Don't remember if this has been thrown up before, but wouldn't it be a good idea (and aid in eq rotation) to put a counter on every piece of eq of, I don't know, two or three, so that afterwards this piece is destroyed (and is no longer repairable)? It also seems more realistic: you can't repair something forever?
And to further this idea:
- why not lower AC every time something is broken?
- perhaps even introduce faulty repairs (like a piece of metal/wood/... scratching/grazing/injuring you from time to time when you fight)
- some things (like legendary/famous/infamous flagged) aren't to be repaired and go 'poof' instead of broken?

At this point, things like dent/stoneshatter/... is not as scaring as it used to be since, well, all you need is gold (which isn't a big deal at high level) and you don't have 'the fear' of losing a difficult to get piece of eq.

as my invokers to gate happy healers who would gate in with a staff of striking of spike toed boots. You know, the 15th level healers that would level sit and just gate to people in their range? Usually a failed stoneshatter was enough to make them stop gating to you for fear of losing their shinies, now it just means they need to get them repaired.

I like the idea of there being a max number of repairs for items so that these skills/spells still present some small amount of danger rather than just an annoyance.

Based on the way Zulg implemented repair, even if I was 100% on board with your idea it's way too much of a pain to implement in my opinion.

nt

Recently I had a discussion with Arvam and Umiron regarding a new ability idea that would, in some circumstances, 'break' a subset of items.

Several years ago, this was off the table. If abilities that destroyed gear got common, it would sharply lower the incentive to explore the most challenging of areas. We don't want a trade space where you take a big risk and invest time recovering a particularly valuable item, then have it destroyed by anyone in a couple minutes.

Now? An ability that destroys gear can be tactically interesting (taking a worn item out of play mid-combat). It creates a use for money, which creates a need to get your butt out of a guild and adventure. Down the road, it can create a niche for skills that resist or undo the damage.

valguarnera@carrionfields.com

What if broken items fell to the ground instead of into inventory?

I kind of hope you don't compromise though.

Dent/stoneshatter/etc. can have a huge impact on a fight, as it immediately removes armor that beyond the simple AC could also be giving them other stats. I remember denting a pair of gauntlets in a fight that effectively removed a few strength points which was enough to weapon drop combined with boneshatter.

You also act as if it is just a couple of gold while it can be quite a bit to drop on repairing something over and over again in a continued fight. If you are an outlander, you are effectively without that piece of gear for a while. Even if they keep going to repair it, you could figure out where they prefer to repair and have a gank set up there.

If you want gear rotation, kill the person and take the piece of gear. Otherwise, this just seems like another complaint over things changing.

It made the game a little less 'carrion fields'

You can no longer weaponbreak/dent/shield cleave/deflect (and crumble) and then go gather the limited piece you destroyed. Simply because they can repair it. I know the intent was to 'improve' the game, but a few changes (this one) along with the mv bleed due to overweight have SIGNIFICANTLY changed the way the game plays, and in my opinion...made it less fun.

I just don't see how you think this is significant. If you want the gear, kill the person for it or do the old blind/disarm. If the only way you can get limited gear from someone else is by weapon breaking then running to the mob, you have bigger issues.

nt

Not really, sitting there and spamming dent trying to get that right piece of armor would end with you dead as well. I didn't personally face Ahtieli, but if they were as good as everyone makes them out to be I would guess they would be wielding an unbreakable weapon (I could be wrong). This just isn't as big a deal as you are trying to make it out to be.

There is a reason ahtieli fullsac'd anyone who tried to use dent. Because it was a very dangerous(then) ability to their character.

The skill was an unnecessary annoyance in terms of time regearing.

Ahtieli was the sort of player who was very shrewd in managing his risk in PK (he survived Lich constitution for a very long time) and probably sacced as a means of dissuading the use of the tactic.

The distinction is between letting someone dent with no consequences aside from their death, or letting them dent you knowing that if they die they are going to need to replace their equipment entirely.

Given Ahtieli's skill level, general game knowledge, plus leader powers, plus a number of competent allies there was a pretty strong chance that anyone going toe to toe with him was going to wind up dead, or running.

But honestly this is way off topic, aside from you proving the point that implementing a change would probably lead to more unnecessary full saccing behavior.

I do not.

