Quest Digest 25/2/96 From: ">>-Josh->" <J.P.Gallagher@durham.ac.uk> Date: Sun, 25 Feb 1996 00:00:00 +0000 ___ _ / _ \ | | 25th February, 1996 | |_| |UEST__| |IGEST \__ | / _ | | |_ | |_| | An e-mail discussion forum for the fantasy |_ / \___/ play by mail game; "Quest". Compiled by Josh Gallagher. J.P.Gallagher@durham.ac.uk o This isn't one of those automatic list thingies, so could all articles be sent clearly marked with paragraphs initalled to me. o If you want off the list, just say! No hassle, no pressure. o All material here is the exclusive property of the author and may not be used elsewhere without their permission. o For answers to specific Quest-related questions, you may want to get in touch with the Quest Helpline; queries sent to quest-help@kokodan.vivi.com will be sent to a panel of experienced Quest players, who will endeavour to answer your problems quickly. Thanks to Bruce Cota for his help. ___ / _ \ Just got the KJC news: "Neil is taking a short break | __/DITORIAL from Quest programming..." Not particularly what I wanted \___| to hear, especially when the Top 5 that appears in this issue of the Digest is to be the one I'm sending in to KJC. The second interesting item in the news was the email facilities. All orders can now be sent to Orders@KJCgames.com and discussions on all games to Gossip@KJCgames.com. Comments@KJCgames.com is the address for "letters, suggestions and problems spefically with KJC and the various games". I intend to send the digest to Gossip@KJCgames.com on a regular basis. Don't know what effect this will have, but I guess the address needs to be used for something! It will apparently be a bulletin board and discussion forum, but I don't think they know quite how they're going to run that. Let's hope these addresses don't bounce... JPG> Just before I give you the articles, can I firstly welcome new additions to the mailing list and secondly request that quoting is kept to a bare minimum. Cheers! -------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Terry Preece <SMA5TGP@cardiff.ac.uk> Date: Mon, 19 Feb 1996 10:37:58 GMT TP> With regards to the NA party order, has anyne actually thought about those groups who are beaten to a pulp and lostover half their members? Surely if this player were to continue in a game, with the group, they should be allowed to go NA to prevent the total destruction of their group and limiting the NA order to groups of 40 turns or less, would mean the player would be better off quitting his/her group rather than taking up the challenge of getting his/her group good again? -------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: thierry stoclet <Thierry.Stoclet@epita.fr> Date: Mon, 19 Feb 1996 14:04:07 +0000 (GMT) > TS>****))) BUT please, PLEASE ! No horse, it's so unrealistic! Imagine one of > your horse die, what did you do with this character?(with no horse) And > when you go to a donjon, where are your horses ?... > > JPG> If a horse was to die, then people could double up on horses, up to > a point, depending on what the maximum weight the horse could carry was. > Alternatively, or perhaps in combination, one or more people may be > forced to walk, and the entire party to go at the same pace as the > walker, hence reducing the movement points to the standard amount. And in > a dungeon, either let them free (lose them) or tether them and hope > you're not down there so long that they die after running out of > available food or water. TS> okay, but for the battle you hac`ve to change totaly the algorithm for integrated horses...Same for the offensives spells and 'S, XXXX' order. It represente lot of work and really, I prefer new spells than horses.... JPG> Good point... But horses would still be nice, from a purely implementationless point of view. > Date: Fri, 16 Feb 1996 13:02:09 +0000 (GMT) > From: Allan Hooper <A.O.Hooper@herts.ac.uk> > > 1) New & Interesting Quests > Why does a temple of Fleyshur care about local farmers?! More varied and > longer term quests please. Reduce Tq's rewards too (max 10K?). TS>for TQ, ok good idea to reduce the rewards but with my thief(99/86) I can steel 5000GP per turn, for a tQ rewards you finish your Quest 3 turns after or more (never less). 