Re: Idea: Plate Mail

[De-Legro]

Wouldn't it be better to make owners lose items than let it degrade away? Like losing a battle can make you lose your item while the winner can search the battlefield and claim it themselves as spoils? Or being wounded can cause you to lose your item even if you win a battle - can lose your item if it is a sword and you get your arm chopped off.

And then what, we need to track the character has lost his arm so we can assign a penalty for things like duels? If items are never destroyed then new items are never created. I'm not saying that is a bad thing mind you, its just not the current design intent. Items are supposed to have a history, then be lost and new items replace them.

[Tom]

Well, some of you may want to revisit the thing. I have increased the longevity of unique items in two steps over the past months. It only affects new items, though.

[Norrel]

I think we should redo the system entirely.

Make them not degrade whatsoever, so that people actually want them.

Make them an order of magnitude more rare and difficult to get, so they actually serve as a status symbol. There should be like, 50-100 items max on a continent, maybe less. Give them bonuses beyond mere prestige by giving them all skill bonuses, and give them a wide variability in quality (so that the rarest items are things Kingdoms would go to war over).

I think the real allure of items is having a lot of history attached to them, a story, a wiki article, etc. High turnover shouldn't be something we're aiming for at all... When I got my first unique items on my advy I was pretty excited and wrote articles about how they were found, but when I found out they were basically just junk you used to get your reccs I was pretty bummed out and cancelled the character.

Obviously, to prevent item inflation, we would need some way to remove them (infrequently) from the system. Allowing people to send their items home as a family artifact for some sort of familial boost (+fame? +prestige to all characters, both current and new? I dunno.)

Alternatively, just have a set amount of items total, and allow them to be lost in battle and (re)found by advies.

The recommendations system would obviously need to be reworked if this were to go through.

[De-Legro]

I think we should redo the system entirely.

Make them not degrade whatsoever, so that people actually want them.

Make them an order of magnitude more rare and difficult to get, so they actually serve as a status symbol. There should be like, 50-100 items max on a continent, maybe less. Give them bonuses beyond mere prestige by giving them all skill bonuses, and give them a wide variability in quality (so that the rarest items are things Kingdoms would go to war over).

I think the real allure of items is having a lot of history attached to them, a story, a wiki article, etc. High turnover shouldn't be something we're aiming for at all... When I got my first unique items on my advy I was pretty excited and wrote articles about how they were found, but when I found out they were basically just junk you used to get your reccs I was pretty bummed out and cancelled the character.

Obviously, to prevent item inflation, we would need some way to remove them (infrequently) from the system. Allowing people to send their items home as a family artifact for some sort of familial boost (+fame? +prestige to all characters, both current and new? I dunno.)

Alternatively, just have a set amount of items total, and allow them to be lost in battle and (re)found by advies.

The recommendations system would obviously need to be reworked if this were to go through.

Okay it is clear some people are missing some info about unique's.

Firstly there is a maximum that can exist on any island at one time, I would be surprised to find that any island had more then 100 items. Secondly they have a MASSIVE variance in quality already. They have a differences in how much prestige they grant, if they grant a boost to a skill, how much they boost a skill and how long they can go without repair. There are items out there that last more then a few months before needing repair. The thing is as unique's age and get repaired, their duration is reduced. Sages seem unable to return them to their full potential  so the longer a item is held on to, the shorter the period it can go for without repair. Still is should be possible to hold on to an item for several years.

Items are already lost in battles, and yes can already be found by advies. Items are created by sages and monster/undead hunts, but the chance is random and is also limited by the island item limit.

I don't know about anyone else but currently Unique's seem like a GIANT status symbol. Since they are apparently so difficult to maintain anyone that has them is obviously powerful and well contected

[Zakilevo]

I think we should redo the system entirely.

Make them not degrade whatsoever, so that people actually want them.

Make them an order of magnitude more rare and difficult to get, so they actually serve as a status symbol. There should be like, 50-100 items max on a continent, maybe less. Give them bonuses beyond mere prestige by giving them all skill bonuses, and give them a wide variability in quality (so that the rarest items are things Kingdoms would go to war over).

I think the real allure of items is having a lot of history attached to them, a story, a wiki article, etc. High turnover shouldn't be something we're aiming for at all... When I got my first unique items on my advy I was pretty excited and wrote articles about how they were found, but when I found out they were basically just junk you used to get your reccs I was pretty bummed out and cancelled the character.

