Cap LRC suits at 60% max.

[Duskofdead]

P.S. no one answered yet... when I asked, how exactly does nerfing LRC add more risk to the game. I don't see how it would be fair appropriate or balanced to add more risk to the game for mages only. Melee have everything they need to get back into a fight from item insurance. Mages do not.

Yes, melee need bandages, but these can be handed around in a fight, or even looted or created on the fly (I've cut up my cloak/robe many times in tight spots) if need be. Melee are not prevented swinging their weapon if they don't have bandages.

If you want to increase risk.. get rid of item insurance. It will NEVER happen imo.... especially with the fact that so many people would rather take their marbles and go home rather than cope with the various mobs who loot things off your corpse in PvM. But it would be far more fair than just thinking mages should be the only ones with "exciting risk" out there.

 

[Duskofdead]

Wow, so because I didn't put the word mage right after you try to invent me as someone who wants to inconvenient others just so you can invent me further to attack my opinion.
So you so funny

Just because my main isn't a mage doesn't mean my idea is mainly to inconvenience people. I just think it's a good idea. Get over yourself, stop inventing posters here, and accept the fact that others who play necro's or mages like this idea.

Unless you "volunteer" as a primarily melee player that weapons should be uncoverable by item insurance.... then sitting around talking about how it would be fine with you for mages to stand to lose something in combat which prevents them from functioning whatsoever is advocating inconveniencing others... at no cost to yourself. A very balanced perspective, it is not.

 

[Viper09]

Unless you "volunteer" as a primarily melee player that weapons should be uncoverable by item insurance.... then sitting around talking about how it would be fine with you for mages to stand to lose something in combat which prevents them from functioning whatsoever is advocating inconveniencing others... at no cost to yourself. A very balanced perspective, it is not.

My main is a necro with macing. More on the necro side since I rely on necromancy a lot more than macing. Second character is a mage. Just because my mage isn't my main doesn't mean I never play him. Just because you don't like my opinion doesn't mean it doesn't stand.

 

[TheScoundrelRico]

Sound familiar?

Nope, not at all. Nice personal attack though...la

 

[Restroom Cowboy]

Wow, so because I didn't put the word mage right after you try to invent me as someone who wants to inconvenient others just so you can invent me further to attack my opinion.
So you so funny

Just because my main isn't a mage doesn't mean my idea is mainly to inconvenience people. I just think it's a good idea. Get over yourself, stop inventing posters here, and accept the fact that others who play necro's or mages like this idea.

Considering you are a self professed necro macer, I can understand your frustration with my statement. your post does not make my point any less meaningful, which again was that you had REASON for agreeing with lowering the cap. In your case, everytime your MAIN CHAR died...you would have to go home and rereg. What better way to make you personally feel better than to agree with an idea which would inconvenience others in the same manner as you.

Take a deep breath...relax...

 

[Duskofdead]

Well I'm sure this topic will get 80 more replies or slink back to page 6 by the time I check the forum again, but,.... last two cents.

Talking about adding in class-specific nerfs to "put more risk in the game", when an item insurance system and animal bonding exists, is utterly ridiculous.

 

[Jove]

The stupidest idea I've ever read. 1st example - Tamer, carries regs and aids how much gold would they be able to come away with since they nerfed the bags of sending. Why they nerfed the bags of sending is beyond me but I can only think it was probably your idea too. 100% reg suit does not give you any particular advantage. It puts you on an even playing field and most of the mages aren't even at full 70's suit opting for other enhancements. If your going to nerf a reg suit might as well nerf the fighters weapons and allow them to be lootable too.... Or better yet introduce regs for all the spellbooks in game and I yes make a paladin carry gold... DUMB IDEA (were you bored or what?)

