Shouldn't DESIGN changes also take care of their leftovers ??

[popps]

This thread does not wish to discuss Design changes, but rather, on the consequences or, if one will, the leftovers of them.....

I will just pick the latest as an example for the discussion.

Artifacts will no longer be imbuable as of the latest patch.

Ok, fine, probably very good reasons made it for this design change to come.

Nonetheless, I read nothing as often it happens about the leftovers from the change.

That is, those artifacts which have already been imbued.

The logic here being, "if" this design change was needed because the imbuing of artifacts results in inbalancing items (in which way it is irrelevant here...) and, therefore, has to stop, then those artifacts which have already been imbued are not imbalancing just as well ?

What I am trying to say, is that when design changes so radical come to place (allowed before, not allowed after...), shouldn't these changes also necessarily deal with all that they leave over from before ?

Sure, eventually the already imbued artifacts will break, but that could take months.... And in the meantime they are left doing the very same harm that the designers wanted to end by making the imbuing of them no longer allowed ?

It sounds odd to me and contradictory.

Perhaps some more clarification on it could be welcomed ?

And in general, shouldn't design changes, especially so radical, also deal with their left overs from before the change ?

 

[Lord Chaos]

I don't know if this is an april fools, but you do have a good point, legacy items should be dealt with and not left overpowering a select few.

 

[Stupid Miner]

This thread does not wish to discuss Design changes, but rather, on the consequences or, if one will, the leftovers of them.....

I will just pick the latest as an example for the discussion.

Artifacts will no longer be imbuable as of the latest patch.

Ok, fine, probably very good reasons made it for this design change to come.

Nonetheless, I read nothing as often it happens about the leftovers from the change.

That is, those artifacts which have already been imbued.

The logic here being, "if" this design change was needed because the imbuing of artifacts results in inbalancing items (in which way it is irrelevant here...) and, therefore, has to stop, then those artifacts which have already been imbued are not imbalancing just as well ?

What I am trying to say, is that when design changes so radical come to place (allowed before, not allowed after...), shouldn't these changes also necessarily deal with all that they leave over from before ?

Sure, eventually the already imbued artifacts will break, but that could take months.... And in the meantime they are left doing the very same harm that the designers wanted to end by making the imbuing of them no longer allowed ?

It sounds odd to me and contradictory.

Perhaps some more clarification on it could be welcomed ?

And in general, shouldn't design changes, especially so radical, also deal with their left overs from before the change ?

Actually in this case, no. The change is for preventing overpowered future artifacts, not past ones, else we never would have been able to imbue them.

 

[Lord Chaos]

Actually in this case, no. The change is for preventing overpowered future artifacts, not past ones, else we never would have been able to imbue them.

Current imbued artifacts will be overpowered compared to non-imbued artifacts.

 

[Stupid Miner]

Current imbued artifacts will be overpowered compared to non-imbued artifacts.

Non-imbued past artifacts, sure, both of which groups will be weak compared to overpowered future artifacts, just look at this round of them.

Besides, it's not nearly that widespread, only a couple artifacts had any reason or even ability to be imbued. Anything with 6 or more properties couldn't be touched. And the total item intensity had to be less than 450, and there had to be something useful to put on there, and the artifact had to have some property or another that couldn't be gotten from plain items, to be of any use at all. With all those restrictions, there weren't many items that were made much more useful.

 

[popps]

Actually in this case, no. The change is for preventing overpowered future artifacts, not past ones, else we never would have been able to imbue them.

"Future" overpowering ??

They either are now, or they are not and will not........

If the change is needed to stop them from existing, and there are good reasons, the SAME good reasons that do not want them for tomorrow should not want them for today as well....

Therefore, as I see it, the leftovers should be dealt with, somehow.

 

[popps]

Non-imbued past artifacts, sure, both of which groups will be weak compared to overpowered future artifacts, just look at this round of them.

Besides, it's not nearly that widespread, only a couple artifacts had any reason or even ability to be imbued. Anything with 6 or more properties couldn't be touched. And the total item intensity had to be less than 450, and there had to be something useful to put on there, and the artifact had to have some property or another that couldn't be gotten from plain items, to be of any use at all. With all those restrictions, there weren't many items that were made much more useful.

So, unless I understand wrongly the point, the design change to stop artifacts from being imbued basically has been a waste of resources ?

I mean, if there was no problem to start with (or just a minuscule problem), why bother investing resources into it ?

And, if instead there WAS a problem to address (since it was addressed), well, then, to be consistent with the design change also the leftovers should be dealt with, IMHO......

 

[Restroom Cowboy]

Current imbued artifacts will be overpowered compared to non-imbued artifacts.