3turns=15000GP for me at town (And I can do other things during these turns)... (JPG> Wish I could steal that much...) > 2) Artefacts > Both one off powerfull and unusual items - Venomblade, Firebrand, Soulstealer > should be relatively easy using the Poison, Flame and Ythcals Touch code. TS>for Southstealer I guess you have already artifact of Ythcal with similary power... > 3) New miracles/spells > Make them hard to gain, rare mages tomes in dungeons? Give priests some high > end power, an 80+sk priest should command some respect. TS>Oh YUUUPPP! excellent idea the rare toes mage in dungeons, (exiting to go in the donjon !) the spells can be beta vs of a spell allready know for example : Cold Ball ... > 4) Racial/Class limits on stats > Perhaps its just me, but I cant see an elf mage being as tough as a > veteran stunty fighter or a dwarf mage matching master elven spellweavers. TS> NO Please ! ELSE, Quest come less interesting with groups only with EM,DW,HP,SV !!!!! > 5) Errrrm! (I guess the below wont count, so a vote for dobbins instead!). > Various game balance thingies like looking into HQ skill abuses, multiple > engages, NA abuses, holiday abuses (some much worse than others). TS>The same problems are in France (DELires)... -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 19 Feb 1996 17:56:47 -0600 From: Erling Solheim <solheim@james.avh.unit.no> Hello Josh! Keep on looking... JPG> Cheers... I'll find it some day. :) >PN> WHat I think would be best would be if when you see a >monster on the map and then teleport out to it you should be >able to locate the monster as you actually already know the >secotr that they are in, or KJC should provide a grid reference >so that you could locate that sector. ES> Agree on this one. When I do TQ's I do as follows: When I've been told the sector the monster group is located, I try to figure out a way in which I can teleport into a position that enables my party to fight the monstergroup on this same turn. Most good TQ's I've got are about 10 sectors outside the town, so Teleport II is the spell to use. I walk the party to a sector that make it possible for the party to teleport to the sector where the monstergroup can be expected to be found. But as the teleport spell can bring the party anywhere from 6 to 10 sectors away, you don't know if the party really has landed on the correct sector. Therefore it's important to make sure that you make some kind of "line" that enable your party to meet the monstersgroup if you continue to walk the distance the teleport spell might have "missed". So after issuing the the teleportspell I first write a T order and an E order (because the party won't fight the monstergroup if you actually land on the "correct" sector), and then 4 M-orders (in the same direction) followed by a T order. If you have a tough group you should kill the monstergroup in one single combat, if not you might actually walk away from the monstergroup, but you would still be able to kill it on the next turn. If everything goes well, you might solve TQ's bringing you 1800-2000 gold per character every 2. or 3. turn! PN>The different techniques >would be excellent coupled with the Gladitorial arenas, who would >win? 15 Beserkers or 15 cold blooded Ninja? ES> I never understand if you try to be ironic or not. By the way, whats your new game number in G14, and was it you who sent some cryptic rumour to 1020 and 1504? JPG> I don't think that one was sarcastic... It's a good point really. I'd opt for the Ninjas personally. The Gladiator arenas could be another way to gamble too... >PN> another mint idea, the ability for two or more groups to >coordinate attacks on one monster group at the same time! ES> I think you made a spelling mistake here, ... on one player group at the same time! (at least that would be a natural follow up sugestion, and why not? It's just for KJC to make their programs better so that players wanting to stay outside hostilities could do so, and the others should have the possibility of fighting several parties at once. Or even better, imagine several parties fighting each other in one place at the same time, either in an arena or on a certain sector on the map named "battlefield". Then could all interested players move to this location, and the battle would take place between turns. Imagine the BKA meeting all other alliances in one such sector outside a town or in an arena? I guess the opponents could be picked on random, and that playergroups winning one battle would continue against an other opponent-party on the next battleround. In the end, one alliance or fighting side would be declared the winner having the only surviving party or parties left on the battlefield). >KW> I agree with some of the top 5's but mainly the ones that allow game >expantion rather than moving between games or canceling NA orders. ES> I agree on this one, and if there would be some kind of charge for going from one continent to an other (in game money/gold), I think it should be possible to move around between all the continents for the same amount and you should be free to go to the continent/game that you wish to, for a cheap price. But my sugestion about an other world is that there could be one new world for experienced groups, a new world where Immortals and their followers are living, and where all parties from the different games could meet. This travel should not be a one way travel, and there would off course be no settlements in this new world, so sometimes the parties would have to travel back to Kharne and buy/sell items