Hi all,

I was curious if the staff would consider either lowering edge costs across the board, or implementing new ways to obtain edge points in addition to those already existing.

A common theme to posts on both forums seems to be that people REALLY like edges - myself included. They provide a route of character customization/building which is a huge appeal to many players of this type of game.

Would you consider:

Automatically giving a character X edge points throughout ranks (every 10 ranks or something)

Putting the obs/explore edge point notches back where they were (every 1k instead of 2k/3k)

Giving edge points, or a fraction thereof for every item retrieval instead of starting it at 10.

Giving edge points for hours played (after level 11) at intervals 20/50/100/150/200/etc. (to avoid abuse of idling a lowbie with PK protection)

I'd personally like to see more edges in the game. Not only were they vastly popular (every time you guys introduced new ones it was quite well received). They add a lot of flavor to the game, and serve as goals in addition to simply ranking/PK stats/etc.

I understand this is a touchy subject, and I do not mean to beat a dead horse. Thank you guys for any response this may bring.

You can't have too much. Deal with it!

(Ok, this whole thread is triggering. I better stop now.)

>Hi all,
>
>I was curious if the staff would consider either lowering edge
>costs across the board, or implementing new ways to obtain
>edge points in addition to those already existing.

I'm not interested in lowering edge costs across the board. We've tossed around some ideas on new methods and some unrelated things, but nothing that has grown legs yet.

>A common theme to posts on both forums seems to be that people
>REALLY like edges - myself included. They provide a route of
>character customization/building which is a huge appeal to
>many players of this type of game.

An observation more than an argument:

Ironically, while there are a LOT of edges (see below), relatively few of them are remotely popular. So while in theory edges allow for a huge degree of customization, in practice they don't really result in customization so much as they amplify the strength or mitigate the weaknesses of builds that still end up being built and played the exact same way. In essence, things are just as 'cookie-cutter' as they would be without edges at all.

That's our fault, of course. Unfortunately, the only solution to that is for a very knowledgeable coder to go back and refactor individual edges and those stars just haven't aligned yet.

>Would you consider:
>
>Automatically giving a character X edge points throughout
>ranks (every 10 ranks or something)

I would not.

>Putting the obs/explore edge point notches back where they
>were (every 1k instead of 2k/3k)

I would not, both because I think it's turned out to be a ####ty mechanic (in the sense that it no longer achieves it's original goal) and because I think the current math is fair. Remember, when that feature was originally coded it was *not* typical, let alone possible, to rack up the kind of EXP/OXP that it is today. Part of that change was merely keeping the value of that exchange rate, so to speak, in line and reasonable.

>Giving edge points, or a fraction thereof for every item
>retrieval instead of starting it at 10.

I would not.

>Giving edge points for hours played (after level 11) at
>intervals 20/50/100/150/200/etc. (to avoid abuse of idling a
>lowbie with PK protection)

I would not, though we've discussed something kinda/sorta like this that I'm not going to elaborate on because then if we don't do it I'll get extra hate mail for a couple of weeks. I will say that what we discussed would not be interesting to min/maxers or players whose interest in edges is predicated on PK.

>I'd personally like to see more edges in the game. Not only
>were they vastly popular (every time you guys introduced new
>ones it was quite well received). They add a lot of flavor to
>the game, and serve as goals in addition to simply ranking/PK
>stats/etc.

It's possible we'll see new edges in the future related to changed class designs (e.g., neo-Shaman) or as compliments to new features. But, given that there are already 800+ edges I'd say coding more for the sake of variety is near the absolute bottom of our priority list. Besides, I hear nobody can afford them anyway.

>I understand this is a touchy subject, and I do not mean to
>beat a dead horse. Thank you guys for any response this may
>bring.
>

You're welcome.

