Development Cycle Archive
Thread: Publish 9.3 Feedback thread... DECREASED STARPORT TIMES, Poison resists, etc.
JediMelvis137
Tue Aug 10, 2004 10:03 am
#92
PhiGon wrote:
Tstorm wrote:
I know the decreased starport wait times are popular, but I have mixed feelings about this. As a player, I want to *play* and spending lots of time getting from point A to point B is annoying.
Starports, however, provide an important roleplay function as well as just plain making it more realistic. Decreasing the wait time where travel time when you board the shuttle is already instantaneous causes the roleplaying galaxy of SWG to effectively shrink instead of being the huge galaxy full of wonder and adventure that the marketing people want it to appear as.
This doesn't provide a justification for me. I have role-played in SWG and one thing I wouldn't do was wait (as a role-player) in the landing area. I wouldn't want a ship to land on me!If you want to Role-Play then sit in the waiting rooms and role-play. Once the ship arrives (multiple ships can be coming in by the sounds of landing around you) and you decide ** your shuttle has come in ** then you can go out to meet it.
By not seeing the shuttle (only hearing it) you can use the terminals inside to your advantage from a role-playing standpoint saying you have a few minutes before your flight gets in.
Yeah - what he said! If you want the Starport wait to be longer, stick around for the next one. Why should the rest of us be punished so you can role-play better?...lol
Samca
Tue Aug 10, 2004 10:06 am
#93
I am a wookiee and I am all for the increase in encumberance. We now have armor that is on par with Composite and Ubese, therefore our encumberances should be on par with Composite and Ubese. We have more stat points to work with and require very small buffs in order to get the armor on. I have friends that play humans that need muon or a mind buff just to get their helmets on much less the rest of their armor with Composite of equal resists to the Hunting Armor. I have other friends who will not even take off their Comp Armor because they don't want to get rebuffed and spiced to put it back on. If we are going to have increased stats, with armor that is equivalent to the rest of the species in the game in terms of resists, then it is only fair that the encumberance be at least equal to, if not greater than what they have.
Ok, first I'll apologize if I'm incorrect about what I'm going to say, but this is the way I understand it
Wookiee armor doesn't have boots, this leaves partial vulnerability to legs.
Wookiee armor has bracers, but not biceps, this leaves partial vulnerability to arms.
Not sure if the chest piece protects both body and head.
Now, this is the way it was told to me, and the way I understand that is that if someone gets lucky and hits those vulnerable spots, it is the same as if we weren't wearing any armor at all, since the spot is unprotected. We take full damage.
Now if that's the case, how is it reasonable for our partial protection set to have the same HAM as say composite that protects every part of the wearers body and does not leave them vulnerable???
Again, if I've been misinformed and am incorrect in these facts, please let me know and I apologize.
WIldWhippy
Tue Aug 10, 2004 10:08 am
#94
BrainMandinga wrote:
I am a wookiee and I am all for the increase in encumberance. We now have armor that is on par with Composite and Ubese, therefore our encumberances should be on par with Composite and Ubese. We have more stat points to work with and require very small buffs in order to get the armor on. I have friends that play humans that need muon or a mind buff just to get their helmets on much less the rest of their armor with Composite of equal resists to the Hunting Armor. I have other friends who will not even take off their Comp Armor because they don't want to get rebuffed and spiced to put it back on. If we are going to have increased stats, with armor that is equivalent to the rest of the species in the game in terms of resists, then it is only fair that the encumberance be at least equal to, if not greater than what they have.
Please be sure of checking your facts before you complain too much about what you got. It is better to have the armor that requires buffs to get into and be able to resist 80% of the Kinetic Damage that comes at you (or 35% stun/70% Kinetic) and suffer through some encumberance. Be happy that more than a year after launch, we finally get something to help us out.
Wookiee Hunting armor is nice, but yes, you have to migrate your stats to secondaries to wear it. The only thin i find strange is that my first generation armor which has 80/40/56 is much lighter in encumberance than my second and third generation which has 78/40/59 because of the bad quality of resources that just came out. can you believe that i only have 20 points left on my constitution when i wear my armor? and that gets pounded when i go out to kill stuff.
