Liav said:I'm worried about witch hunting more than anything else, as well as the massive burden that will be placed on VR's CS team as a result of highly abusable mechanics.
Does VR have the resources to police thousands of people babyraging on the forums on a daily basis? Time will tell, I guess.
If VR fails to act then it's a foregone conclusion that things will go to hell. But if VR does act, the bad actors that just cannot play nice get the boot. Screw em. And the people who can play nice even when they really dont want to will make a personal decision to either modify their behavior, or be a jerk and get the boot as well.
It doesnt take all that many people getting removed from the game for the word to spread. And most people wont be self-destructive when they know someone is watching and willing to swat them down.
The thing I don't like about "whoever does the most damage" set up, is griefing. Saw this in several games, lower level character trying to kill a mob, hasn't got mob hps below 50% yet, higher level player passing by one shots it ..(for the hell of it) gets loot and kill credit. Lower level has to start all over again. I really think first to tag with a percentage credit should be a thing. My personal view anyway.
Feyshtey said:Liav said:I'm worried about witch hunting more than anything else, as well as the massive burden that will be placed on VR's CS team as a result of highly abusable mechanics.
Does VR have the resources to police thousands of people babyraging on the forums on a daily basis? Time will tell, I guess.
If VR fails to act then it's a foregone conclusion that things will go to hell. But if VR does act, the bad actors that just cannot play nice get the boot. Screw em. And the people who can play nice even when they really dont want to will make a personal decision to either modify their behavior, or be a jerk and get the boot as well.
It doesnt take all that many people getting removed from the game for the word to spread. And most people wont be self-destructive when they know someone is watching and willing to swat them down.
As far as that goes...it should always be a "three strikes you're out" set up. Give the bad actor a chance to improve their behaviour...first ..time limited bans and things like that. That way they know that VR is serious...and the ball is in the bad actor's court to improve. Once that third event happens...out ..
Feyshtey said:If VR fails to act then it's a foregone conclusion that things will go to hell. But if VR does act, the bad actors that just cannot play nice get the boot. Screw em. And the people who can play nice even when they really dont want to will make a personal decision to either modify their behavior, or be a jerk and get the boot as well.
I'm saying that having less abusable mechanics in the first place will give VR an easier time policing things.
Kill stealing and training are highly obvious mechanics (to me) that shouldn't exist. If you want your game to be hard, make it hard in other ways. Don't give players the most exploitable mechanics in the history of the medium just for the sake of adding risk to your game world.
The more abusable **** VR allows to happen in Pantheon, the worse off we'll be in the long term. It is absolutely not worthit to me.
Feyshtey said:It doesnt take all that many people getting removed from the game for the word to spread. And most people wont be self-destructive when they know someone is watching and willing to swat them down.
Yeah, that's why every game that's ever banned/suspended players has no issues with those types of things. Except that isn't true, they absolutely do still have those issues. It's a never ending thing.
CanadinaXegony said:The thing I don't like about "whoever does the most damage" set up, is griefing. Saw this in several games, lower level character trying to kill a mob, hasn't got mob hps below 50% yet, higher level player passing by one shots it ..(for the hell of it) gets loot and kill credit. Lower level has to start all over again. I really think first to tag with a percentage credit should be a thing. My personal view anyway.
Tagging a mob by some twitchy griefer seems far more plausible to me, which is why I am against that method. At least with the 51% option, I have a chance to get my mob back.
Beefcake said:CanadinaXegony said:The thing I don't like about "whoever does the most damage" set up, is griefing. Saw this in several games, lower level character trying to kill a mob, hasn't got mob hps below 50% yet, higher level player passing by one shots it ..(for the hell of it) gets loot and kill credit. Lower level has to start all over again. I really think first to tag with a percentage credit should be a thing. My personal view anyway.
Tagging a mob by some twitchy griefer seems far more plausible to me, which is why I am against that method. At least with the 51% option, I have a chance to get my mob back.
