First Id like to say that Im a giant lover and that I am seeing a few things that upset me. I have also played many other races so these views I hope are not to bias or inacurate. If they are I hope a immortal with access to the specifics will correct my view with facts to back it up. That being said here are a few aspects that I want to rant about.

Stat affects:

Different stats seem to have a large affects in the game, unfortunately some more than others. And to top things off there is the ever elusive "luck" stat that seems to have a massive influence on a whole character (that or the game has massive consistent randomnes for specific characters).

A few nit picking things:

STRENGTH; probably the most ####ty stat of them all, it serves no function other than the regular weapon weight/carry weight. Sure its used in a few, and I mean a few spec skills. Otherwise it is 100% useless. Other stats provide incrimented bonuses that are scaled from 15 to 25. From basically useless to extremly usefull. Why not make strength usefull and filter enhanced damage through current str/25 as a multiplier. Why not have str be more "beneficial" in thematically relevant checks. Personaly I think a 25 str giant should easily be able to pull itself out of quicksand, but a arial fail massivly due to lack of strength. Or perhaps breaking bindings, or anything where flexing some muscle is relevant. A conjurer with 10 charisma is appauling compared with 20 charisma (10 more), why should a 15 str elf be able to hit as hard (5 or so less dam roll) as a giant with 25 str.

INTELLIGENCE;
I am working from the shadows on this one, but comments from other immortals in posts and in game have indicated the following: Bonuses to spell casting level , saves check, power of spell (tied in), not to mention alot of checks are made against intelligence. Every level your mana (spell points) is also determind by this stat. The real whopper however is that practice %'s are based on this stat totaly. Personaly I think that this is crooked hugely. I think that spell learning rates should be based on int sure. Certain skills however should be based on relevant stats to that skill If your practicing endurance, consitution should be your check. If your practicing cleave, strength should be your check. If your practicing riposte, dex should be your check. So on and so forth.

WISDOM;
I've had little success in testing wisdoms affects on prayers, I would assume that prayers are similar to that of spells and bonuses are applied equally. Wisdom also determins the number of mana that a person regains per tick/sleeping/standing/resting. It also determins how many practices a person gets per level. This is another aspect that I think needs to be addressed. Train hp/sp/mv needs to be removed from the game. If you can train these then you should be able to train luck and charisma. Basically Being a gnome mage means that you get a extra 6 hp per level from pracs. Now if your average hp level was 60hp, a 10% bonus would still be nice, but not overly impressive. When your hp levels of say 18 for a warrior, a bonus 6 hp is a massive 33% bonus. Seeing gnomes with more hps than giants and dwarfs is far from amusing.

DEXDERITY;
One of the few stats that I think functions well. The difference between 15 dex and 25 is quiet noticable. Many skills use this, some which did not now seem to check dex also. There are many aspects in which I could talk about dexterity, but I have little to comment on it.

CONSTITUTION;
This is a catch 22 stat. Unfortunately due to game design this stat is what keeps your character ticking. Also unfortunately it inbalances the game hugely. It wastes a crapload of time for many players. Con seems to be relevant to many malediction checks (that i've noticed), it determins how many hps you per tick. However when it comes to leveling it only checks your natural con, not your current con, which is think is bad, really bad. You can max your str/int/wis/dex/char and gain full affects (wis to a lesser degree due to needing 2 points for 1 functional point). Yet you get screwed over harshly for pking and losing con which I think is poor design.


*** LUCK ***: Well this stat has pissed me off more than anything. I have had characters that get spamed almost every round with "you land a lucky blow" Lucky this, lucky that. Now I have a character that I think is the total opposite. I seriously think that his luck is like 1 out of 25. With 100%'s in skills nothing works. And I mean shockingly low success rates, below 20%. I Think i've had a good 50 pks where not a single skill has worked, and not just 1 skill, I am talking about 4-6 skills that just fail 5-10 times in a row.

Luck seems to have an affect in the game, It should be displayed on your character sheet. I pissed down the drain 150 hours on a character that is ####ed up and total unfunctional, if it was infact due to a ####ty arse luck stat. I want to know, I will roll 100 characters and check the luck stat each time just to ensure I dont get that sort of character again. There is 100% no need to hide the stat. You might as well hide all stats and remove trainers. Randomly generate stats for characters.


END STATS:


EXP PEN:
Now I can understand how sickly this can be in "tweaking" , balancing races and their perks/negs along with their xp cost isnt nothing easy. However I think that Some aspects need to be looked into, not only relevant to the races but how the whole game has affects on those races.

Fore example: Most races have a vuln, some have two or more. There are many many items in the game that remove the bulk of those vulns, however there are still races that have vulns that cannot be covered. There is a arsenal of weapons for many damage types however there are a few vulns that there are few weapons for, why is this ? Is it a intentional inbalance, are you blissfully unaware of such inbalances. Or is the staff lacking builders to create chessy items for said "gaps".

Perks and vulns in reguards to xp pen:
Personaly xp pen doesnt bother me one bit. I live purely for the pk ar hero range. It means that I dont plan to prowl for pk targets 8 levels below me :). That aside, Yes I have to spend more time leveling, which is boring as hell.. but part of the game and it forces you to put yourself in a position to be pked (which is always good :) ). However I think that a review needs to be preformed on a few races in reguards to perks/vulns/inherents/stats and xp pen. I do not think that stats should be changed (I think the imms have a nice balance, perhaps a tweak or two.) But they sure as hell should be accounted for them when looking at the overall process. If there was a race with 25 str/dex/con, and a 250 xp pen, people would laugh, but if it had a 2500 xp pen, people might think differently.

With current stat influences, certain stats are twice as important as others. Certain vulns and perks are extremly relevant to these as well. Overall tho, these perks & pens have no direct link to the relevant xp pen at all. This is a oldie and probably will never be changed, but look at cloud giants. Vuln neg and holy.. Seriously ####ed up #### right there. 2 vulns that cannot be protected against for #### at the same time. The only bonus all giants have is wielding two-handed weapons in 1 hand.. Which in itself is 100% useless. There is no bonus at all for a weapon that is flaged as two_handed. A ave 31 6 6 axe weight 25 is as good as a ave 31 6 6 weight 25 two-handed axe. Now if two-handed weapons gained a 50% bonus (seing as they normally require 2 hands) then sure being a giant for being able to wield two-handed weapons would be relevant. Giant resist is a joke, I mean a total joke. The weapon base on this mud is saturated with special/elemental damage types which just total negates the usefullness of giant resist. Personaly I think giant resist code should be overhauled from its ancient 1990's code to 2000 and RESIST WEAPON should be exactly that, all melee damage should be filtered through it. Would this inturn require a alteraction to xp pen, or other perks. Perhaps. Would this balance things up for having such a shocking low dex and int & wis that you have to piss hundreds of hours down the drain practicing skills... probably.