I just don't get why, when a majority of people come with ideas they are all shot down because YOU or the IMMs aren't a fan of the ideas. I mean votes, polls, are non existent? Considering that it is something for the player base which we all see is dwindling. I don't know why it's always an iron-fist with IMM's about anything being changed or looked at.

start there and you basically have your answer

tack on balance and policing and you get sprinkles on your cake

nt

nt

NT

>I just don't get why, when a majority of people come with
>ideas they are all shot down because YOU or the IMMs aren't a
>fan of the ideas. I mean votes, polls, are non existent?
>Considering that it is something for the player base which we
>all see is dwindling. I don't know why it's always an
>iron-fist with IMM's about anything being changed or looked
>at.

Dallevian isn't wrong. We're all chasing fun. For players, that means choosing whether to play CF or something else, managing the expectations, and others things. For the staff, it (usually) means balancing other people's fun with their own because oftentimes their fun is derived from that of others. Which is to say that most of us enjoy CF more when, and perhaps only if, it has enough (some subjective amount of) players. On the other hand, we have to also prioritize our own happiness in working on CF otherwise it doesn't make sense to do it at all, which means no CF. Because CF isn't a product and we're not getting paid, the only motivation to contribute is fun, and building someone else's vision when that vision doesn't match one's own is probably not fun. For 22 years now the proposition hasn't changed: we build the kind of game that appeals to us and hope other people enjoy it too. It's a little more complicated than that, but sans the sugarcoating that's basically the crux of it.

So there's that.

Also, you're taking one example and using it as a foundation to assert that we unilaterally ignore players and their feedback, which isn't true. We've changed or implemented a lot of things based on player-submitted ideas and feedback, include some very favorable changes to skill learning and experience. IIRC, the item search (and later upping it's level ceiling) was a player idea, and I'm sure I could come up with many more without even dipping into Santa Zulg.

If a dozen players demanded we let them start at level 51 or allow them to load equipment citing that it would "reduce the grind" or make the game more fun we would say no over and over, no matter how many times they asked. If your assertion is that somehow means we're tyrannical or unreadable then I guess I'll have to get used to your disappointment.

This is not me slamming you guys just trying to understand. Because this isn't a new thing. I normally don't speak on the forums just kinda read, glimpse knowledge, and see what the overall PB is thinking. So me speaking was just from a place of understanding.

I know there is not nearly as many coders as times past so that would slow. But I do feel more times then not I see things shut down on the premise of it not being "fun" to the immortals to look at. Which ultimately will leave you guys with a game built by you with no one to play.

You have no idea how often Destuvius calls my ideas stupid for some reason or another. Mostly, it amounts to the fact that CF is a VERY complicated balance, and lots of cool ideas just don't manage to balance easily. Hell, even stuff that DOES get done, and tested as best as possible in theory still needs adjusted after going live.

*Edit to fix my horrible typing on my phone while chasing pokemon w/ a 6yr old so Demos doesn't mock me anymore. (At least about the typing)

$10 to someone other than beront this time?

"Ironically, while there are a LOT of edges (see below), relatively few of them are remotely popular. So while in theory edges allow for a huge degree of customization, in practice they don't really result in customization so much as they amplify the strength or mitigate the weaknesses of builds that still end up being built and played the exact same way. In essence, things are just as 'cookie-cutter' as they would be without edges at all."

I see your point there. Would you maybe consider rolling these "Need to Succeed" style cookie-cutter edges into their respective class/skill combo's?

I think also, that since edges are more scarce than they were before - people are less likely to vary from "what is known" to try something new.

For reference, I had been considering taking the 'lucky' edge. I have never taken it - ever. And, I'm playing a class which has several critical success chance based abilities. I mulled over taking it for about a week (possibly longer) and ended up going with an edge that I already knew instead.

The availability of less edges, and less lee-way to experiment with edges probably ensures that the same edges are always taken.

Now, I don't think that my character would be "ruined" if I had taken the lucky edge. But, it isn't tried and true and the edge points I had were hard earned.