Obviously, to prevent item inflation, we would need some way to remove them (infrequently) from the system. Allowing people to send their items home as a family artifact for some sort of familial boost (+fame? +prestige to all characters, both current and new? I dunno.)

Alternatively, just have a set amount of items total, and allow them to be lost in battle and (re)found by advies.

The recommendations system would obviously need to be reworked if this were to go through.

Fame boost doesn't sound good. I think items should steadily become more prestigious and gain abilities according to their types. Items with longer history should grant more prestige. As for skills, swords should give bonus to swordfighting while things like crowns provide leadership. If the owner dies, maybe we can have it buried with the owner that way we can get rid of items as well to create new ones.

[Penchant]

I like the idea of making  them better over time so that a year old unique item is considerably better then a brand new unique item.

[Norrel]

Okay it is clear some people are missing some info about unique's.

Firstly there is a maximum that can exist on any island at one time, I would be surprised to find that any island had more then 100 items.

Sorry, I was misinformed.

Secondly they have a MASSIVE variance in quality already. They have a differences in how much prestige they grant, if they grant a boost to a skill, how much they boost a skill and how long they can go without repair. There are items out there that last more then a few months before needing repair. The thing is as unique's age and get repaired, their duration is reduced. Sages seem unable to return them to their full potential  so the longer a item is held on to, the shorter the period it can go for without repair. Still is should be possible to hold on to an item for several years.

There's a variance, but it's basically two-tiered. There's the items worth having (and even then, only barely), and there are the items that are total crap. I would never contemplate going through all the loops and uncertainties and micromanagement needed to maintain an item if it wasn't fantastic.

Items are already lost in battles, and yes can already be found by advies. Items are created by sages and monster/undead hunts, but the chance is random and is also limited by the island item limit.

I know, but I think this would address the issue of item turnover in a system where items have 0 decay.

I don't know about anyone else but currently Unique's seem like a GIANT status symbol. Since they are apparently so difficult to maintain anyone that has them is obviously powerful and well contected

They don't represent someone's prestige or worth or wealth or connections or stature. What they do represent is someone's capacity to put up with constant annoyances.

[De-Legro]

Fame boost doesn't sound good. I think items should steadily become more prestigious and gain abilities according to their types. Items with longer history should grant more prestige. As for skills, swords should give bonus to swordfighting while things like crowns provide leadership. If the owner dies, maybe we can have it buried with the owner that way we can get rid of items as well to create new ones.

Items DO tend to become more prestigious over time. This is one of the basic mechanics of the system, it is also easily observable.

 I would like to see the abilities be tied to the kind of weapon as well. But then who is to say a magical crown can't grant a boost to sword fighting anyway?

[Norrel]

Items DO tend to become more prestigious over time. This is one of the basic mechanics of the system, it is also easily observable.

The gain in prestige (a worthless stat) is mostly counteracted by their increased rate of decay.

[De-Legro]

Sorry, I was misinformed.

There's a variance, but it's basically two-tiered. There's the items worth having (and even then, only barely), and there are the items that are total crap. I would never contemplate going through all the loops and uncertainties and micromanagement needed to maintain an item if it wasn't fantastic.

I know, but I think this would address the issue of item turnover in a system where items have 0 decay.

They don't represent someone's prestige or worth or wealth or connections or stature. What they do represent is someone's capacity to put up with constant annoyances.

On average, the lower the boost the item grants, the easier it is to maintain. It is only after the item has existed for a while that they tend to need the really regular repairs. Given peoples attitude right now they certainly DO represent some ones wealth and stature, since only the wealthy are apparently keen to spend the money to own the item, and they would need to have a few damn good advies to repair them. Mind you this ISN'T what is required, but as it seems to be the general opinion of the player base it is about the same thing.

The gain in prestige (a worthless stat) is mostly counteracted by their increased rate of decay.

Yeah, no they also gain in their skill boost, if anyone can even be bothered to sort that out. Seriously people need to stop posting when they have so little experience with the system.

[Zakilevo]

I agree with slapstick on his last comment. I do not think someone with an item is that rich. Probably richer than normal knights but when I see someone carrying an item around, I am surprised by the fact how diligent the person is. Repairing the item constantly and thinking when the person needs to get the item fixed. It becomes work instead of fun in my opinion. Well there are some people who enjoy being annoyed though.

