From quinn@fazigu.org Sun Dec 12 13:58:35 2004 Return-path: Envelope-to: quinn@localhost Delivery-date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 13:58:35 -0500 Received: from localhost.netsville.com ([127.0.0.1] helo=localhost ident=quinn) by work.fazigu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CdYvT-0005Je-KF for quinn@localhost; Sun, 12 Dec 2004 13:58:35 -0500 X-Original-To: quinn@netsville.com Delivered-To: quinn@netsville.com Received: from requiem [127.0.0.1] by localhost with POP3 (fetchmail-6.2.5) for quinn@localhost (single-drop); Sun, 12 Dec 2004 13:58:35 -0500 (EST) Received: from psmtp.com (exprod5mx115.postini.com [64.18.0.87]) by corpmail.netsville.com (Postfix) with SMTP id E6FA64BA3B for ; Sun, 12 Dec 2004 13:58:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from source ([216.110.12.54]) (using TLSv1) by exprod5mx115.postini.com ([64.18.4.10]) with SMTP; Sun, 12 Dec 2004 10:58:19 PST Received: from moo.ghostmoo.org (yami.57thstreet.com [216.110.12.54]) by yami.57thstreet.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with SMTP id iBCIwHeO021093 for ; Sun, 12 Dec 2004 18:58:17 GMT (envelope-from quinn@fazigu.org) Message-Id: <200412121858.iBCIwHeO021093@yami.57thstreet.com> Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 12:58:17 -0400 From: "Quinn@Ghostwheel" To: quinn@netsville.com Subject: Ghostwheel Message(s) 2128 - 2208 from *ideas (#504) X-Mail-Agent: Ghostwheel (moo.ghostmoo.org 6969) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.1 (2004-10-22) on work.fazigu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50 autolearn=ham version=3.0.1 Status: RO Content-Length: 48142 Lines: 1458 Message 2128 from *ideas (#504): Date: Wed Oct 13 19:54:04 2004 CDT From: Owen (#15637) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: Same old Can, New worms There's been a lot of debate about rerolling or scaling or leveling or even totally zeroing out every stat on the MOO, and here I am starting another one. You'd think I would know better, but I think this is important enough that we should find a solution that everyone can live with and then implement it--the sooner the better. It's no secret that this MOO has been running on almost no player base for the past year, and that even before that the top complaint of folks who were leaving or retiring or giving up in disgust was the massive statistical gap between the haves and the have-nots. Old players left and new players gave up and went in search of greener pastures because even a little investigation made clear that no amount of boosting or sparring could ever let them catch up to the top two percent of statted players. So here's my proposal: Let's implement a scaled rerolling of skills, taking every skill down to a range between 0 and 1000. The way I think it would work goes something like this: - Take each skill and divide the highest score on the MOO into 1000. This gives a multiplier to work with. - Apply this multiplier to every player on the MOO with a score greater than 99. For example, take the Medic skill. According to today's census, the highest Medic skill out there is 1202. Divide that into 1000 and you get .832. Multiply everyone's Medic by .832 (excluding those with a score under 100) and round to the whole number. The exceptions to this system should, I think, be Armed, Unarmed, Shock, and Dodge. For those four stats the gap between the top few scores and the rest of the scores is so large that even scaling wouldn't close it. In one case, the gap between the #1 and #6 places on the top-ten list is over 3000 points. So for those four skills I think the reroll should skip the top five numbers on the list and find the multiplier based on the sixth-highest score, just assigning a flat 1000 to each of the 'ignored' players. And that's basically the plan. The big advantage here is that everyone's ranking stays more or less the same. The folks who are the best Medics are still the best Medics, same with the folks who are the best Hackers, Tinkers, swordsmen, and so on. All that changes is that the playing field gets leveled a bit. Those folks who maybe don't have great stats but who are tired of feeling like they can't step out of their tents without being threatened by some statmonkey with a sword now have at least a chance of standing up to said statmonkey, or even catching up and kicking some statmonkey arse. This plan doesn't prevent people boosting their skills back up above 1000, but with the changes to the Potential system and the limitations on hunting caused by having the slisssh-hole into the Wastes closed, I don't think that things will get so out of control again. People will still be effective enough to hunt and explore the more dangerous areas of the MOO, but nobody will be so incredibly badass that they can never be taken down. If we want to limit growth past 1000 even further (and if it's feasible to code things this way), maybe the boost interval system can be changed so that, for example, the amount of time between boosts is more strongly determined by one's ranking--like, the player who has the top Bladed on the MOO can only boost Bladed once every four days, whereas the player with the tenth-highest Bladed can boost once every two days, something along those lines. So there's my proposal. Apologies for the length of this post, but I wanted to lay things out as clearly as I could manage. So, uh, what do you think? Owen. -------------------------- Message 2129 from *ideas (#504): Date: Wed Oct 13 22:20:29 2004 CDT From: Devon (#23970) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: Another part of the problem. The way people's stats rose so rediculous was abuse in the potential system. Potential should only work on skills upto average, afterwords tough luck. On a side note, potential for RP was abused to all hell, people fake posing, whispering to themselves with scripts, it's a load of crap so get rid of the system entirely, I hate to say that but if people can't actual justify their roleplay, then they shouldn't be rewarded for being a bunch of idiots. >_< -------------------------- Message 2130 from *ideas (#504): Date: Wed Oct 13 22:22:57 2004 