Equipment limits need to be reworked

Archive of the Sojourn3 Ideas Forum.
Rivi
Sojourner
Posts: 50
Joined: Wed Jul 17, 2002 5:01 am

Equipment limits need to be reworked

Postby Rivi » Thu Sep 26, 2002 5:09 pm

Why was it decided to limit the amount of bonuses that could be found on items implemented that low?
For instance the max hit/dam roll on a weapon is like 2/2 for a one hander, or something along those lines. However the way I see this is that it's limiting the equipment variety. How many ways can you pair 3 numbers together, ie 1-4 for hitroll, 1-2 for damroll. Even assuming you can get a 4/2 weapon. There isn't all that much variety. Now I may have the numbers for these wrong but the idea is at least on par with what is actually implemented. This doesn't allow for a lot of differentiation between a high level weapon and a low level weapon. If the range of this was increased then a better variety of weapons could exist. In addition, a larger range allows for more fine tweaking of the melee abilities. It would become easier to create range of equipments that would be usuable and acceptable for assorted character levels. I think this is one of the lacking areas on this mud and should be looked into.

If this doesn't make any sense, post something to the effect and I'd be happy to expand on this further, right now I'm just rambling with this post because the idea popped into my head and I wanted to have it down before I forget.
old depok
Sojourner
Posts: 572
Joined: Thu Feb 14, 2002 6:01 am
Location: Philadelphia PA USA

Postby old depok » Thu Sep 26, 2002 6:25 pm

There are a number of one hand weapons in the game that are > 2/2.

GCD
Etched
Sauruk

To name just a few of the rogue ones. The issue with the hit/dam on one hand weapons is the ability of rangers and rogue to dual.

If you had the spanky dagger of whatever at +6 +6 and I dualed them I would have +12 +12 to start.

I use GCD's and have 35/31 as it is and I don't have a great kit. If you double GCD stats to the range above I would have 41 37.

You would see people with 50/50 running around.

Now if you made more sword type weapons you would have the same issues with Rangers.

Depok
Calinth
Sojourner
Posts: 118
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am

Postby Calinth » Thu Sep 26, 2002 6:44 pm

Years ago most of the upper level 1h weapons were at least 4/4, and quite a few were 5/5. At some point it was decided hitters were overpowered, or simply that weapon stats were inflated. *shrug* I don't know for sure. Anyhow, at that point most, if not all, 1h weapons were dropped to at most that +4 total limit. Since then, they've started working their way back up, and as I recall seeing somewhere else on these boards, some of the older weapons are being reevaluated/reworked. I think the biggest problem with that, which hasn't been all that big an issue to what I've seen, is that it was (mostly) rogue type weapons that were done first. That's led to mostly daggers with stats combining to +8 or so, where most 1h slashing (maybe bludgeoning too, I haven't bothered to look) weapons are still at totals of +4 or 5.
To get back to your original point though, that limit is being changed. Maybe a bit slower than we would like, but there's obviously more important things to work on first. I mean what good is an extra +2 on weapons when melee damage sucks anyway Image

Cal
Shargaas
Staff Member - Areas
Posts: 215
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2001 5:01 am

Postby Shargaas » Fri Sep 27, 2002 2:17 am

I have to disagree Rivi, there is still a ton of room for eq variety on the melee side of things, I tend to have a harder time coming up with stats for mage eq as +hp>all. Consider all the slots missing a 2/2 item which either does not exist or players have not found yet Image

The reason why I can't comment on as I wasn't around when that decision was made
Rivi
Sojourner
Posts: 50
Joined: Wed Jul 17, 2002 5:01 am

Postby Rivi » Fri Sep 27, 2002 6:07 pm

I guess I wasn't clear in my post. I'm not saying to upgrade warrior equipment. What I'm saying is to keep the effectiveness of the hitter equipment, however to increase the range of the equipment. That is to have it so that a current 5/5 is equivalent to a 10/10 under the new scheme, however because the range could go up to 10/10 you can get numbers inbetween, thus 9/9 weapon is almost as good as a ten and may be acceptable to use if people like the way it looks or for some other additional reasons. This will allow for a greater variety of "melee kits"
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Postby kiryan » Fri Sep 27, 2002 7:16 pm

procs much greater than hit/dam

------------------
------
where ara you my rittle raabuuri
Gormal
Sojourner
Posts: 3917
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2001 6:01 am
Location: A Whale's Vagina
Contact:

