| Author | Content | Date |
|---|---|---|
|
ZYZZ |
Implement the weekly cap. ^^
|
#61 2013/09/18 15:24:17 |
|
DOTHRAKI |
"MYSTIC_ROSE"The only way to solve every single problem is whats been in games since the start....a lower lvl cap then raise it progresivly... This is another decent viable option.
PM
Reply
Quote
[quote="DOTHRAKI"][quote="MYSTIC_ROSE"]The only way to solve every single problem is whats been in games since the start....a lower lvl cap then raise it progresivly...
If the lvl cap started at 40 then everyone would get to a point then raise it another 20-30 lvls. it will stop 10 people ruling the entire server being totally untouchable by everyone else.
That way gvw would be awesome! so would pking and people would even have guild wars.
I remember guild wars we had like 25 people vs 1 player...and we'd still lose just cos in soma...higher = don't even bother trying theres no skill involved its just if your stronger you can't be killed by weaker people even if they work in large numbers we'll all be doing 1hp a hit...
The problem with soma is the lvl cap is waaaaaaaaaaay to high. And because its such a slow lvling game its almost designed to be "multi friendly" ...while people who play how your suposed to get shafted.
In other games you might get ganked by a pk...but when you hit the same cap as them you can get them back or even gang up on them...in soma...if you get ganked by a pk..there is absolutly nothing you can do about it as you will never no matter how long you play be able to kill them and they will just kill and kill and kill you.
And dying in soma is a big deal...
Add a lower lvl cap and keep it there for a good while so people can achieve it otherwise you just open up the game for multis and no one else.
Most games its easy to lvl and the effort comes from trying to get the best gear to make you stronger...in soma its allways been 100% about stats you get simply from grinding...if you can take people on naked...and they are fully armed...then a good lvl cap is required in such a game.[/quote]
This is another decent viable option.
[/quote]
|
#62 2013/09/18 15:28:26 |
|
IRNBRU |
The desire to be number one will always be there. People will always be stronger.
When I started soma I knew I couldn't keep up with those that are unemployed and socially inept. Rested exp provides a boost. All be it small but a boost non the less. I wont rage quit because I cant keep up. Just do your own thing. GVW is only one hour of the week if that's the main issue. I remember one time we actually had to go on teamspeak to time 4ths to get pavv off the fkin stone! But we did it ... all be it sabretooth went on stone and we still lost that particular gv but the point remains - multis are a part of soma rightly or wrongly. pm @IRNBRU for multi opportunities - 4No required ;d
PM
Reply
Quote
[quote="IRNBRU"]The desire to be number one will always be there. People will always be stronger.
When I started soma I knew I couldn't keep up with those that are unemployed and socially inept. Rested exp provides a boost. All be it small but a boost non the less. I wont rage quit because I cant keep up. Just do your own thing.
GVW is only one hour of the week if that's the main issue.
I remember one time we actually had to go on teamspeak to time 4ths to get pavv off the fkin stone! But we did it ... all be it sabretooth went on stone and we still lost that particular gv but the point remains - multis are a part of soma rightly or wrongly.
pm @IRNBRU for multi opportunities - 4No required ;d[/quote]
|
#63 2013/09/18 15:29:27 |
|
IRNBRU |
"DOTHRAKI""IRNBRU" But not impossible. And should that be my choice why shouldn't I? But yes thanks for the maths lesson. Doesn't detract from the point I made of : Why should anyone's playing time be limited? Most people going around in sorc/gold etc have already played in excess of 200hours. Is 12+ hours a day sustainable long term? - It is for a multi at which point everyone will then decide 6 hours is best because that is what is convenient for them when the "new server buzz" dies down.
PM
Reply
Quote
[quote="IRNBRU"][quote="DOTHRAKI"][quote="IRNBRU"]
There is no time limit you can implement that will suit everyone.
[/quote]
Explain how an 84 or 112 hour [b]weekly[/b] cap wouldn't suit everyone. Who would this not suit? The only players effected would be hardcore multis.
[quote]
Say I was some soma nutter and could manage 3 hours a day. I then want to do 36hours at the weekend. Why shouldnt I be able to do that?
[/quote]
After playing 3 hours a day Mon through Friday you will have only played 15 hours. You would still have 69 hours left for Friday and Saturday. There are only 48 hours in these two days. So yes...you would be able to do that.
[quote]
Lets say I work on the oil rigs. I am offline for 3 weeks and want to use my 2 weeks off to beast soma 20 hours a day. Why shouldn't I be able to do that?
A time limit is not the answer.[/quote]
Unrealistic hypothetical. You are not going to be playing 20 hours a day for 7 days.[/quote]
But not impossible. And should that be my choice why shouldn't I?
But yes thanks for the maths lesson. Doesn't detract from the point I made of :
Why should anyone's playing time be limited?
