| |
Site Navigation
Main
News
Forums
Games
Games Database
Top 100
Release List
Support Files
Features
Reviews
Previews
Interviews
Editorials
Diaries
Misc
Download
Gallery
Music
Screenshots
Videos
Miscellaneous
Staff Members
Privacy Statement
|
|
|
|
SirDeity
Gothic's Loyal Hero
Joined: 14 Jan 2002
Posts: 602
Location: Maine, USA |
| Does my ideal game exist??? |
|
I used to play Everquest. I played since the very start, up until a few months ago. I was founder of a huge guild, with 175+ members. I was leader for of that guild for almost 3 years. I actually founded two guilds, on different servers. I had a level 60 Wizard, a level 60 Warrior, a level 53 Cleric, and a couple other mid ranged characters. I am an experienced veteran of Everquest.
How do I feel about the game? Frankly, it's a huge disappointment. It was a dream come true the first year or so. Everything was only one step away from perfection...
Then the game started releasing expansion after expansion... With each expansion, came new and easier to obtain items. I remember working hard, gathering money by porting all day long for months at a time. I'd save up enough money to buy something really great. Then an expansion would come out, and the value of the 10kpp item would drop to 2pp. Level 20 newbies would have better inventory than my 2 year old level 60 characters because MOBS from the new expansions would have common items better than the previous rare items. This was the norm, and it was very frustrating. Bottom line, the expansions being released made the game VERY unbalanced; a living hell for those who were there from the beginning.
The most frustrating thing, however, was that the game is designed so soloing is an act of suicide. The lagg isn't all that bad, but it does exist. With lagg, and the understanding that some people like to hunt on their own once in a while, it was a truly painful experience to gain experience points by soloing. The game is time consuming already, forcing characters to find a group of other characters before one can hunt with reasonable safety is not nice. Granted, soloing is "possible" in some locations at "some" levels as a Druid, and occasionally a Wizard too. What about the Warriors? Warriors need some love too!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The only other MMORPG I've played is DAoC (Dark Age of Camelot.) Unfortunately, I did not play this game long enough to discover all its flaws. I played for about one month. The lack of visual appeal and graphics design pushed me away. I found it wasn't engaging enough. The game itself seemed to be an ancient version of EQ. The only good thing I can say about it, is I was actually able to solo. Then again, I was only lvl 7. Even in EQ, you can solo past level 7. It's the game as a whole which matters to me, not the introduction. (I was told by some upper level friends, like in EQ, in the mid to upper levels it isn't very common/safe to solo.
I'm searching for a game that will allow me to solo for experience points whenever I want. No more mandatory grouping. Having to rely on other people to enjoy a game is not enjoyable at all. It's understandable that 6 people can kill a MOB a lot faster than 1, but if the experience points are shared properly, it can be possible to gain experience points just as fast soloing as it is to group.
For example: if a single character solo kills a certain mob and gains 60 experience points, then it would make sense that a group of 6, having the ability to kill that same mob a lot faster as 6 people instead of one, should gain only 10 experience points each per kill. The experience points should be split up. That way, it's possible to solo by yourself and still gain experience points just as fast as with a full group of 6. --Something like this would be an ideal gameplay design. (Of course there would be certain areas or certain mobs where you can't solo, but as long as there are plenty of mobs balanced out for soloing, it would be great.) Another big issue I had with EQ, is that the really special rare items would only be dropped off mobs that requires several groups of people to kill. This isn't a bad idea, it's the fact that rare items of great value ONLY drop of these unsoloable mobs that frustrated me. People who choose to make a life of soloing instead of grouping deserve to have some possibility of obtaining rare items by killing mobs by themselves.
The game also needs to be at least as visually appealing as Everquest was. It would be nice if there was actually better graphics/visual performance. The game needs to have rare items, the ability to gain levels by gathering experience points, the OPTION of grouping with other players, and fairly appealing gameplay. (I was doing some research on Asheron's Call 2, but discovered it's another big dissapointment to most people due to it's terrible lagg, buggy system which allows unfair gameplay; cheating, non-existant storyline, and extremely limited gameplay options; only a few specializations.)
Which MMORPG would you recommend? The above comments are ideal, they are not required. The more similar to what I said, the better your recommendation. The most important thing to me is visuals and the ability to gain experience points at equal efficiency to grouping. Am I ahead of the MMORPG world? Are there even any MMORPG games that offer all the things I'm looking for? Do you think there will be any really great ones released soon? Asheron's Call 2 is still very new. Perhaps it will improve greatly as soon as some patches have been released.
P.S. The future game, World of Warcraft, MMORPG looks like it's going to be amazing!
_________________
I am the founder and former leader of a guild in EQ, retired member of The Code in EQ, original member of KOE in AOE2, past Corporal of EVO in MOHAA, respected veteran of UT 2003, a conquerer of all decent games, and an aspiring game developer.
