Lets first see what happens without limiting your play options too much beforehand.
Im absolutely against TLC it worked for EQ why shouldn it work in Pantheon ?
The rules of the world will be pretty much the same and i dont think the modern players are totally different then us old time EQ players.
I sometimes went for rare loot on a higher lvl char in lower lvl zones but i never took away some lower players camp, saying hey im here its camped by 1 lvl 50 vs 5 lvl 10 or so.
I did respect lower lvl players having the right to camp here first if there are some that can make it to that spot. There have been enough options to camp/get seomthing rare even without bothering other players.
I dont see a problem yet and if there is one that arises you can still try and fix it.
Ondark said:Lets first see what happens without limiting your play options too much beforehand.
Im absolutely against TLC it worked for EQ why shouldn it work in Pantheon ?
The rules of the world will be pretty much the same and i dont think the modern players are totally different then us old time EQ players.
I sometimes went for rare loot on a higher lvl char in lower lvl zones but i never took away some lower players camp, saying hey im here its camped by 1 lvl 50 vs 5 lvl 10 or so.
I did respect lower lvl players having the right to camp here first if there are some that can make it to that spot. There have been enough options to camp/get seomthing rare even without bothering other players.
I dont see a problem yet and if there is one that arises you can still try and fix it.
Absolutely, they should first go with no major solutions, test and then consider things before major changes are implemented.
I also, being a monk and often lacking the ability to solo any content near me, also being poor due to weight causing looting restrictions, and the fact that I disliked the player trade market, I would be relegated to going back to older content and farming an item I missed at the time. When I did, I always passed the camp on to a group of players if they were coming in. Also, when I did this, it was not uncommon for the group to tell me they were after a different item off the mob and would let me know if the item I sought had dropped.
Now granted this was on Test Server where the majority of players scoffed at player trade and usually gifted items to people when they no longer had a need, but I did run into such honorable types from time to time on the production servers. While not everyone went out of their way to help another on production, I found most were fair and balance minded, willing to respect others in such basic concepts. It was always the outliers that were the issue and as we have discussed, the reputation system combined with the NEED to group to remotely excel in the game kept a lot of those behaviors ton the minimum.
Tanix said:Riahuf22 said:Tanix said:Riahuf22 said:Tettnang said:I don't mind higher levels farming lower level stuff. If an area or boss is camped then it's camped. Either by one max lvl character, a duo of higher level characters, a group of level appropriate characters, or a zerg of lvl 2's. In any case I'm going to look elsewhere or work something out with them.
See but if this is a thing than why even bother having a dungeon have different teirs of difficulty if they are simply just going to take the lower teiroto themselves, I mean, granted if I do a cc and they say they have it of course I'm not going to go there to see if it is being soloed camped but it should be discouraged, let the high end dungeons have enough gear at the end to twink their alts if anything so the lower level stuff can actually be camped by close to level appropriate players, it really isn't that hard of a concept.
If you litter the game with gear, then it will defeat the concept of meaningful rewards. The idea is that gear will last over longer periods and will be harder to come by, so it is possible a higher level could be picking up something at the lower end of the spectrum that they can use. If they are designing the game anything like original EQ, you won't have a level appropriate drop for every level and area. That is, you may do a dungeon that does not have a helm that drops at level 40. It may be a helm that dropped at 28 or 30. Even if there is a better item out there for that slot, they may not have the means to get it and so picking up the less effective (but better than nothing) item from the lower dungeon becomes a solution.
As I said, games today have it where the world is saturated with gear all over the place and so there is essentially numerous selections of gear at every level for all slots. I don't think that will be the case with this game, though I could be mistaken.