Ah you just reminded me of another "trick" that some use, they come into a zone where people are hunting...then they tag every mob in sight that is already being engaged. People kill their mobs..and the tagger also gets credit/exps for tagging everything in sight. lol
CanadinaXegony said:Ah you just reminded me of another "trick" that some use, they come into a zone where people are hunting...then they tag every mob in sight that is already being engaged. People kill their mobs..and the tagger also gets credit/exps for tagging everything in sight. lol
In EQ, you only get faction for doing this. You don't get XP unless you do 51%. I'm not sure what game you might be talking about where this is a thing.
Liav said:CanadinaXegony said:Ah you just reminded me of another "trick" that some use, they come into a zone where people are hunting...then they tag every mob in sight that is already being engaged. People kill their mobs..and the tagger also gets credit/exps for tagging everything in sight. lol
In EQ, you only get faction for doing this. You don't get XP unless you do 51%. I'm not sure what game you might be talking about where this is a thing.
Don't remember ..either Wow or Rift perhaps could even have been Warhammer. After a while it all melds together, Played too many MMOs over the years
Dullahan said:A lot of those big name guilds were huge and largely uncontested for long stretches. You can still look back at Legacy of Steel to this day, and after a repop they would basically go around the entire world and kill every named without much opposition.
The TLP is not at all indicative of how things existed on live servers, how they exist on normal servers today, or how they will exist in the future.
This is correct. Many of them were, not all but many. However, the TLP IS what we should be looking at right now because it is exactly what we will be looking at come launch. Hopefully not nearly as bad due to more servers so a spread population but in the end it is how it will be if nothing is put into place to prevent it.
99-01 we did not have near the access to information that we have now. Hell for the most part many people had never touched an mmo before then. That was 15 years ago. Now, all data will be datamined before things even go live, websites will have quest/items/strats/etc before beta is finished, and people will already have found their perfect leveling routes to take come launch. Gaming today is not what it was back then and there is no way we can hope to recreate that.
The best we can hope for is that the population spread out enough that there would only be 1-2 guilds per server really pushing for world bosses. Any more than that and it would be cutt throat. Problem with that becomes lack of groups due to not having enough players around. It's a double edged sword that doesn't need to happen.
Liav said:CanadinaXegony said:Don't remember ..either Wow or Rift perhaps could even have been Warhammer. After a while it all melds together, Played too many MMOs over the years
That sounds like a horrible design flaw, then.
Well with hindsight I agree. :) Given better technology and better designing...hope the VR team works out a better way for this to happen. I DO remember EQII had some weird system where the only way someone could "help" you..(hit your mob) while not grouped with you, there was a thing where you could call for "help". But that wasn't a perfect system either, and most times ended up being annoying due to your solo encounter being locked. :)
CanadinaXegony said:The thing I don't like about "whoever does the most damage" set up, is griefing. Saw this in several games, lower level character trying to kill a mob, hasn't got mob hps below 50% yet, higher level player passing by one shots it ..(for the hell of it) gets loot and kill credit. Lower level has to start all over again. I really think first to tag with a percentage credit should be a thing. My personal view anyway.
The modern solution to that problem is tagging for quest credit, and personal loot generation. That way, even if someone else does help you kill it, all they're doing is truly helping. There is no downside. In your example above, you would get XP, loot, and quest credit, while the "helper" would get loot and quest credit, presuming they were too high to get XP.
It's the difference between punitive design and co-operative positive design. EQ1 is the former, games like GW2, Rift, and others are the latter.
vjek said:The modern solution to that problem is tagging for quest credit, and personal loot generation. That way, even if someone else does help you kill it, all they're doing is truly helping. There is no downside. In your example above, you would get XP, loot, and quest credit, while the "helper" would get loot and quest credit, presuming they were too high to get XP.
It's the difference between punitive design and co-operative positive design. EQ1 is the former, games like GW2, Rift, and others are the latter.
