Vaildez said:
Part of what made EQ great was that people were spread all over the world because there wasn't just one place to find item upgrades. I think having valuable items spread across levels and zones adds more immersion and encourages players to explore the world. I don't want to see another game where at max level there is only one place to get item upgrades and everyone is hanging out there.
Which is why I suggested a compromise. I wouldn't suggest preventing people from obtaining massive quantities of random normal loot if the so desire, nor would I want to eliminate the ability to get a highly valued item once they've outleveled and area, but I don't see why a player would need to loot the same highly valued item half a dozen times. I know there are people who don't agree, but what I'd like to see is a system where you could go back and visit those areas and get that great item you want, or get the super item for an alt, you could go back once in a while and get the item, but IMHO if you want to preserve the challenge in the game you don't want people to get 4-5 of some highly valued item and go sell them for easy gold. That's just my preference.
Kayd said:
Vaildez said:
Part of what made EQ great was that people were spread all over the world because there wasn't just one place to find item upgrades. I think having valuable items spread across levels and zones adds more immersion and encourages players to explore the world. I don't want to see another game where at max level there is only one place to get item upgrades and everyone is hanging out there.
Which is why I suggested a compromise. I wouldn't suggest preventing people from obtaining massive quantities of random normal loot if the so desire, nor would I want to eliminate the ability to get a highly valued item once they've outleveled and area, but I don't see why a player would need to loot the same highly valued item half a dozen times. I know there are people who don't agree, but what I'd like to see is a system where you could go back and visit those areas and get that great item you want, or get the super item for an alt, you could go back once in a while and get the item, but IMHO if you want to preserve the challenge in the game you don't want people to get 4-5 of some highly valued item and go sell them for easy gold. That's just my preference.
That's exactly what people did in early EQ and it didn't affect the challenge, it provided an alternate path for people to gear up to move into new content. Don't know how many FBSS, Crystal Chitin Guantlets, etc. i sold until i could afford a Cowl of Mortality. What it did do was provided a good supply of items for players to sell which helped grow the EC tunnel trade economy.
Reht said:
Kayd said:
Vaildez said:
Part of what made EQ great was that people were spread all over the world because there wasn't just one place to find item upgrades. I think having valuable items spread across levels and zones adds more immersion and encourages players to explore the world. I don't want to see another game where at max level there is only one place to get item upgrades and everyone is hanging out there.
Which is why I suggested a compromise. I wouldn't suggest preventing people from obtaining massive quantities of random normal loot if the so desire, nor would I want to eliminate the ability to get a highly valued item once they've outleveled and area, but I don't see why a player would need to loot the same highly valued item half a dozen times. I know there are people who don't agree, but what I'd like to see is a system where you could go back and visit those areas and get that great item you want, or get the super item for an alt, you could go back once in a while and get the item, but IMHO if you want to preserve the challenge in the game you don't want people to get 4-5 of some highly valued item and go sell them for easy gold. That's just my preference.
That's exactly what people did in early EQ and it didn't affect the challenge, it provided an alternate path for people to gear up to move into new content. Don't know how many FBSS, Crystal Chitin Guantlets, etc. i sold until i could afford a Cowl of Mortality. What it did do was provided a good supply of items for players to sell which helped grow the EC tunnel trade economy.
If you define challenge as just leveling then I agree, but if you define challenge as also getting gear then it does affect challenge because IMHO it allows you to get money to buy gear using mobs that are no challenge. It also meant that you'd level up to a point where you could go get some cool loot from something appropriate for your level and about half the time you'd arrive to find the mob camped by people for whom it couldn't have been any real challenge. It wasn't a once in a while thing, it was a widespread way to avoid getting gold the hard way by fighting things your level. to me that is trivializing the attainment of gold/items.
Edit: I know I am the lone voice on this side of the issue, but I am enjoying the discussion and many of the comments have made me think about the validity of my position. However, just to be clear, what I'm saying is the purest in me is bothered by the idea that you obtained the Cowl of Mortality via a path that involved minimal risk, and the perfectionist in me finds it jarring for players to want experience to come only by taking risks but then hold an entirely different standard for loot/gold.
