PVP is absolutely a solution to poopsocking, for players who want to PVP. But we can all agree I'm sure that for PVE servers it won't apply, so there may need to be other methods to discourage it.
I would only ask that if other, more blue friendly methods are discussed, that they aren't applied to PVP servers because PVP does solve the issue without any other added elements.
Two ideas come to mind, on the idea of multiple bosses spawning simultaneously - have that occur after all the bosses of a certain tier are killed. So killing 5 out of 6 dragons that roam zones wouldn't change respawn timers, but if the sixth is killed, then all 6 repop at the time the first is scheduled to respawn. I also agree the random timers are kinda advantageous (and should be static instead) for the people willing/able to sacrefice sleep and family time for the sake of being on-call for a raid spawn.
The other is more velious-esque. Having raid bosses being in faction conflicting zones. Unless I am mistaken, wasn't it made so in velious as a raiding guild you pretty much stuck to your dwarf/giant/dragon faction until your guild was ready to move on? Making content divided by factions would help alleviate some guilds from trying to dominate all content.
It's important to note that human beings, not just gamers, always aim to de-engineer everything in life. To gaming specifically, players always attempt to de-engineer content in order to guarantee victory and reap the rewards. Human beings strive to be efficient, and as such, they monitor predictability. If you are to prevent poopsocking, you must eliminate the predictability of spawns, or even locations of them. Sure you could use random number generation on a timer to achieve this, but this comes with its own list of consequences. Eliminating predictability is great for shelf-life and immersion as well. It removes much of the "grind" feeling often attributed to these games.
How you achieve this is the question. How do you develop a game to not be predictable?
I suggest giving mobs complex routes to patrol, that cover very large area's. Also, the routes should change. I think AI is important to this. Giving NPC's complex AI whereas they travel throughout the world rather than remaining at a static spawn.
Dullahan said:
Raid content is honestly something that so few people even experience. I'm going to guess that most of us on these forums don't represent the average player from EQ and VG. Its more likely we are those who fully appreciated those games having played them in their entirety and, thus, are more enthusiastic about a spiritual successor. I don't know about modern EQ, but during the early years raiding was probably something that less than 10% even engaged in on a regular basis. An article I was reading today actually reflects this. Apparently in Destiny, less than 15% have even participated in a raid. While Destiny doesn't have a whole lot in common with Pantheon, it still seems in line with my experiences in mmorpgs.
That also says a lot about why modern MMOs lose their playerbase so quickly. Most of the time consuming part of these games is raiding. If only a small portion are actually experiencing that content, of course the shallow and rather trivial gameplay leading up to raiding isn't going to retain players for the long term.
Regarding the p99 PvP server, I thought it would be good to remind folks that they've been sitting in kunark for 2 years now. Its really no surprise that, much like p99 blue, the server has become top heavy. They also have drastically accelerated experience gains there, so that only exacerbates the situation. New players can jump in and be max level in just a few weeks. It didn't used to be that way there, and for nearly 3 years we generally only saw 30-40 man raiding guilds with those guilds representing less than half the playerbase. Those are the real reasons zergy combat has become the norm on that server.
As far as batphones are concerned, it was generally only used for PvP skirmishes, protecting guildmates leveling or farming quest items, or to remind people to log in for repop days. Still, that sort of devotion is only found in the most hardcore players, which make up a larger portion of the population on emulated servers, but I believe would be by far the minority in Pantheon.
You're living in a bubble if you don't think people are gonna play Pantheon hardcore... this might be our last chance at a game like this by Brad and Co. and I'm gonna be hitting it up hard as I think many others will too.
If they don't implement at least some kind of lockout 1 or maybe 2 guilds will lock down all the raid content guaranteed.
Oh and batphones are way more common now just because everyone has access to a cellphone unlike 15 years ago when people were playing the original EQ.
Another Idea that would help alleviate poopsocking a bit... what if there was some group content progression that was so difficult it could have raid quality gear. The gear would be available after long questlines with extremely hard group content similar to the Pantheon in Vanguard... maybe it could even have some 12 man stuff at the end of the it just to ramp it up a bit.
Kiz~
Angrykiz said:
You're living in a bubble if you don't think people are gonna play Pantheon hardcore... this might be our last chance at a game like this by Brad and Co. and I'm gonna be hitting it up hard as I think many others will too.
