No Solitude month Poll

[Cruxis Bane]

I really thought the whole point of you all wanting a no solitude was so that there would be pvp outside of Yew. It seems kinda contradictory to say you want to do a no solitude weekend just to get rid of kill/sac... I understand it annoys you and you are trying to get it limited however there is always something that irritates someone, such as I would love to see malleus not used but chances of that happening is 0. Thus I believe this whole idea is down and wont happen.

[Darian Darkmind]

And why should Guards have atleast 20 seconds casting time? There are other even more OP things yet you don't whine about those since you have those things on your team (Kill and sacrifice). If guards are dispellable it means they are only helpful until the enemy team notices them and dispels them. If the casting time goes back to the way it was atleast they have some use. If the timer would stick I'd rather just keep the guards as they are atm. Dispellable + 20 sec casting time is just too much. Though I understand your unhappiness with them, maybe you should see it from our point of view and how nothing is done when we whine about kill and sacrifice, except for those "nearly-fixes" which in reality doesn't change anything.

If guards are changed back, they should have at least 20 second casting time because they are very strong and there's no denying it. Their use should be defensive, yet the short casting time allows them to be used in offensive means - as in, casting in the middle of a fight or casting on enemy corpse etc. It's a defensive ritual and should be used as one. I suggested the current fix in hope to change its use from offensive to pure defensive. I thought that by adding a longer casting time, longer cooldown time, but in turn make them undispellable (Take some, give some), you would cast them only as back up. It didn't work. I'm sure it could be tuned further, but seems like people rather change it back.

Anyway, fighting against guards should be our choise, our decision, not yours. Luckily the guard-zones already fixed that problem and gave us the option to choose where we fight - inside or outside a guard-zone. If we choose to fight inside a guard-zone, then we agree to fight against guards. That's great, but then again, like you said yourself if we don't attack a town, we nor you might not find any PvP. We've wanted to fight in the wilderness before, but more than often you people don't show up. Maybe we should just be more stubborn and refuse to fight inside guard-zones (Outcluding sieges). I wonder if you'd start to show up. You want us to attack your towns so you can PvP and have fun just as much as we do, yet you seem to do everything in your power to ruin that fun for us by spamming your OP rituals. Do you think for a second it's FUN to fight against waves of guards or constantly running off screen from veritas barely ever getting close enough to hit an enemy?! Do you think this from our perspective at all? If it was so much fun as you may think, we'd be doing it more! We'd even do it in Britain! Why the fuck would we attack your towns (If not counting siege) to give you the enjoyment if it's not equally fun for us? This is something you nor the Staff seem to understand. This is also the very reason, the only reason why we used to attack Natures only. We attacked Natures only because it was fair and pure PvP, equal and balanced - at least most of the time. Sometimes we died, sometimes they died, but most of the time both sides had fun and had no bad feelings after it. Then you came along and ruined that. And now we are allied with Imperial. I wonder why? No one of us enjoy fighting against Law rituals and that is a huge problem - which is something you are unable to see from our perspective. If you want to have more fun yourself, it means you have to bring yourselves down to our level or boost us to your level - I prefer the first option.

I'm actually pretty sure this decade long inbalance is also one of the main reasons (Along with robbing which we haven't had in a long time) that keep breeding hate between players. Pangaea has been divided to sides by the scripts and when those sides are meant to fight against each other, yet without being balanced, one side will never truly have fun. When one side is doomed to be weaker not by numbers or by lack of skill, but by the scripts, that side will always feel mistreated and it makes them hate the other side. This is why it gives us great satisfaction to find you alone hunting, macroing or something else allowing us to grief you as much as possible, because it's the payback time... which in turn makes your side hate us as well. I'm pretty sure if the sides were truly balanced and if all players had equal chances where their own skill actually meant something, the playerbase would be more friendly as a whole. It would not suddenly stop all the grief, but at least it reduces it a lot. Just look at Tekstone and Nature. Even though we have our differences, we don't have any personal problem with each other. Although Zaradon have been a victim of some personal griefing and have felt bad every now and then, I must tip my hat to him because even if he sometimes explodes, he is actually quite cool about it - considering what other players would do in his place. He never goes as low to seek personal revenge. All in all the relationship between Nature and Tekstone players is pretty good even though we are sworn arch enemies... how is this possible?! It's possible because the fights have been mostly fair whereas dying against someone who have been given weapons you can never have or fight against, like Kill is very frustrating and makes you seek other ways to hurt your enemies, personal revenge and griefing.