Moving on.

Weapon Specs:
I recently tested a whole bunch of legacies & specs, I was far from impressed with a bunch of them especially how functional some were compared with others. Simply put I think its bias in reguards to certain races how well some specs work and how poorly others work. I could be wrong, but I go from testing which I have preformed. Some of the differences were so tiny that I thought it purely accountable to randomness. However others stood out blatently.I assume that a bit of common sense applies with specs. However I do think that some common sense reguarding game design is also needed.

Take for example the mace spec:
One one hand you have 1 skill, cranial, that is size based. The bigger you are the better you cranial. Then the flip side, The smaller you are the better you drum... Personaly I can understand the cranial aspect, but I cannot understand the drum aspect it just seems stupid.

Sword spec:
Flurry, totaly str/skill based. Okay Strength for multiple attacks ??? Just because I can lift heavy weights I should be able to land many attacks in a row ?? The flip side, Riposte, heavily dex based. I've seen arials riposte 15 times in 10 rounds and a fire giant only twice in 10 rounds. A parry is a parry, yet you need more dex to turn a attack forcefully back on the attacker. Personaly I view this as a str based skill on the assumption that your allready "parrying" the blow your going to need strength to push the blade back.. Anyway..

Polearm spec:
To start off with I will say that 6 months ago when I tested this I got totaly different results to when i tested it a week ago, tests that were confirmed by another player/character. Polearm, you think large massive weapon heavy, for big strong people. Well you might think that but infact your wrong. Chop seems to be size based, enlarged fire giant seemed to chop alot better and harder than a reduced duergar. The flipside, and I find this stupid beyond all things. Distance. It seems the smaller you are the better it is. Enlarged giant actually tanked nearly 32% worse than it did when reduced on the same creatures, tested over 30 mins each, roughly 135-170 combat rounds was the basis of the test. Now even if the imms think that it might be "realistic". I would have made the assumption that game design would lead to a spec for all races that is both offensive & defensive. I would have considered polearm to be a greate giant defensive spec. It used to be. But not anymore it appears.

END warrior specs:



SUMATION:
Well where do I start. I think that a serious review & publication of all the skills/spells/songs &prayers in the game(this does not include legacies and other questy type aspects) would be a massive step forward in appeasing many of the players. I've heard wizzards/immortals say many times that players simply wouldnt understand some aspects, or that to do so would be to difficult. Personaly I know that is 100% horse####.

Even something as simple as saying, skill x uses str/dex/con for check. Check is made with level + saves. Save for half is made purely on wisdom check. Perhaps having help files have something along the lines of:

SKILL XYZ:
AFFECTING ATTRIBUTES: Size (smaller better), Str(higher better), weight(lower better)
Syntax: OpenCanWhoopAss
Desc: Opening this can, lays down some serious whoopass on whoever your fighting.

Assumeing that the affecting attributes was accurate, it would save alot of frustration, anger, confuse, misinformation... MORE importantly if they were kept up to date the players could rely on it. I would not have wasted 1400 hours on "testing" a ####load of skills only to discover that some finger happy immortal changed a bunch of skills mid test.

I think that An across the board alteration to "learning" rates be made to addapt them to other stats relevant to the skill/spell/prayer or song. Warriors of high constitution should be able to train endlessly, thus imrpoving their learning rates. Smart yet weak and frail warriors might have more insight (learn from mistakes and gain 3% instead of 1) but they still cannot train as much or constitant as their more hearty counterparts)

A stat attunement in reguards to str would be a good step forward to making max 25 str as good as 25 con/dex/int/wis.

The display of luck stat perhaps at level 30.
Removal or training hp/mv/sps at your local trainer.
A review/tweak of race vulns-perks-inherents-xp pen.

PS:
I know that the immstaff donate their free time, I know that you have a arsenal of players all suggesting what they think is good and what is needed for the game. I also know that there are dozens of players out there who put forward valid points time and time again in hope that CF will pay attention and the game will become immensly more enjoyable without the continued trend of it soaking up more and more time, providing more and more frustration.

Shooting down a suggestion with a simple fact/reason/example as to why it would not work is all that is required. Many immstaff allready do this. But I hope that many of the rants that I have posted in this rant are taken into consideration. Take ten steps backwards and Have a look at the whole problem. If im totaly wrong, ask yourself how I could be, what could be done to solve my errors. Could releasing game information relevant to players characters actually help not only them but you. If they have the information avaliable to themselves. They have no leg to stand on when commenting or complaining about a aspect relevant to that, especially if you say simply "We want it that way, and it shall remain that way". With information avaliable you might actually get players polls that ask that a certain aspect be changed in reguards to a specific skill/spell. I know its hard to let go of something you have created, but do remember that players are here to play it, if you please the masses, more will come :)

This is the final response to this thread. I'm locking it now. An hour and a half I've wasted (yes I can say that, since it's my time that I volunteered to research the codebase and answer this) and in the end, my post really could have been summed up just as Nepenthe did.


9:54 p.m.
>SUMATION:
>Well where do I start. I think that a serious review &
>publication of all the skills/spells/songs &prayers in the
>game(this does not include legacies and other questy type
>aspects) would be a massive step forward in appeasing many of
>the players.

I read that as "appeasing me".

>I've heard wizzards/immortals say many times that
>players simply wouldnt understand some aspects, or that to do
>so would be to difficult. Personaly I know that is 100%
>horse####.

Oh I think we could write it so they'd have a chance to understand it, but it'd be a mathematical formula, and honestly...some of the 12 year olds probably haven't taken algebra yet and wouldn't have a clue.

> Even something as simple as saying, skill x uses str/dex/con
>for check. Check is made with level + saves. Save for half is
>made purely on wisdom check. Perhaps having help files have
>something along the lines of:
>
>SKILL XYZ:
>AFFECTING ATTRIBUTES: Size (smaller better), Str(higher
>better), weight(lower better)
>Syntax: OpenCanWhoopAss
>Desc: Opening this can, lays down some serious whoopass on
>whoever your fighting.

This won't be happening. Plain and simple. If we wanted you to know the formula, we would publish it. You don't see this in Diablo, you don't see this in Quake, you don't see this in Warcraft. It's not necessary to play the game.

>Assumeing that the affecting attributes was accurate, it would
>save alot of frustration, anger, confuse, misinformation...

Misinformation created by people like you who waste hours trying to reverse architect something.

>MORE importantly if they were kept up to date the players
>could rely on it.

And we can't even keep the help files we have updated, the religions on the web page. We do not have infinite time.