Gothic's Loyal Hero, SirDeity |
Sun Feb 16, 2003 4:19 am |
|
|
Zakhal
Captain of the Guard
Joined: 13 Oct 2002
Posts: 188
|
Well, the next holy grail of online gaming is SWG. They say its not everquest in space. Thats true, its UO in space. Which though is not necesserily bad at all. If it flops i guess people start to wait WoW.
My gaming experience. 1-2 years playing various muds that were mostly like everquest killing mobs solo and group for exp and eq. Six months UO, before getting tired of it. AO seven days. Return to UO 3rd dawn, two weeks and after that swear never to play UO again. Between those games ive played ww2ol for a month or two. Its always fun for a while.
Daoc, E&B, TSO, AC2, etc i read all the pvp and rp bias about them in teh boards and i saw how boring they really were and no reason to even try.
Well, for now ive tested shadowbane for two months and its bin the first game for all this time that has bin able to keep its fun factor. The biggest reason to this is the challenging and meaningful gameplay. Not to forget the freedom of the world, no artificial pvp or other rules.
My dream game is Adellion. A permadeath true roleplaying mmog.
After playing one pd mud for few weeks i can say it was the most amazing experience ever. (Firax) Only reason i didnt continue was cos i just cant be bothered with text-games anymore.
And no i wasnt killed in it not once. I had a wife, two kids, farm, ox, shop and small house on the praerie. Wife and two kids were real players too. My hours ingame went by with beveridge on the local, fishing, investigating certain stuff, managing our shop, doing som farming etc. There was no mobs to kill at all. It was simply amazing. |
|
Sun Feb 16, 2003 10:08 am |
|
|
Ican
Captain of the Guard
Joined: 16 Feb 2003
Posts: 185
Location: UK |
I share many of the same grievances and frustrations about MMROPG's as you do. I started off playing, what seems like years ago now, with Meridian59, which was a fantastic experience. The online community was still fairly small then, and most individuals were civil and looking to create a great gaming atmosphere.
After 2 years of tranquility the "technojerks" began to creep onto the MMROPG scene and changed the landscape irrevocably. Cheating, player bashing and other forms of abuse became rife, and as newer generations of MMROPGs were developed these problems/players became an increasingly significant burden.
In my opinion, I believe that the "technojerks" are now almost in the majority, and it is to them that the games companies pay homage. This leaves the traditionalist RPGer high and dry, and unfortunately I cannot see this situation changing in the foreseeable future. It's somewhat ironic, that what makes MMROPGs great , that is the interaction between thousands of players, is also its worst enemy.
It is the undesirable populace that exists in today's MMROPGs that makes people, like me and you, want to have an option for good solo experience in our online activities ( not just because it can take so long to find a good group). But, we are the minority now .... the game industry does not care. They make their money from powergamers and griefers, and so long as they continue to do so, will not make their new MMROPGs cater to a different demographic. In short then , there is not an MMROPG presently, that caters to your tastes, and unlikely ever will be, sadly. |
|
Sun Feb 16, 2003 11:12 am |
|
|
SirDeity
Gothic's Loyal Hero
Joined: 14 Jan 2002
Posts: 602
Location: Maine, USA |
Thank you for your posts. To the first poster, my only comment is to please not use so many abbreviations. It was really hard for me to follow you, having to pause every 5 seconds to figure out which game title you were abbreviating. I think I figured most of them out, but I don't think most people would be so lucky. I do appreciate your post, nonetheless. Thank you Zakhal.
To the last poster, I also appreciate your comments. However, I do disagree on one aspect. What you and I have in common; the desire to have soloing be equally efficient and practical as grouping, is also a desire many others have. Towards the end of my EQ life, I would commonly share my frustrations with friends from the adventure. Most of them agree'd with me. I beleive most experienced MMORPG players want what we want. I also believe, it's only a short matter of time before a great, well-balanced, MMORPG is released ---assuming there isn't already one. The MMORPG industry is flourishing. I think MMORPG gaming is going to dominate the PC gaming industry within the next 5-10 years. if you click on the "Release List" you'll notice there is a HUGE amount of MMORPG being made. I'm sure there are a LOT more MMORPG's being made than what is listed there. I believe, it's only a matter of time before the majority of MMORPG fans are declared true MMORPG veterans and demand some of the same aspects you and I would desire in an MMORPG. Games like World of Warcraft, being still in development, have a chance to adapt to the quickly evolving MMORPG world. The reason why I have faith in World of Warcraft, is because Blizzard has ALWAYS delivered brilliantly, and has always remained at the top of the gaming industry. World of Warcraft could, of course, be a complete failure. I'm mostly concerned with what you believe will be the next best thing in the MMORPG industry (best = closest to what you and I demand from an MMORPG.)
I honestly believe, if MMORPG's were made according to our ideal perspectives, it would literally root out close to 70% of all account cancellations. Therefore, increase the MMORPG profits by almost 30%. Think about it, no one could ever complain of boredom. If you didn't feel like spending an hour finding a group, go off someplace by yourself and hunt. Or go explore places you haven't been, without having to worry about being killed instantly because you don't have an entire guild by your side.
