"This way leads to cash shops. Cash shops bad. No soup for you."
Very well put. Now can I have my soup please?
Though Jothany is correct and eons before the Age of Microtransactions MMO companies used websites not ingame stores to sell name changes, server transfers, character slots and the like.
I am not advocating to pay for slots by any means (and I am categorially against cash shops)! I just don't see them severely restricting character slots unless it was behind a paywall (which I would begrudgingly pay to have) as I think the altoholic percentage of players is massive, especially in the slower levelling MMOs about enjoying the experience. I want to have that experience with different classes/races and areas without deleting old chars!
Jothany said:The company selling items that benefit characters ingame may lead to cash shops.
The company offering some account related, customer services - like for instance name or server changes - has been the norm in all the games I can remember. It didn't lead to cash shops.
Over-simplification leads to bad decisions, which leads to cash shops. No soup for you :)
The root of the current debate is whether too many characters slots gives the player and advantage. In part because they might be able to advance more tradeskills, thereby becoming more independent. So with that logic, buying more character slots directly advantages the player. It moves out of the realm of customer service, and into the realm of buying advantage.
Now, I dont personally feel that having more slots inherently provides advantages sufficient to warrent limiting players to just 4 character options. But conceptually more slots does mean more gameplay options and flexibility.
I would argue that buying a new name is more harmful than buying more slots. It provides you a clean slate from which to escape a bad reputation. And reputation is something that has been stated to be important in this particular game. Rightfully, and welcomed, IMO. If someone is an ***hat, I'd prefer they be forced to deal with the ramifications of their behaviour, or start over. So again, I'd chalk that up to being more than just customer service. And I'd go back to : Cash shops bad.
Feyshtey said: The root of the current debate is whether too many characters slots gives the player and advantage.
Actually the root of the my debate with you is your claim that being able to buy extra slots is functionally equivalent to a cash shop and therefore bad. I think most people can see the difference between 'Customer Services' as Dorotea references, and a cash shop. But regardless, cash shops are a controversial subject - and not the point of this thread - so I won't respond to that subject after this.
As far as "too many slots give the player an advantage", you admit that you don't "personally" agree with that claim. And your first post on the 1st page of this thread years ago includes "I love having a bunch of slots available, personally. Particularly when there are many races and classes, the combinations of which are fun to explore... But it's important to me to be able to start up many others to see how I like them."
So you seem to be in agreement with Adrenicus and I about wanting more than 3 character slots.
The Soup of the Day is Hearty, Red Bean & Spanish Rice Stew. Would you care for a bowl?
:)
Of course having more character slots is an in-game advantage. Players who do that in other games often do it so they have constant cheap access to multiple crafters and whatever adventure class they need to most efficiently take on the place they want to play/farm.
It's not a fundamental advantage like cash shop XP boosts or buffs or whatever, but it's definitely not just a 'customer service' like perhaps moving server to join RL friends would be (though even that is just as likely to be moving server to avoid a bad reputation).
Personally, one of the reasons I gave up on New World is they had a ridiculous two character limit. Two! Storage is not expensive and the company owns the server service! Could only be so they could sell more slots later. Unnecessary money grubbing.
I don't see VR restricting slots, though. It would cost them near-nothing and greatly encourage alts and re-playing and social aspects like mentoring. It's also an economy sink, to some extent. Playtime spread across several alts means several lower level (lower earning) alts to gear up rather than one high level high earning character continuing on and on.
Yes, they would 'miss out' on some potential income, charging for new accounts or slots, but, in my not-so-humble opinion, that would garner a lot of ill-feeling when people know it's so cheap to offer mutliple slots these days and such a popular thing.
VR have made all the races and classes very interesting to me and I'm going to want to try out many race-class combos. I like to get to a reasonable level, putting in many hours, on each combo I try before deciding. If I have to delete all but two as I go, like in New World, it will be extremely frustrating.
Maybe they changed it - the game didn't keep me for very long - but New World had a limit of *one* character slot per server. A second on a different server. One of the primary reasons I didn't stick around - though tere were many others.
As with disposalist I want to try quite a few combinations and keep more than two of them. On the same server. But as long as the cost is reasonable I don't mind it if I have to pay for extra slots as long as it is a website service not an in-game store. Still, three free slots would be a highly minimal amount.
But - I can see having one server where there is a character limit of one. With no option to buy more. For the reasons rather cogently argued in this thread.
VR has said that they are currently thinking of just having two types of servers - one pve and one pvp. I would argue that a single character server is simply a pve ruleset since there would be no need whatever for any different coding or any different GM activities outside of imposing that one limitation to start with.
