CL: More Portal Thoughts

In article <awessels-2356E5.18404013112003 DeleteThis @news.supernews.com>,
Maeght <awessels DeleteThis @EXPUNGEpacbell.net> wrote:

 > Last I heard, some of those challeges required many attempts to get TO
 > the challenge and substantial amount of time to take the challenge
 > itself.

If there's a significant possibility of failing the challenge checks on
the way to "The Big One", then some work has to be done on the earlier
challenges first.

--
HWC for Hidden <hidden DeleteThis @noDASHop.com> <http://www.oralse.cx/>
"Carpe diem via scrotum."<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: CL: More Portal Thoughts 

In article, Darkening wrote:
 >
 > Klur...why do you insist on translating "Easier access to a challenge"
 > as "Make the challenge easier"?

Often the process to solving a challenge involves number of tries before a
solution is found. If it on average takes 100 tries before someone solves a
particular challenge then on average you simply have to ask how often can
a exile try this challenge before they get 100 tries and it will be solved.

If we allow 100 tries in 10min then it will be solved in 10min if we allow
100 tries in three years then it will be solved in 3 years. The rate at which
you get to try a challenge is a factor in how much time it will take to
master. The challenge it self does not change the rate to mastery does.

 > Challenges that take years to master are great...

Its not the challenge it self depending on definition that takes years it is
all the things surrounding the challenge that allows the challenge to last
for years before being mastered.

 >but I don't see how clanning for years makes challenges that are
 >based on available large chunks of time more accesible.

I don't either.

I never see challenges in CL at this point and time as based on
"available large chunks of time". What I see is requirments imposed on exiles
to achieve before some challengs will be accesible in very short time. These
requirements as they currently stand can be dealt with in a number of ways
with a number of different methods but each for a given situation as it stands
carries with it a comparable amount of effort. The portals in my view changed
that so drasticly that things where no longer comparable but instead obvious
that the portal was not only capable of reducing the time required but also
many times easier than any alternative.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: CL: More Portal Thoughts 

In article <hidden-B6A615.19540613112003@localhost>,
Hidden <hidden.TakeThisOut@noDASHop.com> wrote:

 > In article <awessels-2356E5.18404013112003.TakeThisOut@news.supernews.com>,
 > Maeght <awessels.TakeThisOut@EXPUNGEpacbell.net> wrote:
 >
  > > Last I heard, some of those challeges required many attempts to get TO
  > > the challenge and substantial amount of time to take the challenge
  > > itself.
 >
 > If there's a significant possibility of failing the challenge checks on
 > the way to "The Big One", then some work has to be done on the earlier
 > challenges first.

My only point was that the time to reach the challenge isn't the
totality of the time to surpass the goal challenge.

Klur said "If we allow 100 tries in 10min then it will be solved in
10min if we allow 100 tries in three years then it will be solved in 3
years. The rate at which you get to try a challenge is a factor in how
much time it will take to master. The challenge it self does not change
the rate to mastery does."

The path challenges may do nothing to test the group's ability to
complete the goal challenge except by extending the time to complete and
accelerating party dissolution merely through the pathetic tactic of
time resource attrition.

The goal challenge could easily be designed to be longer lasting than a
small fraction of the path challenge.

- Maeght<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: CL: More Portal Thoughts 

In article <slrnbr7qs0.g5g.matthew.RemoveThis@red.jenika.com>,
Klur <klur.RemoveThis@poguemahone.org> wrote:

 > In article, Darkening wrote:
  > >
  > > Klur...why do you insist on translating "Easier access to a challenge"
  > > as "Make the challenge easier"?
 >
 > Often the process to solving a challenge involves number of tries before a
 > solution is found. If it on average takes 100 tries before someone solves a
 > particular challenge then on average you simply have to ask how often can
 > a exile try this challenge before they get 100 tries and it will be solved.
 >
 > If we allow 100 tries in 10min then it will be solved in 10min if we allow
 > 100 tries in three years then it will be solved in 3 years. The rate at which
 > you get to try a challenge is a factor in how much time it will take to
 > master. The challenge it self does not change the rate to mastery does.

