Previous
Yay! Even more combat requirements to go with our no combat abilities!
DIMINISHEDANGEL
DR-SOCHARIS
Re: Circle Reqs
03/16/2012 01:56 AM CDT
>>Yay! Even more combat requirements to go with our no combat abilities!
Yeah, I'm not gonna lie, Trader reqs just became a lot more sucky. I'm not going to apologize for them, because they're still more lenient than every other guild, but as the player of a trader I feel your pain.
--
"The ninety and nine are with dreams, content but the hope of the world made new, is the hundredth man who is grimly bent on making those dreams come true." -E.A.P.
Yeah, I'm not gonna lie, Trader reqs just became a lot more sucky. I'm not going to apologize for them, because they're still more lenient than every other guild, but as the player of a trader I feel your pain.
--
"The ninety and nine are with dreams, content but the hope of the world made new, is the hundredth man who is grimly bent on making those dreams come true." -E.A.P.
DIMINISHEDANGEL
Re: Circle Reqs
03/16/2012 02:07 AM CDT
>>Yeah, I'm not gonna lie, Trader reqs just became a lot more sucky. I'm not going to apologize for them, because they're still more lenient than every other guild, but as the player of a trader I feel your pain.
The combat reqs really don't bother me, as my primary character is a Barbarian. It's the paradoxical combination of combat reqs heavier then many other guilds and the lack of combat abilities to match those same guilds.
I can't really complain to you personally, because designing circle reqs, your hands are rather tied by their skillset placement, their status as an NMU guild, and current design philosophy of them. It's just painful and silly that I have to bring a caravan into combat to have a "panic button" maneuver.
The combat reqs really don't bother me, as my primary character is a Barbarian. It's the paradoxical combination of combat reqs heavier then many other guilds and the lack of combat abilities to match those same guilds.
I can't really complain to you personally, because designing circle reqs, your hands are rather tied by their skillset placement, their status as an NMU guild, and current design philosophy of them. It's just painful and silly that I have to bring a caravan into combat to have a "panic button" maneuver.
DR-SOCHARIS
Re: Circle Reqs
03/16/2012 02:23 AM CDT
>>It's just painful and silly that I have to bring a caravan into combat to have a "panic button" maneuver.
I think that's a very barbish way of thinking of it. Most guilds never get a panic button ;).
You hit the design issue on the nose, though - Skillset placement has armor secondary for traders, even if they have no current abilities in combat.
--
"The ninety and nine are with dreams, content but the hope of the world made new, is the hundredth man who is grimly bent on making those dreams come true." -E.A.P.
I think that's a very barbish way of thinking of it. Most guilds never get a panic button ;).
You hit the design issue on the nose, though - Skillset placement has armor secondary for traders, even if they have no current abilities in combat.
--
"The ninety and nine are with dreams, content but the hope of the world made new, is the hundredth man who is grimly bent on making those dreams come true." -E.A.P.
GARBAGE23OMF
Re: Circle Reqs
03/16/2012 02:31 AM CDT
Are both appraisal and trading hard reqs? Is appraisal possibly a soft req? I realize we're lore primary, it's just there's no indication.
DR-SOCHARIS
Re: Circle Reqs
03/16/2012 02:40 AM CDT
>>Are both appraisal and trading hard reqs?
They are.
--
"The ninety and nine are with dreams, content but the hope of the world made new, is the hundredth man who is grimly bent on making those dreams come true." -E.A.P.
They are.
--
"The ninety and nine are with dreams, content but the hope of the world made new, is the hundredth man who is grimly bent on making those dreams come true." -E.A.P.
DIMINISHEDANGEL
Re: Circle Reqs
03/16/2012 02:51 AM CDT
>>I think that's a very barbish way of thinking of it. Most guilds never get a panic button ;).
Most of them have one, actually.
Most of them have one, actually.
DR-SOCHARIS
Re: Circle Reqs
03/16/2012 02:54 AM CDT
>>Most of them have one, actually.
In a sense, I suppose.
Anyway, yeah, traders definitely don't have one though.
--
"The ninety and nine are with dreams, content but the hope of the world made new, is the hundredth man who is grimly bent on making those dreams come true." -E.A.P.
In a sense, I suppose.
Anyway, yeah, traders definitely don't have one though.
--
"The ninety and nine are with dreams, content but the hope of the world made new, is the hundredth man who is grimly bent on making those dreams come true." -E.A.P.
REASONMJ
Re: Circle Reqs
03/16/2012 03:13 AM CDT
>>Ok, you guys are going to hate me. Your reqs previously were really rather low overall. Your new ones are much more substantial, and circling will require a fair bit of non-trading activities.
The only problem I have with your proposal is that our non-trading circling reqs were pathetically easy because the Trading requirement is by a mile the most brutal single requirement in the game. So our previous reqs of "8 ranks of trading and that's basically it" ended up being a pretty reasonable overall difficulty. You can't just add up "total number of ranks required for 150th" and act like that is a valid metric for how difficult it is to level. No other guild had a single requirement anywhere near as difficult as needing to train 990 ranks in one of the most boring and difficult to train skills in the game, which cannot be trained effectively at the same time as other skills. So to even this out, Traders didn't need any other skills other than Trading.
I'm 100% for making Traders have more than one circling requirement that actually takes some effort, but how can you leave that absolutely ridiculous 990 ranks of Trading in place if you are going to add actual survival and armor reqs?
