Guillak

[quote name='Seigheart' timestamp='1339440935' post='114385']
Yes, Rhaegar. The intended purpose was to kill Chewett, and use his popularity to have both Spart and himself revived.
[/quote]

So instead of helping Spartiatis yourself with your efforts and RP, you killed Chewett so that someone else can use efforts to revive Spartiatis?
This looks to me like the case with your death when people accused you of not doing anything to get yourself revived, while all the others did the "dirty work".

Do you really have to be that reckless to set the burden on someone else's shoulders?

Oh, the path of lesser resistance...

lets play it safe and kill seighart again, he already returned from dead so he is our best bet for bringin all dead players back to life

This morning Seigheart killed me.

When confronted with this, he lied about killing me until i gave him evidence that cannot be ignored, and then gave me a story about "killing me to help spar". I waited to hear his reasoning until I posted this topic, it's a poor one and one I personally don't believe because he dislikes me.

Well done sieg, I'm dead. Now honestly, I would have love to be killed, its great roleplay fun, and when it was introduced into the game, I thought it was a really cool idea. When the monarchs were killed I organised a nice little roleplay event that i had great fun in doing, and we revived them. Then when sieg and the others were killed, again I helped out where I could and had great fun doing so.

Sadly, over the past months I haven't had much time for MD, and when Spar died I haven't really had time to attend any of the events that were arranged, let alone run the service that I was thinking of doing for him. He is a great warrior and i felt that we should honour this. I didn't have time to run this, and sadly it looks like he has left now, so that's not good.

I now sit at GoC, dead. I don't have any time to roleplay some event to revive myself, and I will not be paying anyone to revive myself. Death to someone who doesn't roleplay means only that either the community will roleplay for them, and the gods will deem them worthy to be brought back, or that they pay.

Clearly in spars case, he couldn't pay, and sadly I didn't see too much action for the roleplay so he faded away.

This is entirely stupid, there needs to be more mechanics so that people who have died, have some way to be reborn that isnt paying someone an extortionate amount of coin or roleplay that isn't guaranteed to work. When Mur gave out revival items, it was obvious that they would slowly move to the highest bidders, those who would keep them for themselves. The "normal" person has little chance to be revived by an item, unless they have friends that hold said items. Death seems unfinished, especially when it is exceptionally hard for someone to be revived. In Spar's you just tell him to go away, he cant play MD anymore.

Many of you wont have bothered to listen to spar, But hopefully someone is going to listen to what im saying. Quite simply, I'm just going to wait, I don't have time to do any roleplay to save me currently, nor will i be wasting my coin buying the use of a revival item. Lets see if I last longer than Spar until some change happens in MD.

Thanks Sieg, you have made one more person die, which means one more revival item needs to be used, whereas you could have been productive and actually tried to help spar by convincing someone else.

(Somehow related to [url="http://magicduel.invisionzone.com/topic/11883-spells-on-clickables/"]spells on clickables[/url], but much more accessible)

How about the possibility to cast spells on the current location rather than a specific player? The spell would "hang in the air" in the scene and would be automatically released on the next person who walks in the location. A single wizard could cast several spells in a location, then all of them would be triggered off simultaneously whenever a character enters the scene, friend or foe (or the caster himself if he left and came back, forgetting about his own spells). If the spell allows for multiple targets, then it could effect all players in the current location (?).

Technically, in order to cast the spell on the location rather than on a player, you would simply use the spell words without specifying the target (e.g. just "movelock" instead of "movelock Grido").

This would make it possible to set up random traps or blessings on a specific area. In the former case, a group of hunters would have to communicate in order to prevent a member to trigger a trap by accident.

To protect yourself against such time bombs: walk around being cloaked/ghosted, in which case the spell would be lost (or the spell would ignore you and affect the next person instead?). The caster's spell counter would be decremented at the time of the cast rather than that of the triggering.