By that logic you could justify putting all future challenges beyond
greater and greater time-commitments.

Heck, with that logic, a campaign to thwart every PM hunt could be
justified...after all, the less times we let you get to distant
challenges, the longer the time it will take you to figure them out.

  > > Challenges that take years to master are great...
 >
 > Its not the challenge it self depending on definition that takes years it is
 > all the things surrounding the challenge that allows the challenge to last
 > for years before being mastered.

I'm going to re-read that a couple hundred times more to figure out if
you actually said anything. Help me out here...I suspect you missed some
punctuation that is making it uber-hard for me to parse what you are
trying to say.

  > >but I don't see how clanning for years makes challenges that are
  > >based on available large chunks of time more accesible.
 >
 > I don't either.
 >
 > I never see challenges in CL at this point and time as based on
 > "available large chunks of time". What I see is requirments imposed on exiles
 > to achieve before some challengs will be accesible in very short time. These
 > requirements as they currently stand can be dealt with in a number of ways
 > with a number of different methods but each for a given situation as it stands
 > carries with it a comparable amount of effort. The portals in my view changed
 > that so drasticly that things where no longer comparable but instead obvious
 > that the portal was not only capable of reducing the time required but also
 > many times easier than any alternative.

I'm going to be completely honest here. These last few posts of yours
are really hard to read.
--
 > Where did we say that all challanges were good? I bet it would be hard
 > to play while you (the clicker) were on fire too.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: CL: More Portal Thoughts 

In article, Darkening wrote:
 >
 > By that logic you could justify putting all future challenges beyond
 > greater and greater time-commitments.

You must not know the history of CL. Prior to ripture the world was very
different and at times the world was cranked up so high that you could go
from newbie to super exile in weeks. The exp distribution was just so high
that it didn't take much to become super. Everything is controlled by the Gods.

 > Heck, with that logic, a campaign to thwart every PM hunt could be
 > justified...after all, the less times we let you get to distant
 > challenges, the longer the time it will take you to figure them out.

PM wouldn't like that as it stands but to be honest if you had a group and I
could convince PM to it. If both groups agreed to always wear dueling gloves
when in the lands I would welcome this I would encourage this. It sounds
like a lot of fun to me and would add much to the world for me.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: CL: More Portal Thoughts 

In article <HelpfulGM-DD9AAC.08480514112003.RemoveThis@sea-read.news.verio.net>,
Helpful GM <HelpfulGM@*NO-SPAM*PlayNaked.com> wrote:

 > That is, your meaning is "if you can't pass the pre-screening to get to
 > The Real Thing, then you need to work on your pre-screening skills",
 > right?

Right.

 > I'm hoping (fingers crossed!) that you didn't mean "if you can't pass
 > the pre-screening to get to The Real Thing, then the GMs need to soften
 > the pre-screening process."

No, that would be stupid. (With the understanding that in terms of
physical distance the pre-screening amounts to very little of the total
journey. I fully support weakening/eliminating the pre-screening "run
through 50 nearly-empty snells" trials)

--
HWC for Hidden <hidden.RemoveThis@noDASHop.com> <http://www.oralse.cx/>
"Carpe diem via scrotum."<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: CL: More Portal Thoughts 

   > > > Teleport/portals only defeat barrier snells to the extent that we allow
   > > > them. This is one reason why Mystics can only take a few people at a
   > > > time (well, until they can take more ;) -- to cap the power.
  > >
  > > Hasn't this already been circumvented, using fallens on chains?
  > >
 > Isnt that giving away Mystic secrets :)

Exploits might be secret, but we don't consider them Mystic Secrets.


 > (in other words shh or they might hork that too)

Fine with me if they do. Not that "horking" mystics means that much
anymore, given how few bother to log in.

