-
~~@Inimical:~~
> You believe this change will make pk safer for you, in reality it will be used as a tool to kill with impunity, just like the issue with social.
That is not what I see at all. I never thought to every make safer for me in any way I'm over 120 and I takes my chances. It's what we all see some 120 killing off low level players for kicks to up their so call numbers. I don't see it would make it easy for anyone to just walk in to a pk area and take stuff. There are people just the same level looking for it too you know. As for the other that didn't not ever cross my mind. There are ways to abuse all systems anyone suggests. Right now the system is extreamly unfair to the lower levels and we have all seen some high level player hound newbies right out of the game. So what do you suggest?
~~@Inimical:~~
> The prospect of being able to participate in church pk even though you are not in a pk church or individually toggled is also a terrible one. A way for people to be immune to threats while still being able to kill others. Your views are hypocritical it seems, you don't want others to be able to use these tactics against you but you'd like to use it against them. What will stop people from gathering armies of non pkers in their group so that they can go attack another pker? Those who choose a life of pk know what they're getting into. They will be attacked, they will be killed. Involving non pkers in pk battles is unfair.
What? I never said the non-pkers would be able to kill a pker in a non-pk room. I only said it's damn stupid to be in a group and sit there doing nothing while you watch a member of your group get killed. And having a member of your group attacked prevents the rest of us to do much until he fight is over.
As was pointed out to me today. If that same person was formed with NPC's well no one complains. They can have charmed NPC's help them easy.
I never talked about church at all how did that get in here?
~~@Inimical:~~
> Allowing **anyone** to have skills/spells/whatever that their modern counterpart does not have is a cheat against the newer players, and a definitive unbalancing factor. The only just way is to treat everyone the same, favoritism and balance do not make good bedfellows.
So, what you want is all the older players to pay for playing the game in the past. We all have to reset everytime there is a change by your standards. The only way to do what you want is to make everyone every time there is a change made to restart their player. I don't think anyone would like that happening.
It's not cheating and I'm sure all the older players object to be accused of it. We have done nothing wrong period.
-
Someone mentioned that Drow/Shade needed something. I'm putting this in as a suggestion for Drow and Wraith, the remort of Lich. Immunity to blindness. Why? Wraiths don't have much of eyes for one thing. Drow are accustomed to seeing in the dark.
-
~~@Elmah:~~
> Someone mentioned that Drow/Shade needed something. I'm putting this in as a suggestion for Drow and Wraith, the remort of Lich. Immunity to blindness. Why? Wraiths don't have much of eyes for one thing. Drow are accustomed to seeing in the dark.
With the way pk is now.. drows are the best race for pk, they have mana just to sit and heal while the other person runs outta mana and u guys all say swerve sucks but it helps alot i think i barley hit spunky 2-3 times a round outta 7 attacks.. most ppl i get 3-4 hits a round
-
~~@Elmah:~~
> Someone mentioned that Drow/Shade needed something. I'm putting this in as a suggestion for Drow and Wraith, the remort of Lich. Immunity to blindness. Why? Wraiths don't have much of eyes for one thing. Drow are accustomed to seeing in the dark.
Drow see in the dark with infravision. This would be more of a question as to whether blindness completely disables eyes, or disables eyes from picking up conventional light. If it only stops conventional light, then people could just cast infravision on themselves to get around that. Wouldn't work for drow, in my opinion.
-
You're making some pretty big exaggerations that I don't feel are necessary for me to directly respond to. Please do not take my post as a personal offense, the subject of pk balance often gets people worked up but game mechanics are best viewed in a logical manner. My points are valid. If your suggestions were to be imp'd, I assure you those scenarios I laid out would happen. Ideas are great things, and this sort of open forum allows us to examine them for potential flaws. Consider it constructive criticism.
-
Immunity to blindness is far too strong to give anyone, ever.
I do agree with Arkain (the wizard with silence? the sorcerer with roomshield? who knows!) that heal should be examined closely. 2 per round makes outhealing damage in pk too easy, but some mobs out there do such ridiculous amounts of damage that they would be completlely insurivivable without 2x heal every round. Maybe the those mobs that hit so fantastically hard should be toned down to compensate for a longer cast time.
Another potential issue related to healing is the way defenses work. It's possible to spam heal and cast over round after round doing it while your defenses continue to be effective. Either a reduced chance of defenses firing while casting, or possibly even no chance should be considered. A check vs dexterity and/or intelligence could be made.
The changes made to potions were excellent, scrolls still pose a problem however. Spells over a certain sp cost can't be scribed as it is now, it would be more effective to simply develop a list of spells that cannot be scribed. Primary targets of this ban would be:
*Silence
*Roomshield
*Spell Trap
*Spell Deflection
*Kill
Some spells are questionable, they aren't terribly overpowering but they do give some substantial help to classes who normally couldn't have them. Some of these would be:
*Web
*Ensnare
*Holy Sword/Shield
*Wither
*Spell Shield
Through the use of druid alts or other players, it's possible to enter pk with virtually every spell in the game at your disposal. This ban would encourage the individuality some people cherish, and go one step further to keep players to the bounds of their class. It also will address the issue of some "super scrolls" like silence, blindness or blindness, spell deflection. Notice that almost no defensive or healing spells are listed, nor any utility spells such as cloak of guile or detect invis.
