Within Terminus, your Guild won't mean **** to the world, or have any impact on the server. Terminus is MUCH bigger than you... any guild.. (read lore)
Coincidentally, Your Guild could "lock down" things in the past, because most developers had not developed in-depth natural worlds & laws. Upon Pantheon's release, there will probably be thousands of quests and hundreds of dungeons.. all unknown to everyone. With a server able to support 30k players, how is your guild going to lock anything down..?
That line of though is "in the past" thinking & we are many years past this. 64bit game world allows for dynamic content, which means you can't "lock down" random, or triggered, or geo-spawnable, content.
Hieromonk said:Within Terminus, your Guild won't mean **** to the world, or have any impact on the server. Terminus is MUCH bigger than you... any guild.. (read lore)
Coincidentally, Your Guild could "lock down" things in the past, because most developers had not developed in-depth natural worlds & laws. Upon Pantheon's release, there will probably be thousands of quests and hundreds of dungeons.. all unknown to everyone. With a server able to support 30k players, how is your guild going to lock anything down..?
That line of though is "in the past" thinking & we are many years past this. 64bit game world allows for dynamic content, which means you can't "lock down" random, or triggered, or geo-spawnable, content.
This is completely ridiculous speculation that has exactly zero grounding in any information the developers have published.
Hieromonk said:Within Terminus, your Guild won't mean **** to the world, or have any impact on the server. Terminus is MUCH bigger than you... any guild.. (read lore)
Coincidentally, Your Guild could "lock down" things in the past, because most developers had not developed in-depth natural worlds & laws. Upon Pantheon's release, there will probably be thousands of quests and hundreds of dungeons.. all unknown to everyone. With a server able to support 30k players, how is your guild going to lock anything down..?
That line of though is "in the past" thinking & we are many years past this. 64bit game world allows for dynamic content, which means you can't "lock down" random, or triggered, or geo-spawnable, content.
Hiero, I hope this is true, though I can't find any sources for size of the world, how many dungeons on release, how many players a server can hold.
If handled properly, instancing is not a bad mechanic. It just needs to be balanced carefully and not overdone. Within instancing you can have the fully separate zone for a specific purpose or you can have a sequestered area within a zone only reachable when certain criteria are met. The key is for its existence to make sense.
Haha I remember the old topic of the same subject on the last forum.
I was told I should quit pantheon and that its not the game for me, because of my view.
I am actually in favour for instanced dungeons and raids, due to the amount of trolling and bad behaviour you see in modern day mmorpgs and well gaming in general. It's not to say that I don't love open dungeons and raids along with world raid bosses but I just feel that people don't uphold themselves in the best light these days, and that there are too many people willing to troll and be rude in general that a server community wont be able to police itself effectively.
Why I find it funny that I was told I should leave pantheon as this game is not for me, is because I actually enjoy 99% of the older more traditional features, and would never condemn a game or quit a game over one or two features not meeting my likes, god knows the games we see these days have more dislikes than likes for me so I cannot wait to see a traditional mmorpg again. I'll enjoy the game with instances or without, I just hope that if we don't have instances the community can keep its self in check. Before we only had to deal with a small number of people acting up and the server was willing and ready to put people back in place, these days theres a great deal of people that find trolling there main focuse and when you end up getting so many of them it becomes the normal behaviour.
If we were to have instances I'd prefer they where kept at a minimum however, I can see it being used well for raiding to make sure that people cannot over zerg the content and make sure that the content keeps its challenge level as an example and dungeons or end of dungeon bosses. But again the only real reason I would want instancing, is because I've seen so many people misbehaving in games these days that I have a lack of faith in community policing. Does that justify adding a system to the game that will take away enjoyment for many I'm not sure, it has its pros and cons, people can have an enjoyable dungeon or raid encounter without the worry of trolling, but it also makes the world feel smaller.
Edit: Spelling & Format.