Here is a great example: In Warcraft 3 (not an MMORPG), NPC MOBS will only attack you if you get so close to them. You always have the option of running though. You run a certain distance, and the NPC MOB loses interest in you. If this were true in an MMORPG, no more having to run for three hours trying to find the zone entrance. No more needing to print 100's of maps off the internet just so you'll be able to travel around with minimal confidence. Some poeple might think this idea might take away from the AI intelligence or realism of the game. Well, think about it, would an orc really chase human for 5 hours, non-stop just because he doesn't like the way you look or smell? I could see if you murdered his brother first, but if your traveling around minding your own business, even if your not a friendly faction, why have to run without end to get away. This aspect alone would make soloing a LOT easier, and traveling a LOT more fun.
Picture this: Your in a new zone, it's beautiful, you feel like everyone should come here because it looks so amazing, but, wait, here comes a mob and it's going to kill you because you've been so taken in by the visualizations of the zone that you lose your bearings and can't remember which way you came from. Now you realize that none of your lower level friends can come here because it's too dangerous, and once you enter, you'd better automatically (magically) know your way around or else your screwed. The MOB attacking you is 4 levels lower than you, but you can't kill it because at your level, MOBS that give exp are designed to die ONLY by the blades of several. If your a caster, sure it might be possible to kill the MOB if your extremely lucky, but how long will it take? 35 minutes of rooting, nuking, rooting, nuking... hrmm, thats fun... How much exp will you gain in an hour doing this? ..about 40 exp? Everyone in the group next to you has gained seven levels while you haven't even gained one. Blanced? I think not! The only MOBS you can solo at your level with reasonable safety, are ones that offer NO exp, whatsoever. Now you've managed to escape after 4 hours of running around looking for the zone entrance. You go back into the zone, feeling more confident that you'll remember where the entrance is this time. You go back near the group you saw hunting nearby, but, what are they doing? They are rolling an item worth more currency than everything you own combined. Could you have gotten that item by yourself? NO! Understandable? Maybe... Are there mobs you can solo and get items of equal value? Hell no! Rare items drop only from mobs that can only be kills by those who prefer to travel in groups. Now you realize, if you ever want to go site seeing again; if you ever want to enjoy the visual aspects of the game, you'd better hire about 5 high level people to escort you on your exploration. How much will it cost? ONLY LAST MONTHS SAVINGS! ---Sounds like a nightmare eh? I don't think it will be the way MMORPG's are designed for long. The rare items idea, will probably never change. I do believe the ability to travel without ever having to worry about dying, will be possible soon. I also believe that if a player "chooses" to solo instead of group. He'll be able to gain levels just as fast as a member in the full group next to him.
These are mostly my opinions. Please keep sharing yours. It's an interesting topic. It also helps pass time before Gothic 2 comes out! =)
Thank for your posts, please continue to post. Let me know what you think will happen.
P.S. Check out the Release List. (MMORPG's)
_________________
I am the founder and former leader of a guild in EQ, retired member of The Code in EQ, original member of KOE in AOE2, past Corporal of EVO in MOHAA, respected veteran of UT 2003, a conquerer of all decent games, and an aspiring game developer.
Gothic's Loyal Hero, SirDeity |
|
Mon Feb 17, 2003 3:20 am |
|
|
Hexy
High Emperor
Joined: 28 Jun 2002
Posts: 621
|
Uh, why would people group if soloing was as good as grouping?
Why should a dragon (group required) drop loot equally to an orc (soloable)?
Sure soloing should be a bit more efficient, yes. But it should NOT be as good as grouping. Why? Soloing is easier than grouping, plus why do you play an MMORPG if you're only going to solo?
From EQ, I remember that almost any class except maybe warriors could solo, even at higher levels.
_________________
Like some bold seer in a trance;
Seeing all his own mischance |
|
Mon Feb 17, 2003 6:12 am |
|
|
SirDeity
Gothic's Loyal Hero
Joined: 14 Jan 2002
Posts: 602
Location: Maine, USA |
Why should people group if soloing is just as efficient?? A lot of people simply prefer to group. It's more fun to group with people sometimes. Not ALL the time though. There should be certain mobs that can only be killed with groups, but not all. Certain zones should be classified as grouping zones. While others should be classified as soloing zones.
Rare items on soloable mobs also? Obviously the odds of getting a rare item when soloing would be even less likely, hence, well balanced.
For example: A full group of 6 people should have a 6X greater likelihood of getting a rare item of equal value to the item a soloable MOB might drop. The likelihood of a rare item dropping would be based on two things, instead of one. It would be based on the number of people who contributed to the MOB's death, and on the value of the item.
Elaboration: The likelihood of a rare item dropping has always been based on it's value. I suggest including the amount of people who contributed to the MOBS destruction to be taken into account, so that the game would be perfectly balanced whether the mob dies by means of soloing or grouping.