 

[Restroom Cowboy]

The stupidest idea I've ever read. DUMB IDEA (were you bored or what?)

not enough to steal i guess...la

 

[Spree]

Why stop there? Let's just get rid of LRC all together..as well as...
SDI
MR
LMC
FC
FCR
HCI
DI
DCI
and any other stupid addition that came with or after AoS.

signed

 

[Viper09]

Considering you are a self professed necro macer, I can understand your frustration with my statement. your post does not make my point any less meaningful, which again was that you had REASON for agreeing with lowering the cap. In your case, everytime your MAIN CHAR died...you would have to go home and rereg. What better way to make you personally feel better than to agree with an idea which would inconvenience others in the same manner as you.

And I use LRC on my mage as well as my necro, yet I still agree that LRC should be capped... I never said I don't use LRC. Just because my mage isn't my main doesn't mean I have no experience playing as a mage. 100% LRC is nice, I just think it should be capped as I have said plenty of times.

Your postings don't give me any frustration whatsoever, just don't see why you are so persistent over an opinion, but to each their own.

 

[Restroom Cowboy]

And I use LRC on my mage as well as my necro, yet I still agree that LRC should be capped... I never said I don't use LRC. Just because my mage isn't my main doesn't mean I have no experience playing as a mage.

Your postings don't give me any frustration whatsoever, just don't see why you are so persistent over an opinion, but to each their own.

I dont believe you use lrc on your dexxy...that is all.

 

[Viper09]

I dont believe you use lrc on your dexxy...that is all.

Well believe it or or not, I do. It's not hard, just wasn't cheap

 

[Spree]

As for Chivalry, Unbless chiv books and make the tithing points stay in the book.

 

[TheScoundrelRico]

The stupidest idea I've ever read. 1st example - Tamer, carries regs and aids how much gold would they be able to come away with since they nerfed the bags of sending. Why they nerfed the bags of sending is beyond me but I can only think it was probably your idea too. 100% reg suit does not give you any particular advantage. It puts you on an even playing field and most of the mages aren't even at full 70's suit opting for other enhancements. If your going to nerf a reg suit might as well nerf the fighters weapons and allow them to be lootable too.... Or better yet introduce regs for all the spellbooks in game and I yes make a paladin carry gold... DUMB IDEA (were you bored or what?)

Pssst, I didn't save remove lrc...I just said cap it under 100%. If you take the time, you will eventually cast a spell in a situation where you need it...la

 

[Kaleb]

No.

And if you have any more stupid ideas that would accomplish nothing but making people quit, please keep them to yourself.

A cap on LRC wouldnt make people quit. EA is doing a fine job as it is. What is there now on pacific a couple hundred on line? I say cap every mod at 0 and go back to the pre AOS ways.

 

[Restroom Cowboy]

Well believe it or or not, I do. It's not hard, just wasn't cheap

I know it isn't hard silly, I just don't believe you. Everyone is motivated by something when it comes to an opinion...still waiting on what motivates yours is all.

 

[Restroom Cowboy]

As for Chivalry, Unbless chiv books and make the tithing points stay in the book.

Hah...good idea!

 

[UOKaiser]

ROFL, I love the fact that you seem to think this initial post had something to do with me being able to steal something. Let me explain something to you.

It didn't.

ROFL, why bring up stealing or the thief profession in this thread?...la

Simple dear RICO. Because as hopefully you have noticed all these years whatever proffesion is trying to nerf another in this case a thief trying to nerf mages-necros which is a large player base then that player base will turn around and post suggestions to nerf the thief.
I suspect if youre idea actually went through there would be such a backlash that what reminds of the thief skill will be reduced to monster stealing and stealable artifact only by the time a couple publishes come.

 

[DPudding]

Nope, not at all. Nice personal attack though...la

Of course you'd be unaware of your deficiencies. It's one of the symptoms. But...everyone else knows.

 

[Noobish Noob]

The Dead Horse wants to confiscate all your sticks. I can't believe this post is still running. I think I am going to stir the pot and make some crazy posts.. then troll my own posts for uber post count madness. Oh wait....never mind. I get dizzy spinning in circles. As a side note you gotta hand it to the guy....he keeps Stratics spicy. Topic of my next post..... Why are there no toilets in UO..and should there be? You get to vote.