Edit extra info:
When I'm talking about instancing I don't just mean for a single party, it could scale depending on the intended challenge of the dungeon, such as allowing in 50 people before creating a new same dungeon, so it does not get over full. The number could be scaled by devs depending how hard or congested they want a dungeon to be. Please if this system is used, make sure there is always reserved slots so friends can easily join each other if they go in together.
Instancing copys Content and Loot, its an easy way to build a World for a random Ammount of Players. But it introduces almost unlimited Loot and Resources and a Way to avoid other Players and a lots of Ways to exploit the Game World. Even if you could fix this, it would still not feel like a coherent Game World ,.... to me,..... Instances are bad.
Its better to build a Game World for a certain Ammount of Players and create more Servers instead of Instances. This way Players cant easily exploit the Instances and the Game World starts to feel like a World where you cant avoid a camped Dungeon by just going to another Instance. The 1000000 Players per server attempt might be nice on Paper, but in the end you just feel insignificant. Just another worker Bee out there thats not what i want.
You cant be Friends with 1000000 Players anyway, 2000-4000 on a Server is more then enough to have Players to choose and find somone you like and it might even build a solid Community. VS 1000000 ppls in a Bee Hive.
Even Housing,.... my House is in Instance 234 on Domo City is not as cool as look my House is near that Dungeon on top of that Mountain if you visit that Dungeon check it out....by looking up there.
simply gonna drop this here
coined in EQ was the phrase"Your in our world now"
all this talk of instances is mute anyway they have all ready said no to it
they also said the rarest items will be from escalated group content so start at orc camp kill some random trigger suddenly gnolls who hate the orcs deside it's a good day to wipe them out orcs call their friends the ogres who join the fight and the gnolls call their friends the hill giants and we get to kill them all walking away with rare loot from the ogres or giants i am sure there are other examples
no need for instances when we will and can randomly trigger escalations sure there will be raid targets and quest targets to get to but it'll be months down the raod since we will be in VGI's world now :)
I'm against instancing... but some things have to be in place to stop guilds from monopolizing raid spawns.
Raid mob spawns every 3 days but gives a 6.5 day lockout timer when killed similar to Vanguard.
Most raid mobs are behind a whole zone of trash and/or some environmental effects that keep people from just rushing to it.
No COTH spells at all...
Honestly instead of picks I would just rather have more servers. Picks are fine for EQ at this point 15+ years later but for a brand new game like Pantheon I feel they would wreck my immersion.
Thanks again,
Kiz~
Instancing is always a funny one. On the whole I am against it as it splits the player base up and makes the world feel smaller. I'm glad that the developers have already said that they don't want to use instancing since it will ensure that people have to work together. The only time having non-instanced content is a little bit of a problem is when the game very first launches and it is very hard to find any mob up and able to be killed because there are just so many people in the newbie areas. Having an early access of about 3 days helps to spread out the population though so that it isn't such a problem and developers don't need to implement instancing to fix it.
In Vanguard I had early access to the game (I think it was either a 2 or 3 day head start) and it solved the problem really well. There was hardly any problems getting levels at the begining and by the time the rest of the population came online the early access players had out leveled the newbie areas.
How does everyone feel about EQ/Phinigel's solution to overpopulation? Additional "shards" of a zone will spawn when they reach a certain population point which allows you to use the /pickzone command to swap over to them.
This makes sure that everyone can experience the content without "hard" instancing.
Group and solo dungeons should be completely none instanced if groups get closed off and dungeons are instanced like many other games you have people join up together for the 30 minutes it takes to clear a dungeon (shorter in some games :( ) then disband to find another group for another dungeon.
Raids, I like it to be semi instanced. VG I felt did a very good job of this with APW. APW for those that don't know was the end-game raid dungeon. It had 4 wings. Each wing had 3 main bosses and 1-2 minor bosses (depending on their roaming path and if they were up). Each wing was increasingly harder then the next. This allowed for Casual raid guilds to get through the first wing, maybe part of the second for 4-6 total bosses and 1-3 mini bosses. A Core raid group could get through wings 2 and 3 and get 7-9 bosses and 2-4 mini bosses. Only the Hardcore serious raiders (after months of work) were ever able to get the final wing down and kill Kotasath (Spelling?).
