-
Images
Kafuuka
-
Posts
499 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
18
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Gallery
Downloads
Posts posted by Kafuuka
-
-
Perhaps a large set of items which would interact nicely:
Signet Rings
1. Create official documents
2. Seal an envelope [i]- consumes official document[/i]
(I have an item called "Kafuuka's signet ring:", I thought kings have rings too now and perhaps it would make sense for alliance leaders and everybody else who pays a WP to get this functionality too.)
Writing Utensils
1. Create official documents
(I remember a fountain pen, most likely a quill exists too already?)
Official document
1. Read
2. Burn/destroy [i]- consumes official document[/i]
3. Separate seal [i]- consumes official document & loyalty?, yields unbroken seal[/i]
(it would be nice if those made with a signet ring have a picture of the personal seal in the item description and those with 'ordinary writing utensils' to have the playername in a different font, as a signature?)
Sealed envelope
1. Break seal [i]- consumes sealed envelope, yields previously 'consumed' official document[/i]
2. Separate seal [i]- consumes sealed envelope & loyalty?, yields previously 'consumed' official document & unbroken seal[/i]
Forging Tools
1. Duplicate official documents [i]- consumes unbroken seal, creates a new official document with hidden boolean 'forged'=true[/i]
2. Forge official documents [i]- changes the text, sets a hidden boolean 'forged'=true[/i]
3. Forge pass papers? [i]- consumes unbroken seal of associated land leader, sets a hidden boolean 'forged'=true[/i]
Magnifying glass etc
1. Detect forgery
(I think a magnifying glass item exists or has been requested before?)
Remarks:
A signet ring would theoretically allow players to spawn infinite amounts of items (official documents) but the only possible reason for that is getting n°1 on the item owner list, which is a list I don't like anyway.
Separating seals instead of breaking them, should require some sort of skill check, forgery and detection should probably be linked to the transposition principle. It would of course be awesome if restoring the original document is possible too, but I guess it is complicated enough already.
Forging pass papers essentially implies creating a usable item from nothing. (The seal comes from an envelope or document, which is generated from nothing.) Hard to tell if this is overpowered. Obviously getting caught with forged papers equals making an enemy out of an entire country. And somehow the forgeries should be seized and destroyed upon discovery (by a player associated with the country the forgeries grant access to), which keeps them from multiplying infinitely.
Reducing loyalty makes sense if you attempt to get an unbroken seal of your own country, guild or someone on your friend list. (not that defriending is penalized heavily I guess.) -
There is no such thing as random when talking about software. The best you get is pseudorandom and a 'random amount of knators of random level' attacking at a set time interval kinda sounds like farming to me. You didn't even add random stats and vital energy, so it would surprise me if there was no ritual that could defeat all 'random' combinations of knators.
RP wise it doesn't make sense for eg. guardian of the root to be attacked by packs of knators.
Decrease inactivity? Perhaps but it will not increase player-player interaction. Another way of training indeed, except it is more like the lazy version of GGG. Certainly, someone could break your defense while you are idle and thus mess your training schedule, but some sort of punishment system could be devised so that people could sleep-train in relative safety. -
imo caching is freakin efficient. And is there anything preventing us from taking screenshots? (i can't find the printscreen button on this laptop, oh irony!) They make an easy way to generate spoilers.
-
It seems that every time I happen upon something rare, I get these really lengthy private mails:
[i]Untitled - Wrong Label
Hi, are you willing to trade your ....?[/i]
Except that half of the time there is a spelling error in this one sentence. I can somewhat understand why these inquiries arrive and I am not really overwhelmed by the amount of them. But seriously, [b]if[/b] I wanted to sell something to just anybody, I would have announced it in the appropriate channels. If you are not going to bother making an offer, I am not going to change my mind either. I haven't had much time to play the game recently and I simply deleted most of these pm's, without replying, so I thought it might make more sense to make some sort of announcement:
[list]
[*]I am not willing to trade "Kafuuka's signet ring" EVER.
[*]I am not able to trade those special creatures on that one account I got as a reward, because technically they are not mine. Even if the probability that the last one will be claimed by it's rightful owner is near zero, I am not selling something that isn't mine.
