BUMP for new complete IPR

[Nursedaou]

Originally posted by Bima
You can, just like in real life, and it doesn't need IPR. It just takes time and more experience ("training")...

Very good point.

I used EIGHT (read all) of my IPR after full going shotgun for my MA. I didnt' like it when it was overpowered because it felt wrong to be using. It wasn't me. Did I wait for lvl 150 to do it, no, I saved my IP for a few levels, then maxed my MA skills back and switched implants again. I've used one reset since to take shotgun out, but not ranged init, not fling, not AS. Why?

Because I may want to use those skills still.


I think I'm the only self casting tl5 MA that can self buff on a ql 200 bow, parry stick, and WWK (read: 4 dark blue skills) when it comes out, while still maintaining those above ranged skills, and being maxed in all mains like parry, ma, brawl, etc.


It's not about needing full or even partial resets, it's about you all gimping yourselves to be the flavour of the moment and then whining that you did it to yourself. I did what I chose to MY TOON, Funcom doesn't need, nor should be expected to hold my hand when I **** it up, I take responsibility for that...


...you should too.

[Loretta]

Originally posted by Kuroshio
It's not about being clairyvoyant. It's about choosing a skillset, sticking with it and when a nicer item comes along getting rewarded by already having the skills for it. By not having to level to get it.

No, it has to do with luck. Manex could or could have not been fixed.

As for your challenge concerning the Manex, mind if I have a GA4 smurf stand in. That way he can show you why the Manex is inferior

Any weapon has problems against fixer in GA4, not just a Manex. You have to do better than that. How long have you been playing this game again?

Can't remember if it was a single crossbow or all of them that had the rifle/bow reversed. I do remember MAs had picked them up mostly for the alpha capacity in PvP, often switching to a real weapon (or fists) immediately after. So on that one: tough luck. They willingly chose immediate power over future benefit. It was their choice

No, they weren't forewarned about the fact that those things will change till a week before the patch. Check the MAs forum archives for more information. MAs have a green bow skill, but dark blue rifle. Yes it was a balancing fact on Funcom's part. Should the MAs who chose that route be reimbursed? That's a story for another thread.

The possible NT crystal that is supposed to up their nuke damage in exchange for not being able to wield a weapon right? Erm...any NT that relies completely on that nuke power I'll enjoy eating for breakfast, even though the pins get stuck in my teeth. I'm a trader after all

An arrogant one too; just how can you be so sure of that?

1 change was the primary cause. Overequipping. IP lost to release bugs prolly assisted FAR more than any other balance changes. Developers know that nerfs are inevitable. Only players want to pretend they're not.

Right, Init fixes=bug fixes, changes to xbows/LLTS in my book equate to the OE changes.

And now you see why giving IPR away is a bad thing. Just be glad I'm ncie enough not to take advantage of it. Really I'm not that nice, but I won't go through the bother of stripping down and getting rebuffed just to squeeze an extra couple points of damage out of a weapon. Or squeezing and extra couple points of skill from min/maxing.

No I still don't; I think you are just lazy Personally I don't care about what you do in this game.

Erm, lilnymph pointed those out again for you.

Yes, and I've answered all of those in this thread already

Thank you, come again.

[Loretta]

Fist,

I think you might have a valid point if you said that you gimped yourself while experimenting, then didn't reset anything on your character, remaining gimped. Fact is you benefitted from the IP points, IPR gave you a chance to try something unorthodox, and when it failed, to get yourself back together. Kudos to you for trying.

Would you have tried if there was no chance of getting that IP back? (no IPR mechanics?)

[lilnymph]

Originally posted by Loretta
Any weapon has problems against fixer in GA4, not just a Manex. You have to do better than that. How long have you been playing this game again?

.................................................. .

Yes, and I've answered all of those in this thread already

First part:

Weapons with either alot of specials, or fast recharge of specials do well against smurfs. Manex has neither so is bad, Which is why most fixers who PvP alot would switch to something else, like the faster recharging MCS to try and take one out. How long have you been playing this game again? (sorry, joking, couldn't resist it )

Now, your second point, I would have to say that all these where nerfed because "Everyone" (read alot of people, before someone gets picky on me) used them.

