Best Of
Re: Why People are leaving the game
Lycidas said:Don't worry, Gaudi and Celest are in that same boat.
This is BS. Mag was just too much of a pain and their idea of fun was just not fun for me, so why bother? The reality is Celest, Glomdoring, and Gaudiguch spend a lot of effort trying to be fair and actually supporting each other. Which is not the same thing as saying that other orgs never do that.
There were a lot of individual mags I really liked, respected and had fun with. But as an org mag far too often were overly opportunistic.
Gaudi has at times just talked about going 'merc'. We at one point had a serious discussion of the political stance being it was up to the individual who to fight with.
As to it being 'one person' in mag...no it wasn't.
Re: Idea to Equalize Mechanics Across Archetypes
I don't really want to be the naysayer here, and you're free to discuss it. I just want to make sure expectations are set and prevent people from getting their hopes up to see nothing come of it.
At this point in time, something this large and involved is really not on the table for consideration or implementation in the near future. It'd be a huge undertaking that would require a ton of effort.
At this point in time, something this large and involved is really not on the table for consideration or implementation in the near future. It'd be a huge undertaking that would require a ton of effort.
Orael
3
Re: Let's talk about Glomdoring.
Just a reminder both Gaudiguch and Hallifax have this annoying little mechanic where we have to harvest our smobs. The 'feeding' of those smobs is in fact a novice thing (the nexusworld power quest). If we don't do this feeding we don't have flesh/crystals and we can't call our easily killed entities.Aramel said:Cosmic is a good point, though it's dubious how much newbies can really help in a fleshpot raid - though commune mobs also don't respawn like elemental mobs do. And I agree that lowmagic is better. That's why I think the best solution really would be org parity as much as possible, in skillsets, territory, etc, so everyone can stop arguing about what everyone else has.
So yeah easy access to cosmic is a bit more important then just for pvp
Re: Why People are leaving the game
If it's about pure skill and practice instead of skillsets, then surely you can have no objection to letting the rest of the game have access to Glomdoring skillsets and vice versa, and/or rework your skills. Then you can prove once and for all that skill and teamwork is what really matters, and I think life would be easier for Glomdoring as well as for everyone else.
Aramel
1
Re: Why People are leaving the game
Mboagn said:I've only been playing for a little while (again; I've played Lusternia before!) but even in Gaudiguch, there's a sense that we don't at all want to rock the boat with Glomdoring by the sheer fact that we will end up losing big-time if we do. That's how much power Glomdoring has over the game.
I suspect you've misunderstood something. But, please post an example.
Re: Why People are leaving the game
Niwynne said:I did not say that. Don't twist my words. Again, you have missed the point. Giving examples of people you have helped is going to do nothing.Deichtine said:
Well if they don't believe people in their own org that's hard to change. I can always point out examples of people who I have helped with their systems or their kills as examples to show its true though but you are right if people won't listen to whats happening then there isn't anything you can do to change their minds really.
You need to show that Glomdoring is not toxic. You need to fundamentally change how Glomdoring operates, to prove you actually care about the game carrying on. Because no-one is going to rise up to stop Glomdoring. This is what they have been trying to explain for the past...however long it has been. No one can stop you. No one will stop you. You will just keep winning until you discover that there is no one left to fight.
I'm not sure what you mean. I'm trying to help and have been actively helping other "enemy" org people with their systems and how to build kills. I'm really not sure whats toxic about that. I can't force people to take part and I can't force people to be positive. All I can do as an individual is keep on doing what I'm doing and helping them directly.
Re: Let's talk about Glomdoring.
Communes have a bit of a travel advantage over cities with teleport moon/night as well. Sort of minor but if your bringing it up.
Re: Let's talk about Glomdoring.
Cosmic is a good point, though it's dubious how much newbies can really help in a fleshpot raid - though commune mobs also don't respawn like elemental mobs do. And I agree that lowmagic is better. That's why I think the best solution really would be org parity as much as possible, in skillsets, territory, etc, so everyone can stop arguing about what everyone else has.
Aramel
1
Re: Idea to Equalize Mechanics Across Archetypes
As a rough concept warriors and monks are pretty similar already they share the same core mechanics roughly speaking.
Mages/druids while they share the same core mechanic of melding they are quite different in terms of how they go for kills. Up for rework soon anyway.
Bards sort of fit this description already a bit. They focus around aurics, dsong and their terts(drama/etc) terts being mostly accessible to all bards except eco/tarot split. With their song as a supporting element. I know that's a super generalised version of bards so don't pick at it too much, of course there's differences but the core bits are roughly the same for each.
If you wanted to homogenise the game I figure the starting point would be wiccans/guardians as they are the ones with the biggest differences class to class and all have fairly different core styles and mechanics for their kills.
Would this idea basically be to sort of wipe out the six guardian/wiccan classes and essentially replace them with 1 roughly similar class?
Mages/druids while they share the same core mechanic of melding they are quite different in terms of how they go for kills. Up for rework soon anyway.
Bards sort of fit this description already a bit. They focus around aurics, dsong and their terts(drama/etc) terts being mostly accessible to all bards except eco/tarot split. With their song as a supporting element. I know that's a super generalised version of bards so don't pick at it too much, of course there's differences but the core bits are roughly the same for each.
If you wanted to homogenise the game I figure the starting point would be wiccans/guardians as they are the ones with the biggest differences class to class and all have fairly different core styles and mechanics for their kills.
Would this idea basically be to sort of wipe out the six guardian/wiccan classes and essentially replace them with 1 roughly similar class?
Re: Idea to Equalize Mechanics Across Archetypes
@Devora I think what Saran means is that right now there are some archetypes with class skills that are shared between them. For example, bards take the skill Acrobatics as their second, required skill, but monks also have the option to take acrobatics as an optional tertiary, which complicates things when trying to balance between bard and monk. (Though my argument is still that balancing between archetypes is not as crucial at the moment as balancing between orgs.)
Aramel
1
(c) Iron Realms Entertainment 2012.