Naim said:
I was actually paraphrasing what Brad said just a few posts up:
aradune said:
"And of course, there will be many incentives for players to *not* twink an item, mostly positive incentives, making it more worthwhile to trade the item in, sacrifice it, augment it, etc. This should slow but not eliminate twinking"
to me I read: we don't want people to twink, we are doing everything we can to discourage it"
To you, VRi's stance is that they do not want people to twink AT ALL yet in this bolded portion of his statement that you JUST quoted literally states the opposite that they want to allow twinking.
You are reading between the lines where lines don't exist. You are 'paraphrasing' a devs stance on a game's development forums where it has been stated MANY times that nothing is set in stone. You are assuming things when things aren't even things yet.
These are problems that just don't exist. I can understand your position, at least assumingly you'd prefer the game to just leave twinking alone and allow it full on 100%. I could even understand that simply slowing twinking down is undesireable with you. But you are claiming the devs are taking a hard stance on it and trying to do away with it completely. Which they are not, and furthermore it is too early to even know how much they plan on 'slowing' it down. I'm not trying to attack or offend in any way I just don't see why this has to be a problem at this point in time...
I have gone ahead and removed several posts and made a few edits to quotes, please refrain from personal attacks and arguing over opinions, we have made our stance clear, Brad has reinforced that stance in this thread so to keep the thread open pleased read every post from the beginning and keep it on topic minus the insults and personal attacks please.
Feyshtey said:Aradune said:In a nutshell, a twinked item will scale down from it's intended level to the level of the person using it.
@Aradune - Thank you for the replies. Very helpful to the conversation.
I realize we're in the "far to early to say" stage, and you are likely simply speaking in general terms while not meaning to set a definitive rule, but let me just raise a red flag on the quoted item. As a level 35 character, if I can gain experience while grouped with 5 level 40 characters (without mentoring), and are able to bring down a level 40 encounter and I recieve a level 40 drop, it makes no sense to me whatsoever for that item to scale down to level 35 when I equip it however minor that scaling might be. It seems like at worst the scaling of items would begin at the fringe of the range at which players could group and still recieve xp.
That seems like a good and logical threshold to base it on or at least start the testing at. That was a good thing to point out mate
I don't see why there shouldn't be items like this. It also encourages you to make a new character and have a lot of fun doing so with transferred over gear. Very important for gear dependant classes. Only super powerful passives/procs should have level resitrctions, but the item should still be equippable and provide AC or other minor effects.
Aradune said:Naim said:
I guess I don't understand why Pantheon has taken the stance of "We don't Want people to twink, we are doing everything we can to discourage it"
With all due respect, this is simply false. I guarantee you that even with many systems and options encouraging people not to twink, there will be plenty of twinking. The idea is to control the rate of item inflation (or is it deflation, I always forget) and not have it spiral out of control, exceeding our ability to refresh and add to the game new items, etc.
The struggle here, Brad, is that it sounds like you are saying two different things. You are saying twinking will happen, but saying items will scale to the level of the user. These things don't go together.
What is my motivation to give someone an item that's "you'll love it in 50 levels, I swear!" that is only 1 more damage and 1 less delay than that there rusted sword you're using now...? Then not only are you going to scale them, but on top of it, if I give this now rendered junk by scaling piece to a newbie to try to make his day... I can't get that all-important buff from sacrificing it.
I am almost desperate to believe "that's not true," but it's not coming through from your other statements and I'm very discouraged. I don't want to be. I'm a fan across a number of games. Yet one thing I like the most about you is also something I worry about, lol. You're admirably stubborn and confident in your decisions.
This is just my personal issue. I've done it all in games, raiding, alts, all that. I'm not about twinking my own characters... but giving s great item to a newbie and delighting in their delight is my favorite aspect of any game, ever. I don't want to lose that. I hear, "don't worry, you won't" and then I hear, "is just that they won't care all that much and you'll regret not sacrificing it, instead". These things don't go together in my mind. I cannot reconcile them peacefully.
>The struggle here, Brad, is that it sounds like you are saying two different things. You are saying twinking will happen, but saying items will scale to the level of the user. These things don't go together. <
With respect, I totally disagree. To me twinking is giving things to a new character that he or she couldn't normally get starting off. To make the starting levels easier. It is *not* giving overpowered items to make the starting levels *trivial*.
If you can give a new character the Helm of Overwhelming Uberosity strength plus 50 it damn well should scale down to strength +1 which still is a nice twink if the toonling you give it to can't otherwise get a helmet with strength +1.