My final point in this diatribe is in relation to summon. Some players find it prudent to summon anyone they can to the non pk room in the First Born's Tomb in Aethilforge, which is of course roomshielded and withered to get them to flee into cpk. Nosum is fine, and most experienced players will realize that they should keep it on always. Newer players are much more succeptible to falling for this cowardly trick, and with their best interests in mind I suggest a Yes/No prompt when someone attempts to summon you.
````
Lamepker is trying to summon you! Do you wish to allow this? (Y/N)
````
-
Okay, I want to go off-topic here for a moment, and make a comment about Inimical. No, not a flame ;) I think Inimical makes some GREAT suggestions here, and he seems to really know what he's talking about. I think we should all pay attention to what he's saying.
Now, back on topic. I like the idea for the prompt confirming the summon. It seems kinda lame, but I do agree it's somewhat necesary. I think perhaps this could be something you could toggle off, but it is on by default, and automatically turns on each time you log on.
Secondly, I agree that immunity to blindness is a bit strong… So scratch that idea.
I also kind of like the ban on scribing certain spells.
Keep these ideas flowing.
-
~~@Inimical:~~
> My final point in this diatribe is in relation to summon. Some players find it prudent to summon anyone they can to the non pk room in the First Born's Tomb in Aethilforge, which is of course roomshielded and withered to get them to flee into cpk. Nosum is fine, and most experienced players will realize that they should keep it on always. Newer players are much more succeptible to falling for this cowardly trick, and with their best interests in mind I suggest a Yes/No prompt when someone attempts to summon you.
> ````
> Lamepker is trying to summon you! Do you wish to allow this? (Y/N)
> ````
First of all, if you arent pk, wither doesnt effect you and if your not pk and someone roomshields next to cpk u can just walk right out.. and to stop ppl from doing this there is nosum so just have nosum on and theres nothing ppl can do so a summon yes/no propmt is not needed
-
I think most of us know why you oppose this idea.
-
~~@Inimical:~~
> I think most of us know why you oppose this idea.
Indeed…
-
i bet thats whats syns gonna say, but i dun care change it, im just saying it dont need to be
-
For summon, it should not be an automatic success, even while nosum is off. I am unsure if it is or not, but it should be. When someone tries to summon you while it is off and it fails, it should say something like: You feel someone attempting to transport you. You would know when something like that is happening, since it is directed towards you. If it is on, perhaps something like: Your will prevents you from being transported. This way people will know if they have it on or off and can correct it in this situation to protect themselves.
-
personally i'm against a y/n message prompt, my reason being is that at that point the summon spell just becomes another gate/ nexus transfer spell except without any portals. i think the reason for summon being in PK the way it is, is for people (involved in PK combat, that is) to be able to not feel too safe in all situations because you might be moved locations rather quickly and have to defend yourself in new territory.
outside of PK however i highly find there to be little reason in defence of higher level players capturing low level non PK players in this fashion. my idea to fix this is this: give there a certain radius ( of rooms ) about the summoner's point at which they must be away from PK zones if they want to summon a) someone non-PK or b) 20 levels lower below them. say 6-10 rooms, they would have to be at a considerable distance from some danger befor they can summon a lower level player in - and don't forget that at any point the newbie can turn nosummon on. let me know what you guys think of this solution, if it's not the most popular, i'll go with at an alternative.
-
Beautiful, I like it.
-
I do as well, though if arena is going to be considered a PK/dangerous area then people aren't going to be able to summon to… say, the recall in Aeth. Aside from that, it sounds great.
-
I'm for it.
-
~~@Mittens:~~
> I do as well, though if arena is going to be considered a PK/dangerous area then people aren't going to be able to summon to… say, the recall in Aeth. Aside from that, it sounds great.
You couldnt summon to the arena in the first place
-
OK, I changed it so that to summon someone 20 or lower levels below you (who doesn't have PK on), you must NOT be within 7 rooms of a dangerous area.
Coupled with this I have added a new skill for siths called "sense danger" which allows them to sense PK areas… it's adjustable, you type danger <1-4> and if there is a PK area 1-4 rooms away, it will show you [DANGER to the ] when you look in the room. It's just something to boost siths a little who need boosting.
additionally i've cleaned up ranged code a bit and reinforced that NOBODY should be able to do any kind of ranged damage from a safe room.
-
~~@Syn:~~
> OK, I changed it so that to summon someone 20 or lower levels below you (who doesn't have PK on), you must NOT be within 7 rooms of a dangerous area.
>
> Coupled with this I have added a new skill for siths called "sense danger" ….
>
> additionally i've cleaned up ranged code a bit and reinforced that NOBODY should be able to do any kind of ranged damage from a safe room.
Damn those all are great! Keep up the good work!
-
I love the results of some of these debates here. KEEP IT GOING.
