By definition, a

By definition, a :
[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Dioxide's CForum ]

Posted by The Arcane(VIP) on August 18, 2000 at 17:19:47:

In Reply to: A thought someone might agree with... posted by Kinda annoyed on August 18, 2000 at 16:19:47:

> It seems that every rager is a berserker.
> My idea is this.
> Get rid of the Rager 'sect' thing (Scouts,
> Defenders, and Berserkers) and make
> them exactly like they used to be.
> It's only fair.

You mean make them suck again? Ragers are BALANCED now. They kill mages a fair bit. They even kill skilled players with reasonable frequency. Of course, they also die a lot. The con-dying Rager is an archetype for a reason.

> Since none of the leaders reinforce the policy
> of having equal numbers of types of ragers,
> either punish them or ENFORCE the damned thing
> and make it worth while!

Oh, you mean that policy that doesn't exist?

The village is SUPPOSED to be overwhelmingly berserkers! Even Dhaevor, who closed the village to non-defenders for a couple of weeks (and damn, did I ever get some flak for that decision), recognized that it was supposed to be the case.

I envision an "optimal" proportion in the village as 60/30/10 for berserkers/scouts/defenders. When I closed inductions to non-defenders, there was like... one defender, period, who showed up. I sure as hell wasn't aiming for equal numbers.

Defenders are designed so that they can aid multiple people at once, so long as they have the mana for it. Having more than two defenders online at once is actually a waste of a warm body. Having none on just plain sucks when you're dealing with certain situations.

Follow Ups:

rager is a berserker N/T There! 17:30:45 8/18/2000 (5)
- More along the lines of implying that the post failed to meet the definition of a The Arcane(VIP) 18:39:50 8/18/2000 (4)
  - What the hell...? a The Arcane(VIP) 18:44:02 8/18/2000 (3)
    - Ok, that's a bug... the definition of a though (with quotation marks around it) [text for Dio] The Arcane(VIP) 18:45:25 8/18/2000 (2)
      - Re: Ok, that's a bug... the definition of a though (with quotation marks around it) [text for Dio] Dioxide(VIP) 23:35:44 8/18/2000 (0)
      - (test subj) Is it only for VIPs? (test)... "vips" 'vips' %vips% etc. (n/t) Zepachu 23:34:27 8/18/2000 (0)
Odd, dunno why my subject got truncated. Ah well, it wasn't that witty anyway. (n/t) The Arcane(VIP) 17:21:44 8/18/2000 (1)
- *coughs* Did you put a less than sign in it? ...Just a guess for future reference. (n/t) Zepachu 17:54:42 8/18/2000 (0)

Post a Followup

Name:
E-mail:
Subject:
Comments:	> > It seems that every rager is a berserker. > > My idea is this. > > Get rid of the Rager 'sect' thing (Scouts, > > Defenders, and Berserkers) and make > > them exactly like they used to be. > > It's only fair. > You mean make them suck again? Ragers are BALANCED now. They kill mages a fair bit. They even kill skilled players with reasonable frequency. Of course, they also die a lot. The con-dying Rager is an archetype for a reason. > > Since none of the leaders reinforce the policy > > of having equal numbers of types of ragers, > > either punish them or ENFORCE the damned thing > > and make it worth while! > Oh, you mean that policy that doesn't exist? > The village is SUPPOSED to be overwhelmingly berserkers! Even Dhaevor, who closed the village to non-defenders for a couple of weeks (and damn, did I ever get some flak for that decision), recognized that it was supposed to be the case. > I envision an "optimal" proportion in the village as 60/30/10 for berserkers/scouts/defenders. When I closed inductions to non-defenders, there was like... one defender, period, who showed up. I sure as hell wasn't aiming for equal numbers. > Defenders are designed so that they can aid multiple people at once, so long as they have the mana for it. Having more than two defenders online at once is actually a waste of a warm body. Having none on just plain sucks when you're dealing with certain situations.

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Dioxide's CForum ]