1
Fan Art / Re: PlaneShift Portrait Contest
« on: April 01, 2009, 02:52:35 am »
Basileo,
I've always liked that one.
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Basileo,
I've always liked that one.
2
Newbie Help (Start Here) / Re: getting stuck with the healing salve quest
« on: February 19, 2009, 03:18:24 pm »
Did you try giving her 100 tria?
3
Server Status / Re: If Leveling....
« on: February 12, 2009, 12:52:31 am »
I think that for some, the leveling itself is the accomplishment.
But for most, imho, it's for the things that you can do in game, things you couldn't do at the lower levels and (not bashing RP here) things you can back up with actions, not just say you can do.
And of course, I think that some just want to be 1337.
But for most, imho, it's for the things that you can do in game, things you couldn't do at the lower levels and (not bashing RP here) things you can back up with actions, not just say you can do.
And of course, I think that some just want to be 1337.
4
Server Status / Re: If Leveling....
« on: February 11, 2009, 09:53:03 pm »Just wondering, why you are taking "an official poll".
Absolutely nothing even remotely official about my posts.
Just trying keep some focus on nuggets of info in a wall of spam.
(... so, I can put you down for - if any changes are made, make it Harder!
)I don't want to make it sound like I don't do any grinding. Over the time, I've amassed a boat-load of un-used PP. It's just that I've never had very many tria to use to convert them into skills. I've got more than enough PP to max all my attributes plus a couple of fighting and armor skills. Don't know what levels any of the magic Ways top out at or how many PP it would take, but I could probably get one or two of those too. It's just that mining drives me slowly insane. The last time I remember enjoying mining was back when the platinum vein in the Laanx dungeon was still active. But that was because of the conversations, not the act of mining. Did I mention that I hate mining?
So I guess my real vote would go along with those that said - We need new ways to level.
5
The Hydlaa Plaza / Re: Question about nuclear reactions
« on: February 07, 2009, 09:09:02 pm »I pick these
The total mass of the particles after fission is slightly less than the total mass of the particles before fission. The missing mass is what was converted into energy.
E (energy formed during the reaction - fission or fusion) = delta m (change in mass) x c2 (speed of light squared)
The fission products have the same number of total neutrons and the same number of total protons, but the fission products may undergo beta decay converting neutrons to protons. But as Bamko pointed out the total number of nucleons (neutrons + protons) will always remain the same
The added kinetic energy of the fission products is the energy of the missing mass.
6
The Hydlaa Plaza / Re: Question about nuclear reactions
« on: February 06, 2009, 08:58:27 pm »Almost all the energy comes from the kinetic energy of the fission products in the fission and/or alpha decay of uranium.
...
Where does energy come from in a nuclear reaction? From the kinetic energy of the products, mostly.
The added kinetic energy of the fission products is the energy of the missing mass.
7
The Hydlaa Plaza / Re: Question about nuclear reactions
« on: February 06, 2009, 06:28:24 pm »
beta decay started to bug me so I looked it up.
From wikipedia-
Since the nuclei that can readily undergo fission are particularly neutron-rich (e.g. 61% of the nucleons in uranium-235 are neutrons), the initial fission products are almost always more neutron-rich than stable nuclei of the same mass as the fission product (e.g. stable ruthenium-100 is 56% neutrons, stable xenon-134 is 60%). The initial fission products therefore may be unstable and typically undergo beta decay towards stable nuclei, converting a neutron to a proton with each beta emission. (Fission products do not emit alpha particles.)
- so I was kind of right
The fission products have the same number of total neutrons and the same number of total protons, but the fission products may undergo beta decay converting neutrons to protons. But as Bamko pointed out the total number of nucleons (neutrons + protons) will always remain the same
From wikipedia-
Since the nuclei that can readily undergo fission are particularly neutron-rich (e.g. 61% of the nucleons in uranium-235 are neutrons), the initial fission products are almost always more neutron-rich than stable nuclei of the same mass as the fission product (e.g. stable ruthenium-100 is 56% neutrons, stable xenon-134 is 60%). The initial fission products therefore may be unstable and typically undergo beta decay towards stable nuclei, converting a neutron to a proton with each beta emission. (Fission products do not emit alpha particles.)
- so I was kind of right
The fission products have the same number of total neutrons and the same number of total protons, but the fission products may undergo beta decay converting neutrons to protons. But as Bamko pointed out the total number of nucleons (neutrons + protons) will always remain the same
8
The Hydlaa Plaza / Re: Question about nuclear reactions
« on: February 06, 2009, 05:58:52 pm »So... the number of protons and neutrons before and after uranium decays, is it the same?