CDT From: Devon (#23970) To: *ideas (#504) Nevermind, I was just told you only earn 5 potential per day max. Yay. -------------------------- Message 2131 from *ideas (#504): Date: Wed Oct 13 23:30:39 2004 CDT From: Yak (#20718) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: Word I'm all for it. But that's an easy thing to say when your stats are average at best. For characters such as myself this would be a huge equalizer. What is important is to get feedback from the superstat machines out there. So anyone and everyone should drop their two cents in on the possibility. Even if the best idea in the world has been put on the table, nothing is going to happen unless we at least show interest. Let's hear some 'Yay' and 'Nay' going on. As for my part, this is pure peruvian 'Yay'. Yak -------------------------- Message 2132 from *ideas (#504): Date: Wed Oct 13 23:35:01 2004 CDT From: Mirg (#11887) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: Leveling I'll suffer hugely, but what the hell maybe it'll spur some new life around here, more prey is a good thing right? M -------------------------- Message 2133 from *ideas (#504): Date: Thu Oct 14 00:06:26 2004 CDT From: Matt (#24497) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: yay As much as I enjoy my shitty stats I'd have to say that I enjoy agreeing with Mirg and Owen even more. And since there's a lively debate (you all know how much I enjoy a well organized conversation about MOO ethics) I have no choice but to give my plump and gorgeous approval of the proposed stat level. Matt. -------------------------- Message 2134 from *ideas (#504): Date: Thu Oct 14 00:30:54 2004 CDT From: Scorch (#16959) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: votey well I dunno of course I say yes. Its a good Idea. Go go stat revision.. Thats not JUST because I have shitty stats -------------------------- Message 2135 from *ideas (#504): Date: Thu Oct 14 00:36:08 2004 CDT From: Darkpaw (#24594) To: *ideas (#504) Go for it. No one will ever be as rich as I am, so it doesn't matter. -------------------------- Message 2136 from *ideas (#504): Date: Thu Oct 14 14:31:42 2004 CDT From: Vertemis (#23360) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: Stats Would this plan also include leveling of beasties the same way? Some people are quite content at their current levels because they correspond with the amount of time and effort they want to put into the game. Not being able to hunt would suck. Sparring up skills to the levels you had them at in order to hunt again sucks even more. -------------------------- Message 2137 from *ideas (#504): Date: Thu Oct 14 16:42:32 2004 CDT From: Owen (#15637) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: Slisssh go down the Hole Whether the beasties get leveled is ultimately up to Quinn. When I was conceiving this plan I didn't figure on changing the MOBs because this idea allows for accelerated progress for those who have low or mid-level stats and so any ground lost could be recovered quickly. By my best figuring, someone who can take on six or seven slisssh at a time now will end up able to take on about four or five at a time after the leveling. Yes, it's a drop but it's not astronomical. To be honest, the leveling plan was based around the idea of narrowing the range of stats for PvP combat and doing so with the minimum programming effort necessary. I know there are people out there who prefer hunting to sparring, boosting, or beating up on their friends and neighbors. Those people will take a hit with this leveling, but hopefully that hit will be mitigated by the fact that everyone else will as well. If the other hunters can't take on 25 slisssh at a time, that leaves more slisssh available and so on. Owen. -------------------------- Message 2138 from *ideas (#504): Date: Fri Oct 15 00:37:17 2004 CDT From: Dante (#10660) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: I still think. The higher you get overtime, the harder it should be to level, not just to wait a period of time, but also lets say a raw pure swordsman vs an allrounded character. It's foolish to me that the imbalance of the clawed, whip wielding, blunt, trident, brawl, swordsman is overall stronger then a pure swordsman. Any chance we can slow progression somehow? -------------------------- Message 2139 from *ideas (#504): Date: Fri Oct 15 00:46:09 2004 CDT From: Owen (#15637) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: Re: I still think. I *think* what you're talking about here is the fact that Armed contributes to the final stat bonus for a skill, and thus that putting points into Armed effects all weapon skills (Bladed, Blunt, Whip, Spear, etc.) and thus can be a more effective place to put points than the skill itself. If that's what you mean, I want to tentatively point out that now that nobody can expect 40 to 100 points of potential a day, the only really effective way to raise Armed is to boost it by hunting or sparring, and Armed is (I believe) one of the slower-boosting skills. Armed is one of the skills that I'm hoping will be leveled based on the sixth-highest score rather than the 'true' highest, and thus the huge advantage that some people--including me--got by slamming ridiculous numbers of points into Armed will be neutralized. If that's not what you were referring to, Dante, apologies for the pedantry. Owen. -------------------------- Message 2140 from *ideas (#504): Date: Fri Oct 15 01:09:20 2004 CDT From: Vertemis (#23360) To: *ideas (#504) I believe what he's concerned about, is that a bladed, clawed, blunt, whip guy, who spends time ICly studying all those skills, is better at swordplay than a character who ICly spends all day just focusing singly on swords. -------------------------- Message 2141 from *ideas (#504): Date: Fri Oct 15 01:11:48 2004 CDT From: Dante (#10660) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: Yeah. Why don't we just get rid of melee? or just make it melee-armed. -------------------------- Message 2142 from *ideas (#504): Date: Fri Oct 15 01:13:59 2004 CDT From: Dante (#10660) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: Oh. And switch the