Litter ally no where in my post did I say put a crap load of gear into the game I said have enough to where lvl 50 character stay at level 50 dungeons, and not take away the experiences away from lower level players simply becuase you want a price of gear, and even worse just to sell to the people that are trying to camp it. So how about you find a solution that might solve both problems instead of just saying mine doesn't work, it's getting old
You asked why a level 50 would want a level 30 item. I explained that there may not be a level 50 item in that slot because gear is not available at every level for every slot. That is why I said "littered the game with gear". To essentially meet your point, you would have to have gear for every slot, every class, every focus at each specified level range. This would substantially increase the amount of gear in the game. This is also the aproach most modern games take and why in those games you end up having to upgrade every time you level.
In a game like I am explaining, upgrading every level would not exist and so it may be very likely that you can be wearing gear that is spread out over a range of many levels because that is all that is available.
Do you understand what I mean? That is, that level 50 dungeon may not have an item for that slot for that level, making the other lesser dungeons item essentially the best selection for that class/player.
You realize they even did this is eq, in fact they even made the pieces of gear class specific, and most people loved it, it made all classes look different, and have high teir gear, so no I don't see your point, people want to have high level gear not a price of gear they got at level 30 and can't find anything to replace it. And if you say fbss isn't ones of those items, your right but lguk was a high end dungeon so it would still fit my idea of what I was saying
And in kunark they made a class specific weapon for max level, and in velious they made class specific armor again, so again no I don't see it.
Riahuf22 said:people want to have high level gear not a price of gear they got at level 30 and can't find anything to replace it.
Not I. I want the classic EQ itemization where some of the pre-raid BiS or near BiS gear came from low-mid levels. I want powerful/desirable items scattered through the entire leveling journey, not simply top heavy leveling treadmill gear distrubtion that has been the norm from WoW onward.
Give me that living world feel where sometimes powerful items end up in the hands of the less than powerful.
Riahuf22 said:Tanix said:Riahuf22 said:Tanix said:Riahuf22 said:Tettnang said:I don't mind higher levels farming lower level stuff. If an area or boss is camped then it's camped. Either by one max lvl character, a duo of higher level characters, a group of level appropriate characters, or a zerg of lvl 2's. In any case I'm going to look elsewhere or work something out with them.
See but if this is a thing than why even bother having a dungeon have different teirs of difficulty if they are simply just going to take the lower teiroto themselves, I mean, granted if I do a cc and they say they have it of course I'm not going to go there to see if it is being soloed camped but it should be discouraged, let the high end dungeons have enough gear at the end to twink their alts if anything so the lower level stuff can actually be camped by close to level appropriate players, it really isn't that hard of a concept.
If you litter the game with gear, then it will defeat the concept of meaningful rewards. The idea is that gear will last over longer periods and will be harder to come by, so it is possible a higher level could be picking up something at the lower end of the spectrum that they can use. If they are designing the game anything like original EQ, you won't have a level appropriate drop for every level and area. That is, you may do a dungeon that does not have a helm that drops at level 40. It may be a helm that dropped at 28 or 30. Even if there is a better item out there for that slot, they may not have the means to get it and so picking up the less effective (but better than nothing) item from the lower dungeon becomes a solution.
As I said, games today have it where the world is saturated with gear all over the place and so there is essentially numerous selections of gear at every level for all slots. I don't think that will be the case with this game, though I could be mistaken.
Litter ally no where in my post did I say put a crap load of gear into the game I said have enough to where lvl 50 character stay at level 50 dungeons, and not take away the experiences away from lower level players simply becuase you want a price of gear, and even worse just to sell to the people that are trying to camp it. So how about you find a solution that might solve both problems instead of just saying mine doesn't work, it's getting old
You asked why a level 50 would want a level 30 item. I explained that there may not be a level 50 item in that slot because gear is not available at every level for every slot. That is why I said "littered the game with gear". To essentially meet your point, you would have to have gear for every slot, every class, every focus at each specified level range. This would substantially increase the amount of gear in the game. This is also the aproach most modern games take and why in those games you end up having to upgrade every time you level.
In a game like I am explaining, upgrading every level would not exist and so it may be very likely that you can be wearing gear that is spread out over a range of many levels because that is all that is available.
