Tree of Savior Forum

How Class/Rank Resets Could Be a Good Thing

General Discussion
#142

Cause and effect is a hilariously obvious concept that anyone is aware of. The question here is, what kind of effects are you expecting? And how logical would it be to lead to that?

I mean, so far you’ve been assuming the effects of a circle reset would be everyone using it to change their build to a meta build. It’s like you didn’t even consider not everyone would be willing to pay for it which technically makes your scenario fall apart at a moment’s notice. Simple logic can absolutely tell a lot of things already on what leads to what.

How are you even sure this issue isn’t talked about in Korea? Unless you’re an actual kToS player who can read their forums and discussion websites, you can’t really tell. And international players in kToS are obviously more interested in looking at information that they want to look at.

Of course, this also means I can’t say that kToS players want a circle reset, so all in all this is obviously irrelevant to the argument.

Yeah… if every developer followed that kind of system, we’d surely not having bugs that were complained about during CBT, am I right? But I’m pretty sure there have been dozens of complaints regarding unfixed bugs already.

Also, again, you have just said something that further supports the need of a circle reset. If not everything is known, then there should be a way to encourage players to test everything without fear of having wasted time invested on testing them. In which case circle resets would greatly help.

I’ll go through each point:

Pros:

  1. Yes this is a given. It even enables experimentation and even people testing away from a meta build they’re currently using.

  2. This is technically one of the more important factors to prevent people from quitting, and also possibly the most important reason as to why circle resets should be implemented.

  3. With restrictions it wouldn’t be as easy. As a lot of people have proposed, 1 month delay per circle reset doesn’t mean people will switch from one whole build to another in an instant, nor would it be cheap. This pretty much also encourages people to only utilize circle resets for reasons I stated above (#1 and #2). People can simply create a new character if the build they desire is vastly different from their previous one’s.

  4. How would it be short term, mind you? When more classes get released and more levels are added, the demand will increase. When new combinations are found or theorycrafted, more people would want to buy it to experiment. New players can also take advantage of it in case they make mistakes on their first character, which is particularly common. It will never lose demand at all.

Cons

  1. Seriously? That’s like saying implementing new classes or new content for a game is a problem for developers. Nothing is a problem for them, but if you complicate things like making it reset class levels and whatnot, then there’s your problem. Also there are multiple common sense solutions to things like Templar if you think about it.

  2. See #1. Honestly you just chimed this in just to make it look like there are more cons for a reset when it’s literally the same as the 1st point you made. Don’t be getting desperate now.

  3. How the hell would a company lose profit over a virtual item that only requires manpower to develop? Also as I said above, it will always remain in-demand so long as they make new content and new classes. Even then, it’ll still be a cash item that is accessible for everyone anytime, anywhere, and people will still spend for it if they need it. There’s no harm in keeping it in the cash shop regardless.

  4. Again you have missed a point I’ve been trying to make ever since the start of the argument. Multiple builds do not work the same as each other. That’s like saying a Wizard C3 -> Elem C3 -> Warlock is just the same as a Wizard C1 -> Cryomancer C3 -> Chronomancer C3. They are entirely different builds from the same class and they don’t function the same, so that’s where your reasoning falls apart.

  5. Again it’s literally the same argument as #4. Now your argument just looks even sillier…

Honestly this is the hard part. I absolutely cannot think of a repercussion for the existence of a TP circle reset, and no one has given me a decent negative point on it so far.

All these negative points you and others have made haven’t convinced me in the slightest and I have been able to explain the exact reasons as to why they aren’t conclusive proof as to how a TP reset could be bad, nor are they objective in answering the matter. Most of them are just opinions. And before you tell me that advocating circle resets is also an opinion, indeed it is, but of course we won’t stand around and have people like you kick us around just because of that opinion. We’ll state our own arguments too. And if anything, most arguments advocating circle resets are far more objective and reasonable as opposed to yours when it comes to its overall utility.

If anything, the only point I’ve agreed with you so far is that there isn’t much of an objective reason as to why circle resets should be implemented, but this also means a circle reset can be an option to be implemented in the future if the developers want to make them.