I only contend that the hardcores are less of an issue than you make them out to be according to statistics. Even if they are twice as prevalent in Pantheon, you're talking about a quarter of the total population.
Players like that should expect competition. Preventing competition trivializes the experience and makes no sense to me.
Angrykiz said:
If they don't implement at least some kind of lockout 1 or maybe 2 guilds will lock down all the raid content guaranteed.
Oh and batphones are way more common now just because everyone has access to a cellphone unlike 15 years ago when people were playing the original EQ.
Another Idea that would help alleviate poopsocking a bit... what if there was some group content progression that was so difficult it could have raid quality gear. The gear would be available after long questlines with extremely hard group content similar to the Pantheon in Vanguard... maybe it could even have some 12 man stuff at the end of the it just to ramp it up a bit.
Kiz~
You seem adamant about finding ways for the more casual players to be rewarded more for doing less. I don't mean to be harsh or controversial, but I feel like you are missing the point of why we want another EQ. We want a virtual world, not a themepark where accessibility is the most important design tenet.
Casual players have the option of joining a top guild or wait and get their chance once the top guilds have moved on. As long as there is enough content, and it comes in at a fast enough rate post-launch, I see poopsocking being something affecting a small fraction of the playerbase, just like it was in all MMOs. A first-world problem of the genre so to speak.
Dullahan said:
Angrykiz said:
You're living in a bubble if you don't think people are gonna play Pantheon hardcore... this might be our last chance at a game like this by Brad and Co. and I'm gonna be hitting it up hard as I think many others will too.
I only contend that the hardcores are less of an issue than you make them out to be according to statistics. Even if they are twice as prevalent in Pantheon, you're talking about a quarter of the total population.
Players like that should expect competition. Preventing competition trivializes the experience and makes no sense to me.
Angrykiz said:
If they don't implement at least some kind of lockout 1 or maybe 2 guilds will lock down all the raid content guaranteed.
Oh and batphones are way more common now just because everyone has access to a cellphone unlike 15 years ago when people were playing the original EQ.
Another Idea that would help alleviate poopsocking a bit... what if there was some group content progression that was so difficult it could have raid quality gear. The gear would be available after long questlines with extremely hard group content similar to the Pantheon in Vanguard... maybe it could even have some 12 man stuff at the end of the it just to ramp it up a bit.
Kiz~
You seem adamant about finding ways for the more casual players to be rewarded more for doing less. I don't mean to be harsh or controversial, but I feel like you are missing the point of why we want another EQ. We want a virtual world, not a themepark where accessibility is the most important design tenet.
Casual players have the option of joining a top guild or wait and get their chance once the top guilds have moved on. As long as there is enough content, and it comes in at a fast enough rate post-launch, I see poopsocking being something affecting a small fraction of the playerbase, just like it was in all MMOs. A first-world problem of the genre so to speak.
I am advocating for some developer intervention so that more casual guilds can get a shot at raid content...5 day lockouts on 3 days spawn timers is not asking too much and I think that's how it was in Vanguard.
There's no doubt I'll be answering batphones and racing to raid mobs but I'd like it to be a bit more fair than it was in the original EQ.
If there is enough raid content to satiate the masses I'll eat my shoe and gladly go about playing... here is hoping for a bunch of massive raid zones around the time people are getting to max level.
It brings up a interesting thought tho... at max level whats a good ratio of raid to group content ? I think I'd like about 50/50...
Oh and about wanting another EQ... Personally I'm here for something in between Vanguard and EQ.
I never brought up sandbox or themepark gameplay I'm just talking about raid mob lockout timers really.
Kiz~
Raid mob lockout timers are a theme-park bullet point, so yes you did bring it into the discussion.
If there are to be no instances, then lockouts are irrelevant too. If I were in the top guild on the server... and I usually am.. I would immediately level up a 2nd character and form Best Guild on Server #2 to farm the mobs in between my main's lockout timer.
If you want to prevent top guilds from dominating content you are backing the wrong game, go check out World of Warcraft it has what you're looking for.
These are by no means real numbers, but we will use them for example to illustrate the way I think things need to work:
25% of players playing Pantheon will end up being hardcore, say you allow 2000 players on a server at the most, that means you need enough end-game content to keep 500 players busy each week, and still have content left-over for casuals to choose from. And when new content comes out, the hardcores will move on to it, and the casuals will take over what the hardcores leave behind.
