Idea for OE, just for laughs

[Helton1]

Yep, another idea, "Uh Oh" time.

Instead of this relateively easy (in comparison) way to solve OE, by reducing affectiveness, and blah blah blah. Seems like it'll actualy punish OErs and sounds to yucky to work right (I know I sound like a dork) Too many loop holes. Least that's my opinion.

Why couldn't we have 'Huuuh' implemented a steaper learning curve? Increase the number you can bump a skill per title, adjust IP usage accordingly. Adjust nano NCUs, and reqs on armour and weps. Indeed a much bigger project...

But it seems like a better project, not a short term quick, keep the whineing 'can't take ANYONE getting more for doing more than them' little babys happy. The OE fix your implementing sounds way too buggy, and I just have that itch of trouble going off like mad.

Anyways, I'm probably wrong. But this just seemed like a better way to me.

[Docgalaad]

1. Let's Over-Equiping possible like always
2. Let's Non PVP-Players be invulnerable to PvP-Players (1 by day option)
3. Best Over-Equiper will be the best PvP-Man, that's good.

That's All.


My thought are:

OE is taboo because people are:
- Jealous
- pissed off to be killed by inferior level


...::: END of MESSAGE:::...

[LeetRoolzor]

Haaahaaaahaaaa

funny thread

Haaahaaahaaa

[Bionitrous]

Your solution is the proper one. It's called balancing. You are also correct that it would take a long time for them to do.

They decided to go with a quick-fix safety net approach. It is not clever, ingenious, well though out, or worthy of any admiration by anyone who has a clue about databases, game design, or programming in general. Fortunately for them, most of their paying customer base has no clue about any of those.

Instead of going to the roots of the problem. They take the 'easy' way out and put in the classic game designer's 'cop out': the hard cap. The funny thing is that even in their cop out, they couldn't get it right. The mucked up so bad with the approach that you could have a weapon one level higher than the one you are using be actually worse and one two levels higher being better. The implementation is a disgrace to programmers everywhere.

But to get back to my main point, you are correct. The proper solution is to revisit the 'to-hit' and damage calculations (defense is almost impossible to raise to worthwhile levels, weapon quality FAR outways weapon skill in terms of damage increase), the quantity of NCU taken by certain NF's*, damage range for weapons from Qlvl1-200, etc. Unfortunately, this is an exercise that takes time and care. Apparently, we as paying customers are not worthy of the respect of the game designers. Thus we get saddled with what is known in the programming industry as a 'kludge'. Another example of a kludge is a straight percentage reduction of damage in PvP. Another quick fix resulting from the lack of proficiency to properly (or even crudely) balance PvP vs. PvM (an effort I don't think really matters anyway as PvP is basically a crude way to aid the storyline and at best a fun diversion for those who have tired of missions or the mindless monster AI.)

Many players are getting pooped on by the designers, developers, and programmers and are gleefully singing their praises as this glorious 'fix'. I've just given up trying to open their eyes to the fact that they are being disrespected by Gaute and co. in terms of how the company they pay thirteen bucks a month to deems it unecessary to spend the time to 'do it right'.


*(for example, Frequent Customer, a CompLit buff should just about fill the NCU belt of anyone using it. Why? Because it's used for three things: cheaper shop prices, traveling the grid, and most importantly equipping NCU's. There is little to no reason to have any other buff running for these purposes. If it's NCU usage were sized appropriately, it could NOT be executed by a Trader of 'innappropriate' level'.)