Do you understand what I mean? That is, that level 50 dungeon may not have an item for that slot for that level, making the other lesser dungeons item essentially the best selection for that class/player.
You realize they even did this is eq, in fact they even made the pieces of gear class specific, and most people loved it, it made all classes look different, and have high teir gear, so no I don't see your point, people want to have high level gear not a price of gear they got at level 30 and can't find anything to replace it. And if you say fbss isn't ones of those items, your right but lguk was a high end dungeon so it would still fit my idea of what I was saying
And in kunark they made a class specific weapon for max level, and in velious they made class specific armor again, so again no I don't see it.
I am confused. How does that invalidate my point?
Riahuf22,
Never mind, I can't explain it anymore than I already have. We are just going to have to let this one rest.
Iksar said:Riahuf22 said:people want to have high level gear not a price of gear they got at level 30 and can't find anything to replace it.
Not I. I want the classic EQ itemization where some of the pre-raid BiS or near BiS gear came from low-mid levels. I want powerful/desirable items scattered through the entire leveling journey, not simply top heavy leveling treadmill gear distrubtion that has been the norm from WoW onward.
Give me that living world feel where sometimes powerful items end up in the hands of the less than powerful.
Ok
/sigh of relief
I was going crazy there for a moment as I didn't think people understood what I meant.
Sicario said:And you fail to even try being open-minded that game design choices/mechanics can be implemented in a way which maintain a high fidelity of the feeling of an open world, while mitigating against the abuses that will happen. You also express your opinions as an evident truth, making blanket statements about how loot rules on grey mobs make a game less enjoyable without clearly articulating exactly how that is.
Especially in this day and age of gaming, if loot rewards from grey-cons are meaningful in any way and obtainable by someone who's far out-leveled the content, they will be camped by someone. Sure, they may not be perma-camped, but does it really matter if most people are playing during specific hours in the evening and that's when they're most likely to be camped? Doesn't matter if the mobs are up at 3 AM when most of the people running into issues with others farming are sleeping since they have work the next day.
I'm not trying to be open minded, but thanks for suggesting I should. I'm simply referring on your opinion on two recent subject (FD & Low level mob farming) that both went on the same stance : Gutting freedom of gameplay for the fear of the worst.
I could easily quote Ben Franklin on this one, but let's be honest, famous quotes aren't more than quotes of people that were only popular more than right.
As other have stated, I don't want a game where there are artificial mechanics would they be for trivial loot, non aggro training, whatever they are. Thoses mechanics are only here to avoid a few rare occurences at the cost of a lot of possibilities of play, and are as much exploitable as no rule at all since humans can find a way to cheat whatever barrier you put. I don't want either a high level run deep in a dungeon withouth beeing hindered by anything just to kill a named and get loot, trust me. I want his path to be as long as a mid level group, and his kill not guaranteed because he would lack the autonomy to do so. I don't want the powercreep to allow such dispredancy like in modern games, where 10 more levels and you just smite things like they didn't exist.
I however, want to be able to recover things I could not or get a few coins while travelling, going in areas that are poorly populated to gather a few rare ingredients. Because while I want a group focused game, I know a group dynamic is based on mutual benefits and the chances to get a group for gathering crafting mats, poison components or whatever it is will be quite rare as there is only a personnal benefit in it.
I think as well, that a game where a mob stop having a value because he is too easy to you brings dispredancy in the world and allow you not to cover any cost of travelling. If you are group dependant in everything then if by malchance you get a bit behind in gear or spells unlocked, your chance to be able to continue in a group situation will vanish and trivial loot code would stop you from catching up.
To me, in a game, a mob has the same value for everyone, except a high level will have higher chances to victory or few chances to be beaten, but if an orc killed by a lowbie is worth good money, but killed by a high level is worth litteraly nothing, then the economic impact goes beyong making the low level mob worth less, not because he drops few coins usefull for a high level, but because he is litteraly worth nothing and could simply be absent from the world.
Of course this is only my desires, based on an opinion of a guy passioned in MMOS and no willing to grief of disturb anyone while playing friendly.