How exactly do you think the majority are people who don’t want circle resets?

The reality is that most players don’t really care if there is one and there isn’t. And because most players don’t really care, it doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be an option to be implemented, it just means it gets a pass if the developers ever decide to make it.

They’re both bad, but they both make sense. If people want to reroll and quit, let them. If people quit because of the existence of a circle reset, let them. But which exactly would hurt IMC more, a player who clearly wants to spend for a reset quitting, or a player who refuses to buy something quitting? I mean, it’s pretty common sense that IMC would want the paying player to stay here…

And I commend them for doing so, despite being unaware of what they bring.

But just imagine, how many do you think would want to become a Kabbalist? They’re unpopular compared to the ever popular Plague Doctor, and plenty of people want to avoid going that route, thus they never find out things about the kabbalist, like if the playstyle of the class actually fits their criteria, or its skills are actually better in experience than on paper. Why? Because you can’t reset circles in this game. People will be too afraid to walk the untraveled path and retreat to the safety of the tried and tested Plague Doctor.

But what if there is a circle reset? It opens up the idea of testing the Kabbalist and expands more information. This would lead to more players using or testing the class, more information is disseminated and become accessible regarding it. Some will stay, some will change back or into a Plague Doctor, and overall just promotes class diversity in the game.

And you proved yourself that there would some instances that circle reset is warranted and some cases that a circle reset isn’t necessary. Key word here is necessary i.e. do you use one, or not? If the option is there, then people should have the freedom to use it and decide. The case of just minor new information and major changes are not mutually exclusive.

This is not the community’s fault, it’s more of a flawed design choice by the developers. But in any case, you can’t change the community in an instant, and you can’t change the design of the game that easily. In this case, a reset is warranted simply because it’s the easiest solution.

The game through multiple beta phases for over a year and it’s still way more than 2 months since it’s OBT release. This game is already quite old.

We don’t even have most of the kToS balance changes. In any case, that even furthers the need for a reset option because players might be currently building off current balance and not what kToS has since its release.

There are players who spend a long time playing yet do not pay a dime. Hardcore, long time players tend to not need a cash shop because they can simply buy what they need from other paying players.
There are new players that have paid for a good starting boost (i.e. token) or for cosmetics, even though they haven’t spend a lot of time in the game yet.
There are players who only log-in from time to time but have still spent on stuff like cosmetics because that is what the game appeals to them.

Essentially, this is why time invested can never be directly determined as a source of profit. If anything, there has to be multiple factors to be aware of first.

Again you missed my points that I’ve managed to reiterate multiple times now because you seemed to have missed them over and over. Please don’t let me repeat again:

  1. Not all builds in the same class function the same. Not all builds contain the same appeal as well (i.e. A sorcerer is very different from an elementalist. Sorcerers let their minions do the dirty work for them, which would appeal to some players who prefer a relaxed playstyle, while Elementalists are for people who prefer to take matters into their own hands). I mean, not to insult you or anything but have you been playing the game if you have no idea about much of the builds that comprise this game, and that not everything is the same?

  2. As per #1, creating new characters would still be popular because not every build is the same. If something peaks their interest but they still want to keep their old character as their previous character has a playstyle completely different from the new one they want to take, then they will still make them. Also another point is that making a new character and buying slots is considerably cheaper than circle resets if they will be implemented, which means it’s still a win-win situation for IMC whichever a player decides to spend money on.

  3. EXP tomes are flawed anyways and not many buy them. This can’t even be a legitimate proposal as to how TP resets would ruin profits because EXP tomes are needed for leveling. People who want them will still buy them.

  4. With that logic, skill reset should be removed from the cash shop either because nobody would buy it, right? Yet it’s still there.

Again the point: not all builds give the same appeal or the same function as other builds. Again, I question your knowledge about character builds because not everything revolves with 1 perfect build for each base class.

