Lonestrider and his thieves

[Booger]

a thought I had when I beat the thieves on dragoncat few days ago...

since the thieves can put up a good fight it would be nice to get a message in the daily news and maybe your bio for winning or losing to them. something like

Reeve Booger collected the bounty on the heads of a notorious group of gem thieves!

or

Reeve Booger was found mugged in an alley!

[LadyPhoenix]

I like that idea.

[Hammer]

That is a good idea.

[lonestrider]

That is a very good idea. I think I'll add that into the next version of the thief script.

For those interested in d/loading it,

Look for updated patches by the some of the greatest coders in LOGD realm on

dragonprime.cawsquad.net

[Shandra]

What would you guys think of after defeating the thieves, instead of a bounty at times, you find some gems that spilled out of their bag?

(I can see a downside of this, as this special event is meant to wean some gems out of the system)...

[Hermanathor]

Not a bad idea at all, I reckon it would put some more fun to the game.

As for bounty versus gems, I think most lovered level characters tend to prefer bounty since it helps them buy weaponry and armor, gems, well higher level characters like them better than gold since it appears to me that after level 9, most of us are pretty much fully armed and don't require gold as much as we did earlier in the game.

Anyway, why not a mix of it (gold and gems) since thoses thiefs will take away some of your gems (not gold if I remember well) if they beat you, so they should be carrying some and not only gold.

Regards,

[Booger]

I don't think gems as rewards for it would be a good idea simply because it is a special event specifically designed to drain out gems. at higher levels and with buffs it is easy enough to win LoneStrider and for average I think it would just put more gems into the economy.

Besides, if you read the text when you beat the thieves it states that LoneStrider runs away before the battle is over. I always assumed he would have all the gems since he is the leader...

[Sneakabout]

I've always thought that if you managed to defeat them flawlessly or in one round, you should take Strider down too and get a special buff or some gems....

[Karissa]

I've always thought that if you managed to defeat them flawlessly or in one round, you should take Strider down too and get a special buff or some gems....

You know...one would think you guys just didn't appreciate Strider and his thieves by all the bloodthirsty wishes to kill him and his own off.

He's just providing a...erm...service. Taking from you to help himself. Nothin' wrong with that...

[Sneakabout]

I get 18 gems taken from me every time I lose against the thieves.... (which thankfully doesn't happen that often.)

18 GEMS!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If it keeps happening, I'll never hit the 200 mark...

[Hammer]

I get 18 gems taken from me every time I lose against the thieves.... (which thankfully doesn't happen that often.)

18 GEMS!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If it keeps happening, I'll never hit the 200 mark...

Kill smarter.... Not harder. :twisted:

[Sneakabout]

What is this 'smarter' of which you speak...?

[Hammer]

. . .




And now for something completely different:






I'm naked underneath my clothes. Film at 11:00.

[lonestrider]

I've always thought that if you managed to defeat them flawlessly or in one round, you should take Strider down too and get a special buff or some gems....


HAHAHAHAH.... no.

[lonestrider]

Well everyone, there's a new script in town, and Karissa is absolutely right. . . I'm just trying to help out those lessor players... like myself, to umm... your fortunes. I'm keeping you from entering those radically high tax brackets, that's all.


For those interested, the new "Lonestrider's Thieves" script includes a few new extras:

1) A certain love for elves
2) Newsworthy events that can occur
3) Lonestrider get to be a BIT nastier for those gods out there.

[LordWolfen]

How about having immunity for farmers from the thieves.

I think they have it hard enough trying to get a mount by the time they are a page.

Maybe have the theives rob their gold instead.

Just a thought.

[Booger]

you can buy the cheaper mounts first. the more expensive ones aren't supposed to be bought by farmboys and -girls anyway.

and judging from the health of some pages and squires it's far from impossible to get gems. personally I don't even see lonestrider more than maybe 2-3 times every 2 weeks...

[Pirotess]

>personally I don't even see lonestrider more than
>maybe 2-3 times every 2 weeks...