Would this unduly split the community? An argument often made against multiple rulesets. Probably not. Is four pve servers any different in terms of community than three pve servers with a character limit of eight and one with a limit of one? Does it split the community more than having four pve servers with one "RP encouraged" or one "Oceanic encouraged" or one "European encouraged"? And there *will* be those distinctions made by players if not by VR - guaranteed.
To be clear, I am not actually advocating for three slots. I am really trying to illuminate how fewer slots reduces self sufficiency and increases interdependence.
I do believe that "Eight is Enough," at that point you might as well have unlimited slots.
If forced to choose, I would suggest five, plus one per expansion, understanding that many will still disagree with me.
@Jothany - I am in agreement with you on wanting many slots. Never intended to appear to be arguing that point. I'd like to have 8 at minimum. More, if practical from a service design perspective.
My main point was to state that paying for additional slots was neither desirable, nor healthy for the game in the long term. I don't see buying more slots as customer service. Either they are harmful or they arent. If they are, providing more for purchase is knowingly harming the game in the name of making more money. If they arent then gating more slots behind additional purchases is simply designing mechanisms into the system to make more money. Either way it's the same kind of cheesy crap that causes me to avoid several major studios' products.
dorotea said:Maybe they changed it - the game didn't keep me for very long - but New World had a limit of *one* character slot per server. A second on a different server. One of the primary reasons I didn't stick around - though tere were many others.
As with disposalist I want to try quite a few combinations and keep more than two of them. On the same server. But as long as the cost is reasonable I don't mind it if I have to pay for extra slots as long as it is a website service not an in-game store. Still, three free slots would be a highly minimal amount.
But - I can see having one server where there is a character limit of one. With no option to buy more. For the reasons rather cogently argued in this thread.
VR has said that they are currently thinking of just having two types of servers - one pve and one pvp. I would argue that a single character server is simply a pve ruleset since there would be no need whatever for any different coding or any different GM activities outside of imposing that one limitation to start with.
Would this unduly split the community? An argument often made against multiple rulesets. Probably not. Is four pve servers any different in terms of community than three pve servers with a character limit of eight and one with a limit of one? Does it split the community more than having four pve servers with one "RP encouraged" or one "Oceanic encouraged" or one "European encouraged"? And there *will* be those distinctions made by players if not by VR - guaranteed.
You're right about New World, yes! One (!) per server. I was remembering wanting to 'try out' combos, so wasn't really getting into 'the community' so wasn't bothered about being on one server, but very frustrated about having to destroy a character every two.
But that brings me to the second point about servers with one slot.
I think it would split the community. I would like to play on an RP server and would also like to play alts, hence I would find myself playing different servers, with different communities depending on the alt I wanted or needed to play that session. And that's if there even *were* enough EU/RP servers to have several alts.
In reality, RP servers with one slot would effectively exclude me (and many others who want alts *and* a regular community) completely, unless you were also comfortable with spreading and coordinating guilds and friends across several servers.
Feyshtey said:My main point was to state that paying for additional slots was neither desirable, nor healthy for the game in the long term. I don't see buying more slots as customer service. Either they are harmful or they arent. If they are, providing more for purchase is knowingly harming the game in the name of making more money. If they arent then gating more slots behind additional purchases is simply designing mechanisms into the system to make more money. Either way it's the same kind of cheesy crap that causes me to avoid several major studios' products.
Thanks for the clarification. I'll do the same.
First I will say that my reason for wanting many slots - and IMO the reason most altaholics want many slots - is not so we can avoid social engagement, but simply because many classes, races and crafting professions are highly appealing to me and I want to play them all. Not serially by doing one to completion, deleting it and starting another, but all at once.
Since we are paying to play Pantheon, we are indisputably paying X amount of money for Y number of slots already. I've never heard of any game limiting the number of subscriptions one person can have and I don't expect VR to do so either. So the most likely reality already is that anyone can have as many slots as they want by buying extra subscriptions.
IMO if VR gave us an unlimited number of slots for no extra charge, that would be a net harm to the game for various reasons I won't bother going into. Assuming that we get a 'reasonable' number of slots - enough to fulfill the needs/wants of most players - then IMO offering players a better deal for more slots than buying more subscriptions would still server the function of putting a practical limit on how many slots most players have. And at the same time would be a 'customer service' that was appreciated by the few of us outside the norm who wanted it.
Of course if VR limited the base amount to a painfully small number of slots in order to cause many players to feel compelled to buy extras, then that would certainly be seen as some 'cheesy crap' to rake in money that would garner serious resentment.
disposalist said: I'm afraid I need NoOfRaces x NoOfClasses = 9 x 11 currently, or 10 x 13 when they introduce Necromancer, Bard and Gas Bat.
