Why no SSRA? Or are we getting a Part 3...

I agree. Lore is great and all for lorehounds, but Ssra is what'll generate interest with your average fan.

I'm super disappointed that we're not getting it, unless there's gonna be a part 3 of the Luclin remake next year that covers the Ssra part of the world. Scarlet Desert, Twilight Sea, Katta Castellum, and Mons Letalis all have tremendous remake potential, gorgeous areas. Throw Marus Seru in there too. If that's the case then I'm totally cool with what we're getting here. But if this is it for Luclin, then meh. And I'm fairly certain that it is all we're getting, considering that Kunark and Velious also each had two remakes while leaving enough zones for a third.

Luclin has so much more to offer than just Ssra and I think that there will be more Luclin themed expansions because the zone selection for NoS, which is very focused on underground caverns, does only make sense as a part of a greater picture.

colorful*

too*

arcade*

definitely*

Grandpa, please don't forget to check with Clippy the next time you make a hate post. All these spelling mistakes make you look foolish.

Spelling mistakes ? That is Bushism.

So far. None of those zones were nuked into the ground story wise so just because we didn't get a remake of every kunark/velious/luclin zone does not mean we won't go back to them when the story dictates even if it's 3,4,5,15+ expansions from now.

Just because some marsupials read this thread, let me paint the Ssra in a different color.
I hated Ssra back at release time. I hated it on Solusek Ro. I hated it on Stromm (new server opened up with no server transfers, so everybody started at level 1, th predessesor of TLP). And I still hate it when I spin an expedition from AoC.
And I love Luclin zones, my favorite expansion by far. So, to my taste, ToL and NoS missing Ssra is a great win for average fans (including myself), even though it might be a loss for average fans (including you).
Wait! Two different "average fans" ? I bet it's more than 2.

My point - there is more than 1 opinion about Ssra, and marsupials need to be aware of both.

I had enough ssra twenty years ago.

Only zone i wish made the cut is scarlet desert. Oh well!

I try to keep up with the forums when I can. IDK how I'd push my young, feminine agenda otherwise. I hope you guys like all the new, fake colors I discovered for 2023.

But also, thank you for your input. This marsupial is aware of both opinions now

I like the idea that "brown and black" is the "real life medieval world" when in real life, medieval people dressed and decorated in the brightest colors they could get their hands on. The idea that the medieval palette was just a bunch of blacks and browns is ahistorical, and comes from people thinking that TV is real life.

Not to mention the fact that all the colors of nature that exist naturally of course still existed then.

I like.

It's a pretty good justification for all those crazy robes somebody made.

Could is the key word. Most people in the middle ages did not had the ressources to could get colorful clothes so they had to dress in dirty white, brown and grey tones. Also a bit green and blue tones from cheaper plant dyes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safflower
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isatis_tinctoria

Dyed clothes were very expensive and the color pigments hard to get. Only the well armed nobility (knights were rogues/bandits) were able to steal enough ressources from the poor to get colorful and black clothes. Black was even the most expensive "color" to produce and therefor a status symbol until today in most societies. Crimson (carmine) was also very expensive and needed as a component for deep black.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carmine

People in the Middle Ages could get their hands on more colors than you think, and a lot of people get confused on this point because many of the fabrics shared names with colors. For instance "scarlet" was both a fabric (which was relatively expensive) and a color (which was middling expensive).

What colors were readily available depends entirely on region. In Medieval England your three staple dyes were made from Madder Root (for Reds/Pinks), Woad (Blue/Silvers), and Weld (for Yellows).

All of which were relatively cheap to get in pale colors.

What would happen is that your peasant class was likely to own only a single outfit, and while colored cloth in general wasn't particularly expensive, the cheaper dye would be paler in color *and* not hold as as well, so it would tend to fade faster to the "base" color. There was also often Sumputary Laws restricting certain colors (Purple for instance, being reserved for Royalty).

Of course, none of that has any actual bearing on the fact that the two zones you complained about, Deepshade and Darklight Caverns, don't particularly have any brightly colored peasantry in them. Rather you're complaining that the local fauna are too brightly colored. To which of course, one need to only look around at the world outside to see that nature itself is awash with color at every turn.

I cannot remember that being a part of this thread but just take a look at the screenshots. It does look like a nightly goa party under black light and the only thing that is missing are stoned grimling peasants with dread locks. Maybe dark light (caverns) is a reference to black light so somehow it does fit. However natural colors produced by sunlight look very differently if the viewer has not consumed acid or fungi. Of course there is no sun down in those caves but all in all it does produce to much eye cancer. Maybe those screenshots are just extreme examples and the whole zones might not be as bad.






Examples for natural colors (California):
Much less color saturation there even that all of those photo pictures had been aleady increased in contrast and color saturation by the cam and/or user !

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/18/Julia_Pfeiffer_Burns_State_Park_CA1.jpg

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/68/Resting_Spring_Range_from_Chicago_Valley.jpg

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipe...s_Crags_and_Lassen_Peak_at_Manzanita_Lake.jpg

Yea a cave full of animate mushrooms with mouths and noses, perhaps exhaling mushroom spores into the air. You're breathing mushrooms. Maybe thats the source of the light effects.

Add-on sticker for NoS:

Yea, natural mushrooms never have bright vibrant colors.





I mean nature even has bubblegum pink lakes



and berries that look like they've been painted metallic



or entire mountains that are awash with all the colors of the rainbow



and caves that glow blue




and hot springs that look psychedelic



and trees whose bark ranges from lime green to blue, purple, and maroon



and canyons that have the deepest blues and purples you'll ever find

So I dunno dude, maybe you should leave your backyard sometime and actually look at what colors are available out there in nature.

This bird is fake, created by people pushing feminine agendas.