[BardicNerd]

And then what, we need to track the character has lost his arm so we can assign a penalty for things like duels? If items are never destroyed then new items are never created. I'm not saying that is a bad thing mind you, its just not the current design intent. Items are supposed to have a history, then be lost and new items replace them.

Unless it has a reasonably powerful in-game effect, then I don't care about the history of an item that is going to be lost and replaced by a new item.  If I know I'm going to have to replace my item with a different one, then all it is to me is a minor prestige boost that I don't really care about.  It doesn't actually enhance the game for me in any meaningful way.

If, on the other hand, I know that it's something that will be with my character the rest of their days, or at least a significant portion of them, without having to take constant care of it, then without it having any particular abilities -- even if it didn't give prestige -- it becomes part of my character's story.  It makes the game more interesting, the world more deep.

So unless items were to actually have a meaningful impact upon game stats -- and I don't mean prestige boosts, I mean on the level that having them helps your realm win a war -- item turnover is a Bad Thing.

[De-Legro]

Unless it has a reasonably powerful in-game effect, then I don't care about the history of an item that is going to be lost and replaced by a new item.  If I know I'm going to have to replace my item with a different one, then all it is to me is a minor prestige boost that I don't really care about.  It doesn't actually enhance the game for me in any meaningful way.

If, on the other hand, I know that it's something that will be with my character the rest of their days, or at least a significant portion of them, without having to take constant care of it, then without it having any particular abilities -- even if it didn't give prestige -- it becomes part of my character's story.  It makes the game more interesting, the world more deep.

So unless items were to actually have a meaningful impact upon game stats -- and I don't mean prestige boosts, I mean on the level that having them helps your realm win a war -- item turnover is a Bad Thing.

Items can last for YEARS. Can I make that any clearer? Besides that they can if people actually bother to invest in them offer decent bonus to stats. I've seen items that boost things like sword fighting by 10-15%.

I can see items ever having such a massive effect they help you win a war though, nor do I think they should. The are about the character, not the realm.

[Norrel]

On average, the lower the boost the item grants, the easier it is to maintain. It is only after the item has existed for a while that they tend to need the really regular repairs. Given peoples attitude right now they certainly DO represent some ones wealth and stature, since only the wealthy are apparently keen to spend the money to own the item, and they would need to have a few damn good advies to repair them. Mind you this ISN'T what is required, but as it seems to be the general opinion of the player base it is about the same thing.

I don't think any such balancing is necessary. Some items should just be better than others, and allowing the items that people actually want to decay faster defeats the whole purpose.

I don't really think that most people see them as the same thing? My least prestigious, least famous, and least wealthy noble has owned the most unique items in the family. I didn't get any recognition nor did I feel that it spoke to the character's abilities, but rather to my own ignorance about how worthless the items were.

Yeah, no they also gain in their skill boost, if anyone can even be bothered to sort that out. Seriously people need to stop posting when they have so little experience with the system.

I have never seen a unique item with a skill boost, which makes them worthless 90% of the time. If it is only the exceptions, not the rule, that you can argue to, then maybe your argument (or the game mechanics) should be reworked.

I have little experience with it because in all but very few circumstances (and in those circumstances, the item apparently dies faster...) I do not see any pragmatic gain to actually trying to get them.

[De-Legro]

I don't think any such balancing is necessary. Some items should just be better than others, and allowing the items that people actually want to decay faster defeats the whole purpose.

I don't really think that most people see them as the same thing? My least prestigious, least famous, and least wealthy noble has owned the most unique items in the family. I didn't get any recognition nor did I feel that it spoke to the character's abilities, but rather to my own ignorance about how worthless the items were.

I have never seen a unique item with a skill boost, which makes them worthless 90% of the time. If it is only the exceptions, not the rule, that you can argue to, then maybe your argument (or the game mechanics) should be reworked.

I have little experience with it because in all but very few circumstances (and in those circumstances, the item apparently dies faster...) I do not see any pragmatic gain to actually trying to get them.

Items aren't created with a skill boost. People need to invest in them for that. It would appear that people can't be bothered to invest in them, but are conversely quite ready to whine about the fact they don't have anything but a skill boost.

In terms of "some items should just be better" they are. Items when created will have different base levels of both prestige and durability. Those items that start with high levels of both are obviously BETTER, since they will last longer, and get more and more boosts over their age.