Exclusivity is important to what Pantheon is, content must be exclusive, not all inclusive like the other MMO's with instances that we all have come to abhor.
NoobieDoo said:
My idea of raiding philosophy; - raid boss lockout timer = can engage boss twice within 'x' amount of days (5-7 days) but that player is locked out of looting after the first time defeating the boss. This would help players (especially casuals) who can't commit to a raid schedule. If the guild has some players who missed raid night they have a healthy chance at raiding at the time they are able to play because the guild has players who are not locked out from the boss, only they can't loot. -
The best way I have seen this handled was in VG, and it worked very well. Most Mobs are on a seven-day lockout from the time the raid kills it. The raid mob respawns 1 hour after kill so next guild can take it down if there are competing guilds within the same time zone.
This means guild X can kill, loot move on and forget for seven days. No one can hold or lock it down, it becomes fair game for whoever can kill it and it also promotes maturity, communication and diplomacy between guilds within the same time zone, as they usually communicate and work together to make sure their raids do not cause problems or interfere with each others targets. So ahead of time they will work out a schedule of what they kill, on what days and what time, so guild Y can bargain and work with that information to set their raids an hour behind, forward or move targets to different days when they know guild X will be locked out depending on what will suit their guilds needs.
Raids were usually broken up into categories of mob difficulty and loot by guild and raid leaders, so a high end raiding guild would pick 4-5 of the hardest targets and make this raiding day(s)/night(s) their most significant and flag this/these raid(s) as mandatory for all key players and guild members, while other weekday raids could be optional depending on turnout/targets, etc.
This system mitigated a lot of problems and created a fair and still challenging/competitive environment without all the BS and lock downs. The system isn't perfect but it would be an excellent base to build on for Pantheon raiding in my opinion.
Kilsin said:
The best way I have seen this handled was in VG, and it worked very well. Most Mobs are on a seven-day lockout from the time the raid kills it. The raid mob respawns 1 hour after kill so next guild can take it down if there are competing guilds within the same time zone.
This means guild X can kill, loot move on and forget for seven days. No one can hold or lock it down, it becomes fair game for whoever can kill it and it also promotes maturity, communication and diplomacy between guilds within the same time zone, as they usually communicate and work together to make sure their raids do not cause problems or interfere with each others targets. So ahead of time they will work out a schedule of what they kill, on what days and what time, so guild Y can bargain and work with that information to set their raids an hour behind, forward or move targets to different days when they know guild X will be locked out depending on what will suit their guilds needs.
Raids were usually broken up into categories of mob difficulty and loot by guild and raid leaders, so a high end raiding guild would pick 4-5 of the hardest targets and make this raiding day(s)/night(s) their most significant and flag this/these raid(s) as mandatory for all key players and guild members, while other weekday raids could be optional depending on turnout/targets, etc.
This system mitigated a lot of problems and created a fair and still challenging/competitive environment without all the BS and lock downs. The system isn't perfect but it would be an excellent base to build on for Pantheon raiding in my opinion.
I'm not necessarily opposed to the lockout timer idea from vanguard, but respawn times for major bosses should be longer than 1 hour imo. Maybe 24 hour respawn with a 7 day lockout? Especially since raid bosses don't have placeholders like normal dungeon bosses.
There has to be a little bit of competition for raid bosses imo. Otherwise it might as well be instanced raiding like in SWTOR...
Wellspring said:
Kilsin said:
The best way I have seen this handled was in VG, and it worked very well. Most Mobs are on a seven-day lockout from the time the raid kills it. The raid mob respawns 1 hour after kill so next guild can take it down if there are competing guilds within the same time zone.
This means guild X can kill, loot move on and forget for seven days. No one can hold or lock it down, it becomes fair game for whoever can kill it and it also promotes maturity, communication and diplomacy between guilds within the same time zone, as they usually communicate and work together to make sure their raids do not cause problems or interfere with each others targets. So ahead of time they will work out a schedule of what they kill, on what days and what time, so guild Y can bargain and work with that information to set their raids an hour behind, forward or move targets to different days when they know guild X will be locked out depending on what will suit their guilds needs.