Kayd said:
If you define challenge as just leveling then I agree, but if you define challenge as also getting gear then it does affect challenge because IMHO it allows you to get money to buy gear using mobs that are no challenge. It also meant that you'd level up to a point where you could go get some cool loot from something appropriate for your level and about half the time you'd arrive to find the mob camped by people for whom it couldn't have been any real challenge. It wasn't a once in a while thing, it was a widespread way to avoid getting gold the hard way by fighting things your level. to me that is trivializing the attainment of gold/items.
Edit: I know I am the lone voice on this side of the issue, but I am enjoying the discussion and many of the comments have made me think about the validity of my position. However, just to be clear, what I'm saying is the purest in me is bothered by the idea that you obtained the Cowl of Mortality via a path that involved minimal risk, and the perfectionist in me finds it jarring for players to want experience to come only by taking risks but then hold an entirely different standard for loot/gold.
I can't say I remember it being as restrictive as you've described, but I understand the point you are trying to get across.
I believe if the content is designed properly and items scale in power and value accordingly, it will mostly prevent this problem. However, you will never eliminate it because in doing so, you eliminate the freedom that exists in a true virtual world. If there isn't healthy competition in a game, your achievements lack a sense of accomplishment. Its also important to bear in mind that convenience is the bane of immersion as "good things come to those who wait" and to some degree, that has to carry over into a virtual world to give it any semblance of realism. Convenience is not only the bane of the immersive elements that made EverQuest fantastic, its also the reason modern MMOs lack longevity.
Kayd said:
Edit: I know I am the lone voice on this side of the issue, but I am enjoying the discussion and many of the comments have made me think about the validity of my position. However, just to be clear, what I'm saying is the purest in me is bothered by the idea that you obtained the Cowl of Mortality via a path that involved minimal risk, and the perfectionist in me finds it jarring for players to want experience to come only by taking risks but then hold an entirely different standard for loot/gold.
Arguably, being able to buy items was another reason EQ's gameplay worked (and a boost to the economy like Reht said). Yes, the purist in me would "prefer" to obtain all items through drops; however, being able to purchase gear allowed for alternative character advancement and allowed for non-raiders to not be stuck at 50/60 with nothing to do. Further, if everything was Bind on Equip/Pickup in Everquest, then the we must have instances argument would have more merit as well as there would be a limited number of any item in the economy and the fact that certain mobs could be locked down 24/7 would have more justification.
An example... I could be in a raid guild and get the drop, or, I could farm/grind for the plat. Is it less of a challenge to buy the item? Maybe depending on how you're defining what's challenging and who is in your raid group; however, it's definitely not less time consuming camping/selling items if that's how you're defining challenging, and depending on what was being camped for plat, it may not have been less risky. It just provides the player that didn't have time to raid and/or didn't want to, a much slower alternative to obtain better gear. I view it as allowing a player another alternative to advance, versus being easy-mode or less risk. Now, if plat (currency) is ridiculously easy to come by, which allows for a player to obtain equal gear faster than a raider, then that is a design issue and an entirely different discussion.
I realize the response is a little off topic from the trivial loot code discussion; however, it's just another reason I'm against trivializing loot. I don't want to restrict alternative play-styles as long as it's not a detriment to the game.
Raidan said:
Kayd said:
Edit: I know I am the lone voice on this side of the issue, but I am enjoying the discussion and many of the comments have made me think about the validity of my position. However, just to be clear, what I'm saying is the purest in me is bothered by the idea that you obtained the Cowl of Mortality via a path that involved minimal risk, and the perfectionist in me finds it jarring for players to want experience to come only by taking risks but then hold an entirely different standard for loot/gold.
Arguably, being able to buy items was another reason EQ's gameplay worked (and a boost to the economy like Reht said). Yes, the purist in me would "prefer" to obtain all items through drops; however, being able to purchase gear allowed for alternative character advancement and allowed for non-raiders to not be stuck at 50/60 with nothing to do. Further, if everything was Bind on Equip/Pickup in Everquest, then the we must have instances argument would have more merit as well as there would be a limited number of any item in the economy and the fact that certain mobs could be locked down 24/7 would have more justification.
