Dangerous
#1
Posted 09 November 2009 - 06:48 PM
Chris sold me this zerk at lvl 35 mind you, and it had like 89% exp when i bought it. So most of the grats goto Chris.
There is no lvl 36 item for a zerk yet, and it would be cool if the playerbase had some imput in the item i was given.
Considering all the other classes get to hand in the best armor and get a cool renamed version, what should zerkers get? A weapon, obviously. Now all zerkers that are used, either have a cobalt or a SoE. Cobalt is WAY to expensive to have as a renamed item, and SoE would devalue ALOT when handing it in, because it is class restricting an item that is not already class restricted.
My personal veiw is to Exchange SoE, and get back an item with a higher vampyric base. 29bd and .10 vampyric. Like Soul Ripper on main. This sounds like a fair exchange for zerkers, but it would be cool to have the rest of the player base's input.
Possibly 28 bd and .10 vamp?
30 bd and .05 damage?
Lets get some idea's together and see what staff can do!
- Jase
#2
Posted 09 November 2009 - 07:33 PM
#3
Posted 09 November 2009 - 11:10 PM
#4
Posted 09 November 2009 - 11:15 PM
p.s. funny how it's still so deep rooted that we call it a to do list. To be able to carry that name, some needs to be done once in a while you'd reckon. Suprise, suprise, NM is full of lies.
Theres your reply in a diff post.
http://www.nightmist...showtopic=31749
is the post if you wana give it a read.
Pretty much stop these posts cuz nothing is going to get done
#5
Posted 09 November 2009 - 11:21 PM
#6
Posted 09 November 2009 - 11:46 PM
As I don't play 1a much, I had no idea you guys got something when you hit level 36. Which is pretty cool. But 1a getting Soul Ripper would be pretty cool. Whether the only way to get it would be by turning in an SoE at 36 for your grandmaster item, or it being craftable. Would make a nice addition to zerks on that server.
Edit: Btw, gratz on lvl Jase.
Edited by Pureza, 09 November 2009 - 11:51 PM.
#7
Posted 09 November 2009 - 11:46 PM
That being said, it should be even across the board. All classes should be able to trade a class restricted item in for a more unique version. Not a souped up version.
Not supported.
Retired... Now I know how it feels to quit NM and troll forums.
#8
Posted 10 November 2009 - 01:48 AM
The zerk equivalent to Cloak of the Avenger would be a renamed, repic'd Adament Warhammer IMO. Not a more powerful SoE.
That being said, it should be even across the board. All classes should be able to trade a class restricted item in for a more unique version. Not a souped up version.
Not supported.
Agree with this actually.
edit: perhaps fighters and zerkers could all trade in for the same item. Trading in the blade of time for a "renamed repic'd" version. Only because no 30+ berserker is going to use an addy warhamer, just like no 30+ fighter is going to be using a halberd. ..
Edited by Apocalypto, 10 November 2009 - 03:30 AM.
#9
Posted 10 November 2009 - 12:23 PM
Every other class gets to trade in something, thats the best possible for that class. If berserkers trade in an addy warhammer(Thats not the best for that class) they wont ever get used. The reward for training to grandmaster, should be the best possible item it can be (As it is for every class currently).
This only leaves the SoE as a valid option.
Now if a SoE was changed from a level 30 item, for fighters, paladins and berserkers, to a lvl 36 item, just for berserkers, this will pretty much ruin the item, Devaluing it greatly, which none of the other items really are.(Also making it pretty worthless if you have a paladin also, that you change between).
Therefor it needs a slight boost to make it worth while.
#10
Posted 10 November 2009 - 01:10 PM
This only leaves the SoE as a valid option.
No it doesn't.
Therefor it needs a slight boost to make it worth while.
No, it does not.
Retired... Now I know how it feels to quit NM and troll forums.
#11
Posted 10 November 2009 - 01:13 PM
Way to look like an idiot.