So now instead of 1 legendary/epic there are 2-x? Or even instead of 5g its 10-x?
pendragen said:
So now instead of 1 legendary/epic there are 2-x? Or even instead of 5g its 10-x?
As has been discussed at length on these and other forums, loot tables are adjusted with these systems to prevent flooding the market with items. Personal loot can also be customized to match your race, class, specialization, and even things like what spells you have/have equipped at the moment. It can also be turned into colored mana widgets for an environment-based gear system, if you want to run with the Lore of Terminus.
It's not like the economies in other games don't work. They work. People buy and sell, and have for many years. Static loot prevents the implementation of a variety of very challenging, fun, and innovative mechanics, but it's VR's opportunity to miss. :)
pendragen said:
The modern solution to that problem is tagging for quest credit, and personal loot generation. That way, even if someone else does help you kill it, all they're doing is truly helping. There is no downside. In your example above, you would get XP, loot, and quest credit, while the "helper" would get loot and quest credit, presuming they were too high to get XP.
It's the difference between punitive design and co-operative positive design. EQ1 is the former, games like GW2, Rift, and others are the latter.
There is a HUGE downside. Some twitchy griefer comes along and tags my mobs and there is nothing I can do about it. Tagging is terrible and harmful. The >50% rules gives me a chance to get it back.
Tagging is the worst possible option.
Kobrashade said:Hi everyone,
I have an honest question (slight skepticism) about the benefits of mob tagging/credit through the concept of "whoever does the most damage". I just forsee too many possibilites where people could have negative experiences regardless of hoping for community repercussions. I am extremely pumped by a game and philosphy attemping to bring back personal and open world/shared mechanics. However, there are some possibilites of change/adaptation with specifc areas of gameplay.
EDIT: I'm just worried of the possibilities of Kill stealing turning away good, respectful and friendly players from the game and allowing the types of players and mentality opposite of Pantheon's approach to take charge.
Pantheons Goal / Motto: "Group and Community Driven"
Most recent system/idea vocalized in stream about Kill stealing: "Person or Group that does the most damage gets credit. Kill stealers will get a bad rep"
I absolutely hate killstealing. One of my first memorable kill steals was while in High Hold Pass looking for the fabled polished granite tomahawk. I had heard if you log on early in the morning when the Quellious server is slow you have a better chance of finding Grenix. So this is exactly what I did. I log on with my Ranger at like 3 am and cleared the trash for many rotations, but eventually Grenix popped. I was so nervous and I ran up and start whacking away. My god he hit hard back. It was close and I got him to about 85% when he killed me. I run back from my respawn point and grab my corpse and start med'ing up. The zone is still clear and I'm ready to fight again, so I attack. I get him to about 15% and around the corner comes a lower level Wizard. I assume I can still win since I am obviously a stronger/higher level character! He starts nuking Grenix and Grenix is dying quickly. I am trying to reason with this wiz as we fight and tell him I was here first, this is my kill, I need this weapon. He never answers and just keeps nuking. Grenix falls and I run over to the corpse. I try to loot, but I CAN'T LOOT. I see the wiz walk over and he is looting and he sits down to med. I am circling him like a mad dog unable to do anything and then he opens a trade window with me and there is the PGT!. I am so excited and assume he is going to give me the spoils of a hard fight. Then all of a sudden he is gone. He has camped out never to be seen by me again. From this point on I hate Wizards.....and Rangers.
I do hope some other method other than 51% is used to determine who gets loot.
I'm a wizard I don't do things like that...have had it done to me, know what it feels like..and would never do that to someone else. The community can step up and red flag these people by "word of mouth" but if this person constantly ninjas/kill steals then I think it would be up to VR, given enough complaints to do something about them..a warning or whatever. The person that keeps repeating these actions obviously doesn't care about the community he or she is supposed to be part of. And these days, from what I've seen of the newer generation of gamers, some of whom have been spoiled by Wow or other similar games, ..its going to take some convincing to get them to be part of the community and not against the community. That's life I guess.
