I can see the logic in having a caravan attached to a guild raid. For me this makes sense since raids are usually preferred guild only, less drama/complications when loot drops and you have a predetermined rule(s) for looting. Enabling a guild to have someone login to join a raid quickly seems like a fair aide and compromise in the subject. Expediting the time spent waiting for people to commute for a raid is something very different than expediting the commute for a group.
A group is far smaller, and is far more likely to pick up a new player to fill a spot when needed. In a group scenario I would think that being able to reduce your dependance on other players isn't a good thing.
Dullahan said:I understand exactly what you are saying Zenya. It makes perfect sense, even to those that oppose it (because they oppose themselves). You can't be for a meaningful system of travel in a game (one that involves time and risk) and be for a caravan system that allows players to circumvent the actual journey itself and allows players to accumulate experience without personally facing the dangers involved.
First Id like to state for the record that I dont really care about the caravan system one way or another. I think its a neat idea, and I wouldnt mind using it if it were in game. But I doubt I would all th time, and really wouldnt bother me if it got axed from the game.
I will say that if it were in the game Id like to see some restrictions, particularly on time, distance, place (not into dungeons Id think only open worl) and amount of people. But even more important is a restriction on not being able to "teleport" to somewhere you have never been before.
Lastly, the bold part really bothers me. In a comepletely digital world of 1s and 0s, thats fine. I tend to see things a little more analog, or shades of grey if you will. Im not saying what you said is not true to a degree, but that line of thinking is a bit too black and white for me. And maybe thats where me and you disagree the most on various issues. Not whether I can decipher fact from fiction. You say I cant be for it and still be for time and risk? To me that really depends on how it is implemented. Who determines how much time and risk is enough? Is travel more meaningful if it takes 6 hours of nothingness or if it takes 2 hours but you saw some great places. To me the most important thing would be the limitations I mentioned above, and that the danger and difficulty of the world where ever you are. As an example in Dark Souls you can rest at and travel to Bonfires previously visited. But trust me it doesnt make it any less dangerous or any more easy. Once you get there "trash" mobs will still take you out just as easily if not careful and then taunt you with a "You Died" screen. Sure it would be a convenience. But if implemented correctly not one that would ruin the risk or the journey, at least not to me. But of course I realize this is just my opinion.
P.S. I often see certain things only black and white as well. And in some things I think that way because I dont think there should be shades of grey. Maybe this is the case for you on this particular topic. But not to me, and it certainly wont make or break the game for me.
Amsai said: Again. A bit over the top. Can we not call down everything that isnt from the EQ rulebook please?
I think you are forgetting something here.
This game is not everquest and is not claimed to be everquest. Yes Brad and some others on the team was apart of making Everquest, does not mean they are here to make an Everquest Clone.
So to assume to automatically shut down every idea that was not apart of everquest is honostly not any sort of useful feed back from the team.
Now to the actual discussion.
I like the idea of being able to switch characters and it's already there, but I feel like that can be easily exploited as said before. or that if I decide to log off my character there, and want to play my alt and bam my alt is there and i do not want it there.
Amsai
I like the question you throw at us. "Who determines how much time and risk is enough ?"
I suppose ultimatly the Devs will come up with the answer by using the question: What determines how much time and risk is enough ? I think the answer will be Time; the amount of time it takes for fun to turn into a pain in the ass:).
Maybe if you have done enough for the citizens of Western Plateau Lands ( as in you have played and out leveled this zone ) you will have the faction to use the "Western Plateau Land Stagecoach" this will give you quick passage across this land. Some higher level lands may just have a boss that needs some special convincing. Just kicking in an idea to chew on.
Sky
LeonSanborn said:Amsai said: Again. A bit over the top. Can we not call down everything that isnt from the EQ rulebook please?
I think you are forgetting something here.
This game is not everquest and is not claimed to be everquest. Yes Brad and some others on the team was apart of making Everquest, does not mean they are here to make an Everquest Clone.