Yet when I make assumptions they are more on a logical side compared to yours. As I said, you feel like one cause and one effect is absolute. It’s way more complicated than that. Not everyone wishes to use a circle reset, which absolutely points out a major flaw in all, if not, most of your arguments regarding the cause and effect of a circle reset.

See, here’s one point you’re trying to make:

“With circle resets, everyone will be using the same build”

Which is absolutely flawed because of multiple reasons. One of the obvious reasons is that different people make different decisions. Not everyone would buy circle resets, not everyone would need a circle reset. The correct statement should be:

“With circle resets, some people will be using the same build”

Which is a point that is more acceptable and logically sound as opposed to what you have said before above. And in any case, some people using the same build is not a detrimental factor when circle resets are in place because it is already a common phenomenon currently in the game (i.e. people following the same guide and closely following the same build, or people simply following or creating a well known meta-build).

In any case, this isn’t an opinion anymore when I argued about it but rather a logical statement that is backed up by basic statistics where numbers wouldn’t even need to be involved at all.

If you want an easier example to grasp, imagine that there is currently a widely used road that everyone uses to go from one point to another.

Now, contractors decide to create an alternate road. Reason to make one is irrelevant to the scenario, but let’s just say it’s to curb the traffic from going to and fro both destinations.

In this regard, your logic implies that because this other road was made, everyone would only be using that alternate road and nobody would need or want to use the old road.

This is wrong. As per my arguments, I want you to remember that people are individuals who make their own decisions. Some people would probably gladly take the alternate route, but some will relent and stay at the old route, possibly due to it being more familiar to them, or there’s a stop they like to go through, and etc.

What I’m saying now is that your argument is statistically impossible, while my own argument regarding individual choice is sound and does not require any numbers because it approves a logical effect that not all people will take the same route.

#143

Honestly these excuses boil down to wanting others to suffer for mistakes that dont even affect them, or matter outside of that persons scope.

If you think resetting your skills makes somone else stronger than you youre probably a full blown idiot.

1 Like
#144

@Levan

Perhaps you are not in the IT industry nor have dived into or thought about the concepts and workings of designing/building a game. Let me offer you some food-for-thought in which how ToS or rather games are normally built.

I’m sure you have heard about things like databases and such. Database in layman terms is a collection of interconnected tables (like Excel spreadsheets) where columns of certain tables are linked to columns of other tables.

So what has it got to do with the reset argument? It certainly does, as you see each player’s character data is kept in a row of a table which governs player information. The row then have class values tied to the appropriate class tables, and is tied to the skills and attributes tables.

So as you can see, it starts to get complicated here. But do read on, changing all these values isn’t that hard, the problem lies with the limitations or rather game concepts for IMC class system and how inter-connected each value is to each other.

Some classes have prerequisites, like Chaplain need Priest 3 to be able to get. Some classes are tied to skill attributes like riding for SR. Some classes provide additional equipment benefits like equip 2handers. It becomes really complicated and a huge endeavor for the developers to change the tables and make sure it work seamlessly for the player.

If the game has a function to reset 1 circle only, how do you reset a priest3 with chaplain? All 3 priest circles cannot be touched without removing chaplain first. Restrict resetting of priest? How about guilds and Templars? Restrict them also? How many restrictions are you going to add? How many attributes and their levels are going to be removed during resetting? Keep them on the character in case reset back? How is the game going to do or answer these “extra skills” in the character and skill tables? How will these extra “now dead-weight” attributes contribute to the character… like reset dievdirby away but keep the +20% dmg to plants attribute?

All these are things which need to be addressed prior to proposing solutions. It isn’t as simple as “Hey I want some convenience reset” like what you propose and just provide ‘band-aids’ like 30 day restriction and 1 circle only resets. And when met with exceptions like templar and chaplain just chug them aside by saying “Restrict characters from setting out or to that class”.

ToS is set from the ground up to have classes in which in future have pre-requisites to gain access to other classes. Chaplain is a good case of what is going to come. IMC is NOT going to get up more restrictions just to implement 1-circle resets, it complicates the back-end checks and codes even more. Even just changing it on the backend will cause the character to get errors cuz the sheer amount of information in tables that need to change Highlander 1 to Peltasta 1. One missed change and the character might get corrupted.