Apu
_
http://www.elanthipedia.com/wiki/User:Apu
The only problem I have with your proposal is that our non-trading circling reqs were pathetically easy because the Trading requirement is by a mile the most brutal single requirement in the game. So our previous reqs of "8 ranks of trading and that's basically it" ended up being a pretty reasonable overall difficulty. You can't just add up "total number of ranks required for 150th" and act like that is a valid metric for how difficult it is to level. No other guild had a single requirement anywhere near as difficult as needing to train 990 ranks in one of the most boring and difficult to train skills in the game, which cannot be trained effectively at the same time as other skills. So to even this out, Traders didn't need any other skills other than Trading.
I'm 100% for making Traders have more than one circling requirement that actually takes some effort, but how can you leave that absolutely ridiculous 990 ranks of Trading in place if you are going to add actual survival and armor reqs?
Apu
_
http://www.elanthipedia.com/wiki/User:Apu
DR-SOCHARIS
Re: Circle Reqs
03/16/2012 03:16 AM CDT
>>You can't just add up "total number of ranks required for 150th" and act like that is a valid metric for how difficult it is to level. No other guild had a single requirement anywhere near as difficult as needing to train 990 ranks in one of the most boring and difficult to train skills in the game, which cannot be trained effectively at the same time as other skills. So to even this out, Traders didn't need any other skills other than Trading.
I totally agree. I'm still on the fence with the trading req - It's possible that it will be decreased a bit to accommodate the other increases. One of the main perception problems traders have is that they have such a massive trading req and often take to AFK scripting to get there. I'll continue mulling this one.
--
"The ninety and nine are with dreams, content but the hope of the world made new, is the hundredth man who is grimly bent on making those dreams come true." -E.A.P.
I totally agree. I'm still on the fence with the trading req - It's possible that it will be decreased a bit to accommodate the other increases. One of the main perception problems traders have is that they have such a massive trading req and often take to AFK scripting to get there. I'll continue mulling this one.
--
"The ninety and nine are with dreams, content but the hope of the world made new, is the hundredth man who is grimly bent on making those dreams come true." -E.A.P.
REASONMJ
Re: Circle Reqs
03/16/2012 04:00 AM CDT
>>One of the main perception problems traders have is that they have such a massive trading req and often take to AFK scripting to get there.
This is not really a "perception" problem, it's just an actual problem. The Trading requirement actually isn't all that hard as long as you just set your trading script on auto-loop for days on end (and preferably keep an eye on it rather than truly AFK script... but I'm sure some go that route as well). But literally the only way to fulfill the requirement in anything resembling a timely manner is to say "ok I'm not actually going to play DR today, just going to zone out while my script runs all day long"
I think it's awesome to end the days of AFK scripted alt Traders that are 100+ level with only trading and appraisal skills over 100, but those new Armor and Survival reqs are no freaking joke when you have zero combat abilities at your disposal to train those skills with. I mean is there even a single Trader other than me (and probably Abison) who has enough Armor for that 150th requirement? If you're going to require Traders to be hunting enough for 500 ranks of armor, you may as well tack on a Defending hard req equal to the listed 2nd Armor (shield + armor + defending, ought to be plenty doable in tandem), and then a nominal 1st/2nd Weapon and Parry reqs (something like 0 1 1 2 2 in each)
You're already going half way towards forcing Traders to be real characters instead of one-dimensional contract trading scripters - why not force us to be more well rounded (while also toning down the ludicrous trading req) and then give us the combat abilities to back up those requirements?
Apu
_
http://www.elanthipedia.com/wiki/User:Apu
This is not really a "perception" problem, it's just an actual problem. The Trading requirement actually isn't all that hard as long as you just set your trading script on auto-loop for days on end (and preferably keep an eye on it rather than truly AFK script... but I'm sure some go that route as well). But literally the only way to fulfill the requirement in anything resembling a timely manner is to say "ok I'm not actually going to play DR today, just going to zone out while my script runs all day long"
I think it's awesome to end the days of AFK scripted alt Traders that are 100+ level with only trading and appraisal skills over 100, but those new Armor and Survival reqs are no freaking joke when you have zero combat abilities at your disposal to train those skills with. I mean is there even a single Trader other than me (and probably Abison) who has enough Armor for that 150th requirement? If you're going to require Traders to be hunting enough for 500 ranks of armor, you may as well tack on a Defending hard req equal to the listed 2nd Armor (shield + armor + defending, ought to be plenty doable in tandem), and then a nominal 1st/2nd Weapon and Parry reqs (something like 0 1 1 2 2 in each)
You're already going half way towards forcing Traders to be real characters instead of one-dimensional contract trading scripters - why not force us to be more well rounded (while also toning down the ludicrous trading req) and then give us the combat abilities to back up those requirements?
Apu
_
http://www.elanthipedia.com/wiki/User:Apu
DIMINISHEDANGEL
Re: Circle Reqs
03/16/2012 05:16 AM CDT
With these reqs, the optimal way to train a Trader would be to do combat with a commoner for 500 ranks, and then join and do nothing but Trading. I find that amusing.
ALEPH-ONE
Re: Circle Reqs
03/16/2012 05:41 AM CDT
I have to agree with Apu. The Trading req looks nightmarish. I see no reason for any guild to ever suffer 8 ranks/circle, let alone one with such limited options for training it.
>>have zero combat abilities
Well, 1-3, depending on what you count... but I agree that that's a shamefully paltry amount that needs vast improvement.
