Remove the mechanics for complete IPR and burn the disks the code is on!

is to make every interesting item profession or level based anyway.

and the camping was here ever since the eq crowd asked for static dungeons.

i am not arguing that even the semblance of balance we currently have is tremendously difficult to maintain / nurture while still catering to a diverse customer base...

but imo ao is moving away from the skill based system more and more to a class/level based system.

i would not say this trend got started with the ipr - it started with the profession dedicated patches for advs and fixers - suddenly there were class only weapons and nanos with a level req on them.

funcom has continued into this direction ever since.

there is no denying that however crude this method may be it is effective to control the spread of an item across the playerbase.

there are at least 3 classes in ao whose main function is to give and deal with damage and restricting weapons to these classes assures them somewhat of a lead in this direction.

some weapons appear that are not tied to a specific class - say the manex or the queenblade and people flock to them.

before 14.2 or so, shotguns were all the rage.

imo this is however not a problem exemplified by iprs or reroll twink chars but by a bad database were 70% or more of the usuable weapons are utter junk.

a certain amount of min maxing in a rpg cant be helped.

we have a problem because there are weapons that utterly totally destroy any other weapon of their class - yet this has nothing to do with how you spend your ip.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Blackwing
is to make every interesting item profession or level based anyway.

and the camping was here ever since the eq crowd asked for static dungeons.

i am not arguing that even the semblance of balance we currently have is tremendously difficult to maintain / nurture while still catering to a diverse customer base...

but imo ao is moving away from the skill based system more and more to a class/level based system.

i would not say this trend got started with the ipr - it started with the profession dedicated patches for advs and fixers - suddenly there were class only weapons and nanos with a level req on them.

funcom has continued into this direction ever since.

there is no denying that however crude this method may be it is effective to control the spread of an item across the playerbase.

there are at least 3 classes in ao whose main function is to give and deal with damage and restricting weapons to these classes assures them somewhat of a lead in this direction.

some weapons appear that are not tied to a specific class - say the manex or the queenblade and people flock to them.

before 14.2 or so, shotguns were all the rage.

imo this is however not a problem exemplified by iprs or reroll twink chars but by a bad database were 70% or more of the usuable weapons are utter junk.

a certain amount of min maxing in a rpg cant be helped.

we have a problem because there are weapons that utterly totally destroy any other weapon of their class - yet this has nothing to do with how you spend your ip.

---

It does when the top weapons that aren't supposed to have wide distribution achieve exactly that. The thing that is supposed to stop those items from actually being used, once in distribution, is SKILL. But IPR negates that.

It does not matter what the condition the game is currently in. You cannot fix a problem by causing more problems. If your house is on fire, you do not run around pouring gasoline on everything. If you do the firefighters are that respond will not be able to prevent the destruction of your home, no matter how good they are

Blaming the game does not change that IPR causes damage to what fragile balance may exist. This is why no other developer will implement the instantaneous reclaimation of skill. It it makes the game they're trying to maintain too unpredidctable unless they use extreme methods to ensure some integrity in the game. They're not trying to make you play longer. They're trying to keep the game playable for everyone.

Because Funcom cannot relying on skill to prevent the widespread use of items/abilities in the game, we're force to accept marginally better items being next to impossible to aquire. And exceptional items and abilities non-existant.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kuroshio
Complete resets are further imbalancing because they further negate the expenditure of IP, which is a natural 'brake' in the process of aquiring items. A Complete Reset allows the player to aquire items or abilities with skills they would not have had if they were investing to use the item beforehand, making the aquisition process easier. And then reset those skills to use the item they may not have been able to aquire. Or would not have been able to aquire so easily.

---

Kuro, you keep bringing up this "availability" argument and it continues to make absolutely no sense to me.

Ask yourself this, how many Fixers currently raise MatCrea prior to getting ahold of GA? None, if they're smart.

How many Fixers use an IPR to instantly equip GA when they get it? Probably none (which single expensive skill could you completely wipe out, in order to equip GA....).

Does that mean they can never use it unless they were raising it all along? Of course not!

They go out and level for a few hours and dump all the resulting IP from their next level (maybe two) into MatCrea. Skill and IP have absolutely nothing to do with the rarity of things like GA. Nullity Sphere? Please! If you think an NT isn't gonna have this skill to use it, you're mistaken. PPPE? Again, you play a trader, you should know better. Dump the next level of IP into chemistry and POOF, you're an armorer. No IPR needed.

I do not see your supposed correlation between skills and availability.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kuroshio
It does when the top weapons that aren't supposed to have wide distribution achieve exactly that. The thing that is supposed to stop those items from actually being used, once in distribution, is SKILL. But IPR negates that.