Movelock was obviously the spell I first had in mind … Now it would really get hellish, making it possible to really [i]guard[/i] places. Currently, however strong you are, you can't stop someone from passing by you if the person clicks arrows too swiftly. And even if you see the other's name in the player list, by the time you cast the spell the target is likely to be gone since long ago. This would make up for such situations. It might help slowing down pursuers too, especially if your opponent has a large land loyalty advantage in a highly viscous place.

Locate might get a new dimension too, as it would allow to watch over a place and report who the first person to visit it is, assuming the caster is online at the time the spell is triggered.

Etc. All other spells would work as well of course. I think it is an easy way to give much more value to all spells, especially basic ones such as movelock and ghost.

(Somehow related to [url="http://magicduel.invisionzone.com/topic/11883-spells-on-clickables/"]spells on clickables[/url], but much more accessible)

How about the possibility to cast spells on the current location rather than a specific player? The spell would "hang in the air" in the scene and would be automatically released on the next person who walks in the location. A single wizard could cast several spells in a location, then all of them would be triggered off simultaneously whenever a character enters the scene, friend or foe (or the caster himself if he left and came back, forgetting about his own spells). If the spell allows for multiple targets, then it could effect all players in the current location (?).

Technically, in order to cast the spell on the location rather than on a player, you would simply use the spell words without specifying the target (e.g. just "movelock" instead of "movelock Grido").

This would make it possible to set up random traps or blessings on a specific area. In the former case, a group of hunters would have to communicate in order to prevent a member to trigger a trap by accident.

To protect yourself against such time bombs: walk around being cloaked/ghosted, in which case the spell would be lost (or the spell would ignore you and affect the next person instead?). The caster's spell counter would be decremented at the time of the cast rather than that of the triggering.

Movelock was obviously the spell I first had in mind … Now it would really get hellish, making it possible to really [i]guard[/i] places. Currently, however strong you are, you can't stop someone from passing by you if the person clicks arrows too swiftly. And even if you see the other's name in the player list, by the time you cast the spell the target is likely to be gone since long ago. This would make up for such situations. It might help slowing down pursuers too, especially if your opponent has a large land loyalty advantage in a highly viscous place.

Locate might get a new dimension too, as it would allow to watch over a place and report who the first person to visit it is, assuming the caster is online at the time the spell is triggered.

Etc. All other spells would work as well of course. I think it is an easy way to give much more value to all spells, especially basic ones such as movelock and ghost.

(Somehow related to [url="http://magicduel.invisionzone.com/topic/11883-spells-on-clickables/"]spells on clickables[/url], but much more accessible)

How about the possibility to cast spells on the current location rather than a specific player? The spell would "hang in the air" in the scene and would be automatically released on the next person who walks in the location. A single wizard could cast several spells in a location, then all of them would be triggered off simultaneously whenever a character enters the scene, friend or foe (or the caster himself if he left and came back, forgetting about his own spells). If the spell allows for multiple targets, then it could effect all players in the current location (?).

Technically, in order to cast the spell on the location rather than on a player, you would simply use the spell words without specifying the target (e.g. just "movelock" instead of "movelock Grido").

This would make it possible to set up random traps or blessings on a specific area. In the former case, a group of hunters would have to communicate in order to prevent a member to trigger a trap by accident.

To protect yourself against such time bombs: walk around being cloaked/ghosted, in which case the spell would be lost (or the spell would ignore you and affect the next person instead?). The caster's spell counter would be decremented at the time of the cast rather than that of the triggering.

Movelock was obviously the spell I first had in mind … Now it would really get hellish, making it possible to really [i]guard[/i] places. Currently, however strong you are, you can't stop someone from passing by you if the person clicks arrows too swiftly. And even if you see the other's name in the player list, by the time you cast the spell the target is likely to be gone since long ago. This would make up for such situations. It might help slowing down pursuers too, especially if your opponent has a large land loyalty advantage in a highly viscous place.

Locate might get a new dimension too, as it would allow to watch over a place and report who the first person to visit it is, assuming the caster is online at the time the spell is triggered.