Crit buffs/LLTS buffs has nothing to do with weapons being overused. A nova/x-3/beam/whatever do decent average damage. The argument for LLTS/Crit buff removal was one of people critting too much. I remember the days of gamma beamers, and when every other shot was a 3.5k crit. I miss them, but at the same time I understand the reasoning.

Here is where you "answered" them before. You start off with crit nerf, saying it was nothing to do with weapons being over used, and you are part right. It was partially to do with certain (shoguns) weapons being over used, partially to do with crit modifying equipment and nanos being over used, so these last where nerfed. why? Because everyone was using them and the game had become just a contest to see who would get a normal hit instead of a crit and so lose.

FAs had very low multi-wield requirements. Instead of changing MW, Funcom removed them from drop tables. That was when they said there will be no IPR points given, allowing people to switch to different weapons. Check the replies to the IPR announcement. People were very grateful to be able to reset those skills, and put the IP somewhere else. Defenders are not that far off in terms of damage. Yet they weren't removed from the game, were they? Hint: MW requirements.

what has this to do with the fact everyone used them and so they where nerfed? Yes possibly Funcom did it in the wrong way, but they did it because everyone was shooting two of these.

Decranium... Everyone still wears it; all 3 of my chars have a full set, Carrah got her's after the "Nerf". Besides, new armors appeared in the game since. Now my agent wears CDS armor.

Here you even say everyone uses it, which they do, and which is why the drop rate got nerfed.

Hugs

lilnymph

[Kuro]

Originally posted by Loretta


No, it has to do with luck. Manex could or could have not been fixed.

You're dodging the point. This real trader chose SMG/Burst so he could make his own weapons and keep in character with his profession. I don't know if he's switched to Manex or not but if he has, it's a reward to him to have a new weapon that uses the skills he already has introduced.

Originally posted by Loretta
Any weapon has problems against fixer in GA4, not just a Manex. You have to do better than that. How long have you been playing this game again?

Obviously, as lilnymph pointed out, the Manex is inferior against any high evade target. When the majority of your attacks are "Miss", you have to rely on special attack damage to do the trick. And the slow recharge on Burst means the smurf (and a lot of high level mobs) would be picking their teeth with your bones by the time the Manex recharged

Originally posted by Loretta
No, they weren't forewarned about the fact that those things will change till a week before the patch. Check the MAs forum archives for more information. MAs have a green bow skill, but dark blue rifle. Yes it was a balancing fact on Funcom's part. Should the MAs who chose that route be reimbursed? That's a story for another thread.

I consider the titles they got while using the bugged crossbow adequate compensation. Even if I didn't, I wouldn't advocate leaving in a feature in game that causes this many issues. Not for them or anyone.

Originally posted by Loretta
An arrogant one too; just how can you be so sure of that?

I am a Trader. Nanoskills are nice and tasty for me Anyone that relies on nanoskills during combat has issues with Traders. We are hated for a reason, ya know?

More seriously, the only way an NT would be a concern is if whatever Funcom is planning neutralizes Divest/Plunder, The only way to do that would be to signifantly boost the nanoresist or the nanoskills of the wielder. But that would make the NT ungodly powerful in PvM (mobs wouldn't stand a chance), so I doubt they'd do either. Hence NT = Lunchmeat.

Originally posted by Loretta
Right, Init fixes=bug fixes, changes to xbows/LLTS in my book equate to the OE changes.

Your book is flawed. Overequipping was effecting more than a single profession, skill set, item or breed. Totally different scale.

Originally posted by Loretta
No I still don't; I think you are just lazy Personally I don't care about what you do in this game.

Then why did you say:

If the change to LLTS actually comes about, and funcom, as promised will give several IPR points back, it won't be fair to those who used LLTS. Because those points will be free to those who haven't used LLTS to begin with. And while those points are used by those with LLTS to fix themselves, they will be free to those who haven't to use for other things. Of course you won't need those points.

So it's not fair that someone like me, that doesn't have a use for the reset points, would receive them and could use them for whatever I pleased while others would use them to get out of LLTS? But it's fair that you can use reset points to aquire an amount of skill level that might have taken other people months to get?

So are you saying that only your concept of fair is tantamount here? People arguing against IPR have pointed out how it affects their personal sense of accomplishment, which you say doesn't matter. They have pointed out the numerous ways it has affected the game already, which you say doesn't count. And they point out how it affects the future development of the game, which you ignore. But when I say I won't need them, you pull fairness outta your hat pretty fast.

