Howdy, Stranger!
Categories
- 4.8K All Categories
- 4.3K Life in Lusternia
- 453 Announce Posts
- 75 Event Posts
- 1.7K Common Grounds
- 589 Q&A
- 83 Combat Overhaul
- 1.5K World Library
- 86 Combat Logs
- 870 Event Scrolls
- 403 Mechanic's Corner
- 329 Ideas
- 314 Last Chance Trading Post
- 478 Life Outside of Lusternia
- 9 Forum News
- 275 The Real World
- 94 Meet and Greet
- 37 The Funnies
- 63 Mafia Hideout
WonderBrazier Aug 2017 promo
This does seem like one of the more 'must have' wonder items.
I'd like to see the tracking ability removed and replaced (yes it know it is a very limited version). I'd like to see it saved for a future wonderboots item. Wonderboots could have a couple/few limited tracking abilities, the sprint ability, and function as the long requested catacombs substitute.
Steingrim.
I'd like to see the tracking ability removed and replaced (yes it know it is a very limited version). I'd like to see it saved for a future wonderboots item. Wonderboots could have a couple/few limited tracking abilities, the sprint ability, and function as the long requested catacombs substitute.
Steingrim.
0
(c) Iron Realms Entertainment 2012.
Comments
-How long is it kept from being terrained?
-Can we impose both a power cost and a cooldown?
-Why does this game hate melders so much?
-Can it break melded terrain?
- Sure, why not.
- Yes, this will likely be changed.
Feel free to submit a wonderboots concept to artifacts@lusternia.com - As it is, we have zero plans for them and are unlikely to gut an existing wonderitem for something that isn't even a twinkle in our eye.
EDIT: Scrubbed to be less sarcastic. I apparently should not be dealing with forums right now, so I'm going to forget they exist.
Is the Beacon power a permanent thing until it is reset or does it reset after you return to the location?
I get that, which is why I suggested we test it.
I just wish there were like, a fugue artifact for use against bards, or an octave tacet artifact or something. Or maybe bring in an old Magnetize effect in an artifact for monks and warriors. Then maybe there'd be a tangible uproar. Or at least it'd feel equal.
Yes it will hurt defenders, but the attackers will be equally out of luck.
This is purely presumption without being able to see a help file or the item itself, but guessing the powers are likely restricted like so...
If olive oil comes from olives, where does baby oil come from?
If vegetarians eat vegetables, what do humanitarians eat?
If olive oil comes from olives, where does baby oil come from?
If vegetarians eat vegetables, what do humanitarians eat?
As a nonmelder though, woohoo, drop that melder, make it so they cannot meld that room again, move on with my day without worrying about that in the future, unless the duration is dropped to like...60s or so, to keep people rapidly shifting melds around with forcemelds during the course of a fight or something. 5 min is probably what'd be looked at? I dunno...
Ixion tells you, "// I don't think anyone else had a clue, amazing form."
I'm a consent-based roleplayer! Kindly ask first, and I will return the favour. Open to developing tinyplots.
Atlantis is my client of choice! (Guide)
However, implementing it outside of the status quo should probably have gotten some envoy feedback (I'm not sure if it had any, in this case). Existing block-terrain concepts and execution in the game comes with very specific rules that have nothing to do with a time limit, nor a use limit:
1) To be able to block someone from terraining a room, you need to have melded said room.
2) If the other someone is a melder himself, you need to have melded at least two other rooms surrounding said room, and those two other rooms cannot be adjacent to one another.
These two iron-clad restrictions then feed into a much wider dynamic of area control, room-exit layout and meld building strategies that form the basis of existing meld-based combat meta.
Introducing something that ignores, or changes the dynamics of, those two restrictions is in itself a huge balance change. The implementation, therefore needs to take into consideration what impact it will have on those basic rules, and therefore, the subsequent effect on the larger meld-based meta. This will inform and define the role of the ability being created. In this case, we are effectively giving part of a melder's role (and strategic advantage) to artifact holders.
Being clear on what role this new ability should play (empowered trueground for non-melders? or anti-meld ability? or meld-advantage for existing melders?) will make it easier to see how it should be implemented, and the restrictions that must come with it, to keep the status quo of meld balance. This is, of course, assuming that we want to keep the status quo of how melds are created and used in combat.
Finally, you'll need to look at the effect on the combat meta. What needs to be compensated, if any, to add this new dimension to combat? Those restrictions/rules/compensations will have to be targeted, and have meaning more than just being a balancing cost. Some abilities can be added as an artifact, and with a sufficient cost, and that's it. This isn't one of them, because this doesn't exist or sit within any pre-existing framework of melding or terraining. It's a game-changer (literally, in this sense - since we're a game. Geddit?). So what kind of restrictions can be considered?