>I would not have wasted 1400 hours on
>"testing" a ####load of skills only to discover that some
>finger happy immortal changed a bunch of skills mid test.

And we did it only to annoy you obviously. Based on what I've read from you so far. Your interpretation of "changed a bunch of skills" is usually, I got screwed by the random number generator OR I honestly don't know how this skill works.

>I think that An across the board alteration to "learning"
>rates be made to addapt them to other stats relevant to the
>skill/spell/prayer or song.

And yet...it's still learning. (Intelligence...Wisdom)

>Warriors of high constitution
>should be able to train endlessly, thus imrpoving their
>learning rates.

On what? Just standing there swinging a sword...yup...learning a lot here.

>Smart yet weak and frail warriors might have
>more insight (learn from mistakes and gain 3% instead of 1)
>but they still cannot train as much or constitant as their
>more hearty counterparts)

This already exists...your constitution...determines your hit points which determines how long you can stay in combat which determines how long you can train.

>A stat attunement in reguards to str would be a good step
>forward to making max 25 str as good as 25 con/dex/int/wis.

There is stat attunement for strength. If you think wielding a 15 pound weapon with 25 strength, and not having it drop even with -10 strength on, vs the guy with a 17 strength and the same -10 strenth, then I guess we're playing two different games.

>The display of luck stat perhaps at level 30.

No.

>Removal or training hp/mv/sps at your local trainer.

Maybe, but I don't see a compelling reason.

>A review/tweak of race vulns-perks-inherents-xp pen.

I don't think they're broken.

>PS:
>I know that the immstaff donate their free time,

And I've spent an hour and a half of it, responding to this.

>I know that
>you have a arsenal of players all suggesting what they think
>is good and what is needed for the game.

Alot of them think they speak for the entire playerbase when they do, which is more annoying than just making suggestions.

>I also know that
>there are dozens of players out there who put forward valid
>points time and time again in hope that CF will pay attention
>and the game will become immensly more enjoyable without the
>continued trend of it soaking up more and more time, providing
>more and more frustration.

We look at every idea that comes across our boards. Some of them get discussed, some of them get tweaked, some of them get implemented. A lot of them don't.

>Shooting down a suggestion with a simple fact/reason/example
>as to why it would not work is all that is required.

And as can be seen by this post...a waste of time. I could have written up a couple of skills/spells, some progs, an automated quest, fixed 20 bugs, etc in the time it took me to respond to this. Not everything is going to get an answer, pure and simple. Remember...we don't have infinite time, and we work on what we like to work on.

>Many immstaff allready do this. But I hope that many of the rants
>that I have posted in this rant are taken into consideration.

Based on my responses, it doesn't look like it.

>Take ten steps backwards and Have a look at the whole problem.

Okay.

>If im totaly wrong, ask yourself how I could be, what could be
>done to solve my errors.

I could give you the codebase so you could see that what I've told you is correct. I could make this post, and say that lots of your assumptions are wrong.

>Could releasing game information
>relevant to players characters actually help not only them but
>you.

It stops being a game when you have all that information. Trust me.

>If they have the information avaliable to themselves.
>They have no leg to stand on when commenting or complaining
>about a aspect relevant to that, especially if you say simply
>"We want it that way, and it shall remain that way".

They have no leg to stand on if we say that now.

>With
>information avaliable you might actually get players polls
>that ask that a certain aspect be changed in reguards to a
>specific skill/spell.

Yeah...that's what I want. Instead of "What's the best spec/legacy combo for an arial warrior" we'll get posts of "I think flurry needs to work better for me"

>I know its hard to let go of something
>you have created, but do remember that players are here to
>play it, if you please the masses, more will come :)

It's also easy to defend, especially with someone who makes assumptions that just aren't true.

10:07 p.m.

Another 15 minutes on part 3 (That's 1 hour & 15 minutes for those keeping score at home).

9:35 p.m.

>EXP PEN:
>Now I can understand how sickly this can be in "tweaking" ,
>balancing races and their perks/negs along with their xp cost
>isnt nothing easy. However I think that Some aspects need to
>be looked into, not only relevant to the races but how the
>whole game has affects on those races.
>
>Fore example: Most races have a vuln, some have two or more.
>There are many many items in the game that remove the bulk of
>those vulns, however there are still races that have vulns
>that cannot be covered. There is a arsenal of weapons for many
>damage types however there are a few vulns that there are few
>weapons for, why is this?

Because we haven't designed them.

>Is it a intentional inbalance, are
>you blissfully unaware of such inbalances.

It isn't intentional. I also don't think it's that big of a deal.

>Or is the staff
>lacking builders to create chessy items for said "gaps".

We don't see them as gaps like you do. There doesn't need to be at least one weapon of each type with every damage type. We build weapons that make sense with the area we've designed, not because the game needs an acidic bite polearm.

>Perks and vulns in reguards to xp pen:
>Personaly xp pen doesnt bother me one bit.

But you're willing to make a 30 line argument about it.

>I live purely for the pk ar hero range.
>It means that I dont plan to prowl for
>pk targets 8 levels below me :). That aside, Yes I have to
>spend more time leveling, which is boring as hell.. but part
>of the game and it forces you to put yourself in a position to
>be pked (which is always good :) ). However I think that a
>review needs to be preformed on a few races in reguards to
>perks/vulns/inherents/stats and xp pen.

So much for not bothering you one bit.

>I do not think that
>stats should be changed (I think the imms have a nice balance,
>perhaps a tweak or two.)

Score a second point for the Immortals.

>But they sure as hell should be
>accounted for them when looking at the overall process. If
>there was a race with 25 str/dex/con, and a 250 xp pen, people
>would laugh, but if it had a 2500 xp pen, people might think
>differently.

I doubt you'll ever see a race or class with anything over 500 exp penalty. One of the reasons I don't see a big difference in the experiece penalties is that it really doesn't stop anyone from leveling or heroing. If that were the case there'd be all sorts of people stuck in the 20-40 range, and there isn't. The other thing is, the higher experience penalty races are some of the most popular races.

>With current stat influences, certain stats are twice as
>important as others.

To you it might be strength, to someone else it might be con, to someone else it might be int. I don't think any one stat is twice as important as any other stat.

>Certain vulns and perks are extremly
>relevant to these as well. Overall tho, these perks & pens
>have no direct link to the relevant xp pen at all.

They play some factor, but there is no magic formula we plug a racial profile in and come up with experience penalty, no.

>This is a
>oldie and probably will never be changed, but look at cloud
>giants. Vuln neg and holy.. Seriously ####ed up #### right
>there. 2 vulns that cannot be protected against for #### at
>the same time.

Uhm...they can be protected against. You obviously spent to much time figuring out warrior specs & legacies to go actually look for gear that would do this.