This allowed for up to 3 raid groups to be in a single instance at a time without too much trouble. On our server, we knew what other raid groups were cable of, when they raided and what bosses they were after. This would allow us to coordinate with each other and find an instance that worked for us. I believe there were 4 instances on our server, and you could choose which instance number you wanted to go into by clicking on a lever. We would zone 1 person into each and do a quick "Anyone in the north wing" if no one answered we would send that person into the north wing to see if the mobs were up. The respawn on these Bosses
The respawn on these Bosses where 12 or 18 hours, can't remember exactly, but if you killed it you had a 5-7 day lockout on them so could only do the whole instance once per week. Then you had overland raid targets. The big Giant down on the island, Dresula (Spelling?) for the Gryphon quest etc. These guys spawned once ever 3-4 days and were highly contested by all raiding guilds capable of killing them.
A system for raiding like this allows for guilds to be able to plan raids 2-3 nights a week, once a week, 5 nights a week etc and have content to do. It also allows competitive raids to raise for some targets each week whether they spawn at 10am, 11pm or 3am and prove they are the better guild.
Hieromonk said:Within Terminus, your Guild won't mean **** to the world, or have any impact on the server. Terminus is MUCH bigger than you... any guild.. (read lore)
Coincidentally, Your Guild could "lock down" things in the past, because most developers had not developed in-depth natural worlds & laws. Upon Pantheon's release, there will probably be thousands of quests and hundreds of dungeons.. all unknown to everyone. With a server able to support 30k players, how is your guild going to lock anything down..?
That line of though is "in the past" thinking & we are many years past this. 64bit game world allows for dynamic content, which means you can't "lock down" random, or triggered, or geo-spawnable, content.
What exactly do you think 64 bit allows?? It isn't sme magically thing that makes games 10 million tmes better. Also bigger population means bigger guilds means let's lock it down still.
once again you lie and mislead trying to sound like you know something which also hurts people that read what yu say and take it for truth and then are disappointed. Answer posts with fact yu can back up lieing does nothing
Liav said:How does everyone feel about EQ/Phinigel's solution to overpopulation? Additional "shards" of a zone will spawn when they reach a certain population point which allows you to use the /pickzone command to swap over to them.
This makes sure that everyone can experience the content without "hard" instancing.
What I like about non-instanced games is that they 'feel' a lot more like simulated worlds. That's not to say I haven't enjoyed games that rely heavily on instancing, but it does have an effect on my perception of the environment. For that reason I'd like to see methods like this avoided if at all possible. This sort of crowding probably won't be an issue early on, since it sounds like servers are going to be split when they start to get overpopulated. It's going to be later when new content is released, which typically isn't as vast as the initial game world, where we'll see large populations getting funneled into areas that may not be able to support the crowds.
I'd rather see other mechanics introduced to handle this that don't rely on violating the contiguity of the game world, but I don't know exactly what those would be.
As for guilds that locked all the epic spawns down on a server for months on end, that happened on Xegony, I can even name the biggest perpetrator. I quit EQ out of disappointment and disgust, because nothing was being done about it. It shouldn't be that another player or players can stand in the way of my personal achievements. It just shouldn't be. Everyone pays their monthly sub, therefore equal opportunity to participate and achieve things. NO I am not asking to be given anything at all, just my fair chance to work toward my ingame goals. Hopefully the devs, don't allow non stop camping of certain spots such as epic spawns. Don't know how this can be fixed. AT THE SAME TIME I am NOT asking for instanced zones. Probably a difficult thing to be asking for....we'll see what they have to say about it if it matters to them.
CanadinaXegony said:As for guilds that locked all the epic spawns down on a server for months on end, that happened on Xegony, I can even name the biggest perpetrator. I quit EQ out of disappointment and disgust, because nothing was being done about it. It shouldn't be that another player or players can stand in the way of my personal achievements. It just shouldn't be. Everyone pays their monthly sub, therefore equal opportunity to participate and achieve things. NO I am not asking to be given anything at all, just my fair chance to work toward my ingame goals. Hopefully the devs, don't allow non stop camping of certain spots such as epic spawns. Don't know how this can be fixed. AT THE SAME TIME I am NOT asking for instanced zones. Probably a difficult thing to be asking for....we'll see what they have to say about it if it matters to them.