[*]I will trade or gave away my pass papers once the changes to the items are more final. Yes I did say trade or give away: if I don't find anything that makes RP sense for my character to have, then I'll give them away to someone for whom it makes more RP sense to have the pass papers, ie. a citizen. Otherwise I'll use it to bargain with, obviously. Consider this weird/generous/opportunistic if you want.
[/list] -
[quote name='I am Bored' date='22 January 2010 - 11:13 PM' timestamp='1264198401' post='53260']
if we do impliment a way of gaining raw materials, then those who currently have raw materials should be compensated, because the value of them would drop a bunch
[/quote]
They were never meant to be valuable, but as soon as they were released, people saw the potential to corner the market and control the supply-demand ratio. From the start those people were asked politely to refrain from doing this and now you want to be compensated? For what? For thinking of the obvious plan everybody thought about but only a few decided their own gain is worth causing trouble to all other players? I wonder what is more sad: your sheer opportunism, that you think people are silly enough to agree with you, or that you not so long ago tried to see if the average MD iq is significantly different from 100 in a vain attempt to feel better about yourself but now seem to hope people are stupid so you can profit from it?
Besides MD is a perpetual beta game, things will change and there'll be no refund. You know that when you sign up. -
If you ignore the alt problem for a minute, the unbalance can be tackled:
Allow people to posses only one kind of extraction tool/creation device, from many many tools available. Make the creation tree complex. => People will can only specialize in 1 'skill' and are required to trade.
eg. to get iron bars you'd need to mine iron ore, coal, then take them to a smelter (which has to be a separate person and will request a fee).
It doesn't have to be 1 one tool, but the amount of tools you can possess should be much lower than the amount that exist. Some tools could be more expensive both in purchase or in 'space taken'. eg. My character wants to be a miller, he could then produce various kinds of flours from various plants. If farmers are allowed to grow only one kind of crop, then milling is more versatile and should be a more expensive ability. (which is realistic too, a mill was a very important possession in the old times; also the reason why I have long ago stated to want a mill and planned to request the deed to the Golems' mill and all milling rights once I'd get a dozen WP ) -
The idea of unique items doesn't match the coins and pass papers.
Roleplay-wise, it would be easier if people had dozens of items, but nothing not in their inventory list. A lot of existing items don't make much sense to be unique either, like a 'bucket of water'.
Downside: no one has enough WP yet to create separate items for what an adventurer usually carries, from lunch to arrows. So there should be a different method to create/distribute 'ordinary' items. The list of 'ordinary items' is going to be huge too.
I think it would be fun if done well, but there should be a balanced method of acquisition. I'd prefer there to be an interesting economy or quest system instead of a new MD shop category, although a new credit sink is less code work and can't hurt the cash flow. -
[quote name='Grido' date='22 January 2010 - 05:41 PM' timestamp='1264178514' post='53240']
This suggestion has been brought up before, not entirely sure what happened with it...
I like it though, and this is me, with 30kg's of Cement saying this
[/quote]
[post='30224']Indeed it has[/post] and nothing happened.
Although the adding of effects to items seems a bit like the idea of artifacts and mundane items, the basic problems remain. The amount of raw materials is relatively low, making it too easy to acquire a monopoly. And to have a handful of people artificially keep the circle of items in motion is asking too much. -
[quote name='Malaikat Maut' date='11 January 2010 - 03:28 PM' timestamp='1263220080' post='52504']
I think immortality would be a curse. It's something my character wrestles with a great deal, and Dr. Manhattan from The Watchmen is an excellent example of how or what you would become if granted immortality.
[/quote]
I second that; mortality is very important to my character too.
However, if I had to make up powers, I'd go for:
1. excellent health; no fun in having a headache that lasts a century
2. to always stay true to myself; call it 'iron will' if you must
3. never be bored! -
Where are all the interpretative dances, that was the best part!
-
[quote name='Shadowseeker' date='10 January 2010 - 08:12 PM' timestamp='1263150760' post='52446']
There once was even an announcement asking for this..paper shaper or so? I don't remember too clear anymore.
Might be interesting to give some people the ability to edit, best would be those really versed in coding and wanting to help others.
[/quote]
There was a request for someone to become a sort of paper editor RPC, to help with html and stuff.
The paper shaper is a contest we held twice and might (I myself don't have much time right now) do again. -
[quote name='dst' date='08 January 2010 - 10:42 PM' timestamp='1262986927' post='52240']
Why all our suggestions imply nudity? Or similar things?
