Jump to content

Welcome!

Sign In or Register to gain full access to our forums.

Photo
- - - - -

OS Relic Discussion


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
100 replies to this topic

#51 Neostar

Neostar

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 394 posts

Posted 04 November 2010 - 12:55 PM

So your suggestion is to remove every relic from the game, and give everyone a bunch of dusty relics? Forgive me if I misunderstood you somewhere. Your suggestion seems to leave you more worse-off than you are now. So either you're trying to get people to feel how you feel, or you've just lost your mind.

Either way, I don't see what your suggestion would fix that the change isn't already fixing.

#52 Chaosfire

Chaosfire

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 711 posts

Posted 04 November 2010 - 01:57 PM

It balances the useful class 3 relics without making them worthless.

#53 Neostar

Neostar

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 394 posts

Posted 04 November 2010 - 03:33 PM

They aren't worthless. You complain because you're losing a lot of gold with this change, yet propose a solution that will make you lose even MORE.

The way to balance relics out is to turn everything into n/s and balance relics (add slots or whatever is deemed necessary). Handing everyone a bunch of dusty relics when their relics are already considered balanced just seems like a huge waste of time and manpower.

#54 Shinde

Shinde

    Class Terraformer

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 649 posts

Posted 04 November 2010 - 04:24 PM

Now I might be missing the point but I think Chaosfire wants to minimize the nerfing of individual relic stats.

I assume he views the "balance issue" with relics not being their absolute power but the power not being properly reflected in rarity (at least with regards to imm auctions and dusty relics introducing too many of the 'high-power' relics into the game). The wiping & giving out dusty relic idea is to re-align (re-create?) the power/rarity curve while minimizing the redistribution of power between relic holders. The idea of the recipes is that the more powerful relics can reliably be made with sufficient work/resources/dedication (which in turn is supposed to justify their power).

I also feel there is an intent to make low-power relics overall more common. (less sure about this one)

I would like Chaosfire to correct me if I have misinterpreted or missed any other major goals.

#55 Yankee

Yankee

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 310 posts

Posted 04 November 2010 - 07:47 PM

(From Shinde):
blahblahblah



120s should be forbidden to speak about game balance and relics, in addition to not be able to have posted over 3x more than their level amount until they multi to 3rd class.

#56 Nerion

Nerion

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 246 posts

Posted 04 November 2010 - 10:27 PM

I agree with the change

#57 Neostar

Neostar

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 394 posts

Posted 05 November 2010 - 01:35 AM

I understood what he was suggesting and his reasoning behind it... I just don't see a POINT to doing it. There aren't 20 people out there with 15 demigods waiting to bind. The market isn't "flooded" with rare relics at all, or even relatively close to the point where a change like that would be necessary. I feel like the changes already going into affect are more than enough to fix the problems we have.

You'd think that an imm was auctioning a demigod/rose/index finger/destroyer headband every other day after reading all that. Adding a slot here and there, removing the ridiculous o/s relics (14 svs 1 slot, 16 damage 1 slot etc.), and the expiration on relics is enough to fix the problem. I think the dusty relic idea is okay, but a complete waste of time IMO.

#58 Tamlin

Tamlin

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 811 posts

Posted 06 November 2010 - 09:32 AM

I just hope they make everything retro active. I don't want to see o/s relic of xxxx and n/s relic of xxxx..

Fix the problem across the board and in all items, Unbind what is bound and know that you got a long time of over bumped stats which i am sure helped in so many different ways its not funny.

#59 Savior

Savior

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 199 posts

Posted 07 November 2010 - 03:28 PM

I'm really in support of this. I just want to see relics become less uncommon.. :cry:

The problem is obviously the difference in have and have-nots. Taking away from the haves seems required at this point. I'm not one of the "haves" so I won't comment on this.