It all makes perfect sense. It's a flawless design. You understand? MMORPG games weren't originally inpired by the idea that players should always group up. It was inspired by the idea that players "share" a reality or world in which they virtually exist. The option of soloing and grouping whenever desired, would open up a whole new aspect to MMORPG's.
Don't look at it as a limitation, instead, open your eyes and see it as a fair addition to MMORPG realism.
I played EQ from the start. It's not very practical to solo at higher levels. It is NOT possible to solo for XP as certain classes at some levels. I've played every class there is. The game is clearly designed to persuade players to group. It's not balanced for soloing ---it's something that's not debatable.
_________________
I am the founder and former leader of a guild in EQ, retired member of The Code in EQ, original member of KOE in AOE2, past Corporal of EVO in MOHAA, respected veteran of UT 2003, a conquerer of all decent games, and an aspiring game developer.
Gothic's Loyal Hero, SirDeity |
|
Mon Feb 17, 2003 6:49 am |
|
|
Traban
Village Dweller
Joined: 17 Feb 2003
Posts: 4
|
| soloing for the exp=to 6 players and the loot that goes with |
|
soloing cannot be made easier as far as exp it's an mmorpg where grouping is ideal but soloing should be an OPTION if you wish to solo good but receive a slight penelty and more down time if you need cash you have to farm like everyone else.It's impact+dynamic= economy yeah groups make more loot than you but that loot is divded by 6 people .if everyone could solo to get that uber l33t what ever yah wanna call it item then you wouldnt need a group then every one in zone would rush the mob "oh i want the shiny toilet seat of thunder". Ive been broke my whole career and ive learned to save for what i need yeah i see people whose twinks are better equiped than my main does it suck? YES.
There are two MAJOR(there are much more ) drawback's and only two of them fall on the casual player . with the release of pop soloing has become impossible passed 62 unless your willing to kill half the zone doing it .2 there are so few zone in which the exp isnt mind numbing there isnt enough space for all the groups which =over crowding. Gotta remeber if they add a little to the soloers side of the game play they take alot away from the groupers.
Now as far as items there is a ideal way for soloers to get items they have started toying with the idea remember the newbie quests they implemented about 6 months ago well somthing like that but make the mobs higher lvls include semi rare to rare spawns BUT make the item worth the effort that the soloer put into it .no need to put about 3days rl time into somthing that will be obselte by the next expansion.
As far as my ideas they are just that ideas but your idea of better exp for soloing and a great loot from mobs that you can solo it would be way to unbalancing. see if you can do just aswell on your own as i do in a group why would i take the risk of /roll on a piece of loot when i could have soloed it my self hence why group. |
|
Mon Feb 17, 2003 6:57 am |
|
|
SirDeity
Gothic's Loyal Hero
Joined: 14 Jan 2002
Posts: 602
Location: Maine, USA |
Your clearly not comprehending what I'm trying to suggest. I'll elaborate further. Read the below text very slowly and carefully.
I would like to elaborate on two KEY plans. I believe similar systems, in effect, would set the standards for all MMORPG games for the future; these systems would revolutionize MMORPG design.
Experience System (ES):
Experience should be awarded to players in two ways:
- Killing MOBS within a certain range of levels. This range of levels should be determined by the level of your character.
- Completing Quests. There should be individual quests appropriate for all levels, and all classes. There should be focus quests, and general quests.
" Experience should be well-balanced, and well-distributed. "
How experience is distributed should depend on:
MOB:
- The amount of people in the same group as the person who got the kill. (EX: If the person who got the kill is in a group of (6), then since (6) people can kill a certain MOB (6X) faster, than each member in the group should receive (6X) less experience per kill.)
Quest:
- The level of difficulty of the quest in question; probability of completion. The harder the quest, the larger the experience rewarded.
Dropping System (DS):
Items should be broken up into (4) or more groups:
- Common items should drop most frequently. These items should be mostly used to sell, thereby, providing a way of obtaining currency.
- Rare items should drop only on rare occasions, and/or at the completion of a difficult quest. The more valuable the item, the rarer the occasion, or the more difficult the quest.
- Unique Items should drop with near impossible odds. The liklihood of obtaining a unique item should be similar to the likelihood of winning your state lottery. The more unique the item, the lower the likelihood of it dropping. Unique items should be considered the most prized items of all.
- Event Items should drop or be rewarded at the completion of a GM or planned event. These items should be priceless; not necessarily "better" than any other item. They should be one-of-a-kind items which have no market value.
" Items should never be made obsolete by adding easier to obtain items. "
Likelihood of obtaining items should be based on:
MOB:
- The amount of people who contributed to the killing of the MOB in question, starting from the time the MOB was last recorded as being at 100% health. This way, a MOB that might drop a unique item of great value, which requires more than one full group of people to kill, will have an appropriate chance of dropping. (EX: If a full group of (6) attacks a certain MOB, the MOB should have (6X) greater chance of dropping the rare item in question.) NOTE: Most MOBS killable by a full group, should also be reasonably soloable by one person. The likelihood of obtaining the rare item is lowest when the MOB in question is killed by a single(1) person.