[/quote]
My suggestion is entirely against nudity! If you read it the way my character reads it of course... which leads me to the point: nudity is funny. Seriously, have you looked at a naked human? The idea that the feet, the ankles and the spine have to carry their burden is quite comical.
For more serious things to do, I dno. Women rights have been mentioned, but I don't think that fits into MD. The game itself doesn't differentiate between genders, and the way people treat others is set to fantasy standards. Imagine a succubus complaining men treating her like a object... -
[quote name='Windy' date='07 January 2010 - 02:28 PM' timestamp='1262870912' post='52094']
We don't really DO anything...yet. That is why I am asking for suggestions to revamp it. We always address each other as SISTER and we (not all) go skinny dipping in the lake by Wasp's Totem...[img]http://magicduel.invisionzone.com/public/style_emoticons/default/tongue.gif[/img]
[/quote]
You could start 'nudists anonymous' to try and cure that behavior. Or start a bathing fashion line, like a seamstress guild? -
[quote name='Dmik King' date='06 January 2010 - 01:00 PM' timestamp='1262779228' post='51967']
Is it more like department of woman rights?
[/quote]
lmao, The closest person to a feminist in MD is dst and she refuses to join the sisterhood.
(This is my personal opinion based on what I read, for all I know others might be very active irl but it certainly doesn't show through MD.) -
It'll be interesting to see what people will be bidding and i'll be feeling sorry for Mur when he has to read all the nonsensical bids and keep track.
The spell doc reward is a bit odd. It seems to me that it is worth most to those who already have a large collection. [i]"Spell docs were given by RPC players but since there are no more rpcs there is no current way to give them out...yet. When there will be a way to do so, and there will be one, the higher level spells will not be given."[/i] => The use is for high levels of documents, which are only usable if you have all the lower levels. Who is going to bet on getting the lower levels once there will again be a method to get them? The RPC method made some docs readily available and others sparse. I'd rather bid on the ability to distribute a low level doc than on a couple of unique docs and pray I'll get the corresponding lower ones soon. (not that i have the funds for bidding though.)
[quote name='Burns' date='06 January 2010 - 04:35 PM' timestamp='1262792100' post='51994']
Of course it's just one morph and one darkling, it could be a lot worse, but i definitely hope that there'll be some nice quests for those, too, cause.. you know... it's one thing to buy the colored crits that are basically a normal crit with a bit added strenght, but something completely different to buy a creature that's not for sale normally :/
[/quote]
I have it from a good source that a "darkling" has been a quest reward before actually. Rumor has it that it's been sold privately afterward, I wonder if that is true and if the price was similar to current bids. -
For conversations, if a person knows only the very basics about a lot of things, you can never have an in depth conversation. Actually if I encounter people who specialize in impressing people with their vast amount of subjects, but don't know more than the first ten pages of a single book, be it textbook or novel, I consider them annoying. They spent all that time working only on looking smart instead of actually being smart.
@Pipstickz: some people do try. -
[quote name='Burns' date='16 December 2009 - 06:17 PM' timestamp='1260983831' post='50428']
I can't speak for all quest-creators, but i think most would like more reward-codes better than wishpoints to spend themselves... i mean, sure, getting one or two as specail reward would be nice, but it would lead to a huge decrease in quality of quests, and insanely increase the quantity of quests, leading the system ad absurdum, if every bloody stupid action you do is part of a quest, where's your own role?
i'd like it much better if WPs were limited to questees, questers can do other peopels quests anyway, it's not like back then when RPCs were the source of WPs and it was frowned upon when they did quests of other RPCs, now any quest could bring WPs and anybody can participate if they want to, so there is no reason to give out Wishes for the quest-creators imo...
unless something is really brilliant and time-intesive, like Cutlers quests, then appropriate rewards would surely fit, but that's already being done anyways LOL
so, to conclude: i'd like it better to get more reward-codes for being a good quest-creator and do more evil experimental quests, than get a WP and buy something in the shop for the bragging rights, and i don't think that i'm the only one with that opinion
[/quote]
If quest creation is to be rewarded it would make sense for the rewards to be the same as for artisans, right? The RPC thing is of the past and the only other reason i can think of is that clicky acces costs a WP. Maybe a single time refund?