Etc. All other spells would work as well of course. I think it is an easy way to give much more value to all spells, especially basic ones such as movelock and ghost.

(Somehow related to [url="http://magicduel.invisionzone.com/topic/11883-spells-on-clickables/"]spells on clickables[/url], but much more accessible)

How about the possibility to cast spells on the current location rather than a specific player? The spell would "hang in the air" in the scene and would be automatically released on the next person who walks in the location. A single wizard could cast several spells in a location, then all of them would be triggered off simultaneously whenever a character enters the scene, friend or foe (or the caster himself if he left and came back, forgetting about his own spells). If the spell allows for multiple targets, then it could effect all players in the current location (?).

Technically, in order to cast the spell on the location rather than on a player, you would simply use the spell words without specifying the target (e.g. just "movelock" instead of "movelock Grido").

This would make it possible to set up random traps or blessings on a specific area. In the former case, a group of hunters would have to communicate in order to prevent a member to trigger a trap by accident.

To protect yourself against such time bombs: walk around being cloaked/ghosted, in which case the spell would be lost (or the spell would ignore you and affect the next person instead?). The caster's spell counter would be decremented at the time of the cast rather than that of the triggering.

Movelock was obviously the spell I first had in mind … Now it would really get hellish, making it possible to really [i]guard[/i] places. Currently, however strong you are, you can't stop someone from passing by you if the person clicks arrows too swiftly. And even if you see the other's name in the player list, by the time you cast the spell the target is likely to be gone since long ago. This would make up for such situations. It might help slowing down pursuers too, especially if your opponent has a large land loyalty advantage in a highly viscous place.

Locate might get a new dimension too, as it would allow to watch over a place and report who the first person to visit it is, assuming the caster is online at the time the spell is triggered.

Etc. All other spells would work as well of course. I think it is an easy way to give much more value to all spells, especially basic ones such as movelock and ghost.

(Somehow related to [url="http://magicduel.invisionzone.com/topic/11883-spells-on-clickables/"]spells on clickables[/url], but much more accessible)

How about the possibility to cast spells on the current location rather than a specific player? The spell would "hang in the air" in the scene and would be automatically released on the next person who walks in the location. A single wizard could cast several spells in a location, then all of them would be triggered off simultaneously whenever a character enters the scene, friend or foe (or the caster himself if he left and came back, forgetting about his own spells). If the spell allows for multiple targets, then it could effect all players in the current location (?).

Technically, in order to cast the spell on the location rather than on a player, you would simply use the spell words without specifying the target (e.g. just "movelock" instead of "movelock Grido").

This would make it possible to set up random traps or blessings on a specific area. In the former case, a group of hunters would have to communicate in order to prevent a member to trigger a trap by accident.

To protect yourself against such time bombs: walk around being cloaked/ghosted, in which case the spell would be lost (or the spell would ignore you and affect the next person instead?). The caster's spell counter would be decremented at the time of the cast rather than that of the triggering.

Movelock was obviously the spell I first had in mind … Now it would really get hellish, making it possible to really [i]guard[/i] places. Currently, however strong you are, you can't stop someone from passing by you if the person clicks arrows too swiftly. And even if you see the other's name in the player list, by the time you cast the spell the target is likely to be gone since long ago. This would make up for such situations. It might help slowing down pursuers too, especially if your opponent has a large land loyalty advantage in a highly viscous place.

Locate might get a new dimension too, as it would allow to watch over a place and report who the first person to visit it is, assuming the caster is online at the time the spell is triggered.

Etc. All other spells would work as well of course. I think it is an easy way to give much more value to all spells, especially basic ones such as movelock and ghost.