Every woman's teddy bear
BrainMandinga
Tue Aug 10, 2004 10:08 am
#95
The point being on the encumberance is the fact that the new armor is equal to what others have in terms of resists, but as it was put into the game initially it had an incredibly low encumberance compared to Comp armor. I could put on my full set of 80% Kinetic 60% base Wookiee Hunting Armor without having to buff when I got it. That is not balanced. Balanced is requiring the same buffs that any other species should have to have to put on their top quality armor. Did I like the fact that I could put on my armor while unbuffed? You bet I did. I am not going to complain that it is evened up though, it just doesn't make sense to me. When the buff values drop sometime in November or December then I am sure the Devs will have no choice but to make changes with the armor values (which are also slated to change) in order for all the species to put on their best armor. We as wookiees will not be the only ones who are affected by it, but at least the rest of the players don't get to gripe about wookiees not only having increased stats, and equivalent protection, but lower encumberances as well. I have been listening to the wookiee whines since day one being a wookiee. The playing field is now level, lets keep it that way.
PhiGon
Tue Aug 10, 2004 10:10 am
#96
KauraMonser wrote:
as a wookiee you should know our extra stat points are worthless due to our low stat caps. if the caps were not so low i would not complain about encumbrance nerf. you should also know that buffs are going to be drastically reduced in the combat balance. my complaint is not about the present, its about the future.
All species are curious about the future CB/HAM/Buffs, etc. -- not just wookies. I am a mon and I am all combat oriented. I can only put my composite chestplate on maybe a single bracer when I am not buffed.
KauraMonser
Tue Aug 10, 2004 10:18 am
#97
brainmandinga you need to read the posts concerning why the armor shouldnt have ridiculously high encumbrance values. go read my posts and the other one about how our armor doesnt cover full body. 9 pieces of comp is NOT THE SAME as 4 pieces of hunting
phigon, if you are conerned than speak up. do not let the one star trolls quiet you. if we dont get the devs attention before the 'balance' rolls out, many species will be unbalanced for a long time after that. personally i would like to see a species-specific armor for each species and the restrictions on all current armor removed. species-specific armor would allow for better encumbrance values.
can we just remove the idiotic stat caps for all species? that would create a hell of alot more variation among players.
phigon, if you are conerned than speak up. do not let the one star trolls quiet you. if we dont get the devs attention before the 'balance' rolls out, many species will be unbalanced for a long time after that. personally i would like to see a species-specific armor for each species and the restrictions on all current armor removed. species-specific armor would allow for better encumbrance values.
can we just remove the idiotic stat caps for all species? that would create a hell of alot more variation among players.
Message Edited by KauraMonser on 08-10-2004 10:21 AM
DeQuosaek
Tue Aug 10, 2004 10:19 am
#98
Did the poisons and diseases used to automatically hit? Because mine have always had a chance to hit based on their potency and when I was a CM of less skill I used to miss quite often.
JustG wrote:
Combat: Poisons and diseases no longer automatically hit, but now have a chance to hit based on their potency.
Mistwaver
Tue Aug 10, 2004 10:22 am
#99
Samca wrote:
I am a wookiee and I am all for the increase in encumberance. We now have armor that is on par with Composite and Ubese, therefore our encumberances should be on par with Composite and Ubese. We have more stat points to work with and require very small buffs in order to get the armor on. I have friends that play humans that need muon or a mind buff just to get their helmets on much less the rest of their armor with Composite of equal resists to the Hunting Armor. I have other friends who will not even take off their Comp Armor because they don't want to get rebuffed and spiced to put it back on. If we are going to have increased stats, with armor that is equivalent to the rest of the species in the game in terms of resists, then it is only fair that the encumberance be at least equal to, if not greater than what they have.
Ok, first I'll apologize if I'm incorrect about what I'm going to say, but this is the way I understand it
Wookiee armor doesn't have boots, this leaves partial vulnerability to legs.
Wookiee armor has bracers, but not biceps, this leaves partial vulnerability to arms.
Not sure if the chest piece protects both body and head.
Now, this is the way it was told to me, and the way I understand that is that if someone gets lucky and hits those vulnerable spots, it is the same as if we weren't wearing any armor at all, since the spot is unprotected. We take full damage.
Now if that's the case, how is it reasonable for our partial protection set to have the same HAM as say composite that protects every part of the wearers body and does not leave them vulnerable???
Again, if I've been misinformed and am incorrect in these facts, please let me know and I apologize.
I haven't heard of anyone wearing any Wookiee armor complaining about armorholes, nor have I encountered one on my Wookiee character, so I doubt this is the case.
emonde
Tue Aug 10, 2004 10:22 am
#100
There is something inside me saying i shouldnt post this, but I will do it anyways...