 

[Karthcove]

Yes.

Get rid of 100% LRC. 60% sounds good to me...

/signed

 

[Viper09]

Everyone is motivated by something when it comes to an opinion...still waiting on what motivates yours is all.

I don't have much motivation other than having regs be a little more desired and just seeing LRC be capped a little below 100%. Mainly it just seems like a good idea. Regs could be insurable for all I care, just put a little cap.

 

[Kratos Aurion]

Noobish Noob

I can't imagine trying to do champ spawns without a 100% LRC suit

Should have played during UOR/AOS and prior when PvP/champs HAD to be done without LRC

ColterDC

What about Ninja, Bushido, Chiv, Spellweaving........ which dont require any regs?

True.. But Chivalry requires tithing which also requires gold. You've got valid arguements on the other two.

Restroom Cowboy

Better yet...lets add the inability to insure items worn by thieves.

Erm. Even when I played my thief I never wore anything except a robe. Most felucca based thieves don't. I usually only carried 5 or so of each reg when I stoll scrolls too (when they first came out). How about remove insurance altogether?

soze

I see....Rico does seem to be lacking some common sense and posts for the sake of posting

Posts for the sake of posting.. Maybe. You shouldn't perceive proposals from your own perspective but from every direction (meaning you get a good understanding of why he wants the change and his motivation for asking) which you have had a lack of common sense comprehending.

Psycokinetic

If you fail a steal attempt against another player, you are instantly guard whacked, all your possessions (bank box too) are placed on the ground and your thief character is permanently deleted from the server.

good luck on E-Z street

DPudding

Sound familiar?

You?

Sanderism

I read this entire thread and I have yet to see anyone post a single reason why this would be a good idea.

1) The initial implementation of LRC was designed to be for training purposes only. It wasn't initially designed for PvP/PvM
2) Everyone on UO lives on easystreet. I guess the majority speaks for its self in liking that, but even I disagree that its healthy to get accustom too.I personally like set caps and enjoy challenges. But then again I was never all that great on my mage to begin with
3)Presents initial risk into the game. What players keep asking for but never want.

ColterDC again

I'm usually the first to jump on Rico, but I went along with this idea, but asked the question......which no one has answered.

I attempted too above. Also another valid idea proposed from someone else was that paladins be required to carry gold to cast spells (just makes it easier imo). Another idea would be to create a medium for each spell group like they should have done in the first place. For instance, each spell group requires something in order to cast it (regs/gold/etc)

DuskofDead

what is so wrong about it?

I'm not agaisnt LRC. I'm against there being no set cap. And with the new faction arties, all template suits became a breeze to make, especially mage ones.

And lets not forget bandages. Gotta buy them every death because every mage sure as hell loots them. What a fair field.

Pfloyd

Seriously? You really don't know why HCI or DCI woud be capped? give me a break...this post you just made is trolling your own post...la-me

The only templates it would drastically affect are melee based. I don't see how any amount of HCI/DCI would affect a mage template especially when mages already have the up-field advantage over the majority of dexors on the field.

But then again, HCI/DCI is fine where its at...

 

[kaio]

Lowering lrc, to like 60, would make another gold sink, and thats not a bad idea in the long run. People would need to rethink their strategy wether its pvm or pvp. And while we are at it, lets remove quivers also, can't really see why we can't loot the archers arrows, when we kill them? When it comes to overall balance, its alot harder and more expencive to make a lrc pvp mage, than it is to make an archer. Heck make it so that using specials on weapons would cost reagents as well, again gives us more stuff to loot, and another gold sink for the better of the game

 

[sandersism]

1) The initial implementation of LRC was designed to be for training purposes only. It wasn't initially designed for PvP/PvM
2) Everyone on UO lives on easystreet. I guess the majority speaks for its self in liking that, but even I disagree that its healthy to get accustom too.I personally like set caps and enjoy challenges. But then again I was never all that great on my mage to begin with
3)Presents initial risk into the game. What players keep asking for but never want.