An example... I could be in a raid guild and get the drop, or, I could farm/grind for the plat. Is it less of a challenge to buy the item? Maybe depending on how you're defining what's challenging and who is in your raid group; however, it's definitely not less time consuming camping/selling items if that's how you're defining challenging, and depending on what was being camped for plat, it may not have been less risky. It just provides the player that didn't have time to raid and/or didn't want to, a much slower alternative to obtain better gear. I view it as allowing a player another alternative to advance, versus being easy-mode or less risk. Now, if plat (currency) is ridiculously easy to come by, which allows for a player to obtain equal gear faster than a raider, then that is a design issue and an entirely different discussion.
I realize the response is a little off topic from the trivial loot code discussion; however, it's just another reason I'm against trivializing loot. I don't want to restrict alternative play-styles as long as it's not a detriment to the game.
Just a few comments to clarify my opinion. I don't object too farming or selling items at all, I just think there should have been risk in obtaining the items. I have farmed items myself, but for me personally, it just seemed inefficient to waste time farming items that don't also get me experience. I'm farming spider silk now in project 1999 but I get experience from the carrion spiders (and not much silk). So when I outlevel the spiders in Karana I'll move to the everfrost where they get me experience. When those wear out I'll go back to Karana and crag spiders. What I don't think the game should reward is people farming way below their level. IMHO it is reward with little risk. I think when you outgrow a piece of equipment or if you want to get as many gatorscale sleeves as you can at the level the crocks give experience then more power to ya. So it is not and never has been my contention that farming is an issue, or farming for loot, I just think it should entail some risk.
Also obtaining items at a level where there is minimal risk is what trivializes loot. It is trivial for a level 50 to get nice items from a level 30 mob. In that sense what I'm advocating is anti-trivial loot code :)
If the item is sufficiently hard to get already, such as on a long enough spawn cycle then I don't see any need for special code to make it more difficult to get. Raid gear is always risky to get and so it wouldn't be subject to any other restrictions. But, there are plenty of examples of good mid level items that sell for a fair amount and drop every few hour or so, and they are frequently camped by higher levels farming for gold. If they were camped by appropriate level players I would never object because that is just smart planning to get good loot and experience at the same time.
I dont think trivial loot code is the answer to this problem. i would rather see something like a tag on those rare items that players want which makes them unable to have more than one at a time on their person. like a unique item. if the item is *Magic Belt* that drops off of any mob in the zone then a tag isnt needed, but by contrast i shouldn't have 5 *Gimblax's Magic GreatClub* things that drop specifically from named mobs should be unique and unable to have multiples on the same character.
i think this is a good way to keep players from overfarming an item, well along with named mobs spawning randomly in different areas w/o a set timer.
I'm not a big fan of trivial loot code for Pantheon for one reason alone. The devs have indicated that we are likely going to want to hold onto gear much longer in this game as we'll be working on many sets of gear for different environments, resists, etc... There may be a particularly sweet resist item from a low level camp that I want to go back and get.
I'm even less of a fan of twinking although I'm certainly not saying that I've never done it. Pantheon is supposed to be a world where we level much slower. I'd like to see mechanisms in place which discourage players from farming gear on a high level character just to gear up alt #5. I think these same mechanisms would encourage level appropriate camping. Few things are more frustrating than to be in an appropriate dungeon for an hour or so, fighting your way into a sweet camp, only to have some high level toon run through with no agro and either claim the camp or take out the rare spawn that you're after.
Past mechanisms have included trivial loot code and both lore and no-drop flags on gear. We've also seen mobs which banish players who are too high level. I should add to the list items which don't proc their abilities until specific levels.
I'd like to see gear which scaled more as the user leveled. Multi-questing an epic for your level 1 rogue should be both impossible and undesirable. Some gear should be unobtainable and unequipable below certain levels. Even if you could obtain the item, it shouldn't allow you to perform feats or do damage that is grossly out of scale for your level.
If you can remove the market incentive for high level characters from occupying low level camps, you open up more content to the average player.
So the main problem people are having is with people potentially camping an item just for money/trade - that is dropping from a mob significantly lower in level than they are. Correct?