Hmm...

[______________Yazule]

Originally posted by Loretta


Hmm, I would say that if everyone is uber, then everyone is average

that's just my opinion

I like your argument much more than that of Kuroshio; you are not generalizing. I guess I just like the players to have more options than following a path, and then not being able to do something because they chose weapon X, then weapon Y came along. I guess this affects some classes more than others. Kudos to you for playing wisely.

If everyone in group X is in an uber guild and "uber"... and group Y are a bunch of non Uber guilded people, then group X owns... making the contrast I was talking about before.

If you choose weapon X and weapon Y comes out of the same type then you can use it still right? There was a post somewhere in one of these threads, someone actually showed what their IPR were for and the were smg, rifle, ma, assault rifle, and wanting IPR to get more smg... silly huh? and a prime example of people abusing IPR.

Funcom adds weapons of all types, people just need to be patient with their choice, use the Viable weapons til a better comes along, that is what I do ... and thank you for the compliment on my play style... problem is someone who was an IDIOT with their toon can be just as powerfull as someone who was wise with their toon, so I lose my edge to IPR.

[Loretta]

Originally posted by Kuroshio
You are dodging...

No I'm not, I've explained myself on this one; he didn't choose a skillset foreseeing that one day a decent SMG will be introduced. It just happened that way.

Obviously, as lilnymph pointed out, the Manex is inferior against any high evade target....

ANY weapon is inferior against a high evade target. How is Manex unique in that respect? Start a newbie, and then use your newbie backyard against the guard in the backyard. See how many times you hit.

I consider the titles they got while using the bugged crossbow adequate compensation. Even if I didn't, I wouldn't advocate leaving in a feature in game that causes this many issues. Not for them or anyone.

And I don't. I don't think anyone should be punished by changes in game mechanics. Crossbows were never 'bugged'. Crossbows were changed. That's a huge difference.

I am a Trader. Nanoskills are nice and tasty for me Anyone that relies on nanoskills during combat has issues with Traders. We are hated for a reason, ya know?

Any class has issues with traders, not just nano classes. Last time I checked trader debuffs lowered nano and weapon skills on the target.

More seriously, the only way an NT would be a concern is if whatever Funcom is planning neutralizes Divest/Plunder, The only way to do that would be to signifantly boost the nanoresist or the nanoskills of the wielder. But that would make the NT ungodly powerful in PvM (mobs wouldn't stand a chance), so I doubt they'd do either. Hence NT = Lunchmeat.

That was part of the suggestions made. See NT boards for more info.

Your book is flawed. Overequipping was effecting more than a single profession, skill set, item or breed. Totally different scale.

No, I feel that when game mechanics change, and affect a larger part of the population, then something should be done to compensate people for it. Whether its OE, or other changes.

So it's not fair that someone like me, that doesn't have a use for the reset points, would receive them and could use them for whatever I pleased while others would use them to get out of LLTS? But it's fair that you can use reset points to aquire an amount of skill level that might have taken other people months to get?

See my conclusion for an answer to this; you ask the same question below.

So are you saying that only your concept of fair is tantamount here? People arguing against IPR have pointed out how it affects their personal sense of accomplishment, which you say doesn't matter. They have pointed out the numerous ways it has affected the game already, which you say doesn't count. And they point out how it affects the future development of the game, which you ignore. But when I say I won't need them, you pull fairness outta your hat pretty fast.

YES!!!! I thought that's what you were saying here as well? Isn't that a prerequisite for a debate? To have different points of view? AO is not "A world according to Kuroshio", just like it isn't "A world according to Lori".

People arguing for IPR have pointed out how it affects not just their personal sense of accomplishment but also their game play. I think that counts for something too?

I didn't say the changes didn't you provided me in that list didn't affect the game. I just said I don't consider those items nerfed because everyone was using them. UVC/LMA were nerfed along with LLTS; people were critting a lot. Even the biggest change to the game mechanics, the OE change, the one that warranted an IPR, was not done because everyone was using the same set of items.

Finally, about your fairness question: I used you as an example of a person who (as you said it yourself) didn't use an item, and who, if a partial IPR was given, would benefit more than those for whom the partial IPR was intended for. I think that's unfair.