Overall, I think the hyperbolic of "no low level will be able to taste content" is simply spreading false fire, as other have already done on this forum, because no one will listed to "hey if there is a guy that sometimes comes and kill low level bosses", instead of "the low level world is doomed".
Dorotea : Wanting some artifical mechanics here and there when they prevent undesirable conduct and do little or no harm is not trying to avoid an open world. Wanting to to discourage or prevent things that we know have hurt or destroyed other games is not the same thing as putting Pantheon on rails and removing all sandbox elements. Wanting a few "artifical mechanics" is not even remotely close to being puzzled by anything that *isn't* artifical mechanics. Making abuses harder in a few situations will not mean that we do not share a world. Your own statements reflect far more hyperbele than saying lower levels will never be able to enjoy when it was entirely obvious to both you and everyone else that what was meant was that too often they would be unable to enjoy.
Not a fair response.
The less the best my dear. I know, due to how much posts I read from you, that you fear your gaming session will end in stress and not relief because of players behaviour. I'm not implying this is not legitimate, but I remain firmly against artificial barriers, as much as hidden walls in games or complex mechanics that only make things worse in the end. Like in the real world, every car will not be removed because of car accidents, every weapon won't be because of domestic "accidents". There need to be a weight between a mechanic and what it saves, and to me this problem is too minimal to be worth gutting anything.
Of course I can be wrong, and doomsayers be right. Or the contrary.
But I played games where they wanted to fix thoses risks inherent to EQ, like EQ2, and it ended like a failure. Helping a guy killing mobs outside of beeing grouped was impossible (encounter lock, player not healable or buffable outside of party). Instances everywhere to share on demand content, that made people less likely to meet, see themselves and communicate. Trivial loot code that made you poor as heck because you spent money upgrading your gear until you ran out and couldn't get some except on lucky rolls.
And for thoses reasons I just want the game to be a shared world with other players.
I know, I'm 3 pages late, but wo cares.
MauvaisOeil said:Honestly I don't see it as much as an issue, it wasn't really a problem in EQ, and camps like FBSS were technically "high level" back then.
The fact is, to improve your gear and comfort on play (bags and such) you often need money, but when you farm money in group it depends of drops to sell back to other players and they are rare enough not to be sure you obtain one at all.
When your gear is lacking improvement and you are undergeared for proper content of your level, a few hours in a lucrative yet lower level area are a mean to improve your gear through ingame money.
It's also a benefit of levelling up, if levelling is only a hidden gate to what relevant content you can access but not offering you the opportunity to overwhelm some content, then what is it even usefull for ?
As a rogue in EQ It was crazy hard for me to solo anything, and pickpocketting mobs in party was stealing to my teamates so from time to time, I went in some areas (like goblins of warsliks woods) and farmed a it for hours to get grachnists the destroyer to pop and hope for a shrunken goblin skull earring. I never disrupted anyone as I rarelly crossed any other players here, and the spawn and drop rate were low enough that usually no one came here as a party.
Thus, I'm against any artificial fix, levelling by itself has the benefits of opening ways to perks and farm some lower ennemies during loose time, while valorizing your own character.
Absolutely agree. What timeframe do you expect this to be a problem? 1 year in to the game, 2 years, or maybe 3 years? If this game follows any of the design that EQ had, you will not be seeing level 50 characters running through a lower level dungeon camping the entire zone with less than a year of playtime; there will be exceptions of course(those early days of necros camping ghoul lord while FD)
In the five years I played EQ, I saw this happen zero times. If you are referring to where EQ is today, almost 20 years later, then yes I can agree there are players that will lock down an entire area that is much lower than themselves, but to think this will happen early enough in the game to affect a majority of players is not true. If so, that is a failure on game design at high end, not the players.
Please don't make this into a problem that doesn't exist. Do not give us the feeling of freedom in a game only to put the players on rails when it comes obtaining gear. If you are going to follow through with limiting how gear is gathered, I might as well just stick with WoW.