In short, think of classes as the base foundation of a house. You can’t just go in and say “Hey I want to change this supporting pillar to another one”. You will have to take down part or the entire house just to change it.

This is the reason why I said it is really difficult to code and cater (the points 1 & 2 of cons you dismissed) to what you advocate (a 1 circle reset). You are basically telling IMC to redo their entire game concept and codes just to cater for your item of convenience. This is why I said it is detrimental to the core of the game. Development takes time and IMC need to pay their developers for the time take to do up this functionality. Do you think the effort spent redoing much of the code is going to be paid back and turned into a profit with selling that 1-circle reset?

What can IMC do to cater for those who want resets? The only option is a full class reset without changing much of the code. I’m sure you know how much a full all-circle reset is going to affect the game scene of ToS, if not you will not advocate a 1-circle only reset.

If you put the above in consideration, you will see why I advocate resets in the way of a very long quest (a full reset) or reduction in character/job level all the way to the level you want to reset and re-level from there. It isn’t to punish the player for their wrong choices or give more hindrance, it is the only logical way to have a functionality like this without affecting or changing much of the code in which they have taken years to design and develop. IMC cannot also just “cheapen” the reset hence the need for the player to put at least some work to get it, having it like that also conforms to the overall design and feel of the game, having to work for what you need.

If you want to continue on with your idea and promote it, sure by all means. Do bear in mind that for your idea to come into fruition, it will take years to implement as IMC do have other more important things to work on, like adding patches and new content for players past 280. If you want IMC to have reset implementations fast and caters to both ends of the crowd (those who want and those who don’t want), it might be better to improve on your idea. Do think of the positive and negative aspects in your solution.

In terms of logic, your new road and old road makes the perfect example. People are lazy by nature and prefers a convenient way to get things done. If you build a new road which gets to the destination faster, the old road is definitely going to be used less. There are so many real life cases, just take a look at the pathways near your neighborhood . How many pathways are made by clearing the grass/bushes so people can travel to their destination faster? How come you will see patches of grasses become barren dirt roads because people trample onto them every day? Yes few people will still use the old road, but it will become substantially used lesser and lesser cuz the ‘new’ road is easier and faster. Peer pressure is also another factor, if you see a friend of yours walk on the new road, you will more likely to walk on the new road instead of the old.

As for the other points which you dismissed like “players flock to meta builds with resets” as personal assumptions by me with no substantial proof, we will just cross them out since your reasons to refute mine are also personal opinions with no substantial proof. Too much going around in circles. I’m getting lazy and tired to retype and retype the same opinions again and again while you use the same reasoning again and again. Both do hold weight, it is just that we have different opinions which clash with each other.

For your opinion there are 4 base classes which have different builds and each build of the 4 base classes play differently. For me there are 50+ different classes, just that each class is requires a pre-requiste class to get to it. This is what IMC think and designs the game according to to, this is how they place their skill reset potion, to reset skills based on classes the player chooses. Chronomancer is a class. It is not a sub-category in the wizard class. The concept is advance the job from a wizard to a Chronomancer.

P.S
I don’t see why you consider me being desperate to add more cons so that cons looked more than pros. Perhaps my explanation isn’t clear enough, hope the above helps you in understanding which angle I come from.

#145

people we rely need to stop it and just wait for what ever IMC have to say here. we need ot make the topic on top of the forum but stop the hate here :slight_smile:

#146

ToS class design is why exactly circle resets are needed. Circles are less about classes but more on “skill trees”. Other games feature straightforward class advancement systems that don’t diverge too much from a single road, and even if they do they provide distinct differences in roles and gameplay that other classes can’t provide. These types of class advancement systems fit the bill more closely that a circle reset wouldn’t be needed. There would be no actual way to mess up anything through the customization with these systems besides maybe just taking the wrong skills.