Quest:
- Most quests should offer a variety rewards. The greater the value of the reward, the lower the likelihood of the item being given as a reward. This way players can't take advantage of a quest they've already done, and do it over and over again to obtain the desired item for sale. The desired item should, in most cases, be a matter of chance. (Instead of receiving the same item everytime the quest is completed, you should have a certain likelihood of receiving one of several randomly appropriate items; appropriate for the difficulty of the quest.
I hope everything here is clear and comrehendible. It's a flawless design idea. If I explained it correctly, I'm sure you'll agree.
_________________
I am the founder and former leader of a guild in EQ, retired member of The Code in EQ, original member of KOE in AOE2, past Corporal of EVO in MOHAA, respected veteran of UT 2003, a conquerer of all decent games, and an aspiring game developer.
Gothic's Loyal Hero, SirDeity |
|
Mon Feb 17, 2003 8:39 am |
|
|
SirDeity
Gothic's Loyal Hero
Joined: 14 Jan 2002
Posts: 602
Location: Maine, USA |
Just in case you are not able to find the answer to your question yourself. I'll answer it for you. What would stop everyone from just soloing everything for rare items? The likelihood of the rare item dropping when being soloed would be a LOT lower than if more people were to contribute to the MOB's death. If (6) people kill a MOB, the item not only has a (6X) greater chance of dropping, but as a member in the group you've also got a 1/6 chance of getting the item.
Look at it like this:
A certain MOB has a 1/120 chance of dropping a rare item. This means, you have to kill the MOB an average of 120 times in order for the item to drop once. That pre-design dropping rate is based on the assumption that only one person contributes to the death of the MOB.
However, let's say (6) people contribute to killing the very same mob. Instead of having a 1/120 chance of dropping the rare item, the mob now has a 1/20 chance of dropping the item. This now means that for every 20 kills (with a group of 6), the MOB will drop the item once.
You see the difference? See why it's now balanced? It's perfectly fair now. Just ask yourself, which would you do? I'll tell you what I would prefer to do. I would MUCH rather take my chances with a group and POSSIBLY get the rare item within 20 kills, rather than try to solo/farm for the item and POSSIBLY get the item after a whopping 120 kills!
Generally, soloing a mob for rare items would take a LOT longer than in a group. However, EXP wise, soloing and grouping is completely fair, because the EXP is split up according to the amount of people in the group.
I strongly suggest you thoroughly read my previous post. Those two systems are flawless. Peroid! 
_________________
I am the founder and former leader of a guild in EQ, retired member of The Code in EQ, original member of KOE in AOE2, past Corporal of EVO in MOHAA, respected veteran of UT 2003, a conquerer of all decent games, and an aspiring game developer.
Gothic's Loyal Hero, SirDeity |
|
Mon Feb 17, 2003 8:54 am |
|
|
SirDeity
Gothic's Loyal Hero
Joined: 14 Jan 2002
Posts: 602
Location: Maine, USA |
One more comment. Just in case your sitting there wondering, "What if a guild decides they want to gather together and farm for all the lower level characters?" In other words, what is to stop 30 people from taking one swing each at a mob in hopes of dramatically increasing the probability of the rare item dropping. The answer is simple. Depending on the difficulty of the mob, it should have a "probability cap," or limitation.
For example:
Let's use the MOB with the 1/120 dropping rate in this example. If 30 people hit the mob once, and it dies at the last hit, your thinking the mob is now guaranteed to drop on the first kill. WRONG! The best possible dropping probability for this particular MOB should be 1/20 ---since it's the smallest fraction. (1/10 for example would imply 6+1/2 people hit the MOB, which is obviously not possible)
The more difficult the MOB, the greater the effect a massive attack will have. MOBS that are not designed to be attacked by more than one full group at once, will not be subject influence by more than the appropriate number of people.
"Flawless..."
_________________
I am the founder and former leader of a guild in EQ, retired member of The Code in EQ, original member of KOE in AOE2, past Corporal of EVO in MOHAA, respected veteran of UT 2003, a conquerer of all decent games, and an aspiring game developer.
Gothic's Loyal Hero, SirDeity |
|
Mon Feb 17, 2003 9:04 am |
|
|
Hexy
High Emperor
Joined: 28 Jun 2002
Posts: 621
|
....
_________________
Like some bold seer in a trance;
Seeing all his own mischance |
|
Mon Feb 17, 2003 4:28 pm |
|
|
SirDeity
Gothic's Loyal Hero
Joined: 14 Jan 2002
Posts: 602
Location: Maine, USA |
You don't understand.
There should be two types of MOBS. MOBS intended for one person or one full group. And MOBS intended for "raids," (more than one full group.)
In other words: If a full group consists of six people, a MOB designed to be killable by only 6 people, should also be soloable by one.