Tanix said:Riahuf22 said:I understand it completely just don't agree with it there's a difference, it causes problems and solves nothing.
You could have saved us a lot of discussion if you upfront with that. /facepalm
You could be willing to compromise a little instead of making basically saying you want a eq clone and saved us all of your posts
Riahuf22 said:Tanix said:Riahuf22 said:I understand it completely just don't agree with it there's a difference, it causes problems and solves nothing.
You could have saved us a lot of discussion if you upfront with that. /facepalm
You could be willing to compromise a little instead of making basically saying you want a eq clone and saved us all of your posts
How does that make sense?
So rather than be clear on your argument, you think I should have just compromised my position to accomodate your straw man?
/sigh
I give up.
Tanix said:Riahuf22 said:Tanix said:Riahuf22 said:I understand it completely just don't agree with it there's a difference, it causes problems and solves nothing.
You could have saved us a lot of discussion if you upfront with that. /facepalm
You could be willing to compromise a little instead of making basically saying you want a eq clone and saved us all of your posts
How does that make sense?
So rather than be clear on your argument, you think I should have just compromised my position to accomodate your straw man?
/sigh
I give up.
NO you want the loot to be the why it was on eq, you want the content to be group based the way it was on eq, you want the raids to be endurance based like they were in eq, you basically have said anything to do with anything to be like eq, we alrdy have a game like this it's called p99, now that we have that takencare of let's talk about pantheon
But pantheon is being built on a lot of the same concepts and principles that were in place for eq, to ignore that would basically mean ignoring the core tenants of the game that has been stated. This game isn't going to be designed to give you a safe space and competing for resources is part of the equation whether your competition vastly out levels you or not.
*Note* I have not played eq in my life so I cannot draw any comparison to the two games, but reading the basic tenants and faqs along with watching the streams kinda give a clear idea of what the game will be like
MauvaisOeil said:
But I played games where they wanted to fix thoses risks inherent to EQ, like EQ2, and it ended like a failure. Helping a guy killing mobs outside of beeing grouped was impossible (encounter lock, player not healable or buffable outside of party). Instances everywhere to share on demand content, that made people less likely to meet, see themselves and communicate. Trivial loot code that made you poor as heck because you spent money upgrading your gear until you ran out and couldn't get some except on lucky rolls.
And for thoses reasons I just want the game to be a shared world with other players.
I know, I'm 3 pages late, but wo cares.
This is the core of it, I too have played several games where they "fixed" all the so called problems and I absolutely hated the experience. What you get with TLC is a tangled mess when it comes to farming particular crafting items off mobs...you get the honor of rolling alts just to farm those mats because your high level character has been made useless for it. Depending on how quests are designed a player may become too high level to even complete the quest because the mob will no longer drop any items including quest items needed. Players will either need the option to downlevel (Vanguard's mentoring system) or they won't be able to do large portions of the content due to TLC.
I understand what the game is going to be, but if everything that gets brought up and you say you want it to be like everquest than your making a clone, there has to be something different rather than the artwork I mean seriously, not only that but I believe what people want the most out of everquest is the nostalgia of the game which you can't possibly get if it a clone it has to be different it has to be memorable. And if you don't make simple compromising from old school to modern or something different all together than what would make pantheon special?
I would like the base game world like EQ i.e. no leashing mobs no instances no tlc no instant mana regen after a fight or other limiting/casual player formulas a death penalthy that stings quite a bit, a quaternity class wise + no quest hubs =playing on rails+splitting players to me.
All the other stuff may be new, like the world, some special mana or climates, new mob behaviors, new class spells actually theres plenty new stuff but the base rules should stay EQ ish.
EQ was the best MMORPG i ever played in my life and i did so since UO about every mmorpg out there. But if your going to change all the stuff that made EQ truly good you get todays Mmorpg crapishness we already have in about 99.99% of the mmos out there.