importance, currently higher 'armed' in a skill effects bladed more then if bladed were higher. Make it so that the third tier skills give the largest bonus, and the higher up ones effect them less. -------------------------- Message 2143 from *ideas (#504): Date: Fri Oct 15 01:33:44 2004 CDT From: Dante (#10660) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: Example. [Public] A 1000 armed, 20 bladed person has a 333 bonus. A 200 armed, 500 bladed person has 334. In a sword fight, it's a dead heat. So, if we half the importance of armed, and double the importance of the third tier skills, it would be much better for people who want to focus. -------------------------- Message 2144 from *ideas (#504): Date: Fri Oct 15 01:35:47 2004 CDT From: Owen (#15637) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: One foot in front of the other While I'm totally behind finding more ways to improve the quality of life/gameplay around here, I'm trying really hard to push this leveling through as is for a couple of reasons. First, because it addresses the single biggest complaint people seem to have: the huge inequity between the top dozen or so players and the rest of the MOO. Second, because it requires a dead minimum of coding time and effort from Quinn. We all know he's a busy guy and doesn't necessarily have hundreds of hours to dedicate to tweaking code here. Third, and maybe most important, just because it's a step. One step toward evening out this place and making it fun for everyone. I'm not claiming this leveling is the universal panacea. I'm not claiming that this is going to fix everything or even most things. I'm just hoping that it will be one step in the right direction so that we can address the other problems from a better perspective. If we can get this done, we can move on to the next thing, and then the next, and then the next. If we try to fix everything at once we'll get so overwhelmed that nothing will ever get done. I'm not trying to discourage people from plopping ideas on the table (or on this *list). Ideas are good, we need them, because the leveling *isn't* a cure-all. I am, however, asking whether you guys are willing to come down firmly in favor of this one step before we try to implement the next? Owen. -------------------------- Message 2145 from *ideas (#504): Date: Fri Oct 15 02:41:44 2004 CDT From: Camber (#22034) To: *ideas (#504) Since I haven't heard a 'no' yet, I'll supply it. But, seeing as I haven't RPed for more than 10 minutes in the past 3 years, what I have to say shouldn't matter. Oh, and to supply some semantic context to the pedantery, 'Yay' for 'Yea' is 'Gea' ...err, Gay. Wait. Ghey? -------------------------- Message 2146 from *ideas (#504): Date: Fri Oct 15 03:17:02 2004 CDT From: DragonBabe (#5288) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: Re-Rolling/Stat changes/et al I have been for a major reroll/change in the stats system for a very long time. The system Owen brought up sounded good, but incomplete, IMHO. Dante brought up the need for a change in how the stats affect one another in the 'Tree'. This is badly needed. Someone that wishes to be a great swordsman, may never have seen or touched a whip or claws. Possibly it is against her/is ethos or religion or whatever. But someone that spends their time and energies developing ONE skill exclusively would and should be stronger in its use than someone that has used a multitude of different weapons. The Melee Tree with Armed ~should~ be rethought. The weapon of choice should be the strength. Owen also mentioned putting a Cap on stats. I think a permanant cap should be put on them all. Maybe 1000, or 999 would actually be better (Quinn make it so a chars stats stop boosting completely once they hit 999 in a skill). Change the Boosting methods. Maybe in chargen player should have to pick a specific weapon of choice. Say they are given three slots for weapons, they can use them for three different weapons, or put two into one weapon with the second weapon being less, or put all your skill/slots into one weapon. As the character develops, let them use character points to add weapons just as they can use their CP for new skills, but make it costly, either in CPs or in how fast they can boost in the new AND old weapon(s). Or both. Anyway, those are some of my thoughts... DB -------------------------- Message 2147 from *ideas (#504): Date: Fri Oct 15 03:17:55 2004 CDT From: Heretic (#6143) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: caps no H -------------------------- Message 2148 from *ideas (#504): Date: Fri Oct 15 03:18:42 2004 CDT From: DragonBabe (#5288) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: Another thought Get rid of the 'Boost-O-Matic' or whatever it is called. It is SO OOC.. *slinks away* -------------------------- Message 2149 from *ideas (#504): Date: Fri Oct 15 03:20:26 2004 CDT From: Heretic (#6143) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: Boostometer Thank you for your valued opinion. H -------------------------- Message 2150 from *ideas (#504): Date: Sat Oct 16 21:52:35 2004 CDT From: Red_Fang (#5907) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: re: $ Personally.. I'd say we all dressed the same and all had the same stats and all went to the same church and drove the same cars and voted republican and all those other people stayed in the background where they belonged. All the old players should go into history and legend where they belong as a story to be told at bedtime and nothing more. Then everyone could begin new with fresh ideas and fresh stories. Then we'll all be the same and we can comment how much more the same we are than the other guy. It will be a blast. Oh wait. I thought I was someone else there for a bit. Sounds like a good idea Owen. Just wake me when it is all done. Red. Bet you thought that was stupid huh? Just being fangish. Have fun. -------------------------- Message 2151 from *ideas (#504): Date: Mon Oct 18 12:58:26 2004 CDT From: Quinn (#2) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: new stats I just added @newstats as a command for everyone. It will show your raw/cur rank in a skill on the