There are only 71 unique race/class combinations in the game at present, including Bard & Necro.
(plus whatever the Gas Bat brings to the table)
"Take 'Beano' before and there'll "be no" gas"
Matt Damon in "The brothers Grimm" angrily shouting to his partner: There are No Magic Beans! (they are playing con-men and one is starting to believe a little so matt damon centers him with this oputburst)
Obscure pantheon side quest: A step 'n 'fetch it type quest where you start with jack needing to grow flowers for his - bf/gf/thf/SO- but the family is poor because the bean harvest has been lame. He has heard of magic beans that will create a bumper crop and saolve all his problems so he can spend time to grow pretty flowers and needs your help to get them. The family chastisis him because only hard work etc etc. its one of those you get this for me and deliver this to soandso and they will give you what you need. However, on each stop, you dont get the beans and instead get a something that you need for basic crafting, like spoon, axe head, or the like, so its good. at the end you finally get beans and bring it to jack, they are noemal beans byt the mysterious person gives you a phrase to try to con you in believing they are magic beans. You go to jack and say the phrase, and he is elated as you give him the normal beans because he thinks they are magic beans. The father/mother comes out, Jack! there are NO Magic beans! and throws them at you and tells you to get out. jack goes back to planting and you discover some wildflower seeds that you give jack and hes appreciative and gets to work sowing the beans and a small plot for flowers. The object of his desire comes by and asks what the small plot is for and jack explains and they are very impressed and everyone is happy. Meanwhile you look at the beans the father threw at you.
Magic beans, Lore: dont inflate your expectations
Cast time: instant, Effect:animals only, gives intestinal relief directly affecting the nature of the beast.
recast time : 20min
so obscure until a player casts it on a gasbat, it immediately reduces in size to like a squirrel and scampers off. no aggro no harm.
Jothany said:disposalist said: I'm afraid I need NoOfRaces x NoOfClasses = 9 x 11 currently, or 10 x 13 when they introduce Necromancer, Bard and Gas Bat.There are only 71 unique race/class combinations in the game at present, including Bard & Necro.
(plus whatever the Gas Bat brings to the table)
Hehe true, not all are available, but I like contingency slots...
I personally would wish that we can have at least 1 of each class all on the same server without needing to pay for multiple accounts.
If we include Bard and Necromancer there will be 14 Classes. I realize this is an unlikely number at the start. I'm guessing 8 will be what we will get.
If they do have an option for players to purchase extra character slots either with in game currency or even with Real life monies this would not bother me as long as it was cheap enough and a one time payment and not a monthly cost or something silly like that.
GoofyWarriorGuy said:I personally would wish that we can have at least 1 of each class all on the same server without needing to pay for multiple accounts. If we include Bard and Necromancer there will be 14 Classes. I realize this is an unlikely number at the start. I'm guessing 8 will be what we will get.
I'm rooting hard for 9 to start. Some classes don't appeal to me very much, but I very much want to play every race at least once.
I am hoping for 8 slots and willing to pay for extra slots up to 10-12 if needed.
Looking back at my EQ experience, I had only time at first to focus on 2 characters anyways, but having the freedom to experiment with other classes was a must.
I started off as a Dark Elf Shadow Knight, played it for days and weeks until coming to the point of having enough knowledge by playing experience that it was not the class for me, yet I got to the point that deleting the character, not only for the time invested but also for the adventures and players met during that time, would hurt a lot.
Even my second character, a little gnome magician, easier to manage wasn't exactly what I was looking for either, and that point of realization came after level 40.
Just saying, that I hope we have enough slots to experiment and re-roll classes without having the penalty of loosing all our progress made.
I ended up being a main Bard, after trial and error. After 2 years into the game. And I was proud at looking at all my old characters on the screen, knowing that they gave me the knowledge to enjoy my main as much as I did.
So in short, I hope we will have the freedom to experiment without having to worry about loosing all progress if and when we decide to re-roll.
Balanz said:To be clear, I am not actually advocating for three slots. I am really trying to illuminate how fewer slots reduces self sufficiency and increases interdependence.
I do believe that "Eight is Enough," at that point you might as well have unlimited slots.
If forced to choose, I would suggest five, plus one per expansion, understanding that many will still disagree with me.
This sounds legit to me. I mentioned 5-8 a few posts up. I think, 5 is the sweet spot starting out. It really doesn't make sense to have so many slots when just starting to play. No one is going to play more than one character at a time anyway. And the need to have additional toons to fill out your crafting, bank, or imaginary fantasy needs doesn't really materialize until your main has been somewhat established.
The idea of slots becoming available with expansions also sounds right to me. In this way, one does not get too burdened down with alt activity but grows as the game grows.