So to assume to automatically shut down every idea that was not apart of everquest is honostly not any sort of useful feed back from the team.
Now to the actual discussion.
I like the idea of being able to switch characters and it's already there, but I feel like that can be easily exploited as said before. or that if I decide to log off my character there, and want to play my alt and bam my alt is there and i do not want it there.
Im not really trying to call your post count into question here. But you seem new. You probably havent read the entire thread or seen similar arguments go the same way numerous times since the Kickstarter. But no I havent forgotten this isnt EQ. But I do sometimes wonder about other folks. Often their answers include things like "But this is being based off EQ", or "Brad is making this and also made EQ.......sooo". I do have faith that the devs are gonna make a great game. But I also acknowledge the saying "The squeaky wheel gets the greese"! So I make sure my opposite opinion is heard. And I try to keep my opinions in line with the features and tenents. Ive also seen some folks try to use that to counter me, but it often doesnt hold weight because its not something mentioned or even hinted at in those features and tenents but instead soley based only on the fact that Brad made EQ or this is being based off of EQ. And trust me I do supply useful feedback where I can. In the post you quoted its true I was frustrated, but I did think it useful if in nothing else pointing to others for a little introspection and hopefully a little more tolerance for new things. Not too mention the very title of the thread and most of the posts on the first page immidiately jumped to the negatives. Plus I was on my android at work :(
To your opinion on the matter, completely ligitimate, and would require some proper balancing.
Skycaster said:Amsai
I like the question you throw at us. "Who determines how much time and risk is enough ?"
I suppose ultimatly the Devs will come up with the answer by using the question: What determines how much time and risk is enough ? I think the answer will be Time; the amount of time it takes for fun to turn into a pain in the ass:).
Maybe if you have done enough for the citizens of Western Plateau Lands ( as in you have played and out leveled this zone ) you will have the faction to use the "Western Plateau Land Stagecoach" this will give you quick passage across this land. Some higher level lands may just have a boss that needs some special convincing. Just kicking in an idea to chew on.
Sky
Thanks Sky,
Im just trying to offer alternative points of view. I want an old school game like most here. I just think there is some room for some middle ground in some cases, and dont think it will ruin the players experience. I want a hard, immersive, community-based, open world experience. I really do. But I just dont think those things should be done (what I perceive as) in spite of sound game design and mechanics. I really do think there can be some wriggle room without totally loosing what Pantheon is trying to achieve. Now I dont think this needs to be done with every feature or system in the game. Some things need to be the way they were in the old games. But sometimes the attitudes from some seem to suggest all or nothing, or its a slippery slope that will devolve into X. And I neither believe that not have seen any proof from the devs that that would happen.
I like your ideas on the matter about gaining access. Especially the part about "convincing" the boss LOL! I could see that as being something you earn in blood.
Title of the thread has been changed, thread has been cleaned up, inflammatory posts removed, replies to them removed and unless the thread remains on topic discussing the OPs concern for switching to alt characters, it will be closed.
Please do not flame or bait others and please do not reply to hostile posters, just report them so I can deal with them :)
Anasyn said:If tested well this system can work as attended. It's already been implemented by Brad in one of his previous games. Kilsin played that game pretty much from start to finish and knows about all the positives and negatives of the system. Have trust that if the system is implemented in this game that if it doens't work as intended that it'll be removed.
This. :)
Dullahan said:I understand exactly what you are saying Zenya. It makes perfect sense, even to those that oppose it (because they oppose themselves). You can't be for a meaningful system of travel in a game (one that involves time and risk) and be for a caravan system that allows players to circumvent the actual journey itself and allows players to accumulate experience without personally facing the dangers involved.
Thank you, Dullahan :)
@Kilsin Thank you for the cleanup.
@Anasyn and Aradune. I'm glad for the reminder. When I get wrapped up in something, I sometimes forget this. Thank you.
