View Issue Details
| ID | Project | Category | Date Submitted | Last Update | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0004776 | Valley 1 | Suggestion | Oct 10, 2011 11:10 am | Jan 28, 2012 9:04 am | |
| Reporter | zebramatt | Assigned To | |||
| Status | closed | Resolution | open | ||
| Product Version | 0.521 | ||||
| Summary | 0004776: Blurring gem tier level breaks - another way (caution advised) | ||||
| Description | Given the resistance to blurring tier level breaks with % drop chances and Chris's reluctance to implement a system of up-crafting lesser gems into higher tiers, a further idea strikes me. One way to form synergy between the various ideas might be to leave level breaks for gem tiers as-is (10, 20, 30, etc.) but introduce a 'rarity' attribute? A simple, clear scale from common to rare to unique would probably cover it. Common gems of a given tier would produce exactly the same stat spells as now. Rare would produce a spell 15% of the way between the current tier and the next one up; unique 30% - something like that. Then you could muddy the gem levels with rarity instead of tier, and players would always get the tier they were after (and thus not feel cheated) but with the bonus of getting something slightly nicer if they play at a higher level within that tier; and you wouldn't accrue next level tier gems without meaning to - thus meaning you need to always go out in search of them at a higher level region. And you could have some system of crafting x number of lower-rarity gems into the next level of rarity without allowing players to jump tiers without going back out into the field; and discouraging farming because the improvement in quality would be minimal for the amount of time spent - by which point you've probably levelled up anyway and need to go out in search of the next tier up. Of course this idea isn't by any means perfect! It means essentially adding two more levels of spells for every tier for every type, for starters. And it introduces another element of complexity. And it doesn't completely remove the urge for farming, or the disappointment at receiving a common gem. Still, something else to spur thought on the subject, at least. | ||||
| Tags | No tags attached. | ||||
| Internal Weight | Feature Suggestion | ||||
| child of | 0004658 | closed | Always most efficient to go for caves which are the lowest level for a given gem tier |
|
|
finally, a good reason for adventuring higher-level zones! |
|
|
With tiers being taken out, this won't be much of an issue. |
| Date Modified | Username | Field | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 10, 2011 11:10 am | zebramatt | New Issue | |
| Oct 10, 2011 11:11 am | zebramatt | Relationship added | child of 0004658 |
| Oct 10, 2011 11:26 am | zebramatt | Summary | Blurring tier level breaks - another way (caution advised) => Blurring gem tier level breaks - another way (caution advised) |
| Oct 10, 2011 11:47 am | tigersfan | Internal Weight | => Feature Suggestion |
| Oct 10, 2011 11:47 am | tigersfan | Status | new => strongly considering |
| Oct 10, 2011 9:20 pm | Gallant Dragon | Note Added: 0016383 | |
| Oct 11, 2011 4:14 am | zebramatt | Description Updated | |
| Oct 11, 2011 4:14 am | zebramatt | Description Updated | |
| Dec 13, 2011 11:15 am | Toll | Note Added: 0017811 | |
| Jan 28, 2012 9:04 am | tigersfan | Status | strongly considering => closed |
| Apr 14, 2014 9:28 am | Chris_McElligottPark | Category | Suggestion - General Idea => Suggestion - General |
| Apr 14, 2014 9:30 am | Chris_McElligottPark | Category | Suggestion - General => Suggestion |