>>why not force us to be more well rounded (while also toning down the ludicrous trading req) and then give us the combat abilities to back up those requirements?
This seems like a pretty good option.
-- Player of Eyuve
>>have zero combat abilities
Well, 1-3, depending on what you count... but I agree that that's a shamefully paltry amount that needs vast improvement.
>>why not force us to be more well rounded (while also toning down the ludicrous trading req) and then give us the combat abilities to back up those requirements?
This seems like a pretty good option.
-- Player of Eyuve
GRANTJ47
Re: Circle Reqs
03/16/2012 09:16 AM CDT
First the questions. Are tactics going to count as one of our Nth Lore requirements? I'm assuming it will. Secondly, I assume ML will count as an Nth Lore until all the crafting skills come out. So I'm wondering how grandfathering will work for the Nth Lore requirements?
Two examples for Nth Lore requirements. First me at 120th circle, I'll have ML at 885, Scholarship 758, Tactics ~400, Performing 47. Okay, I don't need grandfathering at this stage. I decide to evenly divide ML into 5 equal parts giving me ~200 in each. So one of the craft becomes 3rd Lore. Do I now get grandfathered since 3rd Lore requirement is 230@120th? Okay not best example since I train strangely compared to other traders.
So, say 100th Circle trader. Trading 590, Appraisal 400, Scholarship 400, Teaching 200, ML 100, Winds 50. That meets all current requirements. With Skills 3.0 Trading and Appraisal still good. Now Scholarship 400, Tactics ~200, ML 100, Performing 50. Does Tactics get grandfathered as 2nd Lore, up to 320? ML get grandfathered to 300? If they then split ML up, does that get grandfathered up too?
I really can see Tactics as being a problem for Traders. If it really is going to be half of scholarship, then I'm betting its going to be higher than the rest of their combats. And it has to be trained at more per circle than the other combats.
We have to train 5 of the 10 lore that we can(50%), but 6 of the 9 survival that we can(67%). Really? I'd rather see 5th and 6th survival become 4th and 5th Lore. At least then I'd be using crafting to make stuff that I could possibly sell in my shop.
Abison/Rystien
Two examples for Nth Lore requirements. First me at 120th circle, I'll have ML at 885, Scholarship 758, Tactics ~400, Performing 47. Okay, I don't need grandfathering at this stage. I decide to evenly divide ML into 5 equal parts giving me ~200 in each. So one of the craft becomes 3rd Lore. Do I now get grandfathered since 3rd Lore requirement is 230@120th? Okay not best example since I train strangely compared to other traders.
So, say 100th Circle trader. Trading 590, Appraisal 400, Scholarship 400, Teaching 200, ML 100, Winds 50. That meets all current requirements. With Skills 3.0 Trading and Appraisal still good. Now Scholarship 400, Tactics ~200, ML 100, Performing 50. Does Tactics get grandfathered as 2nd Lore, up to 320? ML get grandfathered to 300? If they then split ML up, does that get grandfathered up too?
I really can see Tactics as being a problem for Traders. If it really is going to be half of scholarship, then I'm betting its going to be higher than the rest of their combats. And it has to be trained at more per circle than the other combats.
We have to train 5 of the 10 lore that we can(50%), but 6 of the 9 survival that we can(67%). Really? I'd rather see 5th and 6th survival become 4th and 5th Lore. At least then I'd be using crafting to make stuff that I could possibly sell in my shop.
Abison/Rystien
TEVESHSZAT
Re: Circle Reqs
03/16/2012 10:03 AM CDT
::insert token drum pounding for work orders to give Trading exp::
DR-SOCHARIS
Re: Circle Reqs
03/16/2012 10:49 AM CDT
>>Are tactics going to count as one of our Nth Lore requirements? I'm assuming it will. Secondly, I assume ML will count as an Nth Lore until all the crafting skills come out.
Yes on both counts
>>I decide to evenly divide ML into 5 equal parts giving me ~200 in each. So one of the craft becomes 3rd Lore. Do I now get grandfathered since 3rd Lore requirement is 230@120th?
You do not. The mech split stuff will happen at your pleasure, which is after the conversion will take place.
>>We have to train 5 of the 10 lore that we can(50%), but 6 of the 9 survival that we can(67%). Really? I'd rather see 5th and 6th survival become 4th and 5th Lore.
The problem with giving you too many lore reqs is that traders end up being forced to do crafting to be a member of the guild, which seems out of line.
>>::insert token drum pounding for work orders to give Trading exp::
Not a bad idea. I'll think on it.
>>You're already going half way towards forcing Traders to be real characters instead of one-dimensional contract trading scripters - why not force us to be more well rounded (while also toning down the ludicrous trading req) and then give us the combat abilities to back up those requirements?
A fair argument. Trader reqs are the (only?) ones likely to be altered based on a conversation I'm having next week with some folks. The reqs that would change based on that conversation are:
* Reducing the trading req to something less punishing
* Adding tertiary reqs
Survival and Armor would likely stay the same, so we can continue talking about those.
--
"The ninety and nine are with dreams, content but the hope of the world made new, is the hundredth man who is grimly bent on making those dreams come true." -E.A.P.
Yes on both counts
>>I decide to evenly divide ML into 5 equal parts giving me ~200 in each. So one of the craft becomes 3rd Lore. Do I now get grandfathered since 3rd Lore requirement is 230@120th?
