| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Do you approve or disapprove of the balance changes in Combat Module A? |
| I liked all of the balance changes in this module. |
|
50% |
[ 12 ] |
| I liked the changes for race/class and dual/enhanced but disliked the hit/dam ones. |
|
4% |
[ 1 ] |
| I liked the changes for race/class and hit/dam but disliked the dual/enhanced ones. |
|
12% |
[ 3 ] |
| I liked the changes for hit/dam and dual/enhanced but disliked the race/class ones. |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
| I liked the changes for race/class but disliked the dual/enhanced and hit/dam ones. |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
| I liked the changes for hit/dam but disliked the race/class and dual/enhanced ones. |
|
4% |
[ 1 ] |
| I liked the changes for dual/enhanced but disliked the race/class and hit/dam ones. |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
| I disliked all the balance changes in this module. |
|
4% |
[ 1 ] |
| No opinion / too soon to tell. |
|
25% |
[ 6 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 24 |
|
| Author |
Message |
Burzuk
Implementor
Joined: 20 Jan 2004
Posts: 529
|
 Posted: Mon Dec 20, 2004 10:47 am Post subject: Combat Module A: Followup. |
|
|
Now that we've had a bit of a chance to settle down and actually look at what's been changed, it's time for a little feedback. I know that we've added many new things, but I'm not going to bother asking you about those. Why? There's an overwhelmingly positive bias in favor of new things by players in general (even if those changes aren't necessarily good), hence it's a waste of time for me to gather feedback on them. Time will be the best judge of that.
However, as usual, here's the poll for the various balance changes to existing features that have been introduced here in this batch. The category breakdowns are:
Race/class selection: Added half-elf warriors. Removed dwarf paladins, slith monks, slith rangers, stone rangers, and minotaur warriors.
Dual wield, enhanced damage: Enhanced damage is doubled for two-handed weapons and removed for offhand weapons. Weapon enchantments apply separately for each weapon. Offhand weapons now carry a level-based hitroll penalty.
Hit/dam changes: Damroll bonus is str-based but hitroll bonus is dex-based. Stat-based hit/dam bonuses scale by level.
Knock yourselves out.
Last edited by Burzuk on Thu Jul 07, 2005 9:21 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Lorne
Immortal
 
Joined: 20 Jan 2004
Posts: 456
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 20, 2004 2:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Added halfling warriors? Ah-ha!
I believe I speak for everyone in AR when I say YOU ARE WRONG BURZUK! Mmmmmm that feels good.
Players 1: Burzuk 1324234085650 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
divsky
Emissary
Joined: 13 Mar 2004
Posts: 1054
Location: Iowa City, IA
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 20, 2004 3:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| OMFG!! The great, infalliable Burzuk made a mistake! The scribes can record this great event and it shall be spoken of for generations to come! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Resatimm
Takes the Cake
Joined: 23 Jan 2004
Posts: 980
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 20, 2004 3:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I hate to ruin your fun. I purposely edited Burzuk's post to make him 'look' wrong, when infact he was not.
Players 0: Burzuk 1324234085651 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
divsky
Emissary
Joined: 13 Mar 2004
Posts: 1054
Location: Iowa City, IA
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 21, 2004 1:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Whose the moron who voted against the changes to enhanced damage/two handed weapons?
Maybe I'm a bit bias because in every single open-ended RPG I ever play I always go for making the knight-esque warrior who uses the hugest friggin' two-handed sword I can find, and maybe I made a human warrior right after the change just because of their favoured weapon bonus to two-handed swords.. but I think I speak for everyone when I say going around with gigantic two-handed weapons rocks.
All hail two-handed weapons! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bones V2.0
Joined: 17 Jan 2004
Posts: 295
Location: Universal
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 21, 2004 11:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Can't say I support some of the changes that have taken my usually one-handed "mage" weapon to a two handed one, but I suppose I can find another.
Back to the commenting: All the changes seem to have been well thought out, as the waiting 1.8 billion years for them to be implemented should justify.
I wish the racial legacies only included one skill (instead of two) and there were twice as many options. i.e. more humans, because they really should be the most populous, but whatever, I'm sure that more will be added, as is indicated.
I declare this experiment a success, and demand a FFA day! 
---EDIT---
Oh yes, and allow contracts to be taken out on people who are not in the realms at the time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sebryn
Joined: 16 Jan 2004
Posts: 1185
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 21, 2004 11:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Oh yes, and allow contracts to be taken out on people who are not in the realms at the time. |
While I've wanted that to be implemented for SUCH a long time (Sebryn used to contract 5-10 people at a time; too much gold + 'nonagressive Heralds'), what if the target deletes/condies, or if the reason they're not playing has to do with some real-life issue that prevents them from playing for months and months? You could delete/condie yourself before they come back, and the contract's just been sitting around, then you're out some serious cash.
This is all assuming that there are adequate numbers of skilled [ASSASSIN]s right now. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Vertas
Joined: 17 Jan 2004
Posts: 1168
Location: Ewa Beach, HI
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 02, 2005 3:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I believe all of the cabal's numbers are suffering... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ 
Search 
Memberlist 
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in 