left, then to the right of the => it will show what your rank and bonus would be under the new system. I never intended any stat to go over 100. If a creature exceeds 100 in an attribute, he is no longer entirely human. Over 100 in a skill is more possible, but the restrictions were meant to make it very difficult to get very much above that "soft cap." Obviously, the restrictions did not work well in the beginning, and a lack of resetting or leveling the field contributed to that. Check out @newstats to see what your stats would be. I added much of the code, sheesh, maybe over a year ago now, and then slipped into one of my periodic hibernations. The "cap" is much lower than what Owen proposes, but that doesn't really matter in that it's all relative anyway. I'd like to keep a "1-100" range for everything, to make it easier for someone to gauge the strength of an NPC, which should always have each stat carefully set. -------------------------- Message 2152 from *ideas (#504): Date: Mon Oct 18 13:00:29 2004 CDT From: Quinn (#2) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: boostomer, sparring dummies I agree with Dragonbabe about the boostometer. At the time, I was asked and let it go public. It could be rationalized. However, its nature is to help with boosting, and that's not the kind of atmosphere we want. Likewise, sparring dummies are evil. Every swing in combat should afford some chance of harm. I would not mind a "teaching" skill which would allow creatures to teach each other, but not simple sword fodder and macro-sparring. -------------------------- Message 2153 from *ideas (#504): Date: Mon Oct 18 13:03:33 2004 CDT From: Quinn (#2) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: the nitty gritty Here are the relevant verbs for the resetting. In a nutshell, the highest new rank is 120% of the current highest player rank. The skill bonus code is rewritten to give higher weight to leaf skills, lower to parent branches and trunks. @verb $skill:"_calculate_reset_rank_for" this none this "RXD" $gamemaster @prog $skill:_calculate_reset_rank_for {pc} = args; {lastcompiled, lowest, average, highest} = this.census; newcap = 150.0; curr = this:raw_rank_for(pc); "the reference rank is ~% over the real highest rank"; adjhighest = tofloat(highest) * 1.2; newrank = tofloat(curr) / tofloat(adjhighest) * tofloat(newcap); return min(toint(newrank) || (curr && 1), curr); . @verb $skill:"new_total_skill_bonus_for" this none this "RXD" $gamemaster @prog $skill:new_total_skill_bonus_for ":total_skill_bonus_for(who)"; "Total skill bonus for the given character, averaging in bonuses of all inherited skills."; {who} = args; currentrank = this:_calculate_reset_rank_for(who); base = this:skill_bonus_for(who, currentrank); "average all parent totals, add this one"; count = total = 0; papa = this; divisor = 2; while (valid(papa = parent(papa)) && papa != $skill) parentrank = papa:_calculate_reset_rank_for(who); parentbonus = papa:skill_bonus_for(who, parentrank); parentbonus = parentbonus / divisor; total = total + parentbonus; count = count + 1; divisor = divisor * 2; endwhile if (count) base = (base + total) / count; endif if (!currentrank) base = base - toint(tofloat(base) * (tofloat(this:unskilled()) / -100.0)); endif return base; . -------------------------- Message 2154 from *ideas (#504): Date: Mon Oct 18 19:08:34 2004 CDT From: FoxFire (#22153) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: @newstats OH MY GOD!! I know everyone would be realitive in regards yo to skills under this new stats syste, but man, would my stats suck major @$$! Especially my shock, my goodness!! By all means, please proceesd. But I swear, I would be a walking target in regards to shock . . . (grumbles(00 ) 8*) Foxfire -------------------------- Message 2155 from *ideas (#504): Date: Mon Oct 18 19:10:15 2004 CDT From: Mirg (#11887) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: Ack, gag, gag, hairball...help.. Can't say I like what it does to me either, Owen's plan sounds like more fun, but do as you will. M -------------------------- Message 2156 from *ideas (#504): Date: Tue Oct 19 00:58:46 2004 CDT From: Yak (#20718) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: boostometer issue Why don't we make it so that boostometers only work until the skill has reached the moo average? That way the only people who will really be using them are newbies who would benefit from a sort of guide as they try to learn the boosting system. Now I know what you're thinking - it would be a waste because when you're below average the boost intervals are fixed, and very short. But I think it would help them none-the-less simply to see how it works, and would help newbies reach average quicker. Just a suggestion, as it may help people meet somewhere in the middle on this issue. - Yak -------------------------- Message 2157 from *ideas (#504): Date: Tue Oct 19 12:48:39 2004 CDT From: Dante (#10660) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: I like it Quinn. Lets do it. But I think we may need to edit the actual bonuses that effect the single stats like dodge, shock, focus, and so on since they'd be effected more dramatically. -------------------------- Message 2158 from *ideas (#504): Date: Tue Oct 19 12:57:16 2004 CDT From: Dante (#10660) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: Another thing. I think we need to make it mainly harder to die, so that combat isn't over in practically a few seconds. In addition to making 'fleeing' not automatic, but based on agility or something so to prevent everyone from running away so easily. Thoughts? -------------------------- Message 2159 from *ideas (#504): Date: Tue Oct 19 14:44:34 2004 CDT From: FoxFire (#22153) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: I thought it would never EVER happen.. . . To tell you the truth, I think Dante has a pretty damn good idea. Thought I'd never see the s day that I'd agree with him. :) I bet you're eating that comment up, aint ya, Dante. :) Happy trails. FoxFire. -------------------------- Message 2160 from *ideas (#504): Date: Tue Oct 19 14:45:44 2004 CDT From: FoxFire (#22153) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: New stats Oh, by the way, when do these new stats take effect? -------------------------- Message 2161 from *ideas (#504): Date: Tue Oct 19 18:43:41 2004 CDT From: Owen (#15637) To: *ideas (#504) For whatever it's worth (not much) I'm for Quinn's reroll plan over mine, or any other reroll plan that treats folks relatively fairly. Anything to level the playing field. Also for what it's worth, I'm for Yak's idea of letting newbies have boostometers and then having them become useless once the skill hits average. Don't get me wrong, it won't stop people from using scripts and triggers to spar--nothing in this universe will stop people from using scripts and triggers to spar. If you take away the training dummies, they'll use abandoned mechs, or kidnapped MOBs and $ahabs, or what have you. But I can see the point of taking the boostometers away from those of us who no longer need every possible little bit of help to toughen up. Owen. -------------------------- Message 2163 from *ideas (#504): Date: Tue Oct 19 18:47:42 2004 CDT From: Owen (#15637) To: *ideas (#504) Quick clarification. I don't actually want to give up my boostometer. I LIKE my boostometer and I want to keep it. But if they're going to be taken away anyway, I say turn them into a newbie-only tool because they're a great way for new people to figure out the fighting/boosting/sparring system here and can remove some of the fairly substantial potential for frustration from your first few weeks and months here. Owen. -------------------------- Message 2164 from *ideas (#504): Date: Wed Oct 20 01:17:29 2004 CDT From: Augustus (#18463) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: re: $ Oh, and I think female players should have at least 20% less strength and all then the male players :) Girls are getting to hard to kidnap around here! Red made me post that.. I don't think that way at all.. Honestly.. -------------------------- Message 2165 from *ideas (#504): Date: Wed Oct 20 11:07:28 2004 CDT From: Quinn (#2) To: *ideas (#504) Males get strength, females get endurance? :) -------------------------- Message 2166 from *ideas (#504): Date: Wed Oct 20 19:41:25 2004 CDT From: Augustus (#18463) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: re: $ Yeah, that sounds about right.. Though I know the ladies sure wish their men had some endurance. Oh well.. I reckon it is a fair trade off. -------------------------- Message 2167 from *ideas (#504): Date: Wed Oct 20 19:52:28 2004 CDT From: Rill (#37114) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: Battle of the Sexes Let's be realistic, here. Men can have all the Strength and even Endurance they like. So long as the women still have the Willpower, it doesn't matter. Rill -------------------------- Message 2168 from *ideas (#504): Date: Wed Oct 20 20:15:32 2004 CDT From: Alux (#37188) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: Re:Rill Touche. -------------------------- Message 2169 from *ideas (#504): Date: Wed Oct 20 23:00:39 2004 CDT From: Augustus (#18463) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: re: $ Except for shopping willpower. Can't have any of that and be a true woman. -------------------------- Message 2170 from *ideas (#504): Date: Thu Oct 21 02:21:00 2004 CDT From: Mirg (#11887) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: locks once you level make them easier to pick, I mean the ones on containers, as it is now I think I'm the only one who's ever picked one. M -------------------------- Message 2171 from *ideas (#504): Date: Thu Oct 21 14:17:32 2004 CDT From: Vertemis (#23360) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: Relative vs. Absolute stats While alot of stats are relative, many are absolute, like shock and dodge, as mentioned earlier, and medic. I agree with Ed in that the bonuses for such skill sneed to be drastically increased, otherwise it's not a leveling, but a nerfing. I've recently sparred and hunted with players who currently have shock/dodge/medic under 50 and it's a slaughter and not because the enemy is so much stronger, but because one hit knocks them out, one hit is extremely easy to land, and if weapon damages stay the same, healing is out of the question. -------------------------- Message 2172 from *ideas (#504): Date: Thu Oct 21 22:04:00 2004 CDT From: Mirg (#11887) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: Leveling Go on and do it, enough of this pull the band-aid off slowly thing. M -------------------------- Message 2173 from *ideas (#504): Date: Sat Oct 23 02:22:34 2004 CDT From: Augustus (#18463) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: reset I'd suggest during the reset all crystal piles are reset to to keep horded piles from being an advantage to people getting stats back up to ungodly or godly levels. A clean slate is what is needed. Gus -------------------------- Message 2174 from *ideas (#504): Date: Sat Oct 23 02:55:20 2004 CDT From: Darkpaw (#24594) To: *ideas (#504) I suggest Gus shove it. -------------------------- Message 2175 from *ideas (#504): Date: Sat Oct 23 03:41:21 2004 CDT From: Heretic (#6143) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: Crystals are only used to improve attributes, we aren't changing those. H -------------------------- Message 2177 from *ideas (#504): Date: Sat Oct 23 06:08:11 2004 CDT From: DragonBabe (#5288) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: Stat Change Only?? I sincerely hope that the change for stats that Quinn posted about are not for skills only and that the attributes are also to be downsized with a firm Cap initiated. If ATTS stay as they are at this time, with atts OVER the 100 mark, then there would be no great change made. Those players with the ungodly atts will remain, thus not fairly leveling the Moo. If you lower the skills and put them under a system that also has a solid CAP, then the ATTS need to also be lowered and put under a hard cap. Fix it that a player is not able to gain a skill over 999 (or three digits) and the highest ATT possible is 99 (or 2 digit). If the caps are hard and the change is made in the code for limited 'place-setters' the playing field