I've suffered far more griefing from tagging systems than I did from 51% systems ... and I played 51% systems (EQ) much, much, more than games with tagging. Any scenario you recount from EQ would be magnified under a system where someone could swoop in and have the game automatically award them with possession of a mob for hitting it first.
People have to come to terms with the fact that there will be kill stealing to some degree. That is by design, and how things will work in an open world game. There will be good guys, and bad guys. All we can hope for is that the game won't be designed in such a way that it allows the bad guys to succeed apart from the community at large.
Dullahan said:I've suffered far more griefing from tagging systems than I did from 51% systems ... and I played 51% systems (EQ) much, much, more than games with tagging. Any scenario you recount from EQ would be magnified under a system where someone could swoop in and have the game automatically award them with possession of a mob for hitting it first.
People have to come to terms with the fact that there will be kill stealing to some degree. That is by design, and how things will work in an open world game. There will be good guys, and bad guys. All we can hope for is that the game won't be designed in such a way that it allows the bad guys to succeed apart from the community at large.
Agreed.
I've come to the conclusion that Dullahan is right here. In this specific case, freedom is more valuable than the alternative. As long as swift justice is applied to people who overly abuse the mechanics to ruin others' gameplay, we'll just have to deal with it.
I still believe that solid encounter locking should be used on raid content, however. Allowing raid content to have the 51% ruleset applied is absolutely a purposeless endeavor with zero positive side effects.
Jaced said:Kobrashade said:I absolutely hate killstealing. One of my first memorable kill steals was while in High Hold Pass looking for the fabled polished granite tomahawk. I had heard if you log on early in the morning when the Quellious server is slow you have a better chance of finding Grenix. So this is exactly what I did. I log on with my Ranger at like 3 am and cleared the trash for many rotations, but eventually Grenix popped. I was so nervous and I ran up and start whacking away. My god he hit hard back. It was close and I got him to about 85% when he killed me. I run back from my respawn point and grab my corpse and start med'ing up. The zone is still clear and I'm ready to fight again, so I attack. I get him to about 15% and around the corner comes a lower level Wizard. I assume I can still win since I am obviously a stronger/higher level character! He starts nuking Grenix and Grenix is dying quickly. I am trying to reason with this wiz as we fight and tell him I was here first, this is my kill, I need this weapon. He never answers and just keeps nuking. Grenix falls and I run over to the corpse. I try to loot, but I CAN'T LOOT. I see the wiz walk over and he is looting and he sits down to med. I am circling him like a mad dog unable to do anything and then he opens a trade window with me and there is the PGT!. I am so excited and assume he is going to give me the spoils of a hard fight. Then all of a sudden he is gone. He has camped out never to be seen by me again. From this point on I hate Wizards.....and Rangers.
I do hope some other method other than 51% is used to determine who gets loot.
You are right, and with the majority under 15 years of EQ experience will not remember those days, and will just be in the new Norm days of todays MMO's or rpg's do whatever it takes to win the loot. Greed at its best.
I expect some, but with the old school eq players i expect it not to go the way a few speak, and will be mightly disappointed when called out.
vjek said:pendragen said:
So now instead of 1 legendary/epic there are 2-x? Or even instead of 5g its 10-x?
As has been discussed at length on these and other forums, loot tables are adjusted with these systems to prevent flooding the market with items. Personal loot can also be customized to match your race, class, specialization, and even things like what spells you have/have equipped at the moment. It can also be turned into colored mana widgets for an environment-based gear system, if you want to run with the Lore of Terminus.
It's not like the economies in other games don't work. They work. People buy and sell, and have for many years. Static loot prevents the implementation of a variety of very challenging, fun, and innovative mechanics, but it's VR's opportunity to miss. :)
This is going to sound harsh, so I appoligize. But this just sounds ridiculous to me.