You are kidding right? Arties only have a 450 weight when imbued, they are non exceptional. Both you and popps are talking outta your behinds; if either one of you had imbuing experience you would realize how ******** your posts really are on the matter.

 

[Stupid Miner]

So, unless I understand wrongly the point, the design change to stop artifacts from being imbued basically has been a waste of resources ?

I mean, if there was no problem to start with (or just a minuscule problem), why bother investing resources into it ?

And, if instead there WAS a problem to address (since it was addressed), well, then, to be consistent with the design change also the leftovers should be dealt with, IMHO......

You're inferring that I actually know why they're making these changes. No one knows that unless you ask them. Before you do that, you're debating with yourself.
Does it matter "why" did they do this and not that or the other thing? No it doesn't, be happy we got to imbue them, for those that actually took the opportunity, and don't complain if you didn't because you had more than enough opportunity to do so.
It would be more than useless and a waste of time and resources to put in any of your propositions for this. You're trying to deal with a very small case-by-case basis and treat it as a macroscopic system that needs an orderly and universal policy.
It makes as much sense as setting up a Republican style of government (people electing representatives to vote for them) for a community of 5 people.

 

[Stupid Miner]

"Future" overpowering ??

They either are now, or they are not and will not........

If the change is needed to stop them from existing, and there are good reasons, the SAME good reasons that do not want them for tomorrow should not want them for today as well....

Therefore, as I see it, the leftovers should be dealt with, somehow.

The artifact that will or may be introduced in the future, being able to imbue them might end up resulting in overpowered items.
Since we know every single artifact that is in existence right now, there's not that many, we know that the ability to imbue them isn't game-shatteringly powerful.

You're trying to deal with this as if it's a general system.

 

[Kiminality]

I'm with Popps on this one.
Either they should be imbuable, or they shouldn't be.

Regardless of which way it's decided, items that aren't consistent with the decided rules shouldn't exist.
Perhaps most of them weren't particularly good for imbuing, but the Daimyo's Helm comes to mind. Prior to them being allowed to be imbued, I never saw a single person wearing one, then they became all desirable because you could have additional useful properties on top of the SSI.

Or, perhaps rather than removing the imbued versions, add the most popular variations as artifacts themselves.

 

[Stupid Miner]

I'm with Popps on this one.
Either they should be imbuable, or they shouldn't be.

Regardless of which way it's decided, items that aren't consistent with the decided rules shouldn't exist.
Perhaps most of them weren't particularly good for imbuing, but the Daimyo's Helm comes to mind. Prior to them being allowed to be imbued, I never saw a single person wearing one, then they became all desirable because you could have additional useful properties on top of the SSI.

Or, perhaps rather than removing the imbued versions, add the most popular variations as artifacts themselves.

Daimyo's helm was the only one that had the potential to be overpowered, but doesn't much anymore, since +SSI is more readily obtainable now anyway.
50 SSI invasion bows, Imbued Turquoise Rings, Jade Armbands, the Leggings in this recent publish have +10 SSI.
Daimyo's helm, other than the +10 SSI, is a terrible artifact, and the head armor slot contains some of the most powerful artifacts, so it's a huge trade off.
And you can cast Divine Fury for +10 SSI anyway.
Regardless of whether it was overpowered when it came out, it's not anymore since the property isnt as rare as it was.

 

[Kiminality]

But surely the removal of artifact imbuing as a whole, rather than making an item unimbuable through other means (or relying on the aforementioned 450 cap), implies that there is a problem overall.

Everything else aside, it's just not good practice to give the players something, then straight-up take it away. That in itself isn't good, but leaving remnants of the removed system is worse.

 

[Beastmaster]

Are there any here besides Popps and Kiminality capable of abstract thought?

Forget the imbuing example and think about the broader picture.

When rules or systems in the game change shouldn't the inconsistencies be dealt with at the same time?

I say yes. They should be handled and the particular circumstances should dictate what measures are taken. There may be times where nothing is done simply because the time spent is not justified. An example would be a bug discovered by QA shortly AFTER a release but as yet not reported anywhere by players. Some players may have discovered it as well and used it to their advantage, but the vast majority did not. A quick patch is in order with little else needed. On the opposite end of the spectrum is housing. When the 1 house per account rule came in many players had multiple houses. The solution was grandfathering. Different situations require vastly different measures. But yes, consideration should always be given to after effects.

 

[Connor_Graham]

Are there any here besides Popps and Kiminality capable of abstract thought?

*raises hand*

 

[popps]

You are kidding right? Arties only have a 450 weight when imbued, they are non exceptional. Both you and popps are talking outta your behinds; if either one of you had imbuing experience you would realize how ******** your posts really are on the matter.