You do not. The mech split stuff will happen at your pleasure, which is after the conversion will take place.
>>We have to train 5 of the 10 lore that we can(50%), but 6 of the 9 survival that we can(67%). Really? I'd rather see 5th and 6th survival become 4th and 5th Lore.
The problem with giving you too many lore reqs is that traders end up being forced to do crafting to be a member of the guild, which seems out of line.
>>::insert token drum pounding for work orders to give Trading exp::
Not a bad idea. I'll think on it.
>>You're already going half way towards forcing Traders to be real characters instead of one-dimensional contract trading scripters - why not force us to be more well rounded (while also toning down the ludicrous trading req) and then give us the combat abilities to back up those requirements?
A fair argument. Trader reqs are the (only?) ones likely to be altered based on a conversation I'm having next week with some folks. The reqs that would change based on that conversation are:
* Reducing the trading req to something less punishing
* Adding tertiary reqs
Survival and Armor would likely stay the same, so we can continue talking about those.
--
"The ninety and nine are with dreams, content but the hope of the world made new, is the hundredth man who is grimly bent on making those dreams come true." -E.A.P.
SCHULTZS3
Re: Circle Reqs
03/16/2012 10:56 AM CDT
>::insert token drum pounding for work orders to give Trading exp::
Yes. Gimme. Naow!
Naniaki
>>Actually an opinion cannot be changed or corrected. Nice try back of line.-VERATHOR
>>But it can be wrong.-Starlear
Yes. Gimme. Naow!
Naniaki
>>Actually an opinion cannot be changed or corrected. Nice try back of line.-VERATHOR
>>But it can be wrong.-Starlear
GARBAGE23OMF
Re: Circle Reqs
03/16/2012 11:04 AM CDT
>>>* Adding tertiary reqs
Would it be safe to assume this means "weapon reqs" as there is currently no approved tie in for our guild to the Supernatural skillset? I have no objections to adding supernatural skill reqs, as long as we have a viable way of training them. Sitting in classes and activating self activating MDs as it turns out is a really really hard way to learn those skills, heh.
Also, fwiw, I will happily take weapon reqs in exchange for some kind of reduction in the overall trading req (as I sit half way through the 6 rank/circle portion of our progression, heh)
Would it be safe to assume this means "weapon reqs" as there is currently no approved tie in for our guild to the Supernatural skillset? I have no objections to adding supernatural skill reqs, as long as we have a viable way of training them. Sitting in classes and activating self activating MDs as it turns out is a really really hard way to learn those skills, heh.
Also, fwiw, I will happily take weapon reqs in exchange for some kind of reduction in the overall trading req (as I sit half way through the 6 rank/circle portion of our progression, heh)
SPANTONV
Re: Circle Reqs
03/16/2012 11:07 AM CDT
Personally, based on what GM Socharis wants to implement for us in the future regarding different ways to train trading, I'm against lowering the trading req. Due to GM Socharis' conversation at the last Simucon I'm for adding a hard combat rank in defense and offense capabilities. So we can better defend and attack when we're being robbed by NPC bandits (which is what the conversation at Simucon was about). Also from an earlier Simucon, GM Socharis said he was interested in implementing for Traders a way for us to make outposts/towns in the wilderness, so having combat abilities to protect the outpost/towns would be beneficial for us at higher levels. The latter being a ways off I think.
Regards,
Sortny/Braunwen
Regards,
Sortny/Braunwen
DR-SOCHARIS
Re: Circle Reqs
03/16/2012 11:07 AM CDT
>>Would it be safe to assume this means "weapon reqs" as there is currently no approved tie in for our guild to the Supernatural skillset?
Assumptions are the mother of efficiency and also the reason shows like Arrested Development are funny.
--
"The ninety and nine are with dreams, content but the hope of the world made new, is the hundredth man who is grimly bent on making those dreams come true." -E.A.P.
Assumptions are the mother of efficiency and also the reason shows like Arrested Development are funny.
--
"The ninety and nine are with dreams, content but the hope of the world made new, is the hundredth man who is grimly bent on making those dreams come true." -E.A.P.
SCHULTZS3
Re: Circle Reqs
03/16/2012 11:42 AM CDT
Those armor reqs are a bear. With such high reqs, Evasion is going to HAVE to be a top 3 Survival.
Here's my analysis of my current circle (95th).
What I need to have to meet the circle:
Trading (whatever it takes for 95th)
400 App
350 Lore 1
310 Lore 2
290 Lore 3
350 Survival 1
300 Survival 2/3
205 Survival 4/5
130 Survival 6
275 Armor 1
205 Armor 2
What I'm looking at having (were 3.0 to happen tomorrow given my latest info):
556 Trading
455 Appraisal
Lore 1 ~350 Outfitting (I have 553 Mech I plan to split to 200 Forging and rest to Outfitting)
Lore 2 375 Scholarship (and will still be Scholarship)
Think I'll be bitten on Lore 3. My Performing would be 206. My Second crafting would be 200ish
393 Survival 1 (Foraging)
296 Survival 2 (Perception, that'll eat my pool just a little with a 4 rank deficit)
185 Survival 3 (Athletics, that'll eat my survival pool a ton with a 115 rank deficit)
171 Survival 4 (Evasion, that'll eat my pool a little with a 34 rank deficit)
148 Survival 5 (Stealth, That'll eat my pool a bit with a 57 rank deficit)
131 Survival 6 (Skinning. Just barely over new reqs)
184 Shield (91 ranks under)
171 Chain Armor (or maybe 184 Defending, depending on how that pans out). 34 or 21 ranks under.
The good news for armor is I have a lot of armor bonus bits, as I train all armors, just not to very high #s. The bad news is my evasion would be tanked relatively. I'm considering doing combat practice to tweak my Top Survivals order to favor Evasion as 3rd suvival rather than 4th so that it gets grandfathered to a much higher level. Further bad news is that while I have a decent amount of bonus bits (174 Climb and 114 Hiding, 18 Disarming would be subsumed), I expect all that will be feeding my survival deficits.