You're not likely to go getting any "best community member of the year" awards if you're running around stomping newer players and full-saccing them (and it might be worth keeping in mind that any time this happens and a new player quits someone on the Imm team has personally lost over 20 man-hours of marketing/advertising time per person to attract them here and keep them interested)...

...But I've been playing the game next to you all for years, I've probably taken more beatings in CF and lost more sets than most over that time. These events no longer phase me personally. If I thought sacrificing behavior was an inherently bad thing all of the time I'd be advocating that sacrifice should be removed, or altered. I'm not.

Plus I do like the idea of risk in the game (see other post on newbie forum about death traps in areas.) Some particular mechanics lead to a lot of drama, character meltdowns etc. I don't think old dent is a direct cause of that, but it can trigger said events.

In any event this is an inconsequential line of reasoning; I have no idea about the code specifics but if Daev says that the time investment is massive for the scope of the changes and that (precious) man-hours of coding should be utilized on more important projects then this is only going to be a back and forth debate about an unrealistic code change.

It's true that gear-"destroying" abilities are no longer a viable method of removing a piece of limited equipment from another character and going out and getting it yourself. I suppose that's the downside of the change, though I personally don't remember those abilities being used for that purpose a whole lot anyway.

The upside of the change is that now we have an entire category of abilities that: A) are mechanically useful; and B) people are no longer averse to using for fear of being labeled a "griefer" (and the various consequence thereof). Likewise, we don't have all the complaining we had before about liberal use of said abilities.

While I suppose one could argue that this change makes CF a little less cutthroat as it once might have been and thus alters the essence of the game, I'd maintain that the change was a positive one and such a sentiment is a little too melodramatic.

Agreed - specifically on being able to use the abilities without feeling like a griefer. I would have never used dent before the changes.

nt

jdkfl

It might get stolen though.

Which brings up another viable way to get gear, pair with a thief and break then steal. It can still be done, and it isn't nearly as big of a deal as you are making it out to be.

nt

No, and that ends civilized discussion so this thread is over for me.

I recommend changing your tone when posting here.

valguarnera@carrionfields.com

There are no people who disagree with our beliefs!

This is beneath you. It's possible to disagree with someone without actually calling them retarded.

... what the skill and battle scene was like prior to the change. They are completely different and to reason they are the same are 'not very' different is just that..

And I like having them come here, which is why I will have a low tolerance for posts like the one I replied to above.

If you or CD feel the need to make posts calling people names, that's why the Internet invented the YouTube comments section. If you come here, be civil.

valguarnera@carrionfields.com

This is a game that is 100% free to play, run and programmed by people for free. It takes no time at all to state that someone is not seeing or understanding our point. In any communication we must phrase it in a way that the receiver understands and comprehends. Further more, don't we contend that positive communications and forming ideas into questions are great tools to persuade others to our opinion?

Just some thoughts on negative and positive communications.

P_N

I definitely agree with you that the changes were for the better, really - I most definitely like the fact that I can hold on to something I spent time in getting (whether that is by killing someone or getting a group together or whatever). I still think that having a piece of eq "destroyable" over time, it might help in quicker eq rotation and help in avoiding absolute powerhouses holding onto all the best eq the whole time. Since as Daev said, it's technically not doable, we'll just have to disagree :)

I'm sorry that you misunderstood the message as a complaint over things changing. You're way too quick with your response, and I personally don't like the attitude 'We decided it to be this way, and it's going to be this way, whether you like it or not'. Part of your (and probably any company's) success is to listen to its customers. Which has been done a lot in the past (with Santa Zulgh and all sorts of other initiatives, which I think only made this game better). However, your reply comes across as a big middle finger. That's a shame, I think. But let's not go down that road, because that was not what I was aiming for, and has nothing to do with the content of my message. I made an honest attempt at trying to improve a game concept you guys introduced to make this game more fun, but which I think is flawed. You don't have to agree with me, but keep the middle finger for a later stage, yes?