Xonth said: If you can swap out one of your own characters for another then whats to stop everyone from having a pocket porter? We are not talking about having 2 accounts here. Im talking about leveling a porting class first and for the rest of the game never needing a port from others ever... simple because you can now port yourself even if you play a cleric or ranger or warrior. Maybe you level an enchanter next. Now forever you have the ability to mana reg buff you group, forever. First character was a cleric? Now you can forever rezz other people anywhere you are simple logging out and in. /ooc Lvl 30 Rogue LFG, Can port, rezz, mana reg, track... This is not the same as logging your rogue out, running your cleric over, then running your enchanter over, then running your ranger over...
This isn't even close to how caravans work. For starters, not all of the characters are logged in at the same time. A Rogue isn't going to DPS and heal on a Cleric at the same time, they're going to have to swap toons. It is literally exactly the same thing as logging your characters out and logging a new one in, the difference is that you don't have to spend time running to the group when you've already spent your time doing so on one toon.
It is functionally identical to logging a 60 Cleric with their rez stick epic at the spot where your group is, so you can swap over and rez at any time.
From what VG people are saying that caravansystem was a very limited feature and was not known to be abused or in some cases not even used at all. I do share your concerns that if implemented wrong it would be abused. But thats what beta will be there for anyways.
P.S.
Aradune said:Anasyn said:If tested well this system can work as attended. It's already been implemented by Brad in one of his previous games. Kilsin played that game pretty much from start to finish and knows about all the positives and negatives of the system. Have trust that if the system is implemented in this game that if it doens't work as intended that it'll be removed.
This. :)
Xonth said: @Liav I never said they would be logged in at the same time. And no one official said it would be the caravan system you are referencing. It was simply said you could log out one character and log in another in the exact spot. People that say its the exact same as it is now in games are missing a huge diffrence. Currently if i have a 50 wizard and a 50 rogue on the same account there is zero ways to use the wizard to port my rogue. I would meed the help of others. Now with the mentioned system my 50 wizard could port my rogue anywhere i want simple because my rogues location is linked to my wizard. If i am in Freeport on my rogue and someone wants me in Plane of Hate, i would just log out my rogue, log in my wizard, port to Hate, log off my wizard and log in my rogue and magically my rogue is in Plane of Hate without ever needing anyone else. I could give you tons of examples how this is massively diffrent then what can be done in current games.
I never said anything about what is currently being done in games. You don't have to expain it to me, I played VG for years.
I know how it functions, and I know that it is simply a convenience over running your alt to where your main is at. What I'm saying is that I don't think there is anything particularly interesting, fun, or positive about needing to run multiple of my characters to the same location as opposed to the proposed system.
If I get a port to Hate on my main, it'd be super cool to be able to bring my alt tank in if our tank leaves, without having to waste a ton of time getting a port.
Raidan said:Amsai said: Again. A bit over the top. Can we not call down everything that isnt from the EQ rulebook please?Pendulum swings both ways, you are always salty aganist EQ vets as well. The majority of EQ vets don't want the a clone of EQ, but the tenets it was founded upon expanded on, not changed. Having a caravan system with CoH readily available goes aganist it.
Similar to mentoring - why take the level 35 rogue who is LFG when a 35 rogue who's twinked with a guild group can be caravaned in and CoH'd? You already know that player's skill set and gear, why take the chance on someone new?
I get systems that are created to try to "assist" in grouping, but, if the game needs all these systems to promote or assist in grouping, then it's failed. People grouped in EQ because they had to, there was no other alternative way to advance. Create an environment like that again, and people will be forced to group, and they will learn to group or they will suffer through painful soloing. If the game's content isn't designed nearly solely for grouping, it doesn't matter what innovative systems are created - people will solo.
I want an EQ clone, because i always enjoyed EQ. If nothing feels right, i will go back to playing it. I enjoyed it in 1999, and enjoy it in 2016, except for the devs constant decission to nerf the game 17 years later.