Most people going around in sorc/gold etc have already played in excess of 200hours. Is 12+ hours a day sustainable long term? - It is for a multi at which point everyone will then decide 6 hours is best because that is what is convenient for them when the "new server buzz" dies down.[/quote]
|
#64 2013/09/18 15:38:06 |
|
IRNBRU |
"DOTHRAKI""MYSTIC_ROSE"The only way to solve every single problem is whats been in games since the start....a lower lvl cap then raise it progresivly... agree
PM
Reply
Quote
[quote="IRNBRU"][quote="DOTHRAKI"][quote="MYSTIC_ROSE"]The only way to solve every single problem is whats been in games since the start....a lower lvl cap then raise it progresivly...
If the lvl cap started at 40 then everyone would get to a point then raise it another 20-30 lvls. it will stop 10 people ruling the entire server being totally untouchable by everyone else.
That way gvw would be awesome! so would pking and people would even have guild wars.
I remember guild wars we had like 25 people vs 1 player...and we'd still lose just cos in soma...higher = don't even bother trying theres no skill involved its just if your stronger you can't be killed by weaker people even if they work in large numbers we'll all be doing 1hp a hit...
The problem with soma is the lvl cap is waaaaaaaaaaay to high. And because its such a slow lvling game its almost designed to be "multi friendly" ...while people who play how your suposed to get shafted.
In other games you might get ganked by a pk...but when you hit the same cap as them you can get them back or even gang up on them...in soma...if you get ganked by a pk..there is absolutly nothing you can do about it as you will never no matter how long you play be able to kill them and they will just kill and kill and kill you.
And dying in soma is a big deal...
Add a lower lvl cap and keep it there for a good while so people can achieve it otherwise you just open up the game for multis and no one else.
Most games its easy to lvl and the effort comes from trying to get the best gear to make you stronger...in soma its allways been 100% about stats you get simply from grinding...if you can take people on naked...and they are fully armed...then a good lvl cap is required in such a game.[/quote]
This is another decent viable option.
[/quote]
agree
[/quote]
|
#65 2013/09/18 15:40:24 |
|
SCOIN |
Whats the average level at the moment and how far abive the average are the chars ppl are moaning about?
|
#66 2013/09/18 16:08:04 |
|
CARNAGE |
"MYSTIC_ROSE"I remember guild wars we had like 25 people vs 1 player...and we'd still lose just cos in soma...higher = don't even bother trying theres no skill involved its just if your stronger you can't be killed by weaker people even if they work in large numbers we'll all be doing 1hp a hit... I understand what the main concern is here and I'll say it once again I'm against multies but paragraphs like that just come off more as a whine with a bit of concern on the side, kinda like saying well I'm not strong enough so no one else should be strong either type of thing. I know this is probably not what you meant but when I read things like that it's how it looks no offense I'm not having a go or anything just saying. In my opinion there will always be strong players who are not multies and weaker players it's just how it is. If a solution can be found then that's cool with me but I'm still not liking the limits.
PM
Reply
Quote
[quote="CARNAGE"][quote="MYSTIC_ROSE"]I remember guild wars we had like 25 people vs 1 player...and we'd still lose just cos in soma...higher = don't even bother trying theres no skill involved its just if your stronger you can't be killed by weaker people even if they work in large numbers we'll all be doing 1hp a hit...
The problem with soma is the lvl cap is waaaaaaaaaaay to high. And because its such a slow lvling game its almost designed to be "multi friendly" ...while people who play how your suposed to get shafted.
[/quote]
I understand what the main concern is here and I'll say it once again I'm against multies but paragraphs like that just come off more as a whine with a bit of concern on the side, kinda like saying well I'm not strong enough so no one else should be strong either type of thing. I know this is probably not what you meant but when I read things like that it's how it looks no offense I'm not having a go or anything just saying.
In my opinion there will always be strong players who are not multies and weaker players it's just how it is. If a solution can be found then that's cool with me but I'm still not liking the limits.[/quote]
|
#67 2013/09/18 16:09:25 |
|
ISYLVER [Staff] |
Theoretically let's say we put in a 65 level soft cap.
The people who 65 will then. A) Farm low mobs for items B) Go on a PK spree harassing the lower levels. C) Moan that they can't level any more. D) Skill entirely until they hit the auras. E) Gain con F) Gain int. They would also be gaining rested exp.
PM
Reply
Quote
[quote="ISYLVER"]Theoretically let's say we put in a 65 level soft cap.
The people who 65 will then.
A) Farm low mobs for items
B) Go on a PK spree harassing the lower levels.
C) Moan that they can't level any more.
D) Skill entirely until they hit the auras.
E) Gain con
F) Gain int.
They would also be gaining rested exp.