Amris said:Aradune said:Naim said:
I guess I don't understand why Pantheon has taken the stance of "We don't Want people to twink, we are doing everything we can to discourage it"
With all due respect, this is simply false. I guarantee you that even with many systems and options encouraging people not to twink, there will be plenty of twinking. The idea is to control the rate of item inflation (or is it deflation, I always forget) and not have it spiral out of control, exceeding our ability to refresh and add to the game new items, etc.
The struggle here, Brad, is that it sounds like you are saying two different things. You are saying twinking will happen, but saying items will scale to the level of the user. These things don't go together.
What is my motivation to give someone an item that's "you'll love it in 50 levels, I swear!" that is only 1 more damage and 1 less delay than that there rusted sword you're using now...? Then not only are you going to scale them, but on top of it, if I give this now rendered junk by scaling piece to a newbie to try to make his day... I can't get that all-important buff from sacrificing it.
I am almost desperate to believe "that's not true," but it's not coming through from your other statements and I'm very discouraged. I don't want to be. I'm a fan across a number of games. Yet one thing I like the most about you is also something I worry about, lol. You're admirably stubborn and confident in your decisions.
This is just my personal issue. I've done it all in games, raiding, alts, all that. I'm not about twinking my own characters... but giving s great item to a newbie and delighting in their delight is my favorite aspect of any game, ever. I don't want to lose that. I hear, "don't worry, you won't" and then I hear, "is just that they won't care all that much and you'll regret not sacrificing it, instead". These things don't go together in my mind. I cannot reconcile them peacefully.
I think the problem is that you're assuming a scaled down item will only be "1 more damage and 1 less delay than that there rusted sword." This is just not true.
"To answer a question that came up, yes, the item, in general and most of the time, would be slightly better than the average item that player would have. Define slightly? Too early, too many variables, but we will address it."
It also may be different definitions of "twinking." I don't believe that an item has to be OP to be considered twink. Even if it just a slight upgrade, that is still a very beneficial and generous gift. The most important thing is to prevent a character from basically being invincible from gifted gear. But an item can still be powerful without being overpowered. It's pretty clear to me that that's Brad's goal - to make higher level items still be valuable to low lvl players, without being game-breaking. It only doesn't make sense if you talk in extremes, as Brad does not deal with extremes. It may be a fine line to find, but there's a lot of room in between underpowered and overpowered. And I feel that a lot of people only see black and white - if it's not one then it must be the other. This is definitely something that they can fine tune during testing with the feedback of players. I'm not worried.
Bazgrim said:I think the problem is that you're assuming a scaled down item will only be "1 more damage and 1 less delay than that there rusted sword." This is just not true.
"To answer a question that came up, yes, the item, in general and most of the time, would be slightly better than the average item that player would have. Define slightly? Too early, too many variables, but we will address it."
It also may be different definitions of "twinking." I don't believe that an item has to be OP to be considered twink. Even if it just a slight upgrade, that is still a very beneficial and generous gift. The most important thing is to prevent a character from basically being invincible from gifted gear. But an item can still be powerful without being overpowered. It's pretty clear to me that that's Brad's goal - to make higher level items still be valuable to low lvl players, without being game-breaking. It only doesn't make sense if you talk in extremes, as Brad does not deal with extremes. It may be a fine line to find, but there's a lot of room in between underpowered and overpowered. And I feel that a lot of people only see black and white - if it's not one then it must be the other. This is definitely something that they can fine tune during testing with the feedback of players. I'm not worried.
We had this in WoW. High level stuff is "slightly better" so you can twink your own characters. They are account bound. They are a total waste.
I don't share your faith. Giving someone fine steel, for example, is nice. It's not memorable. Nobody runs around telling the story of the person who have them fine steel and made them over the moon. When they do get find steel, it goes right to the vendor because the money for spells or other actually useful stuff trumps the negligible "value" of the "gift".
If someone gives you an item that's "sightly better" until you finally grow into it, it's better to sell it to some high level for them to sacrifice, and you can buy something genuinely useful.
That doesn't make me feel like I did something great. Just skip the gift giving and throw the 400 plat at them. They'll remember that for twenty minutes until they get another "gift" that's equally not memorable.