On the other hand, a MOB designed to be killable ONLY by MORE than 6 people, should NOT be solable by one person. This would make it impossible for a single person to go kill NAGGY and claim all the loot for himself.
Do you understand now?
_________________
I am the founder and former leader of a guild in EQ, retired member of The Code in EQ, original member of KOE in AOE2, past Corporal of EVO in MOHAA, respected veteran of UT 2003, a conquerer of all decent games, and an aspiring game developer.
Gothic's Loyal Hero, SirDeity |
|
Mon Feb 17, 2003 4:54 pm |
|
|
Hexy
High Emperor
Joined: 28 Jun 2002
Posts: 621
|
quote:
Originally posted by SirDiety
You don't understand.
There should be two types of MOBS. MOBS intended for one person or one full group. And MOBS intended for "raids," (more than one full group.)
In other words: If a full group consists of six people, a MOB designed to be killable by only 6 people, should also be soloable by one.
On the other hand, a MOB designed to be killable ONLY by MORE than 6 people, should NOT be solable by one person. This would make it impossible for a single person to go kill NAGGY and claim all the loot for himself.
Do you understand now?
I thought ALL MOBS were to be soloable, but by enhancing the droprate of items, you would make grouping a desirability.
Anyway, why should a MOB that require six level 50 characters also be soloable by a single lvl 50 character?
Maybe if the MOB required six level 35 characters or something like that it could be soloable by a level 50.
See where I'm going?
There's much to think about, for example: level progression and such.
Who would win, a party of semi powerful character or a single powerful character? It's all in how you want to design the game.
_________________
Like some bold seer in a trance;
Seeing all his own mischance |
|
Mon Feb 17, 2003 7:52 pm |
|
|
SirDeity
Gothic's Loyal Hero
Joined: 14 Jan 2002
Posts: 602
Location: Maine, USA |
Not all MOBS should be soloable. All MOBS intended for experience should be soloable. In other words, certain MOBS should exist purely for their rare item. That does not mean you can only obtain a rare item from a unsoloable MOB. It just emphasizes that there are two types of MOBS, but the one intended for experience points (the common MOB type), should be soloable.
Here's your quote:
"Anyway, why should a MOB that require six level 50 characters also be soloable by a single lvl 50 character?"
Here's my response:
Why not? If the experience is balanced, but the dropping rate is favored by the group of people, it's perfectly balanced. Sure, people would solo a LOT more often than in EQ. Would more people solo than group? Absolutely not. Grouping is fun most the time, just not ALL the time.
I'll elaborate one last time. If this doesn't explain it good enough for you, then I'm afraid you just can't comprehend it. I appreciate your questions. I hope you can understand the system after reading this post though.
Here is the "elaboration:"
For the sake of argument, I'll present some common questions to my recommendations.
Question: Why would people group if soloing was equally efficient for obtaining items?
Response: People have a higher likelihood of obtaining good loot when in groups. The larger the group, the better the chance of a drop. Rare or unique items will be more likely to drop, according to the number of people who contribute to the MOBS death.
Example: A certain MOB has a 1/120 chance of dropping a rare item. This means, you have to kill the MOB an average of 120 times in order for the item to drop once. That pre-design dropping rate is based on the assumption that only one person contributes to the death of the MOB.
However, let's say (6) people contribute to killing the very same mob. Instead of having a 1/120 chance of dropping the rare item, the mob now has a 1/20 chance of dropping the item. This now means that for every 20 kills (with a group of 6), the MOB will drop the item at least once.
Answer: Just ask yourself, which would you do? I'll tell you what I would prefer to do. I would MUCH rather take my chances with a group of 6 and POSSIBLY get the rare item within 20 kills, rather than try to solo/farm for the item and POSSIBLY get the item after a whopping 120 kills!
Question: Why would people group if soloing was equally efficient for obtaining experience?
Response: Since grouping and soloing will be equally balanced for obtaining experience, which is better is mostly dependant on the mood of the person playing. There are several factors which may or may not influence the average player's decision: Time, Joy, Friends/Allies, Inventory, Currency, Popularity, and Visual Appeal.
Time: If a person has a very limited time to play, whether it be the average amount of time he/she can devote in general, or just an unfortunate, overwhelming desire to spend those last few minutes before school or work playing the game.
Example: Instead of signing on your account, and spending those last 10 minutes first thing in the morning trying to find a group so that you can enjoy the game before work, you now have the option of signing on and soloing for fun. Not being required to spend that 10 minutes entirely on finding a group to join, would allow players to get some quick enjoyment from the game whenever a busy schedule leaves you with a time deficiency. (A lot of people retire from games like EQ because of a tight schedule, in which an inefficient amount of time prevents members from being able to enjoy the hunting aspect of the game.)
Joy: Change is important to people. Just having the option of soloing would promote a greater sense of realism, freedom, and motivation to remain a part of the game. Everyone likes to be alone sometimes, alone in the virtual world, and alone in the real world. Everyone has times when they're able to derive more enjoyment from being alone. The same goes for not being alone.