1. The initial design has no relevance to this discussion, because most of the gameplay you experience today isn't anything near the way it was initially designed.

2. True, but I don't really see how this would make things more "difficult", it would simply make them more tedious. Using the LRC on your suit to recall to a mage vendor or to wherever you happen to keep your regs... and then put those regs in your pack... well... if you find that "difficult" you may need to find a new game yes?

3. Your definition of "risk" is losing a few reagents that are easily and cheaply replaced within 3 minutes? I personally have enough regs stockpiled for inscription purposes that nobody in my guild would have to buy regs for like 2 years.

You also didn't respond to/negate any of the (in my opinion) fairly legitimate points that I made... however at least you responded... contrary to captain rico.

 

[Heartseeker]

This is a bad idea.

Lrc is part of the game just like recalling.

Sure in the old days we ran around and had regs.

The new world is bigger and "that" novelty has ran it's course.

We need to get back and equiped faster and that change would hinder that.

Besides if you want boredom and feel like running everywhere there is Siege.

 

[Addicted]

I didn't bother reading all the posts here, so forgive me, if these points have been made already.

When i first saw the title, I didn't like the idea, but after thinking about it, I think it's a decent idea.

Many things are capped: MR, HPR, SR, DCI, HCI, LMC, DEX, INT, STR and maybe i forgot other things. I tried to look at capping LRC from a positive perspective:

1. A minor gold sink
2. Easier to build a suit, because you wouldn't try to aim for 100 lrc, you could focus on improving other parts of it.
3. Use spells more wisely, not running around in despise, hitting your wither macro every second.
4. For me personally it would bring a "UO feel" having to use regs again.

I think some people posting here are against it, just because Rico was the one coming up with it. The fear of thieves stealing your regs is not valid, how many dexxers are having bandages stolen? Not many I think. Rico plays on Siege anyway, all mages use regs here and I don't hear about reg stealing being a problem there.

the final bonus to UO would be the increased trade in regs among players.

 

[Anakena]

I can't imagine trying to do champ spawns without a 100% LRC suit. Die once and let the ratmen loot all my reagents is not my cup of tea. This seems more like a post stating... "Please let thieves steal even more". 100% LRC suits are as much a part of the game now as insurance. Why bother talking about utilizing other game mechancs when there is no need to. A thief is one of the few templates in game that you can basically do sucessfully naked if you wish...no reagents, no armor, no jewels. Add in Ninja skill and a few smoke bombs for fun if you want to. Granted you may not live long but maybe you should consider nerfing yourself instead other players enjoying the game. Just my to La's.

People used to make spawns without lrc for years, even after AoS. Yes it is annoyine when you die, but it would add some risk in being killed. The only problem with the proposal is that it creates new problems :

- what about the other casting skills using no reagents, like chivalry and Spellweaving?
- what about archers having their arrows/bolts in a quiver?
- ...
- ...

The proposal would give another direction to the game.

 

[hawkeye_pike]

?????
Why?
Capping LRC would not contribute anything to pvp balance, player economy, or gameplay fun. I personally prefer 100% LRC over good resists, because reagent shopping always was a pain in the arse.

There are dozens of other features in game I'd like to see nerfed. LRC is not one of them.

I can't see any advantage in capping LRC. I'd be curious to learn.

 

[Farsight]

Agreed, Pike.

Added input:
Remember the fury of having bags of sending nerfed? That was a reaction to people having to take seconds out of their hunting time in order to bank gold. Now picture what the reaction will be to people being forced to spend sometimes hours (remembering back in "the day") to try to find a reagent vendor who still has reagents rather than having fun with the game.

 

[Wenchkin]

I wouldn't have an issue with removing LRC altogether. Not a property I rely on if I'm honest. I've never found it hard to use a mage vendor when I'm at the bank grabbing bandies/stashing gold, or to make up arcane clothing that I can equip quickly. And no, I don't insure arcane stuff, it's just cloth and a gem

Capping at 60%? No worries at all with that.