As far as the Fungi goes my opinion is that it wasn't game breaking at all. Could you get thru the first 8-10 levels a little quicker? Sure. But once you get past 10 and start acquiring sta/hp items the tics definitely started to slow down and be less and less noticeable. But with this being the best droppable regen item in the game for a long time it was always a highly desired item. But was it ''game breaking?'' I do not see how regenerating 150hps (post lev 20 of course) in 60 seconds is gamebreaking. Once you broke about lev 12-15 or so its not going to make you a a solo God. It doesnt reduce the amount of damage you are going to take trying to solo. Sure maybe a monk or necro could solo but they already could without a fungi in the first place. If anything this item was great for the game and the economy. Everyone in the game wanted it regardless of level. Most people knew who had looted the most recent one due to the crazy low drop rate. People loaned them to friends and moved them between their different toons and accounts... sometimes having to ask someone that you weren't sure was trustworthy to transfer it for you then praying they were still there when you logged back in. And what most people forget is that it scaled with level also. At level 5 it was just 5hp regen and only 1/2 hp more per level up to 20. And by level 20 mobs are tough enough that you need a group with or without a fungi. Did it help a little with healer mana and downtime? Sure. Was it ''game breaking?'' Naw. The Fungi was valuable moreso because it was the best droppable HP regen item in the game... not neccessarily because of how much regen it gave. It could have only been 10 regen or even 5, but if that was the best regen item in the game it is still going to be valuable and highly desired.
Personally, I would love to see items such as these in the game. They are conversation pieces and great for the economy both short-term and long-term.
I think with the way the game is being designed with the importance being placed on class interdependance, making each level matter and (not just end game / later levels), to make this a challenging MMO and to try and design features that are in place so you can't blast through content with little regard for the difficulty... it is quite EASY to see why Brad would want to reduce the usually outragous benefits of twinking top end gear on lowbies. Looking at his game design it's not that hard to understand why he may want it to be like this.
I was in an EQ group around level 20 just the other day, playing with this fella who was wearing fungi and rocking some epic plate armour all over, dual wielding swords that proc'd for similar damage to a wizards dd spell at that level... while it was very epic and anyone would say "ooh and ahh" the content we were playing became immediately boring (on top of all this adding random drop in buffs from high levels). We were stacking mob on top of mob and while some of you might drool at the concept of doing this and getting lots of xp very fast this is not what the game is about and i personally enjoy a challenge every step of the weay not just snoring my way through mobs.
I have twinked and do have a very basic twinked char on p99 at the moment (still plenty of basic cloth armour on him). It is what it is and that is just how EQ is... but given the chance to create a game where you dont have ridiculously overpowered low levels running around and instead moderate their power to keep things challenging for everyone enjoying and experiencing the game for the 1st time whether it is 1 month after release or 5 years, I would always vote YES to be in a group where when you face a tough mob it is tough because your tank is not wearing lvl 50 equipment with all the perks at lvl 10 or 20 or whatever.
@Xaleban - While i see it a bit differently, to an extent you are right regarding the ticks etc on fungi alone, but Fungi also paired with other lvl 50+ armour on a tank dishing out stupid dps with proc's and weapon damage = a tank that can severely change the difficulty level of all mobs in a zone for the group they are tanking for.
@Aradune +1 support for your current direction mate
Amris said:Bazgrim said:I think the problem is that you're assuming a scaled down item will only be "1 more damage and 1 less delay than that there rusted sword." This is just not true.
"To answer a question that came up, yes, the item, in general and most of the time, would be slightly better than the average item that player would have. Define slightly? Too early, too many variables, but we will address it."
It also may be different definitions of "twinking." I don't believe that an item has to be OP to be considered twink. Even if it just a slight upgrade, that is still a very beneficial and generous gift. The most important thing is to prevent a character from basically being invincible from gifted gear. But an item can still be powerful without being overpowered. It's pretty clear to me that that's Brad's goal - to make higher level items still be valuable to low lvl players, without being game-breaking. It only doesn't make sense if you talk in extremes, as Brad does not deal with extremes. It may be a fine line to find, but there's a lot of room in between underpowered and overpowered. And I feel that a lot of people only see black and white - if it's not one then it must be the other. This is definitely something that they can fine tune during testing with the feedback of players. I'm not worried.
We had this in WoW. High level stuff is "slightly better" so you can twink your own characters. They are account bound. They are a total waste.
I don't share your faith. Giving someone fine steel, for example, is nice. It's not memorable. Nobody runs around telling the story of the person who have them fine steel and made them over the moon. When they do get find steel, it goes right to the vendor because the money for spells or other actually useful stuff trumps the negligible "value" of the "gift".
If someone gives you an item that's "sightly better" until you finally grow into it, it's better to sell it to some high level for them to sacrifice, and you can buy something genuinely useful.
That doesn't make me feel like I did something great. Just skip the gift giving and throw the 400 plat at them. They'll remember that for twenty minutes until they get another "gift" that's equally not memorable.