etc. This new world should bring in a new level of Quests involving Immortals and artifacts and the struggle between the different Gods and religions on Kharne. ES>ADVERTISEMENT!!! Don't you think these ideas are great? >8) Gladiator arena (3) > * organised fighting area in town; prizes offered, choice of weapons >9) Computer moderated alliances (2) > * eg. offer special quests, based on religion I see a lot of possibilities in these two, but I would like to say that I find many of the ideas that has been sugested by others to be GREAT. But I do have a sugestion for the next time we vote. I think we first should send in sugestions for improvements, then put these on a list, and then we vote. As it is now, I think those sugestions getting in at first has some kind of advantage, as players have got them repeated over and over again. I also think that those who send in their sugestions now at the end of the "contest" MIGHT chose to vote on those sugestions that allready are among the top 5, as these are the ones who might have any chance of getting through. As it is now, I can't change my mind if someone has sent in a new and very good idea at the end of the "contest", a idea that I find better than my own sugestions. JPG> I knew this was going to be a problem when I started it, but there was little I could do about it. Should the top 5 continue, there will always be new ideas added, and people will always be wanting to change their votes. There cannot ever be a definitive list of ideas from which to pick. Unfortunately those who sent their ideas in early were not able to draw from other people's suggestions. See below for the arrangements for the next top5 (I just made them up whilst writing this paragraph). PN>4) An experience point total just like gold, to let you know how many exp's >you can waste on skills before you drop below TQ level. ES>Hello, hello!!! Adding some numbers shouldn't be that difficult, even I manage that (at least sometimes). >JPG> (On horses)And in >a dungeon, either let them free (lose them) or tether them and hope >you're not down there so long that they die after running out of >available food or water. ES> Camels can survive long without any water, perhaps we should introduce camels instead of horses. Or perhaps a spell named "feed and hide horses" could be introduced... JPG> This does smack of inventing trivial spells to overcome problems with the implementation though. It should be possible for groups to find somewhere to tether horses in forests. Maybe not in deserts, and perhaps a little less easily in mountains. There could be a chance your horses won't be there when you come out. >4.cities of different alignments- Spellcasting would be allowed in chaotic >cities, evil groups might be attacked by NPCs in good cities, theives put in >jail/killed in lawful cities etc etc. might be hard to program, but it would >be a nice touch. Temple quests might then have a different dimension. ES> Even the suburbs in a city could have their own "alignment", as one suburb might be one ruled by chaos and by the assasins guild etc, while an other suburb might be lawful and being the city-guards' location, with the banks, wealthy npcs etc. Ok, this was perhaps too much nonsense at once, but... all the best to all of you. Erling Solheim Student at the University of Trondheim, Norway E-mail:solheim@james.avh.unit.no JPG> Not at all.. the more the merrier. Sorry for peppering it all with my own comments. :) -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 20 Feb 1996 10:32:55 GMT From: thomas@enterprise.bt.co.uk (Roy Thomas) > PN>I met some zombies once, fryed them with lightening blast in a > dungeon! Perhaps such a spell shouldnt be allowed indoors, how > does the lightening get through the floor? Or have I got it > wrong? I don't think I did ever read that blurb. RJT> I always thought that Lightning Blast was a blast much like lightning eminating from the mages hands. I did not think that it was actually a real Lightning Strike. RJT> Does anyone know if a kill undead / destroy undead / turn undead miracle/spell actually works on an undead? If so, what undead and what spell. RJT> How about the idea of changing world to a new and dangerous world (another plane of existence) that would be the same for all games. You could only return to your particular game from there. RJT> Then groups from different games could meet and then go back to their own game. Powerful groups would not be able to pick on weak groups because weak groups unless the weak group went to this dangerous world (then it is there fault). JPG> It should just be a one way trip in my opinion. If a group was allowed to go and come back they would soon be ridiculously powerful in their original world. I like the idea of a world that would not have an upper limit on stats (or at least would extend the current limit). RJT> And there would be another