> As a simplification, how about this. Any player may learn
> up to level 1 or 2 in a skill simply by studying it anywhere.
> For levels 3 to 6, stacking with a structure called a
> library (available in all pre-existing CITY zones -- can
> be built with expenditure of raw materials AND gold
> representing book purchases -- VERY expensive) or a
> player with an equal or higher level and Teaching. After
> level 6, the skill can only be learned by stacking with a
> guild tower or with a character that knows the skill at the
> equal or higher level via Teaching. There would be one
> guild tower for EACH skill at the start of the game
> teaching one skill to 10th level each. 10th level players
> could create new guild towers or add skills to
> pre-existing ones via some sort of expenditure of gold.
> This is a raw idea. Anything good in it? I personally like
> the idea of "going to the library" but I haven't thought of
> a great way to handle it yet.
Why add yet another mechanism to the game ? Low levels will
automatically be easy to learn because there is an odd 2nd or 3rd
leveler in everything in every medium sized and above city or so I
As for libraries I think they are great ideas, but why not just build
small guild towers with an NPC teacher and a bodyguard in them ? I've
argued for the creation of such towers several times on this list, so
I won't repeat all the details once again.
> I think that whatever mechanic finally gets adopted,
> that this is a good thing. I think teaching SHOULD be an
> important "integral" part of the game.
Please don't make us bloody foreigners feel so insecure. I looked up
"integral" and I used it quite correctly. So there ! :-)
> I really like the warp 10 -- er -- level 10 limit. Why?
> Several reasons:
> A) Level 10 provides a fixed goal at which someone is the best.
That is exactly what I dislike about it. As long as you live and have
the money, additional study and training will make you just another
tiny little bit better.
> B) It is very hard to come up with open ended mechanics that don't
> break down at the extremes which...
My proposal was not one to create 135th level people every other day.
Lets do a quick calculation with the numbers I suggested. To go from
level 0 to level 1 takes about 15 days. To go from level 9 to level
10 takes about 10 times as long. If you apply the same stretching
factor once over, you see that it would take about 100 times as long
to go from level 19 to level 20 or 1500 days. But that would only be
if you have a teacher. The first one who wants to reach level 20 from
level 19 would have to do the research and hence need _6,000_ days or
about 25 years ! And that is just for one level. To go from level 18
to level 19 would require almost as long aso.
As a practical matter I don't believe that there are going to be a
handful of people with levels beyond 10 and none with levels beyond
12 or 13. Extreme levels are very unlikely ever to be a factor IMHO.
> C) makes it very difficult to use simple math progressions which
> are easily understandable by all and easy to balance.
Why is that ?
> Just as people were pounding out units and recruits just
> to "see what would happen", people will sit and study and
> study and study just to see what will happen. Remember,
> this game has only run for less than 5 Olympian years. In
> "production", it could run for 20 or 30 or more before
> being reset. That sort of thing has to be planned for an a
> topless system is dangerous in such a situation.
Exactly _because_ a real game might last much longer, maybe with
daily turns it is important to leave the top open. Otherwise people
will just accumulate at level 10 until there is no real distinction
between any two old timers any longer. After all, it takes just 2
years or so to reach level 10 under current rules.