Wow, that went off-topic... anyway,

Yes, Kill and Sacrifice might be OP. In fact ANY easy one-click insta-kill method is OP because it removes the factor of skill. No matter how well your character is trained or no matter how good player you are yourself, if someone can kill you with one click and basically with no player-skill, it is wrong. It's lame and I understand your frustration about it, I really do. I think Kill should be removed altogether and replaced with something fun and tricky, something that needs skill. Sacrifice I don't see as that bad because 1. it can't be spammed and 2. it takes player skill to pull it off and a skilled player can "easily" dodge it when he sees a necromancer approaching with a pet. Sacrifice is all about skill whereas kill is all about luck. Then again necromancer is a class anyone can play and is not religion-dependant so it's actually "fair" because both sides can have necromancers. Anyway, I understand your frustration and I hate to fight against necromancers as well. I just hope that when you're so quick to ask necromancers to give up kill, you'd be prepared to give up some of your power as well (other than solitude which isn't a problem outside Britain). Maybe you should show example and give up some of that power before asking other players to give up their power. I, nor Tekstone as a whole has any say about nerfing necromancers, but I just want to point out we have always been ready to nerf ALL the rituals. When we were in Law we wanted and had Law tome nerfed. We wanted malleus&keening&veritas nerfed when the mana consumption increase was on the table. Hell, I wanted all of them to consume even more mana than it does now. When all religions had guards, I wanted ALL guards removed (Both when I was in Law and in Tekstone), because they turned PvP to GvG. They did the worst possible thing and removed the guards from only one side turning PvP to PvG, which was the only thing worse than GvG (At least GvG was fair and balanced, although retarded... now it's just unfair, unbalanced and twice as retarded)

[Zaradon]

Darian, i can understand the frustration and agree with you on the necromancer debade.

But here is one thing i would like to point out.
We (Natures) PvP for fun, some PvP for e-peen, some PvP for items.
And no, we have some members with different views for PvP in every religion.

You can correct me if i missed one important fact.

I hope i dont have to categorize the religions vs. the "goal" for PvPing on the shard, the goal is simply a small excuse to have "fun"
But fun starts from different tactics, equal numbers, balanced win/loss (which side can outsmart the other etc).

Fun, is mostly PvP nowadays on Pangaea, since PvM is kinda restricted to religions (close to impossible as a non-religious unless you have 110 provo....)

[Boris]

I still don't see how Sacrifice is over the top. It's random factor mixed with skill.

When you sacrifice a nightmare, it does 6d58 damage. That means the damage is between 6 and 348. That averages at 177. So firstly, the damage is purely random. 6d56 means a 56-sided dice is thrown 6 times. The chance for over 200dmg is 25%. The chance for 146dmg or less is the same. So bascily 50% (the clear majority) ranges between 146-200dmg.



After that we added the % damage reduce every 1-tile, so basically, maxium damage is reduced -10% every 1-tile. As an example, I'll use 177dmg.

• 0 tiles (pet) = 177dmg
  1 tile = 159dmg (-10%)
  2 tiles = 141dmg (-20%)
  3 tiles = 123dmg (-30%)
  4 tiles = 106dmg (-40%)
  5 tiles = 88dmg (-50%)
  6 tiles = 70dmg (-60%)
  7 tiles = 53dmg (-70%)

As a sum-up, before this update, Sacrifice did 100% damage (177dmg) for a radius of 7 tiles.