>The only bonus all giants have is wielding
>two-handed weapons in 1 hand..
>Which in itself is 100% useless.

100% bash
100% enhanced damage
inherent racial abilities
larger size than most other races
giant resistance

>There is no bonus at all for a weapon that is flaged
>as two_handed. A ave 31 6 6 axe weight 25 is as good as a ave
>31 6 6 weight 25 two-handed axe. Now if two-handed weapons
>gained a 50% bonus (seing as they normally require 2 hands)
>then sure being a giant for being able to wield two-handed
>weapons would be relevant.

Why would anyone gain a bonus to a weapon that is designed to be used in two hands, but they are using it in one hand? Two-handed dedicated storm giant paladins have to use their two-handed weapon in...that's right. Two hands. To get the use of it. Otherwise, it's just a slightly bigger/heavier sword.

>Giant resist is a joke, I mean a
>total joke. The weapon base on this mud is saturated with
>special/elemental damage types which just total negates the
>usefullness of giant resist.

And yet, most all of those are limited (much more so than any other type of weapon), and still lots of people don't have or use them.

>Personaly I think giant resist
>code should be overhauled from its ancient 1990's code to 2000
>and RESIST WEAPON should be exactly that, all melee damage
>should be filtered through it.

A possibility, but I've got other more interesting things to work on.

>Would this inturn require a
>alteraction to xp pen, or other perks.

I doubt it.

> Perhaps. Would this
>balance things up for having such a shocking low dex and int &
>wis that you have to piss hundreds of hours down the drain
>practicing skills... probably.

You have to piss away. Nobody is holding a gun to your head.

9:50 p.m.

>Moving on.

The time needed to really explore what you claim to have would take far longer than 1400 hrs. The fact you spent that much time figuring out a small portion just baffles me, and yet scares me. I'm not trying to flame, but there is no way you can rank enough characters to hero in that given time, judging all the specs and legacies (two per warrior) let alone do enough practice per character (warrior) to get even a small idea.


To me your whole post and the changes you want seem to all be geared toward giants which you said is your favorite race. That is biased and stupid. The Imm's try to keep this place fun, exciting, and enjoyable as going to another world so to speak. How is it fun when you just number crunch all day...The imm's do that for us! SO WE CAN HAVE FUN!!! Let them handle all that #### (and thanks for doing it) All I know is bash lags and my second/third/fourth attack hits them, if I hit them enough and they hit me less I win. I keep it simple and too the point. I kinda wanna question your strange lifestyle, but I won't.

Part 2: 28 minutes

5:55 p.m.

>Weapon Specs:
>I recently tested a whole bunch of legacies & specs, I was far
>from impressed with a bunch of them especially how functional
>some were compared with others.

Which was part of the design. Some are utility, some are defense, some are offense, there is a wide variety.

>Simply put I think its bias in
>reguards to certain races how well some specs work and how
>poorly others work.

Some legacies were designed with very specific races being good at them in mind.

>I could be wrong, but I go from testing
>which I have preformed. Some of the differences were so tiny
>that I thought it purely accountable to randomness. However
>others stood out blatently.I assume that a bit of common sense
>applies with specs. However I do think that some common sense
>reguarding game design is also needed.

I have no idea what you're actually trying to say there.

>Take for example the mace spec:
>One one hand you have 1 skill, cranial, that is size based.
>The bigger you are the better you cranial.

Partially. There are a handful of other factors in there as well.

>Then the flip side,
>The smaller you are the better you drum... Personaly I can
>understand the cranial aspect, but I cannot understand the
>drum aspect it just seems stupid.

False.

>Sword spec:
>Flurry, totaly str/skill based. Okay Strength for multiple
>attacks ??? Just because I can lift heavy weights I should be
>able to land many attacks in a row ??

Partially. There are a handful of other factors in there as well.

>The flip side, Riposte, heavily dex based.

Dex-based, yes. Heavily, no.

>I've seen arials riposte 15 times in 10
>rounds and a fire giant only twice in 10 rounds. A parry is a
>parry, yet you need more dex to turn a attack forcefully back
>on the attacker. Personaly I view this as a str based skill on
>the assumption that your allready "parrying" the blow your
>going to need strength to push the blade back.. Anyway..

You don't "turn a attack forcefully back on the attacker". The echo is, You parry the blow and return an attack of your own. Being stronger isn't going to make that happen more. Being quicker and more agile is.

>Polearm spec:
>To start off with I will say that 6 months ago when I tested
>this I got totaly different results to when i tested it a week
>ago, tests that were confirmed by another player/character.

And yet somehow, we haven't touched any of the code for polearm specs.

>Polearm, you think large massive weapon heavy, for big strong
>people. Well you might think that but infact your wrong. Chop
>seems to be size based, enlarged fire giant seemed to chop
>alot better and harder than a reduced duergar.

Partially. There are a handful of other factors in there as well.

>The flipside,
>and I find this stupid beyond all things. Distance. It seems
>the smaller you are the better it is. Enlarged giant actually
>tanked nearly 32% worse than it did when reduced on the same
>creatures, tested over 30 mins each, roughly 135-170 combat
>rounds was the basis of the test.

False.

>Now even if the imms think
>that it might be "realistic". I would have made the assumption
>that game design would lead to a spec for all races that is
>both offensive & defensive.

There are powers in most specs that are offensive, defensive and utility. Some obviously favor one of the three more than the others. However, to say that the specs would be the same for all races is stupid. Within the races there are differences (stats & size jump to mind) that affect these skills. This means the specs will work differently for every race.

>I would have considered polearm to be a greate giant defensive spec.

True.

>It used to be. But not anymore it appears.

False.

6:23 p.m.
>END warrior specs:

Up front I'll state, I won't be reponding to any response to this thread. The time I'm wasting doing this isn't even worth it, but somedays I just have a morbid fascination with stupid ####.
Part 1: 30 minutes

12:51 p.m.
To show how much time wasted responding to this I'll time the length of my response.

>First Id like to say that Im a giant lover and that I am
>seeing a few things that upset me. I have also played many
>other races so these views I hope are not to bias or
>inacurate. If they are I hope a immortal with access to the
>specifics will correct my view with facts to back it up. That
>being said here are a few aspects that I want to rant about.
>
>Stat affects:
>
>Different stats seem to have a large affects in the game,
>unfortunately some more than others. And to top things off
>there is the ever elusive "luck" stat that seems to have a
>massive influence on a whole character (that or the game has
>massive consistent randomnes for specific characters).

12:52 p.m.
I'd be more inclined to say that the game has a massively inconsistent random number generator, than blame this on the elusive luck stat, or randomness on specific characters.

