Packers! Packers! Packers!

[ajsuk]

Don't see whats wrong with being able to have more, if you've got the money why not..

[marct]

Only 4 animals stabled at once would work for me. Why can't I risk my animals in the wild. The cost should go up somehow though maybe exponentially. By packer type(speed/strength).

So if the first packer was 300k it should follow something like this:

First packer purchased: 300k
Second packer purchased: 400k
Third packer purchased: 500k
Fourth purchased: 750k
Fifth purchased: 1MM

Sixth purchased: 1.5MM
Senvth purchased: 3MM
Eigth purcahsed: 6MM


And on from there ad-naseum at an additional 3MM each or something pricey like that. Maybe you bump it up even more than that later. The pricing would allow some lesson learning about not letting your packer die.

The price should go up based on the purchase #, not on the number you currently own. So if they get killed or you trade them your price still goes up. Or maybe this should be a function of how many you currently own as well as how many you have purchased in the past.

Noin.

[vguerin]

Yeah but when you dig many lands more packers would be nice.. like that nut er.. Sinful

- and again, what I'd like to see is the ability to craft from apt.. I mean.. maybe even make it like packers.. so you could just stand close to it and craft.. *sigh* tping is such a waste of time..

That would work a lil better... The packers all parked at the apartment doors scares me a bit tho.

A way to access all your mats would be very nice, how to do it though difficult, really needs to happen soon. Not enough bulk and teleporting all over the time is frustrating on a comp as slow as mine for sure.

[ajsuk]

How about we have packer garage with our apts?

[kyesmith]

i agree with having an increased price per packer u have, but after the 3rd the prices shud go up steeply, 1,2,3 cost the usual, then 4 1mil 5, 4mil ect

[blaah]

i agree with having an increased price per packer u have, but after the 3rd the prices shud go up steeply, 1,2,3 cost the usual, then 4 1mil 5, 4mil ect

whats the logic in that ?
"You better keep your packer in stable or you gonna pay 100mil for next one"

i have travelled a lot, lost a 2 packers (source explosions.. oops
and some 4 mounts i think (one my own stupidity, others by gingo dust because of lag - how fun is that ?)

i may pay more if there would be increased value. like i said, for 5k bulk packer 10mil but to punish those who actually take packer with them to travel would be stupid.
besides, there has been a lot of yelks and mysterious source explosions near stables, which kill packers too.

[jared96]

*wonders how those stables can hold thousands of packers*

Elevators and below ground storage

[jared96]

I'd suggest a limit "per land"...say 1 mount and 3 packers per land...and of course yopu pay moreout of yur native land

[aardnebb]

I can see 3 possible reasons for limiting storage space. Depending on which reason it is it gives us an idea of what is likely to be done about it in the future. Could anyone at Nevrax let us know which of the following is correct?

1. System resources for the servers taken up by stored items.
2. Game balance.
3. To allow room for future expansions (such as guild hall add-ons etc).

Would appreciate some kind of reply