shouldn't get so out of balance as it is now. DB -------------------------- Message 2178 from *ideas (#504): Date: Sat Oct 23 06:17:08 2004 CDT From: Owen (#15637) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: Attribute Caps It's my understanding that if you boost any attribute over 100 and then die, any and all attributes with a score greater than 100 will drop to 100. That's been my experience, anyway. If that's indeed the case, it really puts its own cap on attributes, especially with all the skills dropping down so drastically. No one will be 'immune' to death, no one will be so tough that a lucky hit from a slisssh (or another player) couldn't easily kill them. When you further take into account that attributes can't be boosted above 95 with potential (or by boosting, those few that can be boosted in-game), and that a player has to get those elusive final five points in each attribute by eating obscene amounts of crystals, and that the number of crystals you have to eat to go ABOVE 100 is even more obscene I doubt that attributes are going to get out of control and unbalancing. Someone might manage to eat 100,000 crystals and get a couple of attributes over 100, but a lucky hit from a slisssh or an enemy will knock them right back down to 100 and that's 100K crystals they'll never see again. Owen. -------------------------- Message 2179 from *ideas (#504): Date: Sat Oct 23 21:02:09 2004 CDT From: Augustus (#18463) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: re: $ I am just assuming since a leveling and reset would be making a more even playing field that all aspects of a coded character would be evened out. -------------------------- Message 2180 from *ideas (#504): Date: Sun Oct 24 04:56:41 2004 CDT From: DragonBabe (#5288) To: *ideas (#504) Re: $ few The point is to have a level playing field for all players and a way to make things more balanced other than their dying to bring their ATTS down to 100. As things are now, in ATTS also, the playing field is drastically tilted toward a few. Leveling would make things more even, giving newer players a better chance and helping them not to feel as if they are never going to have a chance here.. If leveling and reset occur (PLEASE, Quinnie?!) then ATTS as well as Skills should be changed. As Quinn said, being human is the name of the game, not ungodly characters, and that even an ATT at 100 or more is going over the 'human' range. And there ~are~ players out there that DO eat gargantuan amounts of crystals to push their Attributes way over the top. And dying doesn't really bother them because they can and will eat more crystals to make themselves 'unhuman' in one or more Atts. Dropping ATTS and Skills and setting a hard Cap on Skills and Attributes is the only logical and fair way to reset. And a reset is badly needed here. I truely believe that doing the reset would be the best thing to happen here in a while and I would look forward to some of our old players returning, and with new players to join us, Ghost can be revitalized. DB -------------------------- Message 2181 from *ideas (#504): Date: Sun Oct 24 06:19:30 2004 CDT From: Heretic (#6143) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: atts TOP 10 for: strength ==================== 1. Winter (#8571) [110] 2. Avarice (#19315) [108] 3. Seraph (#16551) [106] 4. Lamia (#3623) [106] 5. Yeullan (#19204) [102] 6. Ynaoise (#11886) [102] 7. Zephyrus (#9887) [102] 8. Skeeter (#4961) [102] 9. Rathe (#14172) [101] 10. Slayer (#9883) [101] TOP 10 for: quickness ===================== 1. Avarice (#19315) [109] 2. Moonheart (#20495) [107] 3. Seraph (#16551) [104] 4. Rathe (#14172) [102] 5. Slayer (#9883) [102] 6. Skywalker (#6644) [102] 7. Yeullan (#19204) [101] 8. Zephyrus (#9887) [101] 9. Naxos (#9972) [100] 10. Red_Fang (#5907) [100] TOP 10 for: endurance ===================== 1. Moonheart (#20495) [168] 2. Avarice (#19315) [108] 3. Seraph (#16551) [105] 4. Lamia (#3623) [105] 5. Yeullan (#19204) [103] 6. Ceri (#24980) [102] 7. Khyber (#12460) [102] 8. Slayer (#9883) [101] 9. Axelle (#9124) [101] 10. Coreen (#18717) [100] Ok granted Moonheart is out of whack, his endurance came from a spell that was latter removed from play before I was a GM. But other then that I don't see what the problem is. H -------------------------- Message 2182 from *ideas (#504): Date: Sun Oct 24 09:52:38 2004 CDT From: Augustus (#18463) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: re: Atts Honestly if you look at the Att's of the top 35 which would show only 6 active Characters with att's over 100 with it being 4 actual players at least in the strength catagory. If you consider the same with stats or atts there is no problem leaving things as they are. But if you want a true leveling it should be across the board and not leave any player who is active or inactive sitting with mega stats or atts. -------------------------- Message 2183 from *ideas (#504): Date: Sun Oct 24 10:33:15 2004 CDT From: Sparhawk (#2572) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: re: Lamia She hasn't played here in probably 7 years or more. So the list could even be refined further. -------------------------- Message 2184 from *ideas (#504): Date: Sun Oct 24 14:15:48 2004 CDT From: Vertemis (#23360) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: Atts A leveling of atts is an even bigger slap in the face to anyone who has put a decent amount of work into the game, especially considering the natural cap of 100 due to death and the obscene amount of crystals it's taken people to get to those levels. Now add in the fact that everyone's skills will be nerfed, making hunting even more difficult and you have a game that's incredibly more tedious to play then it ever was. And secondly, what would an att leveling even mean? That could leave characters with medium to low atts at low to nil atts, which hurts new character's even more, as any att under like 50 starts bring in penalties to skills. -------------------------- Message 2185 from *ideas (#504): Date: Sun Oct 24 16:32:49 2004 CDT From: Bishamon (#23011) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: Stats and stuff Wow, Been out of circulation