I agree that more tools is what I as a creator want: WP codes, other prizes, script features (although i have to try the existing ones first)...
Also, most people seem to propose linear WP-days relationships or piecewise linear relationships. Why not make it some mathematical function like the fibonacci series? It would be fun for people to figure out when they will get the next one (until a spoiler occurs, and obviously fibonaaci isn't useful now that i mentioned it; of course a function with the id as seed would be difficult to spoil, but might be difficult to keep fair and unconfusing).
For this it might make more sense not to reward retroactively, but start the count at zero for all players; maybe an extra WP for the first to crack the series, that would set the record for longest lasting contest -
[quote name='Malaikat Maut' date='15 December 2009 - 03:48 PM' timestamp='1260888497' post='50086']
I believe that Mur may have stumbled on to something that I often consider in philosophical and religious debates, being the subjective application of mathematics. To my knowledge, empiricists have failed to express logic in terms of pure mathematics. Godel showed in his [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_incompleteness_theorems"]Two Incompleteness Theorems[/url] that math is not robust enough to validate its own truths, let alone the absolute truths beyond it.
[/quote]
Mathematics is a logic system. It doesn't make much sense to express logic in terms of maths. The status of maths in society is due to it being the first logic that was axiomatized and has for a long time been the most extensively studied one.
Godel proved that for each non trivial set of math axioms (yes there are mutliple sets and thus multiple mathematics) there are mathematical truths you cannot prove in a finite amount of time. Proving anything beyond what is true in a logic is by definition impossible: if you cab prove it with the set of axioms then it is true in the logic.
Philosophy has difficulties beyond this because there is less consensus on which set of axioms is valid.
@Mur: it makes sense, but it doesn't convince me. My 'problem' is not that there are different representations but that you choose the ones you like. Apples (before beingn cut) looked upon as discrete objects and in discrete numbers 1 is decided upon. Gold however is quantified with continuous numbers. If you were to ask people what 1.001 apples is, they'll have a puzzled look on their face, if you ask them what 1.001 kg Gold is, they will know that it is 1 g of gold more than 1 kg Gold and if they are ecnonomists, they might even be able to say how many euros that difference is.
Extending upon that desired precision is public opinion and looking at one type of object only (thus one precision), I could even argue that multiplication and addition are the most powerfull in terms of digit generation. No matter how large the number, the precision is fixed and thus the number of digits after the comma are always the same, but by multiplying or adding, you can increase the number of digits before the comma.
If we stick to apples I can say that substraction does not give any meaningful numbers: what is -5 apples?
Baseline: for something to be true, it has to be true in all representations. I see no reason to drop that premise. -
[quote name='Muratus del Mur' date='14 December 2009 - 01:19 PM' timestamp='1260793171' post='49873']
infinitely precise is a requirement fulfilled from the start. What you say is only valid in a virtual world, where there is no 1, there is only 1.00000O(infinity), but in reality we say ONE apple, assuming all that the apple means. Now before you reply to this i will throw in your best argument There is a connection between the "virtual" number 1.0000 and the "one" apple. In reality there is no clear border between the apple and the surroundings. At atomic level i mean. You can say with precision the apple ends here and air or plate starts here. Who will claim all the layers of dust and dirt between them ?
So, i guess we are both right in a way.
[/quote]
If you wish to invoke the finite precision of measurements or rely on de broglie wavelengths, then your original division example fails as well. Imagine a pie, slice it in 3 equal pieces. Same as your apple there is no 0.33333(infinity) slice. With platonic numbers 1 must equal 1.0000(infinity) for it is the perfect one and thus .3333(infinity) is not special. Without Plato you could claim 1 is not exactly 1.0000(infinity) but the same can be done for 0.33333(infinity). Either way you are playing with representations and choosing the one that suits you most. As I said before, if you do that, then I too will always choose the representation that is most convenient for me (and in light of having a nice debate that would be the representation that least agrees with your theories; no fun in agreeing.)
Now that we are considering numbers: there is a fun fact about complex numbers and multiplication:
First consider pairs (0,0) (1,0) (0,1) etc. With multiplication you can never stray from axis you are on in R2.