Thus, given the changes that are on the plate and coming, if I had to choose between a total IPR and no IPR at all, I'd choose IPR. That's why I bumped this thread.

[Kuro]

Originally posted by Loretta

ANY weapon is inferior against a high evade target. How is Manex unique in that respect? Start a newbie, and then use your newbie backyard against the guard in the backyard. See how many times you hit.

I did everything except provide results from Jayde's damage simulator, which I don't need since I have a crat alt that uses an OT Kerans. Against a high evade mob a weapon with a longer recharge can end up doing less damage than one with a quicker recharge. The reason being that for both weapons, the majority of the normal "hits" do not land. Damage tends to be done through special attacks. The slow burst recharge for a Manex can make it an inferior weapon choice depending on the situation.

Originally posted by Loretta
And I don't. I don't think anyone should be punished by changes in game mechanics. Crossbows were never 'bugged'. Crossbows were changed. That's a huge difference.

What do you define using the wrong skill as? I call it a bug. And no, whether or not you think the crossbows were using the correct skill does not matter. Funcom decides which skills are the correct ones, not us. So, yes, crossbows were bugged.

Originally posted by Loretta
Any class has issues with traders, not just nano classes. Last time I checked trader debuffs lowered nano and weapon skills on the target.

A weapon oriented profession can continue to use the weapon in their hands to do damage, even if it's at 75% or 50% effectiveness. A nano oriented profession has to find a nano they're capable of using in their Divested/Plundered state. At high levels where you have a lot of nanos, it's often easier to start running at that point. An NT that couldn't do any damage with weapons, because the crystal would allegedly prevent them from doing weapon damage, is instantly more vulnerable than a weapon user. Again, the weapon user can continue to do damage.

Originally posted by Loretta
That was part of the suggestions made. See NT boards for more info.

Both possibilities I mentioned would have severe effects on PvM and would likely not be implemented. Raising the NT nanoresist to make them less vulnerable to Trader Divest/Plunder would also make them less vulnerable to mob nanos. Raising their nanoskills to offset a possible Divest/Plunder would grant them access to nanos far before they were supposed to get them. Both wouldn't be very appealing to the developers, given Funcom's history with Nanoresist and using nanos before intended levels.

Originally posted by Loretta
No, I feel that when game mechanics change, and affect a larger part of the population, then something should be done to compensate people for it. Whether its OE, or other changes.

Difference is scale. Overequipping was being used by a much larger portion of the playerbase than the crossbows. And it was having a much larger affect on game balance than crit scopes.

Originally posted by Loretta
YES!!!! I thought that's what you were saying here as well? Isn't that a prerequisite for a debate? To have different points of view? AO is not "A world according to Kuroshio", just like it isn't "A world according to Lori".

People arguing for IPR have pointed out how it affects not just their personal sense of accomplishment but also their game play. I think that counts for something too?

I didn't say the changes didn't you provided me in that list didn't affect the game. I just said I don't consider those items nerfed because everyone was using them. UVC/LMA were nerfed along with LLTS; people were critting a lot. Even the biggest change to the game mechanics, the OE change, the one that warranted an IPR, was not done because everyone was using the same set of items.

Finally, about your fairness question: I used you as an example of a person who (as you said it yourself) didn't use an item, and who, if a partial IPR was given, would benefit more than those for whom the partial IPR was intended for. I think that's unfair.

Thus, given the changes that are on the plate and coming, if I had to choose between a total IPR and no IPR at all, I'd choose IPR. That's why I bumped this thread.

The difference is the majority of the people that are demanding IPR from personal desire and saying "I don't care about the repercussions". I oppose all forms of IPR at a personal level as well but also have stated many many times I can deal with single reset points if they are earned. But I'm completely opposed to another complete IPR for the good of the game.

[Loretta]

Originally posted by Kuroshio
I did everything except provide results from Jayde's damage simulator, which I don't need since I have a crat alt that uses an OT Kerans. Against a high evade mob a weapon with a longer recharge can end up doing less damage than one with a quicker recharge. The reason being that for both weapons, the majority of the normal "hits" do not land. Damage tends to be done through special attacks. The slow burst recharge for a Manex can make it an inferior weapon choice depending on the situation.