Postby Gormal » Fri Sep 27, 2002 9:45 pm

6d3 4/2
3d6 4/2
5d3 4/2
2d6 3/3...these are all weapons in the game that aren't too hard to get.
giantbane is 3/3 then goes 6/6 vs giants so yes its possible to get 12/12 if you wear maxstr and fight giants.

theres plenty of weapons out there.

------------------
Gormal Stoneforge -Hammerstrike-

"Forward Mithrilguard!"
Tanji Smanji
Sojourner
Posts: 765
Joined: Thu Apr 18, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Atlanta, Georgia

Postby Tanji Smanji » Sun Sep 29, 2002 8:43 am

And there are other decent 3/3 weapons that go to 6/6 under the proper circumstances.
Rivi
Sojourner
Posts: 50
Joined: Wed Jul 17, 2002 5:01 am

Postby Rivi » Mon Sep 30, 2002 5:39 pm

Bah, you guys are still totally thinking of this in the wrong way. What I'm saying is to scale the current 50/50 hit/dam on a PC to 100/100.
Sarell
Sojourner
Posts: 1681
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:01 am
Location: brisbane, australia

Postby Sarell » Tue Oct 01, 2002 11:18 am

What's with the gleaming falchion! *gag*

------------------
Zoldren
Sojourner
Posts: 1309
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2001 6:01 am
Location: mt. vernon, il
Contact:

Postby Zoldren » Tue Oct 01, 2002 12:57 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Rivi:
Bah, you guys are still totally thinking of this in the wrong way. What I'm saying is to scale the current 50/50 hit/dam on a PC to 100/100. </font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Y? so that you have to re-stat every eq in the game? or create new zones that make current zones obsolete?

no thanks

------------------
MoM-D
Chandigar2
Sojourner
Posts: 117
Joined: Fri Sep 06, 2002 5:01 am

Postby Chandigar2 » Tue Oct 01, 2002 1:42 pm

No, what he's saying is:

Take all eq, and double their hit/dam bonuses, but make them 1/2 as useful.

So... you'd go from 30/35 to 60/70 but still be hitting just as hard and frequently.

Basically its just a shift in the scale for the numbers.

The benefit of this as he states it, is more equipment variety possible. Before, a 2/2 weapon was common, a 4/4 weapon fairly hard to find. With the new system, instead of only 2/2 3/3 and 4/4 available, you'd have 4/4 5/5 6/6 7/7 8/8 within the same range of hit/dam and therefore have more possibilities on stats while remaining within the high/low boundaries for eq.


Now, whether this is a good idea, I dunno. Just offering some clarity.
Rivi
Sojourner
Posts: 50
Joined: Wed Jul 17, 2002 5:01 am

Postby Rivi » Tue Oct 01, 2002 2:10 pm

YES finally someone understood my muddled english, thanks chandigar!
moritheil
Sojourner
Posts: 4845
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2001 6:01 am

Postby moritheil » Tue Oct 01, 2002 7:20 pm

Every time I try to figure out all possible configurations of the 'best' gear my head hurts.

I'm not certain we need more.

It's true that weapon bonuses are kind of standardized, but the procs are far from standard.

------------------
Daz group-says 'rofl, moritheil is the mcdonald's of death'
Gormal
Sojourner
Posts: 3917
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2001 6:01 am
Location: A Whale's Vagina
Contact:

Postby Gormal » Tue Oct 01, 2002 7:33 pm

ive just gotta disagree because this involves reflagging EVERY piece of hitdam gear in the game

------------------
Gormal Stoneforge -Hammerstrike-

"Forward Mithrilguard!"
Rivi
Sojourner
Posts: 50
Joined: Wed Jul 17, 2002 5:01 am

Postby Rivi » Tue Oct 01, 2002 8:00 pm

Well, if you don't want to reflag everything, just "crank the melee adjustment knob" (something some imm said they had a long while back, few days back? who knows :P) down way low, and drop in some new zones with the equipment stated way up. Piss a lot of people off who think they now have the "uber" eq and they don't..

ok ok, well it's just something to consider if the imms ever go to rework the eq database.

