In the discussion about the recent skill changes, the imms have
suggested that we should create new characters to explore our new
options. A few players have expressed frustration with this
suggestion.
Would it be possible for Legend to run something like a mini-testmud,
where players could log into stock characters to experiment with the
available skills? A testmud with a small area with a few mobs that
automatically repop, no pkilling. Perhaps limit the number of
characters concurrently logged in, or the duration of the connection
in order to minimize the impact on the real mud?
And as an aside, I find it strange that we can't unlearn augment
because it requires such a commitment, yet we can unlearn any and all
first and second circle words. It seems to me that so many words
requires a much greater commitment than herblore>poultice>augment.
|U6
From: Sandra
Wednesday, May 14 2003, 09:57AM
Just a small note, we did put in the 5 fight skills on april fools
day for everyone to test out prior to installing them into the
game for real. Will we do things like this all the time? Dunno.
As for the augment/2c words thing, 2c words are considered
half-hearted mage requirements. Whereas 3c words are 'full'
mages and require a high commitment. Thus, augment is
considered a 'full' druid and requires a higher commitment
than poultice.
-Sandra
|U6
From: Masha
Wednesday, May 14 2003, 11:46AM
I have to agree with some of the appends I've been seeing
on the boards about the new skills, requirements, and whatnot
that the Imms have put in. Unfortunately, there's a caveat to
all these changes: some of the Imms don't seem to understand
why some people are a bit irked about the changes. (Not going
to point fingers on this one, really.)
People were told -- by the Imms -- that there were not going to
be any new skills added until skilltrees were completed. More to
the point, it was not said "We're not sure what's going to happen
in the future, but for now, this is our policy." No, it was said,
"No, we will not be adding anything until skilltrees." And, as a
result, people thought that with the current system, they might as
well use their practices. There was no reason not to, so people
went off and learned things like skin, fishing, cooking, etc.
Now suddenly, new skills and not a lot of warning to go with them.
We, as players of Legend, had about a month's worth of warning.
Of course, for the people who can make level 50 characters in a
week --and they exist-- this is not an issue to make a new
character. Others, unfortunately, who take anywhere from six
months to a year to make a level 50 character, this could be
rather frustrating as well as irritating.
I personally don't have too many problems with the new skills,
I just have issues with the fact that the Imms don't seem
to understand the fact that some of these people are upset. They
just seem to blow it off as if it's unimportant.
--Masha Corlan
|U6
From: Taziel
Wednesday, May 14 2003, 11:28PM
Well said, Masha. =)
|U6
From: Sandra
Thursday, May 15 2003, 05:08AM
People were told, when skilltrees were still being worked on, that
all coding energy was being placed on trying to get them in. When
that work stopped, people were told so. Then came the constant
questions about balance. 'strength fighters suck', 'my fighter
sucks!' 'Do something about fighters!'. We tried tweaking the
fight system. Didn't work. We tried weakening other types. Didn't
work. So, this year, we discussed adding in new things for fighters
to help them come up to par. We had hoped that the 5 new fight
skills would go in for the mud's birthday as a nice surprise. Due
to testing and such, that didn't happen. So, we told everyone they
were coming, put them in for april 1st so that everyone could try
them out, and tweaked them some more based on comments from that
day. Then they 'went live'.
People WERE told that we weren't sure what was going to happen
prior to these going in. The only thing we knew for sure was
that skilltrees were on hold.
We offer skill reimbursements for some skills so that people
can choose to get the new skills. Sure, it's not every skill
we're offering to reimburse, and that most likely won't ever
happen until the currently-on-hold skilltrees are complete.
Do I understand that some people are upset by not being able
to get the skills? Sure I do. But I have to ask myself this
questions: Would I rather a few people be upset because their
character can't learn a new skill or two, or would it be better
to try and balance out the fighter class as a whole? While I'm
sorry that some people went skills-happy and learned everything
on their allskills list just because they had extra practices,
I'd rather try to balance out the class as a whole. So if that
makes it seem like I, or other imms, are blowing off the complaint
that people don't have enough practices, I would have to say so
be it.
Amusingly though, with the years of complaints about fighters,
we've finally worked to get them up to par, yet have yet to
hear much more than 'I want more practices!'.
-Sandra
|U6
From: Dolor
Thursday, May 15 2003, 07:18PM
Funny. I remember specifically stating in my particular append (on
another post about the topic) that I was absolutely happy there were
new skills going in. That I know of, NOBODY is complaining that there
are new skills. But I still have yet to see an imm address the point
@&
are new skills. But I still have yet to see anybody address these
points-
1) That is was stated several times in the past by imms that the
implementation of any new skills would not occur until after skilltrees.
2) That at the time skilltrees was implemented, a skillwipe would occur.
