Game Development & Fairness

[DontDieSteve]

As many of you know a lot of GMs have left and many professions are out of a Guru or someone to care for them and be a voice for their side.

Also, as many of you know GMs in this game get paid squat and thus much of the reasons why they play is because they love the game and want to develop it's professions and mechanics.

Thus, much of what the GMs do is considerably bias toward their own agendas and their own goals which bleed incoherently because their stake in the game as a player and their powers as a GM/Guru.

Example, the new wormling changes. As GM Oscuro of Empath/Cleric team stated he upped the CM dodging abilities of all the non-square professions because it was "seriously biased towards warriors and rogues." Well, sir, don't you think that it was intentionally put their for a reason, Mr. Oscuro of Empath/Cleric Team?

Perhaps,Mr.Oscuro decided "Well, Gee Golly, my cleric dies a crap ton more to CM attacks (as it should be) then Bob the warrior my hunting partner.".... "Well, Gee Golly, I think I'll just tweak that when I go in and fiddle with the BCS for worms heh heh heh." Essentially it'll be like a rider on a congressional bill... with guess what? No opposing sides!

Further,of even more grave concern. Mr. Oscuro of Empath/Cleric team now works full time on monks (since Coase has now left.). He stated numerous time on the officials to the affect "Well, I really don't care much for monks... what I really want to see is Savants! (another pure profession.)" So, what does that say to the developmental prospects of monks (a square profession)? Will he do it just willy nilly? OR perhaps when he's coding some numbers will be fudged this way and that so that "Super cool monk punch won't outdo cleric spell so and so"?

Granted, the vast majority of the game enjoys magic using professions more then the physical combat people (although there is a whole universe of untapped mechanical prospects for physical combat including the unarmed combat). But, how can we enjoy a game when it's inherently stacked against/for certain players? How can you enjoy a game when the people who make the rules cheats?

[Fallen]

Leaving archaic coding in place just to favor a profession or two is a pretty crappy idea, Steve. Further, squares still maintain the advantage when fighting roa'ters, with Oscuro stating that brittle characters (AKA Pures) will likely be outright killed by a landed blow and squares will not. Calling the update to bring the Roa'ters to a standardized BCS code is to say all BCS monsters are "biased" against warriors and rogues, which is nonsense. The formula still favors those with a physical build. One few pures, especially at that level, possess.

Your conjecture on monks and anti-square GMs I am not going to touch. It reads like a conspiracy theory pamphlet some crazy man would hand you in the subway.

"George Bush hates squares."

[petroglyph]

You do realize that Oscuro's main is a square, right?

[Tolwynn]

That's just how vast and deep the conspiracy is - even the GMs that play squares have a burning need to bring them down.

[DontDieSteve]

Oscuro's Characters:

Main - Capped Cleric/Capped Rogue

Main/Secondary - Capped Sorcerer

Secondary - 50ish warrior/empath/Bard.

He favors pures. The Rogue is magical, and was just his main because he started out as one. Plus, he just uses him as a picker from what I hear.

[Fallen]

Rogues that aren't magical are dumb.

[Drew]

MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS . Monks.

[Renian]

Rogues that aren't magical are dumb.

Indeed. I have 425 for a reason.

That said, quit QQing. You're bitching about a single change on a single critter, which has no significant impact on the overall game. Wah.

[Danical]

Oscuro's Characters:

Main - Capped Cleric/Capped Rogue

Main/Secondary - Capped Sorcerer

Secondary - 50ish warrior/empath/Bard.

He favors pures. The Rogue is magical, and was just his main because he started out as one. Plus, he just uses him as a picker from what I hear.

What Cleric or Sorc are you talking about?

I only know of the rogue.

[Allereli]

http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d26/vankrasn/Conspiracy.jpg

[Tea & Strumpets]

Leaving archaic coding in place just to favor a profession or two is a pretty crappy idea, Steve. Further, squares still maintain the advantage when fighting roa'ters, with Oscuro stating that brittle characters (AKA Pures) will likely be outright killed by a landed blow and squares will not. Calling the update to bring the Roa'ters to a standardized BCS code is to say all BCS monsters are "biased" against warriors and rogues, which is nonsense. The formula still favors those with a physical build. One few pures, especially at that level, possess.

Your conjecture on monks and anti-square GMs I am not going to touch. It reads like a conspiracy theory pamphlet some crazy man would hand you in the subway.

"George Bush hates squares."

I respect your opinion, but you are extremely biased towards pures. The burrow is literally the only way a roa'ter can kill a like level pure that doesn't have his head up his ass.