Example: You've been grouping with friends and/or strangers everyday for the last few weeks. Your tired of the occasional arguments, bickering, and/or the same old routine day after day. Soloing for a while would be the perfect solution to this very common issue.
Friends/Allies: Friends or Allies often times prefer to hunt with each other. It's a common pattern in any MMORPG game. When your with a friend or ally, you might have a feeling of satefy you might not otherwise have. You might have a feeling of enhanced satisfaction when defeating MOBS. Most great things, whether it be a triumph over the enemy, or a treasured experience of any kind, are made better if shared with someone you'd call friend or ally. Friends or Allies might even summon you for help. Performing favors for friends or allies is also a common act. Most favors in an MMORPG require the presence of the individual performing the favor.
Example: 1) You've just explored to a beautiful new zone. Everything about it is overwhelmingly beautiful to you. You immediately summon all your friends, because you know it will be a memorable experience to share it with others. 2) Your having trouble solving a quest, or killing a certain MOB, so you summon one of your friends to come help you.
Inventory: A player might want to obtain experience, and at the same time have a chance of obtaining an item of value. When presented with the option of one or the other, or both, most people would choose both.
Example: Who doesn't want to gain experience AND have a chance to win a valuable item? Since experience can be equally obtained by soloing or grouping, and since players have better odds of obtaining items from MOBS, when in a group, the most practical solution to obtaining new inventory AND obtaining experience would be to camp MOBS while in a group.
Currency: If a player is low on currency, and wants to accumulate fast currency while gathering experience, he/she will have to find MOBS that are known for dropping large sums of currency. These MOBS will most likely be already camped. In most cases, the practical solution would be to get accepted into a group, thereby, eliminating the wait for a free one, and in the long run, increasing the amount of currency obtained!
Example: If the average player in a full group of 6 obtains 50gold for every 5 minutes that passes, in three hours that person will obtain 1,800gold.
Meanwhile, if a player waits an hour to find a camp of his/her own, and for the next two hours makes 70gold every 5 minutes, then he/she will only have made 1,680gold. Of course, the longer the wait, the larger the increase in currency for the group member.
Popularity: In general, popularity will have a huge impact on whether or not you group. If the zone your hunting in, for whatever reason, is extremely popular; full, the only option might be to get accepted into a group.
Example: It makes more sense to join a group, than to wait for what could possibly be hours before you find your own camp.
Visual Appeal: Most people care what the environment looks like. The more realistic, detailed, or colorful, generally the better. The environment you hunt in effects your mood. This would be the cause of more poeple choosing to group due to two things: Popularity of the zone, and the urge to "share the experience" with friends or allies.
Example: 1)You might feel like playing the roll of a dark or mysterious character, therefore, you'd most likely prefer a dark, shadowy, foggy, deserted or slimy environment. 2)You might feel like playing the roll of a holy, or royal character, therefore, you'd most likely prefer a light/bright, clear, gold, developed, populated, or high in currency environment.
Answer: In most cases, people will "prefer" to group, rather than solo. Having the "option" of soloing would not be a limitation to the game, instead, it would be a fair addition to the game.
Question: Are you saying, the more people that hit the MOB, the higher the likelihood of it dropping a rare item?
Response: The amount of people who contributed to the killing of the MOB in question, starting from the time the MOB was last recorded as being at 100% health, would in fact influence the dropping rate of the item, but only to a certain extent. Depending on the minimum amount of intended players required to defeat the MOB, there will be a "probability cap."
Example: Let's use the MOB with the 1/120 dropping rate in this example. If 30 people hit the mob once, and it dies at the last hit, the probability of the rare item dropping will not be any better than the probability which would result from only 6 players contributing to the kill. The best possible dropping probability for this particular MOB should be 1/20 ---since it's the smallest fraction. (1/10 for example would imply 6+1/2 people hit the MOB, which obviously isn't possible)
The greater the number of intended players required to defeat the MOB, the greater the effect a massive attack will have on the probability of the item dropping.
Answer: Yes and No. The amount of people does effect the probability, but only to an appropriate extent.
Question: How many players do you suggest be required to kill the average MOB equivalent to the level of the character?
Response: Most MOBS should be intended to require only 1 person to kill. Every MOB that is killable by 6 players, should also be killable by one. However, MOBS that require more than 6 people to kill, should NOT be soloable by a single player.
Example: I'll use a couple scenerios from EQ in this example. Obviously, it should be impossible to solo a MOB with a reputation similar to NAGGY, since this MOB requires more than one group to kill. On the other hand, it should be possible to solo all MOBS at the Frenzy camp, one at a time. (The odds of getting the rare item, the Sash, would be extremely unlikely if soloing. It would be more practical to camp this mob with a full group of 6, in this example, only because the MOB would have 6X greater chance of dropping the sash.)
Answer: One player should be required. Six players should be more practical, only for obtaining items. The MOB should NOT be especially difficult to kill for a soloer. Two people paired together should be able to kill the MOB with relative ease.