Would you take the lucky edge? ;)

>"Ironically, while there are a LOT of edges (see below),
>relatively few of them are remotely popular. So while in
>theory edges allow for a huge degree of customization, in
>practice they don't really result in customization so much as
>they amplify the strength or mitigate the weaknesses of builds
>that still end up being built and played the exact same way.
>In essence, things are just as 'cookie-cutter' as they would
>be without edges at all."
>
>I see your point there. Would you maybe consider rolling
>these "Need to Succeed" style cookie-cutter edges into their
>respective class/skill combo's?

These are almost never "need to succeed" and almost always "insist because it's good and possible to have so why wouldn't I?", which are different things. So this goes back to finding the time to refactor some of those edges so that they're not the obvious choice 100% of the time. Of course, then we're the bad guy for "nerfing" things. There are exceptions, don't get me wrong, but more often than not we're talking about a player going, "Well the +10 to assbeating sword is good, but the +15 is better" and eventually forming an expectation that only the +15 will do even though the +10 is plenty effective. That's probably our fault for catering too much to the wrong kind of player.

>I think also, that since edges are more scarce than they were
>before - people are less likely to vary from "what is known"
>to try something new.

That's a reasonable theory, though I do occasionally see people comment about experimentation on death threads.

>For reference, I had been considering taking the 'lucky' edge.
> I have never taken it - ever. And, I'm playing a class which
>has several critical success chance based abilities. I mulled
>over taking it for about a week (possibly longer) and ended up
>going with an edge that I already knew instead.

And that's kind of the point. To a degree, we want to put you to your guns, as the saying goes.

>The availability of less edges, and less lee-way to experiment
>with edges probably ensures that the same edges are always
>taken.

I don't agree with this conclusion.

>Now, I don't think that my character would be "ruined" if I
>had taken the lucky edge. But, it isn't tried and true and
>the edge points I had were hard earned.

Your character wouldn't have been ruined if they had taken the Lucky edge.

>Would you take the lucky edge? ;)

Never.

I have been thinking lately that there are more "cookie-cutter" edges for a build than one can take. In that respect you have to pick and choose which way you want to go with a character because edge points are more scarce. If you want to take a more niche edge then you have to sacrifice even a bit more.

I look at my current and I definitely have cookie cutter edges but I also have foregone choosing some and decided to try and focus on a certain area that other people might not do in my position. That at least makes it somewhat unique. I know on the previous system I probably would have eventually been able to just take them all.

I also think there are some less popular more niche edges that might be worth foregoing the cookie cutter type and I've even been sitting on EPs trying to decide on one.

If I were to make a suggestion, holding the point system as-is, perhaps look at letting the players know how much EPs they have and how much edges cost? I think that would help game plan for a character since you can no longer take all the edges you want. Another suggestion would be to make the less popular niche edges slightly less expensive making where you might create a situation where it is more attractive to have multiple less useful niche edges over the cookie cutter one.

Overall I'm not too disappointed with where the system is at. Some classes might suffer more than others though.

Too many edges needed to bring them where I consider them fun and convenient to play.

Nt

Unless there's an edge that directly counters bash lag which I don't know about, I'm struggling to name any must have bard edges. Maybe Killing Joke?

They did get rid of the only edge I actually really liked on bards which was hear light though. I so hated being eyejabbed in Organia right before killing the NPC and having the corpse decay before I could see to get the key. And being able to brandish a staff of return when eyejabbed and entwined against a thirsting villager was sweet.

But what edges made them more fun and convenient?
Perfect Pitch?

Last time I did it they nerfed tail of the lizard scrolls.

I was pissed because for the first time ever had I found a combo I could PK with reasonably well and they destroyed the hell out of it through combined nerfage of edges and tail scrolls.

Now, if bards could take matador's timing (if it noticeably helps), THAT would be a must have edge for a bard. Otherwise, there's nothing out there groundbreaking.