[This message has been edited by Rivi (edited 10-01-2002).]
Shargaas
Staff Member - Areas
Posts: 215
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2001 5:01 am

Postby Shargaas » Tue Oct 01, 2002 8:19 pm

Doubling all current eq hit/dam would be a simple code issue.

But right now your weapon dice + damroll = approx damage/hit which makes the numbers easy to understand for newbies and casual players. Is this worth it to allow a few more pieces of hitter eq between 1/1 and 2/2?

old system 1/1 (2/1 1/2 3/1) 2/2
new system 2/2 (3/2 3/3 4/2 4/3 5/2 5/3) 4/4

twice as many options but its rare to find slots with all three current variations, as well as variations I ignored such as 0/2 and 4/0 (becasue they tend to have extra stats ie. tiny ruby ring)
Wargo
Sojourner
Posts: 298
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2001 6:01 am
Location: New York, N.Y., USA
Contact:

Postby Wargo » Wed Oct 02, 2002 10:28 am

You guys are sooooo short sighted Image

For the long term survivability, this is the only way to go. Otherwise, a pwipe is imminent.
Chandigar2
Sojourner
Posts: 117
Joined: Fri Sep 06, 2002 5:01 am

Postby Chandigar2 » Wed Oct 02, 2002 3:05 pm

I dunno about that Shargaas... I don't think newbies will be thrown off at all.

Right now, you have a weapon that does 1d6 +1 damage. It takes like multiple rounds to kill a sparrow because the mob hp modifier makes them have more hps than PCs. So really... higher hit/dam at 1/2 effectiveness isn't much more misleading since the mob hp modifier makes estimates inaccurate anyway.
Guest

Postby Guest » Sat Oct 12, 2002 9:19 am

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Chandigar2:
<B>I dunno about that Shargaas... I don't think newbies will be thrown off at all.

Right now, you have a weapon that does 1d6 +1 damage. It takes like multiple rounds to kill a sparrow because the mob hp modifier makes them have more hps than PCs. So really... higher hit/dam at 1/2 effectiveness isn't much more misleading since the mob hp modifier makes estimates inaccurate anyway. </B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually, most PC's have more hit points than the sparrow you're probably thinking of.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Postby kiryan » Sat Oct 12, 2002 5:27 pm

umm so your trying to say that doubling the current range on hit/dam then reducing the amount of actual impact hit/dam has is the key to long term playability?

If there is anything wrong with the current system it is that there are so many items at the high end of the spectrum that have 0 negatives that even an 8d4 12/12 weapon is trash becaues it doenst proc like Gythka/Darkened steel/Twilight.

I think we need to see a negative put on most every single "high end" piece of eq. stuff like silver bands being 30 hps and 10 ac is crazy when a lot of great warrior wrist wear isnt more than 8 ac. stuff like starsilver sleeves at 27 hps and -4ss and 8ac is insanity compared to clouds sleeves at 18 -2ss and deep blue at 15 6 ac. You can't put all good stats on eq and expect there to be variety or really choice

doubling the "face value" of eq is stupid when your reducing it on the back end. when we re-eval we gonna leave everything at the high end of the spectrum again? who gonna want a 1/3 ring when theres lots of 2/4 rings?