But as a thought, another way to help balance the two is to provide for the have-nots. Not by removing relics but by adding an abundance of low stat class one relics. Like +1 Damage or +2 svs or +1 stat. Make them easy to get and easily replaced so that everyone can participate. I can't see a first classer buying a demigod, but wouldn't it be nice if they could find some +1 stat relics? Nothing imbalancing but enough so that everyone gets a chance to use relics without a great expendeture of money or effort.

Of course rare relics should remain rare, i'm not saying that they shouldn't. I'm just saying it would be nice if they were more common.

#60 Krim

Krim

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1824 posts

Posted 08 November 2010 - 12:53 AM

Are you guys even going to consider removing relics all together?

And when is this happening, I don't want it to turn out like another "Oh we're going to remove all OS items" fake out.

#61 Vassago

Vassago

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 7968 posts

Posted 08 November 2010 - 10:24 AM

Why would we consider that? The system just needs tweaking and cleaning up. Multiplying relics the way it was done initially was clearly a bad idea, which seems to be primarily what caused the issues.

#62 Saitok

Saitok

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 412 posts

Posted 08 November 2010 - 09:33 PM

I want to weigh in and say that the driving idea behind this change (or changes) is what balance demands. To those complaining about how this isn't fair or demanding compensation: The game's not fair.

When mights got nerfed, everyone who owned them was affected. Nobody was given their spell turnings and baldrics back. Yet these items were obtained "fairly" or whatever, under the terms of the system as it existed at one point. Simply put, an item was deemed overpowered and changed retroactively, and if you lost functionality, tough. The same situation applies here. Yeah, maybe you spent an assload of gold on relics. So what? Under what logic is this instance of change different? The game changes, and sometimes you end up getting screwed by those changes.

If the staff wants to implement some form of compensation, great. But the people who come on here demanding it, like they've somehow earned it because they've played for a long time or they spent a lot of time/money on the game, are ridiculous. This change is being made for the sake of balance, and if you're against it, you're a selfish five-year-old.

#63 Rotten

Rotten

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 52 posts

Posted 09 November 2010 - 08:53 AM

I do not agree with the taking from the "haves" and giving to the "have not" group. Just sounds too much like "Obamacare". I also agree that if something is done, it must be uniform and retroactive.

Regarding the point from Saitok of people who donate to this game thinking they should have a little more say.....they should. THEY help keep the game alive. For those who don't donate and bitch about every change no matter what it is, sorry, but your ingame gold doesn't pay the bills.

#64 Uika

Uika

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 230 posts

Posted 09 November 2010 - 10:02 AM

:cry:

#65 Saitok

Saitok

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 412 posts

Posted 09 November 2010 - 11:12 AM

(From Rotten):
Regarding the point from Saitok of people who donate to this game thinking they should have a little more say.....they should. THEY help keep the game alive. For those who don't donate and bitch about every change no matter what it is, sorry, but your ingame gold doesn't pay the bills.



No. See, the thing you don't seem to understand is that you've already been compensated for your donation: You got your RU. That's the end of the relationship. You don't get special treatment because you donate, and you don't get more of a say. The idea that you do, somehow, is just ignorant and greedy.

#66 Neostar

Neostar

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 394 posts

Posted 09 November 2010 - 11:19 AM

How exactly are we giving to the "have not group"? Also they've already said it will be uniform and retroactive.

No, Saitok is right. You shouldn't have more say based on how much you donate. People wouldn't donate if there weren't people online to play with. If you don't please the people who log on and play, they don't log on. Then the people who donate don't log on. Anyone who logs on and plays helps to keep the game alive. I'm sure you can see the pattern/logic behind it all.

#67 Rotten

Rotten

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 52 posts

Posted 09 November 2010 - 01:41 PM

(From Saitok):

(From Rotten):
Regarding the point from Saitok of people who donate to this game thinking they should have a little more say.....they should. THEY help keep the game alive. For those who don't donate and bitch about every change no matter what it is, sorry, but your ingame gold doesn't pay the bills.



No. See, the thing you don't seem to understand is that you've already been compensated for your donation: You got your RU. That's the end of the relationship. You don't get special treatment because you donate, and you don't get more of a say. The idea that you do, somehow, is just ignorant and greedy.