Command denial (mostly from bash and I'll throw in bearcharge when applicable) is the only thing that effectively ruins my bards day (and I honestly think the existence perma lag is about the stupidest aspect of CF period since it makes fights so utterly boring and predictable to the point when available nobody ever uses anything else).

I can deal with anything else in CF as a wood elf bard and be fairly effective with no edges. But bash alone has caused by far the most of my pk deaths. That alone is the sole reason I would never again play another villager bard.

PS: what bard edge was nerfed? Or are you saying you effectively needed 6+ edges, and bash lag reduction for this combo to work?

Which cracks me up, but yep.

NT

It is the option we now have instead of tail scrolls.
Will have to wait for the next spring, though. And better not be a villager unless you like outrageous pain.

It wasn't a bard edge that was nerfed. I had a full list as Haraji and was thinking on what was essential to pick and what could wait, and then they did some "recalculation" and my edge list vanished and I never was able to take another edge. It wrecked everything for me.

I already had the three bard edges I consider absolutely essential, and a few others, but feeling cheated didn't help my desire to play at all.

But let's say you're human or halfie. You've got swashbuckler right off the top which is super expensive.

Woodelf - Woodsong and psychological insight

Tragic - erode confidence and depths of depression and maybe the buff edge to languid carol and laborious lament

Some might consider perfect pitch a must have. Some might feign weakness. I particularly like distortion opportunist.

If you are evil is Insinuative overture a must have for fighting Maran? Not sure how that one works.

Either way for most builds I can think of a few must haves that will burn EPs and a bunch of edges that I'd feel were nearly must haves.

I'll just comment on one edge. I don't really agree with those edges you mentioned, it's really just a matter of our preferences not being the same and I think most of them are pretty niche.

And you still get enough EPs to take any few edges you want, maybe even Frightful Fiend/Swashbuckler/Distortion Opportunist which I think are 3 of the most expensive bard edges, so you can always still probably take any of your must haves on a build.

Feign Weakness: Almost everyone assumes you have this edge as a bard anyway. Nobody at hero is gushing after two mangles normally. It's too easy to know a bard has this edge for most of the PB. It only really helps against newer players who you'd probably kill anyway.

I like the idea instead of feign being one edge, and you could toggle it to str/weakness/off so that the edge serves a purpose beyond the first time you are in a pk against someone and they figure it out.

I actually think this and perfect pitch (changing tune to 1 round) shouldn't be edges, they should be bard skills. Deception of the opponent is a major part of pk with a bard, this would add to their ability to keep opponents guessing, without adding any actual efficacy to how they fight and what they can do to an opponent in a fight.

I would rather have much less edges, and more opportunities to manage the flow of fights before and during. Edges often end up serring fights in a singular direction more often. I go mace to cranial, I take skull crusher to cranial more effectively, now in fights I use cranial more often.

Edges amend builds slightly to make them a little more unique, but they have the bad result of narrowing how people fight using those builds once they have those edges.

No one really needs any edges to be effective. But, people take them and consider some must haves since they are there.

I think if you look at the edge set and the bard builds I mentioned - most would take them because they are there and they would consider them high priority for that build. I think that's more what we are talking about.

I have no doubts you could play an edgeless bard and do very well.

One can play a sword spec without seven winds of Hamsah. Or an assassin without a buki edge or master edge. But most won't.

And you are right that they do narrow down how people fight. Your skullcrusher example shows that and shows we are kind of talking about the same thing. If you disagree with the bard edges - that's cool. I'm speculating on what I think are going to be the "skullcrusher" edges for bards. I guess one could go through recent bard PBFs and see.

Although, I absolutely think anyone playing human/halfie would see swashbuckler as a must have. How could you not? 23 dodge/evade over 20 when you only already parry with one hand?

I think the point of edges should be that the argument of it's necessary could never be made for any class and edge set though.