(Somehow related to [url="http://magicduel.invisionzone.com/topic/11883-spells-on-clickables/"]spells on clickables[/url], but much more accessible)

How about the possibility to cast spells on the current location rather than a specific player? The spell would "hang in the air" in the scene and would be automatically released on the next person who walks in the location. A single wizard could cast several spells in a location, then all of them would be triggered off simultaneously whenever a character enters the scene, friend or foe (or the caster himself if he left and came back, forgetting about his own spells). If the spell allows for multiple targets, then it could effect all players in the current location (?).

Technically, in order to cast the spell on the location rather than on a player, you would simply use the spell words without specifying the target (e.g. just "movelock" instead of "movelock Grido").

This would make it possible to set up random traps or blessings on a specific area. In the former case, a group of hunters would have to communicate in order to prevent a member to trigger a trap by accident.

To protect yourself against such time bombs: walk around being cloaked/ghosted, in which case the spell would be lost (or the spell would ignore you and affect the next person instead?). The caster's spell counter would be decremented at the time of the cast rather than that of the triggering.

Movelock was obviously the spell I first had in mind … Now it would really get hellish, making it possible to really [i]guard[/i] places. Currently, however strong you are, you can't stop someone from passing by you if the person clicks arrows too swiftly. And even if you see the other's name in the player list, by the time you cast the spell the target is likely to be gone since long ago. This would make up for such situations. It might help slowing down pursuers too, especially if your opponent has a large land loyalty advantage in a highly viscous place.

Locate might get a new dimension too, as it would allow to watch over a place and report who the first person to visit it is, assuming the caster is online at the time the spell is triggered.

Etc. All other spells would work as well of course. I think it is an easy way to give much more value to all spells, especially basic ones such as movelock and ghost.

(Somehow related to [url="http://magicduel.invisionzone.com/topic/11883-spells-on-clickables/"]spells on clickables[/url], but much more accessible)

How about the possibility to cast spells on the current location rather than a specific player? The spell would "hang in the air" in the scene and would be automatically released on the next person who walks in the location. A single wizard could cast several spells in a location, then all of them would be triggered off simultaneously whenever a character enters the scene, friend or foe (or the caster himself if he left and came back, forgetting about his own spells). If the spell allows for multiple targets, then it could effect all players in the current location (?).

Technically, in order to cast the spell on the location rather than on a player, you would simply use the spell words without specifying the target (e.g. just "movelock" instead of "movelock Grido").

This would make it possible to set up random traps or blessings on a specific area. In the former case, a group of hunters would have to communicate in order to prevent a member to trigger a trap by accident.

To protect yourself against such time bombs: walk around being cloaked/ghosted, in which case the spell would be lost (or the spell would ignore you and affect the next person instead?). The caster's spell counter would be decremented at the time of the cast rather than that of the triggering.

Movelock was obviously the spell I first had in mind … Now it would really get hellish, making it possible to really [i]guard[/i] places. Currently, however strong you are, you can't stop someone from passing by you if the person clicks arrows too swiftly. And even if you see the other's name in the player list, by the time you cast the spell the target is likely to be gone since long ago. This would make up for such situations. It might help slowing down pursuers too, especially if your opponent has a large land loyalty advantage in a highly viscous place.

Locate might get a new dimension too, as it would allow to watch over a place and report who the first person to visit it is, assuming the caster is online at the time the spell is triggered.

Etc. All other spells would work as well of course. I think it is an easy way to give much more value to all spells, especially basic ones such as movelock and ghost.

(Somehow related to [url="http://magicduel.invisionzone.com/topic/11883-spells-on-clickables/"]spells on clickables[/url], but much more accessible)

How about the possibility to cast spells on the current location rather than a specific player? The spell would "hang in the air" in the scene and would be automatically released on the next person who walks in the location. A single wizard could cast several spells in a location, then all of them would be triggered off simultaneously whenever a character enters the scene, friend or foe (or the caster himself if he left and came back, forgetting about his own spells). If the spell allows for multiple targets, then it could effect all players in the current location (?).

Technically, in order to cast the spell on the location rather than on a player, you would simply use the spell words without specifying the target (e.g. just "movelock" instead of "movelock Grido").

