32 replies to this topic

[Tietsu]

Although I'd like to see a new 1 ALT server, I wouldn't mind this one sticking around for a more extended period of time, with more leniancy on ALT usage. We all pretty much know that the playerbase has thinned out for many reasons. Rather than punish the playerbase for their loyalty to an underbalanced system, we should certainly not take without replacing. We all have given this game our precious time.


-Today, I seen a post about something I've tried to point out before. "I didn't know this was a 20 ALT Server, just can only log on 1 at a time.". I feel this was a huge outplaying issue, with people camping certain areas and exceeding golding potential. Although I admit to doing this myself, I think it's an advantage to verteran players.

-With the current status of the playerbase, it makes much of the server completely useless. Tirantek runs have been slowed down to a hault, especially the higher end sections. Imhotep goes deathless, the Banshee is free to slaugter the innocent without a challenge. This would allow 3 to 4 people a chance to do bosses, rather than a 12 that doesn't exist.

-I'm not sure what would be wrong with having 3 servers. Thinned playerbase? Maybe. I've considered 1 ALT and Multi to be entirely different games, endorsed by the same website. It is a person's choice to pick a game that they enjoy playing, rather it be a 1 ALT Version, 3 ALT Version or a 20 ALT Version. I like options, I don't know about everyone else.

-Retaining your legacy on a game is probably one of the most important aspects of multiplayer gameplay. All single player games sometimes have to come to an end; Mario for example. Could beat the game in a day. Not a single person came to play on a server that would be deleted because the person of authority didn't feel like fixing it. It's too hard... Well, I don't think it's too hard, especially when I volunteer my time, along with many others. I don't think it's even a close call, but I do believe there was more support toward keeping and fixing this server. Whether people still submitted to the idea of a new 1A2, they'd still like to keep what they've worked for.


I admit some of it may have been rambling, but I did manage to sneak in a few points. I talked to a few people who all pretty much agreed that increasing alt usage would be a neat course of action for a server that was originally get deleted. Make use out of it, or delete it. Opinions.......

[Crane]

3 alts would be a nice number for a game like Nightmist, but to suddenly change what is currently the 1-alt server to 3 alts is, in my opinion, foolhardy, since it has been adapted at long last to cope with 1-alt, just like the multi-alt server was adapted to cope with large parties after it was discovered you could log on more than one character.

A 3-alt server would also have to be started from scratch, either just the characters or the whole map, to be fair, but I doubt that would happen. Besides, can we at least wait until 1-alt Mark II comes out?

[Tietsu]

I guess my point revolved mainly around keeping this server around. If that was the plan, than I see no need for a change. But if we have the oppertunity to save hard earned work and not have two 1 ALT Servers, than why not. What is the big deal in making this change if it's to be deleted.

I appreciate your opinion and you do make a valid point. Get the priority of 1A2 taken care of. It's a more solid idea with more support.

[Walt]

I have actually given this idea a bit of thought. Here it is in shorthand....


....have a 3 alt limit. only 1 of any class may be played at the same time. This means you may not log on 3 mages, or 3 thieves, etc, etc. A 3 alt, 1 class limit server would be something new. It would be the fresh start many may need. It may give new life to those who have fallen by the wayside.

.....Do not say no just out of fear of the unknown. Fear is something to be embraced, and conquered.

[Tietsu]

This was another issue discussed and agreed on. Should all be seperate classes logged in.

[Momba]

....have a 3 alt limit. only 1 of any class may be played at the same time. This means you may not log on 3 mages, or 3 thieves, etc, etc. A 3 alt, 1 class limit server would be something new. It would be the fresh start many may need. It may give new life to those who have fallen by the wayside.

This idea might be hotter then your wife. Without the glasses of course.

100% in support of a 3alt limit with only one of any class being logged at 1 time.

Dwarf Cleric
Elf Druid
Halfling Pally

I'm ready to pawn. Lets crank it up. Being limited in such a way will truely make this sexy. Just to see the diffrent combinations of classes being used and who can run what best. This could get really challenging. A mage could actually venture more then 12 sqaures from town without running outta mana, rangers could once again use rapid fire and no more of that dual shot hypno combo, and zerkers. Poor poor punching bag zerkers could let their nakedness reign down all over the realm with a cleric friend.

I'm excited about the possiblities.

[Dublin]

I would very much enjoy a 3A server, however I believe that 3 servers is far fetch'd player base wise. I know we like to call them different games, because they are, but it is still the same people who play them. On games with high player bases, it is easy to throw in another server and see how it goes, but nightmist has roughly 40-60 active users on a different times through out the day.

I think that if there was a 3A server it should come from the 1a2 server. However, I still believe that one of the other servers should be taken down. Probably the 1A server, mainly because the 20a server is balanced for 20alts and the 1A server isnt, not to mention the reason a new server is being tossed around is because of how unstable the 1A server has become.

As I doubt this will happen because 1a2 is already "planned" and Simon has posted before that he always meant for NightMist to be a 1a game, I will post some ideas on what a 3A server could/should have.

Classes - I like the idea of saying that you should only be able to log on 1 of each class, but I don't think you should be forced into it. However, I think that there should be no more then two of one class on. Eg 3 mages running around. This would still lead to diversity's in partys but lets face it, with a handful of classes and having to be on 3 different ones, it wont take long before everyones party starts to look like mains. Eg, 4-5 Clerics, 1 Druid, 14-16 Zerks/Rangers/Thieves

Sharing - Still be gone.

Trading Characters - Still be gone.

Roller - Fixed like I posted.

Maps/Mobs - New totally redid.

Those are the major ones I can think of now, because there wont be a DRASTIC change from what the new 1a could be (that i assume its going to be) to just balancing for 3alts.

Most my suggestions can be found: Here

Edited by Dublin, 25 May 2009 - 03:30 AM.

[ice_cold]

thatll only split the player base even further. it would never work having 3 servers. if anything i would say leave alts to the main server a 1alt to 1alt. if anything i would say reduce the ammount of als playale on main, but thatll never happen

[Desendent]

if any new server is to work it has to be the one and only server to play. multiple servers dont work when you have a playerbase of 50 people and 10-15 on at a time on average.

[ice_cold]

if any new server is to work it has to be the one and only server to play. multiple servers dont work when you have a playerbase of 50 people and 10-15 on at a time on average.

i could see it working if you had 'Old' Nightmist and "New" nightmist old one being probably main and the new one being the current one in work, but only if the new nightmist was a completely new game and not a copy like nightmist, in that way it might work. if not though, just a revamped version of nightmist, then we really do need to get the 2 servers merged at one point

[Prophet]

I'd just like to point out that when this was tested on Main server for a day for a bit of fun it was stupidly imbalanced and I mean ridiculously so...

The only sets that would be used would be Cleric/Ranger/Zerk or Cleric/Zerk/Mage. The first Combo offers you ridiculous dropping power of someone training and the 2nd can be used for a stealth attack or alternatively for the Spell the Zerk take out one alt and invis again move combo, repeat until they are dead.

Edited by Prophet, 25 May 2009 - 03:06 PM.

[Dublin]

I assume your talking about 3alts? And in which ways was it unbalanced?

[Walt]

I'd just like to point out that when this was tested on Main server for a day for a bit of fun it was stupidly imbalanced and I mean ridiculously so...

Because MAIn has the same exact flaws as 1a does. You just do not notice it because you have 20 alts to play with. But what about the new person who wants to play main? How is that unbalancing fair to them?

[Prophet]

Its not, I'm just pointing out how claiming that its more balanced than a single alt is just not true and as such the idea is not a good one, it was tested and it was just silly it has more flaws I would speculate than 1a currently.

Also I edited my above post to include what is most likely to happen, its a strategy that was used very well by Rafa during the Zeum days and it was annoying enough against 20 alts; when someone is on the same number of alts as you its destruction.

Edited by Prophet, 25 May 2009 - 03:10 PM.

[Dublin]

Im sorry but you would just have to try to level a crit on 1alt and actually play it to see where the 1alt player base is getting there unbalanced logic. Just so you can get a taste of how bad 1a is right now......... Did you know that simon wants to build a 1a server from the ground up completely rebalanced? For some odd reason he doesn't think that the current one is balanced nor could it be fixed without a total redo.

[Prophet]

I've read enough on here/played Main enough to understand how single characters fair enough against each other and how combos of characters could lead to an almost 'abuse' of the game, but what I'm trying to say is that during this brief time in which everyone was forced to play on 3 alts running around for a day therefore an exact replicate of the system your suggesting combined with how 3v3 duels work, it would be much less balanced than how it is currently you'd have fun for a few weeks until everyone got up the items they needed to maximise there 3a parties and I guarantee you'd be back on here wanting it changed back it was truly stupid about how imbalanced it was.

[Walt]

Im sorry but you would just have to try to level a crit on 1alt and actually play it to see where the 1alt player base is getting there unbalanced logic. Just so you can get a taste of how bad 1a is right now......... Did you know that simon wants to build a 1a server from the ground up completely rebalanced? For some odd reason he doesn't think that the current one is balanced nor could it be fixed without a total redo.

OMG, I finaly got it. I think you are hinting around the word RESET. OMFG, NOT A MOOSING RESET!!!!!!THE WORLD WILL END AS WE KNOW IT!!!!! PEOPLE WILL RUN AROUND NAKED AND HAVE UNPROTECTED SEX WITH TOTAL STARNGERS!!!! THE WORLD ECONOMY WILL COLAPSE........SIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONNNNNNNNNN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Dublin]

For starters, to say you've played enough main to know how class vs class goes on 1a is just arrogant. I remeber when a thief didn't stand a chance vs a druid/mage of the same level in a 1v1. Now they put up a pretty even fight and if that mage/druid fail to get there armor spell up its over very very quickly. At 30 the mage could round the thief and the thief could click the mage (without aop) at 35 however the tables turn. The mage can no longer round (Most) thieves but can get clicked even WITH aop on. This is just one of the many issues wrong with how classes fair vs each other if comparing them to the past and to the present.

So your saying being able to level different classes and being able to actually take down some bosses would be more unbalanced then it is right now? I hate to see a balanced game.



P.S - Who ever banned walt from the forums before was crazy. I just wait for his post

Edited by Dublin, 25 May 2009 - 03:40 PM.

[Prophet]

You forget one of the reasons thieves stand more of a chance is because they were given an increase in assassinate which meant they hit more consistently, this change happened on both servers so please don't call me arrogant, I presume other factors such as spell absorb come into it on 1a, but to say that mages could always round thieves is a touch silly as their fizzle chance is high enough to regularly cause a problem. Thieves have always been one of the mages biggest nemesis' due to assassinate ignoring armor(or atleast partially ignoring it, I forget whether it is smite or assassinate that totally ignore and the other partially ignore) therefore with a mages low health its likely for him to be clicked. I would then go on to say that perhaps it is you being a touch arrogant to think that the Main/1a server are so completely different when both reduced to a 1a basis as you no longer played Main when they changed thieves assassinate.

[Dublin]

You miss the main thing from main class vs class and 1a class vs class. The main thing is the NEW EXTRA stamina.. Have you ever played any class on 1a with the new stam vs anything? I didn't think so. That extra stam changes the 1v1 completely. Not to mention how you seem to think mages fizzle alot.. Obviously you haven't seen very many 33+ mages. Especially gnomes, they.. dont fizzle? And just the fact that you bring up abosorb shows that you have no idea about 1v1 on 1a. Since the absorb never really had a big impact in the game, because it wasn't long after that came in that people figured out mages aren't as overpowered as some people made it out to be.

[Prophet]

Perhaps you should read more clearly and look at things in perspective, the absorb being a reason for thieves now being better against mages was a suggestion, if it isn't then it is irrelevant that I suggested as it was purely directed at reasons as to why mages are less effective against thieves. As far as the fizzle my comments were related entirely to level 30 mages as your comment was about level 30 mages always being able to round the thief, this just isn't true.

The reason why thieves beat mages so badly is simple:

Mages output linear damage ignoring armor.

Thieves output non-linear damage ignoring armor, thus one of the mages greatest assets is nullified and the mage has no reply due to it being limited by linear damage, quite what this has to do with anything I can't see, the same problems arise if you use 3 alts with combos even more imbalanced than this, at least the mage can invis to get away if the thief fails.

[Cruxis]

So it seems the original post was to make the current 1a, 3a, as to make it more balanced, and most importantly, playable because of the low playerbase. Some agree, some disagree.

To all who disagree, why? 1a is a direct copy of main, that's what it was made to be, a co op server, where main is a solo server. Some say we'd still have character unbalances if it was turned 3a, and the same 3 to 5 character combos would be used. REALLY? YOU BELIEVE THAT? Obviously, look at main, isn't it the same? People use the same combos, clerics, rangers/zerks, and mages for when they're needed.

Honestly, I'd believe if 1a was turned 3a, it'd be much more balanced character wise then main. With 20 alts, speed is a must, you have to have clickers. With 3 alts, it's less important, and can lead to more diversity, having fighters/druids/paladins used in parties more.

The way I see it, we have Nightmist. It has an attraction that you can do about anything yourself.
People wanted a server that's not as important alt wise, so Nightmist1a was created. This server promotes teamwork.
This new coming server, if it's gonna take up to a year to balance, I'm gonna guess it'll have new maps and items, so I wouldn't even call it Nightmist.

So we have 2 Nightmists, one for yourself, one for co op play.

As it stands now, even with co op play, even if everyone ingame banned together, the high tier bosses on 1a still wouldn't die daily, this is one reason why it's wanted to be 3a, the playerbase is too low now for all the content to be enjoyed. This would help that.

The classes are more suited to alt play. I won't say they're balanced, but they're definitely more suited. The next reason people want a 3a, it would add more diversity to the classes used.

Now, if this server stays 1a, there's no doubt in my mind it'll be deleted once this new game picks up, since it'll be single character aswell. That's just one more reason, I want/support it to be 3a.

[Dublin]

For starters, if you would of read my 30 thief vs 30 mage, I said that the thief could click the mage and the mage could round the thief however, when the mage got aop up it became impossible for the thief to click the mage, and yet the mage still had a chance to round the thief. Either way if the pot duel went all the way to who ran out of pots first it almost always ended with the thief running out of pots first because lets face it 60*4 = 240 dmg every 10secs from the mage meaning 2-3 pots depending on how the thief wants to look at it. Meaning 5-6 rounds and thats it. The thief does about 270 every 20 seconds.

NOW - Thieves click mages fully equiped with aop on. And magess don't round thieves. At the same level. You see what Im getting at?

On a side note, you seem to think that 3v3 is more unbalanced then 1v1 so is 20v20 more unbalanced then 3v3 or where does your logic come into play?



Btw - Alex wins.

Edited by Dublin, 25 May 2009 - 04:14 PM.

[Tietsu]

Stamina gains at levels are different. One of the major differences from Main to 1 ALT. Right?

[Walt]

NOW - Thieves click mages fully equiped with aop on. And magess don't round thieves. At the same level. You see what Im getting at?




Btw - Alex wins.

Alex always wins.


But seriously though. Mages are not supposed to be a dueling class. They are meant to sit and wait until it is to their advantage to show thier face and take a life. Some classes they can just go and duel with, but with rangers/zerks/thieves, 9/10 the mage takes a short ride to his/her local.

Mages are the only class that can make any other class invisible. So they can cast a few spells, and drag their friends with them to get the drop on any party, and with a bit of skill and luck, that party will be dead and localed before they have a chance to react.

[Walt]

Stamina gains at levels are different. One of the major differences from Main to 1 ALT. Right?

I think the only difference between main and 1a are the stamina and hp/mp gains at 31+.
That and main has a few newer areas and they only lose 1.5 million everytime they die.

[Dublin]

Duh walter. I wasn't trying to say "omg thieves rape mages it unfair" I was trying to show Mr. Main, how different it is on 1a especially with the new levels.

[Cruxis]

Btw - Alex wins.

Alex always wins.

<insert staff application here>

<insert fail stamp there>

Always win? How about no ;p

Make 1a, 3a, and make me supreme overlord of it?

[Walt]

the sayings goes as follows.

You can not teach an old dog new tricks.

You can not get blood from a stone.,

You can lead a horse to water, you can even shove its head in the trough, but you can not make the mother mooser drink.

I ad libbed that last one a tad.^

[Prophet]

If assassinate is armor ignoring/partial ignoring then why was it impossible?

Why do you presume that how balanced a number of alts is has to be linear, 20 alts is more balanced as you can't easily use the stealth method described above as a mage can't invis them all... Even if your jumped 20 alts take long enough to use that you can easily move square, reassemble and have a fairer fight, 3a just wouldn't allow for that you could be dropped consistenty without even the need for nightshades.

Edited by Prophet, 25 May 2009 - 04:33 PM.