>A few nit picking things:
>
>STRENGTH; probably the most ####ty stat of them all, it serves
>no function other than the regular weapon weight/carry weight.
>Sure its used in a few, and I mean a few spec skills.
>Otherwise it is 100% useless.

12:57 p.m.
A few other examples:
Chance to break out of adhesive web.
Chance to force your way through gel rooms
Chance to disembowel
Chance to parry

>Other stats provide incrimented
>bonuses that are scaled from 15 to 25. From basically useless
>to extremly usefull.

12:59 p.m.
There is a sliding scale based on strength for:
hitroll
damroll
carry weight
weapon wield weight

I wouldn't call any of those "basically useless"


>Why not make strength usefull and filter
>enhanced damage through current str/25 as a multiplier.

1:02 p.m.
Because the enhanced damage skill is based on your ability in enhanced damage. You don't have to be strong to do more damage (It's one way, but not the ONLY way). You could be smart and know the sweet spot to place a blow. You could be agile and sneak a blow into an unprotected area and twist it deeper.

>Why not have str be more "beneficial" in thematically relevant
>checks. Personaly I think a 25 str giant should easily be able
>to pull itself out of quicksand, but a arial fail massivly due
>to lack of strength. Or perhaps breaking bindings, or anything
>where flexing some muscle is relevant.

1:02 p.m.
See above where there are examples of this.

>A conjurer with 10
>charisma is appauling compared with 20 charisma (10 more), why
>should a 15 str elf be able to hit as hard (5 or so less dam
>roll) as a giant with 25 str.

1:02 p.m.
See the enhanced damage argument above.


>INTELLIGENCE;
>I am working from the shadows on this one, but comments from
>other immortals in posts and in game have indicated the
>following:

>Bonuses to spell casting level

No, that's called spellcraft.

>saves check

In some cases.

>power of spell (tied in)

Again...that's called spellcraft.

>not to mention alot of checks are made against intelligence.

1:06 p.m.
"alot of checks" very factual, and not even worth responding to.

>Every level your mana (spell points) is also determind by this stat.

Partially.

>The real whopper however is that
>practice %'s are based on this stat totaly.

Correct.

>Personaly I think
>that this is crooked hugely. I think that spell learning rates
>should be based on int sure. Certain skills however should be
>based on relevant stats to that skill If your practicing
>endurance, consitution should be your check. If your
>practicing cleave, strength should be your check. If your
>practicing riposte, dex should be your check. So on and so
>forth.

No. You don't get better at cleave because you have high strength. You have to LEARN. Being strong doesn't mean you learn well.


>WISDOM;
>I've had little success in testing wisdoms affects on prayers,
>I would assume that prayers are similar to that of spells and
>bonuses are applied equally.

False.

>Wisdom also determins the number
>of mana that a person regains per
>tick/sleeping/standing/resting.

Partially.

>It also determins how many
>practices a person gets per level.

True.

>This is another aspect that
>I think needs to be addressed. Train hp/sp/mv needs to be
>removed from the game. If you can train these then you should
>be able to train luck and charisma.

How can you train luck? If there was some way to do that, people would flock to Las Vegas.
How can you train charisma? Plastic surgery perhaps. CF doesn't have that concept.

>Basically Being a gnome
>mage means that you get a extra 6 hp per level from pracs. Now
>if your average hp level was 60hp, a 10% bonus would still be
>nice, but not overly impressive. When your hp levels of say 18
>for a warrior, a bonus 6 hp is a massive 33% bonus. Seeing
>gnomes with more hps than giants and dwarfs is far from
>amusing.

1:10 p.m.
Statistical analysis ingored.

>DEXDERITY;

It's dexterity.

>One of the few stats that I think functions well. The
>difference between 15 dex and 25 is quiet noticable. Many
>skills use this, some which did not now seem to check dex
>also. There are many aspects in which I could talk about
>dexterity, but I have little to comment on it.

Chalk up 1 for the immortals. They've pleased you, which is apparently nearly impossible to do.

>CONSTITUTION;
>This is a catch 22 stat. Unfortunately due to game design this
>stat is what keeps your character ticking.

True.

>Also unfortunately it inbalances the game hugely.
>It wastes a crapload of time for many players.

I'm not seeing any inbalances in your argument.

>Con seems to be relevant to many malediction
>checks (that i've noticed),

Some.

>it determins how many hps you per tick.

Partially.

>However when it comes to leveling it only checks your
>natural con, not your current con, which is think is bad,
>really bad.

True that it does. False that it's bad.

>You can max your str/int/wis/dex/char and gain
>full affects (wis to a lesser degree due to needing 2 points
>for 1 functional point).

Because the benefit you get from magical items isn't as good as natural talent with regards to vitality and wisdom.

>Yet you
>get screwed over harshly for pking and losing con which I
>think is poor design.

1:15 p.m.
It's a good design. Nobody lives forever. There is an inherent risk in anything that you do. If you never lost constitution, what penalty is there for dying? You can go throw yourself at big nasty evil monster infinitely without any penalty.


>*** LUCK ***: Well this stat has pissed me off more than
>anything. I have had characters that get spamed almost every
>round with "you land a lucky blow" Lucky this, lucky that.

Which won't do a thing.

>Now
>I have a character that I think is the total opposite. I
>seriously think that his luck is like 1 out of 25.

Nobody's luck can be that low.

>With 100%'s in skills nothing works. And I mean shockingly low success
>rates, below 20%. I Think i've had a good 50 pks where not a
>single skill has worked, and not just 1 skill, I am talking
>about 4-6 skills that just fail 5-10 times in a row.

See the comment way up there about the random number generator.

>Luck seems to have an affect in the game

In some cases.

>It should be displayed on your character sheet.

No, it shouldn't.

>I pissed down the drain 150
>hours on a character that is ####ed up and total unfunctional,
>if it was infact due to a ####ty arse luck stat.

1:17 p.m.
That won't happen. How much luck affects you is not enough to cause a character to be completely unfunctional. You are making massive assumptions that just aren't true.

>I want to
>know, I will roll 100 characters and check the luck stat each
>time just to ensure I dont get that sort of character again.

There was a change a couple years ago to make it entirely random in a given range. The low end won't #### you, the high end won't make you a superhero. It doesn't have THAT large of an affect.

>There is 100% no need to hide the stat.

Yes there is. It's luck. It's not something YOU can quantify.

>You might as well hide
>all stats and remove trainers. Randomly generate stats for
>characters.

1:19 p.m.
Stupid comment aside, be careful what you wish for.

>END STATS:

1:20 p.m. - Break time for Zulg

Uh. So there's a luck stat after all? I always thought it was the paranoid invention of players who can't handle the realities of random number generation. Guess I was wrong.