If they continue nerfing maneuver attacks for the pures, I hope they add 2 or 300 DS and TD to rogues and warriors. Then everyone can be invincible.

All that being said, I thought the official message said something about the roa'ters not being nerfed? If they are now easier for pures to dodge, that's a giant nerf bat. I always enjoyed those annoying ass maneuver attacks like minotaurs, roa'ters, the stronghold, etc. (I usually enjoyed them more if they killed my hunting partner rather than me).

[Khariz]

I respect your opinion, but you are extremely biased towards pures. The burrow is literally the only way a roa'ter can kill a like level pure that doesn't have his head up his ass.

If they continue nerfing maneuver attacks for the pures, I hope they add 2 or 300 DS and TD to rogues and warriors. Then everyone can be invincible.

All that being said, I thought the official message said something about the roa'ters not being nerfed? If they are now easier for pures to dodge, that's a giant nerf bat. I always enjoyed those annoying ass maneuver attacks like minotaurs, roa'ters, the stronghold, etc. (I usually enjoyed them more if they killed my hunting partner rather than me).

I really don't think Fallen is extremely biased toward pures. He self admits that a spell tanked warrior is the hoss with cherries on top.

[Tea & Strumpets]

I think spell tanking throws everything out the window, except implosion (seeya in town square central Khariz!).

[thefarmer]

If they continue nerfing maneuver attacks for the pures, I hope they add 2 or 300 DS and TD to rogues and warriors. Then everyone can be invincible.

The RSN future of combat will have Dodge play a factor into maneuver attacks and such. There's your pure nerf right there.

[Tea & Strumpets]

The RSN future of combat will have Dodge play a factor into maneuver attacks and such. There's your pure nerf right there.

According to my Simu time/Actual time conversion pamphlet, that isn't going to happen until July 14th, 2016.

[DontDieSteve]

Indeed. I have 425 for a reason.

That said, quit QQing. You're bitching about a single change on a single critter, which has no significant impact on the overall game. Wah.

I don't think you understand... this is for ALL MANUEVERS in the game. Not just a single critter.

>>Ahhh, so they used to be on a system unique to themselves?

Yes. One that was extremely biased towards warriors and secondarily to rogues. Warriors are still the most likely to avoid maneuvers than other classes, but the difference is no longer staggering.

>>Any idea when the "standard creature maneuver roll" will factor in dodge?

As soon as GM Warden gets time. He's literally the busiest man I know.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Cleric/Empath Team



Thus, Nerf on warrior/rogue, Boost for Pures and Semis. Oscuro should give warriors +5 to TD per level now.

[Lucos]

I don't think you understand... this is for ALL MANUEVERS in the game. Not just a single critter..

You do realize that rooters had their own special manuever that was coded for them and only them, right? And that one manuever was so ridiculously slanted towards squares it was stupid. It was a holdover from way back...so old they can't even remember why it was coded that way. Does it really matter that squares can avoid the manuever 50% better than a pure now instead of 150% (made up numbers) like the old way? Squares will still get off way better.

And really...it is one critter. If you spend more than a couple of months training past rooter level, then you sux.

[Fallen]

The RSN future of combat will have Dodge play a factor into maneuver attacks and such. There's your pure nerf right there.

Bingo.

[stormtov]

Perhaps i entirely misunderstood something but my impression was that this manoeuvre got updated to involve training factors rather then professional factors. Systems where a straight modifier is in place(like foraging) depending on profession seems wrong to me.

Now instead of a straight check to see if the person dodging is a warrior it now, i presume, checks certain physical skills/stats which warriors are going to have in abundance(baring mutant builds).

The end result is warriors are still the best at avoiding it, but not just cos they are a warrior. It's cos they trained for it.

[Gnomad]

Perhaps i entirely misunderstood something but my impression was that this manoeuvre got updated to involve training factors rather then professional factors. Systems where a straight modifier is in place(like foraging) depending on profession seems wrong to me.

Now instead of a straight check to see if the person dodging is a warrior it now, i presume, checks certain physical skills/stats which warriors are going to have in abundance(baring mutant builds).

The end result is warriors are still the best at avoiding it, but not just cos they are a warrior. It's cos they trained for it.

this post is what i was going to post

[Tea & Strumpets]

this post is what i was going to post

What gives you the impression that the roa'ter attack (as outdated as it is) had a built-in freebie pass to warriors or rogues? I assumed the warrior/rogue advantage was more CM (and maybe physical fitness) and better physical stats (Dexterity, strength, constitution, agility, etc.), rather than a profession based bonus like there is to hiding for rogues and rangers.