I wonder would it help to make (rare/unique) items that drop from a grey con mob for example, be account bound on a character if looted? So you'd have people able to solo camp a mob to twink an alt, but not to simply farm item(s) for sale/trade.
I propose the idea, but at the same time, my personal opinion on the matter is I am fine with EQ's way of doing it. In my experience most people didn't go and farm gear for an alt, not beyond a few pieces at least, because most items were in level-appropriate camps, and people would grind those camps for exp while trying to farm the desired item. Most groups I were in, had people enjoying the experience of leveling, not trying so much to power level thru like current games.
Never thought I'd see the day Pantheon forums heard the words "account bound" or "trivial loot code" with people pushing for them..
In a properly designed game, it wouldn't be efficient for higher level players to farm lower level mobs for loot, because they can't make as much money as they could farming their own level loot. If they are farming it for an alt or for themselves (resist set) then there is nothing wrong either. On top of that if the game has Alternative Advancement at max level (AA's), you may find that a problem that existed in early Everquest, was alleviated by this because rather than farming some green con spiders for silks, you could hit 2 birds with 1 stone by farming spiders that were expable.
Creating better alternatives for farming for high levels is better than simply saying no you can't do this.
I think if we scale and balance our levels correctly that mid-high level players will have bigger and better things to farm, camp and keep their interest instead of killing lower level mobs which will be inefficient and less rewarding for them than if they focussed on level appropriate mobs/loot.
I have never liked artificial tags like "unique", "bind on equip" or "account bound" apart from there being many ways to get around those tags it just makes the game feel forced in terms of loot and I really want to avoid taking that course of action if possible.
Kilsin said:
I think if we scale and balance our levels correctly that mid-high level players will have bigger and better things to farm, camp and keep their interest instead of killing lower level mobs which will be inefficient and less rewarding for them than if they focussed on level appropriate mobs/loot.
I have never liked artificial tags like "unique", "bind on equip" or "account bound" apart from there being many ways to get around those tags it just makes the game feel forced in terms of loot and I really want to avoid taking that course of action if possible.
I agree with this.. I don't like the invisible barriers like BoE/Account Bound. I am also hoping to not see a gear treadmill where we are constantly replacing gear. I like when loot feels special and isn't replaced by a new item every few levels.
Vaildez said:
Kilsin said:
I think if we scale and balance our levels correctly that mid-high level players will have bigger and better things to farm, camp and keep their interest instead of killing lower level mobs which will be inefficient and less rewarding for them than if they focussed on level appropriate mobs/loot.
I have never liked artificial tags like "unique", "bind on equip" or "account bound" apart from there being many ways to get around those tags it just makes the game feel forced in terms of loot and I really want to avoid taking that course of action if possible.
I agree with this.. I don't like the invisible barriers like BoE/Account Bound. I am also hoping to not see a gear treadmill where we are constantly replacing gear. I like when loot feels special and isn't replaced by a new item every few levels.
I understand what you are saying and it drove me a bit nuts to have have the great gear at level 20 then you get to level 25 and you have something better for almost every slot. It creates a treadmill where you can never quite keep up. However, the reverse is what creates the problem. If there's some slot for which you can get a great item at level 30 and it still remains the best you can get till level 45 then you're pretty much encouraging those level 40 players to go back to the level 30 area and compete with level 30 players for that loot.
If the devs think they can find a balance that works, then I'm willing to wait and see.
even if the loot drops arent as good as what players can get in thier own level, i think twink items will always have a premium market. look at EQ and VG i had vast fortunes in both those games, so much plat i couldnt spend it all on my mains. i made all that by farming twink items like Dragonscale Breastplate, that have no lvl restrictions and in VG making HQ crafted sets for low level toons. because there wil always be more alts than mains.
although i am interested in brads idea of making high level gear equippable on low level toons and only giving a % of those items benefits, this could also keep players from farming low content as people going for twink items might go after that level 50 belt because it gives a % of haste or some other stat that does not appear on low level gears. even if its just gaining 1% out of 20% haste it should be preferable to not getting any haste.
we can always keep out eyes open during alpha and say something then if the measures taken dont seem to be an adequate deterrant of this type of behavior.