Wenchy

 

[Nvnter]

Why stop there? Let's just get rid of LRC all together..as well as...
SDI
MR
LMC
FC
FCR
HCI
DI
DCI
and any other stupid addition that came with or after AoS.

Yes thats the answer. Lets dumb down the game and give it fewer playing stategies. Apparently having more then 10 options is difficult for some to handle. Perhaps we should remove all the gaming optons and have Mythic sell UO to Nickelodeon. :gun:

 

[Nvnter]

edited due to head space and timing failure

 

[Nestorius]

If your suit is under 100% it just means you get the 'you don't have the reagants' message occasionally. Its like an extra fizzle. What's the big deal?

 

[RichDC]

Try either PvP or Decent PvM with less than 100% and tell me that message doesnt hit when you NEED to cast a spell (greater cure/heal oand invis's are the favourite it seems) even at 99% it will kill you from time to time when you should easily survive.

 

[Mistura]

For regs to be an asset again they would have turn off the vendor/cost program that is running now. I dont see a market when black pearl is over 65 gp ea. Until they adjust that, you cant touch LRC.

Black pearls will never cost 65 gp each beacause they are not subject to the same system as arrows and other resources.

If LRC was not available, regs would be a tradable commodity again.

 

[TheScoundrelRico]

Try either PvP or Decent PvM with less than 100% and tell me that message doesnt hit when you NEED to cast a spell (greater cure/heal oand invis's are the favourite it seems) even at 99% it will kill you from time to time when you should easily survive.

I'm not saying to go out and PvP without regs, but for those who claim that this would prevent them from playing a mage seems silly. Sure, you would have to have regs or arcane clothing if you went out to fight, but if you died, you'd have your suit of let's say 60% lrc, you'd be able to rez and restock to head back to the fight.

I agree that removing the lrc completely would be a big nerf to mages, but the addition of a cap to lrc would not. Like I've stated numerous times in this thread...it doesn't have to be 60%, it could be 80%...*shrugs*. Just something less than 100%...that's all.

Oh and for those of you that claim I have only an thiefly alterior motive...please note...I do have magery on my thief template. Do I wear lrc items? Sure...not that much though. I prefer to walk around Fel and pick them up myself. It's actually a great way for me to find marks who are doing the same thing. (please note: finding new marks has nothing to do with me posting this thread)...la

 

[Nestorius]

Try either PvP or Decent PvM with less than 100% and tell me that message doesnt hit when you NEED to cast a spell (greater cure/heal oand invis's are the favourite it seems) even at 99% it will kill you from time to time when you should easily survive.

You would just need to carry a small bag of reagants to cover the fizzles. If you die, you should be able to heal and spell-cast your way to your corpse without the bag.

 

[RichDC]

I wasnt making an argument for or against it,

I was just replying to the comment about its just like a fizzle( which its not, you dont fizzle an invis), personally i have no problem either way as it is or changed, i dont use Lrc on siege but do on Prod.

 

[Turdnugget]

No LRC would mean more tamers at spawns. Who wants to carry around hundreds of necro regs to wither a few hundred times at a spawn?

I've played for a long time... and adapted. Why can't you? Just because thieves got the shaft, no need to take away something that benefits so many players on so many different levels.

If you want to lower LRC, I want lower resource cost, lower ammo cost, lower speeder cost... and I want vendors to sell more than 20 freakin' regs/scrolls at a time instead of having to buy those 20, and come back when it repops to 40 and so on.

I think LRC is fine the way it is. It alleviates a lot of hassle for different tasks w/in the game. I don't want to spend hours upon hours upon hours to develop a character to enjoy the game. If I wanted to do that, i'd play a game with better graphics.

I've played since before AoS and items... things were different. Who gives a flying poo on a stick about how LRC is capped at 100% and other mods are capped lower... who cares? I don't see it harming anyone in a negative way, other than scripters can wear a LRC suit and recall back n' forth between their mining/lumberjacking etc. But who cares =/

 

[Lore Master]

Just an idea, but it seems with 100% lrc suits, you have really cut down on the risk in the game. Not that this would bring whole sale change, but it's something.