On second thought, leave the reqs as they are, it's like auto-allocating my bonus bits.
Naniaki
>>Actually an opinion cannot be changed or corrected. Nice try back of line.-VERATHOR
>>But it can be wrong.-Starlear
Here's my analysis of my current circle (95th).
What I need to have to meet the circle:
Trading (whatever it takes for 95th)
400 App
350 Lore 1
310 Lore 2
290 Lore 3
350 Survival 1
300 Survival 2/3
205 Survival 4/5
130 Survival 6
275 Armor 1
205 Armor 2
What I'm looking at having (were 3.0 to happen tomorrow given my latest info):
556 Trading
455 Appraisal
Lore 1 ~350 Outfitting (I have 553 Mech I plan to split to 200 Forging and rest to Outfitting)
Lore 2 375 Scholarship (and will still be Scholarship)
Think I'll be bitten on Lore 3. My Performing would be 206. My Second crafting would be 200ish
393 Survival 1 (Foraging)
296 Survival 2 (Perception, that'll eat my pool just a little with a 4 rank deficit)
185 Survival 3 (Athletics, that'll eat my survival pool a ton with a 115 rank deficit)
171 Survival 4 (Evasion, that'll eat my pool a little with a 34 rank deficit)
148 Survival 5 (Stealth, That'll eat my pool a bit with a 57 rank deficit)
131 Survival 6 (Skinning. Just barely over new reqs)
184 Shield (91 ranks under)
171 Chain Armor (or maybe 184 Defending, depending on how that pans out). 34 or 21 ranks under.
The good news for armor is I have a lot of armor bonus bits, as I train all armors, just not to very high #s. The bad news is my evasion would be tanked relatively. I'm considering doing combat practice to tweak my Top Survivals order to favor Evasion as 3rd suvival rather than 4th so that it gets grandfathered to a much higher level. Further bad news is that while I have a decent amount of bonus bits (174 Climb and 114 Hiding, 18 Disarming would be subsumed), I expect all that will be feeding my survival deficits.
On second thought, leave the reqs as they are, it's like auto-allocating my bonus bits.
Naniaki
>>Actually an opinion cannot be changed or corrected. Nice try back of line.-VERATHOR
>>But it can be wrong.-Starlear
SCHULTZS3
Re: Circle Reqs
03/16/2012 11:45 AM CDT
>* Adding tertiary reqs
My 95th Trader's terts:
190 Arcana (and 1 TM)
Weapon 1 151 Brawling
Weapon 2 111 LT
Weapon 3 110 Offhand
Not counting parry and multi
It's all the same to me.
Naniaki
>>Actually an opinion cannot be changed or corrected. Nice try back of line.-VERATHOR
>>But it can be wrong.-Starlear
My 95th Trader's terts:
190 Arcana (and 1 TM)
Weapon 1 151 Brawling
Weapon 2 111 LT
Weapon 3 110 Offhand
Not counting parry and multi
It's all the same to me.
Naniaki
>>Actually an opinion cannot be changed or corrected. Nice try back of line.-VERATHOR
>>But it can be wrong.-Starlear
SCHULTZS3
Re: Circle Reqs
03/16/2012 12:46 PM CDT
>Think I'll be bitten on Lore 3. My Performing would be 206. My Second crafting would be 200ish
Abison pointed out I'd have 264 Tactics, so I'd only be down 16 ranks in Lore 3.
Naniaki
>>Actually an opinion cannot be changed or corrected. Nice try back of line.-VERATHOR
>>But it can be wrong.-Starlear
Abison pointed out I'd have 264 Tactics, so I'd only be down 16 ranks in Lore 3.
Naniaki
>>Actually an opinion cannot be changed or corrected. Nice try back of line.-VERATHOR
>>But it can be wrong.-Starlear
REASONMJ
Re: Circle Reqs
03/16/2012 02:02 PM CDT
>>* Reducing the trading req to something less punishing
>>* Adding tertiary reqs
>>Survival and Armor would likely stay the same, so we can continue talking about those.
This sounds perfect to me. I would recommend (4 5 5 6 7) for trading (870 at 150th) instead of the current (4 5 6 7 8). Still damn high, but not blatantly higher than any other req that any other guild has. It was justified (although still really lame) to force Traders to do their "Ur Skill" far more than any other guild back when the circling reqs were "you are expected to script trading and nothing else", but now that we have to be well rounded characters just like any other guild (which is great) - what justification can there possibly be for giving us the highest Ur Skill req?
