For people that don't know recently the EQ team..or Daybreak..or however you want to look at it recently announced that they are going to be releasing new Time Locked Progression servers and were polling and asking the community for their thoughts and preferences around this. Since I read this announcement and being such an EQ fanboi I instantly got intrigued by it and jumped to the forums and started to dive into the discussions (which is me usually just lurking and reading).
It is very interesting how divided the community is on how this should look and what would make it successful. It's the constant arguments of the people that want to progress as fast as possible to the top, consume all the content as fast as possible and just move onto the next expansion, vs the more casual people that maybe have played that way in the past but now are older and are looking for a more casual pace on where they want to enjoy the game, friends, and make new memories along the way. There have been a lot of suggestions on making both factions (if you will) happy. And almost always it comes down to you have to have 2 separate servers, one where the content is pumped out at a fast pace so the people that want to rush it will always have something more to do, and one where the content is extremely slowed down even to the point where the servers become locked at a certain expansion.
Now you are probably thinking, Pol what the hell does this have to do with Pantheon. I feel that if you could find the perfect target audience for pantheon all in one place, this is it!! It is like EQ is doing free research for us. And what that research is telling us, that there will always be the elite of the elite consume and move on players and the casual hey let's enjoy the ride kind of players, and making them both happy is done best by separating them! Of course we know that that is not practical nor do I feel like it should be the answer to Pantheon. Basically the only answer that I have seen anywhere that can someone appease both camps is instanced raid content, which is sad. But when you really really think about it, is there any other way for both camps to co-exist together? How would casuals ever get to see raid content when there are 60 ppl by their phones ready to log on at any notice and drop the raid bosses down? Instancing would also destroy the economy in an economy where everything is able to be traded due to so many more copies of those elite items being in the game. I know that Brad has mentioned before that there won't be static spawns for camps, so can't just sit your guild at frenzied ghoul camp for weeks straight until you get your whole guild equipped with fbss, so that does help with that problem but can't make raid targets non-static I feel.
In Summary, EQ wants to open TLP servers, no one can agree on how to appease casuals and hardcores w/o separating them. The EQ TLP discussion going on I feel is great research for Pantheon's target audience and we should be browsing it for some information. Finally does pantheon have a general idea on how they are going to keep an open world, and not have it dominated by a small % of players? I wrote this stuck in traffic because of an accident on this snowy day, so excuse the mishmash of thoughts.....wow mishmash doesn't get auto corrected..go figure.
There is a older thread on this
https://www.pantheonrotf.com/forums/topic/1729/new-eq-progression-server-vote
Exmortis said:
There is a older thread on this
https://www.pantheonrotf.com/forums/topic/1729/new-eq-progression-server-vote
Hardly consider that the same thread as what I'm posting.
pol1 said:
Exmortis said:
There is a older thread on this
https://www.pantheonrotf.com/forums/topic/1729/new-eq-progression-server-vote
Hardly consider that the same thread as what I'm posting.
It's not the same. Anyway my view on the OP is the "hardcore, need to consume the content asap" type of gamer is not the target audience of the progression servers. If you want to do that just play on a server that its already all unlocked on.
As for how this affects Pantheon, well this is the same discussion that is brought up before every mmo launches. There is no way to appease all types of players 100% , all anyone can do is try to appease as many of them as possible. The benefit of Pantheon is that its catering to a select group of players, I'm sure there will be "hardcore" and "casual" players in that group but I also think its the type of group that can get along better than in some other games.
Ephemeros said:
Won't the progression server still be the modern EQ with a lot of the changes just limited to the content you can do
Yes, to what extent it's hard to say, but they have repeatedly stated that the original classic code base no longer exists (i find it hard to believe that there isn't an archived version somewhere, it's more plausible that they are using that as an excuse) so they would either have to attempt to recreate/reverse engineer it or it's going to have some enhancements that were added later on.
hmmm I don't want it get too off topic, I really am not interested in how EQ is going to implement it and what details they have. I'm just using the whole situation as a reference, to the game that most of us have grown up on and love, that if it came back brand spanking new just like it was in 99 the troubles and tribulations that it would be going through with today's modern gamers, kind of as a starting point for discussion for pantheon on how they are going to attempt to handle the obvious disconnect between the 2 types of players.