As for the grouping part, if you allow multi characters to be transported around, i believe you will destroy some of the social aspects. Groups will form, and others will not use the LFG system(s).
Thats the way i feel it will go eventually. It sounds like a great way to reduce some of the LFG system. It may shrink the whole need for LFG for specific characters.
Becareful trying to bring a whole guild into a group situation. It will dum down a system we put in place back from 99 on.
Brad i get where you are going, but i also feel you might seperate us from the social thingy.
Seems like this would sort of take away from having meaningful travel. I realize this isn't finalized but there is no way of getting around the fact that it will simplify getting to where you want to go. It will basically shrink the world.
And I just have to say from my point of view I hate the idea of people justifying this as a way to bring their alts into things. In my opinion you should not create a game mechanic for the benefit of an alt. Nothing good can come of it. I get it if it's a way to keep you close to a friend while you are leveling up. Don't like it much but it's understandable. What I don't get is allowing someone to bring all their alts in tow. If someone wants to bring their alts to the same place as their main they should have to hoof it out there using a seperate mechanic. People will always find away around things but please do not have this work as a way to keep your alts at the ready.
If this is used it should be a way to keep people together if they have limited playtime, not as anything that would benefit smoeone and thei alts. If the game is so sparsely populated that you can't find someone to fill a spot in the group it's a sign that the game is on its way out. Would rather not see this one start out with mechanics in it that a dying game would normally put in place.
But hey, could be wrong. Until its up and running to test its all speculation right?
Liav said:Xonth said: @Liav I never said they would be logged in at the same time. And no one official said it would be the caravan system you are referencing. It was simply said you could log out one character and log in another in the exact spot. People that say its the exact same as it is now in games are missing a huge diffrence. Currently if i have a 50 wizard and a 50 rogue on the same account there is zero ways to use the wizard to port my rogue. I would meed the help of others. Now with the mentioned system my 50 wizard could port my rogue anywhere i want simple because my rogues location is linked to my wizard. If i am in Freeport on my rogue and someone wants me in Plane of Hate, i would just log out my rogue, log in my wizard, port to Hate, log off my wizard and log in my rogue and magically my rogue is in Plane of Hate without ever needing anyone else. I could give you tons of examples how this is massively diffrent then what can be done in current games.I never said anything about what is currently being done in games. You don't have to expain it to me, I played VG for years.
I know how it functions, and I know that it is simply a convenience over running your alt to where your main is at. What I'm saying is that I don't think there is anything particularly interesting, fun, or positive about needing to run multiple of my characters to the same location as opposed to the proposed system.
If I get a port to Hate on my main, it'd be super cool to be able to bring my alt tank in if our tank leaves, without having to waste a ton of time getting a port.
So you want a free port to a zone that takes a specific class to cast a specific spell with an expensive reagent. Got it.
Krixus said:So you want a free port to a zone that takes a specific class to cast a specific spell with an expensive reagent. Got it.
If I've already found a port on my main then yeah, I'd like that. I also honestly wouldn't mind having certain zone flags and such be account wide instead of character specific. I don't enjoy repeating the same content again and again just because I want to play another class. To be perfectly honest, I wish there was an item that cost $50-100 that would allow me to change my character's class so I just don't have to roll alts at all.
While that's obviously not going to happen, I simply stated it so my intentions are clear. If I as a person have already received a port to Hate, and I have my character there, it'd be nothing but tedious to me to find another port for my alt.
Edit: And once again baed on the previous 2-3 replies, people don't understand how the caravan system works. You have already traveled to the location. You and your group are already there. Why should the same person be required to travel there a second time, especially if you're ridiculously deep in a dungeon? You're basically asking for Mages (or COTH equivalent) to be required for some content, which is silly to me.
If I've already found a port on my main then yeah, I'd like that. I also honestly wouldn't mind having certain zone flags and such be account wide instead of character specific. I don't enjoy repeating the same content again and again just because I want to play another class. To be perfectly honest, I wish there was an item that cost $50-100 that would allow me to change my character's class so I just don't have to roll alts at all.
