This is all sorts of wrong, and you know it The principles to growth, as you pointed out, will remain constant but the speed at which one will grow will be forever altered. This will exacerbate the already nearly-impossible task of "catching the biggies."Johnny wrote:It wouldn't widen the gap in regards to it being tougher to get bigger faster.
If the game were nerfed ...
Forum rules
- Use common sense and be respectful towards each other at all times, even when disagreeing.
- Do not reveal sensitive game information. Guild secrets, player seconds are examples of things not allowed.
- Use common sense and be respectful towards each other at all times, even when disagreeing.
- Do not reveal sensitive game information. Guild secrets, player seconds are examples of things not allowed.
Re: If the game were nerfed ...
Re: If the game were nerfed ...
Sounds like we just need a good ole fashioned player wipe.
Re: If the game were nerfed ...
Exp. Rate * time = size. The "nerf" only changes 1 of the 2 variables. Play longer than others and you can gain that size to catch up.Manglor wrote:This is all sorts of wrong, and you know it The principles to growth, as you pointed out, will remain constant but the speed at which one will grow will be forever altered. This will exacerbate the already nearly-impossible task of "catching the biggies."Johnny wrote:It wouldn't widen the gap in regards to it being tougher to get bigger faster.
What I was trying to say with my previous post is the size difference between big and small will be much more noticeable with the special nerf.
Re: If the game were nerfed ...
Johnny wrote:Exp. Rate * time = size. The "nerf" only changes 1 of the 2 variables. Play longer than others and you can gain that size to catch up.Manglor wrote:This is all sorts of wrong, and you know it The principles to growth, as you pointed out, will remain constant but the speed at which one will grow will be forever altered. This will exacerbate the already nearly-impossible task of "catching the biggies."Johnny wrote:It wouldn't widen the gap in regards to it being tougher to get bigger faster.
What I was trying to say with my previous post is the size difference between big and small will be much more noticeable with the special nerf.
Wich is why... we nuke combat xp O_O
Re: If the game were nerfed ...
That is what I've been saying. Nerf combat xp. Cut 50% or more of our combat xp and you'll see that it will be easier to catch up. The biggest people will still be big in comparison with others.Draugor wrote:
Wich is why... we nuke combat xp O_O
And one other thing, do people vote for what is good for them or for the game? What is good for the game is the nerf as I see it. Better balance, more challenging, encourage teaming (this is a multi game after all) and solve the issue that players are op compared to NPC.
Re: If the game were nerfed ...
Ofc ppl vote for what's good for themDaerin wrote:Draugor wrote: And one other thing, do people vote for what is good for them or for the game?
The funniest part is when they try to rationalize it as 'good for the game' (a.k.a: my way of playing the game is better than yours!)
Re: If the game were nerfed ...
No one's going to argue with you, because you play the character you want to play, regardless of its "power." I've always been impressed with your commitment to RP and the character...we could all take a page from your book. Edit: This was aimed at Kvator as a compliment.Kvator wrote:Ofc ppl vote for what's good for themDaerin wrote:Draugor wrote: And one other thing, do people vote for what is good for them or for the game?
The funniest part is when they try to rationalize it as 'good for the game' (a.k.a: my way of playing the game is better than yours!)
Re: If the game were nerfed ...
My vote is based mostly on personal interest and concern about my guild. I also think that many people experiencing what they'll perceive as a step backward (rather than, say, perceiving formerly "easy kills" as a fun new challenge) will be really bummed out, maybe to the point of quitting. I feel like it's pretty easy to separate the one rationale as self-interest and the other as not.Kvator wrote:Ofc ppl vote for what's good for themDaerin wrote:Draugor wrote: And one other thing, do people vote for what is good for them or for the game?
The funniest part is when they try to rationalize it as 'good for the game' (a.k.a: my way of playing the game is better than yours!)
Re: If the game were nerfed ...
Daerin wrote:That is what I've been saying. Nerf combat xp. Cut 50% or more of our combat xp and you'll see that it will be easier to catch up. The biggest people will still be big in comparison with others.Draugor wrote:
Wich is why... we nuke combat xp O_O
And one other thing, do people vote for what is good for them or for the game? What is good for the game is the nerf as I see it. Better balance, more challenging, encourage teaming (this is a multi game after all) and solve the issue that players are op compared to NPC.
Nononono, 100% nuke on Combat xp. Might aswell
- OgreToyBoy
- Champion
- Posts: 633
- Joined: 05 Mar 2010 11:36
Re: If the game were nerfed ...
Draugor wrote:Daerin wrote:That is what I've been saying. Nerf combat xp. Cut 50% or more of our combat xp and you'll see that it will be easier to catch up. The biggest people will still be big in comparison with others.Draugor wrote:
Wich is why... we nuke combat xp O_O
And one other thing, do people vote for what is good for them or for the game? What is good for the game is the nerf as I see it. Better balance, more challenging, encourage teaming (this is a multi game after all) and solve the issue that players are op compared to NPC.
Nononono, 100% nuke on Combat xp. Might aswell
I totally agree, let's start over but also add a penalty for every year has passed since creation !!
http://tworzymyatmosfere.pl/przescieradla-jedwabne-z-gumka/