So why would you say for example ok EQ was good but lets make everything different it might be a better game then EQ lets add loot codes instances remove death penalty add instant gratification lvling to 60 should take 5 hours or you can just buy lvl 60 in the cash shop we will add one too, we make it free to play and so on ....it just wont be a good game if you dont stick to the core rules that made EQ shine. And i believe all the above described things play a role in that.
Ondark said:I would like the base game world like EQ i.e. no leashing mobs no instances no tlc no instant mana regen after a fight or other limiting/casual player formulas a death penalthy that stings quite a bit, a quaternity class wise + no quest hubs =playing on rails+splitting players to me.
All the other stuff may be new, like the world, some special mana or climates, new mob behaviors, new class spells actually theres plenty new stuff but the base rules should stay EQ ish.
EQ was the best MMORPG i ever played in my life and i did so since UO about every mmorpg out there. But if your going to change all the stuff that made EQ truly good you get todays Mmorpg crapishness we already have in about 99.99% of the mmos out there.
So why would you say for example ok EQ was good but lets make everything different it might be a better game then EQ lets add loot codes instances remove death penalty add instant gratification lvling to 60 should take 5 hours or you can just buy lvl 60 in the cash shop we will add one too, we make it free to play and so on ....it just wont be a good game if you dont stick to the core rules that made EQ shine. And i believe all the above described things play a role in that.
Well, that was extreme, and honestly those weren't compromising features those were completely different features than what eq had. Compromising would be like Eq was pretty much a 100% grp base game, modern in solo, but instead of only having certain classes that can solo in Pantheon have it to where all of them can but it would be at targets 8-12 levels below them, this is considered a compromise not the crap you threw in that eq wasnt.
And btw ultimately this would make the game even more group based at the high end levels becuase even in EQ necros were soloing yellows at level 50 and 60 in velious, and if the best soloing class can only solo 8 levels below them with diffculty, than that would technically make pantheon an even more group based game at the harder areas of the game where you'll want the group aspect the most, instead of seeing people in eq where they are solo camping fbss's, and yaks bam almost knocking out 2 birds with 1 stone what do you know.
And if you ask about the lower end places or the leveling process I alrdy said I wanted it to be like at least 5x slower on average that grping, I want grping to be the focus of the game so if someone got to max level in 4 months on average by grping than it would take someone 20 months on average by soloing on average I've stated all of this before in fact last time I said 7 but decided to use easy math. But ultimately little compromises like these can actually make the gane harder
For one I would make Open World mobs loot weaker than dungeon loot, like a 38 green would be like a 35 dungeon, to even further the want into going into these places and if a lvl 50 only did solo he would only at best be geared pretty much like a level 35 character that went to dungeon in groups. I also said to make dungeon mobs harder than open world to make it basically impossible to kill them solo til they gave no exp so the purpose of trying would be close to frustrating if not impossible.
I have laid out all these ideas compromises and people still haven't liked them even though to me anyway it a great compromise, it let's you do what you want to do at a price, either to sit around asking chat LFG, while possibly doing other things til you get a response, than get a group and get really good gear and feel awesome, or you realize time isn't on your side, simply not in the mode to group, or whatever reason (it could be a multitude of 1000 thibgs) and solo knowing your basically not going to find anything good, and the exp is going to suck, but at least you can get a little bit of something out of it til you have to log off.
And like I said at the end of the day, and at end level content the game would actually be harder since not a single character would be able to solo anything with much luck, unlike every single game out there. Including old EQ.
Riahuf22 said:Well, that was extreme, and honestly those weren't compromising features those were completely different features than what eq had. Compromising would be like Eq was pretty much a 100% grp base game, modern in solo, but instead of only having certain classes that can solo in Pantheon have it to where all of them can but it would be at targets 8-12 levels below them, this is considered a compromise not the crap you threw in that eq wasnt.
So you want solo content designed into the game. Gotcha.
You keep claiming otherwise, but then go ahead and state that exact thing again.