Oh really? How bout everyone stop donating and we will see where this game goes. Its not being greedy, those who donate should have their voices heard just a bit more than those who don't. It isn't greed, it human nature. If we had more people playing, then Vass could get away with not listening because someone will take their place for donating. Unfortunately, that isn't the case here. BTW, no one cares about your "contract law".

#68 Neostar

Neostar

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 394 posts

Posted 09 November 2010 - 02:16 PM

You didn't answer my question. How are they giving anything to the "have nots"? Also you're completely off-topic right now this has nothing to do with the change. Your points on people donating can be for or against this relic change so try to elaborate a little. "It isn't greed, it human nature."? What part of that makes sense? If I were to donate it would be to get RU/help out the game. No where in my mind would I be thinking "I'm getting more pull/influence". Hence why it's greed/immature.

#69 Csia

Csia

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 391 posts

Posted 09 November 2010 - 02:58 PM

No, really, Saitok is correct.

Here's a good reason why he's correct (for the sake of argument, pretend Saitok does not donate): if what you said were true, you would have more say over the game than Saitok. Considering how unbelievably stupid you are, and that Saitok actually qualifies as a rational agent, this would clearly be poor for the game. This is 'mercia, where we judge ideas based on their merit, not their bank accounts. Your idea sounds a lot like Materia Magica royalty, something our founding fathers explicitly rejected, and was part of the reason for the American Revolution. I'd say go back to England, but you really are so stupid that they wouldn't let you in.

I honestly can't believe you need this explained to you. And it's not like I'm starting with a high opinion of your mental facilities here.

#70 Saitok

Saitok

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 412 posts

Posted 09 November 2010 - 03:26 PM

(From Rotten):
Oh really? How bout everyone stop donating and we will see where this game goes. Its not being greedy, those who donate should have their voices heard just a bit more than those who don't. It isn't greed, it human nature. If we had more people playing, then Vass could get away with not listening because someone will take their place for donating. Unfortunately, that isn't the case here. BTW, no one cares about your "contract law".



You're not actually addressing my point. Obviously, if nobody donates, the game can't run. To suggest that the game can run without donations is absurd. It also isn't what I said, and has nothing to do with the point I raised.

Let's look at the key word here: donation. You're donating your money to the game because (supposedly) you enjoy playing, and want to personally support it. Really, you shouldn't get a damn thing, because it's a donation. You donate because you support something, and the donation in of itself (and the support it lends to the game) should be reward enough.

However, the staff has so generously decided to give you something back for your charitable donation. That something is donation items/reward units. They don't have to do this, as I touched on above. But they do. This is great, as it gives more people a reason to donate more money. Giving a reward for donations circumvents the greed of people. You're right, it is human nature. Humans are greedy. They want something for their donation, and they get it.

But then, because people are ignorant and greedy (as I mentioned earlier), that isn't quite enough. So they feel a sense of entitlement, that idea that if it weren't for them, the game would crash and burn. I'm not saying that idea isn't accurate--in a general sense, it is. However, this attitude turns into a childish mentality, one of "If I can't get my way, I'll just stop giving you money."

It's certainly your prerogative to stop donating if you no longer enjoy the game or don't agree with the direction the staff is taking it in. This is called choice, and its yours to exercise. But the staff is in no way beholden to specific players because they donate. This is a good thing; the players who donate the most aren't really the most generous, or the ones who are most invested in the game's well-being--they're the greediest. I would rather my playing experience not be affected by the whims of greedy players, personally.

I'll end with an analogy, a kind of tl;dr summary, because I'm sure you haven't bothered to read all this. When you donate to the Red Cross, does that give you the right (or do you expect to have the right) to go into a care center and say, "Hey, I don't like that guy. Don't save his life."? Of course not; that would be (and watch how I do this) absurd.