This would make it possible to set up random traps or blessings on a specific area. In the former case, a group of hunters would have to communicate in order to prevent a member to trigger a trap by accident.

To protect yourself against such time bombs: walk around being cloaked/ghosted, in which case the spell would be lost (or the spell would ignore you and affect the next person instead?). The caster's spell counter would be decremented at the time of the cast rather than that of the triggering.

Movelock was obviously the spell I first had in mind … Now it would really get hellish, making it possible to really [i]guard[/i] places. Currently, however strong you are, you can't stop someone from passing by you if the person clicks arrows too swiftly. And even if you see the other's name in the player list, by the time you cast the spell the target is likely to be gone since long ago. This would make up for such situations. It might help slowing down pursuers too, especially if your opponent has a large land loyalty advantage in a highly viscous place.

Locate might get a new dimension too, as it would allow to watch over a place and report who the first person to visit it is, assuming the caster is online at the time the spell is triggered.

Etc. All other spells would work as well of course. I think it is an easy way to give much more value to all spells, especially basic ones such as movelock and ghost.

how about if shouting would somehow send chat lines also in the area surroundings?
perhaps that will mess up the game, if its spammed but then maybe a spell for special people (example: someone's roleplaying a strong forest spirit... someone attacks its forest, it can "whisper them" with that spell from far away, maybe even scare them), that allows you to speak in surroundings
or perhaps triggers in specific location, example oak tower, you have a trigger when you shout, its hearable infront of the tower (you yell through a window...)

I think this would bring in more element of realism... what do you think?

I'd like to see the AL to be restarted... again.

And not like the last one, but one where the AL is influenced by the players again

Alternate views of your creatures would be good. One quick view where you toggle through them quickly (assuming such would load faster) and a grand table view that displays properties.

If we still had kings, they should be able to create and dissolve alliances at will, and reward or punish their subjects by changing land loyalty. Alliance leadership should be based on land loyalty, not the kind that reflects loyalty to your protector. Absent the kings, whoever holds the ruling items would do this.

There should be a comprehensive effort to fix the grammar and spelling in all of the hardcoded text (stuff Grido can't reach now). It gives an amateurish impression to newcomers.

[Edit - lines removed as they are copied below. Done - thanks guys.]

[b]Dynamic land loyalty[/b]
One of the things I would like to see changed is the way people gain land loyalty. Currently the way to gain it is be joining an alliance from a specific land and after that all you need to do is make sure you log in from time to time and it'll keep going up.

While this is a nice start and does give some indication of a persons loyalty to a specific land it is very limited. For example someone who joins a land only to damage it or it's people still gains loyalty and will keep it for all eternity, while someone who does help to protect the land or in some other way helps the land, but is not (yet) a citizen of that land gets nothing.

While this might not be the most important change and I'm not certain how it should be changed with the growing importance of land loyalty just time isn't enough.

i would personally like to see "everybody can beat anybody" again, cuz atm combat is all about stats

so combat system redesign is wut i say

Work on citizenship, no one can become a member of a land without joining an alliance, and with all these takeovers and tools requiring loyalty its entirely stupid not to have some way of becoming a normal citizen.

A suggestion to make fight logs much clearer: one matrix per round, where attacking and target creatures are displayed in rows and columns, respectively. This can give a good overview of a whole round at a glance, rather than the current linear text.

It would look like this:

[attachment=3666:matrix.png]

(As for using colors or not, Pipstickz started a thread [url="http://magicduel.invisionzone.com/topic/10649-pretty-logs/"]here[/url] some time ago.)

Edit: the example above is for a 2 vs. 2 fight, but in case more creatures are used (e.g. 6 vs. 6), it would be better to remove all data in the cells, and display them only when passing the mouse over, otherwise it will be too big:

[attachment=3667:matrix2.png]

A suggestion to make fight logs much clearer: one matrix per round, where attacking and target creatures are displayed in rows and columns, respectively. This can give a good overview of a whole round at a glance, rather than the current linear text.