Then, WHY they are making this design change so that from now on artifacts will no longer be imbuable ?

If it is an unnecessary change, why spend resources on it ??

 

[popps]

Does it matter "why" did they do this and not that or the other thing?

I said it first and foremost, it does not matter why they made this change.

I am NOT discussing the change.

I assume they had good reasons for it.

BUT, this said, if they had good reasons NOT TO WANT artifacts be imbued, then this should work ALSO for the leftovers from before the change.......

There can only be 1 logic, IMHO.

Either yes to imbuable artifacts, before and after the change.

Or no to imbuable artifacts after the change, but ALSO before the change.

Hence, the need to address somehow the left overs from before the change....

 

[Cogniac]

Hit Chance Increase on shields.

I rest my case.

 

[LordDrago]

Perhaps the change was made because a specific artifact, not currently available in the game, will shortly be available, and if it is embued, would result in it being overpowered, and only available to a limited few.

Perhaps, also as a result of the way embuing, weights, etc are calculated, it is much easier/cleaner to just do away with artifact embuing, or, because the artifacts currently embued, which some pervieve as "overpwered" will themselves be replaced with more powerful variants, and thus, the currently "overpowered" artifacts will no longer be so.


And who cares? If you say it is because some people will have embued artifacts, and some won't, and this is "unbalancing", then your argument is flawed. There are many different changes in this game, where items no longer are available, that would then be "unbalancing". Anyone get a lucky mempo drop lately? Sorcerer's armor, the blue jewelry set, etc.

 

[Stupid Miner]

Are there any here besides Popps and Kiminality capable of abstract thought?

This is precisely what I'm debating about.
You* shouldn't use abstract thought for specific cases, especially when using the abstract though over-simplifies, as it tends to do when applied to reality, simply because abstract thinking tends to deal with one or a few aspects of a problem while in reality there's an incredible multiplicity of aspects to a single problem.
Sometimes the different aspects are so minor that they can be hand-waved. This isn't one of those situations.



* "You" is being used in the second person general sense of the word.

 

[Stupid Miner]

There can only be 1 logic, IMHO.

This seems to be our point of contention.
I agree with the statement, there is only one logical conclusion for a set of propositions.
What I disagree on would be the propositions for your argument.

Your post seems to convey that you mean there should be a solitary unchanging and regular method for this situation. That they should conform all the artifacts to the structure which they'll be using for future artifacts.
In other words, the past artifacts should be unimbueable like the future artifacts will be.

I see that line of thinking to be forcing the items into the pattern even though they don't fit into the pattern, instead of constructing the pattern around the items so that they fit correctly.

You seem to think that there should be structure for the sake of the structure itself.
My view is that there should be structure as long as it's useful, and once the structure becomes a hinderance, it should be discarded since it obviously wasn't a good structure for that situation.

 

[Cogniac]

I think the real question here should be "Is popps capable of anything other than abstract thought?"

 

[Lord Frodo]

Please answer this for me.
1 What artifacts were being imbued?
2 What properties were being added or which property was being upped?

I understand not all artifacts were imbued because of thier weight.

3 Which artifacts were imbuable?

 

[popps]

And who cares? If you say it is because some people will have embued artifacts, and some won't, and this is "unbalancing", then your argument is flawed. There are many different changes in this game, where items no longer are available, that would then be "unbalancing". Anyone get a lucky mempo drop lately? Sorcerer's armor, the blue jewelry set, etc.

I think it is rather different when an item drop is planned as part of a limited time Event, i.e. discontinued when the Event ends, and a design change because a given feature is flawed or inbalancing.

Imbuing is no Event, it is a permanent feature of the game.

Either imbuing artifacts is ok and tolerable or it is not.

There is no middle ground here as I see it. Yes or no.

If it is a no, and imbuing cannot apply to artifacts, whatever the reaons, then also the leftovers from before the change should be taken care of.

 

[Konge]

I think it is rather different when an item drop is planned as part of a limited time Event, i.e. discontinued when the Event ends, and a design change because a given feature is flawed or inbalancing.

Imbuing is no Event, it is a permanent feature of the game.

Either imbuing artifacts is ok and tolerable or it is not.

There is no middle ground here as I see it. Yes or no.

If it is a no, and imbuing cannot apply to artifacts, whatever the reaons, then also the leftovers from before the change should be taken care of.

And what happens to the people who imbued them? They're **** out of luck because one day they looked at the patch notes and say "Artifacts are now imbueable." Decided to Imbue, and then the devs say "oops, our bad, our QA monkey died of rat poison and okayed this, it wasn't ready yet and we decided we're just going to say... HAHA TAKE BACKS! Yoink! Btw, Cal loves you. ."

