
Problems of ROSE
#201
Posted 24 July 2011 - 07:56 AM
#202
Posted 24 July 2011 - 08:17 AM
Thank you for letting us know, hopefully they will respond you soon enough.Sorry for the delay in my reply. I did send these issues to the Dev Team for review and am still awaiting a response. Since there are a number of issues being brought up here, it is likely that not all of which will be able to be addressed immediately.

#203
Posted 26 July 2011 - 09:45 PM
#204
Posted 26 July 2011 - 09:56 PM
#205
Posted 27 July 2011 - 09:07 AM

#206
Posted 27 July 2011 - 09:28 AM
Another problem is the lack of support for scamming. I think the GMs have to implement a rule that will make it clear to the kids that scamming won't be tolerated. I have been the recipient of a scam that bled me dry of my resources. I don't have the energy nor the will to start over again because it took me 5 months to obtain what I lost in just an instant. So it's too late for me. But hopefully they may be able to implement an anti-scamming policy of some sort kind of like what ebay/paypal has. For someone who got conned, paypal/ebay may reimburse your money up to a certain amount (won't work with big items such as cars) and exact a stiff penalty on the scammer like banning their account.
One thing that's still bothering me is the scammer got off way too easy. I don't know if he was even punished. So in his mind "oh, nothing was even done to me so let me scam again." I'm just happy not to be a part of a game/community where this ahole exists anymore. But if I had the chance to exact my revenge on this guy, I would and I'm sure to love every minute of it.
#207
Posted 27 July 2011 - 06:00 PM
#208
Posted 27 July 2011 - 09:58 PM
You know it's really a big problem when you see thousands of people making tons of Proposal and Suggestion thread to have this game changed, because many things are just not right.
#209
Posted 28 July 2011 - 03:33 AM
Sorry for the delay in my reply. I did send these issues to the Dev Team for review and am still awaiting a response. Since there are a number of issues being brought up here, it is likely that not all of which will be able to be addressed immediately.
It's been 4 days. The devs are soo slow on giving answers!

#210
Posted 31 July 2011 - 11:38 PM
#211
Posted 01 August 2011 - 12:27 AM
#212
Posted 01 August 2011 - 07:14 AM
I feel that those answers are approaching with the speed of a snail!Sorry for the delay in my reply. I did send these issues to the Dev Team for review and am still awaiting a response. Since there are a number of issues being brought up here, it is likely that not all of which will be able to be addressed immediately.
#213
Posted 01 August 2011 - 11:33 AM

#214
Posted 01 August 2011 - 12:31 PM
Well been away from ROSE for a few days and I thought this thread would of been answered by now!
Getting a response from devs? UNHEARD OF! ... Maybe we'll hear of it Soon ...
Edited by Kittiz, 01 August 2011 - 12:32 PM.
#215
Posted 02 August 2011 - 11:31 PM
Do you remember that you told us that you would bring us answers more than a week ago?Sorry for the delay in my reply. I did send these issues to the Dev Team for review and am still awaiting a response. Since there are a number of issues being brought up here, it is likely that not all of which will be able to be addressed immediately.

#216
Posted 03 August 2011 - 07:59 AM
Do you remember that you told us that you would bring us answers more than a week ago?
bleh;
Back to our descusion on gem7's
..
What if uhm; They just made the gem7's for Garnet7/Ruby7 significantly cheaper by greatly ruducing amount of chems it takes to produce them?
Personaly; I think that stuff should be worth like 1m-5m per gem7- That way noobs could take full advantage of being able to use a gem7 without bursting their pocket books - and them changing the gem7's would kill anyone's pockets.
#217
Posted 03 August 2011 - 12:20 PM
I'd say it would be ok if they lowered the cost of the basic gems such as ruby or garnet, but gems like StarAgate and the rest should still be adjusted and should be close to Diamonds in terms of power.bleh;
Back to our descusion on gem7's
..
What if uhm; They just made the gem7's for Garnet7/Ruby7 significantly cheaper by greatly ruducing amount of chems it takes to produce them?
Personaly; I think that stuff should be worth like 1m-5m per gem7- That way noobs could take full advantage of being able to use a gem7 without bursting their pocket books - and them changing the gem7's would kill anyone's pockets.
On a side note, I personally feel that there is absolutely no need for all those useless grades of gems (1 to 7). It would be much much simpler and less time consuming to craft gems if they changed the 7 grades into 3 grades. Think about it, there are 3 different glows so it would somewhat make sense.
An example of what I am thinking:
- Ruby Piece (grade 1-3)
- Ruby (grade 4-6)
- Giant Ruby (grade 7)
#218
Posted 03 August 2011 - 02:36 PM
I'd say it would be ok if they lowered the cost of the basic gems such as ruby or garnet, but gems like StarAgate and the rest should still be adjusted and should be close to Diamonds in terms of power.
On a side note, I personally feel that there is absolutely no need for all those useless grades of gems (1 to 7). It would be much much simpler and less time consuming to craft gems if they changed the 7 grades into 3 grades. Think about it, there are 3 different glows so it would somewhat make sense.
An example of what I am thinking:Of course the crafting materials would have to be adjusted accordingly.
- Ruby Piece (grade 1-3)
- Ruby (grade 4-6)
- Giant Ruby (grade 7)
+1 like the idea; Just hope they wouldn't OP the StarAgate.
#219
Posted 03 August 2011 - 06:44 PM
bleh;
Back to our descusion on gem7's
..
What if uhm; They just made the gem7's for Garnet7/Ruby7 significantly cheaper by greatly ruducing amount of chems it takes to produce them?
Personaly; I think that stuff should be worth like 1m-5m per gem7- That way noobs could take full advantage of being able to use a gem7 without bursting their pocket books - and them changing the gem7's would kill anyone's pockets.
i don't think top item in this games should be made too easily obtained by anyone... it suppose to be very hard to get and it should take lots of work to achieve that!
#220
Posted 07 August 2011 - 12:07 AM

Edited by PickUp, 07 August 2011 - 12:08 AM.
#221
Posted 07 August 2011 - 12:13 AM
Why not make each gem unique by stats, but all evenly powered? Why does there have to be a 'god gem'?bleh;
Back to our descusion on gem7's
..
What if uhm; They just made the gem7's for Garnet7/Ruby7 significantly cheaper by greatly ruducing amount of chems it takes to produce them?
Personaly; I think that stuff should be worth like 1m-5m per gem7- That way noobs could take full advantage of being able to use a gem7 without bursting their pocket books - and them changing the gem7's would kill anyone's pockets.
Don't fret, your precious D7's will remain "op" for you're "buff sets" for a while, until the demand shifts from them to somethng else due to a "balance" update.+1 like the idea; Just hope they wouldn't OP the StarAgate.
#222
Posted 09 August 2011 - 05:05 AM
Because Canehda has them, I guess.Why not make each gem unique by stats, but all evenly powered? Why does there have to be a 'god gem'?

#223
Posted 09 June 2012 - 12:40 PM
bump
rose needs to foce on story and other stuff like the other biggest games and not every update IM IM IM and bug fixes :-(
Edited by zera, 09 June 2012 - 12:42 PM.
#224
Posted 09 June 2012 - 01:01 PM
I feel that those answers are approaching with the speed of a snail!
Snails move much faster apparently

#225
Posted 09 June 2012 - 05:49 PM
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users