for awhile. Here goes. The problem with stats, as the general consensus is, is the bonus associated with the skills. Though, several years ago, measures were put in place so that a high bonus does not automatically gain victory. Someone with a +300 bonus vs. someone with a +400 bonus might be a 40%/60% victory either way, determined by weapon stats and other factors. There is no stat cap, and as such players can gain an unlimited number of total stats across all their abilities. While this makes every character unlimitedly versatile, it isn't really demonstrative of the fact that a person can spend a good chunk of their life perfecting one ability, while every other might be neglected to a degree. I am actually a huge fan of stat-caps, since this resolves the problem automatically, though it should be a stat-cap of TOTAL points in all abilities as opposed to individually capped stats. Alternatively, as I have seen in other games that use an uncapped point system in stats, we can offer SPECIALIZATION. With certain requirements in certain skills, players can become more proficient across the board in those specialized skills. I.e., a "warrior" type might be 130% proficient in all weapon skills but only 60% competent in mechanical skills and a mere 40% in focus for magic skills, while a "mage" type might be 130% skilled in blunt weapons and focus skills, and less in others. This, combined with a method of stat-planning ("forgetting" certain abilities so that others can be learned) would be far easier to balance across a player-base instead of having to deal with the mage character who wears armor and wields huge swords like a grizzled warrior. The mage/spellcasting system would need a complete re-vamp for the above idea to work, although, since magic is currently worked into the combat system as a poor replacement for a good broadsword or a shotgun. Offering $0.02, Bish. -------------------------- Message 2186 from *ideas (#504): Date: Mon Oct 25 17:21:09 2004 CDT From: Quinn (#2) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: major stat changes Stats have been "leveled." If it turns out my fine calculations have been in error, well, something more DRASTIC will happen! BWAHAHA..? The skill tree has been pruned and grafted, and two new attributes (Intellect and Charisma) have been added. I'm working on setting proper starting values for those right now. -------------------------- Message 2187 from *ideas (#504): Date: Mon Oct 25 20:14:42 2004 CDT From: Dante (#10660) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: Levelling problem. The people who pot whored and abused the system ended up with over a 30-50 point lead on the rest of us in intellect and charisma, to those of us with stats at 100 this makes raising those skills very difficult. Could an average of the non charisma/intellect stats be taken and set the other stats that high? Thats seems only fair given the current situation which would take about 300k crystals for a person like Rathe, Rynaldus, or Dante to get equal to someone like Rill. -------------------------- Message 2188 from *ideas (#504): Date: Mon Oct 25 20:19:00 2004 CDT From: Vertemis (#23360) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: The nerfing Consider Bish's idea of an over all skill point cap. Without it, then this nerfing was for nothing. All it did was slow down the problem. You've always said this game is for all types of players. Well you've been really heavy on the: player's who have gobs of time and who enjoy doing incredibly tedious work in a game-environment type of player lately. -------------------------- Message 2189 from *ideas (#504): Date: Mon Oct 25 21:10:49 2004 CDT From: Mirg (#11887) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: Leveling Just wanted to say thanks for putting in the time Quinn, We appreciate it. M -------------------------- Message 2190 from *ideas (#504): Date: Fri Oct 29 10:26:08 2004 CDT From: Dante (#10660) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: Boosting seems a bit too difficult to be honest. Perhaps you could make it a little easier? I think you mentioned it raised on 20% previously, how about making it 10% now instead? -------------------------- Message 2191 from *ideas (#504): Date: Fri Oct 29 16:09:50 2004 CDT From: Heretic (#6143) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: throwing daggers are still set to throwing, is that bad? H -------------------------- Message 2192 from *ideas (#504): Date: Fri Oct 29 16:31:17 2004 CDT From: Quinn (#2) To: *ideas (#504) Sorta bad. I think they should properly be using 'Tomahawk', named as such because I couldn't think of a good skill name for 'throwing knife' or 'weighted throwable'. -------------------------- Message 2193 from *ideas (#504): Date: Fri Oct 29 20:03:59 2004 CDT From: Shandryl (#24740) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: stats Are you still working are where the stats are gonna be reset, Quinn? Two night in a row I login and my stats are a few points lower in the skills than when I logged off. -------------------------- Message 2194 from *ideas (#504): Date: Sat Oct 30 15:18:27 2004 CDT From: Quinn (#2) To: *ideas (#504) I added in attribute penalties/bonuses to the display, so that could have been the reason for the numbers switching. -------------------------- Message 2195 from *ideas (#504): Date: Mon Nov 1 14:41:19 2004 CST From: Nny (#25135) To: *ideas (#504) Skill decay.. After a set period of a skill not being used, its value begins to drop. :) -------------------------- Message 2196 from *ideas (#504): Date: Mon Nov 1 15:17:51 2004 CST From: Quinn (#2) To: *ideas (#504) That's an awesome idea, Nny. Not sure how to do it, but it would be pretty cool. Might be able to overload the infrastructure for determining when a person last boosted... -------------------------- Message 2197 from *ideas (#504): Date: Mon Nov 1 15:27:28 2004 CST From: Heretic (#6143) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: please don't do that. H -------------------------- Message 2198 from *ideas (#504): Date: Mon Nov 1 15:59:38 2004 CST From: Quinn (#2) To: *ideas (#504) I think it'd be awesome, and