While that's obviously not going to happen, I simply stated it so my intentions are clear. If I as a person have already received a port to Hate, and I have my character there, it'd be nothing but tedious to me to find another port for my alt.
Edit: And once again baed on the previous 2-3 replies, people don't understand how the caravan system works. You have already traveled to the location. You and your group are already there. Why should the same person be required to travel there a second time, especially if you're ridiculously deep in a dungeon? You're basically asking for Mages (or COTH equivalent) to be required for some content, which is silly to me.
This is almost exactly what I would like to avoid. I see your point of view and respect it but completely disagree with it. And I mean all of it. An alt should get its own bus ticket, and the whole pay to change a characters class? I know that not what the thread is about but it goes a long way to show us your thought process. I quit EQ2 the day they brought in the ability to get a level 80 character for real money. I know you said you know they won't do that here but if that same kind of attitude bleeds into much I would be out.
Sabot said:This is almost exactly what I would like to avoid. I see your point of view and respect it but completely disagree with it. And I mean all of it. An alt should get its own bus ticket, and the whole pay to change a characters class? I know that not what the thread is about but it goes a long way to show us your thought process. I quit EQ2 the day they brought in the ability to get a level 80 character for real money. I know you said you know they won't do that here but if that same kind of attitude bleeds into much I would be out.
I'm a pragmatist and I'm aware that those things would likely never happen in Pantheon, but yeah, I'd like it if they did personally.
That said, I don't see why my alt should "get its own bus ticket". What is gained by me having to spam general chat for 30 minutes to find a port? Other than a complete waste of time and productivity that could be spent doing something meaningful.
Liav said:Sabot said:This is almost exactly what I would like to avoid. I see your point of view and respect it but completely disagree with it. And I mean all of it. An alt should get its own bus ticket, and the whole pay to change a characters class? I know that not what the thread is about but it goes a long way to show us your thought process. I quit EQ2 the day they brought in the ability to get a level 80 character for real money. I know you said you know they won't do that here but if that same kind of attitude bleeds into much I would be out.
I'm a pragmatist and I'm aware that those things would likely never happen in Pantheon, but yeah, I'd like it if they did personally.
That said, I don't see why my alt should "get its own bus ticket". What is gained by me having to spam general chat for 30 minutes to find a port? Other than a complete waste of time and productivity that could be spent doing something meaningful.
I supose its a slippery slope. Where does it end? Thats the kind of think that led to instances. Why wait for for a camp when I can have a whole zone just to myself? Next was why find players to fill my group when the game can do it for me. Then it was why form a whole group when we can hire some NPC mercs to fill out the group/raid.
For me its the hardship that makes the mundane and trivial stuff challenging. Makes you think before you act. Same logic as a corpse run. If you take out the pain in the ass parts then the only challenge left is the raid /boss fight. Why build the rest of the world? Just make it an arena game. You should be fighting with the world just as much as fighting in it. Makes it last longer and is more meaningful when you accomplish something.
Sabot said:I supose its a slippery slope. Where does it end? Thats the kind of think that led to instances. Why wait for for a camp when I can have a whole zone just to myself? Next was why find players to fill my group when the game can do it for me. Then it was why form a whole group when we can hire some NPC mercs to fill out the group/raid.
For me its the hardship that makes the mundane and trivial stuff challenging. Makes you think before you act. Same logic as a corpse run. If you take out the pain in the ass parts then the only challenge left is the raid /boss fight. Why build the rest of the world? Just make it an arena game. You should be fighting with the world just as much as fighting in it. Makes it last longer and is more meaningful when you accomplish something.
Is it really a slippery slope though? Look at it this way.
All the other things that I suggested clearly violated Pantheon's tenets. I'm cool with that. That's why I put them there, as an example.