level of excitement to the whole game. AD&D has many planes of existence (fire, ice, positive, negative, earth, air), as well as quasi planes (smoke, ooze, ash, etc), and also outer planes (The Abyss, Tarterus, Pandemonium, The Nine Hells, Gehenna, Nirvana etc). RJT> I know KJC can't just copy this, but it gives ideas for new planes with new monsters, and new dangers. > 5) Computer moderated Allainces, like knightly orders etc that you could > join. Forgot the name of the pal who suggested this, but I definetly like > it! RJT> Neat!!! How about joining the Militia, An Army in a war etc. Very dificult to program, and things like joining a knight order usually only applies to one character at a time. HOWEVER... RJT> I have a copy of the very first Quest rule book (yes, I have played a LONG time) and at the back, it says that the following options are available: Quest for Heroes: A member of your group decides to leave and quest for himself. The rest of the group continue questing as normal. Quest for Power: A member of your group decides to leave and join a political struggle for power in the clerical order or as a Lord. The rest of the group continue questing as normal. Quest for Life: You continue playing for ever at a set fee. RJT> I have only seen the latter. Where are the other options??? RJT> It was in the rule book - is this contractual? - are KJC obliged to provide these options? (JPG> Anyone versed in law out there? :) RJT> This would certainly change things for many groups - adding a new level of unknown. Joining a Knightly order could be part of Quest for Heroes. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 20 Feb 1996 13:37:38 +0000 (GMT) From: Allan Hooper <A.O.Hooper@herts.ac.uk> > From: editor@elbon.demon.co.uk (Paul Noble) > PN> The contenders in the fights would get and xp bonus for competing > (to stop groups using it as a xp machine a minimum flee factor > would have to be installed) the winner gaining twice the amount > as the loser. AH> How about a minimum flee factor of 100%? If its only one on one combat thats -10K to the loser and fame and glory (+items) to the victor! > And in a dungeon, either let them free (lose them) or tether them and > hope you're not down there so long that they die after running out of > available food or water. AH> Or rent a stable in town at X gp's per turn per Mr Ed before you do spelunking. Then pay out of your hard earned dungeon loot or they'll clamp your geegees and tow them away. > JPG> I guess they _ought_ to count, but really they are problems that KJC > should be looking at individually, not additions to the game but fixes of > problems. AH> Actually its a bit nasty of me to put multiple engages in that list - I use them from time to time and there is not many people I know who dont use them. Although it has to be said that they are a bit powerfull and unrealistic. AH> This is how it stands at the moment: "Hey look! Here comes 'Death Spells R Us' a well known member of the <insert evil alliance of your choice here>. We dont think their hard, lets meet their charge!" [ Sounds of battle, many screams, etc. Then a few minutes later ] "Here comes DSRU again, they only managed to kill half our members for no loss last time. We still dont think they're hard, lets meet their charge again!" [ Again sounds of battle, one heavily wounded character remains while DSRU are untouched ] "Come on you pansies! Its only a flesh wound. I'll take you all on!" [ Fade to fifteen newly dug graves.... ] AH> Would'nt it be better that after a fight in which you were defeated AND lost at least one character your group would be marked as defeated and be sort of NA for the remainder of the turn and the next one (or two turns if attacked between turns - as the first turn after being attacked tends to go horribly wrong). This would only give time for groups to try and get back to safty before they are open to attack again. JPG> Imagine this in a real battle though; a group suddenly becoming invunerable once they lost one battle? Sounds more unrealistic than the current situation. AH> As for Hq skills, again its debatable but I find it hard to believe KJC intended all alliance groups to have 99 health allround - which is the way things are going now. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 20 Feb 1996 16:26:08 +0000 (GMT) From: Chris Clarke <ctc@coventry.ac.uk> CC> Whoever suggested a Leicester meet; I would probably go depending on timing (not near exams, heavy coursework etc). Also Bill Godfrey would go and there is at least one other player in Coventry (Steve Mckee is at Cov Uni). It's only just down the motorway. Count me in. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 04 Jan 1980 15:53:17 GMT From: Paul Noble <editor@elbon.demon.co.uk> PN>Hallo folks, I have updated the spreadsheet which I mentioned a couple of digests ago (several months =)). It is alot easier to use now with no unnamed numbers floating around. Also the XP - Weaponskill bit is better, it now shows you when a char can hit 100WS or not. Just in case you can't figure it out I'll mail you a copy of my G3 stats as well to show you how it works. Also the Awareness column has been corrected. JPG> 2 digests = several months... Am I _that_ bad? :( -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 23 Feb 1996 00:08:00 +0000 From: Geoff Blakey <geoff@gtblakey.demon.co.uk> NA Order ^^^^^^^^ On the topic of NA orders, I had a letter from Mr KJC himself on this topic. The main reason for the NA orders, is simply *KJC profit*. Apparently many players are not continuing Quest or are quitting it if they suffer a heavy loss. The people leaving seemed to be denting KJCs profits, hence the NA order. Since the NA order, KJC have had many more people join and *remain* in Quest. The reason I wrote to KJC about NA, was that many newer groups (and some older ones) are going to be put off joining an Alliance because they no longer need any friends or protection. Seems to me to be making the game even less social than it already was... -------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: bv@bigblue.no (B. Vermo) Date: Thu, 22 Feb 1996 13:39:06 +0100 |8) Less rewards for Temple Quests (3) | * max 10K? BV> Make this a change to make all rewards on a per group basis, not on a per person basis. |3) NA order for groups under 40 only. | BV> Instead, remove NA order and replace with much improved fleeing capability for lightly armed and armored groups. The idea should be to protect new groups and explore-only groups, not to make a new "game within the game". The adjustment can be made by making it more difficult to discover small groups with light equipment. Cloth armor does not make sounds, and does not glisten in sun or moonlight. Few, lightly armed persons can easily move unobserved where a larger group of heavily armed and armored people cannot easily hide, as anybody who has led a reconnoisance patrol will testify. Add to this a "caution factor" ruled by the combined flee factor and peace-war alignment so that a 1% flee factor group with extreme peaceful alignment will always detect a 99% flee factor extreme war-aligned group long before it is detected itself. It will then be able to see if the other group seems friendly-looking before it reveals itself. Unlike NA groups, they will still run some risk, but they will be able to control the level of risk they accept better than with an on/off switch. They will be able to fight and gain experience, but the combination of flee factor and light equipment will make it easy to escape from heavy, warlike groups. On the same lines, it should be fairly easy to detect and foil an attempted ambush by a large, heavily armed and armored group. In short: Replace NA with fast escape for light groups. |From: thierry stoclet <Thierry.Stoclet@epita.fr> |Date: Mon, 12 Feb 1996 14:08:39 +0000 (GMT) || |3) Follow Roads | BV> Good idea. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ________ ____________ |___ ___| | | | | ____ _ __ | _______| | | / __ \ | |/ __ \ | |____ | | | |__| | | |__| | | \ |__| \ ____ / | |\____/ |_______ \ | | \ | |_| _______ / | | / |__________/ i) Please put your Top 5 in a different email; it really helps me when I'm compiling them. ii) Limit your suggestions to one or two lines _at the most_. The more detailed the suggestion, the less likely it will be to have widespread support, and it won't make the list below. JPG> Okay, this is the final result of this round of the Top 5 votes. The results, as shown below, will be sent to KJC. After hearing about Neil moving off Quest Programming for a bit, I'm not sure what will be done with them, if anything, but it must at least be better to inform them what we want to see programmed then let them guess for themselves. NB: ONLY the top 5 will be sent (so as not to intimidate KJC ;) ARRANGEMENTS FOR FURTHER TOP 5 BALLOTS ====================================== I'll leave it a while before doing another one, but I'll keep hold of the suggestions I received. When another vote is opened I'll show all the previous ideas and accept votes for them. If anyone wants to add ideas, they won't have to include it in their top 5, but it will be added to the list of available ideas for everyone to see. If there are any objections to this system then tell me. You will have a couple of months probably before the next vote, but in the mean time you can still send me ideas to include in the list. So, here's that final Top 5 for Round 1: 1) New & Interesting Quests(18) * Rescuing artefacts, clearing dungeons, clues from library, involve NPCs, Quests from Banks. 