Beta test mud

[Rigwarl]

It's all fun and games till someone kills the elder titan at level 40.

[Atwell]

Terminology like "needs rebalancing", "broken", and "fixed" in this context implies that we have an objective standard for what gameplay should look like, and you're trying to make the game mesh with that standard. We'd all agree on extreme basics, for example that modifying the MUD to not crash where it currently does is a "fix". Beyond that, I contend that a game is a standard unto itself. We don't propose to balance the chess queen with the rook; we just play chess with knowledge of the difference.

Changing the game when players identify strong strategies or high-payoff mobs discourages players who enjoy sloth for its gamelike challenges. Those who enjoy sloth as a society more than a game welcome such changes.

[*Chobbs*]

[quote:1cqahqv4]Terminology like "needs rebalancing", "broken", and "fixed" in this context implies that we have an objective standard for what gameplay should look like, and you're trying to make the game mesh with that standard. We'd all agree on extreme basics, for example that modifying the MUD to not crash where it currently does is a "fix". Beyond that, I contend that a game is a standard unto itself. We don't propose to balance the chess queen with the rook; we just play chess with knowledge of the difference.[/quote:1cqahqv4]

"Broken" and "fixed" can be interpreted in a fairly broad sense, but like you said, these two are generally agreed upon. However, it is the "balance" issue that seems to raise the most concerns.

I would contend that when things are changed, these instances of "balancing", "broken" and "fixed", that they are simply attempts to create or work towrds an ingame equilibrium, this standard that you speak of (hence the term "balancing", or "rebalancing" if you wish). It's true there is no objective standard, but until that elusive perfectly objective game engine is devised, there is little choice but to rely on subjective judgments which to implement changes.

I do not see how the balancing of a chess rook and queen is relevant. No one proposes they be "balanced", largely because they already are. The game is not just a duel between a queen and a rook; the encompassing game system ensures that any perceived imbalance in their movesets be kept in check, or balanced if you will, by the inclusion of turns and other pieces. Should the queen suddenly become, say, impervious to capture or charm as many pawns as she can, then some voices might be heard.

[quote:1cqahqv4]Changing the game when players identify strong strategies or high-payoff mobs discourages players who enjoy sloth for its gamelike challenges. Those who enjoy sloth as a society more than a game welcome such changes.[/quote:1cqahqv4]

This is very true. But changes are not synonymous with 'nerfs'. I would contend that changes are meant to preserve the gamelike challenge, either by making things more difficult (for is that not part of the definition of challenge) or simply changing things to help keep an old game fresh.

These changes/rebalancing/fixes are largely to resolve some glaring issues, for instance, when someone can finish an entire aq chain without doing any of the intermediate steps. Who even knows how to get sin's true name anymore? Or say, when you can cycle a mob that loads premium eq/high rewards but doesn't really put up a fight. It becomes more of an exercise in waiting/seeing how many times you can regen and run back to him than any real challenge.

Also, a few of these changes/rebalancing/fixes are to increase low rewards for high effort. Why does no one ever complain about those rebalancings?

Chobbs!

[angel]

wb atwell,where u been?:) well said anyways

These changes/rebalancing/fixes are largely to resolve some glaring issues, for instance, when someone can finish an entire aq chain without doing any of the intermediate steps. Who even knows how to get sin's true name anymore? Or say, when you can cycle a mob that loads premium eq/high rewards but doesn't really put up a fight. It becomes more of an exercise in waiting/seeing how many times you can regen and run back to him than any real challenge.

Also, a few of these changes/rebalancing/fixes are to increase low rewards for high effort. Why does no one ever complain about those rebalancings?

-- change all the aq's, coz we know the ropes of how to get 90% of it done, stare......
a games spose to keep progressing, coming up with new stuff n all.
this s4 doesnt look to be nothing much different other than the fact that u made us stronger just to hit the same old mobs,same old maps.. it would be dumb of us not to do it to our best potential.
same mobs, stronger chars,n so s4 is just beefing the old mobs up so we take longer time to redo all that we've done b4?
u talk about challenge, this is wat ur proposing arent u? just beef up mobs from s3,make us stronger,longer time to lvl = s4?

[angel]

so lessay one find day,ill get a 4x40 n solo fallon,tiamat,all the boring crap.
ur gonna beef them up as well? go ahead,do it now why wait till we start doing it b4 u change them

[angel]

You brutally gut a purple dragon!
A purple dragon looks down in terror as a lone, sharp scale falls to the ground!
A purple dragon is dead! R.I.P.
You receive 0 experience points as your share.
You gain 0 experience for leadership!
Your conscience has been bothering you a bit.
Tuk receives 0 experience points.
Toxis receives 0 experience points.
Yoshimi receives 0 experience points.
Zeraz receives 0 experience points.
Cizin receives 0 experience points.
Total exp for kill is 0.

gjob, 0 xp too now?

[*juggleblood*]

[quote="Atwell":2nok61m8]Terminology like "needs rebalancing", "broken", and "fixed" in this context implies that we have an objective standard for what gameplay should look like, and you're trying to make the game mesh with that standard. We'd all agree on extreme basics, for example that modifying the MUD to not crash where it currently does is a "fix". Beyond that, I contend that a game is a standard unto itself. We don't propose to balance the chess queen with the rook; we just play chess with knowledge of the difference.

Changing the game when players identify strong strategies or high-payoff mobs discourages players who enjoy sloth for its gamelike challenges. Those who enjoy sloth as a society more than a game welcome such changes.[/quote:2nok61m8]

I can agree with this for the most part. I don't want to give the impression that we're constantly spying on you guys looking for stuff to nerf.

This change was one of a larger subset of changes to the autoquest system. A lot of quests are being added as well. So the total available drachma is being increased, even if a few are being reduced or made harder. It is a net positive.