However, let's say Pantheon on release for some stupid reason only displays enemy HP in a red bar. I complain that I don't like the bar and I'd rather see a percentage because it's more accurate. Suddenly I'm making a concession, either for aesthetic pleasure or for functionality that I think is "easier" or "better" in a sense. Clearly something like this isn't a slippery slope to instancing.
I also don't think that the caravan system would be. EQ had Magicians that could trivialize a lot of things with COTH, but nobody said that COTH was a slippery slope to instancing. While I can appreciate a difficult game with a difficult game world, the caravan system definitely falls under the "resolving tedium" portion.
Let me elaborate some more. When I look at a game like EQ and someone says that it was "challenging", I disagree in a lot of ways.
There are two distinct categories that a lot of people conflate and it leads to some shitty miscommunication. There is "challenge", and there is "tedium".
Targin is tedium. You sit on a spawn for 70 hours looking for a specific mob, and another Monk comes in and manages to get Targin to pop in 3 hours. Is that really challenging? Fun? Or is it just boring ******* tedium?
AoW is challenge. You need to be good at playing EQ and knowing your class to win content like this, at least in the context of tanks and healers.
Oh, our group has to split because we don't have a Mage and our tank left, because if we had a Mage we'd be able to COTH our new tank? That isn't challenging. That's just pointless bullshit, to me. Something that should never happen. I'm forced to stop playing the game because of a particular set of circumstances that I have no control over.
This forum really needs a chill pill... With some trepidation, I'll type up my thoughts and opinions:
I'm all for modern conveniences where they don't detract from the challenge of the game.
I think Call of the Hero was a bad idea. Totally trivialised a lot of content. Need to fight your way through a dungeon to get to the dragon at the end? Nah - just sneak through invis and teleport your guild into place. Was there a couple of level-appropriate, hard-working groups making their way carefully through the dungeon to that boss? "Who cares - Too slow - l2p and git gud". Not nice.
I like the caravan idea for groups but there should be some restriction, like you can only stay with the caravan offline for 4 times the amount of hours you were online with it perhaps - something like that.
Allowing a bunch of folks, especially guilds that generally have pretty great resources anyway, just to 'register' with a caravan, log out and then just pop to that location later (when bat-phoned maybe) just sounds 'exploity' to me - more than an unneeded convenience even. And to allow alts of the same player to all be in the caravan? And you only needed one of those characters to register with the caravan? Euw. Nasty.
If you get into a party and decide to try a new dungeon and find you need a rogue to pick a lock, then, oh no, you need to try again later with a rogue, or find one to come help you. Good thing you will probably have years of playing to get it right. Or just go read the inevitable Wiki and be prepared better.
In EQ P99 - the 'hardcore' MMO, if you like - there were many occassions where you'd die in zone and just shout "hey anyone got a cleric parked?" and, I kid you not, I once had 3 log in with clicky epics (busy night in Karnors). Lovely friendly kind folk, yeah, but death totally without it's teeth that night (and others). With caravans you could imagine every dungeon effectively having a roster of every class available at the door every night.
Caravans, especially with alts somehow switching in, would trivialise a lot of content and mechanics.
I think travel is one of the most fundamental and important concepts/mechanics in a game like this. Exploration is surely fundamental to everyone's experience. Travel is something that everyone has to do. We all have somewhere we want to be. Personally, I think to give fast-travel abilities to just a couple of classes is bad. In EQ druids and wizards are at a massive advantage to others and SoWing/gating/binding casters at a great advantage to melee classes. One good thing about caravans is at least it would level the playing field, class-wise, giving all classes a chance to get straight to the action. To be clear I would prefer that travel (and binding) be more limited though, but available to all classes.
Amsai said: Again. A bit over the top. Can we not call down everything that isnt from the EQ rulebook please?
I don't think it was over the top, Amsai. I originally WAS worried that you could just SWISH BAM BOOM change your group's makeup on the fly, with no real pre-planning required. Not all of us who question things are 100% Pro-Eq1. :)