Release 17 Instructions

I'm not defending the idea as not being 'pay-to-win', but I AM defending 'pay-to-win' as a funding source for a game, when "winning" is entirely subjective.

I also deleted my char from R15, because I had got horribly stuck and hadn't had much effort into him. I also wanted to re-name him anyhow...

I'm all for RL money supporting the game, and getting exp boosters. I'm not at all for exp gained through glitches/exploits in one release carrying over like a ripple effect into next releases after a wipe. As it's pre-release, I don't mind the actual exploitation itself, within said release. I had always assumed that each wipe would give everyone a clean slate at the start of the next one, and as such never complained about people's advantages from glitches. If they are concerned about having high levels for testing stuff, they could simply give everyone increased exp boot for say levels 1 to 40, or 1 to 60, etc, and apply it equally. But if they are doing it to "Reward hard work" (from previous releases) they are also rewarding exploitation.

Definitely intrigued by INT affecting exp gains, but I suspect it would wrongly encourage pure mage builds early on, and create more of a cookie cutter scenario to player choice. We could CHOOSE to be melee, early on, and then watch our mage friends out-level us, or just choose to be a mage ourselves.

 

I am curious as to what exp glitch and exploit you think existed.

 

Why? How is this going to make the game better or more fun for the players?

 

The whole skill based leveling concept was that there would be parity to most choices, meaning there would be no "wrong" way to build a character. With the way passives worked in prior versions, this wasn't the case. So there were two options: limiting how many points you can spend on passives, or making passives less effective. They went with the first option, for now. I'd really rather see the other explored, with a declining return for the higher levels of those skills. But this should give us an idea of how that would work, and what other tweaks might need to be made.

 

Why not just make the passive skills more expensive in points?

 

For EP1.. implying that cap will be lifted in future releases. Very possibly all the way through EP5.

XP == skill points.. skill points translate into power.. and you'd basically be buying half your XP.. buying power == pay to win. If *I* see it that way.. a lot of others will too. I'm usually defending the store but on this idea I just can't justify it. Less grind == more fun; isn't even a factor here.

 

I like the spirit of the idea, I hate to grind. But here's what you're missing.

Current State: The game allows jobless power gamers to grind their way to a faster state of power.
Your Idea: Allow for an option to buy a faster state of power.

What this idea misses is that jobless power gamers can also buy this in the add-on store. So what you'd be doing is punishing people that didn't buy the experience fast track. That's not a good idea in my opinion. I hope you understand why.

 

Jobless lol... half of them are getting paid for doing nothing by selling google ads and making make pages and articles to get clicks. Another quarter gets money from playing games and levelling other people's accounts...

A good portion of them make much more money than portalarium will ever make by doing all this effort in making us a nice game, which is one of the reasons I 100% back our team even if we don't agree with the basic premise of what makes a true "King British game"... And yes literally the basic premise, the foundation on which game logic is built.

In fact I despise those people who make money doing nothing on the internet so much that I've proposed solutions to drain them of their money while keeping them behaving like well trained dogs. But of course noone had the time to even consider my solutions...

I guess we all have different priorities in life...

 

Thats one reason I'm so happy to be part of this community, especially those of you who listened to King Gariott when he witfully asked us to "be ourselves" cause I realise most of you are completely oblivious to the evil force that was created when people started selling virtual items for real money. Groups that were started in UO and made so much money they built gaming centers in china where kids are paid below minimum or even reasonable salary to mine items and levels for that market...

And I mean completely oblivious, and that reassures me somehow, makes me feel cozy and powerful at the same time.

And those that remain silent and aren't honest, well thats how you'll go down in history... all truth will eventually be known, and money will disapear.

 

when can we expect the patches? lol

 

You aren't so impatient usually, aren't you a bit exited maybe ?

 

my game aint workin well at all ......