Know you won't reply, but maybe someone else will. The idea of a undetectable luck stat that affects (even if only slightly) multiple aspects of the game seems like a bad, bad idea. I can imagine instances where it would be okay (like if you're cursed by a god or affected by something like the deck of fate) but having significant variations *from the outset* that affect a character for his/her entire life...is just icky.

nt

How about updating the helpfile for parry, firstly the part of: if you fail to dodge it block it.

Parry is checked before dodge right?

And perhaps mentioning that it is partly based on strength. Not that matters much though I guess.

And now my questions:

Does luck affect gains?

Does luck affect learning skills?

Your entire post is unbelievably innacurate. Next time know what you're talking about before you go on a tirade. I especially like the part where you act like you're some kind of spokesperson for the entire playerbase.

Well I could say I know hastur for a while not IRL, though, and he's an asshole a dip#### but he isn't a "n00b". Maybe he sucks and swallows but he is not a "n00b", I just feel offended when people talk outa their ass and fling insults(Hastur himself probably does this too), though my belief is that he didn't actually post this post out of his ass(surprisingly). Anyway, if you could define being a "n00b" then Hastur _might_ fall into that cattegory which I highly doubt. Thanks
Drive Through
Cheers
Not Jhyrb.

I would not have wasted 1400 hours on "testing" a ####load of skills only to discover that some finger happy immortal changed a bunch of skills mid test.

1) What MUD did you test on? I don't think it was CF, looking at your conclusions.

2) You can avoid having your 1400 hours (equivalent to ~35 full-time weeks at work, if you're curious) of anal-retentive number-crunching wasted by not spending 1400 hours anal-retentively number-crunching. Problem solved.

3) We constantly adjust things. As in, daily. I don't see that changing. Helpfiles give broad information- enough so you know how to use the skill, without holding your hand. I don't see that changing.

4) You aren't the player I design for. The player I design for plays games to have fun, not to run simulations. I'm not sure if you're the player that anyone designs for. If every player was you, I'd move to another MUD before conforming to the style of administration you want, because it would be the most boring place imaginable.

5) It's not even practical to enumerate what effects what in a lot of cases. Bash is ~600 lines of code. The skill is potentially effected by dozens of things. No one wants helpfiles that are 3 pages long. Good luck reverse engineering that, by the way.

valguarnera@carrionfields.com

>3) We constantly adjust things. As in, daily. I don't see
>that changing.

When is CF finished?!

>4) You aren't the player I design for. The player I design
>for plays games to have fun, not to run simulations. I'm not
>sure if you're the player that anyone designs for.

Rather personal, but mud comes in all types. I think he's the player that enjoys not only roleplaying, but PKing. Perhaps he enjoys winning PK battles! Perhaps he is trying to learn the game so that he can learn how to win! He seems like a very normal player to me.

What do you think is fun about CF?

>If every
>player was you, I'd move to another MUD before conforming to
>the style of administration you want, because it would be the
>most boring place imaginable.
>
I think different things must excite me!

Which MUD would you suggest?

>Bash is ~600 lines of code.

KISS! No wonder the staff has no patience for the playerbase.

>>3) We constantly adjust things. As in, daily. I don't see
>>that changing.
>
>When is CF finished?!

When Jullias pulls the plug.

Perhaps he enjoys winning PK battles! Perhaps he is trying to learn the game so that he can learn how to win! He seems like a very normal player to me.

My experience talking to people who have made a name for themselves as top-tier PKers is that they don't do anything remotely resembling Hastur's ill-guided masochism rituals. Not coincidentally, they can and have beaten him like a rented kobold.

I don't think he's a normal player. Actually, I found that whole post obsessive and rather painful to read.

Analogy: If you see a top-tier basketball player interviewed, they never say things like "I spent 1400 hours compiling a pie chart, and I know my 42.3% jump shot becomes a 39.5% jump shot against his defense, but I should also be able to get 12.7% more layups." Instead they say, "I watched him on tape a few times. He plays good perimeter defense, but I think I can put the ball on the floor and blow by him if I have to."

valguarnera@carrionfields.com

I'm gonna agree with the immortal here. CF is a game, when i'm playing any other game I just try a few different things out to see what works best for me and then I go with it and you learn along the way. I think the problem is that people think that because this is a mud run by people just like us, there must be a bunch of flaws, or tricks that would let us rule Thera if we could only figure them out. We just need to come to grips with the fact that CF has been around a long time and is a well done MUD and no amount of number crunching is going to make us better whereas playing the game more and trying different tactics will. I just got my ass beat by six imperials, what did I learn? errr..nothing but I know I hate the empire and i'm gonna kill every one of them if I ever get good at this game and figure out how.

>I'm gonna agree with the immortal here.

The immortals have taught you well, friend.

>no amount of number crunching
>is going to make us better whereas playing the game more and
>trying different tactics will.

Hm. What do you think the difference is?

>i'm gonna kill every one of them if I ever get
>good at this game and figure out how.

I'd like to know how to get good at the game too.

That's why I'm posting.

>Helpfiles give broad information- enough so
>you know how to use the skill, without holding your hand.

Allow me to boil down what small nugget of Hastur's post I might actually agree with on some planet. It might make for more interesting discussion than whether the luck stat exists. Might.

Nobody wants complete de-mystification. Well, maybe Hastur does, but he's not representative. I've been accused of being crunchy and I certainly don't want it. What I think might enhance the game's enjoyability for some people, though, is if the helpfiles provided a tad more general information about what influences various skills.

Maybe something on par with the new legacy helpfiles. If a skill is particularly effective {or ineffective} based on a certain vector {strength, size, weapon weight, etc.} then it would be nice to know that info after reading the helpfile. Not an exact chart of how each stat point influences success rate...just enough non-specific info that I can use the skill where it makes sense and not where it doesn't.

Ex. "While there are situations in which any warrior may find it beneficial to chop, those of exceptional strength will find themselves able to perform the maneuver to much greater effect."

Just a thought.

First of all:
Hastur is on crack. Don't take him seriously.
However with his random jumping and wild guesses
he has hit a few good points.

>4) You aren't the player I design for. The player I design
>for plays games to have fun, not to run simulations. I'm not
>sure if you're the player that anyone designs for. If every
>player was you, I'd move to another MUD before conforming to
>the style of administration you want, because it would be the
>most boring place imaginable.

There is one obvious thing about CF.
It is so obvious that many fail to notice it.
Immortals constantly enforce roleplaying
and constantly try to hinder number-crunching.
Why is that?
Ask this question not a philosopher but a child and he will asnwer:
"That is because people don't like to roleplay
but they like to PK and thus they are crunching."
Now you can start to deny that. :)
After all, why would there be a need to enforce something
that everyone likes and tries to do anyway?
And why to hinder something that people don't like to do
and avoid to do anyway?