There are probably hundreds of general edges at this point that have very narrow PK application, but still provide a benefit. That what edges should be. These are also more likely than not the least selected edges across the board.

Skullcrusher is a must have because of what? PK. Nobody cares about effectively cranialing a NPC. And yet what mace spec is taking dragon slayer over skullcrusher? Maybe a herald.
In fact, I'd assume almost all the edges that are must haves are so because of the perceived benefit in PK.

So eliminate those edges (so people stop bitching about not enough EP!), and roll aspects of them into the class itself, so that people end up taking a more varied assortment of the other available edges and still don't mind that they don't get as many, instead of what is what you refer to as the high priority for that build. (which probably does exist to a degree for every build for most players)

People say edges diversify, but really, when the same edges are taken by the same builds every time, edges aren't providing a great deal of variety.

I agree with this statement wholeheartedly. However, they will say it erodes the fun stick for those IMM's involved so this idea although sound. Won't happen most likely.

Other than that I felt OP half the time until I got ganked and perma-lagged.

When I muster enough will to play a bard again, perfect pitch I'm not taking. Don't have breathing room to take convenience edges.

Of course, this is mostly because I love edges that allow me to add new utility to thinks, even if it's not just "better", and in part I've convinced myself that one of these times I'm going to pick some random unused edge and find out it's super powerful even though everyone thinks it's not and own face with it.

Sadly, I'm pretty certain I haven't found that edge yet.

Alternatively, I never decide what to take and invariably don't choose ANY edges until I'm down to like 5 con 😞

But I'm not going to find any more because all of my edge points are spent on edges I know.

I had a thief who went to the graveyard with devious versatilityx2 available because I couldn't decide what to choose. :P

>If I were to make a suggestion, holding the point system
>as-is, perhaps look at letting the players know how much EPs
>they have and how much edges cost? I think that would help
>game plan for a character since you can no longer take all the
>edges you want. Another suggestion would be to make the less
>popular niche edges slightly less expensive making where you
>might create a situation where it is more attractive to have
>multiple less useful niche edges over the cookie cutter one.

Given everything I know about our playerbase and and its tendencies, I just don't think this is a good idea.

Besides, the amount of armchair edge balancing we'd get (e.g., "A is X points and B is obviously better than A so it should cost no more than Y!!!" times 800+ edges) on the forums and via email would drive me right off the deep end, as my father would say. We opened Pandora's box once with edges. So fool me once, shame on .. shame on you. Fool me .. you can't get fooled again!

YOU are the guy who doesn't play mortals.
Which one here is the armchair balancer?

>YOU are the guy who doesn't play mortals.
>Which one here is the armchair balancer?

If you don't understand the difference between what I described and a someone with not only thousands of hours of experience playing mortals but more hours than I can count observing (snoop) various types of players play out all kinds of builds, along with all the benefits of being a coder, then all I can say is that I feel like we dodged a bullet by rejecting your heroimm application.

gr

He sometimes misses a few things in translation, but #### if he isn't the best English-speaking non-native English person I've met in a while.

"Murphy has English as a second language."

Not "Murphy is English as a second language."

Stupid native speakers.

I probably should have put an "an" before it, though, you're right.

rager-loving bastard

It's annoying when players think they know better than you, I've experienced plenty of it.

However, I think an imm might be just as bad at balancing as those know-it-all players, when they don't play morts.

I know because I've made some bad decisions in the past and then reversed them after actually trying things out first hand.

"Experience playing morts" doesn't count. You need to play in today's CF.

EDIT: then again, you personally probably would fare rather fine without any edges, based on my experience interacting with your last known mort.

>I know because I've made some bad decisions in the past and
>then reversed them after actually trying things out first
>hand.
>

So have I. We (the coders) are also blessed with a number of knowledgeable, objective, and active immortal players who provide feedback as well (with a significantly lower noise-to-nonsense ratio).

is that even immortals who do play morts are not a panacea for balance and they need to be careful because they take for granted the insider knowledge which the players don't have. Certain things will seem easier to them than they are to most of the playerbase.