If this was a result of a glitch, the the Ecru rings, then yes by all means, remove them

But if this is the result of the devs failing to QA test an INTENDED feature, and then remove it, kicking everyone who did something legitly in the groin, no.

The dif is they CHANGED imbuing so it was possible and said, "Yup, it's intended, have at it!" And then changed it back.

Doing what you suggest just screws over people who did nothing wrong just because you don't like the idea of a limited number of limited durability items that are somewhat useful now.

While we're at it, lets have them remove server rares, I don't have any, they fixed it so they don't spawn anymore. What about EM Items? Sure we have replicas, but those are weaker versions than the real thing, I don't have the blessed invulnerable one, they should spawn on rabbits.

 

[popps]

My view is that there should be structure as long as it's useful, and once the structure becomes a hinderance, it should be discarded since it obviously wasn't a good structure for that situation.

Are you trying to say that the Developers had a change of mind about imbuing artifacts ?

That is, initially this was OK with them but then, whatever the reasons, had a change of mind ?

Well, even so, that does not change the fact that they now have decided that they do NOT want to see imbued artifacts in the game any longer.

Now, I fail to see why this should be only for "future" imbued artifacts and not also for "past and present" imbued artifacts.........

Either artifacts are ok to be imbued or they are not.

And if they are not, I think that this has to also be valid for all of the artifacts which have so far been already imbued.

 

[popps]

While we're at it, lets have them remove server rares, I don't have any, they fixed it so they don't spawn anymore. What about EM Items? Sure we have replicas, but those are weaker versions than the real thing, I don't have the blessed invulnerable one, they should spawn on rabbits.

There is a whole world of difference between eye candy stuff which has no direct effect on combat and items like artifacts which are even made tougher through the use of imbuing to gain edges in combat.

While leaving some deco out there won't get other players defeated in combat more easily, leaving imbued artifacts might........

And what happens to the people who imbued them? They're **** out of luck because one day they looked at the patch notes and say "Artifacts are now imbueable." Decided to Imbue, and then the devs say "oops, our bad, our QA monkey died of rat poison and okayed this, it wasn't ready yet and we decided we're just going to say... HAHA TAKE BACKS! Yoink! Btw, Cal loves you. ."

How about returning the cleaned (non imbued) artifact and the resources used for the imbuing ? Maybe, depending on the intensity of the imbued mods a few resources more to account for fails could even be factored in.

The solution can be found and coded, to take care, with a reasonable approach, also the left overs.

 

[Coldren]

Just to make a small, small point...

Any artifact that has been Imbued WILL BREAK eventually. You can't PoF it, and they won't be able to be made again.

Won't this problem pretty much take care of itself?

 

[Konge]

There is a whole world of difference between eye candy stuff which has no direct effect on combat and items like artifacts which are even made tougher through the use of imbuing to gain edges in combat.

While leaving some deco out there won't get other players defeated in combat more easily, leaving imbued artifacts might........





How about returning the cleaned (non imbued) artifact and the resources used for the imbuing ? Maybe, depending on the intensity of the imbued mods a few resources more to account for fails could even be factored in.

The solution can be found and coded, to take care, with a reasonable approach, also the left overs.

You didn't respond to the EM items part, so I assume you agree with me?

The odds of them actually coding this in, is slim to none. They'd have to have make a program that checks what the server saved since the patch that allowed it, and the patch that turned it off, check imbuing attempts on any artifact, then calculate the resources used, and return them. That's if the server saves that information, if it doesn't you'd have to ask the player, and of course they're going to say "Oh, I imbued my jackals collar with (relic frag here) and failed 45 times, then I failed on my dam helm (relic frag) 500 times, plus used 100 essence and a ridable gorrilla. I also broke my nose on the keyboard while spinning around saying "NO WHAMMIES!" So I need to be reimbured for the medical bill as the whole injury could have been avoided had I not been able to imbue!

The point is, it's probably not gonna happen. So if they do remove em, the people who did nothing wrong get screwed. Hell, I didn't imbue any marties/arties. I wanted to, I thought it'd be cool to have a usable berzerkers scythe for RP reasons, but now I can't. And I'm sad. I will kill 30 panda's by tomorrow evening if this is not taken out. You heard me cal, 30 freaking pandas.

 

[popps]

Just to make a small, small point...

Any artifact that has been Imbued WILL BREAK eventually. You can't PoF it, and they won't be able to be made again.

Won't this problem pretty much take care of itself?

Depending on the item and usage, 255 durability points, repairable, can last a very long time.........