2) Artefacts (11) * Include artefacts in the game, might increase attributs for eg 3) Horses (& other mounts?) (10) * include horses in the game to increase movement points (+ feed Kreorses) 4) Change world spell (of some form) (9) * change to either another game or a new, tougher game 5) Mixed and large groups of Monsters (8) * New monsters, mixed race monster groups, villages of monsters - - - - - - - 6) Follow Road (7) * implement a follow road order 7) Gladiator arena (5) * organised fighting area in town; prizes offered, choice of weapons 7) Catacombs/sewers (5) * under the city, poplated by monsters/bandits/NPC's 7) Separate Spell rankings (5) * one ranking for monsters, another for parties 8) Less rewards for Temple Quests (3) * max 10K? 8) New miracles/spells (3) * Eg: Regeneration, locate underground location. Higher lvl priest spells 8) More varied battle reports (3) * Examples: include names of oponents 8) Town politics and trading (3) * Trading between towns that specialise in produce, politics in towns 8) More races and professions (3) * professions possibly just for more experienced characters to specialise 8) E-mail game (3) * Set up a game that sends turns by email. Charge less. 8) Computerised situations (3) * Wars between cities, waring groups, news and events 9) NA order for groups under 40 only (2) 9) Computer moderated alliances (2) * eg. offer special quests, based on religion -------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Terry Preece <SMA5TGP@cardiff.ac.uk> Date: Mon, 19 Feb 1996 10:37:58 GMT 1) spell rankings monster/player groups. Surely not hard to do remember the days of offensive/defensive spell casting? 2) change world spell however a group should be unable to chose the world to go to. Therefore the only players likely to use the spell would be those in a rubbish game. 3) more varied temple quests especially introduceing quests from banks. 4) higher level priest spells. 5) the ability to increase the fighters skill! after all it is possible to increase all other stats! Even if there is a restriction to say 60 skill I know of loads of players with doulbe ACE fighters but only having 35 or so skill. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Neil Benson" <9365040@mull.sms.ed.ac.uk> Date: Mon, 19 Feb 1996 10:55:44 +0000 1. Actually get Kevin to effect some of these changes. The horses and roads improvements were suggested in an RKM newsletter over three years ago, and they certainly weren't the first. 2. Run a spell checker over inputs and outputs to cure the dreaded inputter mitten disease. 3. Email turns. 4. Colour output. 5. NPCs with intelligence, including the monsters. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: newmansc <newmansc@helios.aston.ac.uk> Date: Tue, 20 Feb 1996 10:49:08 GMT 1] Catacombs/sewers * under the city, poplated by monsters/bandits/NPC's 2] Gladiator arena * organised fighting area in town; prizes offered, choice of weapons 3] Mixed and large groups of Monsters * New monsters, mixed race monster groups, villages of monsters 4] Artefacts * Include artefacts in the game, might increase attributs for eg 5] Follow Road * implement a follow road order -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 22 Feb 1996 15:49:49 +0000 (GMT) From: ==*PAUL*== <madden@coventry.ac.uk> 1) new and improved quests possibly involving layered components i.e research at a library, search out a location then retrieving an object. 2) detailed artefacts and magical weapons not many but enough to make the game more interesting. They should dissapear after a random time 5 turns plus 1d10 maybe! 3) mixed and large groups of monsters 4) more varied battle reports 5) change world spell -------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Bent C Dalager <bcd@pvv.unit.no> Date: Fri, 23 Feb 1996 13:33:00 +0100 (MET) in no particular order; mixed monster groups more varied battle reports new more interesting (and time consuming) quests implement some sort of town politics/alignments implement computerised situations (wars, crusades, blights, whatever) -------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Skeltem@aol.com Subject: Quest-Top Five My Top Fives for Quest are: 1. More character classes 2. More character races 4. Arenas and Dungeons in Cities 5. More interesting Quests JPG> I'm a little confused as to where number 3 went to, but I guess four will do. :) -------------------------------------------------------------------------- JPG> Well, as you saw, Follow Road order got beaten at the very last minute by the mixed and large monster groups. For the moment, no more Top 5's, please. Thank you to everyone who sent their votes in. As I say, we'll do it all again in a couple of months (or some arbitary time in the future), but if you fancy sending in ideas for inclusion on the long list of ideas, please feel free. Keep them in the same format as the ones in the Top 5 list above. Saves me choosing what to chop out of them. Until next time folks, happy Questing! >>-Josh-> "But I still haven't found what I'm looking for..." - U2 Up