------------------
------
where ara you my rittle raabuuri
Wargo
Sojourner
Posts: 298
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2001 6:01 am
Location: New York, N.Y., USA
Contact:

Postby Wargo » Sat Oct 12, 2002 11:48 pm

You are not getting the point. Here's an example:

Right now there's a max hit/dam bonus per item slot which is 5. Each hit is 1 point and each dam is 2 points. With this you have the following choices:

5/0, 4/0, 3/0, 2/0, 1/0, 3/1, 2/1, 1/1, 0/1, 1/2, 0/2

And if you only count the combos with max stats you have:

5/0, 3/1, 1/2

Now if you double the possible points yet half the effects you have the following choices:

10/0, 9/0, 8/0, 7/0, 6/0, 5/0, 4/0, 3/0, 2/0, 1/0, 8/1, 7/1, 6/1, 5/1, 4/1, 3/1, 2/1, 1/1, 0/1, 6/2, 5/2, 4/2, 3/2, 2/2, 1/2, 0/2,
4/3, 3/3, 2/3, 1/3, 0/3, 2/4, 1/4, 0/4, 0/5

That's 35 choices vs the original 11.

And if you count the combo with max stats you have:

10/0, 8/1, 6/2, 4/3, 2/4, 0/5

That's 6 vs 3.

Your point about people will choose the max possible regardless of the system is valid. However, you are not taking into account the variety.

Every new zone that comes in has to at least have one item that fits the max combo or the zone will not be done. With the old system, that's 3 x 20 slots (not counting weapon) = 60 varieties. With the new system it will be 6 x 20 slots = 120 varieties.

At the way things are going, the 60 varieties is pretty much filled up. That is why when new zones come in, they break the rules and you start seeing stuff like the 2/2 tanar'ri gloves. By changing to the new proposed system, you give the zone writers more alternatives in creating top end items which attracts players to their zones without breaking the system. How hard is that to see?

Kiryan, your views about the unbalancing items are valid however you are only looking at specific item issues. Rejecting the whole while only looking at a few is illogical. Just because the individual items need changes does not mean the overall system doesn't need change. They both do.

Yssilk
Dalar
Sojourner
Posts: 4905
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2001 6:01 am

Postby Dalar » Sun Oct 13, 2002 9:46 am

Imho there should be a cap on saves too, like -4 or something. Having -13 sv spell items really takes away ever needing save psell in other slots

------------------
[Erevan] Our elite team of gods will be watching for equip campers.... beware...
Erevan OOC: 'One god is specifically assigned to Dartan :P'
Kiaransalee OOC: 'rangers suck'
Iyachtu OOC: 'and a lovely nite it is :)'
Gerad
Sojourner
Posts: 591
Joined: Sun May 13, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Contact:

Postby Gerad » Sun Oct 13, 2002 12:44 pm

Ok, here, listen,

world stat:
Total number of different objects: 10067

I know not all of those have stats that must be reworked, but,
Thats TEN THOUSAND objects. Heres my (very roughly estimated) breakdown:

I estimate 1000 of those are 'invisible' items fall into these holes: God Items, Code only items, and items that are no longer in the game, or placeholders for stuff that has had stat changes.

I would guess about 500 of those are food items.

I would guess about 1000 are no-stat quest items, quest placeholder items, or items that just dont do anything at all (sticks, rocks, whatever)

I would guess around 500 are items that are not takeable or you cant get, demon weapons, fountains, shubberys, etc.

Subtract another 1000 for stuff nobody uses or hasnt been found that wouldnt have to be changed right away.

Thats still SIX THOUSAND objects that would need stat changes.
And, you cant just run the files through a filter for stat changes: When EQ is ballanced hit/dam wise, you also take into account things like prots or perm spells, how hard it is to get, how many other items are in the zone, if its quest, how hard is is it, and is it hard to figure out, etc.

Its a great idea, ballancing things out to have a wider range of hit/dam combos, but it really just does not work.

Oh yeah, and if you change all the objects, you have to change all the mobs:
Total number of different mobiles: 13114
(not going down that road Image )
Gerad

------------------
Auril tells you 'Yes, we're plotting the destruction of all that is holy - and unholy, too. Just to be thorough.'
cherzra
Sojourner
Posts: 1868
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Holland

Postby cherzra » Sun Oct 13, 2002 12:52 pm

No, you wouldn't have to change any mobs.