Survival and Armor seem good now. Those reqs are not easy at all, and there is no room to increase them imo - with the one exception that you could add a hard Defending requirement (since it would naturally train at the same time as Armor1/Armor2)
Magic reqs I will safely assume that you are only adding if we have a way to train them. And if we get ways to train these skills, I think everyone would be thrilled to get new skills at the cost of new circling requirements
Weapon reqs may seem like they would be a sore spot for many Traders, but really with the way the Armor and Survival reqs are set up, it is pointless to avoid adding a couple Weapon requirements. You simply aren't going to get enough Armor, Shield, Evasion and optional survivals like Stealth/Skinning/Locksmithing to fulfill those Armor and Survival reqs without spending a noticeable amount of time in combat, so it's not like we won't be picking up weapon skills automatically as part of the process. I would recommend at the least, adding a couple weapon reqs at fairly low values (either Weapon 1 + Parry, or maybe 2 weapons, etc). It's pretty silly if you can reach the King of the Road title without even getting the Road Warrior title, so something like a couple (1 1 1 2 2) weapons req is perfectly fair
Apu
_
http://www.elanthipedia.com/wiki/User:Apu
>>* Adding tertiary reqs
>>Survival and Armor would likely stay the same, so we can continue talking about those.
This sounds perfect to me. I would recommend (4 5 5 6 7) for trading (870 at 150th) instead of the current (4 5 6 7 8). Still damn high, but not blatantly higher than any other req that any other guild has. It was justified (although still really lame) to force Traders to do their "Ur Skill" far more than any other guild back when the circling reqs were "you are expected to script trading and nothing else", but now that we have to be well rounded characters just like any other guild (which is great) - what justification can there possibly be for giving us the highest Ur Skill req?
Survival and Armor seem good now. Those reqs are not easy at all, and there is no room to increase them imo - with the one exception that you could add a hard Defending requirement (since it would naturally train at the same time as Armor1/Armor2)
Magic reqs I will safely assume that you are only adding if we have a way to train them. And if we get ways to train these skills, I think everyone would be thrilled to get new skills at the cost of new circling requirements
Weapon reqs may seem like they would be a sore spot for many Traders, but really with the way the Armor and Survival reqs are set up, it is pointless to avoid adding a couple Weapon requirements. You simply aren't going to get enough Armor, Shield, Evasion and optional survivals like Stealth/Skinning/Locksmithing to fulfill those Armor and Survival reqs without spending a noticeable amount of time in combat, so it's not like we won't be picking up weapon skills automatically as part of the process. I would recommend at the least, adding a couple weapon reqs at fairly low values (either Weapon 1 + Parry, or maybe 2 weapons, etc). It's pretty silly if you can reach the King of the Road title without even getting the Road Warrior title, so something like a couple (1 1 1 2 2) weapons req is perfectly fair
Apu
_
http://www.elanthipedia.com/wiki/User:Apu
MARGASH
Re: Circle Reqs
03/16/2012 02:41 PM CDT
the trading req, whether historic or not, is ridiculous
full disclosure: i don't play a trader, and never have
MARGASH
Re: Circle Reqs
03/16/2012 02:41 PM CDT
>because they're still more lenient than every other guild, but as the player of a trader I feel your pain.
Why would you say this?
Why would you say this?
PELIC
Re: Circle Reqs
03/16/2012 02:46 PM CDT
>>* Reducing the trading req to something less punishing
>>* Adding tertiary reqs
>>Survival and Armor would likely stay the same, so we can continue talking about those.
This is VERY preferable.
Currently, in TF, scripting 24/7, at 110th Circle, I'm gaining an average of 2.5 ranks of Trading per day.
To gain the 312 ranks I need for the current requirement, I would have to continue to gain at the same rate for over three months.
Trading is, by far, the most difficult skill to train, as far as 'the grind' goes.
I, for one, welcome reducing Trading requirements, in exchange for tertiary requirements.
I also feel that the Survival and Armor requirements are fair, it seemed goofy that my Weapon/Armor requirements were on par with a 50th Circle Barbarian.
At first, I was disappointed, but if the changes I quoted are made, I'd definitely be satisfied.
~P
>>* Adding tertiary reqs
>>Survival and Armor would likely stay the same, so we can continue talking about those.
This is VERY preferable.
Currently, in TF, scripting 24/7, at 110th Circle, I'm gaining an average of 2.5 ranks of Trading per day.
To gain the 312 ranks I need for the current requirement, I would have to continue to gain at the same rate for over three months.
Trading is, by far, the most difficult skill to train, as far as 'the grind' goes.
I, for one, welcome reducing Trading requirements, in exchange for tertiary requirements.
I also feel that the Survival and Armor requirements are fair, it seemed goofy that my Weapon/Armor requirements were on par with a 50th Circle Barbarian.
At first, I was disappointed, but if the changes I quoted are made, I'd definitely be satisfied.
~P
SCHULTZS3
Re: Circle Reqs
03/16/2012 02:47 PM CDT
Give us Necro LE requirement (except being any weapon).
290 ranks at 150th is, as Armifer/Zeyurn said at the time, token requirements given the rest of the guild's requirements. It would also be enough to account for killing enough to get enough skinning/boxes skill for 6th survival reqs.
I would throw my lot in for 4/5/6/6/7 Trading. Which I believe is Empath Empathy.
Naniaki
>>Actually an opinion cannot be changed or corrected. Nice try back of line.-VERATHOR
>>But it can be wrong.-Starlear
290 ranks at 150th is, as Armifer/Zeyurn said at the time, token requirements given the rest of the guild's requirements. It would also be enough to account for killing enough to get enough skinning/boxes skill for 6th survival reqs.