3) Taking these two statements together, the implementation of any new
skills would not occur until a skillwipe occured.
Any number of players followed this particular logic tree, and several
have built their characters based on that third statement. When it was
decided that skilltrees was on hold, I don't recall anybody bothering to
state "And by the way, since we may never finish skilltrees, we may be
putting new skills in now." In other words, although skilltrees were put
on hold, nobody bothered to tell the playerbase that the logical assump-
tion derived from two bona fide statements by the imm staff was no longer
correct. I don't think this should be "fixed" at all. The fact is that
adding skills is a good change overall, and anything done to try to
"balance" older characters who have burned all their practices will do
more harm than good. We have enough practices as it is (I, for one, still
have 13 of them puttering around back here) and there's no justification
for a skillwipe over a whopping eight new skills. But I have yet to see
anybody in authority accept the fact that those characters who should
benefit from this change but cannot because of statements imms have made
in the past are going to be just a tad pissed off.
And by the way, Sandra, does the phrase "vocal minority" mean anything
to you? It just might be that you haven't heard much other than "I want
more practices!" because people who are just content with the change don't
feel any need to write a post on the discussion board saying "I love the
new skills! Nothing to complain about!" It would be a pretty worthless
discussion, anyway, and besides, the new skills are nice, but they're not
good enough to inspire people to compose poetry in their honor, and if
that's what you're expecting, you'll be waiting in the coffee shop a long
time. Count your blessings: the biggest complaint you've had (other than
"these skills don't do anything", which I noticed was actually addressed
and worked on) is this rather trivial thread here. It could be infinitely
worse, after all: non-fighter types could be complaining that you've over-
balanced, but I have yet to hear that one, and the fighter types haven't
been complaining that the skills are worthless lately, so--wonder of
wonders--the change is probably about the best you could hope for. If
you're going to be mad because not everybody is ecstatic, you're going to
be very angry indeed.
Dolor, temporary devil's advocate, who points out that he's one of the
biggest beneficiaries of the new skills, so he's not biased against them.
|U6
From: Sandra
Thursday, May 15 2003, 09:24PM
Reread my append, Dolor. I did address the points you bring up.
Yes, when trees were being worked on, we said no new skills til
they were done. Trees were put on hold. We said they were put
on hold. We began working on balance. Tweaks to the system
didn't work. Some people begged for new skills. It took us
a while, but here they are to help with balancing the fighters.
As for being mad, nah I'm not mad. It's the norm.
|U6
From: LadyAce
Friday, May 16 2003, 02:57PM
Part of what you guys need to understand is that what we say in
Q&A is what is true at the time. At the time we said "no new big
stuff 'til trees", we said that because it was the plan at the time,
it was what we believed to be true at the time. But we can't predict
the future, and we can't promise to never ever change our minds.
If the only things we could tell you were things we could promise would
be true forever....we would either be frustratingly vague all the time,
or unable to say anything.
Surely the last thing you want from us are a bunch of people who will
never level with you about their thinking, whose slippery politicking
keeps them from ever committing to anything...surely the last thing
you want is for us to be the sort of people who never change their
minds, who never react to experience and feedback, and who hold on to
old strategies even when changing conditions have made those strategies
far less workable.
Q&A is your chance to see how things stand, but it's not a religious
experience, and we don't have a pope. Things change, we learn, you tell
us things we didn't realize, and we're all wrong now and then.
-LA
|U6
From: Pop
Wednesday, May 21 2003, 09:39PM
My point also wasn't complaining about the fact that new skills are in --
I have yet to hear a good argument as to why we can't 'unlearn' worthless
skills which we learned because there was nothign else to do with the
practices for the last many years. Explain why the mud and morale
and the game would be compromised by letting people unlearn skills
which there is no benefit from having -- like 'listen' and others.
Why cannot I trade them in for a practice -- there should be
different levels of skills -- I don't see how giving a character
a chance to rectify past mistakes by unlearning skills makes
the game worse -- it makes no sense at all. I don't have the time
to make new characters and besides -- I like this character I
would really just like to trade in some worthless skills -- instead
you all offer the chance to trade in the skills I have which I
actually use.
-Pop
|U6
From: LadyAce
Thursday, May 22 2003, 05:41PM
I think that the gap between what you're talking about, Pop, and what
we're talking about, is that we look at it from the opposite way.
Skill reimbursals are a matter of "what particular skills have been
effected by the change?" If the reqs change, or pre-reqs, or something
changes drastically in terms of purpose (eloquence is an example here),
the particular effected skills are what we change.
So while I understand the perspective that you were just playing around
with useless skills, we haven't done anything that changed those skills.
Ascribing this to trees just ends up being a red herring. New stuff
has come in, off and on, in a rush or in a trickle, even as the plan
with implementing trees changed over time.
-LA
|U6