I have to say, today : GOOD JOB
gngbng
Tue Aug 10, 2004 10:22 am
#101
Wow, thank you guys a ton. This is one of the best publishes I've seen in a loooong time. The help against CM ( I am one btw) is amazing. Now CM will hopefully be more medic instead of terrorist. The 5 minute starport times is a gift better than any veteran rewards we've seen. I know having grinded BH 4 times that I'd like to have seen it come earlier. But as they say, better late than never!
/bow Devs
Earymi
Tue Aug 10, 2004 10:24 am
#102
Thunderheart wrote:
No. It means no matter how good or bad any particular poison or disease is, there will always be a 5% of being affected or a 5% chance of resisting. In other words, there will be no 100% all-of-the-time absolutes.
Um, maybe I'm just being dense today, but what's the other 90% chance? If there's a 5% chance of being affected and a 5% chance of resisting, then there's a 90% chance of what?
nolan007
Tue Aug 10, 2004 10:27 am
#103
Mistwaver wrote:
Samca wrote:
I am a wookiee and I am all for the increase in encumberance. We now have armor that is on par with Composite and Ubese, therefore our encumberances should be on par with Composite and Ubese. We have more stat points to work with and require very small buffs in order to get the armor on. I have friends that play humans that need muon or a mind buff just to get their helmets on much less the rest of their armor with Composite of equal resists to the Hunting Armor. I have other friends who will not even take off their Comp Armor because they don't want to get rebuffed and spiced to put it back on. If we are going to have increased stats, with armor that is equivalent to the rest of the species in the game in terms of resists, then it is only fair that the encumberance be at least equal to, if not greater than what they have.
Ok, first I'll apologize if I'm incorrect about what I'm going to say, but this is the way I understand it
Wookiee armor doesn't have boots, this leaves partial vulnerability to legs.
Wookiee armor has bracers, but not biceps, this leaves partial vulnerability to arms.
Not sure if the chest piece protects both body and head.
Now, this is the way it was told to me, and the way I understand that is that if someone gets lucky and hits those vulnerable spots, it is the same as if we weren't wearing any armor at all, since the spot is unprotected. We take full damage.
Now if that's the case, how is it reasonable for our partial protection set to have the same HAM as say composite that protects every part of the wearers body and does not leave them vulnerable???
Again, if I've been misinformed and am incorrect in these facts, please let me know and I apologize.
True.
Wookiee armor has unprotected areas (ie. feet holes).
Therefore, it does NOT make sense to increase the encumberance.
Why devs? You giving us boots soon to compensate?
KauraMonser
Tue Aug 10, 2004 10:28 am
#104
Mistwaver wrote:
Samca wrote:I am a wookiee and I am all for the increase in encumberance. We now have armor that is on par with Composite and Ubese, therefore our encumberances should be on par with Composite and Ubese. We have more stat points to work with and require very small buffs in order to get the armor on. I have friends that play humans that need muon or a mind buff just to get their helmets on much less the rest of their armor with Composite of equal resists to the Hunting Armor. I have other friends who will not even take off their Comp Armor because they don't want to get rebuffed and spiced to put it back on. If we are going to have increased stats, with armor that is equivalent to the rest of the species in the game in terms of resists, then it is only fair that the encumberance be at least equal to, if not greater than what they have.
Ok, first I'll apologize if I'm incorrect about what I'm going to say, but this is the way I understand it
Wookiee armor doesn't have boots, this leaves partial vulnerability to legs.
Wookiee armor has bracers, but not biceps, this leaves partial vulnerability to arms.
Not sure if the chest piece protects both body and head.
Now, this is the way it was told to me, and the way I understand that is that if someone gets lucky and hits those vulnerable spots, it is the same as if we weren't wearing any armor at all, since the spot is unprotected. We take full damage.
Now if that's the case, how is it reasonable for our partial protection set to have the same HAM as say composite that protects every part of the wearers body and does not leave them vulnerable???
Again, if I've been misinformed and am incorrect in these facts, please let me know and I apologize.I haven't heard of anyone wearing any Wookiee armor complaining about armorholes, nor have I encountered one on my Wookiee character, so I doubt this is the case.
yes, i'm sorry, but there are holes in the armor. it does not cover full body (and it shouldnt anyways). if it covered full body then i could understand the arguments pro nerf.