LOL, in missions, you end up doing at most 1 special per mob. Even against high level mobs, I miss at most 75% of the time on regular shots. At 1/1, even with hellfury with burst recharging every 8 seconds, that amounts to 20% damage done by a special. Manex is good not because of it's one, slow recharging special, but because of high average damage. I don't rely on any database. I have 3 chars > 165 which use 3 different weapons. I rely upon my in-game experience.

What do you define using the wrong skill as? I call it a bug. And no, whether or not you think the crossbows were using the correct skill does not matter. Funcom decides which skills are the correct ones, not us. So, yes, crossbows were bugged.

LOL again, why doesn't it matter what I think, but it does matter what you think? Read the patch notes where the changes were implemented. I and Funcom called it a change. I don't care what you call it, and no, crossbows weren't bugged. They were changed.

A weapon oriented profession can continue to use the weapon in their hands to do damage, even if it's at 75% or 50% effectiveness. A nano oriented profession has to find a nano they're capable of using in their Divested/Plundered state. At high levels where you have a lot of nanos, it's often easier to start running at that point. An NT that couldn't do any damage with weapons, because the crystal would allegedly prevent them from doing weapon damage, is instantly more vulnerable than a weapon user. Again, the weapon user can continue to do damage.

Yes, that's why my NT has 3 different nukes in her hot bar, in case she gets divested in a mission. I don't have to find anything, I have it ready. I would be foolish to have to search my quick bar for a nano every time I got plundered/divested by a mob in mission.

Both possibilities I mentioned would have severe effects on PvM and would likely not be implemented. Raising the NT nanoresist to make them less vulnerable to Trader Divest/Plunder would also make them less vulnerable to mob nanos. Raising their nanoskills to offset a possible Divest/Plunder would grant them access to nanos far before they were supposed to get them. Both wouldn't be very appealing to the developers, given Funcom's history with Nanoresist and using nanos before intended levels.

Thats a speculation on your part. Take this discussion to the NT forums please

Difference is scale. Overequipping was being used by a much larger portion of the playerbase than the crossbows. And it was having a much larger affect on game balance than crit scopes.

Hehe, ok, check the number of posts in LLTS related threads. I won't go there. Obviously 500+ posts on the subject rivaled those that were posted about OE. I'd venture to say that's an important issue. Same with the crit issue.

The difference is the majority of the people that are demanding IPR from personal desire and saying "I don't care about the repercussions". I oppose all forms of IPR at a personal level as well but also have stated many many times I can deal with single reset points if they are earned. But I'm completely opposed to another complete IPR for the good of the game.

And I support complete IPR. I don't really about those repercussions because thus far, the only repercussions I can see is that it will destroy someone's sense of accomplishment. That's not a good reason for me.

[Blackwing]

Originally posted by Kuroshio


You can't continue to add items to the game if you can't have some guarantees that everyone will use them. Funcom can't add anything that trully is superior because everyone will use it and distort the game balance. A superior item isn't meant to be used by everyone. And only the most drastic of measures, like the ones being used on GA and Nullity, barely work. I say "barely" because they only slowed down people aquiring them (while pissing off everyone that doesn't have one yet). But obviously the distribution is getting fairly wide on at least GA. Wanna bet on whether that will get nerfed eventually?

i think that the way funcom is going with restricting items to certain classes is the best way to ensure a limited class a lead in their focus - read for instance soldiers and enforcers. these classes are by definition limited. their trade skills suck, they are one dimensional and they should fulfill their task well.

without slapping specific class only reqs on new weapons you cannot reasonably limit access to their tools they need to do their job.

people will use a variety of items IF said items are viable.

at the moment players emulate the high level "gods" and avid posters because they do not wish to be gimped later on - they fear experimentation or to squander their precious iprs.
this leads to MORE cookie cutters instead of less.

i think items like the abbadon combat suit - if implemented properly - is exactly what the game needs (disregard the next lines if it is 18 hour 4 teams of 180+ drop junk).

an item that is good, not über (by collecting a load of rare items you will have better stats but provided this armor is attainable then this closes the equipment batch between the "l33t" and the "casual" players).

an item that will make a member of their target profession stand out in a crowd of professions which leads to a sort of recognition and reputation, it is great if team mates remember you.

an item you can personalize to your own tastes because it feels much more like "your thing" then instead of just getting what others told you rocked.