If the developers have made imbuing of artifacts NOT possible because they do NOT want to see such items in the game, waiting for the existing ones to break can spell for quite a long wait..........

 

[Llewen]

I'm with Miner on this one. My guess is that they didn't want items with some of the new magical properties to potentially be imbued. Quite possibly they didn't know what weight to give the new properties, and wanted to see them in greater use before deciding what weight to give them, and/or they didn't want to put the effort into weighting them as they have no intention of ever making them imbuable properties.

From the look of the new items they are also being very careful with the new properties and are trying to avoid the possibility of having to haul out the nerf bat, which always presents all kinds of issues, both from a coding perspective and a client psychology perspective. I expect that some of the problems around imbuing, with relic frags being too easy to obtain, and the faster cast issues, caused some serious consternation and they are being especially cautious now with the introduction of all these new relics.

The point being that I don't think they are too concerned with relics that have already been imbued.

 

[Coldren]

Depending on the item and usage, 255 durability points, repairable, can last a very long time.........

If the developers have made imbuing of artifacts NOT possible because they do NOT want to see such items in the game, waiting for the existing ones to break can spell for quite a long wait..........

No one said they wouldn't last a long time....

.. But the WILL break and go away... It's just a question of how fast, and if they're used a lot because they are so OP and desirable, even faster.

 

[Stupid Miner]

There is no middle ground here as I see it. Yes or no.

Then it means you're setting up a 'false dilemma.'
And it also means that you're not actually debating this topic but merely asserting you opinion over and over until people get too tired to reply.

As it seems logically arguing with you is impossible, I will discontinue.

 

[Kiminality]

There are several points to consider in this case.

Firstly, as I stated earlier - Players (and people in general) just plain don't like having stuff taken away from them. Therefore, it's not a good idea to do so if it's at all avoidable, especially in an entertainment product.
If something needs changing, it should be adjusted with the minimum impact on the people it will inevitably impact.
There's something worse than just removing stuff, mind you. When there are remnants left, it begs the question of "If it needed removing, then why wasn't it completely removed?".

Secondly, the answer for the previous question:
To prevent future artifacts being made overpowered with imbuing.
Why would they be any different to the current artifacts?
Under the same rationale for why removing the ability to imbue the current artifacts won't result in overpowered legacy items, why would the new artifacts be overpowered, when they're constrained by the same rules for imbuing?
Any discrepancy there surely lies outside of the realm of being able to imbue them, and more in the weights and balances of imbuing (regarding the artifacts), and the power of the artifacts.

Thirdly, using the new artifacts as mitigation for it.
Such as the argument that, there are many ways to get SSI these days (in the case of the Daimyo's helm).
The listed alternatives are not cheap, since they don't come from a proud history of 3 ToT periods, so they don't really compare with the more affordable "equaliser" of imbuing.
Comparing the things may work mechanically, but it lacks scope.

They should either:
a.) Add a flag that defines whether an item can be imbued or not.
b.) Fix the issues that would allow the new artifacts to be made overpowered with imbuing.
c.) Add boosted "imbued-level" versions of previously popularly imbued artifacts to ToT/peerless/Doom/whatever
All would be better than "you can't do what you used to be able to do, because of future issues that have so little impact on the past use of it that we're leaving those be"

 

[Stupid Miner]

Secondly, the answer for the previous question:
To prevent future artifacts being made overpowered with imbuing.
Why would they be any different to the current artifacts?
Under the same rationale for why removing the ability to imbue the current artifacts won't result in overpowered legacy items, why would the new artifacts be overpowered, when they're constrained by the same rules for imbuing?

"Why would they be any different to the current artifacts?"
Since the current dev team is going to leave eventually and be replaced by others. Others who could be unaware of the specific line of thinking that drove the devs to do this.
And the fact that there aren't any over-powered artifacts now is actually due to random chance, and the fact that the ones that could have been overpowered have the tendency of having extra useless properties that makes them unimbueable. Like mage armor, or 100% durability, or Lower Requirements, or +3 in all 5 resists (since imbuing has a 5 property cap)

They're completely capable of making something that'd be overpowered, it's lucky coincidence that this hasn't been a result.

---------

As to why they're applying this to all artifacts instead of future artifacts? I believe it has to do with the way in which artifacts are coded into the system.

a.) Add a flag that defines whether an item can be imbued or not.

This would be the best option in my opinion.

 

[Konge]

Secondly, the answer for the previous question:
To prevent future artifacts being made overpowered with imbuing.
Why would they be any different to the current artifacts?
Under the same rationale for why removing the ability to imbue the current artifacts won't result in overpowered legacy items, why would the new artifacts be overpowered, when they're constrained by the same rules for imbuing?