Because the original restrictions of pre-existing mechanics have nothing to do with time limits or use limits, adding things like time limits or use limits will only be able to do one of two things: 1) fail to address the balance concerns that arise from the new ability's existence, or 2) completely neuter the new ability. This is why last-until day change restriction is itself (edit:) not a weird implementation. I'm not sure what exactly it's supposed to do.
For example, if you wanted the new ability to give non-melders a way to interact with (and combat/challenge) an opponent melder's strategic advantage (ie, create a non-melder's "meld" dynamic), then the last-until day change restriction becomes too heavy - because they won't be able to do this role effectively. Sufficient compensation on other areas need to be implemented instead (for example, make it follow the two rules of terrain blocking listed above). On the other hand, if you only wanted the new ability to be an empowered trueground, allowing non-melders to break a meld, then the day change restriction is the wrong restriction: there's simply no need for it - instead, the ability itself should just be made to respect the existing rules for breaking melds, and then there'll be no need for the effect to block further terraining, if the role is simply to allow non-melders to break melds. Etc.
This has the potential to be a cool addition to the game. It just doesn't seem to be clear, at the moment, what it's supposed to actually be.
Non-melders get to break a meld? It's a very arguable point. It needs to be stuck in a report - a potential solution would be something like
Solution 1: Trueground can now break melds at a breakpoint, and costs 3p to do so. Since it's normally 2p and forcetrueground (presumably) should cost 3p.
But they've denied even that - it's now artifact gated. So I'd be very opposed to a change to the actual Trueground skill if Purify remained as it is.
It's /always/ like this. Artifacts are just released without any consideration - it just happens over and over again. It's so embittering. Guess it doesn't really matter to them, though.
I really, really don't care if the ability is neutered - it should be, because it shouldn't exist. Put up a trueground report, general envoys, if you want this.
I think you're making a mountain out of a molehill.
But Mali isn't wrong. There's been a lot of anti-meld lately. I'm happy if we're moving away from passives for melders and into actives, but for the moment we're just nerfing the meld and giving nothing in return.
4. Not sure it needs a power cost as the aff given is random. Also, wonderbrazier doesn't seem to have any way to strip blindness so there's that.
10. From the syntax and seems implemented: WONDERBRAZIER ACTIVATE DREAMGLIMPSE - 1/day
11. Doesn't seem to be a limit xday and given the limitations in place (not being able to unite) not sure any are needed.
14. Can't seem to get this to work.
18. Your suspicions appear to be correct. To those not-familiar with illusions/glamours they mostly, including this skill has a timer.
There is some limit but I don't know how often yet. Don't know that soullfire can only be activated once per weave and I don't agree that esteem going up is automatically a reason to slap a limit on it. The cost on soulfire can be adjusted if there's a problem. For all we know the admin had looked at esteem and thought it was too cheap (remember the days of needing it constantly for raiding is behind us). I would expect a spike as people stock up.
I would expect that much of the esteem used by the brazier is likely to be from offering.
@Ianir there's a bit of difficulty in using the brazier that doesn't exist with the illusion skill. In that with the illusion's skill you can use the ILLUSIONS command to see the timers on illusions.
Only little bit of feedback right now is the damage types are a bit org specific it would be more attractive to buy if it buffed all org damage types.
Purify seems a bit odd. Haven't had a chance to test it but it seems like a hefty buff to defensive melds on paper.
It's an ok item but it's not one I could see myself paying big money for right now. I'd be more tempted to buy it if the damage buffs works for my org.
No need to be so harsh about this, they already dealt with one issue post-release (Overload) based on feedback and they will be much more likely to deal with any problem with Purity based on rational comments instead of emotional reactions.
Just because they are administrators, they are no less human or subject to the various foibles of which we all too often succumb.
So - seriously - I'm just reciprocating the inconsiderate attitude that was shown to me, that you probably didn't see. If you really want to look at the "constructive" criticism, it's there - Ciaran's post is also much better at getting across what I think would be tons better too.
- Beacon should be changed either to, 1) not also transport your entourage and/or 2) be more limited, with regards to respecting monolith [it's not stopped, both ways] and the planar range shouldn't extend to aetherbubbles. I'd probably recommend it to be a copy of Demigod Anchor, unless you really want to break the fortress meta.
- Track should cost bal if it's meant to be more limited, or otherwise just show you the full direction list to the item [It's balance-less, so you can spam it and autowalk already.]
- Purify, I have to agree, imposes an unfair strain on melders. No ability should shut down the vast majority of a class' prime skillset without counter-play. A less invasive implementation might be to give personal immunity to meld passive effects for a limited time (60s?).