ToS branching is absolutely complex and there are so many ways to build your character that it is so easy to screw it up. Sometimes you might think of taking a single circle (either just a single circle or a 2nd/3rd circle) after reviewing its skills, thinking on paper that it will mesh well with the other circles you’ve chosen. But a combination of misinformation (apparent when there are multiple diverse opinions regarding the circle’s synergy with the others as well, just look at the forums and there are occasions that this happens), lack of accessible information (i.e. information locked behind a language wall, like it’s in Korean, or the information is buried within the forum and the person was not able to dig deeper) or simply enough, the playstyle does not fit your desires in terms of playstyle. Essentially you have just screwed up progress for the whole character itself just by one lone decision. Now the options that person has left is to continue to lie to himself/herself that they “enjoy” the character even if they don’t, or re-roll a character. And not many will choose to completely re-roll if the time they invested is valuable to them. They will choose to quit.

And again your post is full of theorycrafting and “what if” scenarios.

This doesn’t make your argument solid, it only makes it ridiculous. You have no idea how ToS is coded in the first place so you do not simply tell everyone that “this and that” works when it comes to ToS, unless you’re directly working for them and have a firsthand view of what they’re working on.

And really, are you trying to place things into technical terms where the only one that applies a need of a strict construct from one point to another at the very moment is Priest C3-Chaplain?

Even then, I don’t see why you can’t look at it without thinking, “oh there’s no solution to this, pack up let’s go”.

Chaplain is the only class so far that requires a specific circle route. Now how to do this? Simple. Only Chaplain can be removed initially, before you can remove everything else. It’s not that hard to code if they’ve already managed to create an algorithm for circle resets.

Same goes to Templars. Disable from changing into and out from them.

The thing is, once they create a proper system values can be easily shifted to and fro. How do you think developers in MOBA games can disable and re-enable specific characters when game breaking bugs are discovered related to them? How do you think any other game can easily disable features from being accessible (i.e. a gamebreaking bug is found on a new game mode. Instead of making the game completely inaccessible until the issue is resolved, they simply disable the game mode with the issue and re-enable it once it’s fixed.)?

Your “what if” scenarios don’t even make sense. You talk about attributes yet there’s already a system in place that deactivates attributes when conditions aren’t met. For example, a level 3 skill is required to gain/level up a specific attribute. When you use a skill reset and lose the level 3 skill, the attribute is deactivated until the conditions are met again.

Obviously, when it comes to circle resets, these attributes would be deactivated simply because they don’t fit the criteria to even have the circle in the first place, and as such will be deactivated accordingly until the conditions are met again (if you change back into that class). And if they wanted, they could code it so that changing circles will simply just wipe all the attributes you’ve learned so far in the same class.

The thing is, Chaplain is the only class known so far to ever require initial circles. You have no right to say that the game is designed that way from the ground-up. That’s just misinformation and again, another big fat assumption and “what if” scenario you have placed.

You can make a musketeer out of a Quarrel Shooter base or Ranger base. Do you really think shedding a circle to another from either will suddenly mess up the code? I don’t think so.

And I believe you missed something that I was expecting for you to mention - different classes are only accessible at certain ranks, and of course you find it bad that a person could change an earlier rank into a class of a higher rank. Same solution applies, restrict it based on the rank they got it.

Also here’s a realization for you, in case you don’t know about it yet.

Remember that we have a class advancement interface everytime we rank up? This interface shows all the available classes you can take for the next rank, as well as all the classes/circles you could have chosen for the all the previous ranks you’ve went through, and the classes available to you while it was still there. If you ever have a rank 2 or higher character that’s about to approach a new class advancement, I want you to look at this interface carefully.

This very interface already shows that there is already a base that IMC can work on when dealing with a class reset. This won’t be too difficult to code when there’s already a system like that in place.

As for the rest, you repeated the same things you have said before and I know this is just a back and forth retort now. It’s clear that you don’t understand the complete idea of cause and effect and you purposefully miss multiple factors when it comes to making your assumptions.