We all seem to have this underlying assumption, perhaps even a sense of entitlement that if I level one character in a game I should have an advantage on subsequent alts. Perhaps this is desirable, necessary or at least unavoidable. I'd be willing to put just about any element or assumption from previous games on the table for negotiation if would strengthen the game experience and help build community.
I don't really care how the mechanics are laid out but I'd like to see an end result where:
1. The are enough areas to get the experience, gear and fun play time I'm after that I don't have to sit in line while some level 50 farms a dozen "belts of niftiness" for his guild mates. Perhaps we need to get away from the idea that item X drops from mob Y. Maybe that item should be dropped by several similarly difficult mobs in different dungeons/areas. I never want to sit in a queue like for the AC in OoT waiting for my turn to access what is already a long camp. For the record I have no problem with taking a while to get a drop, just with idling online waiting for my turn to start to play.
2. Players shouldn't have access to gear which allows them to solo group content or otherwise tear through levels/content at a greatly accelerated rate. If you want to equip a level 1 monk with a fungi tunic and t-staff, you can find that on P99. I'm all for great gear, but if Pantheon is going to be primarily group content and a world where we are expected to level slowly, let's ensure we keep it balanced that way.
3. If the team can in fact "design well" so most people are doing level appropriate content, we don't need a lot of built in safeguards. If we feel the need to have draconian rules and back end systems in the game, use them to track down people engaging in RMT for goods and services. Gold spammers, PL services, RMT item traders and the people who keep them in business should be fed to the dragons.
Celandor said:
We all seem to have this underlying assumption, perhaps even a sense of entitlement that if I level one character in a game I should have an advantage on subsequent alts. Perhaps this is desirable, necessary or at least unavoidable. I'd be willing to put just about any element or assumption from previous games on the table for negotiation if would strengthen the game experience and help build community.
I don't really care how the mechanics are laid out but I'd like to see an end result where:
1. The are enough areas to get the experience, gear and fun play time I'm after that I don't have to sit in line while some level 50 farms a dozen "belts of niftiness" for his guild mates. Perhaps we need to get away from the idea that item X drops from mob Y. Maybe that item should be dropped by several similarly difficult mobs in different dungeons/areas. I never want to sit in a queue like for the AC in OoT waiting for my turn to access what is already a long camp. For the record I have no problem with taking a while to get a drop, just with idling online waiting for my turn to start to play.
2. Players shouldn't have access to gear which allows them to solo group content or otherwise tear through levels/content at a greatly accelerated rate. If you want to equip a level 1 monk with a fungi tunic and t-staff, you can find that on P99. I'm all for great gear, but if Pantheon is going to be primarily group content and a world where we are expected to level slowly, let's ensure we keep it balanced that way.
3. If the team can in fact "design well" so most people are doing level appropriate content, we don't need a lot of built in safeguards. If we feel the need to have draconian rules and back end systems in the game, use them to track down people engaging in RMT for goods and services. Gold spammers, PL services, RMT item traders and the people who keep them in business should be fed to the dragons.
Agree on all 3 points. Number 1 could really be a viable solution for some of the most sought after items. As time went on, certain items were spread to specific types of mobs (rather than a single mob) in a particular zone and it basically made it possible to camp the same items from multiple locations. In Sebilis for example, there were some really nice rare drops off of almost every kind of mob in the zone (tomb, spear, rbg, dirk, gems, cobalt bracer & other set pieces), and they were spread out into areas that gave multiple groups an opportunity to obtain the same items. While I don't think particular named and their drops should be eliminated, this is a way to prevent too many of those scenarios.
Another solution would be to have named mobs spawn in multiple locations in a dungeon. Ideally a mob of a certain level would only be found in areas where mobs of that level range are found, but if you think back to EQ dungeons, that is a lot of territory. Going into a dungeon would mean doing a lot more crawling and tracking, and actually provide a wider variety of items for groups. No more being sad face because the only group you could find was camping certain mobs that dropped nothing of value to your class.