We can't plan as efficiently because we barely know how edges interact with builds, and even if we did, there's still a zillion things we don't know about the workings of the game.

>is that even immortals who do play morts are not a panacea
>for balance and they need to be careful because they take for
>granted the insider knowledge which the players don't have.
>Certain things will seem easier to them than they are to most
>of the playerbase.
>
>We can't plan as efficiently because we barely know how edges
>interact with builds, and even if we did, there's still a
>zillion things we don't know about the workings of the game.

Just remember that we DO listen and take seriously player feedback.

Regarding your point, I think you dramatically overestimate the "insider knowledge" the average immortal has. It really is basically nothing.

EDIT: Obviously coders (can) have a significant edge, but that's a fraction of the staff. So historically we've had a pretty good blend of experience level and knowledge-of-code level amongst the staff providing feedback (again, in addition to player feedback).

Also, just because *I* have lost my tolerance for our players doesn't mean every immortal or coder has/had.

The insider knowledge I have on my own mud is a huge advantage. That said, it is a PvE world deliberately full of discoverable secrets which I don't need to discover because I created them. You're probably right that the situation is different in CF. Maybe imms are just better players, then.

This all doesn't make me feel any better about having fewer edges. Consciously, I may understand things, but emotionally I will never forgive you.

And I will come and be snarky every time another ####ing genius starts a thread about edges thinking he or she can wrest something from the staff.

"Your character wouldn't have been ruined if they had taken the Lucky edge.

>Would you take the lucky edge?

Never."

They absolutely change how the class plays and what tactics the player employs. They do not represent a tweak, they are really must-have for that build the players is going for.

For an easy and cheap example - Smoke and mirrors. You now always succeed and vanish/hide. More expensive assassin ones would be the buki edges, most of them are char-defining.

For other examples: Necro sleep-now-does-damage absolutely changes whether I want to try to sleep that rager now, warrior edges in any spec make certain skills worthwile instead of worthless, AP edges totally change how a char plays post-edge, etc.

On the other hand, there are way too many edges that should be rolled into a class or you just get one per each 5/10 levels to pick for free, like Lucky, Extra X or other niche stuff (You regen better in fire/forest??? Seriously?) that should be the "customize my build" kinda stuff that doesn't cost EP. That's regardless of what you do with the system as a whole.

NT

And it almost made me play a wood-elf warrior.

Almost.

>>Giving edge points for hours played (after level 11) at
>>intervals 20/50/100/150/200/etc. (to avoid abuse of idling a
>>lowbie with PK protection)
>
>I would not, though we've discussed something kinda/sorta like
>this that I'm not going to elaborate on because then if we
>don't do it I'll get extra hate mail for a couple of weeks. I
>will say that what we discussed would not be interesting to
>min/maxers or players whose interest in edges is predicated on
>PK.

Please do not waste your precious time implementing that.

After some threshold they cease to be additional power and become convenience and/or utility. Min-maxers are the ones who will never take convenience over raw power, e.g. the current system caters to min-maxers.

It was fine. You broke it.

Characters were never supposed to have that many edges, what don't you get about this?

Half of those I didn't need but how was I supposed to know before I took them? There were yet others I wanted but couldn't take.

I managed to experiment with edges enough to find some really powerful ones that were almost never taken. Experimenting with edges has a huge opportunity cost because edge points are so scarce, so received wisdom prevails.

Before, it was a free-for-all for multiple years. We, the playerbase, have had plenty of time to determine which edges are useful and which edges aren't.

So, if multiple edges are "useless", then why the #### would we still get edge points to take them?

I don't think characters were EVER supposed to have 10+ edges (much less 20+ or 30+). It changes the balance of the game significantly, much like IMM-rewards (which nearly everyone bitched about) and role contest rewards (I kind of was at the top of the soap-box on this one).