Yes
(I don't believe there is any beta decay, but I could be wrong)
9
The Hydlaa Plaza / Re: Question about nuclear reactions
« on: February 05, 2009, 06:45:40 pm »
The total mass of the particles after fission is slightly less than the total mass of the particles before fission. The missing mass is what was converted into energy.
E (energy formed during the reaction - fission or fusion) = delta m (change in mass) x c2 (speed of light squared)
E (energy formed during the reaction - fission or fusion) = delta m (change in mass) x c2 (speed of light squared)
10
Server Status / Re: If Leveling....
« on: January 22, 2009, 05:21:44 am »
******! Really?
Thanks for that last load of spam walling off the topic.
I'd re-quote Pizik again, but Bamko already did and it's obviously consciously ignored.
----------------------------------------
2 votes for "it would be nice if leveling were faster"
I'm going to agree with Farren and StitchedChin on the leveling faster, but only up to that mythical point where the player starts to feel happy with their character.
Any other players who like working with the game mechanics remember the levels of their attributes and skills when this happened?
After that point though I think that gaining levels should become a bigger challenge.
I really agree with the "we need new ways of leveling" posts. But I haven't heard any indication that the current system supports anything other than giving out more PP for quests (I happen to think PP should be dropped)
Bamko-
I know you've done alot of grinding in the recent past
Do you remember what levels you were at in metallurgy/blacksmithing/weaponmaking when you were able to make what you thought were good weapons? (what quality were the weapons when you began to be satisfied?)
And more importantly - how many hours of grinding do you think it took to get to those levels?
You also seem to like harassing the Ulbers. Do you remember levels and hours of grinding for that hobby?
Unfortunately I have a low tolerance for grinding, so my 3 years with one character and not having anything maxed out shouldn't be taken as a norm. But I was happy with my character before the end of the first year (still probably much slower than the norm). So for me, faster leveling would probably mean I would be maxing out my character about ... now.
Thanks for that last load of spam walling off the topic.
I'd re-quote Pizik again, but Bamko already did and it's obviously consciously ignored.
----------------------------------------
So far we have:looks like we should add:
2 or 3 "we need a new way to level"
1 "leveling is ok, just needs to be tweaked in a spot or two"
1 "to balance current leveling grind with fun, we need more info on player expectations and Devs idea of a fair grind"
2 votes for "it would be nice if leveling were faster"
I'm going to agree with Farren and StitchedChin on the leveling faster, but only up to that mythical point where the player starts to feel happy with their character.
Any other players who like working with the game mechanics remember the levels of their attributes and skills when this happened?
After that point though I think that gaining levels should become a bigger challenge.
I really agree with the "we need new ways of leveling" posts. But I haven't heard any indication that the current system supports anything other than giving out more PP for quests (I happen to think PP should be dropped)
Bamko-
I know you've done alot of grinding in the recent past
Do you remember what levels you were at in metallurgy/blacksmithing/weaponmaking when you were able to make what you thought were good weapons? (what quality were the weapons when you began to be satisfied?)
And more importantly - how many hours of grinding do you think it took to get to those levels?
You also seem to like harassing the Ulbers. Do you remember levels and hours of grinding for that hobby?
Unfortunately I have a low tolerance for grinding, so my 3 years with one character and not having anything maxed out shouldn't be taken as a norm. But I was happy with my character before the end of the first year (still probably much slower than the norm). So for me, faster leveling would probably mean I would be maxing out my character about ... now.
11
Server Status / Re: If Leveling....
« on: January 21, 2009, 08:08:44 pm »I think you are all confused. ...
I think you are confused about the topic
So far we have:
2 or 3 "we need a new way to level"
1 "leveling is ok, just needs to be tweaked in a spot or two"
1 "to balance current leveling grind with fun, we need more info on player expectations and Devs idea of a fair grind"
12
Server Status / Re: If Leveling....
« on: January 21, 2009, 06:42:38 pm »
Topic Bump....
No really, that is the topic.
And my apparently useless on topic post
Then if you still have an urge to flame anything in this thread, flame that
....was made easier, would you prefer it? Being able to max everything in a couple of weeks for example.
If yes, would it not mean that everyone was, rather quickly, equally leet and defeat the object of you levelling up in the first place?
If no, should levelling take even longer than it does now?
If niether, is the system perfect as it is?
No really, that is the topic.
And my apparently useless on topic post
Very tough question. ...Go back and read it.