Celandor said:
We all seem to have this underlying assumption, perhaps even a sense of entitlement that if I level one character in a game I should have an advantage on subsequent alts. Perhaps this is desirable, necessary or at least unavoidable. I'd be willing to put just about any element or assumption from previous games on the table for negotiation if would strengthen the game experience and help build community.
I don't really care how the mechanics are laid out but I'd like to see an end result where:
1. The are enough areas to get the experience, gear and fun play time I'm after that I don't have to sit in line while some level 50 farms a dozen "belts of niftiness" for his guild mates. Perhaps we need to get away from the idea that item X drops from mob Y. Maybe that item should be dropped by several similarly difficult mobs in different dungeons/areas. I never want to sit in a queue like for the AC in OoT waiting for my turn to access what is already a long camp. For the record I have no problem with taking a while to get a drop, just with idling online waiting for my turn to start to play.
2. Players shouldn't have access to gear which allows them to solo group content or otherwise tear through levels/content at a greatly accelerated rate. If you want to equip a level 1 monk with a fungi tunic and t-staff, you can find that on P99. I'm all for great gear, but if Pantheon is going to be primarily group content and a world where we are expected to level slowly, let's ensure we keep it balanced that way.
3. If the team can in fact "design well" so most people are doing level appropriate content, we don't need a lot of built in safeguards. If we feel the need to have draconian rules and back end systems in the game, use them to track down people engaging in RMT for goods and services. Gold spammers, PL services, RMT item traders and the people who keep them in business should be fed to the dragons.
I agree with most of this, I would however like to note that sometimes having to wait in line is a good thing. People never wanting to share or wait in line is the idea that is at the root cause of where we are in the MMO world right now. It is directly connected to players having to socialize, if you never have to wait for anything or share anything then you never have a reason to talk to anyone either.
You used the example of the AC in OOT being a long wait in line before you could get your spot on a long camp. First off the AC was never as camped on live as it is on Project1999, which I'm assuming is where your example comes from. Second, the AC does spawn in multiple locations, but probably not enough for a server like Project1999 which spends 5 years in classic and 5 years in Kunark. Third, and it just happens to be my favorite solution, PVP eliminates any need to wait in line, if you want to camp it, kill whoever is there and do it. (WTB PVP Servers in Pantheon! :)
I also absolutely love the idea of named mobs spawning in multiple proper locations in a dungeon, my example of this scenario would be the skeletal warlord in Karnor's Castle who had over 13 different spawn locations, but could not spawn if he was already up. I could see this used in dungeons to alleviate camp disputes as there is really no way to camp every location of a particular valuable mob.
We're getting kind of off topic now I guess, sorry about that heh.
Kayd said:
Vaildez said:
Kilsin said:
I think if we scale and balance our levels correctly that mid-high level players will have bigger and better things to farm, camp and keep their interest instead of killing lower level mobs which will be inefficient and less rewarding for them than if they focussed on level appropriate mobs/loot.
I have never liked artificial tags like "unique", "bind on equip" or "account bound" apart from there being many ways to get around those tags it just makes the game feel forced in terms of loot and I really want to avoid taking that course of action if possible.
I agree with this.. I don't like the invisible barriers like BoE/Account Bound. I am also hoping to not see a gear treadmill where we are constantly replacing gear. I like when loot feels special and isn't replaced by a new item every few levels.
I understand what you are saying and it drove me a bit nuts to have have the great gear at level 20 then you get to level 25 and you have something better for almost every slot. It creates a treadmill where you can never quite keep up. However, the reverse is what creates the problem. If there's some slot for which you can get a great item at level 30 and it still remains the best you can get till level 45 then you're pretty much encouraging those level 40 players to go back to the level 30 area and compete with level 30 players for that loot.
If the devs think they can find a balance that works, then I'm willing to wait and see.
Except every game since EQ has gone with the formula that item upgrades are expected every few levels. It just makes items expendable and they just get destroyed or vendored. What is wrong with item competition? I don't see a problem with an item useful to a level 40 in a level 30 area... Maybe there's an even more useful item in the 40 area but its more rare. I personally would rather see people spread out in the world instead of just each zone being a layer for leveling then never visiting it again.