Raids were usually broken up into categories of mob difficulty and loot by guild and raid leaders, so a high end raiding guild would pick 4-5 of the hardest targets and make this raiding day(s)/night(s) their most significant and flag this/these raid(s) as mandatory for all key players and guild members, while other weekday raids could be optional depending on turnout/targets, etc.
This system mitigated a lot of problems and created a fair and still challenging/competitive environment without all the BS and lock downs. The system isn't perfect but it would be an excellent base to build on for Pantheon raiding in my opinion.I'm not necessarily opposed to the lockout timer idea from vanguard, but respawn times for major bosses should be longer than 1 hour imo. Maybe 24 hour respawn with a 7 day lockout? Especially since raid bosses don't have placeholders like normal dungeon bosses.
There has to be a little bit of competition for raid bosses imo. Otherwise it might as well be instanced raiding like in SWTOR...
As I said, it would be a good base to build on ;)
If making people wait longer to take down a very difficult raid mob is something that the community wants then I am sure the team will look into it, we had a lot of high end raiders asking for the lockouts to be lowered in VG so there is an argument for the other side of the fence too.
As an example:
If you and your guild rocked up ready to go after organising all week to get everyone online to kill this raid mob and my guild swoops in and kills the target first due to us having all members ready to go before you, then you and the 24+ other members would all miss out and have to wait 24+ hours to attempt it again and when raids are organised to try and get 24+ people online at the same time for a few hours with work and families and other commitments, I cannot see this being very well received since the next night you may not be able to get all of those members online again to attempt the raid mob.
Little things like that hurt guilds a lot and it makes it hard to keep morale up when little things like that continue to happen, so the 1 hr respawn lessens the pain a bit and allows a guild to go and do something else then regroup an hour later to try again before anyone else can jump in.
Here is an idea for how to handle this. I am picturing raids in game like either playing a NFL game against the winning team but YOU have to play. I don't think any of us would be trying to do more than one raid a day or even one raid every 3 days. If that analogy doesn't work for you then let me try another one. Mountain climbing to all intents and purposes seems to be a very physical activity as well as mental. I don't know how often mountain climbers actually climb mountains but I doubt they climb more than one a day. A raid to me is this kind of drastic physically, mentally, and spiritually exhausting event. If I join a raid, I should be exhausted and limited in some way after the raid for a certain amount of time.
The football analogy, I would be physically tired and abused and would be moving slowly and gingerly because of all the joints and bruises and injuries I sustained from playing the game. I would still be able to do quests but I don't think that would be easy. Why not make Pantheon so that there is a consequence for raiding? Make it so that a toon can only raid once every 3 days or make it so that there are some disadvantages to doing multiple raids in a day. The first raid you get full resources but the 2nd raid you get 3/4s the total amount of Hps, Mana, and Stamina. The 3rd raid you have half your normal amount of hps, mana, and stamina. the 4th raid you have a quarter of hps, mana and stamina and the 5th raid you are mince meat.
I know I am going to upset a lot of people with this idea but it makes perfect sense to me. They are going to through out that this is a magical world so those limitations do not apply. They will say that it is limiting the game but I have yet to see anyone climb multiple mountains or even play multiple NFL games in a day. They will say it is limiting the amount of fun that a player can have and in some ways it is but EVERYONE has said they want a CHALLENGING MMORPG and that would definitely make things more challenging because as a guild you would have to carefully pick and choice your targets. This would also prevent one guild from locking down specific raid targets for themselves.
I know that people will create multiple toons then to do multiple raids but I believe that the Devs have said that the amount of toons per account will be drastically limited. Lets say 3 toons per account. If that is the case then that high end guild would be able to do maybe 3 raids a day but they would have to have multiple accounts which would benefit VRI because more account subscriptions, the more money to be made and re-invested into the game.
Sogotp said:
Here is an idea for how to handle this. I am picturing raids in game like either playing a NFL game against the winning team but YOU have to play. I don't think any of us would be trying to do more than one raid a day or even one raid every 3 days. If that analogy doesn't work for you then let me try another one. Mountain climbing to all intents and purposes seems to be a very physical activity as well as mental. I don't know how often mountain climbers actually climb mountains but I doubt they climb more than one a day. A raid to me is this kind of drastic physically, mentally, and spiritually exhausting event. If I join a raid, I should be exhausted and limited in some way after the raid for a certain amount of time.