Anyway, nerfing roa'ters is for n00bs. You don't have to hunt there, and not all critters have to be overgrown roltons.

[Khariz]

What gives you the impression that the roa'ter attack (as outdated as it is) had a built-in freebie pass to warriors or rogues? I assumed the warrior/rogue advantage was more CM (and maybe physical fitness) and better physical stats (Dexterity, strength, constitution, agility, etc.), rather than a profession based bonus like there is to hiding for rogues and rangers.

Anyway, nerfing roa'ters is for n00bs. You don't have to hunt there, and not all critters have to be overgrown roltons.

>>Ahhh, so they used to be on a system unique to themselves?

Yes. One that was extremely biased towards warriors and secondarily to rogues. Warriors are still the most likely to avoid maneuvers than other classes, but the difference is no longer staggering.

>>Any idea when the "standard creature maneuver roll" will factor in dodge?

As soon as GM Warden gets time. He's literally the busiest man I know.

= - GM Oscuro - =

[RainyDay2080]

Yeah, I think the fact that he used the term staggering to describe the difference is telling. Plus if you've paid attention to posts from people hunting roa'ters over the years almost every single person who has ever posted they hunted roa'ters a lot and didn't have much trouble with burrowing was a rogue. I'm betting it was a profession bonus.

I don't mind profession bonuses for some things, like foraging for rangers. But they're a terrible idea for something like getting out of the way of a giant worm.

RD

[Tea & Strumpets]

Yeah, I think the fact that he used the term staggering to describe the difference is telling. Plus if you've paid attention to posts from people hunting roa'ters over the years almost every single person who has ever posted they hunted roa'ters a lot and didn't have much trouble with burrowing was a rogue. I'm betting it was a profession bonus.


I disagree. I think the "bias" he is talking about is the cost per rank of combat maneuvers, physical training, etc., and/or physical attributes like strength, agility, dexterity, etc. I seriously doubt there is any maneuver attack in the game that has a flat profession based bonus/penalty.

[Khariz]

I disagree. I think the "bias" he is talking about is the cost per rank of combat maneuvers, physical training, etc., and/or physical attributes like strength, agility, dexterity, etc. I seriously doubt there is any maneuver attack in the game that has a flat profession based bonus/penalty.

Were you following the discussion on the officials when it was being made? He was clearly saying Roa'ters didn't use the combat maneuver equation, were on their OWN unique formulae, and that warriors and rogues were heavily weighted against getting hit from it.

It seemed pretty clear that he wasn't talking about CM. Perhaps I was just imagining things.

[droit]

I didn't take what he said to be referring to professional bonuses. I think it's some equation with several factors, most of which warriors tend to have in abundance. Think of it like redux--warriors don't get an inherent bonus to redux, but they tend to have high physical stats and lots of physical skills, therefore they have the highest redux in the game.

[Stanley Burrell]

Warriors have it so good. That roa'ter ate my baby.

You realize that everyone (Warriors included) that have played GemStone IV run across the drawbridge the second a roa'ter burrows? You can't outrun weaponfire or any other CS spell that might be a bit more of a constant burden on a Warrior who, say, decides not to always grouphunt with their multis/wear 500m in gear once you get past kobolds. Motherfucking retardedheads.

[Stanley Burrell]

MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS MONKS . Monks.

Yeah. Basically.

[Tea & Strumpets]

Were you following the discussion on the officials when it was being made? He was clearly saying Roa'ters didn't use the combat maneuver equation, were on their OWN unique formulae, and that warriors and rogues were heavily weighted against getting hit from it.

It seemed pretty clear that he wasn't talking about CM. Perhaps I was just imagining things.

I didn't follow the thread on the officials--just the snippets that were posted here. Are you saying that Oscuro clearly stated that the skill Combat Maneuvers has no part in the roa'ter burrow? Or is it one of those situations again where maneuver attacks and combat maneuvers are used interchangably, and you don't know if he is referring to a maneuver attack equation, or the skill in the character manager Combat Maneuvers?

[Khariz]

I didn't follow the thread on the officials--just the snippets that were posted here. Are you saying that Oscuro clearly stated that the skill Combat Maneuvers has no part in the roa'ter burrow? Or is it one of those situations again where maneuver attacks and combat maneuvers are used interchangably, and you don't know if he is referring to a maneuver attack equation, or the skill in the character manager Combat Maneuvers?

Yeah...we call him Obscuro for a reason, hehe. I really have no clue.