I never played Vanguard, but it sounds like it incorporated mechanics to combat this that didn't rely on instancing.
CanadinaXegony said:As for guilds that locked all the epic spawns down on a server for months on end, that happened on Xegony, I can even name the biggest perpetrator. I quit EQ out of disappointment and disgust, because nothing was being done about it. It shouldn't be that another player or players can stand in the way of my personal achievements. It just shouldn't be. Everyone pays their monthly sub, therefore equal opportunity to participate and achieve things. NO I am not asking to be given anything at all, just my fair chance to work toward my ingame goals. Hopefully the devs, don't allow non stop camping of certain spots such as epic spawns. Don't know how this can be fixed. AT THE SAME TIME I am NOT asking for instanced zones. Probably a difficult thing to be asking for....we'll see what they have to say about it if it matters to them.
The best way to combat this without doing instances all over is to do static spawns. In EQ you knew where the mob you needed would spawn so you would just farm that one PH. IN VG the mobs spawned in a general area and made it much harder for one person or one group to lock down something.
My point of view may be very WoW'ish but i have made very bad experience with non instanced content. I'm afraid that on servers with a higher population many people will not have a chance to see some raid bosses because this bosses are already killed when the people come back from work/school/whatever. In WoW the hardcore guilds farmed the raid bosses on cooldown. They had an 40 manned raid ready and waited for the respawn. I have seen that bosses only on vacation.
And i don't know how to solve the problem without instances. Hundreds of bosses spreaded over the world maybe? Oo
Greetings
EQ/Phinigel has what I would consider the absolute optimal system for all of their content honestly. I really don't want to poopsock Pantheon.
In regards to how to solve these problems. Simple answer is always lockouts and flagging and triggering. Things like this.
Lockouts: Anyone involved in killing a named (no matter if they got a drop or not) is locked from getting drops from that mob for say 48-72 hours per mob (not universal).
Flagging: Anytime someone wants to gain access to the area in which a named resides they have to undergo a 12-24 hour long epic quest.
Triggering: Farming a rare drop item and using it to force pop a named.
In FFXI that triggering one worked well in 2 different Endgame zones that held 9 to 13 Named each but because they were open world also had healthy but not impossible competition for the pop items. Look up FFXIs SKY and SEA on Alakazam if interested. The trick to these though would be keeping them relevant enough that the open world competiton remains while having the area and number of named numerous enough that a couple of guilds cant have everything locked down 24/7. My Linkshell (Guild) would usually be lucky to get kill a God every 2 days and more likely every 3 days. Not from a hard lockout but due to competition for the pop items which were gotten from other named in the zone.
Dreconic said:Group and solo dungeons should be completely none instanced if groups get closed off and dungeons are instanced like many other games you have people join up together for the 30 minutes it takes to clear a dungeon (shorter in some games :( ) then disband to find another group for another dungeon.
Raids, I like it to be semi instanced. VG I felt did a very good job of this with APW. APW for those that don't know was the end-game raid dungeon. It had 4 wings. Each wing had 3 main bosses and 1-2 minor bosses (depending on their roaming path and if they were up). Each wing was increasingly harder then the next. This allowed for Casual raid guilds to get through the first wing, maybe part of the second for 4-6 total bosses and 1-3 mini bosses. A Core raid group could get through wings 2 and 3 and get 7-9 bosses and 2-4 mini bosses. Only the Hardcore serious raiders (after months of work) were ever able to get the final wing down and kill Kotasath (Spelling?).
