You wouldn't be able to comment during admin review and for pending, you would have needed to vote first but should have received a message telling you that. Others were able to comment. The only thing that changed for the do-overs was the considera…
1) I'm not at liberty to divulge who wrote what report - but I would think you would think this person is knowledgeable about monks. Maybe I'm wrong, but given your comments, I don't think I am.
I apologize for the delay in responding but I haven't had a chance to until now.
I'm not quite sure what is meant by 'sneaky changes in changelogs.' By definition, that isn't sneaky - announcing that we're making changes. That's why we po…
I'm not in a place that I can respond to issues about 'sneaky changes' but I do want to reiterate that while we do not police what takes place in discord outside the Official Lusternia Server - if players are sending DM's with toxic or derogatory me…
I think the disconnect here is that everyone thinks they need to convince other players that their reports are solid and would be beneficial to the game as a whole.
That's not the case. You are trying to convince the admin that your repor…
This is a volunteer coding project that has been taken on by a volunteer, it isn't something that I'm committing myself to do. When it comes to volunteers doing volunteer projects, we want them to work on something they are genuinely interested in d…
I know that many of you were looking forward to this, but unfortunately, it's going to have to be put on hold for the time being. Real-life sometimes gets in the way. This was a volunteer coding project that unfortunately had the volunteer pulled aw…
We already stated that we would look at allowing lessons to be traded in for credits and allowing the trading in of trade artifacts. I don't know that we'll do trade-in on spectral trade curios though as those are gained through performing the trad…
Everyone will get one merchantile trade and one artisan trade slot inherently. So where right now, you only get one for free, you'll now be starting off two. Yes, it's specific to certain…
(Quote)
1) They'll have to perform the trade once a year or something to maintain proficiency - and that's only to encourage buying from active players vs dormant players (primarily in shops). Proficiency at the moment wouldn't be that much o…
Look - it's quite obvious that I'm not Capt Charisma here. I can be pointed, untactful and direct. I certainly have my opinions about how I think things should be and what makes a fun game, and I definitely get frustrated and snappy. But I can tell …
You are right, I went out of my way to ensure that my opinion and feelings on the matter were based on the same information the players have. I wanted to ensure that there wasn't a disconnect or different information being displayed between us and t…
No, I'm not willing to retract or apologize for the prerogative statement. I can understand your reasoning while also disagreeing with it. As I said, we're going to be addressing it.
As I said before, I don't want to engage in a debate ab…
As I said, I'm not interested in debating this. I've acknowledged the main reasons why players are holding on to them and that we're going to take actions to address it.
I'm not really interested in opening a debate, the worst-off org has enough stockpile in their commodity reserves to upkeep their research objects for the next 1.75 years. Other orgs have enough reserve for closer to 5 years of upkeep. Each object h…
I don't think you are understanding the intention of this thread.
This thread was to gather player input on what our potential goals should be. Not how to fix it, not how to solve the problem, but what players want to see in our game econ…
Yeah sure - the update is I'm currently putting together the proposal/plan on the changes we want to make. This will be presented to other admin first for their input and then brought to the playerbase at large.
(Quote)
I'm not interested in making this a thread about Grimkeep and whatever failings you think are there. So I'm ignoring those points to stick to the topic at hand. I'm not opposed to addressing it, just not here.
(Quote)
Okay - but this goes back to my main concern.
Bob, Bobby and Robert see Greg, Gregory and Grog signed up for a tournament - they know they cannot beat the three G's so they just don't bother to sign up because it's not appe…
Just to be clear - I don't want this to devolve into an argument about whether or not you agree with this premise. That isn't the point, the point here is I want to implement systems that everyone wants to participate in.