really work towards keeping those entrenched in the top spots from idly perching. I'm not sure /how/ it would work, though. One way would be to temporarily reduce the skill based on the last time used, and keep it at that lower level until a single field improvement is made, boosting it back up to normal. Awful bookkeeping, though. -------------------------- Message 2199 from *ideas (#504): Date: Mon Nov 1 17:21:49 2004 CST From: FoxFire (#22153) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: skill deacy That skill decay sounds good and all, but would really suck considering how hard it is to boost now and when it comes to skills like archery and shooting , which heavily depends on how much ammo you have. So, that woud not be a good idea, at least not yet. FFMD -------------------------- Message 2200 from *ideas (#504): Date: Mon Nov 1 17:34:05 2004 CST From: Owen (#15637) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: Skill Decay I think it's a great idea, but needs a lot of thought before implementing. For example, does anyone out there currently know how to boost Climbing? Or Teach? Or even Tinker? I'm actually all for skills decaying if they're not used, but if that's put into play I think there has to be a way to use and/or boost every skill on the tree and for the information how they work to have had a little time to disseminate. I'm not saying there has to be a help file or anything explaining how to boost each skill. Part of the fun is figuring it out. But still, the information does get out there--one person figures it out, they tell their friends, their friends give or sell the information out to other folks, that's part of the organic economy of gossip and goods on the MOO. I think if the skill decay is going to be put in place, it should be done slowly and as naturally as possible. So much has changed in the last two weeks already, people are still reeling from that. Learning that their wildly decreased and newly difficult to boost skills are now going to start crumbling away from disuse has a strong possibility of alienating people, making them throw up their hands and give up on this place. I'd hate for that to happen right when things are starting to pick up around here. Owen. -------------------------- Message 2201 from *ideas (#504): Date: Tue Nov 2 02:30:53 2004 CST From: DragonBabe (#5288) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: Re: Skill Decay WOW! That would be sooo cool, Quinn! Great idea Nny! -------------------------- Message 2202 from *ideas (#504): Date: Tue Nov 2 02:37:05 2004 CST From: DragonBabe (#5288) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: Re: $ Actually, I don't think it will have that affect on players at all. Maybe just those players that have skills that are high, but seldom used. We already have a problem (Which should be fixed with Quinns new changes on the skill tree) with many players that have skills in things that would not ICly have, but do have cause they wanted to boost armed or melee or whatever. Anyway, I am hoping this will bring back some of the players from olde, those with all their RP skills that brought so much fun to so many of us. There are people I just plain miss! Anyway, great idea NNY! And Kudo's to Quinn. -------------------------- Message 2203 from *ideas (#504): Date: Tue Nov 2 02:40:19 2004 CST From: DragonBabe (#5288) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: Offensive?? Wouldn't Shock and Dodge be -Defensive- Quinn? Also, just looked at the new skill tree. Good question, Owen. How are we to gain in the skills of Teaching, swimming and acrobatics? Climbing, there are some climbing exits out there, so maybe that is covered? -------------------------- Message 2204 from *ideas (#504): Date: Tue Nov 2 17:03:50 2004 CST From: Dante (#10660) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: I like skill decay, however. I think it needs to only effect something like twice average. How does that sound? -------------------------- Message 2205 from *ideas (#504): Date: Sun Nov 7 10:13:23 2004 CST From: Quinn (#2) To: *ideas (#504) Oh, hell. You're right re:Offensive, Db. I don't know how the funk I missed that snit. -------------------------- Message 2206 from *ideas (#504): Date: Sun Nov 7 13:58:34 2004 CST From: Dante (#10660) To: *ideas (#504) It seems that the current average is out of whack due to so many low people, perhaps we should move the minimum upto 30 to be fair? The ratios are way out of proportion. -------------------------- Message 2207 from *ideas (#504): Date: Sun Nov 7 14:13:02 2004 CST From: Shandryl (#24740) To: Quinn (#2) and *ideas (#504) Subject: reroll I like the idea of the reroll and also of keeping the best at near 100. makes things easier to compare. but I am also noting that I can't seem to boost anything. Not claws, nor dodge, nor perception, even though I use them for like 1 hour to 2 a night. Also, with not being able to earn pot, endurance is getting so low I cant keep up with the worms in n'Orleans anymore! The only less than that is Jizo. I think we lose too many in the skills with each death, since it is near impossible to regain the lost ground. Soon, I will be below 0! :> Now, I know you dont ewant this to be hack and slash, and to encourage us to do more roleplay things got tougher, but I like to hunt when noone is here, and RP when they are. I think all the skills loss is too high for us that want to mindlessly gather crystal for the time when we can RP and perhaps buy enchanted items. For a mage to be useless in focus isnt helping anything. My focus was 1216 prior to the reroll. I have lost like 20 points in it since the reroll. How can I RP and teach and be respected with scores lower than the newbies? jUst my 2 cents. Carry on, let me know if there are other things we can ddo to bump up the skills we need to RP the way oyr character is portrayed. -------------------------- Message 2208 from *ideas (#504): Date: Thu Nov 11 15:24:28 2004 CST From: Heretic (#6143) To: *ideas (#504) Subject: Magic Someone needs more control over the Magic system. The release of new spells, and fixing bugs that happen with teaching. H --------------------------