Celandor said:
We all seem to have this underlying assumption, perhaps even a sense of entitlement that if I level one character in a game I should have an advantage on subsequent alts. Perhaps this is desirable, necessary or at least unavoidable. I'd be willing to put just about any element or assumption from previous games on the table for negotiation if would strengthen the game experience and help build community.
I don't really care how the mechanics are laid out but I'd like to see an end result where:
1. The are enough areas to get the experience, gear and fun play time I'm after that I don't have to sit in line while some level 50 farms a dozen "belts of niftiness" for his guild mates. Perhaps we need to get away from the idea that item X drops from mob Y. Maybe that item should be dropped by several similarly difficult mobs in different dungeons/areas. I never want to sit in a queue like for the AC in OoT waiting for my turn to access what is already a long camp. For the record I have no problem with taking a while to get a drop, just with idling online waiting for my turn to start to play.
2. Players shouldn't have access to gear which allows them to solo group content or otherwise tear through levels/content at a greatly accelerated rate. If you want to equip a level 1 monk with a fungi tunic and t-staff, you can find that on P99. I'm all for great gear, but if Pantheon is going to be primarily group content and a world where we are expected to level slowly, let's ensure we keep it balanced that way.
3. If the team can in fact "design well" so most people are doing level appropriate content, we don't need a lot of built in safeguards. If we feel the need to have draconian rules and back end systems in the game, use them to track down people engaging in RMT for goods and services. Gold spammers, PL services, RMT item traders and the people who keep them in business should be fed to the dragons.
My Opinion is who cares if a level 1 monk as a fungi/t-staff.. In EQ it was a game where Melee had an extreme disadvantage in soloing and the only way to get around that was to pimp them out with gear. That made it fun for a lot of people that didn't want grind a melee character without some solo ability. In the end you could only take soloing so far in EQ no matter how twinked and the most effective way to have sustained experience was by partnering with other folks.
I just would like to add my vote to the no trivial loot code please. Nothing is more irritating then having to buy items for my character and alts that I could easily farm, but can't because the items wont drop due to some coded restriction.
I use to love in EQ that I could at any time I needed to go kill Ooolgump(sp) the Ogre for a fish bone earring for my next character that I was starting. I use to fall asleep alot at the keyboard and lost many of corpses because of auto run and water LOL.
Also since the topic is also about selling loot please for all that is holy let the NPC vendors be as they were in EQ. Meaning they retain and sell all the loot that players sell to them until server resets. I loved during down time in EQ to run around to various vendors hunting through their wares looking for items to resell. The best item I ever found this way was a almost fully charged staff of resurrection for about 4k plat. Turned around and sold it to a raiding guild for 250k plat.
Keiiek said:
Keep a trivial loot code. If you need the item, mentor down to a lower level. This is, of course, assuming that there will be a mentoring mechanic in game.
O Please NO mentoring or trivial loot codes ...
Totally immersion breaking for me ...
Kiz~
This is a tough one, as as already noted, also a controversial issue.
We are not fans of having higher level players go into lower level zones, disrupting the gameplay of the players that should be there, and then also trivially obtaining items that are supposed to be rare (for the intended level of that area).
But we are also not fans of creating rules and limitations that feel artificial. We want players to feel like Pantheon's world is theirs, that it is an open world, that it has sandbox elements, etc.
Other games have tried to address this issue indirectly, for example with loot that is no-trade or bind-on-equip. We're also not fans of those kinds of 'solutions' because we want an open player driven economy. Outside of specific quest items (e.g. items you obtain and then trade in to, say, complete a quest), we're not big on no-trade or bind-on-equip.
So the big question is, how could we achieve both? And is 'both' even achievable?
We have ideas on how to address this issue, I think they're pretty good. But we aren't going to discuss them yet because 1. it's early, and there's no reason to create controversy now and 2. because they are the types of ideas that should be tested in Beta, so we can get feedback from players, listen to their reactions and opinions, etc. Sometimes it's great to theorycraft, but when it comes to issues like these, it often just creates unnecessary drama and concern. The time to discuss this sort of topic is when people are in the game, in beta, where we can experiment and get feedback on the actual implementation.
-Brad