you will find people arguing against making the game profession focused as they call it limiting - i am not one of them.

the lines between the professions are so blurried that in order to ensure that every class remains viable its niche has to be carefully carved and nurtured.

combining a skill AND class AND level based game is extremely tricky.

moreso in an online game where the only means of advancement is either repetition of a task or combat.

i may not like it but i sure cant think of a better way.

grid armor is i think an excellent example of this problem.

the fixer imagine apparently is that of a ranged martial artist, maybe what you could call a commando or skirmisher.

fast, light and highly mobile.

they got a suit that boosted these stats which unfortunately directly cut into another profession: the soldiers.

the only reliable means in game for either a fixer or soldier to hold aggro is by doing damage.

holding aggro is what defines a successfull tank in a team.

with the advent of smgs that kick out HIGH damage the soldier has become absolute in a wide variety of missions.

i think funcom is very aware of it and working on a fix that fits their vision. i do think so not because i am a fanboi but because i think they want to remain in business.

*edit:
oh man, what a long post. cudos to all who read through it.

you now know where my arguments come from.*

[Hajkster]

Bump, and for the once's that say its your problem if you screw up your ipr's.. Well let me tell you it took 9 iprs to change my gun first time, when i went AR. It turned out not be as good as i had hoped and i would really change back. But that is out of question as i dont have enough IPR's left. So dont put up that crap.

[Zanthyna]

I understand the arguments against IPRs...
1) reward long-term planning
2) cut down on flavor of the month IP allocation
3) more IP allocation diversity
4) breaking game immersion by instantly becoming an expert in different skills and 'forgetting' your old ones

But, as a quasi-newbie ( >1 year of on/off playing), I still remember just how much work it is to make a character that isn't gimped. Throughout my AO career, I have spent more time researching and planning my characters then I have spent actually playing (and not because I want to). AO is a very complicated game, and for a newbie to come in and figure out how to do IPs, implants, equipment, nanos, etc requires a lot of effort. Personally, I am counting on my 15 IPR to fix the many mistakes I have and will continue to make. Without those 15 IPR, my only real choice would be either cookie-cutter character or to make a test character, level her up, then make another one and start over (which I won't do--my other games don't require that I play them twice).

I fully agree that there needs to be some scarcity to IPRs, but there needs to be a way for newbies, even those who don't have the patience to research for days on end, to keep their characters playable.

And just so you know, I'm not an uber-gamer or power-leveler. I value having fun and doing something out of the ordinary above having a powerful character (which is why my Agent uses a bow).


I'm to lazy to start a new thread with this idea, but how about a "retraining" terminal that will retrain you in different skills for a fee and that will only give you back 95% of the IP you reset. This will allow gimps to reset themselves, but it will have a strong deterant against frivolous use and it will reward those who never reset their IPs (because they will have 'more' IP). FC can further discourage its use by making it so that only one skill can be reset every 24 hours. Perhaps the machine can even require certain objects before it can be used (say monster parts/robot junk) from specific mobs only found in remote parts of the world. My making it an in game terminal, it becomes part of the game (keeping game emersion). Another posibility is that to get a single line IPR, you must first get a Nano Retraining Kit at or above your character level. This would be a tradeskill item that must be assembled from several parts specifically for the user, and thus would be a big hassle, but still there if you need it.

sorry about the rambling post, but it's late and I'm tired, but I wanted to get my ideas down before I forgot them.

[rk1parker]

i need ipr asap

Im gimped cause tested 2 many things

now i need ipr b4 i buy nw or it will be a total waste




Missparker 200mp

[lilnymph]

OK, I am still totally against Total IPR, and in most ways against one skill IPR, however at the moment the argument seems to be going round in circles (with my posts ignored *pouts* ).

However this is something that I dont have too much objection too, and as far as I know does Kuroshio (feel free to shout at me Kuroshio if I am wrong ), Not sure about Yazule (and I can't believe I am on the same side of an argument as you Yaz, I feel dirty somehow ). What is it you ask? well, some system to retrain skills you no longer need. This would be different from IPR in that it would be slow. One way is that you flag certain skills you no longer want, and they slowly drop (wether over time or levels, or some other means of counting would have to be decided, I would personally, at present, favour something that counts the number of xp giving actions you do, to allow level 200 people who can't level any more to use it, but to prevent people just logging a character on before they go on a week long holiday, and reseting all their skills.