"Why would they be any different to the current artifacts?"
Since the current dev team is going to leave eventually and be replaced by others. Others who could be unaware of the specific line of thinking that drove the devs to do this.
And the fact that there aren't any over-powered artifacts now is actually due to random chance, and the fact that the ones that could have been overpowered have the tendency of having extra useless properties that makes them unimbueable. Like mage armor, or 100% durability, or Lower Requirements, or +3 in all 5 resists (since imbuing has a 5 property cap)

They're completely capable of making something that'd be overpowered, it's lucky coincidence that this hasn't been a result.

---------

As to why they're applying this to all artifacts instead of future artifacts? I believe it has to do with the way in which artifacts are coded into the system.


This would be the best option in my opinion.

Yeah, no one else thought artifacts were given a specific label in the system? I mean come on people, it's been staring you in the face since SE. "You can only dye enhanced items or artifacts." That being said, it's logical that, to simplify the system, artifacts are labeled as artifacts, thus how the dying system works, a check box in the gump or something. Maybe this is a temp fix until the devs rework that part of the system.

The reason they would want to change the system for the new arties would be the SA mods on some of them, The Eaters, probably. Not wanting people to stack 30% eater without sacrificing anything, but who knows.

 

[MalagAste]

Ok...... I'm sorry but whoever thinks that imbuing an artifact will make it somehow "overpowered" is a MAL'AI! And if you don't know what that is tough....

First off you can't put much on an artifact...

Artifacts that are IMBUED CAN NOT be powdered over and over and over and over like normal arties can...

There is a LIMIT to the properties you can imbue on them....


YOU can CRAFT better items than some arties...

They will break......

ANYONE can get them if you work at it.

If you are too lazy to work imbuing and gather resources why should I suffer because I'm NOT???

Who's the srow who thinks that items are over powered???

Give me a legitimate artifact that is imbued to be overpowered..... I dare you to name one.

I want an explanation of exactly HOW anyone has the notion that arties can be imbued to be overpowered.

It's 100% FALSE.

The beauty of imbuing is that the items eventually BREAK....

Without being imbued these artifacts will NEVER break... And without imbuing many artifacts are completely WORTHLESS.... they don't even unravel into anything worthwhile...

 

[Martyna Zmuir]

I agree with Malag.

If an artifact is under 500 in weight it should be able to be imbued. Period. No good reason to allow it... Or to allow it, disallow it, allow it again only to disallow it a few months later.

*coughs*

Overpowered artifacts like a soulseeker, weighted at 900, should obviously not be imbuable.

 

[LordDrago]

I think it is rather different when an item drop is planned as part of a limited time Event, i.e. discontinued when the Event ends, and a design change because a given feature is flawed or inbalancing.

Imbuing is no Event, it is a permanent feature of the game.

Either imbuing artifacts is ok and tolerable or it is not.

There is no middle ground here as I see it. Yes or no.

If it is a no, and imbuing cannot apply to artifacts, whatever the reaons, then also the leftovers from before the change should be taken care of.

Things change Popps, get used to it. Nobody i know of has stated why this change is taking effect, but it is (at least as of now). You have concluded that it is because of past artifacts being embued and being too powerful. It is also a possibility that it is because incoming artifacts could be embued and be too powerful. Thus, this change will have a negligible effect (but I know you willl blow the effects way out of proportion). It is also a possibility that some of the Devs hate you and put this in solely to **** you off (I don't think so, but you never know).

If it makes you feel better, since the change has already been announced, you can consider embuing artifacts as a "limited time event". You still have a chance to do it, so if you want to, do it now before the publish goes into effect on your shard.

 

[aarons6]

i agree but it will never happen. there are still bugged quivers out there that are over powered.. even tho they were supposed to patch them all..

here is the real question tho.. what arties were being imbued to be powerful?
the most i saw was some of the weaker arties being imbued.. you remove one useless property to add one semi less useless one.. they still sucked.

 

[Viper09]

I think it is rather different when an item drop is planned as part of a limited time Event, i.e. discontinued when the Event ends, and a design change because a given feature is flawed or inbalancing.

Imbuing is no Event, it is a permanent feature of the game.

Either imbuing artifacts is ok and tolerable or it is not.

There is no middle ground here as I see it. Yes or no.

If it is a no, and imbuing cannot apply to artifacts, whatever the reaons, then also the leftovers from before the change should be taken care of.

Of course there is no middle ground for you. We know this already about you. You're a broken record. Only you just use different words each time.

But the reason they are NOT dealing with leftover items is very simple if you bothered to think about it. People are/have been buying those imbued artifacts. They are paying gold for them. It would be considered very bad if someone were to pay a lot of money for an item only to have it decreased in it's power or even removed.