Oh, and the 60% is just a random number I came up with...just cap the suits below 100%...imo...la

no thanks it would ruin the game even more lrc is here to stay and it should stay at 100 percent. seems to me that almost every payer that crys for these nerfs are players that pvp and are players that steal from others in fel most players don't do either.

 

[TheScoundrelRico]

How would it ruin the game? It's not like you would have to trash your suit?...la

 

[Lore Master]

How would it ruin the game? It's not like you would have to trash your suit?...la

what i mean is it would be another part of the game that would be ruined for me. bags of sending where nerfed now i don't use them so there ruined. if lrc was capped lower it would be something else ruined for me i like having the freedom to wear 100 lrc without having to carry or use heavy regents.

 

[TheScoundrelRico]

...use heavy regents.

Heavy? ROFL, really?...la

 

[Turdnugget]

I didn't see Gandalf using regs when he was casting spells =)

Why should I?

 

[Tina Small]

If your suit is under 100% it just means you get the 'you don't have the reagants' message occasionally. Its like an extra fizzle. What's the big deal?

Because of the wonderful RNG, you get that message now fairly often if the LRC percentages on your suit equal exactly 100%. I can only imagine how many times in a row the RNG would cause you to get the message about not having enough reagents if you were only at 60% and had no backup system (i.e., equipped arcane clothing or a supply of reagents) on your character.

I have a few characters that are mages and don't wear LRC. With the bag of sending nerf, carrying the extra weight of regs, and being elves, I always hesitate a bit at the thought of taking them out to do much serious hunting.

I imagine the same hesitation would exist but on an even stronger basis with the rest of my mages should a change like this be implemented across the board. It would just feel like one more negative change to the game that ultimately would do little or nothing to make me enjoy playing more. Maybe someone who has a higher tolerance for risk would be okay with the change. However, from what I've experienced in life, tolerance for risk isn't something that you change easily. Education, experience, knowledge--all those things do often help someone become less risk averse. But if you are cautious by nature, you sometimes just get to the point where you decide that trying to become less risk averse in a particular situation just isn't worth the end result. You decide to walk away rather than take what looks like it will be an uninviting plunge. In other words, some of us truly do prefer safety and less excitement over risk and more adrenaline.

After considering this proposal once again, I have to come down on the side of saying that I think it's a bad idea to force a change like this on everyone. If people want to give themselves an extra challenge, more risk, more adrenaline, they definitely have the option today to make suits with no LRC or less than 100% LRC and carry regs. I just don't think there is a need to demand that everyone else also do the same, because doing so will only drive away more people. I honestly don't see it being a change that by itself would bring anyone back to playing UO.

 

[Kensai Tsunami]

no. we as players have 'literally' asked for ALMOST all the changes that occur in uo in one way or another. lrc is pointless if it isnt 100%. almost as pointless as this thread. seems some folks need to direct their attention to more productive endeavours. i blame myself for even reading it. but god knows it hard to resist a train wreck.
*sigh*

 

[TheScoundrelRico]

no. we as players have 'literally' asked for ALMOST all the changes that occur in uo in one way or another. lrc is pointless if it isnt 100%. almost as pointless as this thread. seems some folks need to direct their attention to more productive endeavours. i blame myself for even reading it. but god knows it hard to resist a train wreck.
*sigh*

And yet you felt it important enough to post in it as well. *golf claps*...la

 

[TheScoundrelRico]

...doing so will only drive away more people.

A baseless assumption...la

 

[Tina Small]

...doing so will only drive away more people.

A baseless assumption...la

Okay, Rico, if you want to persist in being stubborn about it, I'll say it very clearly for you: If the LRC mod is capped at something less than 100%, it will drive me away. That's a fair number of accounts no longer pitching money at EA to help keep this game running.

Go put that one in your pipe and think about it for a while, okay?