I know its not perfect (but then I didn't think of it, I'm jsut repeating it ) but it all people who have invested in the correct skills to use new items straight off, woudl allow people who feel they have been nerfed out of recognition to recover, and would slow do the rate people could follow the cookie cutter of the month type characters.

Hugs

lilnymph

[__________Curmudgeon]

Originally posted by Hajkster
Bump, and for the once's that say its your problem if you screw up your ipr's.. Well let me tell you it took 9 iprs to change my gun first time, when i went AR. It turned out not be as good as i had hoped and i would really change back. But that is out of question as i dont have enough IPR's left. So dont put up that crap.

People "put up that crap" as you put it because IPRs are not meant for you to change weapon types at will. IPRs should be reserved for changing your skills in response to changes in game mechanics, and should be hoarded (not blown on experimentation).

[Nursedaou]

Originally posted by Loretta
Fist,

I think you might have a valid point if you said that you gimped yourself while experimenting, then didn't reset anything on your character, remaining gimped. Fact is you benefitted from the IP points, IPR gave you a chance to try something unorthodox, and when it failed, to get yourself back together. Kudos to you for trying.

Would you have tried if there was no chance of getting that IP back? (no IPR mechanics?)

Umm...no, that's not what I said. I was uber with a shotgun, but it wasn't for me. I remained with my shotgun until I could train back to MA, but it didn't require any additional IPR, and I'm not advocating a need for it. training in something and leaving it like that is a good thing.

Please don't twist what I say.

[Loretta]

Originally posted by Fistofpaper
Umm...no, that's not what I said. I was uber with a shotgun, but it wasn't for me. I remained with my shotgun until I could train back to MA, but it didn't require any additional IPR, and I'm not advocating a need for it. training in something and leaving it like that is a good thing.

Please don't twist what I say.

Oh, I'm sorry, I thought you said:

I used EIGHT (read all) of my IPR after full going shotgun for my MA.

My Bad.

[______________Yazule]

Originally posted by lilnymph
Not sure about Yazule (and I can't believe I am on the same side of an argument as you Yaz, I feel dirty somehow

?? am I that bad? roflol

or is it you normally dont agree with me?

[lilnymph]

Originally posted by Yazule


?? am I that bad? roflol

or is it you normally dont agree with me?

hehe our viewpoints never used to agree, but lately we seem to be seeing eye to eye.

*Hugs to cute Atrox Yazule*

lilnymph

[Kuro]

Originally posted by Blackwing


i think that the way funcom is going with restricting items to certain classes is the best way to ensure a limited class a lead in their focus - read for instance soldiers and enforcers. these classes are by definition limited. their trade skills suck, they are one dimensional and they should fulfill their task well.

without slapping specific class only reqs on new weapons you cannot reasonably limit access to their tools they need to do their job.

They wouldn't be able to if as they levelled and spread their IP into different skills they discovered that they couldn't come up with the IP necessary to raise a skill to meet an item requirement. If you put 50 levels of IP into AR then decided to switch to shotgun, depending on when you attempt it you will not have enough IP to be good at it for a couple levels. Even more, you'll have to ignore your other skills while raising shotgun. Compared to someont that's been using shotgun for those same 50 levels, you're a dilettante. You would be able to conceivably catch up. But you'd have to sacrifice some of your total ability to do so.

Originally posted by Blackwing
people will use a variety of items IF said items are viable.

at the moment players emulate the high level "gods" and avid posters because they do not wish to be gimped later on - they fear experimentation or to squander their precious iprs.
this leads to MORE cookie cutters instead of less.

The "Gimped" excuse is a tired one. People equate "Not the absolute best" as gimped. Which is nonsense and just a cover. A person would have to go out of their way to "Gimp" themselves in AO. I can understand people naturally want to be the best. But that doesn't mean they automatically deserve to be the best. They have to earn it.

Maybe my perspective if different because on my characters I chose a balanced character instead of a focused one. And therefore I automatically know I won't be the best damage dealer or best tradeskiller or best wrangler. But I'm not gimped either. I've got good all around characters, capable of doing several things to some degree. Despite wielding a bow and having tradeskills