One Reason To Limit Item Stacking

from Elemental Forums

First off, I have been playing this game a lot over the past few days, and I am having fun with it.  However, as most posts will also share my opinion, it seems to have no adhesiveness to it.  In other words, no boundaries or limitations.  I mainly speak of the item stacking, as others have pointed out as well.

Stacking attack and defense and easily winning the game is one thing, but in my opinion, there is a much larger game changer if this ever does go multi-player.  I am talking about the Band of the Eagle Eye.  It takes very little to unlock this ring, which gives +1 sight when equipped and only costs 10 Gildar per ring.  I am playing a game at the moment and started at the very top (North if the map was turned directionally).  So i decided to see how many rings it would take to unlock the entire map by staying inside the starting city.  The total was 137, which allowed me to see every single thing on the map, including what kind of troops were guarding the enemy towns.  So, if one were inclined, they could go straight to the tech that unlocks the ring and only spend 1370 Gildar (even less I bet depending on where you start on the map) to map out a plan to win the game.  Of course this would lead to everyone doing it, so it would change the face of the strategy altogether.

I'm not a programmer, so I won't pretend to know the best avenue, but something like this could definitely be a game breaker.  please consider limiting the equippable items.  To me, it doesn't matter if it's realistic or not, as long as it isn't overpowered and a must in every game.

elemental
17,717 views 39 replies
Reply #1 from Elemental Forums Top

Hah, that is kinda funny and silly at the same time. I'd like them to limit them as well, maybe to 2 or 4 but increase the rings power to make it harder to decide which ones you want to use, thus making the game more fun and not a constant stream of equipping accesories.

Reply #2 from Elemental Forums Top

I agree.  Maybe create a "paper doll" for the equipment slots and increase the items given bonus amount.  Or at least something along those lines.

Siege of Centauri
Reply #3 from Elemental Forums Top

I bought the health ring which cost 50 gildar - much better then actually leveling it up. I bought like 20. It is a bit ridiculous.

Reply #4 from Elemental Forums Top

Hah, yeah at first I had just sort of assumed this game followed the same slot mold as every game from pen and paper dungeons and dragons to heroes of might and magic - ie two rings, one amulet, etc. 

At some point I had a ton of rings in my pack and noticed that while I thought I was clicking the better and that it must have been auto-unequipping the other ring (like it will do with armor), I had actually just been equipping an increasingly large array of amulets and rings.  Until I noticed that I was wondering why my sovereign was such a godlike being with hawk-like eyesight and cartoonishly fast movement.  I had just assumed he must have descended from the unholy union of Birdman and the Roadrunner. 

Reply #5 from Elemental Forums Top

lol what? Why is it even like that? You can wear 137 rings? lol.. What were they thinking.

Reply #6 from Elemental Forums Top

I mean, in real life you can wear a lot of rings.. haha, it just doesnt get along well with game balance ;P

Reply #7 from Elemental Forums Top

I really think the should make a limit like 1 helm 1 armour 2 rings 1 necklace and so on,a little much with 1337 rings  :grin:

Reply #8 from Stardock Forums Top

someone should dig up that pic of Mr. T posted on the forums earlier, count how many rings/amulets he's wearing, and base the limits off of that.  I think it's safe to assume he found the max (IRL) limit. :P

Reply #10 from Elemental Forums Top

I support a cap of 10 rings, one pack, etc.

Reply #11 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting Clawdius_Talonious, reply 10
I support a cap of 10 rings, one pack, etc.
End of Clawdius_Talonious's quote

10 rings FTW

1 less if sovereign is married

Reply #12 from Stardock Forums Top

well considering how powerful things get as the game progresses they will have to make higher level stuff with better stats at the mid and high end of the game. I personally don't like that you can buy these items and they should be hidden away in dungeons and crypts and old castles with high level monsters and npc's guarding them. Now this is the part of the game that isn't like MOM cause that's what you had to do unless you used the forge and smithing features of the game to make your own. But the cost of one item of significant stats was HUGE in MOM as well,

I only support 1 item per item slot like in other rpg games like a Diablo 2 or something. But as I said have wonderful magical trinkets all over the map in hidden and hard to get to places. Anyone remember Warlords III where you got a map from one ruin that showed you where another ruin was with lots of loot? That's what I'd like to see maybe here.

Reply #13 from Elemental Forums Top

What I thought the first time I played the game was that you could only ever equip 1 of each item, so you could have 10 different amulets, but not 10 of the same one. I think that would probably be the most balanced approach, because then you could get a slight boost to all stats but you couldn't stack anything to high heavens.