Why wouldnt an entire guild of 100 people camp a named, and have every guild member pop the mob once before it's killed? Everyone wins, encounter over, no one returns. Worse, given that VR has said that bind on pickup gear will be very limited, why wouldnt large groups all pop the mob and flood the market with 100 items?
This is ripe for trivilialing content by incentivising people zergin mobs, all of them knowing they will get the reward, and completely break the economy in the process.
Because risk vs reward and time efficiency. Yes, if you get more people than necessary to camp something, it does make it easier, but they also collectively get a smaller reward. When both mobs and items are actually rare the way they were in EQ, there is a lot to achieve and time is money. People have places to go and loot to get. Sitting around to help kill something with more people than necessary at the cost of sacrificing one's own progression is ultimately counterproductive.
The same reason that people leave zergs to join more coordinated and efficient guilds. More accomplishments and less waiting in line.
Dullahan said:Because risk vs reward and time efficiency. Yes, if you get more people than necessary to camp something, it does make it easier, but they also collectively get a smaller reward. When both mobs and items are actually rare the way they were in EQ, there is a lot to achieve and time is money. People have places to go and loot to get. Sitting around to help kill something with more people than necessary at the cost of sacrificing one's own progression is ultimately counterproductive.
The same reason that people leave zergs to join more coordinated and efficient guilds. More accomplishments and less waiting in line.
Off topic yes, about zergs we can not complain. They gave us first attempt knowledge and paved the way for other people to attempt the same raids with less people. Zergs dont last long, they make it fun for a short time then that reality sets in... was i in the "In crowd" or did i just help those SOB get all the rare loot, and they disbanded. Leaving the "In crowd" with the majority of rare items to join another zerg guild. Our time sync was their gain.
But we still learned from them... it took a few years to figure out that zerging system, and avoid it at all costs.
Back on topic... Play nice rules, dont grief other people and show some respect, is all anyone can say. I am not 20 and sitting behind a computer to hide my face, but to approach this topic with good values.... try to respect others, and try to socialize with others when trying to tag their pulls. Dont be rude about it, we have enough MMO's that are full of bs people running around griefing others.
It boils down to one thing, disrespect to everyone but yourself. "A dont give a damn attitude" doesnt work with seasoned EQ players... i will warn you now if you try it.
I want to throw in my comments on this one. I am a personal fan of the eq2 lock system , if you tag the mob first be it in a group or raid situation then that encounter is locked to said group. This moves into once the mob is locked , there is no outside help period . The players either win, die or zone.
This also helps with the eq1 type of train that we all are fond of , since the mobs are locked to the above group. I am not saying training can not happen , but it reduces the chances.
So moving on!
Why is encounter locks a good thing? .
It removes the concept of having to even waste the time of a CS rep with a /petition or even the community's time with people complaining about xxx kill stealing a mob. It simply does not happen, since the encounter is locked to the person that engaged. If you want to claim a mob .. pull first , there is no argument's involved.
If you want to have open world contested style content ... You need to realize it is contested content, be it a trash mob , quest mob or raid target... Pull faster.
This is furthered by with the fact , no one has given a legit way to prevent credit being assigned to the 6 wizards that can out dps a raid yet based on a +50 % scale. Also if you do not think its going to happen , you are sadly mistaken. I have seen Time+ geared wizards out dps a entire lower geared raid vs the raid mob Gorinare using as a example.
This being compounded by the fact we are starting to mix in camp check at orc 1 vs time waiting on orc1 to be camp free. I do see both sides of the argument , but it is not VR's job to babysit.
The encounter lock system removes all these factors.
In this system you either engaged first or you did not ... simple. There is no /petition because someone got there feelings hurt in a contested enviroment.
This type of enviroment promotes social interaction, competition , organization and gives a sense of urgency when rare content is available that can not be stolen if the encounter is locked down.