Question: Do you suggest the majority of focus should go towards expansions, or GM held/planned events/quests; hosted quests?
Response: A lot of work needs to be put into an expansion, in order to maintain a fair and balanced environment. Hosted quests would be more practical. The temporary excitement that would come as a result of these planned events would dramatically increase the fun factor within the game. A system set up to hold a planned event periodically would not only increase the fun factor within the game. It would also increase the morale of players throughout the game. In turn, more people would want to play the game, and people would want to play more frequently.
Example: Someone who has been a loyal member for a long time, has reached the highest permissible level, and has seen all there is to see, has one never ending thing to look forward too, hosted events. It would also be a stretch for further originality. Since items rewarded for solving or completing the hosted events are completely unique, players would strive to "make their mark," or have their "story of glory." It's a priceless thing, to actually possess something that's one-of-a-kind. It inspires centiment.
Answer: Between the two, I suggest the majority go to GM held/planned events/quests; hosted quests.
Further Suggestions:
- Players who really get involved, and live inside the game, deserve to be remembered. I think WoW should have Notebooks you can purchase at stored. These Notebooks should enable the player to type a Journal, to write down the player's journies on paper. The player should have the option of handing it over to another player if he or she chooses.
Example: 1)It would be a great idea for a guild to have it's own Journal. The founder of the guild should be the first person to use the journal. When he/she retires from leadership, he/she hands over the Journal to his/her successor. This would provide the means for a guild to store it's history, and lessons. 2)One example, would be to automatically recieve a journal by a GM when founding a guild.
- Each server should be a "cheat free" environment. Players should NOT be allows to get away with taking advantage of bugs.
Example: Player's should be punished for intentionally killing MOBS from a spot where the MOBS can't reach you, or fight back.
- When a new expansion is released, there should not be easier to obtain items of equal value to an already existing item. This would make it unfair for players who work hard to earn their inventory. Players do NOT want to play the "stock-market." They want to play WoW, and want to say, "WOW!" after every session of gameplay.
Example: Someone who spends three months savings on an item should not have to suffer because a better item is released which is easier to obtain and worth only a couple days currency. Items should not be made obsolete as a result of their value changing due to newer, unforeseen items.
_________________
I am the founder and former leader of a guild in EQ, retired member of The Code in EQ, original member of KOE in AOE2, past Corporal of EVO in MOHAA, respected veteran of UT 2003, a conquerer of all decent games, and an aspiring game developer.
Gothic's Loyal Hero, SirDeity |
|
Mon Feb 17, 2003 11:30 pm |
|
|
Hexy
High Emperor
Joined: 28 Jun 2002
Posts: 621
|
Wow, all that and you still missed me point.
quote:
"Anyway, why should a MOB that require six level 50 characters also be soloable by a single lvl 50 character?"
Here's my response:
Why not? If the experience is balanced, but the dropping rate is favored by the group of people, it's perfectly balanced. Sure, people would solo a LOT more often than in EQ. Would more people solo than group? Absolutely not. Grouping is fun most the time, just not ALL the time.
You have not taken level progression and combat into that little system of yours, thus making it incomplete.
I have MOB A. MOB A requires 6 characters to take down. That's 6 characters with different classes/skills thus different strength that can be used together. Now, the group of 6, manage to kill the MOB, BUT it's not an easy fight (SINCE THE MOB IS DESIGNED FOR 6 PEOPLE), and thus they get very injured, or maybe one or two of the party members die. Then a soloer, with same equipment and level as the members of the group, comes along and kills the MOB.
Was he more skillfull or does that system sound retarded to you too????
LET me elaborate further: WHY DOES 6 = 1 to you???
So a MOB that requires 12 people can be taken down by 2?
So a group of 6 people don't need to take on a MOB that is thusly DESIGNED for 6 people, since they should be able to take down a MOB that requires 36 people? Why not simply divide all factors by 6?
Grouping WON'T become prefered since EVEN if you cram 120 people in one zone and thusly get one item for every creature you kill you still have to split that item between 120 people.
Do you realize that there's work with organizing 120 people? Why go through that when you're COMPLETELY independant?
Furthermore, why would a group of 6 go around killing MOBs that require one person? Why simply not take on MOBs that require more than one person? Because MOBs that reuqire more than one person ALSO requires more than 6 persons? I am lost in this twisted web of logic...
You do realize that making items that drop 1/120 PLUS making a gap between exp MOBs and ITEM MOBs will make the game EXTREMELY tedious and boring? MOBs should almost ALWAYS drop loot, otherwise the game becomes a gigantic tedious timesink.
I pray that that kind of overcomplicated stuff doesn't make it's way to WoW.
_________________
Like some bold seer in a trance;
Seeing all his own mischance |
|
Tue Feb 18, 2003 10:25 am |
|
|
|
Goto page 1, 2 Next
All times are GMT. The time now is Mon Apr 08, 2019 9:43 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
