Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!


Anette ✭✭✭


Last Active
  • Re: Improving Imperian

    I have to agree with Alvetta.  We can say they're not *supposed* to be Gods 2.0 until the celani come home to roost, but the fact of the matter is, pretty much everyone - yes including those that have been saying this - are treating them as if they are.  We lament at the ways people want them to be different from gods, and shout them down, and then complain they're not fulfilling the same mechanical role gods did.  Get a grip.  (Or don't, chances are I'm blowing this popsicle stand.)

    The fact that an apparent large number of people are voicing complaints that are getting shouted down - that is basically exactly why Imperian is where it is today - but more importantly, why it isn't going to change.

    I'd find the "but muh RP" arguement a lot more compelling if I felt any of them actually had interesting RP, but I'll be honest, having interacted with several of them (they seem to like to constantly pop up to pester me in my own house), I don't find any of them particularly endearing.  I don't particularly enjoy being condescended to.
  • Re: November Wheel Promo

    Pha said:
    Proving power creep issues as people don't want to buy unless they get even shinier stuff than they got in past years or they get to pay x credits to get a return on investment so they can buy more artifacts. 
    I've been around for every single one of these promotions and if I wanted to just pay to win (in a mud with pretty much zero active PVP anymore...) I could very much have done so if I was inclined to spend the money.  What I want isn't a win button (though I'd be lying to deny its not what some people want).  What I want is, in a word, a novelty.  Something that is interesting and different.  Giving me a promotion that gives me the same old stuff or even better FRAGMENTS of the same old stuff that before I could buy whole - often for less - is frankly starting to get to the point where it's insulting my intelligence.

    One thing IRE I think dearly needs to learn is the same promotion that works on Achaea isn't going to work here.  Or on Aetolia or Lusternia, for that matter.
  • Re: I HEART

    The spirit of Stavenn lives on!

  • Re: I HEART

    I have been having a lot of fun RPing with @sarrius, lately.
  • Re: Mudlet Scripting

    Dreacor said:
    How can I do the next thing: Attack with EQ and BAL and next attack is with only EQ, then again with EQ and BAL and then again only with EQ? So I'd attack with those two rules rules every other attack. All help is appreciated.
    So if I understand you correctly, you are alternating attacks between one that needs EQ+BAL, and one that only needs EQ?

    What I would do in that case, is remember the last attack with a global variable with something like LastAttack.  Then call a function on receiving EQ that checks what the last attack was:
    -- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    -- function: AlternateAttack
    -- Alternate between an attack that needs EQ *and* balance, and one that
    -- only needs EQ.  Call me from the equilibrium recovery message for best
    -- results.  Returns the attack we did if we attacked, false if we did not.  
    function AlternateAttack()
       haveBalance     = gmcp.Char.Vitals.bal or false
       haveEquilibrium = gmcp.Char.Vitals.eq or false

       if (LastAttack==nil) then
          -- first attack
          if (haveBalance==true and haveEquilibrium==true) then send("<PUT EQ+BAL ATTACK HERE>") lastAttack="<PUT EQ+BAL ATTACK HERE>"
    return lastAttack else return false end elseif (LastAttack=="<PUT EQ+BAL ATTACK HERE>") then -- second attack, just EQ if (haveEquilibrium==true) then send("<PUT EQ-ONLY ATTACK HERE>") lastAttack="<PUT EQ-ONLY ATTACK HERE>" return lastAttack else return false end
       elseif (LastAttack=="<PUT EQ+BAL ATTACK HERE>") then -- third attack, EQ+BAL if (haveBalance==true and haveEquilibrium==true) then send("<PUT EQ+BAL ATTACK HERE>") lastAttack="<PUT EQ+BAL ATTACK HERE>" return lastAttack else return false end end
    I wrote this up entirely now, and haven't tested it, but it should put you on the right track in terms of the logic at least.