Changing the items WOULD be easy. Since we're talking hit/dam here, you can write a small program that parses the object file and replaces all hit/dam occurrences with the old value multiplied by two.

Nothing would have to be rebalanced, no saves prots and other things looked at.

See Yssilk's post on why - you're merely multiplying hit/dam by two so you have room for more options. Currently there's nothing between 3/0 and 2/0, this new system would allow make that into 6/0 and 4/0, leaving room for a new 5/0 item. The code would later divide all hit/dam the player wears by two so the actual impact would be zero except for giving more options to zone writers.
Gerad
Sojourner
Posts: 591
Joined: Sun May 13, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Contact:

Postby Gerad » Sun Oct 13, 2002 3:00 pm

Ok ill try to explain that in more detail.

First and foremost, turning a 4/3 item like windsong into an 8/6 sword is insane. What your talking about would make glimmering bastardsword 2/6. You just made ayuruks tears +8 to hit each. More goes into EQ ballance than just hit/dam. "dialing" the numbers to make it harder to hit may be possible, and you might even be able to rework every last .mob file to double all the mob hitpoints... but you also just gave a ranger like 70 (or so) hitroll, and like 90 (or so) damroll. But, of course, the idea is to make it so that is effectivly equal to what it was before,

which means reworking THAC0 on melee classes, and reworking the way AC works. Which would require doubling AC on equipment, since equipped mobs are effected by AC they wear. Oh yeah, mobs are also effected by hitroll and damroll of weapons, so now we have to go through the 80 or so mob races and their agility bonuses and decide how well they can dodge now.

Next, spells. Doppelganger would have to be fixed. Oh yeah, player pets too. How about dammage done to you through fire/coldshield? Would have to be fixed, as well as would probably stoneskin and dragonscales, to reflect the new max_str critical rates done through them.

It sounds like a simple thing, giving us a wider range of weapon bonuses. But your effectivly talking about undoing the last years worth of ballance work.

We would proabably be better off adding 3.5 to hit/dam and rounding down, do get a wider range, since the other option utterly changes everything.

Dont forget, you'd have to work that all out for player vs. player in archeron as well.

Honestly, I do like the idea, I write zones myself and I hate to just put in restrings of everything else, but there is a ballance and a limit. I try to be creative, but there will always be the 'best' items, and deciding which of those goes where is a tough thing. (all hail cyric)

-Gerad

------------------
Auril tells you 'Yes, we're plotting the destruction of all that is holy - and unholy, too. Just to be thorough.'
Wargo
Sojourner
Posts: 298
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2001 6:01 am
Location: New York, N.Y., USA
Contact:

Postby Wargo » Sun Oct 13, 2002 3:12 pm

Gerad,

They have nobs to adjust the damage. According to Miax during Alpha, we have nobs placed for every aspect of the combat engine. It's just a matter of tweaking them. Pretty simple according to Miax. And if it is indeed so then there really isn't any problem with rangers running around with 70/80 hit/dam cuz they really only have the equivalent of 35/40 of the old. If it isn't unbalancing to have them at 35/40 then it won't be unbalancing to have them at 70/80 with the new system.

Open your mind Image

Yssilk
cherzra
Sojourner
Posts: 1868
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Holland

Postby cherzra » Sun Oct 13, 2002 3:17 pm

Why is this so hard to understand?

You wouldn't actually DOUBLE hit and dam. Items would get their current hit/dam doubled, but before any function is done that uses a player's hit and dam, a simple division by two would be done.

What you would NOT be doing is rewriting everything to make use of these new numbers (doubling mob hitpoints, changing thac0, rewriting all the code). You would make sure that before you atually use the hit/dam numbers, you divide them by two, so that you can keep the current code. You would do a simple "divide by two" every time any calculation is made using a player's hit and dam.

I'll give an example.

Player now has 20/30. Every time he hits, this is read by the code and used.

In new system, player has 40/60. Every time he hits (or anything else is done which reads hit/dam), it is divided by two and only then used.

End result is the same. Nothing has to be changed besides adding a simple division by two in some places.