Here is a real life example that should help you understand why exactly your assumptions are absolutely wrong.

We all know that Microsoft and their Windows 10 fiasco that’s been popping up lately. They allow people to upgrade their old Windows to Windows 10.

Now, by your logic, this is similar to how you think that everyone would be using circle resets the moment it’s implemented. Because Windows 10 is available and it’s a later and more advanced OS, you’re assuming here by your logic that everyone will flock to the new OS.

Yet as we all know, not everyone wants to change their old OS. Multiple reasons go as to why it is so.

Now, in accordance to your logic and reasoning, your very assumption is that EVERYONE will be using circle resets when they’re implemented.

You missed multiple factors when it comes to this:

  1. Not everyone is willing to spend for it.
  2. Not everyone has money to spend for it.
  3. Not everyone requires to change their build

By these three points alone, it completely dismisses your idea that not everyone will use it.

My main point that I’ve been trying to relay to you that you completely ignore since the last few posts is that your logic and reasoning is not only impossible but absolutely wrong because it’s as if you think everyone who plays this game is a single entity tied to only 1 decision when it comes to this.

If you believe I make assumptions, then please point them out. But in any case, I’ve said time and time again that NOT everyone would use circle resets. This is a standpoint that reigns true just from basic logic alone.

I don’t know, but this statement sort of gives me an idea that you know little about the game. The only class in the game that absolutely requires a prerequisite is Chaplain. Everything else is free and can be gotten no matter what circles you’ve obtained from previous ranks.

And also you have pinpointed more “what if’s” into the picture by stating an opinion regarding how IMC designed this game into. You made a glaringly bad assumption out of just one class that follows a certain restriction (chaplain). You have no right to make statements like these, only IMC themselves have the right to.

You didn’t even go over the points you’ve made on those pros and cons, so no, the above you’ve said did not fill it in. Not to mention it’s another batch of what if scenarios that you presented which just voids the idea that they will explain it.

Anyone who looked at your cons can absolutely determine that one is the same as the other. The real issue here is if you think they were different, then this is a classic case of miscommunication on your side, something of which you are supposed to explain yourself and not expect people to have to look between the lines to do so.

Overall I can say that you are getting very predictable and I’m not getting convinced in the slightest about your latest arguments at all. It was better at the beginning but they’ve sadly degraded to assumptions that either bear no logical reasoning or with no concrete proof (i.e. you claim everyone will use it when it’s impossible, you claim IMC designed a game a certain way when you are not a part of IMC staff/development).

And again you will say to me that I’m making assumptions myself when I’m clearly not.

I did not assume that the game is designed for circle resets like you assumed it was not designed for circle resets, but I did say it would need them.

I did not assume that no one will use circle resets like you assumed that everyone will use them, it’s just that some who need it will use them.

I believe this should address the main flaws of your argument and as to why I cannot be convinced. You either have to take a different approach and stop using “what if” scenarios and ludicrous assumptions regarding game design on a game you did not develop, or you can keep repeating the same mistake and I’ll be here to answer that for you.

2 Likes
#147

@Levan

Face-palm. Never-mind I rest my case to get you to see what is wrong with your solution. No point getting you to understand where I’m coming from when I can spend more time on my characters or help the community in some other way. I wonder how many blocks of text and players we killed with our wall of text lol.

Just agree to disagree. In terms of logic, we both have our opinions and we do stand by them. You may have disagreed with my logic and views but it doesn’t mean yours is absolutely sound and correct. We may argue until the cows come home but without actual verification, all these are just our opinions. And then again, my previous post contain no “what-ifs” I wonder did you even read the entire thing. Those are things which are in the game itself.

Btw, interfaces mean nothing much. They contain no logic and just serve as a viewing area to display whatever the game wants the user to see in whatever way they want, hierarchical or not.

#148

Uhh alright then, I’ll just drop these here:

I also suppose that by you not mentioning other posts, you concede and admit that you have been making ridiculous assumptions all along in our argument that does not support your claim in the matter.