True, there is a difference between being balanced and being memorable. It's always debateable which one is more important. Tbh, I'm not sure - I don't think I have a hard stance either way. But knowing that they will scale, regardless of how much, I still think it's a pretty nice perk to have a weapon that automatically grows in power with you as you level up.
The bottom line is we'll really just hafta wait to see to what degree they scale.
Even though I much prefer making alts and twinking them, compared to a mentoring system (which I most likely will never use), I agree twinking should be controlled somewhat.
When players start twinking massively overpowered items it makes the low level game much too easy. This means players blow through the content much faster then normal. This creates a couple problems. 1) It continues the skew of pushing avg player level up making low end content emptier as players are exiting low level content faster than ever. 2) Twinked characters are significantly more powerful than noobies which means either the twinked character will not want to group with someone so underpowered relatively, or quickly surpasses them in levels. This might frustrate new players as they see the experienced players quickly advancing and them being left in the dust.
Twinked characters, using items that scales down at lower levels, will still be more powerful than a new character. I'm sure there will still be a benefit from twinking, it's just not going to make your character a soloing god like in EQ. And even though I like that, I think the health of the game will be better off.
Dullahan said:Imo, items should never scale. If an item gives 10 str, it should always give 10str. However, 10 str should mean more to a level 50 than it does to a level 10. Worked in EQ, and it allowed twinks to be strong, but feel neither overpowered or worthless.
There is a difference between a 10k plat twink, a 400k plat twink, and a 400k plat twink with raid level no drop gear. OP is the only point of twinking.
Brought back to life from the Fungi Tunic thread that was locked and redirected.
What was the name of the collection in EQ2 that made u do proc dmg? I remember it was from quite early in the game, but it was still BiS many many levels later. I love stuff like that. Itemization and items like you mention mean alot to me. On the other hand you have WoW where I don't even know what the current end-boss drops. At least I hope Pantheon goes a mile away from the itemization we see in WoW. I get angry just writing about it now.
The only issue with the complaints in this thread is people's inability to see anything other than what EQ was. Twinking in eq was just about buying the most hp and mana gear you can get and wrecking things.
In a modern game. Take classic wow for example. Twinking can be much different yet still yield the desired effect. If you start an untwinked character on a classic wow server and then replay that same character with ACTUAL PURCHASED items (even if they are just +1 or 2 to stats) you see a SUBSTANTIAL difference in both speed and ease in leveling.
Items that scale down, are usually still better than items available at level (or for most people an empty slot) and you will still be able to twink. People need to open their minds to slight differences in systems and mechanics from what EQ had.
Porygon said:The only issue with the complaints in this thread is people's inability to see anything other than what EQ was. Twinking in eq was just about buying the most hp and mana gear you can get and wrecking things.
In a modern game. Take classic wow for example. Twinking can be much different yet still yield the desired effect. If you start an untwinked character on a classic wow server and then replay that same character with ACTUAL PURCHASED items (even if they are just +1 or 2 to stats) you see a SUBSTANTIAL difference in both speed and ease in leveling.
Items that scale down, are usually still better than items available at level (or for most people an empty slot) and you will still be able to twink. People need to open their minds to slight differences in systems and mechanics from what EQ had.
Like weapon damage, haste and STR items had no impact in twinking in EQ...
People refer to EQ because Pantheon has been stated as "no level required items", thus opening the twink possibility. Scaling or less effective items seems like a solution to me, like Heritage armor is in Wow, or most Pop-later items in EQ.
Rare playstyle altering and defining items like the Fungi Tunic, Circlet of Shadow, JBBs, haste items, J-Boots, fishbone earring, manastone, etc... are at the core of longevity in a game like this. Make them an insanely rare drop, or the result of a very difficult quest. But those items create memories and make one player stand out from another of the same class. They also are quality of life improvements, which makes them all the more sweet when you finally obtain one. And if you put more work and time into your character, as well as feel special, you're less likely to abandon the game. I hope they put these types of items in the game.
MauvaisOeil said:Like weapon damage, haste and STR items had no impact in twinking in EQ...
People refer to EQ because Pantheon has been stated as "no level required items", thus opening the twink possibility. Scaling or less effective items seems like a solution to me, like Heritage armor is in Wow, or most Pop-later items in EQ.
So you decided to bring up a moot point regarding twinking, only to agree with me in the end?
If I'm a wizard, which was a popular twink , I dont care about str haste or weapon damage. Hp and mana were the primary stats people looked for when twinking.
But I agree. Scaled items would be fine.