Maybe a coder can comment, but I really think it is that simple.
Jegzed
Sojourner
Posts: 1240
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am

Postby Jegzed » Sun Oct 13, 2002 3:23 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by cherzra:
Maybe a coder can comment, but I really think it is that simple.</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Its a 30 seconds to 1 min fix if Sojourn's code is using anything near a standard diku for its core.



------------------
/Jegzed - Sorcere Master - Crimson Coalition
Gerad
Sojourner
Posts: 591
Joined: Sun May 13, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Contact:

Postby Gerad » Sun Oct 13, 2002 5:11 pm

Ah, I see what your saying.

However,

Sojourn does not have one huge ass .obj file, there is one for each zone and prolly a couple for stuff that isnt in a specific zone, still alot to worry about. Also, what about stuff that is -stats? Doubled?

The opinions that really matter here are probably those of Cyric and Shev, wonder what they think of all this.

Gerad

------------------
Auril tells you 'Yes, we're plotting the destruction of all that is holy - and unholy, too. Just to be thorough.'
Gerad
Sojourner
Posts: 591
Joined: Sun May 13, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Contact:

Postby Gerad » Sun Oct 13, 2002 5:21 pm

OOOOOH Yeah thats the point I forgot,

Not only does hit/dam from items give you bonuses... you would also have to double what is given to you by race, or you'd be screwing yourself dividing it in half :P

Gerad

------------------
Auril tells you 'Yes, we're plotting the destruction of all that is holy - and unholy, too. Just to be thorough.'
Gormal
Sojourner
Posts: 3917
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2001 6:01 am
Location: A Whale's Vagina
Contact:

Postby Gormal » Sun Oct 13, 2002 5:49 pm

I'd be willing to be the reason a coder wont post on this board about their thoughts because they are too busy laughing at you. What about all the hidden modifiers? Racial bonuses?

All this would serve to do is make things a little more customizable. There is no such thing a simple fix with such a large scope...theres always tons of unseen things and other things that we as non coders never see.

------------------
Gormal Stoneforge -Hammerstrike-

"Forward Mithrilguard!"
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Postby kiryan » Sun Oct 13, 2002 6:03 pm

the change proposed has only a visual effect. so balance is not an issue.

however, the thrust of my point is this.

if the best rings in the game are 2/2 and it becomes 4/4 under the new system. then even if you have more "variety" to stat items as a zone creator it will still be trash because the top end of the eq spectrum is already saturated. no one will want a 3/4 ring if 4/4 rings are relatively easy to come by.

you solve nothing but zone writers desire to have eq that is different statwise. to solve zone writers dilema you must raise the cap. either by raising the maxs or lowering the existing gear.

what is the root problem we are trying to solve? zone writers dont have enough variety in possible stats? or that theres no room for new eq since current eq is at the very top of the spectrum? I'm not against the change (its a wash), but I question whether the work is worth the visual effect and I suggest that no actual problems will be solved by the change suggested.

------------------
------
where ara you my rittle raabuuri
Rivi
Sojourner
Posts: 50
Joined: Wed Jul 17, 2002 5:01 am

Postby Rivi » Mon Oct 14, 2002 5:24 pm

Root of the problem is equipment variety. Right now you're still thinking of it in terms of low numbers.

Another example to the change of thought possible. Suppose 1000/1000 was the max possible hit/dam a character could have.

Suppose you have a weapon that is +500/+500. Do you think someone would refuse to use a weapon because it's 499/499?
Zoldren
Sojourner
Posts: 1309
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2001 6:01 am
Location: mt. vernon, il
Contact:

Postby Zoldren » Mon Oct 14, 2002 8:56 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Rivi:
<B>Root of the problem is equipment variety. Right now you're still thinking of it in terms of low numbers.

Another example to the change of thought possible. Suppose 1000/1000 was the max possible hit/dam a character could have.