Complex numbers are often represented as pairs (a, [img]http://magicduel.invisionzone.com/public/style_emoticons//cool.gif[/img] with z = a + bi. However if you multiply (0,1) with itself, you get (-1, 0).
Not certain if you can do anything with it though?
[quote]
Note: I can't reward you for "being right with me", even if you deserve a reward for the math stuff, its not ethical. Sorry.
[/quote]
How expensive would it be to airmail a cookie? afaik cookies are the standard reward for nice posts. -
Difficulty of programming depends a lot on what you want. If you want a shout to be heard at every location that is 1 click away, except if there is a door between the scenes, then the code will be quite annoying to write. If you want to send a line of text to a single location, specified upon 'casting' that should be child's play.
For things in between, it depends a bit on the coordinate system. afaik That is the only way for the server to recognize which scenes belong together and it is a bit fuzzy for this purpose. -
Swiftweasel (a fork of firefox) on ubuntu linux (9.10 for amd64) with an alpha flash 10 plugin... and it works!
-
Name – |_Ark_Mattarox
Player ID – 10113
Title/Tag – Controlled Shade
Undefined entity commonly referred to as Shade. Usually being a fragment of a larger cluster and without individual identiy.
Interests – Individuality
Petition – I believe humans would call this my birthright -
[quote]*Adam Riddle destroys the Gate*
(Remember MD is MD; RL is RL)
*Adam Riddle runs off*[/quote]
I think we have had several topics on godmodding. To state that this is roleplay is far fetched at best, but to state that this is roleplaying a madman is completely ridiculous. If only he had written *Adam Riddle [b]thinks[/b] he destroys the Gate*, it would have been consistent with playing a hallucinating character. All comments made by Thomas Riddle are based upon meta knowledge, dual login is impossible, so it is also impossible for him to have witnessed Adam's doings, yet he acts as if he knows everything.
The OOC comment is quite out of place. Someone with no apparent RP skills instructing a veteran player is ironic and sounds quite like a taunt. If such provocation is met, then that is ultimately caused by the provoker and does not warrant any sympathy.
Clarification: all of the above is based upon 'evidence' brought forth by Lazarus and to refute the idea that he was punished for his excellent roleplay. -
Most, if not all, ethics are an extension of 'treat others like you want them to treat you'. It makes perfect sense regardless of religion, for it is an equal trade, while the alternative is the will of the strongest. This is also why anarchy is the least stable state, it will collapse into dictatorship (or evolve into democracy, but less likely). And do so very quickly: as soon as people in an anarchic state realize this fact, plans will be forged and carried out.
@Malaikat: then put fries on the left side and the hamburger on the right, and bury the toy from the happy meal somewhere out of sight!
New Ideas For Usable Items
in New Ideas
Posted
[quote name='Jester' date='05 February 2010 - 01:42 AM' timestamp='1265330535' post='53848']
What would the purpose of official documents be? I don't see any reason for them. In addition, due to the low number of active players it would be extremely easy to find false documents if any existed.
[/quote]
Roleplay: treaties, diplomatic requests, military plans, laws could all be made into an official document which could be intercepted. What is the purpose of the proposed owl item? The private mail system works fine, but owls and pigeons add a flavor that some of use already roleplayed with the dreaded [color="#0000FF"]*sparkly blue text*[/color]. If you consider them useless then I was probably wrong in worrying that it might be too powerful a tool...
I think you are assuming that detection of forgeries is easy. Obviously the forged papers would not appear as 'forged document' in the inventory, that would be ridiculous and is why I said 'a hidden boolean 'forged' should be used to make the distinction'.
If the 'detect forgery spell' was 100% accurate and could be cast at will, then too it would be easy to find them. However imagine that it only works 20% of the time... using a binomial distribution, that means that if you cast it 13 times on a forged document, there is still more than 5% chance you don't know it is forged. Not that it should be 20% chance per try; a [u]simple[/u] formula could be: P(detection=true) = x / ( 1 + x) wherein x is the difference in transposition principle between detective and spy; if x is negative it should be replaced with zero (automatic failure). (x should probably be measured in hecto or kilo transposition for scaling purposes.)
If subjects are a bit loyal it should take considerable time before enemy spies get a hold of the material required to create a forgery and if they are a smart enough they wont use it unless there are enough real documents around. Casting 'detect forgery' 1000 times a day sounds like a chore to me.