Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
General Discussion / Re: Group size
« Last post by reed23 on Today at 12:28:30 PM »
I've posted this bs before so I apologize in advance.

Option 1 - Move group size back to 10 permanently.  More inclusion, more spots for crap pre-legend classes such as shaman, mages, druids, thieves, etc.  Would also give smaller clans a better shot at winning end-game material.
Option 2 - Move group size back to 10 temporarily.  Adjust back to 8 at a pre-determined point (6-8 weeks).  This option would be considered if Imms think 10 stacked legends are too "game breaking."  This would allow inclusion when mud numbers are at its highest and then phase back to 8 when numbers are less and true-addicts are still around.
Option 3 - Move group size back to 10 permanently with the requirement that 2 group members must be non-legend.  I made a post months ago about this, but think this would entice people to keep making alts (to fill the non-legend slots), give a strategy portion of compiling your best 10 man for end-game material, allow for 10 at rush (because all would be non-legend) for more inclusion, etc.
General Discussion / Re: Group size
« Last post by gulca on Today at 11:17:17 AM »
Remove assist, tell, shout.

Auto aggro to any players or mob in same room.

Auto cast random spells.

Random actions depending on time of day. Sleep, sit, rest, who, news, forget all etc. When log for more than 30 min, quit is added to the random action list aka RAL.

General Discussion / Re: Group size
« Last post by Alecto on Today at 09:45:44 AM »
group size should be limited to 1 - then we can eliminate the issue of multi-ing!
General Discussion / Re: Group size
« Last post by Willoe on May 27, 2017, 06:04:54 PM »
As I stated in the other post I agree with Jack. Bring it back to 10 so people aren't left on the sidelines...this happens often.
General Discussion / Re: Group size
« Last post by Kir on May 27, 2017, 02:53:43 PM »
Bring back 10 mans, imo it will mean useless mages get included in groups once more and more people able to end game content besides core or rise
General Discussion / Group size
« Last post by Jorake on May 27, 2017, 12:01:41 PM »
Let's talk seriously and make a thread for group size. Yes the pbase is lower but as was stated before; group sizes didn't affect anything except putting people out.

I was all for the lower group sizes. Because over powering etc. all end game content still got done. I'm not sure what the answer is. But the game is moving more towards just zoning. Not near as much pk as there was.

When I'm on, I'm normally leading. And while I think any clan that has 20+ people in it should seriously think about breaking up into two. This probably won't happen any time soon. So all that's left is people being left out and most of the time, logging off.

Development News / Re: What's in the works - preview of next wipe additions
« Last post by kielmobile on May 27, 2017, 09:50:55 AM »
what if nightmare was revamped so that you get "the illusionist" effect, where one minute you think you're fighting cyan, then lord soth, or maybe a cuddly bunny and anyone in the room who fails the save can't initiate attacks or something or gets a chance at brain damage, confusion, hysteria, mind mangle, take your pick like prism. possible or not? would be funny as hell though.
General Discussion / Re: Whoa! Settle down Scooter
« Last post by el conquistador on May 27, 2017, 01:37:30 AM »
its pretty hard for me to understand the fun in pvp on this game.  would arranged fair fights be better somehow?  i dont think so.  smash equal groups into each other and see who's bash triggers go off faster and who gets lucky with saves as mages spam their favorite spell?  no healer is actually casting their own heals in a fight like that anymore are they?  how much skill would it be?  i cant see the fun in it.

the rise way probably gives more pleasure.  planning out clever ambushes and setting up fights where your enemies have almost 0 chance with tricks and superior force.  there is definitely a kind of fun to fully dominating your enemies and then keeping them down.  but it is the fun of the schoolyard bully.  especially when your opponents have little interest in fighting back.  you are grinding the smaller kids faces into the ground and making them grovel and beg for your amusement. 

that way used to appeal to me when i was young.  but now that im old and soft i dont have any interest in ruining other peoples fun for my own enjoyment. 
General Discussion / Re: Alignment free wipe? Thoughts and discussion
« Last post by Alecto on May 26, 2017, 09:25:20 PM »
How about just reducing the xp penalty for some under-loved alignments, like Chaotic Neutral.  Seriously, who would EVER pick CN?  The xp is so bad that LG and LE characters can double their xp rate over them.  Also, should make it so DKs can only be LE - if you pick any other alignment you can't do the quests you need for legend - so why even have them as an option?

Obviously there is some balance to alignment stuff.  Paladins get huge xp buffs because they have to be very careful at low levels not to kill anything good-aligned.  But neutral characters get beaten by every branch of the ugly tree when it comes to xp.  When the neutral in a goodie group is only level 21 while everyone else is level 25 it just doesn't seem balanced.

Yes, there should be less xp for neutrals - they have more options for what to kill - it just should not be quite as prohibitive as it is now.
General Discussion / Re: Exotic
« Last post by Alecto on May 26, 2017, 09:19:39 PM »
Isn't the short bus for a Half-Ogre just a REGULAR bus?

Also, exotics have better overall stat rolls (+4 to +6 based on my experimentation) as well as a few nifty bonus which are considered SLIGHTLY better than the bonuses the default classes get.  An obvious example is that Dargonesti are water_freeaction.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10