Sleuth Home - Message Boards - Sleuth Talk


0 0
All I Want for Christmas is a Shady Cap
  <<First Page  |  <Previous Next>  |  Last Page>>  

sunny
sunny
Lady of Shadows

Dec-15-2007 12:59

So, as you may have noticed the "Beating a Dead Horse" discussion has been archived. (A post started by Roamie about the perceived steepness of Shady prices). Be assured that everyone's opinion was read and appreciated here in the Sleuth Admin household. We would like to put an offer on the table: cap at 1 mil.

Please let us know what you think and based on your posts, we'll make a decision by Christmas morning.*

*Disclaimer:
This message is not intended to promote and/or belittle Christmas. You do not have to celebrate Christmas or any other winter holiday in order to post here.

Replies

Paranoid_Android
Paranoid_Android
Story Teller

Dec-16-2007 00:22

I think one of the things I liked about sleuth when I got into it was that I could lose. The other thing of course was that it didn't have an 'end game' and I could just keep going and going as long as I didn't false out. It had the best of both worlds. Threat of failure, but continued enjoyment based on my skill.

I think coupled with the resurrection feature (which I don't particularly like either), there's no threat anymore of failure. There's no metaphorical Sword of Damacles hovering over our heads. If you play long enough, you amass enough $'s and skill points, you become invincible and 'beat the game', and you play well to 'play'. There are already people like that now, even with Shady in his current state. You only increase the amount of 'invincibles' by increasing the options to become so.

The other thing too is that you free up a lot of cash in the Sleuth Economy. X can now pay off Shady, so pays off A, B & C's debt as well since they can now afford to. That in itself isn't a bad thing, but it has, to an extent, a knock on effect, thereby negating some of Shady's threat not only to the 'invincibles', but also to their friends and Agency members.

We all hate Shady, but it's no good him being a toothless tiger either. The fact we all complain about him is something that's become integral to the game, and I think that negating that threat will negate interest in Shady, and vis a vis the game itself, and that will be a sad thing indeed.

If the change happens and it makes lots of the punters happy in return that's great, I'm all for people getting what they want, but in the long run I think, maybe it might turn out to be to the detriment of the overall gaming eperience.

** PS even if you don't want to rabbit on like me, at least take the time to post 'YES I'm in favour' like bignut up there, so that Sunny and Ben get a decent indication of what we want. PLUS if enough people post 'YES, I'm in favour' it will bump my 'no' onto the previous page ;)

Treschaude
Treschaude
Washed Up Punter

Dec-16-2007 03:40

I am not in favor of a cap on Shady. Most of those reasons have been most eloquently described above. But Sunny asked for our thoughts so here are mine. (Sorry - here's another long one!)

Like I said in another thread, putting a cap on Shady makes him manageable. I like the having the risk inherent in the game that if I am not careful, if I make too many mistakes, I could lose everything. And if I do get sloppy and careless, or if I guess, then I must pay and I would well deserve to. Every single FA I have ever gotten could have been avoided. I didn’t think so at the time of course. There were a couple I was SURE were some bug in the game. It couldn’t have been me! But looking back at them, they were all game play mistakes on my part.

I fell in love with this game with all its unsavory aspects. I love how Larry extorts $500 from unsuspecting newbies in New York. And how I paid that dirty little runt to get into the club just like everyone else did. I like how I can’t go for more than three cases without some guy chucking a knife at my head. And I like Shady. He IS horrible, but he’s supposed to be. He won’t even talk to you unless he stands a chance of making a buck off you. I have hated having to go to him. I hated selling my first apartment to pay him. I hated having to tearfully go to friends and borrow $1M to pay him. But after it was over, when Shady said it would be taken care of, when I read “And it was”, I could have kissed the creep for saving my butt yet again.

Treschaude
Treschaude
Washed Up Punter

Dec-16-2007 03:40

After that last experience, I have not gotten an FA in probably 6-7M exp. pts. Sorry, I don’t know what that is in real time. But it was before resurrection was an option. Had it been easier on me, if I could have thrown skill pts at it, if I hadn’t walked away almost broke each time, I don’t know if I would be the same player I am now. I learned the hard way and have prepared myself in case of another disaster. This game has not been easy on me and I like it that way. Granted, it’s a lot easier now, but that came through time and experience. But the risk is always there and I know it. Just because I have reached a certain level in this game, I don’t think I should be cut any slack or be exempt from any Shady torture the rest of the Sleuth community isn’t subjected to. I am no better than any newbie out there. I’ve just played longer. I don’t see how the game as a whole benefits by making things easier on people.