The RNG must ilke me...I've never EVER seen lonestrider.

Lady Pirotess

[silentrob]

It's been throwing them all my way.... I'm only a level 5 farmboy, and have seen lonestrider twice (2 days in a row even), losing 2 of the 3 gems I'd found so far...

Of course, I've only recently figured out where exactly the good spot for finding gems is. Now that I've got that figured out, I'll have a mount in no time ;) (as long as I don't keep seeing lonestrider on a daily basis)

[LordWolfen]

I see the theives at least every other game day. :?

It's been throwing them all my way.... I'm only a level 5 farmboy, and have seen lonestrider twice (2 days in a row even), losing 2 of the 3 gems I'd found so far...

Of course, I've only recently figured out where exactly the good spot for finding gems is. Now that I've got that figured out, I'll have a mount in no time ;) (as long as I don't keep seeing lonestrider on a daily basis)



Really, where is this gem yard?

[silentrob]

I can't give away a spoiler like that... I will tell you, you don't always get a gem (there's only a percentage chance), but it involves *no risk* and is easy to do, once you figure it out (in other words, it doesn't require a special like the mine, etc)

[Pirotess]

>you don't always get a gem (there's only a percentage chance),
>and is easy to do, once you figure it out (in other words, it doesn't >require a special like the mine, etc)

Ever consider that there might be more than one opportunity of this sort?

>but it involves *no risk*

None? None whatsoever? Are you *sure* about that? :)

Lady Pirotess

[Sneakabout]

I know what he be talkin' about and yes, no risk. However, enough o' yer enquiries, such things be secrets o' th' game!

[FanboyElric]

If he's discussing what I think he's discussing we're looking at a 1/4 chance of getting a gem every day for something I'd do anyways....

Works for me!

:)

[Pirotess]

>I know what he be talkin' about and yes, no risk.

Aww....but it was so much fun to think of him sitting there every time...dreading the time that the bad thing DID happen...

Lady Pirotess

[silentrob]

Who me? Nah, I had already read the source... ;)

[JCP]

Who me? Nah, I had already read the source... ;)

The source code does change, you know. :twisted:

[FanboyElric]

*FanboyElric watches as JCP inserts a Roman latrine monster into the script to attack people 1% of the time....

[lonestrider]

>personally I don't even see lonestrider more than
>maybe 2-3 times every 2 weeks...

The RNG must ilke me...I've never EVER seen lonestrider.

Lady Pirotess

::his green eyes shimmer slightly as he averts his elvish gaze::

No, I just like you m'lady Pirotess. . . so we let you pass in peace. . .

Seriously though, I have considered putting in a FarmCreature protection program, but I haven't done so yet. I think that it's a proper game of snakes and ladders. If you get the snake, alas, you'll have to earn it back up.

I've noticed on Legendgard that people have changed their strategies about the mounts because of it though.

[Mitsuko]

I don't see Lonestrider much on Central, but I've seen him a few times.

On Legendgard, though, he's become a weekly event. More like a weekly suprise, since I never expect to see him. Ah, he's just a sweetie. ^.^ Er, :oops: I mean..a lone, ruthless thief...yeah... :

[cactus]

What if we put the gems in the bank? The banker will "tax" for each gem with progressive price (ex 1 gem = 1 gold, 2 gems = 3 gold ), then you can protect some amount of them...

[MightyE]

*FanboyElric watches as JCP inserts a Roman latrine monster into the script to attack people 1% of the time....
/me makes a note of this idea, having apparently missed it last time he read this thread.

[MightyE]

What if we put the gems in the bank? The banker will "tax" for each gem with progressive price (ex 1 gem = 1 gold, 2 gems = 3 gold ), then you can protect some amount of them...
gem bank with taxes. Not a terrible idea.

The idea behind LoneStrider was to bleed gems out of the game, particularly for those who were hoarding gigantic amounts of them. The more gems you have the more gems he takes from you. If you keep few gems, you'll be a dissapointing quarry for Lonestrider.