I would throw my lot in for 4/5/6/6/7 Trading. Which I believe is Empath Empathy.
Naniaki
>>Actually an opinion cannot be changed or corrected. Nice try back of line.-VERATHOR
>>But it can be wrong.-Starlear
DR-SOCHARIS
Re: Circle Reqs
03/16/2012 03:17 PM CDT
>>Apu
You and me are on the same wavelength. I'll get back to you guys about primary/tert reqs soon.
--
"The ninety and nine are with dreams, content but the hope of the world made new, is the hundredth man who is grimly bent on making those dreams come true." -E.A.P.
You and me are on the same wavelength. I'll get back to you guys about primary/tert reqs soon.
--
"The ninety and nine are with dreams, content but the hope of the world made new, is the hundredth man who is grimly bent on making those dreams come true." -E.A.P.
TEVESHSZAT
Re: Circle Reqs
03/16/2012 03:18 PM CDT
>>Give us Necro LE requirement (except being any weapon).
>>290 ranks at 150th is, as Armifer/Zeyurn said at the time, token requirements given the rest of the guild's requirements. It would also be enough to account for killing enough to get enough skinning/boxes skill for 6th survival reqs.
I don't think they said it was token as much as it was thematic. It's like if War Mages were given a small requirement in staves because wizards wave them around a lot for magical purposes so they might eventually know some minor details about using one in combat, or if Traders had to learn a minor amount of Cloth Armor due to being out of combat and running routes you might be more comfortable in armor that isn't notably bulky.
>>290 ranks at 150th is, as Armifer/Zeyurn said at the time, token requirements given the rest of the guild's requirements. It would also be enough to account for killing enough to get enough skinning/boxes skill for 6th survival reqs.
I don't think they said it was token as much as it was thematic. It's like if War Mages were given a small requirement in staves because wizards wave them around a lot for magical purposes so they might eventually know some minor details about using one in combat, or if Traders had to learn a minor amount of Cloth Armor due to being out of combat and running routes you might be more comfortable in armor that isn't notably bulky.
JORDAND1
Re: Circle Reqs
03/16/2012 05:11 PM CDT
I need someone to walk me through this change, since I'm just returning and ALREADY behind since apparently some reqs changed while I was gone?
Canten (the Original, the one, the only, DEAL WITH IT!)
AIM - djordan881@gmail.com (yes, its also my e-mail)
Canten (the Original, the one, the only, DEAL WITH IT!)
AIM - djordan881@gmail.com (yes, its also my e-mail)
SCHULTZS3
Re: Circle Reqs
03/16/2012 05:29 PM CDT
>I need someone to walk me through this change, since I'm just returning and ALREADY behind since apparently some reqs changed while I was gone?
No one will be behind. Some will just move forward slower than others (depending on their bonus pools to push them forward quickly while others' pools are drained out in the grandfathering). These are just proposed requirements for DR 3.0, which is months away.
Naniaki
>>Actually an opinion cannot be changed or corrected. Nice try back of line.-VERATHOR
>>But it can be wrong.-Starlear
No one will be behind. Some will just move forward slower than others (depending on their bonus pools to push them forward quickly while others' pools are drained out in the grandfathering). These are just proposed requirements for DR 3.0, which is months away.
Naniaki
>>Actually an opinion cannot be changed or corrected. Nice try back of line.-VERATHOR
>>But it can be wrong.-Starlear
JORDAND1
Re: Circle Reqs
03/16/2012 05:36 PM CDT
Ok, I was freaking out a bit since I just got back, and am already relearning the game, its like..crap, do I have to relearn all this again? I was already short 3 circles worth of Gen Lore and 2 worth of Appraisal to get back to 60th as is, I was hoping this wasnt going to stick me with more mindless scripting just to catch up.
GRANTJ47
Re: Circle Reqs
03/16/2012 08:09 PM CDT
Canten, if you are behind when this happens, you will be grandfathered. For now you are stuck with what you are until 3.0 is released. That is still some time away, like weeks, not days.
That being said, you will find learning much more friendly than when you played before. The x/34 you should like, ask about it. Offline draining of skills is also great.
Where people gather is going to be different. Traders actually having shops you are going to love, until you find out that all the good ones are taken. Next fest you may find that you can get a custom caravan, or at least one of so many designs. Crafting is really happening....is happening. Find a plaza and a trader for more info as needed.
Oh and good to see you around old friend. Not sure if you will remember me. I was Klindor way back then. Spent some time in the tower and in gargs with you. Didn't reactivate account, just started new one.
Abison/Rystien
That being said, you will find learning much more friendly than when you played before. The x/34 you should like, ask about it. Offline draining of skills is also great.
Where people gather is going to be different. Traders actually having shops you are going to love, until you find out that all the good ones are taken. Next fest you may find that you can get a custom caravan, or at least one of so many designs. Crafting is really happening....is happening. Find a plaza and a trader for more info as needed.
Oh and good to see you around old friend. Not sure if you will remember me. I was Klindor way back then. Spent some time in the tower and in gargs with you. Didn't reactivate account, just started new one.
Abison/Rystien
GARBAGE23OMF
Re: Circle Reqs
03/16/2012 08:13 PM CDT
>> That is still some time away, like weeks, not days.