It would look like this:

[attachment=3666:matrix.png]

(As for using colors or not, Pipstickz started a thread [url="http://magicduel.invisionzone.com/topic/10649-pretty-logs/"]here[/url] some time ago.)

Edit: the example above is for a 2 vs. 2 fight, but in case more creatures are used (e.g. 6 vs. 6), it would be better to remove all data in the cells, and display them only when passing the mouse over, otherwise it will be too big:

[attachment=3667:matrix2.png]

Skill bonuses in combat have gone awry, they need to be redesigned but there are other elements of combat that need attention.

This is my interpretation of how combat was envisioned:
Battles are fought with heat.
Principles define the rules of combat.
Creatures are the conduits for a player's will and experiences in battle.

With those core elements one can see where combat may be lacking.

These are some aspect of the game that may yet - and I feel should - be included in combat:
-Group/team combat - more than 2 players taking part in a battle (perhaps someone can find Mur's post about the next combat level from a few years ago?)
-Species - creatures have an affinity to certain other creatures.
-Land loyalty - the incorporation of land relations and allegiance to lands.


Interesting discussion so far. There will be plenty of food for thought.


@apophys: Indeed it's a much better scaling version. I don't know what possessed me to exclude logarithms

First of all I need to say that from my point of view there is always an unbalance in our world but only from our own point of view. Because we behave differently and this creates an “unbalance”. I will explain this as short as possible:
If you are interested in training your body, think of any form - it´s a principle I´d like to show, you will invest different amounts of “energy” into the whole idea! As a martial artist I take my example. I trained a lot when I was young (16-20) and I was good - the best in my town but it came a time when I moved to Berlin the capital of Germany. Thousands of people were training there and some of them trained more intense, invested more money (private training) and had more competition with others than I had in my hometown all those years before, through which they were able to have more different experiences. So I started to feel uncomfortable. Why? Because my position in the world change, of course it was only from my point of view, but it had an effect. So what did I do? I jumped on the train and started training more, learned to train more effective, intense and invested a lot money for private lessons which were so intense and helpful that I was able to succeed others who trained even 10 years longer than myself in a short period of time.
You may ask now what my short story has to do with this here? Simple as that - it’s the same principle working here. You desire something and if your desire is big enough you will invest much more than others to reach your aim and from various points of view it looks like unbalance. Others who have not this strong desire start feeling uncomfortable and they will search for a solution to solve their own uncomfortable problem their ego is producing. I say there is a solution to this, but not the way we are looking at it.
I take the example of Lightsage now. If I´m wrong in what I think please excuse me. He himself just said he was able to raise his attack stats from 8500 to 1000000 (is it really 1 Million or 100000?).
“I went from 8500 attack to 1000000 in no time at all.”
No time at all? I don´t think so. As far as I know one thing you did to reach this, was to sacrifice creatures, fully tokened and with a huge amount of wins on them. Some people don´t even have those creatures because they are hidden in the shop and you need shop resets to get more than one of them. This means you need to play for a long time and invest alot money. From your own perspective it was in no time (the jump from 8,5 K to 100K) but if it is like I think then you put a lot of effort and planning and TIME into it to raise your attack power that much.
So there is a balance even in this.
If I have someone totally new coming to my training and he feels, after a couple of weeks, the big difference between “my fighting skills” and his newly started once, he will mostly be disappointed and many people start losing their interest and stop training. They have not the strong desire which was and still is in me. Same here in MD. Some people are in this “game” since 4-5 years, might have worked a lot on training their creatures, they might have invest a lot in the shop (resets) and the have thought about different tactics and other forms of playing over those years. Now after all those years others who are different are feeling something is not correct. Well its again simple, there is no balance here if you look from your own personal perspective. We cannot take away something from others who worked hard on it only because we want to feel better. Instead we should no think in terms of losing something, we should start thinking of gaining something.
Life is always in balance but not as we wish!
Our EGO tries to be on top all the time and if it´s not possible to reach it as the EGO wishes we call it unbalance, it a nice excuse. There is a solution to that but it lies inside all of us.