I've never seen any "over-powered" imbued artifact. I've never even heard of "over-powered" imbued artifacts.

 

[popps]

I want an explanation of exactly HOW anyone has the notion that arties can be imbued to be overpowered.

It depends on the artifact.

Imbuing has limits by design.

First. intensities on a single mod cannot exceed certain limits and, most importantly, not all mods can be imbued on all pieces. Some pieces are barred from being able to host certain mods.

Now, being able to imbue artifacts which bypass imbuing limits so as to make them more matching to one's own needs for a particular template, can mean maximizing certain modifiers whch can boost one's own template offensive or defensive capabilities thus, effectively, providing an unbalancing edge in combat.

Allowing some of these "leftovers" to stay in the game after the change will potentially allow some players, over others, to have items which can better boost their combat abilities which other players will not have nor be able to make.

That is why several think that these imbued artifacts left over from the design change should not be left unaddressed.

 

[popps]

I agree with Malag.

If an artifact is under 500 in weight it should be able to be imbued. Period. No good reason to allow it... Or to allow it, disallow it, allow it again only to disallow it a few months later.

*coughs*

Overpowered artifacts like a soulseeker, weighted at 900, should obviously not be imbuable.

Some artifacts, were design created with exceeding CAP intensities or, with modifiers put on that piece which imbuing is barred from being able to imbue on.

Yet, most often the "other" modifiers on that artifact do not match players' more common needs.

So, even if an artifact is "potentially" very interesting to a given template, because of the other mods not matching as well the needs of the template, it makes that artifact not a big hit.

But imbuing changed all this making it possible to maintain the special mod or the above the top intensity wanted AND adjust the unwanted mods to imbue them into something wanted.

As long as any and all players can do this, it is ok for balance in the game.

But when this ability is barred by the developers because of a design change and players can no longer imbue artifacts, leaving currently imbued artifacts in the game can spell for quite some unbalance in combat for many months to come (until the repairable 255 points all wear off and the items break which can be a long time....).

This is why several players think that these left overs should be addressed, somehow.

 

[Viper09]

It depends on the artifact.

Imbuing has limits by design.

First. intensities on a single mod cannot exceed certain limits and, most importantly, not all mods can be imbued on all pieces. Some pieces are barred from being able to host certain mods.

Now, being able to imbue artifacts which bypass imbuing limits so as to make them more matching to one's own needs for a particular template, can mean maximizing certain modifiers whch can boost one's own template offensive or defensive capabilities thus, effectively, providing an unbalancing edge in combat.

Allowing some of these "leftovers" to stay in the game after the change will potentially allow some players, over others, to have items which can better boost their combat abilities which other players will not have nor be able to make.

That is why several think that these imbued artifacts left over from the design change should not be left unaddressed.

How about stating an actual example of an "overpowered imbued artifact" that actually exists instead of one of your evidence-less theories?

 

[popps]

If it makes you feel better, since the change has already been announced, you can consider embuing artifacts as a "limited time event". You still have a chance to do it, so if you want to, do it now before the publish goes into effect on your shard.

I am sorry, but if I think that something is wrong for the game, I need to voice my concerns.

Hopefully, those who are concerned like me for the game, will be able to get the message through to the Developers and, *crosses fingers*, the Developers may decide to do something about the leftovers as well.

Why do you think only "some" artifacts were being imbued and not all of them ?

Ask yourself, "what logic" was behind deciding this or that artifact a better candidate for imbuing ?

It is because imbuing could allow a template to make good use of certain, very usefull mods boosted on a given artifact, while adjusting all other unwanted mods into something better matching the template needs.

The result ?

An item which could not be imbued from scratch, without using the artifact base mods and intensities....

This alone should hit developers to why these leftovers should not be left unaddressed, IMHO.

 

[popps]

But the reason they are NOT dealing with leftover items is very simple if you bothered to think about it. People are/have been buying those imbued artifacts. They are paying gold for them. It would be considered very bad if someone were to pay a lot of money for an item only to have it decreased in it's power or even removed.

Over the 12 years of history of UO, soon to be 13, there have been quite several design changes which have effected players in one way or another.

Addressing leftovers from this latest design change would not be the first time and, I imagine neither the last time that a design change in the game may have consequences for players.

As I see it, the designers must look at the game global picture, and at keeping the game, especially its combat dymanics, as much balanced as possible and individual necessities or losses should not be weighted over greater necessities for the larger picture of the game.

Leaving imbued artifacts in the game would be a bad decision, IMHO, hurting the game for quite a long time to come.

Especially because I suspect the imbuing of artifacts may have got a boost after the design change was announced and probably now there is already tons around......