---

I can almost sort of see where you're coming from with this argument. But as people love to point out, you get tons of IP at the high end anyway, so in many cases you wouldn't need IPR to achieve a broad range of skill.

For instance, an enforcer can level all the way 161st with a 2hb beam, camp a Queen Blade, and then max 2he in a couple levels, without even using an IPR.

What you need to point out, to strengthen your argument, is that Professions that are not good at those skills should be at a disadvantage. That disadvantage is eliminated by IPRs. An enforcer should be able to grab a Queen Balde and have the IP to "add" it to his armory. But an X3-using NT, should have a heckuva lot harder time picking it up and using it. I don't care how much IP you get in the end game, having Rifle/AS maxed and then adding 2he/Brawl should hurt a high level NT. Obviously, resetting would make it painless.

While I don't buy into your "distribution and availablilty" theories, I can see how professions that are not supposed to be good at weapons can use IPRs to continually change weapons and stay with whatever is hot. That isn't fair to those professions like enforcers and soldiers who should be able to max multiple weapons skills and have the profession-specific benefit of switching between them compared to non-weapon intrinsic professions. Of course profession-specific items are curtailing that.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Yazule
What you are saying is "just let people become what they want whenever they want" and I do not agree with this. In long term online games you will have plenty of time to develop as many toons as you want as high as you want and with whatever skills you want.

---

No, I'm not saying that. A completely fluid IP reset system would be horrifying and easily exploitable. I am saying that I think a system that lets you slowly adapt to changes in mechanics and content is necessary in an evolving game.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Yazule
1) you are not held accountable for you decisions on making your toon (any idiot can follow a cookie cutter esp with IPR to fix "oop's"). This is not a twitch game, the skill is in the planning, basically it is giving the inferior players the ability to be competitive without learning a thing. DUMB.

---

I agree with this 100%. I am an obsessive planner. If IPs were pennies, I'd rub old Abe Lincoln bald, before spending them. But guess what. Some of the people calling for Total IPRs are also highly intelligent planners and have spent their IPs exceptionally. THEN, FunCom changes game content and their careful planning is thrown out the window.

They feel cheated, they feel frustrated, they feel like they bought a car but got a lemon. Kuro (and probably you) would say "tough bronto oysters, they should have figured potential game changes into their master plan". But it is contrary to human nature to ask people to subject themselves to frustration like that in a game. As is obvious by all the calls for IPRs. I guess I almost wish FunCom would play hardball, but I don't think it will happen.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Yazule
2) nerfs are made due to IPR, look at the list of items above to see that. dumb dumb dumb.. I would rather nerf myself than have funcom nerf me... and I would MUCH rather you nerf yourself rather than have YOUR mistakes create nerfs for me.

---

I didn't buy this argument when Kuro made it, and I still don't. Things are nerfed when they aren't balanced. IPRs may point them out a little quicker. But if a weapon is too powerful in the hands of 1000 characters, then it is still too powerful in the hands of 100 characters.

The above argument basically states: if my weapon is overpowered, I want as few people using it as possible so that I can keep getting the benefit of it being overpowered. If something is overpowered, it is overpowered when 2 people are using it, or when 2000 people are using it. The only difference is that you can get away with it, if the number is really few. Does that make it good that the item is overpowered?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Yazule
Nobody, and I mean NOBODY has ever explained to me how funcom nerfed them so bad they had to use a full IPR and 15 IPR points. Everyone out of IPR were experimenting and they were INTENDED to let people fix funcom mistakes. If you spend your rent money at a casino it is not MY fault... you spend IPR on what you should and you will have plenty.

---

OK. I'll buy that. If you discount "experimentation" and "hopping from fad-to-fad" as valid expenditures of IPR, then I agree no one should need that many IPRs. I will not agree that it would destroy the game to have a Total IPR or a bunch of free IPRs, but I am willing to agree that it should not be needed.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Curmudgeon
but I am willing to agree that it should not be needed.

---

Welcome to the side of Truth and light Curmudgeon ;)

hugs

lilnymph

OK, I'm getting bored arguing "for" allowing more IPRs or a Total IPR. So I'm gonna switch sides. :D

There have only been two arguments that I agree with in this thread (number two was only loosely implied).

I think that a total IPR should not occur:

1) An essential part of being "good" at the game is the careful and knowledgeable management and expenditure of IPs. I am proud of my IP expenditure habits and knowledge and have worked hard to develop those skills as a player. IPRs (and especially Total IPRs) negate that skill/knowledge. If someone spends their IPs willy-nilly without plan or forethought, they should end up with a less effective character. Period.