#12
Posted 10 November 2009 - 01:28 PM
(I.e. Maybe the npc in the Nightmist Zerker guild could take SoE and trade it for a renamed SoE that is zerk only and 36+, then you can trade it back if you want to sell it or use it on another alt)
Edited by Prophet, 10 November 2009 - 01:32 PM.
#13
Posted 10 November 2009 - 01:40 PM
#14
Posted 10 November 2009 - 01:43 PM
Granted, Zerks only utilize their Weapon. But my point is not all classes get their best item used. Could use BoT and make it easy and use for pally/fighter/zerk and give each respective class it's own unique name and pic and class restricted.
And "Therefor it needs a slight boost to make it worth while", you threw some information out before you said that but none of it pertains to this conclusion you came to.
Why does it need a boost? It doesn't. The weapon of choice just needs to be made more unique and rare as a sign of hitting lvl 36.
You cut me deep. I'll try and remember to cry next time.
Retired... Now I know how it feels to quit NM and troll forums.
#15
Posted 10 November 2009 - 01:50 PM
Therefore, perhaps for zerks as they only use one item slot(the weapon) they could get an array of choices I.e. A Halberd/Addy/SoE/Cobalt could all be traded in to get a unique version of the weapon class restricted and level restricted.
As long as the process is reversible it doesn't stop people using the item on another alt or trade it.
Edit: Sausage is spot on when saying it shouldn't get a boost as then it would be an unfair advantage over other classes.
Edited by Prophet, 10 November 2009 - 01:51 PM.
#16
Posted 10 November 2009 - 02:06 PM
Thieves - No
Mages - Meh maybe
Druid - No
And clay, CPA is the best armour for a thief. You are trading in the best armour possible, for a thief, and getting a renamed version of it. Just because its gold value isnt that of a SoE, doesnt make the principle any different.
And yes, all of the information was relevent, maybe i was batting slightly above your IQ level.
Thieves/mages/druids get the BEST item possible, to show off. This item is = the best in game item of its type. As i explained above.
This rules out, Halberd,rose blade,Addy Warhammer,and to some extent the blade of time. Not many zerks, or prominant zerks, use those weapons. They have a SoE. This is the only weapon that should be altered upon reaching level 36, because by that level, any zerk will have a SoE.
Right so, renaming a thief only item, that the thief would have been wearing, to a thief only item, that the thief will wear.
"Cloak of Avenger"
The big difference is, CPA would only ever have been equipped by thieves. And its the best armour available, and its intrinsic value is pretty low. Not so much of a biggy that you cant transfer an 80k item onto your alts, you can buy another one.
Changing a SoE (A 2.5mill) item, directly from a paladin/zerk/fighter lvl 30 weapon, to a zerk lvl 36 weapon, will diminish its value incredibly.
If this was the case, zerkers would NOT trade in the SoE. Myself included.
Berserkers, being the hardest class to solo train without a cleric/cobalt, deserve a slightly better vampyric weapon thats not a cobalt, if we're being required to devalue our SoE's upon reaching level 36.
Its a reward system at the end of the day, for the classes that require it. Thieves simply do NOT require anything better than they have. Simply another way to help balance the game
I tryed to dumb it down for you, Sausage. Not sure if i managed too, though. Please give the usual "WTF THIS THREAD DOES NOT GIVE MY THIEF LAZER EYES, SO I WILL UNSUPPORT ANY ATTEMPT TO REBALANCE THE GAME THAT DOESNT FAVOUR THE CLASS I USE" that the community expects from you.
#17
Posted 10 November 2009 - 02:44 PM
Problem: Don't want to trade in SoE as it will devalue it.
Solution: Make the trade reversible.
So why exactly does it require a modification?
If your saying Zerkers need a boost then that should be an entirely different topic.
This solution isn't even hard to implement. Just make the SoE trade for the item with an NPC and make the same NPC trade the new item for SoE.