EQ didn't design solo content. As you point out above, EQ had some classes that could solo simply by emergent play. You however want ALL classes to be able to solo a specific range of mobs. So you want solo content designed into the game.
This isn't a compromise, this is you expecting modern MMO soloing in the game.
If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it is a duck.
Tanix said:Riahuf22 said:Well, that was extreme, and honestly those weren't compromising features those were completely different features than what eq had. Compromising would be like Eq was pretty much a 100% grp base game, modern in solo, but instead of only having certain classes that can solo in Pantheon have it to where all of them can but it would be at targets 8-12 levels below them, this is considered a compromise not the crap you threw in that eq wasnt.
So you want solo content designed into the game. Gotcha.
You keep claiming otherwise, but then go ahead and state that exact thing again.
EQ didn't design solo content. As you point out above, EQ had some classes that could solo simply by emergent play. You however want ALL classes to be able to solo a specific range of mobs. So you want solo content designed into the game.
This isn't a compromise, this is you expecting modern MMO soloing in the game.
If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it is a duck.
You look at it as designed solo content, but I would rather have it designed that way than, have classes in eq that are soloing well beyond their means, and killing target even to 5 levels above them with little difficulty, I mean seriously you act like eq had it all right but if people are simply snaring a target and walking it like a dog with dots on it, how exactly wad that hard it wasnt, so how about where you stop pretending eq didn't have design solo content when it obviously did
Now back to my orginal post if you badically cap the potential of soloing of targets than you will ultimately make a healthier game imo, you can nip tick it, you can say I want solo content, but if by having solo content, and by only doing solo content makes you so much weaker than the person next to you and you'd have to go back to lower dungeons just to get geared up slowly, than yeah I guess I do, becuade honestly if it took someone 20 month to get to max level by soloing did he really do anything that hindered you, no he didnt, so
And like I was saying if you can find a cap of soloing targets, and let's say this was based on a fresh level 50, and let's say the gane goes on and they become raided geared or at least well geared, that obviously bumps them up, and let's say the best soloing class can kill someone even con to them in open world, that would still mean by my standards they wouldn't be able to kill those dungeon mobs at those levels, or creep into lvl 40 zones getting gear solo due to NPCs able to aggro you regardless of level and making other target fight you as well, due to a organic mechanic.
@Tanix I would rather have all people have a chance to solo, than have some that couldn't and other that can kill reds by pretending to walk their dog, so we can back and forth on all of this all day but if certain classes can solo and others can't their will be a huge influx into going into that class and possibly playing a character they don't want to play but do simply becuase they want to solo, so honestly your way prevents nothing other than them picking another class, congratulations so instead of picking that warrior they wanted to be now they might go shaman just becuase it fits his playtime/will inestimable solo than the warrior did and ultimately made him be a class he wouldn't of picked but was forced to cuase the warrior couldn't solo, again congratulations.
Which hy the way is better than eq but not only can a necro/wizard or anything good soloers in eq they can actually go to the heart of a dungeon pull a named mobs of equal or higher level and kill him, sometimes easily sometimes not but nonetheless he dies, my way if done correctly would never happen which is a ton better imo, so like I said you can keep to eq standards I plan on playing a better gane
MyNegation said:Questaar said:For me the problem of high level farmers is simple. If the mob is grey the PC gets no exp or loot. Simple.
I think this is a good rule, it can be tweaked around like: every level above 'grey' is 10% less to the drop etc.
but generally this is a good solution and it doesn't break my immersion. and it is less "fake" than top level griefers farm lowbie areas.
Correct, for you. It is completely opposite for me. If VR goes the way some of you are suggesting, lower level mobs drop nothing, then they will be programming themselves right out of my bank account. I will not play this game. I will not pay cash again for a game that leads me around everywhere while pretending to be free roam. That is exactly what is being suggested here. Just gained a level? Well, you need to move on to the next spot, this one is useless.
Seeing a item on a mob, killing that mob, and the item not dropping because I am too high level? That is 'fake' and immersion breaking.