So besides being expensive, you actually need some skill in targeting the pet next to the target and even if everything else is setup perfectly, the damage is rolled purely on dice - so it may kill 0 or it may kill 4.

If you compare that to Solitude, sure it's limited to 2 cities, but it kills without a random factor. Also compared to Solitude, you can see a Sacrifice coming your way. Unlike Solitude, Sacrifice is avoidable. You can always track a pet and which should already ring some bells. Besides that you have hiding skill, invisibility potions and if you're fast enough, you can most likely even run away from the biggest damage (danger zone) which is tied to 2(-3) tiles.

- Boris

[Jyrgen]

If you compare that to Solitude, sure it's limited to 2 cities, but it kills without a random factor. Also compared to Solitude, you can see a Sacrifice coming your way. Unlike Solitude, Sacrifice is avoidable. You can always track a pet and which should already ring some bells. Besides that you have hiding skill, invisibility potions and if you're fast enough, you can most likely even run away from the biggest damage (danger zone) which is tied to 2(-3) tiles.

- Boris

Dunno, but at least I survived a law solitude directly at law altar when I was red. So seems to have a random factor... Oh, and I'd rather say that solitude is avoidable (don't fight in Brit and Moonglow and voila), yet Sacrifice can be brought to you anywhere (the only way to avoid is to go log off when ya see a necro).

And about the sacrifice - if you get (REALLY) lucky you can still kill pretty much everyone except barbarians within 3-5 tiles etc. You got to remember it's AREA effect spell, so it has the potential of killing pretty many people with just ONE spell.

EDIT: So, if a precastable spell has a chance of killing 4+ people at the same time, it's not imba at all, eh?

[Palma]

Fuck Lauri, you gotta learn how to do summaries man!

Cruxis, even if not everyone agrees about malleus and veritas and few others, people seem to be agreeing on instant kill things. Let's not remove the whole idea then. Let's do a small step even if it's a small one.

Not using solitude and kill for a while seems to be a step in the right direction so far! Let's try at least that, see what happens! Maybe more fun, maybe we get raped all the time... only time will tell! We're all just agreeing that we will try.

We can find our ultimate goals this way, trying and trying.

[Boris]

And about the sacrifice - if you get (REALLY) lucky you can still kill pretty much everyone except barbarians within 3-5 tiles etc.

It's under 25% for a over 200dmg, which I would guess every barbarian most likely has.

Of course it's clearly different when mixed with religions, as there's a Veritas flying here and a Keening over there. When talking of purely Sacrifice + pet, the chance for survival is bigger than for death for more than 1 class.

Point still being, Sacrifice has taken a clear hit. I do think Kill's kill rate is still too high, but I've also given my opinion on how it should work. A fixed 10% kill-rate not depending on skill (both caster and victim) combined with a skill-oriented fail damage, is the way to go.

- Boris

[Zaradon]

Sure, i've always been supporting fair/fun pvp.

Altough, i wont be giving any ideas no more =)


+1

[Simmo]

What is this? Nerf Kill topic? Test 100/100 magery ss with casting kill and then nerfing ._.

[Jyrgen]

And about the sacrifice - if you get (REALLY) lucky you can still kill pretty much everyone except barbarians within 3-5 tiles etc.

It's under 25% for a over 200dmg, which I would guess every barbarian most likely has.

Of course it's clearly different when mixed with religions, as there's a Veritas flying here and a Keening over there. When talking of purely Sacrifice + pet, the chance for survival is bigger than for death for more than 1 class.

Point still being, Sacrifice has taken a clear hit. I do think Kill's kill rate is still too high, but I've also given my opinion on how it should work. A fixed 10% kill-rate not depending on skill (both caster and victim) combined with a skill-oriented fail damage, is the way to go.

- Boris

What about different pets? I.e, doesn't a dragon deal more damage than a nightmare.