[Pwyll]

The idea behind LoneStrider was to bleed gems out of the game, particularly for those who were hoarding gigantic amounts of them. The more gems you have the more gems he takes from you. If you keep few gems, you'll be a dissapointing quarry for Lonestrider.

And we want to bleed gems out of the game why??

[Mitsuko]

What about us that have no gems to bleed, have no hoards of gems?! :cry:

[cactus]

What if we put the gems in the bank? The banker will "tax" for each gem with progressive price (ex 1 gem = 1 gold, 2 gems = 3 gold ), then you can protect some amount of them...
gem bank with taxes. Not a terrible idea.

The idea behind LoneStrider was to bleed gems out of the game, particularly for those who were hoarding gigantic amounts of them. The more gems you have the more gems he takes from you. If you keep few gems, you'll be a dissapointing quarry for Lonestrider.

I think a good way to bleed gems out of the game is offering "attractive services" payed with gems, but with expensive prices (ex: a new master challenge for 10 gems). So that who have gems will gems will spend more gems that can find and eventually will return to an "acceptable level" (which, I belive, is below the price of mounts)

[LadyPhoenix]

I was thinking, as a way of bleeding gems, that there might be an option added to mounts where you have some that can only be fed by spending gems on their food. (I'm thinking the top level mounts.) Once you have a top level mount, you are more likely to be able to spend gems for feed, after all.

[Deimos]

I could see paying a gem or 2 to feed my LP. Perhaps the top level mounts might last longer for that price? Or it could be an extra option. So you'd have feed, for 100gold*level, or supercharge, for 1gem(level/3) or something.

[mysticii]

lonestrider! i must kill lonestrider...

ive been losing most of my gems to that greedy brat, i think we should be able to win a small amount of gems if we defeat them, its only fair since they take so much off me, and apparently sneak :)

by the time the new mounts arrive i be lucky to have any gems left.

the idea of the "no risk" place of getting gems, getting more deadly is a great idea...NOT. isnt already hard enough to find gems everywhere else...not to mention the place with the highest amount of risk, which causes massive losses.

i know you guys creating the code dont want to make getting gems too easy, but some specials are just plain EVIL :evil:

[Pwyll]

Um... once again, why is it so important to bleed gems out of the game?

[Deimos]

Supply and demand. They are not rare if they are not rare. They are valuable because of their rarity. A lack of rarity decreases their value. Inflation would/should ensue, as in prices aren't changing to reflect the change in value of the gems, so a standard value of gems should be maintained, which is mostly simply done by having about a certain amount available in the game; this would guaratee that the gems you do have are valuable and that you are earning your superpowered mounts.

[mysticii]

most of my gems come from one source...this place has low risk and high pay off...most of more experienced players like sneak should know where im talking about.

but my point is gems are already rare enough as it is. i dare you to name another place where you are garanteed gems each day...or even a high risk of getting gems. no? so i dont know where you are coming from Deimos

[Deimos]

most of my gems come from one source...this place has low risk and high pay off...most of more experienced players like sneak should know where im talking about.

but my point is gems are already rare enough as it is. i dare you to name another place where you are garanteed gems each day...or even a high risk of getting gems. no? so i dont know where you are coming from Deimos

You established that you have a steady, nonrisk source, and then you put that forth as a premise for the conclusion that gems are rare. This doesn't make sense on its own.

I know where you're talking about, by the way. I think I get more gems just from fights, even though I don't think a guaranteed source of gems is a good idea at all.

To the point, your message didn't actually counter mine at all, except where you reiterate that you don't agree with me, and that you believe gems are rare enough.

To restate my point more simply if I can:
Gems are constantly being put into the game, through such means as the one we keep alluding to. They are coming inward at a higher rate than they are being spent. Since people have more of them, each individual gem is worth less. Gems may still be relatively rare, as it relates to gold, but as it relates to how rare gems were a week ago, they are less rare. The idea behind gem bleeding is to keep the gems valuable/rare. It's a balancing issue.