[/quote]
|
#68 2013/09/18 16:59:25 |
|
DOTHRAKI |
I can see 'B' being a big issue.
|
#69 2013/09/18 17:04:26 |
|
MONSTER |
Is this all hsoma related only? devs would have literaly nothing to farm if they was capped at 65 since there isnt upgrades ect, devs would probaly play alot less out or boredum
|
#70 2013/09/18 17:07:10 |
|
SKIEBLUE |
Only viable option is to leave it as it is :)
Cannot agree more with what Isylver said. He knows exactly what he is doing and knows what will happen if level cap is introduced. If he did put it in We will still be fucked. Imagine a 20 hour char hunting for items?.. lol the market would be ruined and the char would be 10x more powerfull with godly items. Leave everything alone. :) /Blue
PM
Reply
Quote
[quote="SKIEBLUE"]Only viable option is to leave it as it is :)
Cannot agree more with what Isylver said. He knows exactly what he is doing and knows what will happen if level cap is introduced. If he did put it in We will still be fucked. Imagine a 20 hour char hunting for items?.. lol the market would be ruined and the char would be 10x more powerfull with godly items.
Leave everything alone. :)
/Blue[/quote]
|
#71 2013/09/18 17:14:58 |
|
CARNAGE |
"ISYLVER"Theoretically let's say we put in a 65 level soft cap. Actually funny that in 5 pages no one mentioned any of that. Can also add G) Log in to trace and kill bosses constantly.
PM
Reply
Quote
[quote="CARNAGE"][quote="ISYLVER"]Theoretically let's say we put in a 65 level soft cap.
The people who 65 will then.
A) Farm low mobs for items
B) Go on a PK spree harassing the lower levels.
C) Moan that they can't level any more.
D) Skill entirely until they hit the auras.
E) Gain con
F) Gain int.
They would also be gaining rested exp.
[/quote]
Actually funny that in 5 pages no one mentioned any of that. Can also add
G) Log in to trace and kill bosses constantly.[/quote]
|
#72 2013/09/18 17:15:05 |
|
RAVER |
people wanted the game released for ages.
Now it is, Stop worrying about other people and Enjoy it with the good user count! |
#73 2013/09/18 19:56:37 |
|
AST |
"ISYLVER"Theoretically let's say we put in a 65 level soft cap. The target in the game should be items, not stats. Like the vast (every?) popular game out there. How many current generation mmos don't have a level cap? That alone should tell you something. A is a good thing, it means a better economy. Just increase the chance for the normal repairer to break items, and you also make crafting more desirable in the process. B happens anyway, with a focus on items people will be too busy farming. If they do decide to go on PK sprees, there will be a lot more people around that stands a short at defending. C, tell them to go hunt for items instead, if they are too stupid to work that out for themselves. D, and this is a bad thing? Least the auras aren't going to be doing as much damage vs same level players after all. E, I'd probably cap this too personally, it's frankly a stupid stat and that's probably why it doesn't feature in any popular game afaik. F, How? If it's on the same cap system.
PM
Reply
Quote
[quote="AST"][quote="ISYLVER"]Theoretically let's say we put in a 65 level soft cap.
The people who 65 will then.
A) Farm low mobs for items
B) Go on a PK spree harassing the lower levels.
C) Moan that they can't level any more.
D) Skill entirely until they hit the auras.
E) Gain con
F) Gain int.
They would also be gaining rested exp.
[/quote]
The target in the game should be items, not stats. Like the vast (every?) popular game out there. How many current generation mmos don't have a level cap? That alone should tell you something.
A is a good thing, it means a better economy. Just increase the chance for the normal repairer to break items, and you also make crafting more desirable in the process.
B happens anyway, with a focus on items people will be too busy farming. If they do decide to go on PK sprees, there will be a lot more people around that stands a short at defending.
C, tell them to go hunt for items instead, if they are too stupid to work that out for themselves.
D, and this is a bad thing? Least the auras aren't going to be doing as much damage vs same level players after all.
E, I'd probably cap this too personally, it's frankly a stupid stat and that's probably why it doesn't feature in any popular game afaik.
F, How? If it's on the same cap system.[/quote]
|
#74 2013/09/18 21:30:59 |
|
HEISENBERG |
Multis have always been a part of soma, and MMO's - its just the way it is.
That being said, the only person i really have a problem with is Style and Mr_Perfect. Multi's happen, fair enough, but these characters are literally on 24/7, i'm actually disgusted :P I think the fairest thing to do here is implemented a 48 hour system. Say every 48 hours, if an account has a total played time of 35 hours out of the past 48 hours, then the account must wait 13 hours before they can log in again. This stops EXCESSIVE multi's, whilst not punishing the weekend warriors that play soma, pulling an all nighter on the very few days they have off. Not a brilliant solution, but the best i can think of. /Heisenberg
PM
Reply
Quote
[quote="HEISENBERG"]Multis have always been a part of soma, and MMO's - its just the way it is.
That being said, the only person i really have a problem with is Style and Mr_Perfect. Multi's happen, fair enough, but these characters are literally on 24/7, i'm actually disgusted :P
I think the fairest thing to do here is implemented a 48 hour system. Say every 48 hours, if an account has a total played time of 35 hours out of the past 48 hours, then the account must wait 13 hours before they can log in again. This stops EXCESSIVE multi's, whilst not punishing the weekend warriors that play soma, pulling an all nighter on the very few days they have off.
Not a brilliant solution, but the best i can think of.
/Heisenberg[/quote]
|
#75 2013/09/19 02:08:34 |
Please sign in with one of your characters to reply