6 replies · 64 views · thread synced · 9 days ago
· View on torn.com
About this thread
Posts archived:7 / 7 posts (100%) · the total is Torn's reply count + the opening post at the last fetch
Counted by TornLife from the archived posts.
Archived posts
7
Discussion span
→
People posting
7
Likes on archived posts
10
Posts by staff, officers and moderators
1
Authority score
46 / 100
Historical score
17 / 100
Story score
36 / 100
Engagement score
46 / 100
Most-liked replies
Ceb[68232]Committee
· 1 likes · Passives are not the way to do this. Like museum sets, the way to handle these items are to exchange sets or make the items consumables. Think about it...everyone already has these useless items...that's why they're useless...so if you just …
In torn there are so many useless items, would be nice when all items would do something to add more variety
Like enhancers for crime would be ncie if all the useless items would get a (very small)bonus
Examples:
Crazy straw: +1% chance of breaking out of jail Dart board: +1% increase to your precision when using rifles Sextant/compass: +1% less flying time Peg Leg: No damage when hit in your right leg, 50% decrease of running away from your opponent Fire hydrant: 50% less damage when someone uses a flame thrower or molotov on you Glow Stick: +1% chance of finding ietms in city Kabuti Mask: +0.5% Dexternity Article on crime: 1% chance of crime experience
The items that currently give bonuses probably have less than 1% effect anyway, with a very few exceptions such as Sports Sneakers... Doing this would totally tip the game upside down I reckon... the items market would get screwed and who is going to go through every single item to appoint what each item does? The time needed to just appoint enhancements would be massive, plus time to debate each one, then there would be the coding needed... I can't see this happening at all to be honest. [:disappointed:]
Edit: The dump is there for a reason if you find items useless [:wink:]
i agree. what i WOULD perfer is a randomizer. you throw in 1000 items, or 5000, or something, and a random item shoots out. could be anything from A to Z with a couple of noteable exceptions. i think this would instantly regen the entire market system, every single price would go up for everything. younger people would be able to make more money from crap, older people would be able to to gamble on the faint hope of finding a rockstar item, etc. etc.
this would be a good compromise i know its not something that will ever happen, but this would be nice for the market as a whole.
Like museum sets, the way to handle these items are to exchange sets or make the items consumables.
Think about it...everyone already has these useless items...that's why they're useless...so if you just need one...it won't do anything at all.
Sets and consumables...that's how to do this.
For Otter's converter, I would say you're just bypassing a mechanic that already exists: selling to shops.
A better option would be to have items sell prices fluctuate by some formula accounting both a global flat rate (maybe +/-1k) and a % of the base sell price (maybe +/-10%) together. This would let the market become responsive to a random factor. investing in random items would stay relevant with the amount of cash used and nothing could take advantage of outlier items that are either cheap or expensive.
Granted, things that are like $200 in shop could have much larger turnovers, but you'd be relying on a large random factor so it'd be a large investment over a large amount of time.
EDIT:
Also, i would say that even that, while better, is unnecessary and overall a bad idea. It's better to have uses for these items. It wouldn't be hard to come up with uses if you just take time to think about it. In fact, i've already started it a few months ago.
I agree, sets seems much more reasonable path for this rather than passives. For the OP, does the passive "stack"? Does that mean that if i have a junk item article of crime x100, would i gain 100% increase in crime exp? How about a 1000? Seems too game breaking for me