The existing 15 IPRs, over a character's career, should be more than enough to rectify any major rules changes by FunCom, unless they are frittered away on non-conventional experimentation or switching to the Fad of the Week.

2) Some professions should be inherently more flexible in their weapon choices. At high level, it is easy for enforcers and soldiers to max multiple green weapon skills. Switching between different styles of weapons should be a professional benefit for enforcers and soldiers. They should have (and do have) the IP to readily raise multiple weapon skills at high level. IPRs negate that advantage.

A high level soldier should have the ability to use a Manex AND a hellspinner AND an X3 through raising multiple weapons skills. This gives the profession the profession-specific benefit, at high level, of being able to use whichever ranged weapon is best for their situation or is best in the game. Ranged weapon flexibility and adaptability should be a soldier advantage. An enforcer should have the same profession-specific benefit for melee weapons.

However, IPRs allow any class to switch from X3, to Manex, to Queen Blade, to whatever else is the next best weapon in the game. Sure, their AR will never be as high as a soldier's or enforcer's, but they can still use any type of weapon they want, to always have the very best weapon. This tactic has become rampant amongst professions who suck at weapon skills. This detracts from one of the implied strengths of the enforcers and soldiers.

Without IPRs, a high level enforcer will always be able to use the best melee weapons in the game (by raising all the low-cost melee skills). Without IPRs, a high level soldier will always be able to use the best guns in the game (by raising all the low-cost ranged skills).

However, with IPRs, every profession can always use the best weapons in the game. They don't have to raise multiple dark blue skills, they can just reset. POOF. They have the same adaptability of the strong weapon classes. And that ain't right. It's not fair to enforcers and soldiers.

Put that in your pipe and smoke it!
/cackle
:D

does not take into account that most of the new weapons added to the game are profession locked anyway.

profession locks and level caps provide some crude and effective means of balancing things and they are the way the game is going.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Blackwing
is to make every interesting item profession or level based anyway.

and the camping was here ever since the eq crowd asked for static dungeons.

---

both of these things are the main reason I have my eyes on SWG

*edit* and more IPR will be the last nail in that coffin (if given out just do to whining on the boards)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Yazule



both of these things are the main reason I have my eyes on SWG

*edit* and more IPR will be the last nail in that coffin (if given out just do to whining on the boards)

---

I can guarantee if any of the people demanding IPR here go to SWG, you'll hear their complaints there as well (at least until SOE/Verant remind people just who is boss there).

Verant has stated they will make items obsolete, especially tradeskill items (which are supposed to be the best items in the game), by making the components necessary to make them obsolete. You can bet this will be done based on how much usage an item gets and it's relative balance compared to others.

Be prepared to hear "It takes too long to reclaim skill. I want to wield a Wookie Fur Lined Lightsaber" there. At least there, you'll also get the satisfaction of hearing Verant cracking them across the skull with blunt objects until they're too concussed to remember their names without reading them floating over their heads :D

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kuroshio


I can guarantee if any of the people demanding IPR here go to SWG, you'll hear their complaints there as well (at least until SOE/Verant remind people just who is boss there).

Verant has stated they will make items obsolete, especially tradeskill items (which are supposed to be the best items in the game), by making the components necessary to make them obsolete. You can bet this will be done based on how much usage an item gets and it's relative balance compared to others.

Be prepared to hear "It takes too long to reclaim skill. I want to wield a Wookie Fur Lined Lightsaber" there. At least there, you'll also get the satisfaction of hearing Verant cracking them across the skull with blunt objects until they're too concussed to remember their names without reading them floating over their heads :D

---

Yeah but I know verant, they wont let it happen, what scares me about these threads on the AO boards is they are too wishy washy... only reason IPR were EVER needed was to compensate Advents for changing the color of multiwield.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Yazule


Yeah but I know verant, they wont let it happen, what scares me about these threads on the AO boards is they are too wishy washy... only reason IPR were EVER needed was to compensate Advents for changing the color of multiwield.

---

Actually after digging for the article on it, it was justified for the 75% of the playerbase that was about to wake up the next day and find everything they had equipped at 50% or lower effectiveness. Yeap, it was done to let the extremely large amount of the playerbase out of the trap they were in with overequipping.

that may have been THIER justification, but the advent thing was ripping off IP's... the over equip thing would not have been a big problem in my opinion, just people selling their now USELESS weapons to higher level players, or buying, something, or teaming up with a doc to mission for them, sure a little slower with 50% effective weapons, but doable.