Like if we could go back and change original EQ after everything that we have learned since 99 what would do to make it cater to todays gamers. Would we do instance? Would we have different kind of servers, with the idea of some servers being slower, maybe different kind of rulesets, i.e. Raid bosses spawn slower, or faster, drops are rarer or more common.. IF EQ original was getting released tomorrow, what would you want to be done differently?
My first thought process, is raid bosses are spawnable through some kind of event and then adjust the loot tables or the spawn rate that you are allowed to spawn it slower to keep comparable amount of loot out in the world. As for group or solo spawns for loots, I think they are going down the right road of not making it a static camp and making it more spread out..or at least that impression I am under.
So what are your ideas to help mix the 2 types of gamers together?
I think I get what they are getting at with TLP, but with a new game at launch I am not sure it applies really. In EQ they have expansions already set, its just a question of when they would be released on the server. When Pantheon is released it will have its current beginning, mid and end game. Anything after that falls under the category of a new expansion. Imho expansions should be more about being done right (as few bugs as possible, not breaking content etc) So on a new game they are spaced appropriately because if done right, the expansions will take time to develop.
I am still kinda hoping that the road to the end game is going to take a nice chunk of time for even the hard core players. Most games lately they have made the xp curve way to easy, Seeing people hit the cap in anywhere from a weekend to a month. I personally dislike it because that road to the cap is where most of the learning is done in the game, friends are made, memories are made and creates that "bond" (for the lack of a better word) to your toon. If its to easy then its kinda like "too many tanks, eh let me reroll then, be ready next week." I also like a steeper xp curve because it allows the developers enough time to properly work on new content. If it took the average player 8-12 months to hit the cap, then the devs have tons of time to work on it. Hopefully if done right it will have people seeking out all those remote areas for xp that a normally skip over to grind to the cap. Key is not making the journey to the cap feel like a mindless grind though :p
*edit sorry Pol, typing this on and off as I was getting up from the desk and didnt see your new post till after I hit post* But my 2cp is have it take time like EQ, just not the "camp grind" of EQ but in a rich quest system not on rails and exploration encouragement
Personally, I wouldn't change much about the original EQ1 approach to raiding. Launch the game with the contested raid content (non-instanced, long respawn timers, rare loot, etc). Expansions every 9 to 12 months.
As long as there are multiple tiers and plenty of raid content, I don't see it being a problem. Seeing that there is such a debate going on, it just goes to show you that casual and hardcore players both love the original EQ1.
The hardcore players will plow through the easy raid bosses first, get geared up, and begin working on the next tier. By the time the casual players get to max level, and want to dip their toes into raiding, they should be able to. They may have to compete with other casual and semi-hardcore guilds. But the more hardcore guilds should be on to the harder raid content, and at some point decide not to bother wasting their time on the easier raid content.
The EQ progression server debate, I believe is a different scenario than Pantheon. The debate going on is how fast the expansion packs should be unlocked. Some players want to spend years in vanilla EQ or some other expansion. Maybe they're casual, maybe they're hardcore. But the reason they want to delay progression is because they do not like the changes that a particular expansion brings to the game. Like PoP introducing the Planes of Knowledge for example. They want time to enjoy the content at their own pace without feeling rushed. You're still going to have hardcore players defeating all of the raid content first on every server, regardless of how fast they decide to unlock the expansions.
However, in Pantheon, we don't have that problem. No expansions have been created yet.