#71 Bougie

Bougie

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 80 posts

Posted 09 November 2010 - 04:15 PM

where do you draw the line here? ive been playing this game for years, just like most of you. i honestly dont see the game getting more balanced if you take away these items, o.s relics. all you will achieve is having some pretty upset people who will prolly quit, and thats all this game needs. people who wanted to donate and spend a poo ton of money on these items that was there choice, i spent my time working on my char with mobbing betters, quests, etc. that is the olny way you can make you char better, not gear, and you all know that. i didnt have 1 single relic bound till about a 2 months ago. i think yes some relics are overpowerd, but isnt valk overpowerd? isnt bard overpowerd? we could go on and on about what people think is unbalanced.

the other arguement is take it away because not everyone can obtain them anymore. so get rid of all o/s sigils o/s tooths. and the endless weapons out there. hey i hear anagon has a o.s ultimate evil axe.(vampiric) thats not fair :(

if this relic thing does change,(which im sure it will)imo the people that put all that time and money into them items should be reimbursed in some sort of fair way

#72 Havoc

Havoc

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 643 posts

Posted 09 November 2010 - 07:00 PM

Caveat emptor, bitches. You had to have known this stuff looked too powerful to remain as it was forever when you bought it, it was pretty obvious. I'd be willing to bet that most of you bought most of your o/s relic stockpiles AFTER seeing the stat changes, and I have to tell you, that's never a wise investment or a good idea.

Everyone using o/s relics is being reimbursed in the fairest way possible for the system. They get their relics back, in a non-broken form. Anyone who says they'll quit because their unfair advantage is being taken away is a selfish crybaby and the game wouldn't miss them.

#73 Duende

Duende

    Advanced Member

  • Administrators
  • 1612 posts

Posted 09 November 2010 - 07:06 PM

I'd point out that all the complaining and drama isn't due to unfairness; this change is predicated on MAKING things fair. The fact that it will finally make things fair is what has people reacting.

#74 Matthia

Matthia

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 926 posts

Posted 09 November 2010 - 07:40 PM

(From Duende):
I'd point out that all the complaining and drama isn't due to unfairness; this change is predicated on MAKING things fair. The fact that it will finally make things fair is what has people reacting.



I'd say that's a false assumption Duende. You believe the change is predicated on fairness - and as a view from player v. player balance (not in the pk sense, but in comparing characters), I'd say you are correct.

However, it's pretty clearly they feel this is unfair because they feel like they are losing something without adequate compensation. Don't dismiss their complaints on the grounds they are complaining the playing field will be level - I think it's a mis-characterization of their argument entirely.

Full disclosure: This change massively benefits me. I just don't think it's fair to pillage others. Instead - let's find a middle ground. Judging by a lot of posts, people just want to be fairly compensated.

-M

#75 Csia

Csia

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 391 posts

Posted 09 November 2010 - 10:05 PM

(From Matthia):
However, it's pretty clearly they feel this is unfair because they feel like they are losing something without adequate compensation. Don't dismiss their complaints on the grounds they are complaining the playing field will be level - I think it's a mis-characterization of their argument entirely.



He's not dismissing their complaints on the grounds they they are complaining that the playing field will be level. He's dismissing their complaints because their complaints are self-centered, greedy, ignorant, and myopic. It's not like there's a big lack of reason for this change, it's just like any other area where oldstat gets updated.

[...]let's find a middle ground. Judging by a lot of posts, people just want to be fairly compensated.



And I want a pony. As has been explained numerous times, people are fairly compensated. First, the utility from having these powerful relics. Secondly, it's not like they're getting robbed, they still keep the new stat version of the relics. Third, have you seen what their idea of fair compensation is? Boy, you must be out'cho mind.

Lastly, because I know Chaosfire is going to whine about how he never got the chance to use some of his relics and thusly isn't being fairly compensated: tough. You had plenty of time. To put up an analogy, when I buy produce from the store, and don't get around to cooking with it before it goes bad, I don't go back to the store demanding a refund. You had your time to use it, but in your six month searches for perfect eq, you lose some things. It's called opportunity cost. Perfection has its price.