Deliberately utilizing flaws in the game mechanics (fallen on chain to
exceed teleport limit, fallen in portal to teleport portal) has got to
be the lamest way to "develop" the mystic class that the GMs could have
come up with.

The Mystic Mandate used to be "Knowledge and Communication", but it sure
doesn't seem to be that way anymore. Maybe it never really was, given
how pitiful the tools we have really are. The GM's, so fearful that
Mystics would take over CL, have instead elected to make mystics
permanently irrelevant.

-jrr<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: CL: More Portal Thoughts 

In article <jeff.ray-60FB5F.13421414112003.DeleteThis@ftp2.dfrc.nasa.gov>,
Jeff Ray <jeff.ray.DeleteThis@dfrc.nasa.gov> wrote:

 > Deliberately utilizing flaws in the game mechanics (fallen on chain to
 > exceed teleport limit, fallen in portal to teleport portal) has got to
 > be the lamest way to "develop" the mystic class that the GMs could have
 > come up with.

Perhaps you misunderstand how chains work. They're not just metal,
they're magically infused metal. That's why you can hook someone from 5
feet away, wrap 'em around a tree, walk a few hundred yards, and
suddenly they're right next to you again.

--
HWC for Hidden <hidden.DeleteThis@noDASHop.com> <http://www.oralse.cx/>
"Carpe diem via scrotum."<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: CL: More Portal Thoughts 

In article <hidden-B6A615.19540613112003@localhost>,
Hidden <hidden.TakeThisOut@noDASHop.com> wrote:

 > In article <awessels-2356E5.18404013112003.TakeThisOut@news.supernews.com>,
 > Maeght <awessels.TakeThisOut@EXPUNGEpacbell.net> wrote:
  > > Last I heard, some of those challeges required many attempts to get TO
  > > the challenge and substantial amount of time to take the challenge
  > > itself.

 > If there's a significant possibility of failing the challenge checks on
 > the way to "The Big One", then some work has to be done on the earlier
 > challenges first.

Am I correct in interpreting this to imply "...by the player hoping to
get to 'the big one'"?

That is, your meaning is "if you can't pass the pre-screening to get to
The Real Thing, then you need to work on your pre-screening skills",
right?

I'm hoping (fingers crossed!) that you didn't mean "if you can't pass
the pre-screening to get to The Real Thing, then the GMs need to soften
the pre-screening process."

--
You have to remove stuff from my e-mail to reply, it's not difficult.
Everything here is my personal opinion, do with it what you will.

"[T]he idea of a game with people nicer than in CL makes me wanna puke."
-Michael<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: CL: More Portal Thoughts 

In article <hidden-8620F8.13125214112003@localhost>,
Hidden <hidden.RemoveThis@noDASHop.com> wrote:

 > In article <HelpfulGM-DD9AAC.08480514112003.RemoveThis@sea-read.news.verio.net>,
 > Helpful GM <HelpfulGM@*NO-SPAM*PlayNaked.com> wrote:
  > > That is, your meaning is "if you can't pass the pre-screening to get to
  > > The Real Thing, then you need to work on your pre-screening skills",
  > > right?

 > Right.

Whew!

  > > I'm hoping (fingers crossed!) that you didn't mean "if you can't pass
  > > the pre-screening to get to The Real Thing, then the GMs need to soften
  > > the pre-screening process."

 > No, that would be stupid. (With the understanding that in terms of
 > physical distance the pre-screening amounts to very little of the total
 > journey. I fully support weakening/eliminating the pre-screening "run
 > through 50 nearly-empty snells" trials)

I'm with you on that one!

Helpful "I dare someone to try to mis-quote me on this! ;)" GM

--
You have to remove stuff from my e-mail to reply, it's not difficult.
Everything here is my personal opinion, do with it what you will.

"[T]he idea of a game with people nicer than in CL makes me wanna puke."
-Michael<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: CL: More Portal Thoughts