This allowed for up to 3 raid groups to be in a single instance at a time without too much trouble. On our server, we knew what other raid groups were cable of, when they raided and what bosses they were after. This would allow us to coordinate with each other and find an instance that worked for us. I believe there were 4 instances on our server, and you could choose which instance number you wanted to go into by clicking on a lever. We would zone 1 person into each and do a quick "Anyone in the north wing" if no one answered we would send that person into the north wing to see if the mobs were up. The respawn on these BossesThe respawn on these Bosses where 12 or 18 hours, can't remember exactly, but if you killed it you had a 5-7 day lockout on them so could only do the whole instance once per week. Then you had overland raid targets. The big Giant down on the island, Dresula (Spelling?) for the Gryphon quest etc. These guys spawned once ever 3-4 days and were highly contested by all raiding guilds capable of killing them.
A system for raiding like this allows for guilds to be able to plan raids 2-3 nights a week, once a week, 5 nights a week etc and have content to do. It also allows competitive raids to raise for some targets each week whether they spawn at 10am, 11pm or 3am and prove they are the better guild.
Close on spelling, Kotasoth was the end Dragon in APW. The giant in the North on Island was Jagund "The Wave Breaker", You also had Fengrot "fowl breath", Dresula was the wyvern queen in Qualia and and she had good loot and was part of the wyvern mount quest. You got the egg from her. I don't remember the caster mob in Kojan. Qualia also had Guar and another roarmer giant that you really had to spawn by killing his ph he dropped a nice caster drop. There was also another in Thestra Vadraad or some such nother brother to fengrot and jagund had a cool sword or dagger that had a bunch of skulls on it.
In apw you got locked out of the mob like you said still had to kill the trash named turned green after kill and you couldnt even engage them.
I could probably come up with at least 10 solutions that you could leverage instead of instancing. You could have one raid boss place a curse periodically throughout the battle, after a day or so the curse makes everyone vulnerable to dark magic for 7 days which would be that raid bosses main source of damage. You could put some raid bosses with guards that don't aggro, but once the raid boss is killed they would become aggro for a set time period to those that slayed the raid boss and would be an added challange if that group decided to do it again. You could raid bosses in locked rooms where only one key per server is ever available once used it or after a certain amount of days ot poofs and can be re-aquired as a random drop off different lower teir raid bosses. There are tons of solutions, instancing is just lazy.
Liav said:How does everyone feel about EQ/Phinigel's solution to overpopulation? Additional "shards" of a zone will spawn when they reach a certain population point which allows you to use the /pickzone command to swap over to them.
This makes sure that everyone can experience the content without "hard" instancing.
EQ2 had the same mechanic whereby a new version of a zone would spawn once the current version reached a certain population. It proved to be very easy to exploit.
If you had a large guild, you would pile into a zone until it triggered v2. Then you all piled into v2 until v3 spawned and then you would start moving some people in v3 to see if you could spawn v4. V2 would soon despawn because it was empty. You'd leave 1 person behind in v3 while you try and trigger v5. Leave 1 person in v4 and work to trigger v6. If you had enough players, you could make any number of copies of a zone which you would then divide your people amongst them so each zone had only 1-2 groups in it. Because you had a gap of despawned zones, anytime the original zone triggered a new zone it would always be in that empty zone gap. Your guild could enjoy their zones all to themselves nearly all day.
Lock out times on raid bosses in open world wont work in modern gaming. Guilds will still kill that boss every time it spawns to prevent other guilds being able to keep up or over take the number 1 raiding position on that server, even if they don't get loot they will be doing it to make sure they stay on top. This is what worries me about the current generation of gaming its "cool" to troll and be an idiot. Yes we hope that servers can police themselves but really, when you have guilds in the top tier willing to generally just out right be rude it becomes very hard to police, let alone when many people these days will defend their behaviour.
This is what worries me in general and its the only reason I would agree with instances, it's kinda sad that things like this happen but it is a very real situation these days. If there where good ways to manage these problems without instances I'd be more than happy to never see an instance ever again. I hope the Pantheon team can come up with some ways to combat this.
If you made it so raid bosses could not be seen by people that had already killed it for X days it could work but that is not much diffrent than instance content over all.
Edit: Spelling as usual.