[mysticii]

high level people like me earn our gems, and when you say you get more gems in the forest thats good for you.

[Luinefirithion]

*sits down in a rocking chair and looks about*

Back in my day, there were only three mounts, the Pony, the Gelding, and the Stallion. D you know how rare the gems were then? It took me 5 DKs to save up for that stallion, and that was without Lonestrider. Plus, I had to walk 5 miles through the forest every day, barefoot, uphill...both ways, and in five feet of snow!

:P

Seriously though, the gems were too rare when the game first started, and I think we were at a pretty good balance before Lonestrider. That people have stockpiles of gems speaks to the fact that they aren't being creative enough with them.

[Deimos]

high level people like me earn our gems, and when you say you get more gems in the forest thats good for you.

I have enough experience with higher level playing on dragoncat, and I don't see that that majority of my gems are earned any more than at lower levels.

And not only is that "good for" me, but it answered your challenge to name somewhere where you are guarenteed a chance of gems each day. And I think the odds are better that you'll find them after at least one fight each day than the other thing.

And surely such a high level person like you who earns your gems could afford to have some bled by the system.

[mysticii]

*sits down in a rocking chair and looks about*

Back in my day, there were only three mounts, the Pony, the Gelding, and the Stallion. D you know how rare the gems were then? It took me 5 DKs to save up for that stallion, and that was without Lonestrider. Plus, I had to walk 5 miles through the forest every day, barefoot, uphill...both ways, and in five feet of snow!


i know exactly what you mean, it took me 5 Dk's to get my stallion, and another 3-4 to get my warhorse, then another 5 Dk's to get my wyvern. i lost heaps of gems when the specials were first implemented, mainly because i didnt know what they were. And now with lonestrider implemented, it limits the places where gems are available.

by the way Deimos, getting gems in the forest doesnt compare to where i get mine. and when you are in the forest trying to fight monsters, theres a high chance you will face the lonstrider when you are half dead. furthermore ive noticed that people who have been playing on dragoncat got heaps more gems than people like myself who play on the central server. So maybe dragoncat server gives more gems in the forest, and lonstrider is required, but in the central server, we hardly get any, i be lucky to get 3 per dragon kill.

[Deimos]

Perhaps the server difference could be part of it. If central is indeed much less gem-handy than bleeding gems out would be less neccesary. But I think that the same code runs the forest. I guess twice the turns would mean twice the gems per day, on average. But I don't know how that might account for the differences you claim.

[Mitsuko]

I'm lucky to find 1 gem in two weeks now on Central. But that's just me...

[Luinefirithion]

*sits down in a rocking chair and looks about*

Back in my day, there were only three mounts, the Pony, the Gelding, and the Stallion. D you know how rare the gems were then? It took me 5 DKs to save up for that stallion, and that was without Lonestrider. Plus, I had to walk 5 miles through the forest every day, barefoot, uphill...both ways, and in five feet of snow!


i know exactly what you mean, it took me 5 Dk's to get my stallion, and another 3-4 to get my warhorse, then another 5 Dk's to get my wyvern.

Forgot to add one thing...AND we liked it that way!

Well, actually we didn't. For most players, bleeding away of gems is unnecessary. However, there are some gods who have huge stockpiles of over 1000 gems (I am not one of them because I find creative ways to spend my gems). My solution to a gem problem wouldn't be a system to bleed the gems out, because with that even the people who desperately need gems suffer along with those who have too many gems. A better solution would be to decide a maximum number of gems a player can hold and anything beyond that isn't credited to the player. I propose 300 as this number because it allows the gods to carry around a decent number that they may or may not choose to spend on hitpoints or something of that nature, but doesn't give them a ridiculous number of gems either.

[Sneakabout]

I be one of those with the huge stockpiles, and I'd like to make the point that I meself only carry around such amounts of gems because I want to spend them (ironic, eh?).

I live in hope for something to spend me gems on apart from HP..... for I be using a low HP strategy as those who attack me will know. (I must say that it not be paying off to well, but I do live in hope.)