Yes, I think gear rotation has changed a lot over time, and I do think that the concept is part of the fun for a majority of players. I think there won't be many people who would play the game if all eq would be standard and very much alike. So, at some point, people will go looking for eq to better themselves. You, as CF management so to speak, also introduced 'chromatic fire' when dying and 'poofing eq' if someone doesn't log on enough. Gear rotation, no? I like that. And then all of a sudden, you do the contrary with the 'broken eq concept'. I'm just trying to point out that your strategy for gear rotation and for which you introduced several good things (honestly, I think they're good), is being countered by this concept. With a tweak here and there, you could 'improve' (from where I stand that is) it and follow your overall strategy of gear rotation.

Start quote:
"Dent/stoneshatter/etc. can have a huge impact on a fight, as it immediately removes armor that beyond the simple AC could also be giving them other stats. I remember denting a pair of gauntlets in a fight that effectively removed a few strength points which was enough to weapon drop combined with boneshatter."
I'm not saying dent or stoneshatter are bad skills/spells, and sure, they can have a huge impact on a fight, but that's honestly not my point. It's the fact that when eq is broken, it can be repaired time and time again, and doesn't move around to other players. They don't scare

Start quote:
"You also act as if it is just a couple of gold while it can be quite a bit to drop on repairing something over and over again in a continued fight. If you are an outlander, you are effectively without that piece of gear for a while."
I agree that for an Outlander, repairing can be a pain in the ass. For every other PC, gathering 10K, perhaps 15K for most famous/infamous eq and a lot of legenday items (ok, even 20K - and I do mean at higher levels, as from 30-35 on) isn't much of a problem. So yes, I don't feel the gold needed isn't really a drop for most people.

Start quote:
"Even if they keep going to repair it, you could figure out where they prefer to repair and have a gank set up there."
Really.

Start quote:
"If you want gear rotation, kill the person and take the piece of gear."
I can probably gather 20K gold far more easy than kill a person and get a piece of eq, really. That being said, I agree with you. Then again, I think your overall game concept of gear rotation, would be improved by putting a counter on it, so that it would be destroyed after two or three times.

Start quote:
"Otherwise, this just seems like another complaint over things changing."
As I said, I'm sorry you misinterpreted my idea. Because that is what it was.

I am a hero imm. I have no power or decision making in anything. At all. Honestly, it would be best if you treat my entire response as player opinion because that is much closer to what it is.

I'm not trying to be a jerk, though I am likely coming off as one. I just don't view your "fix" as anything but moving in the opposite direction. Causing items to be gone after two or three breaks really makes all of the repair changes kind of pointless to me because it would just break too fast in my mind.

Beyond this, there were skills like dent that I would never use before the changes and I wouldn't use after your changes. It just is pushing things backwards, which you view as good and I don't. I don't believe these repair changes had much of an impact on gear circulation in the first place (my opinion), so I don't really see any changes as necessary here.

Not really. It merely means you get a few more uses out of it. Like your gear and weapons are more like talismans that other players can choose to brandish to remove charges.

Of course, in a much more limited fashion as you need to be fighting that combo.

It's a joke that you say 'have a gang ready' at the repair shop. Like that is killing the Kuo-toa King for a boiled shield which is designed to be very easily cleaved because of its power threshold.

Don't fall into the trap of thinking that someone disagreeing with you is someone giving you the middle finger. The dude is joining a discussion you started. The fact that he joined in the discussion is evidence that the "company" is listening. Even if it is a low level sales rep.

Bringing up how a "company" should act is stupid also. You aren't the only customer and due to the nature of the game, no individual can have their experience customized to suit them.

This is not a comment on your ideas, just your attitude. Don't be yet another one of "those guys."

As it is (as I said) not the point of the idea that I had.

I am far more inclined to go with Umiron's reply, or Daevryn's. The tone, or message, is different from what Ekaerok used or said in his first reply. I can live with a disagree, seriously. If you read his first message again, you'll agree with me it's definitely not listening, and it's really poor evidence. The second one is far more 'listening' and trying to discuss, really.

I do agree on not being able to have every individual's preference implemented though. And yes, the whole company thing was probably way over the top also (doesn't make it less true though). Still, you're as patronizing as I probably was, what with your whole 'don't be yet another one of "those guys"'. So I guess we're even now.

My post was at least 1000x more patronizing than yours. That's what I do. I am "that" guy. We only need one. Don't be one of "those" guys, because I want to keep my status as "that" guy. The day "that" becomes "those" is a harbinger of the end times.

Red Green, my master.