Wellspring said:
The hardcore players will plow through the easy raid bosses first, get geared up, and begin working on the next tier. By the time the casual players get to max level, and want to dip their toes into raiding, they should be able to. They may have to compete with other casual and semi-hardcore guilds. But the more hardcore guilds should be on to the harder raid content, and at some point decide not to bother wasting their time on the easier raid content.
I think you underestimate the mindset of hardcore raiders. they want everything contested on lockdown, even the easier mobs so other guilds wouldn't be able to catch up to them and given enough time compete with that hardcore guild over the contested mobs they are after.
just my 2cents..
Gelax said:
I think you underestimate the mindset of hardcore raiders. they want everything contested on lockdown, even the easier mobs so other guilds wouldn't be able to catch up to them and given enough time compete with that hardcore guild over the contested mobs they are after.just my 2cents..
When there isn't enough raid content, I totally agree. Hardcore raiders will take everything.
That's why I said that there needs to be plenty of raid content. If 10 different raid bosses respawn within an hour of each other, in different dungeons. There is no way a single guild could keep it on lock down.
In EverQuest 1 now a days, you don't see hardcore raiding guilds keeping Planes of Power on lockdown. They're doing the raid content that is at their own gear level.
But you're right, if Pantheon doesn't have enough raid content at launch to appease a server, then other measures may need to be taken. But personally I'm all for open competition.
Well truthfully, there are no true hardcore raiding guilds in EQ anymore. Raids are learned beaten in beta, with dev explanations of the mechanics provided on the beta boards for everyone else to read and copy. Realm of Insanity, has won the progression race for the last 7 or 8 expansions, is the closest thing to a hardcore guild that remains and they only officially raid one day a week (they may do alt raids on other nights). None of the other top 10-20 guilds raid more than 2-3 days a week either. If the game changed overnight to where you had to raid 5-6 nights for months at a time to complete progression, maybe half or even less of the top 20 guilds would be able to sustain the pace due to the changes in gaming habits of their members.
In EQ1 we solved this with cooperation on a server wide scale. every guild that raided would apply for a spot in the server raid calendar. a couple times one raid guild or another stepped out of line, they were ostracised by the entire community, unable to interact with any players not of their guild. guess what? those guilds folded as members left for other guilds, that could still raid and group. some of the smaller guilds were integrated into raiding alliances.
this was done via emergent gameplay, users setting rules of decorum and punishments for those who don't toe the line.
Gawd said:
In EQ1 we solved this with cooperation on a server wide scale. every guild that raided would apply for a spot in the server raid calendar. a couple times one raid guild or another stepped out of line, they were ostracised by the entire community, unable to interact with any players not of their guild. guess what? those guilds folded as members left for other guilds, that could still raid and group. some of the smaller guilds were integrated into raiding alliances.
this was done via emergent gameplay, users setting rules of decorum and punishments for those who don't toe the line.
What server was that? MT had that exact same thing for a very long time.
i started on Morrell thule, then got blended into Emarr
P.S. i would hope all of you guild leaders and member of guilds interested in raiding would be behind the same kind of thing. an alliance built on cooperation and giving everyone a chance to have the same experiences.
Gawd said:
In EQ1 we solved this with cooperation on a server wide scale. every guild that raided would apply for a spot in the server raid calendar. a couple times one raid guild or another stepped out of line, they were ostracised by the entire community, unable to interact with any players not of their guild. guess what? those guilds folded as members left for other guilds, that could still raid and group. some of the smaller guilds were integrated into raiding alliances.
this was done via emergent gameplay, users setting rules of decorum and punishments for those who don't toe the line.
I agree. This is the way to go with Pantheon. Leave it up to the players to coordinate and organize contested raid content. Like you said, not all guilds will play nice initially, but over time they will be forced to cooperate or suffer the consequences.
Contested raid content should not be controlled by game mechanics, like instances and lockout timers, imo. One of the tenets of Pantheon is about encouraging social game play. Giving the players the opportunity to work it out among themselves, enforces that social dynamic.