NT

It's only been semi-erect since edges were introduced, sadly. Even Ghrim couldn't fix that :(

>bitched about) and role contest rewards (I kind of was at the
>top of the soap-box on this one).

Are you suggesting we go back to 2 trains and a title like the good ole days? Because that's what I got with Iunna and I'm pretty sure I'd rather have had an 8th legacy. Just sayin'. :p

For example, my 6 path invoker with 10 in ooze may get something like Venom Malison.

Which would be powerful in an necromancer or shaman...but not really for an invoker. That being said, it could open new tactics that are completely outside the box (plague wands, etc).

Or, say I'm Iunna the Fuzzy-Mittened Queen of Floofi. I get ardor (or puissance, or ferocity, or what-the-####-ever).

Or maybe I'm a shapeshifter who is Utility/Utility and I get caiman. Or yellowjacket.

Or something like Daphedee's tattoo. Didn't you win that for a role contest?

And if you're saying no more quest forms, I'm definitely frowny-facing that. Quest forms are awesome because they're different. If it's the balance/powergamer issue that you're worried about, they could just tone them all down across the board and make them average forms with kickin' descs (although I'm not a huge fan of this either). Lucky for you, I have as much power as you do. :P

I do like the idea of handing out lower tier forms to cool people though or even the time Laeden got lion was cool. I think I got sand lizard once for participating in a quest one time 10-15 years ago, and that was spiffy too.

>Or something like Daphedee's tattoo. Didn't you win that for
>a role contest?

Yes, and it was awesome from a RP standpoint. (Thanks Ralt + Umiron!) But how often are you going to see something get pulled from a role, coded specifically for a character, and handed out? Not that often. Great idea, and actually wish I saw this for more (outside of RCs too).

>Yes, and it was awesome from a RP standpoint. (Thanks Ralt +
>Umiron!) But how often are you going to see something get
>pulled from a role, coded specifically for a character, and
>handed out? Not that often. Great idea, and actually wish I
>saw this for more (outside of RCs too).

You're welcome!

That happened for exactly two reasons:

1) Other people did all the thinking for me.
2) It took ten minutes.

Bonus 3) Daphedee evoked more RP from *other* characters more than perhaps any other character I've come across in my time, and characters who raise the bar like that deserve a little extra.

gr

Now it's unthinkable

1. Slighty increase skill learning and gained expeirence by 10-20% (like permanent 10-20% bonus).

2. Slighty increase the speed of how fast you master wands skill. It's really very slow to learn skill, but it's not combat skill. So what's the point of wasting hours and hours on practicing wands skill?

>1. Slighty increase skill learning and gained expeirence by
>10-20% (like permanent 10-20% bonus).

In the past 2-3 years we've scaled up learning rates across the board as well as again for low(er) int races, and that's on top of regular global bonuses and fairly frequent 6+ hour 200% bonuses. So it's probably something I'm going to do again soon. This is just one of those requests that tends to get repeated no matter how how often we oblige.

>2. Slighty increase the speed of how fast you master wands
>skill. It's really very slow to learn skill, but it's not
>combat skill. So what's the point of wasting hours and hours
>on practicing wands skill?

I think the above covers this, but I'll add that if someone chooses to spend "hours and hours" spamming the wand skill (which hardly anybody does) then they haven't "wasted' anything because the obviously see a lot of value in having it perfected.

Stop going for your weekly "rolling - full mastering - ragedeleting" routine. And you'll forget about pain of spamming skills.

Don't think we don't notice badass high-profile characters deleting after first death.

I'm giving myself a word not do it again every week.

But god damn i like leveling/mastering so much i cannot force myself to stop doing it.


After little rest Umiron is the very positive guy. Thanks to him and all other Immortals for keeping CF alive. I really LOVE CF! :)


P.S. Don't make the process of becoming immortal easier than before. The system with immortals is the best thing in CF. It's what helps the game to be alive.