Suppose you have a weapon that is +500/+500. Do you think someone would refuse to use a weapon because it's 499/499?</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


yes they would


------------------
MoM-D
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Postby kiryan » Tue Oct 15, 2002 2:14 am

499/499 vs 500/500

ok your talking .20 % difference here.

doubling a 6/6 to 12/12 we are talking a 8% difference. and damroll is pretty much limited to 2 doubled is 4 which would make the smallest increments 25%.

and you still missed my point. the numbers dont matter. the high end of the eq spectrum is saturated. no one is gonna wear a 999/999 ring when 1000/1000 rings are easy to come by.

i think our problem is we keep writing harder, longer, rarer zones/quests/mobs but we can't one up the eq because the existing eq is at the existing maxs. if you write a quest 100x harder than silverband, what you gonna stat it 35 hps 10 ac?

making unique eq is not hard. making unique eq that will get worn (good) that falls in a place proper to its risk in relation to other eq that gets worn in the game is the hard part because all existing worn eq falls in a very narrow band right at the eq max limits.

------------------
------
where ara you my rittle raabuuri
Rivi
Sojourner
Posts: 50
Joined: Wed Jul 17, 2002 5:01 am

Postby Rivi » Tue Oct 15, 2002 3:51 pm

I never said that doubled should be the final solution, doubled was just an easier example.

If you take a look at the ring situation on the mud right now, the giantkind ring(?) seems to be highly sought after by certain classes just because it has an ac bonus to it, even though it has fewer hp bonus than the eldritch ring or amethyst ring. So there will be people who want different range of stats on their equipment.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Postby kiryan » Tue Oct 15, 2002 6:51 pm

right so explain to me again where the problem is for area makers stating eq?

folks say theres a problem putting stats on eq but then theres stuff like ring of giantkind. where is the problem? how does doubling tripling the limits then updating existing eq to be at an equivalent level under the new system solve any problems?

it doesnt leave room at the upper level for new eq. it provides a greater range and numerically more possibilities, but i find it hard to believe that we have saturated the numerical possibilities under the current system. however, i do believe we have saturated the high end of the eq spectrum, which would make stating eq tough especially for zones and quests that are harder and longer than the existing ones. but the proposed change does not address this at all.

btw the ring of giantkind phenomenon has more to do with its rarity and who is wearing it than anything else.

------------------
------
where ara you my rittle raabuuri
Malacar
Sojourner
Posts: 1640
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Boston, MA, USA

Postby Malacar » Tue Oct 15, 2002 6:55 pm

Actually, Riv is right, at least as it applies to me and my warrior.

I'd get giantkinds just for the ac. So it's a few less hp.. Big deal. Image

------------------
Malacar - omg ymir!
Wargo
Sojourner
Posts: 298
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2001 6:01 am
Location: New York, N.Y., USA
Contact:

Postby Wargo » Thu Oct 17, 2002 12:15 am

Here's an idea:

Phase 1: Double the equipment bonus limit without doubling the current eq stats. Half the currently eq effectiveness. Results: zones suddenly become harder to do because all your eq suddenly acquire near crap status. Brings back the fun of post wipe spankage.

Phase 2: Selectively upgrade hard to obtain items so to keep the current eq on par with incoming eq. Wow upgrades!

Phase 3: New zones come in with eq carefully considered and that fits into the new system.

Yssilk
gordex
Sojourner
Posts: 265
Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2002 5:01 am
Contact:

Postby gordex » Fri Oct 25, 2002 8:07 am

I just read most of these posts, and I don't understand at all what you folks are trying to get across (either side of the coin). Do you want to do more damage or not?

------------------

Gordex - Gordex Travel Agency
Shargaas
Staff Member - Areas
Posts: 215
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2001 5:01 am

Postby Shargaas » Fri Oct 25, 2002 11:56 pm

The original debate (in a nutshell) is wether we should create more incremental hit/dam equipment as a way to offer more variety.
Rivi proposed doubling the current hit/dam values on existing items (so TF chains would be 2/2, shells necklace would be 4/4) and turn the melee damage knobs down to compensate. Paving the way for new items with values such as 3/3 (1.5/1.5 under the current system)

Return to “S3 Ideas Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest