That now. (in General)

QBOddBird April 20 2008 8:31 PM EDT

<JS> in a bleak, dystopian future, thieves roam cyberspace hunting for TSA owners

8DEOTWP April 20 2008 8:49 PM EDT

as if we were in utopia

Koshka April 20 2008 8:59 PM EDT

A Trollskin Armor [22] (+30)
Net worth: $703,669
Bid: $10,500,000

I'd say it's about time for a TSA re-issue! End this madness now!

(Cue cries of dismay from TSA owners worried about their assets being devalued...)

QBOddBird April 20 2008 9:07 PM EDT

Heh, I called it. By the second post...

I will say this ONCE in this thread: just because an item is expensive doesn't mean we need to re-issue it...

...but I still figure it will happen. If everyone whines loudly enough together, Jon will hear them again...

QBOddBird April 20 2008 9:08 PM EDT

Oh, and I -just- sold mine. Btw. And it was the 2nd biggest in the game. So this isn't a cry from an owner by any means.

Sickone April 20 2008 9:23 PM EDT

What if supporters could simply PICK whatever item they wanted instead of the "current" item ?
Of course, new items could still be introduced at any given time.

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] April 20 2008 9:45 PM EDT

price will come back down or it'll get nerfed...

Fanta [Fanta's Forge] April 20 2008 9:45 PM EDT

Supporter items would become even more powerful than they already are if they were so easily accessible like that...

Relic April 20 2008 9:47 PM EDT

I have an idea......why not let rares be actually rare.....I know it is crazy, but kinda makes sense right? :P

8DEOTWP April 20 2008 9:50 PM EDT

Stop calling them rares, and <poof> we can reissue.

QBOddBird April 20 2008 9:52 PM EDT

Exactly JahRoor!

We all eagerly await the day every team can have 4 TSAs!


Usul [CHOAM] April 20 2008 9:52 PM EDT

I really don't mind a reissue....

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] April 20 2008 10:15 PM EDT

i really doubt forum posts are what decides whether jon reissues an item or not (if it is, i vote aof!) most of jon's visions for cb2 seem to be based on giving everyone a fair chance at competing, even at the top, regardless of when you found the game.

keeping rares rare seems contradictory to his philosophy as seen so far in cb2. i don't think it has so much to do with keeping prices down as it does with keeping the flow of items going. both the tsa and the aof, as well as other items perhaps, have seen very little auction activity this year.

with central bank, we also have some items leaving the market forever! reissues also are easier to implement than new supporter items as they really can't break the game any more than it already is whereas a new item may introduce new balance issues. as i see it, reissues will be a part of the game as long as we have supporter items.

Templar April 20 2008 10:22 PM EDT

/me votes against ALL reissues

QBOddBird April 20 2008 10:37 PM EDT

That is true, dudemus. It is certainly more work to introduce something new than it is to reintroduce something old. But where's the excitement in that?

As far as 'keeping rares rare', I don't see that as an issue at all. There are a -great- number of each supporter item, often far many than there are common items. Player hoarding and item usefulness are the issues that cause it to appear as though there is a shortage.

However, I don't think it is 'better' if everyone is capable of owning any item they want, no matter how valuable or useful...should every team have 4 TSA and 4 MgS? I daresay that reissuing these items in such a quantity would break the game far more than many new items he could issue.

Either way, I'd rather see an average amount of a great diversity of items, rather than a great amount of the same items. Choose your items well and save for them, rather than have any number of a smaller selection available.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] April 20 2008 10:42 PM EDT

"Player hoarding and item usefulness are the issues that cause it to appear as though there is a shortage."

a true shortage or the appearance of a shortage differ little if there are none of the items to be bought, no? perhaps there should be a limit on the number of supporter items on any given account to address the hoarding issue?

QBRanger April 20 2008 10:45 PM EDT

I can see the reissue of the ROE.

New players have to have the option to use it to maximize MPR growth if they choose to do that instead of going with a tattoo.

However, other items such as the TSA, AoF, MgS are useful, but not essential items. Nice to have and plenty helpful but not as essential as the ROE.

but... I would like to see supporter items available to the community via the black market.

It would cause perhaps 1 or 2 more items a week into the game.

So, would 104 or so new supporter items really devalue the current ones? I think not as we have supporter items stuck in inactive accounts, sold to central bank, and horded by prospectors. This would cause a minimal increase in a certain item, perhaps offset by the factors just discussed.

Allowing the community to get together, if they can, to spawn an old supporter item every so often will give people some hope they can get one. Opposed to now, when a near base TSA is going for 10.5M when one is ever sold.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] April 20 2008 10:48 PM EDT

i think the bm is a good solution, but reissues might still be needed depending upon game population growth.

i truly doubt the bm would even really keep up with the loss due to accounts and central bank bids.

QBRanger April 20 2008 10:56 PM EDT

Probably not Dude,

But it still will possibly add some very rare items for people to have a chance to buy.

I think it is better then flooding the community with another 200 TSA's or MgS's as would be seen in a reissue.

Unappreciated Misnomer April 20 2008 11:14 PM EDT

re-introduced = nerfed

TheHatchetman April 20 2008 11:23 PM EDT

on the fence about re-issues... I like the idea of "rares" being rare, but it doesn't bother me too much, as if I feel there are too many of an item, I can slowly whittle down their numbers via tourney :P (3 HoCs and counting! :D).

But the numbers of many supporter items are often misrepresented, as there are a *lot* of supporter items owned by inactive accounts, like Ballin's 9 RoEs... I see supporter items on chars owned by inactive users all the time when making fightlists too... Not sure how many are owned by inactives, but I'm sure it's a decent number...

Cube April 21 2008 12:00 AM EDT

"i think the bm is a good solution, but reissues might still be needed depending upon game population growth."

The amount of spawns would be proportional to population because more population = more voters.

Xenko April 21 2008 12:10 AM EDT

I'm not a fan of re-issues. It really unbalances the market and causes some people to make a big profit, and other to take a big loss all based on chance (and I don't see CB as a game of chance).

The black market idea isn't a bad one. Give the items a high # of votes to limit rate of introduction, without bottoming out the market value of the item.

It would be nice to be able to see the stats for the numbers of supporter items on active accounts vs inactive accounts, to see how many are actually in play.

[RX3]Cotillion April 21 2008 1:33 AM EDT

''It would be nice to be able to see the stats for the numbers of supporter items on active accounts vs inactive accounts, to see how many are actually in play.''

Lamu, you're up!

Anyhow, I think the blackmarket idea is good as well. Definitely raise the amount of votes needed to spawn supporter items.

Eliteofdelete [Battle Royale] April 21 2008 1:40 AM EDT

But wouldn't Jon like re-issuing items? It means he gets more money right?

QBOddBird April 21 2008 1:45 AM EDT

I'm certain he does, when an item is in such great demand. He gets a good bit of money, however, from issuing new items as well; players are generally very eager to get their hands on the latest item. However, I have no way of comparing the amount he gets for each...

RX3, that would be great to see in Lammy's Econ. Report, but how exactly would she get that data?

TheHatchetman April 21 2008 2:24 AM EDT

"(and I don't see CB as a game of chance)."

See Changemonth

"However, I have no way of comparing the amount he gets for each... "

Check items extant :P as far as re-issues, i guess you'd hafta know how many there were beforehand... :P

BootyGod April 21 2008 4:44 AM EDT

There are obviously NOT enough supporter items or the price wouldn't be so high.

Supporter items ARE obviously necessary, or the people with them wouldn't use them.

The people who complain are, for the most part, people who've benefitted when the prices were high.

Get over the reissues. They're necessary, unless YOU (yes, you with the item you plan to sell for 15 mil one day) stops ripping people off. And YOU with the NUB and the infinite money stop paying such ridiculous prices just because you can.

I swear, you all forget that there are players WITHOUT a NUB or a 6/20 character.

Xenko April 21 2008 9:56 AM EDT

"See Changemonth"

Changemonth affects everyone; a re-issue helps a minority who sell just before at a high price, and harms the minority who buy it at said price.

"The people who complain are, for the most part, people who've benefitted when the prices were high."

I've never benefitted from when the prices were high. I took a several million CB loss when the RoE was re-issued as I had purchased one less than a week earlier.

"They're necessary, unless YOU (yes, you with the item you plan to sell for 15 mil one day) stops ripping people off. And YOU with the NUB and the infinite money stop paying such ridiculous prices just because you can."

I've never had a NUB, nor do I plan to sell my TSA.

BootyGod April 21 2008 10:39 AM EDT

Way to take a statement to the masses and disprove it by applying it to one ^.^

Also, the fact that you lost money there makes the sentence still apply to you ;P

lostling April 21 2008 11:40 AM EDT

$10,500,000 bid by Glory (Bleys) on Apr 20

OH great people... tell me that he is a NUB :)

Little Anthony April 21 2008 12:16 PM EDT

And YOU with the NUB and the infinite money stop paying such ridiculous prices just because you can."

And how else you think nub can get old supporter item?

BluBBen April 21 2008 12:19 PM EDT

I second LA.

Little Anthony April 21 2008 12:27 PM EDT

you would not want to know how much usd it takes for me to obtain 2 TSA and 1 Mgs :P

I bled. ('cause i was a poor NUB without credit you see?)

QBOddBird April 21 2008 1:19 PM EDT

"Supporter items ARE obviously necessary, or the people with them wouldn't use them."

He's right, you know. They are 100% necessary. Everyone's strategy failed before Jon started putting supporter items into CB2.

"The people who complain are, for the most part, people who've benefitted when the prices were high. "

Um. By the people who complain, do you mean the people who whinge around in forums until a reissue occurs, or the people who are resentful that the whiners got their way -twice-?

On a side note, I've not benefitted yet. I suppose if the TSA were re-introduced, you could say that I did, since I just sold mine. But if I just sold my TSA, doesn't that put me in the category of people who would -want- them reintroduced? Hm.

"Get over the reissues. They're necessary"

Again, 100% correct. Before we reissued the HoC and the RoE, I saw top strategies dropping like FLIES. Hell, I wasn't sure Ranger would stay in the top 10 since he didn't use a RoE.

"I swear, you all forget that there are players WITHOUT a NUB or a 6/20 character."

I forget myself every day.

Daz April 21 2008 1:29 PM EDT

The standard argument against re-introductions is, "I want rares to stay rare"

Fine. Your rares are rare. My supporter items aren't rare.

Look at Lamu's tables. There are far more supporter items than some of the rares. I don't see the problem with a re-introduction following your argument.

Note that nowhere on this site are supporter items dubbed 'rare'. That's all the communities doing.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] April 21 2008 1:36 PM EDT

"resentful that the whiners got their way -twice-?"

the cause & effect relationship here seems to be tenuous at best. do you have documentation of jon stating his reasoning for reissues being forum posts. all of the evidence from my over five years of playing points to jon not responding to public opinion much at all other than in a purely coincidental manner.

maybe you have special insight into what motivates jon as well as his decision-making process or is it mere assumption? jon just might be clever enough to watch auctions and see how often items sell and for what prices. perhaps his ingenuity even extends into some type of data mining tool that alerts him when rares are "too rare."

QBOddBird April 21 2008 1:40 PM EDT

dudemus: That is likely true, but when you consider that a reintroduction occurred right after an outcry for it, and then another occurred immediately after the same thing happened again, it leads one to believe that Jon saw what was going on and decided to give people what they were asking for (especially since that meant he could certainly sell these reintros.) So yes, this is assumption based on what appears to be a cause-and-effect. It could easily be something else, but since we have zero evidence of what as opposed to a little evidence of something else, I'm going with what relationship I see.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] April 21 2008 1:44 PM EDT

an alternative solution is that people noticed the same things that jon is looking for as far as reissues go. rarity in auctions or fs/wtb threads could be noticed by both jon and the community at the same time as we now are seeing rarity with both the aof and tsa.

thanks for admitting it was an assumption though, that is all i was going for. too many times we state things as facts and others may actually listen to us and formulate opinions based on misleading or erroneous data.

QBOddBird April 21 2008 1:48 PM EDT

The fact remains, however, that the group of people begging and whining in forums for days on end -did- get their way regardless of cause and effect.

I personally don't think it is good for the game to have a few items that everyone has all they need of, it makes for dullness in strategy. If everyone puts 3 TSA, 1 ToE, 4 HoC, 3 MgS on their team we have all damage reduction teams. If everyone finds that with these items, a particular strategy is best, you have a massive shift to that strategy and EVERYONE has the items available for it.

Maybe nobody here understands what I'm saying, but again, I would personally prefer that the game had MORE variety LESS availability, which forces decision-making and strategy, rather than LESS variety MORE availability, which insinuates conformity to common strategies and items always available for these strategies.

Like I said, that's my personal belief, but I'm going to shout it in these forums all I like because I think it is absolutely silly to say we should reintroduce something every time it becomes a little more expensive than the majority wants to pay. It's like a crowd of children around the ice-cream truck.

QBOddBird April 21 2008 1:50 PM EDT

Hah, took me 8 minutes to type it and I didn't see your reply.

I agree, I don't like when things are stated as fact and not as opinion. I'll try and make that more clear in future posts: doesn't change my position on the issue, however. ;)

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] April 21 2008 1:59 PM EDT

as opposed to one kid with a bucket of ice cream, gloating over the fact the he is the only one with any or charging outrageous amounts for a scoop?

i agree with your ability to express your opinion and disagree with your opinion. there is a fairness factor that i discussed in my first post in this thread. should we trade variety for fairness? if so, then mages need more gear and skills even if it unbalances the game.

for example, you have two teams in the 6/20 range. one is a 2005 member the other recently finished their nub. they have the same mpr. if the nub wasn't able to get the same gear due to rarity or the fact that each piece cost more than the 2005 character and thus the nub has less items, would it make a difference in the results of a fight between the two or fight lists of each of them? if the items are worth having, which supporter items are, then they should be available to all.

if you truly want something that is rare and worthless or worth little, then perhaps we can dump all supporter items and turn them into cb t-shirts. i truly don't see how anyone who says they want any sort of balance in the game can desire worthwhile supporter items and rarity of said items as the two are mutually exclusive.

QBOddBird April 21 2008 2:09 PM EDT

On the contrary, each supporter item, after its original period, becomes an item one must save for. Players who were here originally have that as their sole real advantage: they were able to get them for far less. The majority of players who were here since 2005 and are in the 6/20 region got their via NCB or buying a character. 2005 vets who have been able to stick with their old character are a tiny minority.

One of our examples, dudemus, deals with the community running to Jon and screaming for more anytime they run out; the other deals with the relationship between community members. Any time there are rare items, there will be kids that grab them up and gloat that they have them and don't give them to others. I don't think this is something that needs a fundamental game change to affect, as it is simply human nature.

On a side note, I totally agree - mages need more skills and gear. Back to topic!

The 2005 character and the NUB should end up with similar amounts of money by the end of that second character's NUB, if I understand the system right, with the exception that the 2005 character has had several years to dilute his money and lose some of it, especially if that said character likes to hold contests ;) so the supporter item availability as it is currently makes up for that in a small way.

We must leave USD out of the discussion, unfortunately, to compare these two characters accurately; even though in truth high USD usage cripples the newbies compared to the veterans. However, in time, hopefully the introduction of Encumbrance and the lowering of the WA will help even this out.

See, I -don't- want something that is rare and worthless. With the exception of the CB-T, which is a great "I was here" item, there shouldn't be such a thing...Let me give a different example.

If you've ever played other games, such as Runescape, D&D-based games, other RPGs, etc. you will notice that there is a hierarchy to weapons. There are the newbie weapons/armor (common), decent weapons/armor (compared to CB's Big Five), and then the ultra-rare weapons that everyone saves/quests for and strives to obtain (I compare this to CB's supporter items.) I don't think we should keep adding more of the "ultra-rare" category simply because everyone wants it: rather, it should be the category that everyone saves and quests for, because you finally have accomplished something when you obtain these items and they can give you a real boost to your strategy.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] April 21 2008 2:15 PM EDT

i have played mmorpg's for over ten years now and pen & paper previously. i understand what you are saying, but unfortunately in cb we don't have quests.

what you are now equating to quests actually ends up being the person gloating over having something that is rare and charging outrageous prices for it. in a capitalistic society, we call that a monopoly.

if cb had a mechanism for rareness...reward items based on your start date or somesuch, then i would be more inclined to accept that. when people put in the time you did, they can also get that weapon. when you depend though on the community as you put it for the distribution of said rares, the greed factor cannot be ignored as you suggest. it is human nature and it is just too darned strong to resist.

QBJohnnywas April 21 2008 2:32 PM EDT

Looking at the top 50 TSAs, 20% of those are held by inactive players. Even if that percentage rises across the total TSAs in the game that still most likely means about 150 held by active players. There are more TSAs than there are Morgs for instance. So the perception of 'rare' is interesting here. About 70% of those top 50 are in use. Which is a much higher usage rate than a lot of other items.

Which also would indicate that there are only a handful of players wanting them. Admittedly that handful may grow as time goes on, but not enough in my opinion to re-issue them. The people owning/using them currently may have an edge on those who don't. But so do those people with large tattoos.

I don't believe re-issuing would do anything other than lowering the price and creating a hoard that will see this problem arise again in future. If people are prepared to charge and pay high prices then let them. There are ways of obtaining these items. Loans, saving, rentals. I've hardly owned any items for years. And yet I've always been able to get hold of the items that I do want through one of those ways. I think it impacts negatively personally on the game to have everything too easy to get.

I'm with OB on this one I think.

TheHatchetman April 21 2008 2:40 PM EDT

"Get over the reissues. They're necessary, unless YOU (yes, you with the item you plan to sell for 15 mil one day) stops ripping people off. And YOU with the NUB and the infinite money stop paying such ridiculous prices just because you can. "

YOU was banned... something about mating with ladybugs or whatever...

As far as things being overpirced, I ask: Should everyone really be able to own whatever they could possibly want for a char, with the only effort in obtaining "rares" being to wait a week to obtain the item?

If not, then anyone complaining is being hypocritical as all hell by wanting re-intros...

If so, why are rares spawning in auctions? After all, they're "supposed" to be readily available, right? Why can't I run into the armor store and pick up a AoM and some TGs? I don't mean "camping", I mean on a regular basis. If I'm supposed to be able to own anything on a week's earnings, why should I have to look for it too? Supporter items should also be available in any quantity, at any time, reguardless of introduction date. Devalue all items, and turn cash into a strictly nw/BA/minion thing... That what you're looking for?

Either way ya look at it, someone's not gonna be happy about it... Quitcher...

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] April 21 2008 2:57 PM EDT

i am not trying to force my view on anyone here nor whine for reissues. all that i am trying to do is explain what i see is going on with jon's decision to reissue items. it has happened before, it will likely happen again.

all of jon's decisions in cb2 were based on experience gained in cb1. when jon chooses to approach something differently from the way he did in cb1, then he probably has a pretty compelling reason to do so. unless something has happened to change his "game vision" then i think we can expect more of the same, including reissues.

if this is a battle you choose to fight, then more power to ya! i have seen jon change his thinking on things before (linear curve for weapon x modifier for one), it doesn't happen all that often though which is probably best for the game. a non-unified or focused game vision has killed many games with much larger populations than this one.

the discussion with ob brought up something that i found very interesting though. i think we would both agree that the idea of questing and earning perks with dedication would add depth and thus longevity to a game, as would storylines and end-game content. after ob talked about these things, i realized how many games i have quit over the years that have had so much more to do than cb does. most of them i played for 1 year on average and probably 2-3 years at the most. my cb habit has been going for 5+ years now though. if you had asked me to predict behavior though i would have stated the opposite though.

QBOddBird April 21 2008 3:03 PM EDT

In all honesty, I've sort of viewed tournaments as that sort of 'mini-game/quest/side material' that I really enjoy partaking in.

I agree though, being able to quest and earn perks from time to time would certainly add an enjoyable new dimension to CB. I'd love to see that sort of thing.

Perhaps one possibility would be the potential re-release of supporter items through tournament wins? This would still allow for the 'questing' bit to the attainment of such items, would allow a separate avenue for them to be released, and would not diminish their value as "special" items.

Cube April 21 2008 3:57 PM EDT

I actually like the tournament idea; if supporter items aren't going to be treated as normal items, you can have them trickle in somehow.

I don't think there should be a hard cap on the number of strategies available to someone because they started late.

Levon [Clocked Out] April 21 2008 4:16 PM EDT

the blackmarket needs an overhaul... seems a little too stale to be a black market

iBananco [Blue Army] April 21 2008 4:17 PM EDT

Ripping people off implies that they're reluctant to pay such a large amount because the seller is greedy. It's the buyers, if you haven't noticed, who are driving up the price.

Cube April 21 2008 4:22 PM EDT

^No reason to blame anyone at all, it's all economics. It's just how it works, low supply and high demand means high prices.

winner winner April 21 2008 4:25 PM EDT

Maybe people are paying high prices because they think the prices of supporter items are going to go up?

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] April 21 2008 4:39 PM EDT

supply and demand seems to be the driving factor as far as i have seen. rc has it correct and it is really no one's fault.

Wizard'sFirstRule April 21 2008 4:40 PM EDT

I will make an assumption that supporter items are "better" than rare item, which makes S.Item tier 1, rare item tier 2, and other newbie items tier 3.

Suppose S.Item are reintroduced, there will be in increase in the number of S.Item (duh). It makes it more available to the community, at the same time dropping the prices. This shift will have serious impact on the rare item (which isn't used enough in my humble opinion), thus reducing to S.Item only blender. That = bad.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] April 21 2008 4:44 PM EDT

the only way that would happen is if jon keeps introducing new supporter items that will replace all the rares. so you are saying don't do any new supporter items but only rerelease existing ones or do away with supporter items entirely and never have another one?

{cb1}Linguala April 21 2008 5:29 PM EDT

my opinion on the matter...
there should be 3/4th as many supporter items as active users exist, at the very least anyway.
Once there aren't 3 rares for ever 4 active users, it should be re-released, but in limited amounts.
Maybe like 10 per time rares drop under the 3/4th limit.
That way, they stay rare and at the same time able to get more.
This might also encourage active users to advertise more for this game as that will be the best way to drop the rares under the limit.

P.S.: All numbers are for example only, I'm sure the admin team and Jon can figure out a better ratio.

Soxjr April 21 2008 6:13 PM EDT

JW. I would like to comment on something you said.

"Which also would indicate that there are only a handful of players wanting them. Admittedly that handful may grow as time goes on, but not enough in my opinion to re-issue them. The people owning/using them currently may have an edge on those who don't. But so do those people with large tattoos. "

This is the kind of comment that I look at as opinion. It is of your opinion that there are only a handful of players wanting them. You got a bunch of stats in your comment and yes they are very compelling, but how many tsa's are on farms that aren't really being played, how many are just sitting there doing nothing. I could care less one way or the other if this item gets re-issued or not, but I do care when people start throwing out one sided stats that make their argument look better. I doubt that is what you intentionally did, but to say that there is a small group that wants the item is not something you can say with certainty. Thanks. That is all I wanted to say.

QBJohnnywas April 21 2008 6:45 PM EDT

Lol Sox, you're right it is only opinion. I'm not particularly fond of people throwing out half the picture as fact myself.

I did though base it on the top 50 stats, which I did check, player by player and I did compare against other 'rares', which did enable me to come to that opinion with as much information as is available to any of us.

Of course, as any statistician knows, numbers can be bent to any argument. I could just as easily take my findings and use the same numbers to back the opposing side of the argument.

It does seem to me, and it's only opinion again; but the perception of the TSA's rarity comes from a couple of places: 1, the fact that not many sales have taken place of the item, and 2, FIVE people have bid on an item when it does come into the market. Yes the high bid is over 10 million, but there's quite a lot of cash about at the moment thanks to 'disenchant'. (Prices are generally quite high on some items right now.) I don't think that five people bidding on an item constitutes a panic situation.

QBJohnnywas April 21 2008 6:59 PM EDT

Of course there is one way to find out for certain: POLL!!!!


Flatcap [East Milwaukee Devival] April 21 2008 7:00 PM EDT

Why not just make lesser versions of some of the rares. Helm of clearsight obviously cant have a lesser version but a tsa with a 1% regen and the stats of a chain mail wouldn't blow it away.

The problem with rares is they are the only items that can do what they do. It makes CB less of a strategy game and more of a "OMGOMGOMG I needs it" kinda game.

Soxjr April 21 2008 8:12 PM EDT

It's ok JW. I was just picking.. I personally don't care. I know that when I get a 2nd minion the TSA would be the best bet for my archer, but I know I won't have one and I won't rely on rentals. So I will get a MCM and go with more armor and deal with it.

lostling April 21 2008 8:22 PM EDT

the root of the problem being the lack of selection we have here... its either TSA if not its MCM if not AC? i've posted again and again about making the wonderful newbie armors/weapons useful... but jon doesnt seem to hear me (or he doesnt seem to read it)... so i would once again like to beg... make the newbie armors/weapons useful.... or just get rid of the load of them =\

if there were more viable selection on armors and weapons you think people would be paying 10mill on a piece of armor that you could probably replace with a 2mill piece of armor with a slightly different effect?

DrAcO5676 [The Knighthood III] April 21 2008 9:09 PM EDT

You are aware that for a MC to hit 100 ac it would cost about 5.1 mil while for a McM to hit 100 ac it would cost well over 20 mil. This is including the base AC it comes with... And for an Adam to hit 100 it would cost 2 mil....

BootyGod April 21 2008 9:13 PM EDT

Okay, firstly, just because life existed before something doesn't mean it isn't necessary now. Once an item is introduced, you either adapt to it or lose. You don't say "HA! I got you beat. Because I did fine before you existed I don't need you at all."

The problem with supporter items is that no one wants to sell. I have a TSA that I may one day use and so I'll never sell it. I'm active too. BUT IT NEVER DOES ANYTHING. It sits there, day after day on the off chance I may need it. Because if I DO sell it, and then one day need it, it may be impossible to get another one. So, I'll just keep it. Sorry, but that's the system that exists now.

What I don't understand is why you all are SOOOO obsessed with not allowing the items to be re-introduced. It would only make the game more fair.

I just don't undersand.... Are you so determined that you get treated special for simply finding something before someone else? Do they deserve to be penalized? I mean... That's what it is...

You say there are so many... Then why are they so expensive when they are for sale? Everything you say is against the data.

You say they aren't necessary, but all the big teams run at least a few....

You say they're common, but they're rarely for sale...

Maybe you're just not thinking long term. What happes in 5 years with no reintroductions? When there simply aren't any to be found.... *shrug* Whatever makes ya happy I guess. Enjoying screwing over others so you can be happy and hve your shiny little toy that's only so shiny because no one else has it.

Relic April 21 2008 9:26 PM EDT


With that logic, why have a black market, or supporter items at all? Just let all worthwhile items spawn in auctions. The stores are only for noobs and ammo purchases imo.

QBOddBird April 21 2008 9:36 PM EDT

"Enjoying screwing over others so you can be happy and hve your shiny little toy that's only so shiny because no one else has it."

Ahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahaha, what a drama llama!

BootyGod April 21 2008 10:20 PM EDT

The supporter items are just to encourage people to donate to the game so that is can continue to exist. It was NEVER so that you could dominate the world by becoming one.

And I don't see why the black market would be affected at all....

And, OB, the amount of "ha"s in your laughter indicates that you're the one being dramatic.

QBOddBird April 21 2008 10:42 PM EDT

-1 ha
This thread is closed to new posts. However, you are welcome to reference it from a new thread; link this with the html <a href="/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=002PvG">That now.</a>