The football analogy, I would be physically tired and abused and would be moving slowly and gingerly because of all the joints and bruises and injuries I sustained from playing the game. I would still be able to do quests but I don't think that would be easy. Why not make Pantheon so that there is a consequence for raiding? Make it so that a toon can only raid once every 3 days or make it so that there are some disadvantages to doing multiple raids in a day. The first raid you get full resources but the 2nd raid you get 3/4s the total amount of Hps, Mana, and Stamina. The 3rd raid you have half your normal amount of hps, mana, and stamina. the 4th raid you have a quarter of hps, mana and stamina and the 5th raid you are mince meat.
I know I am going to upset a lot of people with this idea but it makes perfect sense to me. They are going to through out that this is a magical world so those limitations do not apply. They will say that it is limiting the game but I have yet to see anyone climb multiple mountains or even play multiple NFL games in a day. They will say it is limiting the amount of fun that a player can have and in some ways it is but EVERYONE has said they want a CHALLENGING MMORPG and that would definitely make things more challenging because as a guild you would have to carefully pick and choice your targets. This would also prevent one guild from locking down specific raid targets for themselves.
I know that people will create multiple toons then to do multiple raids but I believe that the Devs have said that the amount of toons per account will be drastically limited. Lets say 3 toons per account. If that is the case then that high end guild would be able to do maybe 3 raids a day but they would have to have multiple accounts which would benefit VRI because more account subscriptions, the more money to be made and re-invested into the game.
What an interesting twist on the lockout mechanism - I love it! It gives a good immersive feel to a lock out.
Sogotp said:
Here is an idea for how to handle this. I am picturing raids in game like either playing a NFL game against the winning team but YOU have to play. I don't think any of us would be trying to do more than one raid a day or even one raid every 3 days. If that analogy doesn't work for you then let me try another one. Mountain climbing to all intents and purposes seems to be a very physical activity as well as mental. I don't know how often mountain climbers actually climb mountains but I doubt they climb more than one a day. A raid to me is this kind of drastic physically, mentally, and spiritually exhausting event. If I join a raid, I should be exhausted and limited in some way after the raid for a certain amount of time.
The football analogy, I would be physically tired and abused and would be moving slowly and gingerly because of all the joints and bruises and injuries I sustained from playing the game. I would still be able to do quests but I don't think that would be easy. Why not make Pantheon so that there is a consequence for raiding? Make it so that a toon can only raid once every 3 days or make it so that there are some disadvantages to doing multiple raids in a day. The first raid you get full resources but the 2nd raid you get 3/4s the total amount of Hps, Mana, and Stamina. The 3rd raid you have half your normal amount of hps, mana, and stamina. the 4th raid you have a quarter of hps, mana and stamina and the 5th raid you are mince meat.
I know I am going to upset a lot of people with this idea but it makes perfect sense to me. They are going to through out that this is a magical world so those limitations do not apply. They will say that it is limiting the game but I have yet to see anyone climb multiple mountains or even play multiple NFL games in a day. They will say it is limiting the amount of fun that a player can have and in some ways it is but EVERYONE has said they want a CHALLENGING MMORPG and that would definitely make things more challenging because as a guild you would have to carefully pick and choice your targets. This would also prevent one guild from locking down specific raid targets for themselves.
I know that people will create multiple toons then to do multiple raids but I believe that the Devs have said that the amount of toons per account will be drastically limited. Lets say 3 toons per account. If that is the case then that high end guild would be able to do maybe 3 raids a day but they would have to have multiple accounts which would benefit VRI because more account subscriptions, the more money to be made and re-invested into the game.
One thing I loved doing after raid was still having so many people online we would break off and do thing in smaller groups, have fun and generally hang out, implementing a mechanic to drain our characters of something or exhaust them would ruin that fun and essentially render our character useless after a few hours gameplay.
Why would you limit this to raiding? Groups, Dungeons, running across the map, crafting for hours. if you are going to include realism you need to include all of the game, raiding in some cases is less intensive than doing a group dungeon, just because there are more people does not always mean more energy exerted, a lot of the time raiding is about managing all of those people and getting them to do something specific at the right time, many raiders have important but fairly effortless roles for some fights, so why would the game force an exhaust mechanic on them to just for participating?