To alleviate more stress, I think it's actually more like months, not weeks... It's a complete and total rewrite on the mechanical level, so they're at the point where they're now taking our feedback as they fine tune and QA everything and make final decisions about how certain skills will be calculated. www.elanthipedia.com is a priceless resource these days. You should be able to find recent posts that will have tags and links to older posts, that cover what's been proposed/said so far. Like Abison pointed out, the Trader guild has a lot going for it these days compared to the past.
To alleviate more stress, I think it's actually more like months, not weeks... It's a complete and total rewrite on the mechanical level, so they're at the point where they're now taking our feedback as they fine tune and QA everything and make final decisions about how certain skills will be calculated. www.elanthipedia.com is a priceless resource these days. You should be able to find recent posts that will have tags and links to older posts, that cover what's been proposed/said so far. Like Abison pointed out, the Trader guild has a lot going for it these days compared to the past.
JORDAND1
Re: Circle Reqs
03/16/2012 08:19 PM CDT
Yeah, seems OK. Panic mode hits quick when you are already back training, hehe. Everything is almost caught up as is, and I've had all my skills for a while more still other than Appraisal and Gen Lore.
And yes, I remember Klindor. My brain is fuzzy, but its all coming back slowly.
And yes, I remember Klindor. My brain is fuzzy, but its all coming back slowly.
JORDAND1
Re: Circle Reqs
03/16/2012 08:34 PM CDT
I feel like I'm going to be not liking these new Reqs at all as I was never your typical trader. Hell, I was never your typical player. It hurts my head trying to number crunch all this and get a grasp on all the combining of skills and how thats going to work (I've been back for 2-3 days and trying to get a grasp of whats changing). But I can say that judging by my (limited/lacking) knowledge of how the change is going to happen, I'm going to have a very strange character when it all shakes out.
ALEPH-ONE
Re: Circle Reqs
03/16/2012 08:59 PM CDT
>>To alleviate more stress, I think it's actually more like months, not weeks...
The quote we got from the GMs was, "months, not years."
>>It hurts my head trying to number crunch all this and get a grasp on all the combining of skills and how thats going to work (I've been back for 2-3 days and trying to get a grasp of whats changing).
Just wanted to say, I wouldn't worry about it too much. No matter what, you'll get grandfathered. And eventually there will be calculators and guild leaders to guide you through the new reqs. Until then, it is perfectly acceptable to go about your business training as you want to for now. Just know that when that eventual day comes, you may have to jump into some different systems (like combat), or engage with the same systems you know in a different way.
If you really want to prepare now to soften the blow, you can, but you do have some months.
-- Player of Eyuve
The quote we got from the GMs was, "months, not years."
>>It hurts my head trying to number crunch all this and get a grasp on all the combining of skills and how thats going to work (I've been back for 2-3 days and trying to get a grasp of whats changing).
Just wanted to say, I wouldn't worry about it too much. No matter what, you'll get grandfathered. And eventually there will be calculators and guild leaders to guide you through the new reqs. Until then, it is perfectly acceptable to go about your business training as you want to for now. Just know that when that eventual day comes, you may have to jump into some different systems (like combat), or engage with the same systems you know in a different way.
If you really want to prepare now to soften the blow, you can, but you do have some months.
-- Player of Eyuve
ALEPH-ONE
Re: Circle Reqs
03/16/2012 09:14 PM CDT
Sorry, I forgot that I wanted to respond to this.
>>The problem with giving you too many lore reqs is that traders end up being forced to do crafting to be a member of the guild, which seems out of line.
This is really surprising to me. I thought that, of all the guilds, Traders were the ones best situated to become "the Crafters." In fact I was sort of half-expecting a partial shift in guild focus, and maybe even a renaming/restructuring of Trading. I would not have been surprised in the least at a hard Craft req.
Is there a reason that this isn't happening? It seems to me like a broadening of the guild focus would be a Good Thing, since right now it's so narrow that GMs have struggled to provide interesting and, dare I say it, powerful abilities appropriate to a heroic fantasy setting. Being "The Masters of Crafting" sounds pretty neat to me. (Although caveat, I don't play a Trader.)
-- Player of Eyuve
>>The problem with giving you too many lore reqs is that traders end up being forced to do crafting to be a member of the guild, which seems out of line.
This is really surprising to me. I thought that, of all the guilds, Traders were the ones best situated to become "the Crafters." In fact I was sort of half-expecting a partial shift in guild focus, and maybe even a renaming/restructuring of Trading. I would not have been surprised in the least at a hard Craft req.
Is there a reason that this isn't happening? It seems to me like a broadening of the guild focus would be a Good Thing, since right now it's so narrow that GMs have struggled to provide interesting and, dare I say it, powerful abilities appropriate to a heroic fantasy setting. Being "The Masters of Crafting" sounds pretty neat to me. (Although caveat, I don't play a Trader.)
-- Player of Eyuve
REASONMJ
Re: Circle Reqs
03/16/2012 10:23 PM CDT
>>I feel like I'm going to be not liking these new Reqs at all as I was never your typical trader. Hell, I was never your typical player.
Didn't you used to dabble in combat and detest contract trading? Unless I'm way off base, these new reqs are right up your alley
Welcome back Curmudgeon :)
If you have AIM, IM me at Homer3142
Apu
_
http://www.elanthipedia.com/wiki/User:Apu
Didn't you used to dabble in combat and detest contract trading? Unless I'm way off base, these new reqs are right up your alley
Welcome back Curmudgeon :)
If you have AIM, IM me at Homer3142
Apu
_
http://www.elanthipedia.com/wiki/User:Apu