No thanks, not addressing them and leaving them capable to affect the game one way or the other for who knows how much time to come would not be a good decision, as I see it.

 

[Viper09]

Leaving imbued artifacts in the game would be a bad decision, IMHO, hurting the game for quite a long time to come.

Especially because I suspect the imbuing of artifacts may have got a boost after the design change was announced and probably now there is already tons around......

No thanks, not addressing them and leaving them capable to affect the game one way or the other for who knows how much time to come would not be a good decision, as I see it.

No they wont. First off, what "overpowered imbued artifacts?" Give us some good examples of existing ones that are "overpowered." Second, they cannot be repaired or powdered and thus will break. I have seen people complain that they wear too fast!

I have never seen any imbued artifacts used that were not at MOST equal to regular items that can already be made by players.

Developers have gotten rid of "leftovers" before. But the only times I've ever seen them do that were because the "leftovers" were due to bugs, not features that were completely legal. Before you, I have never heard anyone saying that imbued artifacts were overpowered!

I can only guess you assumed that they are excluding artifacts from imbuing because they are overpowered because nowhere does it state why they are doing that. Nowhere else are people complaining about imbuing artifacts. Keep in mind, the publish also states that minor artifacts are also being excluding from imbuing. Are you going to state that minor artifacts when imbued will also be overpowered???

 

[Basara]

If design changes took care of themselves, we wouldn't have most of the rares people collect today.

But, let me give you a crafter's view.

Minor artifacts really need a re-definition, as something separate from majors. Most of the ML Artifacts need to be classified one way or the other, and frankly some of the Doom arties need to be turned into minors.

What the Minors NEED to be, are the base items for player-crafted majors, using the imbuing system - which would include allowing the minors to be imbued to 500.

Many of the minors had NO use prior to this change. No one used the Daimyo's helm, for example. I only messed with the one I had after finding out about it on Stratics.

Here's the other "game-shattering" imbuing mods I did of minors.

1. This one is probably the most game affecting - forget the Daimyo. I took the Gloves of the Pugilist, which had Dex +8, Wrestling +10, 15% Damage Increase, and 18 Physical (that's what), and added +8 Stamina Increase. This maxes the gloves give an artifact-worthy +16 total Stamina (factoring in the 8 from the Dex), to go with the DI. But the wearer better be able to compensate for the sucky resists.

2. I took the Alchemist's Bauble (already "The Poor Man's Orny"), and altered the magery & poison resist on it, and added one more property. For a caster that goes into a lot of combat, this might be FC 1, some LMC, SDI, Eval, etc. Me, I added the one resist my Imbuer was weak in, to give him a better shot at surviving while out trying to get access to the Queen's forge.

3. The lowly Arms of Tactical Excellence. Has +12 Tactics (effectively nerfed by the requirement for real tactics for specials), +5 dex, and 20 extra resists scattered in 3 categories (+5 fire & poison, +10 cold). Are now actually useful in a suit for someone using the Tactics for extra damage, by adding 20 more resists (puts it just shy of 450), either by taking fire & poison up to max, or taking them to a little less, and raising cold as well. 35 resists=bad; 55 resists=workable into a suit.

4. Bow of the Juka King: How many of you have actually seen people using these? Me neither. Change the slayer type, change the hit spell, add in 5 more DI. Now, it's a competent entry-level PvM bow, until you can get the chance to get a superior crafted one.

5. The Melisande's Corroded Hatchet. I'm particularly proud of this one. Changed the -50% DI to positive 45%. I think I also was able to raise the SSI.

Are any of these overpowered? Maybe the gloves, but you'd have to have the perfect suit to fit them in.

On the other hand, there are plenty of people who don't PvP or go soloing Peerless, who would find such things useful.

How about giving us recipes to make the Tokuno minors and majors, and get rid of the turn-in?

 

[Llewen]

5. The Melisande's Corroded Hatchet. I'm particularly proud of this one. Changed the -50% DI to positive 45%. I think I also was able to raise the SSI.

Nice one.

 

[Kiminality]

Popps... Drop the "Overpowered Artifacts" angle, unless you can provide specific examples.
Right now, along with your pretty terrible method of arguing, that is your weakness. Anything you say can come straight back to "Give Examples", and if you can't, then your argument's taking water.
"Freedom to customise" could be a good angle to take.
Or just general consistency.
Whatever, I don't care. But there's enough people out there that are going to leap on your arguments because it's you, that repeating the same party-line without adapting or providing examples is going to keep landing your threads in SnR, and I don't want that.
Learn from the counter-arguments given against you, to either strengthen your own, or compromise. Smart arguments are always better than broken records.