#18
Posted 10 November 2009 - 03:23 PM
#19
Posted 10 November 2009 - 03:28 PM
The topic is suggesting what should be done. I agreed your idea was good, but I'm throwing other ideas out.
I was just worried about the solution getting drowned out by a discussion on which classes are overpowered.
#20
Posted 10 November 2009 - 03:40 PM
Edited by Tietsu of TSA, 10 November 2009 - 03:41 PM.
#21
Posted 10 November 2009 - 04:08 PM
Im so glad something constructive came from a member of the community
gg
#22
Posted 10 November 2009 - 04:29 PM
But sometimes they don't make sense
Refrigerator
#23
Posted 10 November 2009 - 04:59 PM
This solution isn't even hard to implement. Just make the SoE trade for the item with an NPC and make the same NPC trade the new item for SoE.
not sure how this would work unless this said NPC isnt inside the leveling guild in TK. Last i remember when i got my cloak on my thief the guy could only be accessed at lvl 35 and when i lvled to 36 i couldnt re enter the area.
#24
Posted 10 November 2009 - 06:21 PM
Edit: Zerks have no need for a newer, better weapon as they are beasts already.
And I say no go on the trade reversal, as it would not be fair to any other class for having to shell out some gold or spend time killing a certain boss for said item, only to have to trade it away.
Plus giving a zerk something to wear would make their look over that much better, wich is only what the level 36 item trade in was all about.
Edited by Walt, 10 November 2009 - 06:24 PM.
#25
Posted 10 November 2009 - 06:38 PM
This solution isn't even hard to implement. Just make the SoE trade for the item with an NPC and make the same NPC trade the new item for SoE.
not sure how this would work unless this said NPC isnt inside the leveling guild in TK. Last i remember when i got my cloak on my thief the guy could only be accessed at lvl 35 and when i lvled to 36 i couldnt re enter the area.
Put it in the Nightmist berserker leveling guild, so that its easily accesible. Yes theoretically none 36's could trade for the weapon, but they can't equip it so...
And I say no go on the trade reversal, as it would not be fair to any other class for having to shell out some gold or spend time killing a certain boss for said item, only to have to trade it away.
Make other classes be able to reverse their trade as well?
Edited by Prophet, 10 November 2009 - 06:40 PM.
#26
Posted 10 November 2009 - 07:05 PM
Imo, nothing should be reversable. Once you make a trade, or anything of the sort, it is a done deal, and you live with your choice.
#27
Posted 10 November 2009 - 07:12 PM
Giving berserkers an item that actually does nothing, would be the worst idea ever. It has to be the weapon slot, and thats been discussed by most of staff and agree'd already.
And no, zerks are not "Beasts" as you describe them. Considering what it takes to level one, and how easy they are to pk, they are still very under-powered compared to the other classes.
Also was there any need for the part about reversing a hp gain? it was totally irrelevant to the discussion. Reversing an item trade, that you make completely by choice, should be a personal choice.
#28
Posted 10 November 2009 - 07:28 PM
All of the items that are traded in are nothing but mear "Mirrors" of that same item. Only a different name and picture. So going from a bikini to some tattered clothing would imo be a very nice improvement.Giving berserkers an item that actually does nothing, would be the worst idea ever. It has to be the weapon slot, and thats been discussed by most of staff and agree'd already.
Also was there any need for the part about reversing a hp gain? it was totally irrelevant to the discussion. Reversing an item trade, that you make completely by choice, should be a personal choice.
The hp thing may have been a bit over the top, but it fits. You are making an on the spot decision as to wether or not you want to trade in your item you know all about, to get a new item, that may or may not be as good as what you may be getting in return.
#29
Posted 10 November 2009 - 07:31 PM
Having a 0 armor reward for leveling to 36, when all the other classes get a useful item they will use, is the problem.
#30
Posted 10 November 2009 - 07:32 PM
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users