As above, they’re literally all assumptions. You created assumptions of IMC’s game design that only they could answer. You created assumptions of coding difficulties that they can only answer. You created assumptions that only lead to supporting your claim without even an inch of proof. They’re all what if scenarios that only occur in your head and that alone.

Your assumptions can only deem true if there is sufficient evidence to support it, and there is none. You do not work for IMC and know it’s backbone. You do not know how IMC has coded and designed their game to function. All in all, you have no right to deem something as true when you have no authority over it.

Meanwhile, I proposed realistic proponents as an answer to your queries (which I have been doing so since your initial reply) when it comes to circle resets, such as that not everyone will use it due to multiple factors such as weighing down the cost, unnecessary to an individual’s plan of action, etc. In any case, you can’t tell me that it’s not true when that’s the most logically sound prediction when you consider all factors.

I would absolutely love you can quote assumptions I’ve made in my previous post if you believe I have, and make sure those assumptions aren’t logically sound as the above proponent I’ve made.

Uhh, what? Interfaces are not just for display… Google it and find out what it is. Honestly I thought you were IT when you were discussing coding and game design but by this statement alone you have proved you aren’t. Well now that makes even more sense considering you make assumptions and game design and coding with little idea behind it.

In any case, that interface is the actual interaction between us and choosing which classes each rank would hold. The class advancement button is called class advancement because you use it to get quests for your class advancement! I mean, if it was “just for display” then it would just be there for viewing and not something we use to advance our class.

And that interface alone proves that there is already an existing infrastructure on class change/advancement that IMC can work on when they begin developing a form of a class reset. This would make it easier. And before you say “but you’re making an assumption!” it truly is, there is no need to point it out. But this is something IMC could only answer. Not you, or me, just IMC.

#149

OMG. Please do get your facts right first. An interface is just a display area where the game developers put sprites (graphics or text) with event listeners (detection of mouse up / mouse down / key up / key down). This is where they place any kind of graphics and information and get user responses.

They CONTAIN NO LOGIC, they just track which button the user clicks and sends it to the games LOGIC ENGINE which is an entirely different part of the code which has NOTHING ELSE to do with the interface except to get the user input. There is no whatever logic infrastructure you talk about in that interface itself. The design and layout could be swapped and changed around.

That said, anything can be placed on the interface. You have have another button called “change class” to replace the graphic of job advancement button and it is the same.

#150

What with this wall of text and no tldr

Im on no circle reset tho
Well if there is one then you can be sure guild recruitment will be everywhere coz people gonna roll templare and roll back so no

#151

Templars must disband their guild before using the item.

Easy.

#152
#153

How is it that there are such a large number of morons in these arguments that believe that the current system fosters experimentation, and use that as their crutch to argue against resets?

Like, I’m super tired of crushing this one, but I’m just absolutely flabbergasted the kind of leap in logic you’d have to make to observe the current system as being in any sort, encouraging experimentation.

The current system encourages going meta from level 1. If class diversity is your main desire, you should be arguing for resets.

1 Like
#154

Fine, then interface isn’t the right word here, I’ll call it something like a system instead.

However, the point remains still that there is an existing infrastructure for changing/advancing classes, which means IMC already has a base to begin with in creating a circle reset system. They don’t have to start from scratch, and so many of your “what if” scenarios on the implementation of one in your recent post would easily be avoided. To just completely solve all your queries, all they have to do is to make a few tweaks here and there to satisfy the conditions.

#155

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.

#156

I think the easiest and fairest solution for this to be settled is IMC doing progressive class balancing to make it so what whichever build you go, whichever job you take (mistake or not), you can keep playing and not suffer while reaching the cap/dungeon/etc.

Regardless, I’ve seen rainbow builds in dungeons/missions and they still do ‘okay’ as an extra hand. Because it’s party play, y’know. Course they won’t be popular for the hardcore saviors who want to Earth Tower and WB hunt or Pvp.

#157

155 posts later, answer is no.

Kthxbye

#158

Ye its like imc dont want money and going to close the game soon.

#159

Bump bump bump imc bump.