>5) It's not even practical to enumerate what effects what in a
>lot of cases. Bash is ~600 lines of code. The skill
>is potentially effected by dozens of things. No one wants
>helpfiles that are 3 pages long. Good luck reverse
>engineering that, by the way.

I don't mind to have help files that are 3 pages long.
I would prefer to see a detail help file and trust me
I'm able to skip its parts that would be unimportant for me
rather than to see a very vague roleplaying help file
that gives me slightly above the usage syntax.
And if I want to have a clue how this or that skill/spell works
I have to create a test character.
Many people actually do that ( I don't merely because I don't have time for that )
A good example is the whole deal with legacies and their help files.
Every second deleted warrior writes that he rolled just to test legacies.

know anyone who took say a fencing class in college?
or is in the sca or one of those groups?
riposite is entirely dex based, perhaps if another stat
should be checked it would be int.

from personal experience irl.

The Immortals don't care if you're happy or not.

Once upon a time, there was a PK/RP mud, where a set of immortals decided (wisely) that open crunching of numbers was counteractive to a roleplaying atmosphere.

The mechanics were still simple enough, that a player could intuit what factors affected his skills, and could have some idea of how a character would fare before rolling it.

Once upon a time, Immortals were Players.

Perhaps the staff that has inherited this mud has forgotten why they do not discuss code or numbers, regardless - you are not the first to be frustrated by it, and by the looks of things you will not be the last!

Testing things for yourself is futile. As the staff is quick to point out, they spend their time improving the mud, continuously updating code and implementing new features.

Thera is now a subtle beast, full of so many complexities and calculations, that you will perhaps never know why a thing works the way it does.

Those who know the code will be quick to point out when you are wrong, and their loyal army of yes-men will be quick to flame. Rest your fingers, preserve your reputation, and quietly play the game. Enjoy the sense of wonder that comes from winning a fight.

Long for the skill/spell just out of reach! Despair when it does not improve your character!

But do not complain, friend.

>The Immortals don't care if you're happy or not.

This much is true, but on the other hand if you weren't happy, then why play? Noone is holding a gun to your head, forcing you to log in.

>Once upon a time, there was a PK/RP mud, where a set of
>immortals decided (wisely) that open crunching of numbers was
>counteractive to a roleplaying atmosphere.

OK, with you so far.

>The mechanics were still simple enough, that a player could
>intuit what factors affected his skills, and could have some
>idea of how a character would fare before rolling it.

Thus eliminating the need to play said character. Why play if you know how it's going to turn out? That's just not my idea of fun.

>Once upon a time, Immortals were Players.

Actually, in the beginning, the imms were imms. They had mortals, but with one or two exceptions, they played as imms. Most if not all of the current immstaff, started out as players, so they have a better grasp of the "common being" (The PC non sex term) mentality. PLaying without a grasp of the numbers behind it all. Many of said imms were recent additions, in the last two or less years, and so have an even fresher memory of being an ignorant "Joe/Jane normal".

>Perhaps the staff that has inherited this mud has forgotten
>why they do not discuss code or numbers, regardless - you are
>not the first to be frustrated by it, and by the looks of
>things you will not be the last!

I pretty much agree, knowing how it all works just takes away from the fun of trying new thinsg and being pleasantly surprised.

>Testing things for yourself is futile. As the staff is quick
>to point out, they spend their time improving the mud,
>continuously updating code and implementing new features.

Thus you will never run out of new things to try.

>Thera is now a subtle beast, full of so many complexities and
>calculations, that you will perhaps never know why a thing
>works the way it does.

I'm just content to know it works at all. I don't need to take apart my 52 inch screen TV and 6.1 surround sound home theater system, and map out it's parts, just to be able to throw Braveheart in and enjoy me some Gibson-kicking-the-english-ass action.

>Those who know the code will be quick to point out when you
>are wrong, and their loyal army of yes-men will be quick to
>flame. Rest your fingers, preserve your reputation, and
>quietly play the game. Enjoy the sense of wonder that comes
>from winning a fight.

Frankly, I have a few things that I enjoy, that NOT many people know how to do. I like it this way. If everything was common knowledge, then it wouldn't be special. How did I find these things out? Trial and error.

>Long for the skill/spell just out of reach! Despair when it
>does not improve your character!

Because your character isn't just a list of skills and spells. It's a character and only has as much life and personality as you give it.

>But do not complain, friend.

Well, to be honest what good does it do? You either like the game, or you don't. If not, then don't play.

if you weren't happy,
>then why play? Noone is holding a gun to your head, forcing
>you to log in.

I don't :)


>Thus eliminating the need to play said character. Why play if
>you know how it's going to turn out? That's just not my idea
>of fun.
>
Perhaps our idea of roleplaying differs! Let me explain why I am here posting:

Every few months, for the past few years, I start to remember fantastic moments that I enjoyed in CF. And I find myself daydreaming about a character, and how I could roleplay that character in CF.

When I am ROLEPLAYING, as the word means to me, I am seeing my character moment to moment as it interacts with the world of Thera.

Unfortunately, as it stands, most of the time spent in Thera is hard-coded actions through the games' commands. If I am playing to WIN, in PK and otherwise, I cannot wear the clothing I would like my character to wear, nor necessarily fight the way I would like my character to fight.

So, to create a character, I must consider how I will incorporate GAME MECHANICS into my daily, living, breathing life. The joy is in the interaction with others, not in experimenting with "myself" to discover how I work.


>>Once upon a time, Immortals were Players.
>
>Actually, in the beginning, the imms were imms.

The current Immortals, were once Players - and once, the Immortals Played.


>Thus you will never run out of new things to try.

I (and the original poster) enjoy very different things about this mud then you must!!


>Frankly, I have a few things that I enjoy, that NOT many
>people know how to do. I like it this way. If everything was
>common knowledge, then it wouldn't be special. How did I find
>these things out? Trial and error.

Knowledge of secrets should grant the advantage in battle, not skill.

In a world where secrets have so much power, why would a group without knowledge suspect a group with effortless access to every nook and cranny?!

>Well, to be honest what good does it do? You either like the
>game, or you don't. If not, then don't play.
>
I loved a game, and know exactly what I loved about it - but I seem to have lost it somewhere!

You're drawing a lot of conclusions that are not accurate. I don't generally agree with you on the rest of the points. That's about as much energy as I'm in the mood to give this at the moment.

The Imms will post a list of all the common misconceptions about CF. And on that day, we will all find out that Zorszaul was, in fact, played by a genetically engineered lab rat.

Stat stuff.

Strength: Uh, weapon weight stuff is pretty big. It's huge for any fighting class, and even important for some non-fighting classes that need the weapon to parry. There's a reason gearing for strength is one of the more common things to gear for in the game.

