). Assessments would be made each time you logged in on the assumption that characters who are actively participating in the world are both spending and making more than those who are simply sitting at home doing nothing. My PCs have no income and my only major expense is a million gp every 6 RL months to have Mikey advertise the Temple of Love (which then goes out of the economy). I'm tempted to demonstrate my approval of a tax or cap system by simply giving up most of my cash as a gesture - but I haven't quite reached that point.  I'd rather see everybody agree on modifications to the system. Which will never happen. _________________  ~Sharess on AmiaWiki~Priestess, politician, prostitute "[They] were moving in on me like Sharessans on a new broad in the bath house" - Tracer BoltAmiaWiki mod (mostly inactive)
|
|
|
|
|
|
ainjyll
|
Posted: Sun, Apr 25 2010, 14:51 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 14 Jun 2006
Location: wilmington, nc
|
|
After some reflection on the subject, I've noticed a small problem with charging casters money for spells... it may cut into what they make solo'ing, but... the cost will be offset with what they charge to buff their party. "You want the full suite of awesome mage buffs? That'll be 9,000 gold, please." or "Oh, you guys want me to keep my Extended Mass Haste up? Someone pony up 1,000 gold per casting, please."
I also agree that it would be kinda unfair to make casters run back and forth all the time and not give them a teleportation spell. Then you're making them pay for the reagent bags and increase the amount of portals needed, thus increasing mythal consumption which can get pretty pricey, too.
I like Mosh's breakdown of the bags, but I still think that they should just open a convo and let you pay at the spot instead of having to port back to town. Even if the bag only does it a few times and then you have to buy another. Just something to keep the caster from having to port back to town every hour to resupply, which would really suck if the "Return to where you ported from" option is ever removed.
_________________ "I once took the high road and it took me straight to hell and I stood there all by myself." -Hank III
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selmak
|
Posted: Sun, Apr 25 2010, 15:23 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 17 Dec 2004
|
If you can simply pop open a conversation and pay up without porting back, it's basically the same thing as charging GP at casting with a minor twist. Having a whole hour's supply of components (or more) is such a convenience that it's silly. "Oh yes, we'll stay in the exact same area and farm monsters back and forward for an hour and not run back to the crystal bind point or even a nearby settlement, because that would be too inconvenient." Seriously. MoshingChris wrote: A level 4 spell consumes one component
Component bags can be replaced by purchasing from magic shops such as Hil'rash etc
10 components cost 1000 gold
90 components cost 9000 gold
So one level four spell named Haste, according to that, would cost a measly 100 gold, or 90 if you go for the bulk deal. If a caster does decide to pass on the cost, it won't be some huge hardship for the party.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Neso
|
Posted: Sun, Apr 25 2010, 18:35 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 03 Mar 2007
|
|
There will never be a consensus here. It seems nobody actually wants to do anything about the inflation, and it seems that some people only have the choice of soloing and do not want anything done about it, so there goes fixing the gap between soloers and those who party.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yossarin
|
Posted: Sun, Apr 25 2010, 18:43 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 23 Jan 2006
|
|
Congratulations. It only took you three pages to figure out what I knew before this thread ever began.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mobile_Svensk
|
Posted: Sun, Apr 25 2010, 18:48 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 21 Jul 2005
Location: Awarded most Confused Git of 2014!
|
|
Yep. Im against the idea to change the Gold system. It's ...To much risk of it getting messier... And we don't want an arelith system here, where you have to drink and eat and blabla
_________________
Amia Minecraft Server Ip: vps1602.directvps.nl
NWN Damage Calculator: http://www.afterlifeguild.org/Thott/dnd/
NWN Build Calculator: http://nwvault.ign.com/View.php?view=Other.Detail&id=856
|
|
|
|
|
|
TormakSaber
|
Posted: Sun, Apr 25 2010, 22:51 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 16 Dec 2004
Location: Somewhere
|
Neso wrote: There will never be a consensus here. It seems nobody actually wants to do anything about the inflation, and it seems that some people only have the choice of soloing and do not want anything done about it, so there goes fixing the gap between soloers and those who party. Correction: A few people want to but he vast majority enjoys their economic control and will never consent to change. Other than that, Yossarin is right.
_________________
Davion Telemos - Monk of the Four Winds
Korthan Isharnos - Dragon Shaman of Thunder Spirit Zamasham
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selmak
|
Posted: Sun, Apr 25 2010, 22:59 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 17 Dec 2004
|
You know, economic control is all very well when there's a healthy economy to control. When it starts dying from the inside out, be sure and let us know if you want to give it chemo or radiotherapy. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grymia
|
Posted: Sun, Apr 25 2010, 23:00 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 14 Dec 2004
Location: Kohlingen, and a Basement in Canada
|
|
Sad part is, in all technicality we have a compelling reason TO try to stimulate some sort of change, quite IC at that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logicality
|
Posted: Sun, Apr 25 2010, 23:13 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 23 Apr 2008
Location: The Otherworld
|
|
Make gold have weight? Maybe something like one pound for every five thousand gold. 5000 gold is easy to carry... 5 million is not. Doesn't clear the problem, but makes it hard to carry a lot of gold.
Just a suggestion, take it as you will.
_________________
"A somebody was once a nobody who wanted to and did." - Anonymous
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mobile_Svensk
|
Posted: Sun, Apr 25 2010, 23:15 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 21 Jul 2005
Location: Awarded most Confused Git of 2014!
|
|
Gold -has- Weight
_________________
Amia Minecraft Server Ip: vps1602.directvps.nl
NWN Damage Calculator: http://www.afterlifeguild.org/Thott/dnd/
NWN Build Calculator: http://nwvault.ign.com/View.php?view=Other.Detail&id=856
|
|
|
|
|
Who is online |
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 guests |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Login
