Doctor Archive
Thread: Enhance Constitution D
Page 3 of 3
MasterNerfSlayer
Wed Feb 02, 2005 3:35 pm
#27
beyowulf wrote:
MasterNerfSlayer wrote:
I'm noticing a trend of people feeling like we're trying to take the challenge in the game away from them. This really isn't the case. There is no rhyme or reason to the current pack requirements at all.Four packs require the same resources, andtwo differ from each other and the rest. If that were Health and Action, and those packs had the same requirements as each other, I'd see it as intended (ie. they buff the same type of stat: pool size). But it is Action and Constitution.
I don't blame people for liking the challenge, and heck, if you'd prefer that Health and Action be different from the subs, sure, or even make pool size buffs take resource set x, pool cost buffs take resource set y and pool regen buffs take resource set z then fine! I can see that being just as legit as what I believe is intended (all the same resource set), but I don't see why it should be left as Action and Constitution. There is no pattern to that. No logic.
The only way we'll ever know if the schem's for the buffs are really "working as intended" would to be put the devs under the white hot light and interrogate them....until then anything we think is speculation....and while speculation drives the entertainment value of the boards, it's really just a waste of energy-outside the entertainment value. I know that if I were looking at the buff schems and wanted to make them more challenging to craft well, I'd do something like the present schem configuration. Viewed within the context the Devs created with all the other med schems, theD-level buff schemsare a consistent decision. Think about it the "illogic" of how it increases the challenge:
Primary stats are critical on the buffs, so let's make the pack composition as different as is practical on the Action and Health packs. How do we do that....hrm.....change the component mix and change the resource requirements.....yeah that works.
Okay, now the primaries are differentiated.....is that enough? Well....let's just take one more pack that has the same resource requirements and give it a different component mix. Which one?...hrm....let's just do Constitution.
Any schem configuration that makes Action and Health different from each other and in some way different then the rest of the packs is the simplest and most powerful way to raise the challenge of crafting buffs. To make crafting anything dramatically harder, you need to break up logical sets of schems.
Are the current schems illogical from the perspective of making buff packs as challenging to craft as possible? Nope...sure there are other ways to accomplish the goal, but this is one of the valid choices.
Could the devs have been a six-pack into a Friday afternoon un-winder when they came up with the schems? Sure.
Could it have been an intended plan to make crafting buffs a greater challenge? That's equally possible.
While each of your suggestions is brilliantly logical, they're also much easier to craft. Any combination that matches the schems for the primaries as a set and the secondaries as a set is really pretty easy....because your logical sets of stats are all crafted the same. Hum....does that mean the presentschem sets are a "logical" craftingchallenge?.......
More importantly, the Devs can and will only address a limited number of issues. Aside from the fact that I don't want the game "dumbed-down" for my enjoyment, I think that there are much more important issues for all of us to pursue.
I can understand and respect that point of view. Lets not get onto the issue of which issue is most important. The only place this issue is being discussed is right here. You guys voted on the top issues, and those are what the doc corre is trying to get fixed.
DoctorGriggs
Thu Feb 03, 2005 2:00 am
#28
One top issue I submitted and hope gets fixed is this random bivoli bug. Had it happen to me for the first time ever today.
pircio
Fri Feb 04, 2005 12:13 pm
#29
it is annoying to have differnet component requirements, but there are different stats. First off, I love the fact that action takes organic and inorganic, saves on that avian meat, and allows for better action packs.
My proposal:
re-think the way buffpacks are composed
Enhance Health/Action packs - these are the primary stats, they should be the same
Strength/constitution/quickness/stamina - secondary stats, they should be the same
for health/action - organic/inorganic, 28 units each, 3abec, 2acrdm, 1asds
str/con/quick/stam - avian/reactive, 22 units each, 2abec, 2acrdm, 1asds
this would give some conformity for enhance packs. the reason i set it up like this, is so there would be better primaries, but they would require more components, just a little more generic. and the secondaries wouldn't be necessarily as good as the primaries, but they would be equal. it would also help with the avian requirements for doctors, and might bring the price down a little bit
Message Edited by pircio on 02-04-2005 08:54 PM
Traigus
Tue Feb 08, 2005 5:21 am
#31
It was on the list.
It was cited as "not a bug" but as part of the design at launch. It was open to negotiation, but deemed a "we don't have time to look at it at this time" option pre-JTL.
It made it into a Top 5 as a "crafting oddities is the medical profession" item. Zarlor got most of them fixed, but was told this was intended . The design was for a different combat system though, so there might be some action here with the CURB, because of the changing roles of stats, with specials and armor.
This is before cure packs C, so that wasn't in the list.
-T
It was cited as "not a bug" but as part of the design at launch. It was open to negotiation, but deemed a "we don't have time to look at it at this time" option pre-JTL.
It made it into a Top 5 as a "crafting oddities is the medical profession" item. Zarlor got most of them fixed, but was told this was intended . The design was for a different combat system though, so there might be some action here with the CURB, because of the changing roles of stats, with specials and armor.
This is before cure packs C, so that wasn't in the list.
-T
Message Edited by Traigus on 02-08-2005 07:23 AM
DarkDeathDude
Tue Feb 08, 2005 6:19 am
#32
i kinda like the quirkyness of the difference in packs, and i certainly dont have a problem with it. If anything i like the fact that 2 of the 6 stats only use up 2 ABECS in the enhance D pack sets.
It means i know i can get a full run of 333buffsets with a 100k stack of wheat and fiberplast (its 96K ,18x(1000x4)+18x(600x2))
I always use same materials for all 6 stats, so action has never been a bonus, maybe im old fashioned but i like all 6 stats to be identical, which they are in this case. so for me its 48K of Avain fora full run not 37K+other organics.
SpicyChani
Tue Feb 08, 2005 8:19 am
#33
I like having constitution being 2 ABEC requirement. When a new shift of avian comes out, before I start hiring rangers and inform the guild, i always will make a test buff to see exactly where it falls. Sure, I can compare the #'s to what I have, but nothing beats the facts of a real buff in front of you.
As for action taking generic org/inorg, I hate it. I have never made buffs using anything but avian/reactive for all 6 stats. Why? So the buffs die out the same time...everytime. Just because you can make your action buff 150 points higher and last 10+ minutes longer doesnt mean you should. Those extra 10 minutes are down time for the player if the same doc is not there to rebuff using same packs. Once I screwed up and mixed 2 separate runs of buffs together in my inventory, one was 15 minutes shorter..really comes as a surprise when half your stats drop early. And if they were applied with bivoli, then the Doc would have to take it again just to match the buffs, and sometimes, in the field, you cannot spare the stomach space for bivoli when you need to take other foods.
Yes, it is economical in the long run on avian. If I found an organic that matched within 100 sec duration, and within 10 points of buff strength, I MIGHT consider doing that.
Page 3 of 3