After all this above I will give some thoughts and ideas which came into my mind while reading this whole post. It can “cure” some problems but the “unbalance” which so many feel at the moment, But as I said the source for this is from within the people not the surrounding.

1.Idea (negative abilities/stats)

There is a balance in fighting and a very strict limit if you think of the whole win/lost/honor construction. But there is nothing in comparison when you look at the stats. In our RL we have that, why not here in MD too. We all have abilities which are growing our whole life and if you put them into words or onto paper you can call them stats. But we have negative abilities too and they grow too if we are not aware of them and try see their deeper meaning. I´d say leave the normal stats as they are and create “negative stats” as their opposition. At this point I have no idea how to call them and how they should work this should be the work of our community to form this.
An example: If you have a very strong fighter who achieved many things in fighting and he is attacking a new MP5 with all his force, he should be reminded that he should be able to attack in a different way 0if he feels the desire to fight against the newly MP5. Reminded with the growth of a “opposition” stat which affects his fighting against a weak opponent next time, maybe temporary but permanently is better I think. Same like the honor idea is working. Don´t see it as punishment just as figuring out how to deal with different situation.

With my skill achieved through training martial arts I can control an attacker in a total different way after 20 years of training than 20 years ago. I can use abilities which even look soft and friendly to win a fight. Look at it from this point of view. I could write much more about this idea but my post is already long. Let´s brainstorm about it .

2. Idea (championship)
Create a championship like we have in all big sports in the world. Twice a year. This competition should be for those who like to invest a lot of time and fighting skills to pleasure their desire for fighting. Let it be something ongoing the whole year. I played another game which was (and still is) badly constructed but one thing worked good. This idea comes from there. There is a championship and you have to fight a lot against a group of other players. There is no need that both players are online to fight. You just set your defence and attack and then you could log off. Your opponent had some days time to do the same. Once both were set, the system created the fight like it did when both were online in a normal tournament. I have no idea if it´s possible to implement here in MD but the Idea is here to discuss. I even thought of opening the MP levels for this. Let´s say MP6 (losing it 30 adepts of course this could be MP7 then) is the level for the participants in the championship. They have some restriction when the fight against normal MP5 outside of the championship (how - needs to be discussed). And a normal MP5 can attack but he should be aware that he is facing a fighter who was able to qualify himself for the championship. A lot more can go in here.

3. Idea (creating things)
Maybe this is a very strange one but it´s an idea. What about creating other sorts of expansions in MD in which people can invest a lot of time effort and energy to fill their desire to be someone in MD and show it in the world. Something more visual than politics. Let´s say housing. The resource system is already there (needs maybe fixing I don´t know I´m not into it). Create a housing area where people need to achieve access, once have access they can purchase (or through a long quest) a plot to build a house/home. From this point on you need drawing artists who are able and willing to create individual houses at different stages of building and once building is finished the whole interior. A LOT OF WORK! But if you think of it as a long term project, were people could do whatever they want, with of course huge investments (time and effort) it´s a nice idea to create something and enjoy afterwards. And I think life is about creating and joy. This Idea is very abstract and hard to implement and sounds to me very huge, but I like to let all the ideas and thoughts out, which I was able to catch when they were crossing my consciousness.

Let´s be open and let´s try to brainstorm because a big “change” always needs time!
Menhir

Cool!

[quote name='Fire Starter' timestamp='1337777709' post='112683']
Glad to see you back in action, apophys

Still, the problem with unsatisfied players, who worked hard for those millions of stats would remain...
[/quote]

Certainly they should be taken into consideration, but honestly, for them the best system is the current one. However the system gets changed, they will likely be unsatisfied.

I think my suggestion is the best compromise so far. It still gives some kind of real combat benefit to increasing your stats.