Int: You're wrong on a lot of stuff here.

Wis: I rarely see gnomes with more hps than dwarves or giants. I'm talking natural max here, not geared max. If they couldn't train hp/mana/mv, they'd be screwed.

Con: We want dying to have penalties. Hell, several recent changes have lessened these penalties. Losing con is something thats gonna stay, and how hp gains are calculated is going to stay the same. Less penalty for death means a lot more mindless suicide throw away chars. We don't like that.

Luck: Wow. I mean...wow. You're wrong. Thats all I've got to say.

Giants: You forgot to mention that cloud giants fly. I'd call that major. Wielding two-handed weapons in one-hand is no big deal? Man, I need some of that crack. Do you get a bonus for using a 2-h weapon? No, but it increases your potential choice in weapons by a ton. You can duel-wield that 2-h weapon, whereas a non-giant race couldn't. This is an advantage. Giant resist is crap? There's more physical damage weapons out there than magic, and even some spells and abilities that use physical damage. All giants have at least one elemental resist in addition to giant resist. I'm...baffled. Pissing hours down the drain practicing? Simple solution, don't do that. Or if you absolutely have to have perfect skills, play a high int race. Guess what, there's a reason for all that, and giants aren't going to learn stuff as fast as smart races.

Sword Specs: Flurry is strength based because it's an unrelenting series of attacks. You tear into an opponent with a series of attacks. It's all muscle, no quickness or finesse about it. Riposte is all about finesse and timing. These make sense to me.

Posting a big sheet of magic numbers? Never gonna happen. I don't understand them. I don't want to. I don't want to make this game into one big fat statistics class where it's purely running numbers. While you're busy crunching numbers, a creative player will be finding a neat way to kill you. We want some mystery with the game. We want some stuff unknown. There's a reason for that. Valg made a post that summed up a conversation he had with The Pico that illustrates that perfectly. Damn if I can remember where it's at now, but it's a good read. I don't know all the secret numbers, as I said, nor do I wanna know. I play with things in game, and I get a feel for every ability, and I go by that from my own experience, and I don't spend hundreds of hours testing to figure it out. Do I have numbers to back it up? Nope, but I'm doing just as fine as anyone else.

Am I saying everything is going to stay the same and we feel the system is perfect and aren't going to change it? No. I am saying it isn't as broke as you make it out to be, and that you've blown a lot of issues out of proportion. You do bring up a few interesting ideas, but on the whole, I don't think it's as broke as you think it is.

Secondly, are you playing the same game I am? You make a lot of grossly inaccurate assumptions, wild speculations, and what I can only assume are anger-induced hallucinations. I'm not going to explain where you're wrong, but I will tell you why I'm not going to as well as why we don't release specifics to players of what everything does exactly.

As a whole, we imms hate number-crunching. There are enough variables in play in any situation that spending hours and hours of crunching numbers (stats, skills, percents, gear, saves, etc etc etc) to find the 'perfect situation' is pointless. Since people complain about not having enough time for the game already, we kindly old imms have tried to steer players away from the inevitable number crunchaholicism. Despite our best attempts, there are some of you we failed to reach. Sorry 'bout that.

I realise as I type that this sounds horribly sarcastic and not very helpful, sorry 'bout that too. Basically, the more specifics we throw out at players, the more inclined people seem to be to crunch them down to nasty (ultimate) meaningless numbers. I think the basics of all skills (despite what you posted above) and stats are fairly easy to track if you pay enough attention and stick around long enough. The basics are more or less covered in helpfiles, it's why we write them.

Strength stat analysis.
19 = +3 to hit, +3 to damage
20 = +3 to hit, +4 to damage
21 = +4 to hit, +5 to damage
22 = +4 to hit, +6 to damage
23 = +5 to hit, +7 to damage
24 = +5 to hit, +8 to damage
25 = +6 to hit, +9 to damage

A cloud giant gets 9 more innate dam roll then a felar.
Thats big. I couldn't be bothered to read the rest after the weak opening.

It must just be me, but that bonus 6 damage for 6 points of str is just outstanding. I guess your just unable to bend your brain around how 6 damage in a 100 dam roll kit is even comparable to the difference 25 dex has on 19 dex, or 25 wis to 19 wis, 25 con to 19 con.

I guess i'll just add you to the fools r'us group of the player base. nice constructive reply, Dont waste peoples time reading your #### if you've not even thought on it.

PS: nice cut paste from dios :)

And its just as asinine as the first paragraph. I tried to be contructive, I corrected you when you said str had no affect on how hard one hits. I didn't flame you as you did me, I just pointed out your mistake. Yes, I copied and pasted from dio's, you really think I'm going to waste my time writing that out when theres a copy readily avaible? Oh, but wait... now I am wasting my time feeding the troll.

I don't know about you, but I've never had a set with 100 dam roll...hell, I've never had a set with 60 dam roll. So if you are always walking around with this big set with 100 dam roll, then my apologies. You're obviously the king of cf and know everything about it.

You throw #### out in this post that have *no* basis in fact. I think you just made up half of it. Have you seen the code? Do you know what skills check which stats? No... you don't. And if you've tested every skill with every different combinations of stats(You're spouting off like you have done this) then you're a sad little man. Example of this is you claim con gear has no affect on hp gains... I'm not saying it does, or doesn't but you have NO WAY OF KNOWING THIS. PERIOD.

Now, again, while your talking about vulns.. your spouting off like you know every ITEM in the game just as well as you know every SKILL. Wow, man, you're like so smart. Of course you know how many weapons that expliot X vuln exist better than the imms do. Why would I think anything different? I tip my hat to your genius. Now you claim cloud giants have two vulns that can't be protected against...its called resist postive and resist negative. AND THERES A LEGACY THAT PROTECTS FROM NEGATIVE AS WELL. ..Wait, oh right you know everything, sorry, I must be wrong.

Weapon specs. AGAIN! You know how every stat affects every skill! THAT IS JUST AMAZING! I'm not even going to touch this part, because unlike you obviously, I haven't seen the code.

I don't know about you, but I love the mystery in cf. I wouldn't look at the code if I COULD. Whats the fun in playing a game that you know exactly whats going to happen in every situation??

Now, you say the imms are lazy and thats why they don't solve these problems you've reported. No, see, the problem is THERE ARE NO PROBLEMS. Sorry, you're ####ing fired.

6 points of damage, better weapon choices, + heavier weapons means you deal a lot more damage.

And if you have 100 damroll, you are either lucky and don't deserve it, and no amount of strength is going to save you from the hunters, or your strength will allow you to lands more hits with that damroll.

I think I might agree with you on a few things, but damned if I'm reading all that.

nt