Then if you still have an urge to flame anything in this thread, flame that
13
Server Status / Re: If Leveling....
« on: January 21, 2009, 05:43:55 pm »* Quin tosses Bamko -pitbull guardian of the ezpcusa server- a milkbone
Now before the next posters decide it will be fun to tear into Bamko, please read my inane ramblings 5 posts above and make the majority of your post on topic
14
Server Status / Re: If Leveling....
« on: January 21, 2009, 03:23:36 pm »
Very tough question. And multi-layered as I see it.
First: Ask the “average” player - At what skill and attribute levels would the player be happy with their character? Not maxed out, not considering themselves among the elite, not even considering themselves masters of their chosen craft. Just the feeling of “OK, now this is something I can work with”.
Second: Ask the game designers - How many hours of grinding (not playing - and yes I know that for some, these are one in the same) do they feel is fair for a player to feel “happy” with their character.
Third: Then with these two pieces of info in mind, get into the real messy work of figuring how to divide these hours into the amount of skill progression wanted.
As far as I can see, we currently only have 3 general “character classes”
Warriors, Mages and Crafters.
Why not poll the players and ask what class they play and what would make them “happy” with their character?
Maybe Warriors would be – 150 in each of the physical attributes plus weapon and armor levels high enough to take on an Ulber. PvPers just want to be “a little better” than the guy they are fighting, so I don’t know what metric would be good for them.
Maybe Crafters would be – metallurgy, blacksmithing and weapon smithing levels high enough to craft a Q200 weapon (seeing as I gave up grinding weapon smithing along time ago, I’m assuming Q300 is still the top)
Mages? – no clue here.
And those Jack-of-all-Trades/I wanna be good at everything people should realize that this will take a very long time.
Who knows what would make the average player content? But I think it is very important info to have. Once a player spends that fair amount of grinding to be “happy”, then really crank up the learning curve and let the hard core grinders really work to become among the elite.
Just my 2 tria.
BTW – Just to start the poll.
My main character would fall into the general Warrior class and 150 in each of the physical attributes plus weapon and armor levels high enough to take on an Ulber was where I became “happy” and then started branching out into other skill areas.
Edit: I would am kind of curious about what the Devs think is a "fair" number of hours of grinding (not trying to start a fight, just curious)
First: Ask the “average” player - At what skill and attribute levels would the player be happy with their character? Not maxed out, not considering themselves among the elite, not even considering themselves masters of their chosen craft. Just the feeling of “OK, now this is something I can work with”.
Second: Ask the game designers - How many hours of grinding (not playing - and yes I know that for some, these are one in the same) do they feel is fair for a player to feel “happy” with their character.
Third: Then with these two pieces of info in mind, get into the real messy work of figuring how to divide these hours into the amount of skill progression wanted.
As far as I can see, we currently only have 3 general “character classes”
Warriors, Mages and Crafters.
Why not poll the players and ask what class they play and what would make them “happy” with their character?
Maybe Warriors would be – 150 in each of the physical attributes plus weapon and armor levels high enough to take on an Ulber. PvPers just want to be “a little better” than the guy they are fighting, so I don’t know what metric would be good for them.
Maybe Crafters would be – metallurgy, blacksmithing and weapon smithing levels high enough to craft a Q200 weapon (seeing as I gave up grinding weapon smithing along time ago, I’m assuming Q300 is still the top)
Mages? – no clue here.
And those Jack-of-all-Trades/I wanna be good at everything people should realize that this will take a very long time.
Who knows what would make the average player content? But I think it is very important info to have. Once a player spends that fair amount of grinding to be “happy”, then really crank up the learning curve and let the hard core grinders really work to become among the elite.
Just my 2 tria.
BTW – Just to start the poll.
My main character would fall into the general Warrior class and 150 in each of the physical attributes plus weapon and armor levels high enough to take on an Ulber was where I became “happy” and then started branching out into other skill areas.
Edit: I would am kind of curious about what the Devs think is a "fair" number of hours of grinding (not trying to start a fight, just curious)
15
Newbie Help (Start Here) / Re: Finding herbs
« on: January 21, 2009, 01:36:19 pm »What I want to know is a rough idea of how they look and whether or not I can just type /pick and gather them this way.
...
I can't really wander the wilderness typing /target (any old word) until I get it rightWell I could but I think I'd get bored playing after a couple of hours of that.
Right now they all look like sacks sitting on the ground, the art work isn't finished for them yet. Herbs don't work like mining, you'll see them and pick them up like anything else lying around. (if you have your labels visible, you'll even see what they are without even clicking on them)