This leads me to a question. Would the changes to the scale for Shady payments simply be a cap on the highest level at $1M or would the entire scale be adjusted for everyone?

If it is simply a cap at the highest level, then the rich and experienced would benefit and the less experienced players would still be struggling while knowing that the people that have the most abilities are not. A very small percentage of the sleuthing population would be helped by this change if the cap was at the top only. If it is changed for everyone, then Shady’s threat becomes weak to bordering on non-existent.

Please leave Shady the way he is: the man we all love to hate, but the only man that can save us short of a resurrection by the Sleuth gods.

Sophie4
Sophie4
Gopher to the Sleuth Gods

Dec-16-2007 05:50

I never thought I'd say this but I am against a cap on Shady's fees. Close your jaw and hear me out.

I am one of the directors of an agency. I don't want our agents to sit and suffer, holding FA's because they are too embarrased to admit to having them. I'm not talking about those of us with 4xp or higher, we may have one but we won't get a second. I'm talking about those with 3XP and less. If Shady wants 600,000 to clear 2 FA's they might think....."I'll just hang on until I have 1mil. to pay him off" That can be dangerous. You could lose a good agent over that. It's not worth it.

I would rather they ask for help to clear up their record than to have them sitting on pins and needles hoping to gather enough cash to do it themselves.


roamie
roamie
Well-Connected

Dec-16-2007 06:39

Wow, I would hope someone wouldnt be silly enough to sit around waiting to hit 1 million to pay off shady when they could have paid him off for 600,000. (might be one of the reasons they got 2 FAs in the first place) Go pay off shady and upgrade your apartment with the extra 400K. lol

If you all want a threat in the game, lets get rid of the resurrection of detectives. That was way more a threat than any money aspect could be. Because no matter how high the costs get, agencies can pull together and raise the cash.

Sophie4
Sophie4
Gopher to the Sleuth Gods

Dec-16-2007 08:13

Perhaps some of us have forgotten what its like to be a young sleuth. They're not silly, just inexperienced and usually don't want to burden others with their mistakes. Whether they're "newbies" or "tweens" we should have a heart for them, we've all been there and done that...and me probably twice ;)

roamie
roamie
Well-Connected

Dec-16-2007 08:29

When you have enough experience to have to pay shady a million dollars, you are neither a newbie or a tween. :-)

R Anstett
R Anstett

Dec-16-2007 12:06

I am for both proposals here.

Keeping Shady as the greedy sucking money pit that he is in devouring huge carefully hoarded bank accounts.

I am also in favor of Roamie's suggestion of getting rid of the resurrection option. Having that in the game has seriously weakened the penalties for mistakes.

It seems to my point of view that this is all about making the game easier if you make Shady cheaper. Easier is not better.

roamie
roamie
Well-Connected

Dec-16-2007 12:14

wow, rare occassion. I agree with R Anstett. lol But only about getting rid of resurrection.

I still want the cap! ;-D Do people really have big hoarded bank accounts? I'm too busy helping out my agency to hoard a big bank account. How about giving me some Money, honey? Come on R. Send some my way.

Kirstie Bones
Kirstie Bones
Old Shoe

Dec-16-2007 13:55

I,m all for the cap.

Dont get me wrong I know shady is part of the game and he keeps you on your toes, but I dont think a 1 mill cap is unrealistic or would make us less careful. It is still a large amount of money to find, and would still hurt to hand it over.

I think the amounts you pay as a 'newbie's', is realistic in the fact that they make you learn a valuable lesson. By the time youve hit the one mill mark, its a rare occurrance for a more experienced player to get a FA as i believe youve learnt your lesson by paying as a newbie .

( Ive hopefully learnt my lesson lol).

I dont believe that the more experienced dedicated players should be penalized by the rising amounts of the never ending money grabber we all know as shady.

C'mon what has the guy got to spend his money on. :)



  <<First Page  |  <Previous Next>  |  Last Page>>  

[ You must login to reply ]