Exmortis said:
Gawd said:
In EQ1 we solved this with cooperation on a server wide scale. every guild that raided would apply for a spot in the server raid calendar. a couple times one raid guild or another stepped out of line, they were ostracised by the entire community, unable to interact with any players not of their guild. guess what? those guilds folded as members left for other guilds, that could still raid and group. some of the smaller guilds were integrated into raiding alliances.
this was done via emergent gameplay, users setting rules of decorum and punishments for those who don't toe the line.
What server was that? MT had that exact same thing for a very long time.
Karana did this - the "Karana Guild Council"
You needed to prove you could beat a mob on the progression path to sign up for the next one - and you were in a rotation.
On one hand - it worked well because it was sort of like "play nice" rules. On the other hand, waiting for "your turn" for a given mob could mean slower progression overall...
I would like to point out that "Hardcore" doesn't necessarily mean "wants to rip through content as fast as possible"
Sure - there is a segment of the population that will want to try to do that.... but I think this particular community is full of a more traditional type of "hardcore" player.... folks who want mechanics that stress them, slow them down, etc...
For example - someone who says "Make death really hurt - I want to de-level!" - likely is not the same person who says "Beat the game's ultimate end boss faster than anyone else, or bust!"
about these encounters and taking turns and cooperate or take the consequences of "the server" etc etc.. if you truely believe "HC" guild made it to the top by beeing nice and friendly and helpfull to everyone on the server then you're wrong. atleast this is my experience raiding top lvl in EQ2 for several years. we were all friendly and helpfull to the casual crows but when it came to the competition there was no such thing.
not saying i wouldn't want everybody to be helpfull and friendly etc. it's just not in humans nature.
edit: how are you "the server" going to force people playing nice? consequences are just words imo. if you have a well organized guild with enough capable members you don't rly need the rest of the server. maybe there are going to be events that require cooperation of the whole server.. but we don't know that yet.
Gelax said:
about these encounters and taking turns and cooperate or take the consequences of "the server" etc etc.. if you truely believe "HC" guild made it to the top by beeing nice and friendly and helpfull to everyone on the server then you're wrong. atleast this is my experience raiding top lvl in EQ2 for several years. we were all friendly and helpfull to the casual crows but when it came to the competition there was no such thing.
not saying i wouldn't want everybody to be helpfull and friendly etc. it's just not in humans nature.
edit: how are you "the server" going to force people playing nice? consequences are just words imo. if you have a well organized guild with enough capable members you don't rly need the rest of the server. maybe there are going to be events that require cooperation of the whole server.. but we don't know that yet.
IIRC the only "contested" mobs on EQ2 were the Avatars at one point...everything else was instanced so yeah you could be a bunch of little ***** thinking you were just so wonderful because you didnt have to work with the rest of the server. In EQ1 EVERYTHING was contested...First come First serve. So if you were the "we are so special and uber we dont need anyone else" type guild you got a bad server rep and things could get very bad for you.
I think i played untill The Shadow Odyssey expansion pack somewhere and there sure were more then just the avatars as far as contested mobs go.
We actually had a very good reputation on our server tho we only had to really compete with 1 other guild. the first come first serve race was for the one who could get 24 people online first. pickups couldn't really be formed cause they would just wipe on it. (not wel enough equipped + strats)
edit: Sadly i never played EQ1 or VG so i am just basing my experiences on EQ2 mostly.
Gawd said:In EQ1 we solved this with cooperation on a server wide scale. every guild that raided would apply for a spot in the server raid calendar. a couple times one raid guild or another stepped out of line, they were ostracised by the entire community, unable to interact with any players not of their guild. guess what? those guilds folded as members left for other guilds, that could still raid and group. some of the smaller guilds were integrated into raiding alliances.
this was done via emergent gameplay, users setting rules of decorum and punishments for those who don't toe the line.