 

There is no such thing as winning or losing in this game. If your wants are satisfied, you're a winner. You wanted a big house, bought a big house, and now you're a winner, and you paid for it.

I'm perfectly ok with that, but you're deluding yourself if you think you didn't pay to win, and why should you deny that same right to someone else?

Violation wants an exp boost, he should be able to buy one, its that simple to me.

I just find it strange, that you make some arbitrary distinction between a PVP'er wanting levels, or an RP'er wanting a big house/village.

You can say the house is just vanity, but so are levels and winning fights, to a PVP'er.

It's ALL just vanity, this entire game. But so is every other game, and most things in life.

I for one, enjoy making money in game. I know I would be more competitive at it, if I had a prime vendor location, and more starting capital to work with. So for me, quite literally, you are at a competitive advantage, with your pledge.

However, at the end of the day, we are only in competition with ourselves, and I for one, want the satisfaction that comes with earning it by being a merchant in game.

For me, I enjoy to be a merchant, and to make money in the game. I wouldn't get the same satisfaction if I started at an advantage in that. So I won't be buying a large house, OR an exp boost myself. But I defend your right to, and the same goes for violation's right to pay extra to get ahead. Because ultimate, at the end of the day,

I'm only in competition with myself !

 

Release notes say:
"Unfortunately, the amount of architectural changes in this release required us to do a full wipe of everything except Friends and Guilds. "
But my friends list and my guild list are empty too?
(Hm but maybe its a client bug, since I have seen friends go offline.)

*Salute*
Olahorand

 

Yeah connection bug to the group server.

 

Hey I find it strange that you find it strange and arbitrary. That a house should be considered the same as beating down other players. You know.. RPers fight too.. as do PvPers buy homes. These things are not mutually exclusive to different groups.

 

Now it works again.

 

As a merchant, I play this game to make money. Vendor locations are the singularly most important aspect to that. You have a distinct advantage with being able to place your house on day 1, where you see fit.

You are "beating down on me" just the same as violation will be beating down on other pvp'ers who choose not to, or can't afford to, avail themselves of the same advantages.

But I'm defending that right, because the game will NEED much more then a single purchase, to finance it's continuous operations. However I do find it a little offensive, that you don't see yourself as paying to win, when I know I'm at the losing end of it. (well not you specifically if you don't go into commerce, but people in the same position as you, who choose to.)

In fact, with house lots being of a fixed quantity and location, it is that much more of an advantage then an EXP booster to PVP. Everyone can at some point attain the highest level, with or without the exp boosters. But not everyone can at any point obtain the prime vendor locations.

I'm ok, with being at the disadvantage, because it's a necessary thing for the game. But why can't you be ok with acknowledging your advantage in this case? And allowing others, like Violation, to have the same (in his view of success) advantages?

 

You're making an awful lot of assumptions regarding where you will or won't be able to place your house and the availability of high traffic areas.. which may or may not fluctuate depending upon the community. Also not everyone will be rushing for prime real estate. Another problem with your analysis is that it applies only to backers.. many of whom will be filling player owned towns and also not be merchants. Plus, once the initial land rush is over everyone is on equal footing.

XP on the other hand.. effects everyone.. and will continue to do so as any skill / level caps are raised when new skills are added.

Also, you don't know that about vendor locations. The assumption your argument is making is that vendors can only reside on player owned lots. That however would be bad design. Anyone, whether they own a home or not will be able to have their own vendor. I should think a vendor leasing a stall (or whatever system they go with) or located at a friend's home in the middle of town would be in a far better location than a home owner with a vendor somewhere off to the side.

It may very well be that for most players would seek a stall in the town square than placing their vendor in their house.

That, and I rather suspect only hardcore merchants will see a noticeable difference from their location. Then, I am making an assumption here myself that there will be enough players in the game that pretty much everywhere will see enough traffic to turn a profit.

 

One thing I wouldn't want to see is rows of vendors in "popular" houses... like in UO...

Please keep it realistic