The other alternative would be that each stat would only be boosted by the highest individual modifier rather then add them up, that would allow you to make series of rings, ring +1, +2,+3 etc and still be balanced.

Though if they ever fix stacking they need at the same time adress Champion scaling, even with 20 rangers backpacks, 50 assault rings and 50 defense rings (A grand cost of 20*20+50*100+50*50=7900) barely keeps you competitive a moderate mid game stack.

Reply #14 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting AnnihilatorX, reply 11

Quoting Clawdius_Talonious, reply 10I support a cap of 10 rings, one pack, etc.

10 rings FTW

1 less if sovereign is married
End of AnnihilatorX's quote
Hey, if my wedding band is a ring of health or something, so much the better.  :D

Reply #15 from Stardock Forums Top

When discussing this in the chat with Kryo, he told me not to expect the unlimited stacking functionality to stay in the game. So chances are item stacking is going to be very limited soon enough. Right now I just limit myself to 1 neck 1 backpack and 2 rings. I made the crazy champion with 1,000 rings and while amusing, it was definitely gamebreaking.

Reply #16 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting rossanderson48, reply 12
well considering how powerful things get as the game progresses they will have to make higher level stuff with better stats at the mid and high end of the game. I personally don't like that you can buy these items and they should be hidden away in dungeons and crypts and old castles with high level monsters and npc's guarding them. Now this is the part of the game that isn't like MOM cause that's what you had to do unless you used the forge and smithing features of the game to make your own. But the cost of one item of significant stats was HUGE in MOM as well,

I only support 1 item per item slot like in other rpg games like a Diablo 2 or something. But as I said have wonderful magical trinkets all over the map in hidden and hard to get to places. Anyone remember Warlords III where you got a map from one ruin that showed you where another ruin was with lots of loot? That's what I'd like to see maybe here.
End of rossanderson48's quote

 

i agree with this, the store should have basic armor and weapons, but all the legendary armor and weapons plus other equipment you get through the magic tech tree should be in notables and quests.

also, this game needs a paperdoll bad. especialy on the merchant so we can see what we're buying compaired to what we already have equiped.

Reply #17 from Elemental Forums Top

You need tons of rings and such for champions to have any chance against monsters and armies.  No way your champion will ever compete with the normal units that run around at 400+ attack (stacks of 12 units generally have that or more and you may be fighting 10 or more groups of them).  I do think having it be rings and such is silly though.  Perhaps potions you can drink for a permentant stat boost (not vision.....) and then rings and such with limited numbers for things like vision and move speed as to prevent the abuse of those specific mechanics while still allowing champions to have a shot vs the run of the mill armies in the game.  Currently I think it is rather silly that champions are easily outdone by normal units unless you spend tens of thousands of gold upgrading them just to keep up. 

Reply #18 from Elemental Forums Top

Has anybody considered that just because there's an exploit in a game doesn't mean you have to abuse it?

Reply #19 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting Mtn_Man, reply 18
Has anybody considered that just because there's an exploit in a game doesn't mean you have to abuse it?
End of Mtn_Man's quote

 

Not sure why would would consider trying to tone your champions up to be equal to normal units as being an exploit or abusive.

Reply #20 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting Mtn_Man, reply 18
Has anybody considered that just because there's an exploit in a game doesn't mean you have to abuse it?
End of Mtn_Man's quote

Granted and I hate that it's basically required to make champions anything but really sucky cannon fodder.  Without massively abusive overuse of rings, amulets and packs all but a heavily min-maxed melee sovereign is in big trouble later in the game.  Ya know, when you can easily be hit for 100+ damage by wandering packs of jerks.

Reply #21 from Elemental Forums Top

I too chalk this up to yet another oversight. Just one of those flags from beta that wasn't changed, or even written, for the release.

Reply #22 from Stardock Forums Top

Another complete whiff by SD.  I can't believe they would make a game like this with no limit to the number of items you can wear.  It just makes absolutely no logical sense whatsoever, and makes game balance impossible.

Reply #23 from Elemental Forums Top

Official word would be nice.

I consider this to be completely broken and very silly.

I don't abuse it because it's obviously screwed up, but it's not like this game is remotely balanced in any way so who cares.

Reply #24 from Elemental Forums Top

You should only have 2 rings and one amulet. Thats it.

Reply #25 from Elemental Forums Top

This was intentional not an exploit or a bug. When asked on irc Brad said he hated ring limits.