Getting a character to raid level is no small task, it took me years to get so many raid geared max level toons in VG, they need to be able to take a hit and put out the required damage before they can join a raid, that includes many hours of grouping, questing, farming to get the required gear and weapons to even be worthy of entry-level raiding.
I like the effort you have put into this but for me as a raider and raid leader this just wouldn't work and would end up making me log off instead of playing with my friends and guildies. The raid lockout solution from VG worked very well in my opinion.
I'm seeing a whole lot of "lockout players from being able to compete for content" going on in here, and it's getting to me. I never raided in VG but from what Kilsin is saying, you get locked out from doing a boss when you kill it for 7 days, but it respawns every hour, so that means that boss can be killed 168 times a week........................... That takes 100% of all the exclusivity right out of the game and puts the theme-park buffet plate right there for everyone to have everything they ever wanted.
I'm all for raid mobs being hard, I'm even for them being nearly unkillable by top geared players. But having raid content be accessible by every soul who wants it will drive inflation through the roof, force BOP and BOE items, and render raid gear virtually worthless.. cuz every noob will have it.
In this scenario no longer will you see the guy in town and say "dang nice gear he must've worked hard for that"... instead you'll say hey bro nice gear, i have it to, and so do the other 168 people standing around.
Rallyd said:
I'm seeing a whole lot of "lockout players from being able to compete for content" going on in here, and it's getting to me. I never raided in VG but from what Kilsin is saying, you get locked out from doing a boss when you kill it for 7 days, but it respawns every hour, so that means that boss can be killed 168 times a week........................... That takes 100% of all the exclusivity right out of the game and puts the theme-park buffet plate right there for everyone to have everything they ever wanted.
I'm all for raid mobs being hard, I'm even for them being nearly unkillable by top geared players. But having raid content be accessible by every soul who wants it will drive inflation through the roof, force BOP and BOE items, and render raid gear virtually worthless.. cuz every noob will have it.
In this scenario no longer will you see the guy in town and say "dang nice gear he must've worked hard for that"... instead you'll say hey bro nice gear, i have it to, and so do the other 168 people standing around.
The fact of the matter is the lockouts didn't block anyone if you could kill it, but killing it was the whole challenge. The difficulty for a lot of the high-end raid mobs in VG was that they were out of reach for even some of the best guilds, so to learn that strategy, practise and improve on attempts you needed time with the mob, if the mob was not spawned or camped by the first guild that got there no one else would be able to attempt it let alone kill it, so this lockout worked well.
Have as many attempts as you like but once it was killed every member of the kill team got locked out, 7 days was VGs timer and it worked well as raid schedules would be set each week and you would know down to the second when you lockout ended and allowed you to engage again but if Pantheon wanted to change this so be it. I think the majority of high-end raid mobs in VG were so far ahead of normal guilds reach that them being open and unlocked was perfectly fine, without knowing the strategy the guild with no knowledge of the encounter would wipe instantly but they could at least have a go if they wanted to.
The exclusivity was seeing another guild swoop in wearing the best of the best, seeing names that were legendary on the server for being the best in their class and then watching them destroy something so professionally and effortlessly that moments earlier wiped your entire guild in a matter of minutes. There were different tiers of raiding though, so that high-end tier would be untouchable by any regular guild and even some good guilds but the next tier down would be say 4 overland mobs that were slightly easier and those mobs would be something that even normal guilds struggled at but you get the picture.
VG didn't need lockouts because the difficulty was set so high that it was it's own lockout, which made it all the more rewarding once you got your first kill after so many wipes previously.
Just because anyone can walk up to the mob doesn't mean they will have a chance of damaging it let alone killing it ;)
Themepark is on rails, Sandbox is open and free...I think you have your descriptions mixed up, this way is much more sandbox than themepark mate and again, it worked very well.
Kilsin said:
Themepark is on rails, Sandbox is open and free...I think you have your descriptions mixed up, this way is much more sandbox than themepark mate and again, it worked very well.
While its true that a themepark is on rails, its also true that themepark by design, promoted accessibility and convenience over realism and competition. That's basically the trademark of themepark games, and manifest in the form of solo content, generally quest based progression, and highly instanced content.
Lockout timers would definitely fall into the accessibility and convenience category.
Dullahan said:
Kilsin said:Themepark is on rails, Sandbox is open and free...I think you have your descriptions mixed up, this way is much more sandbox than themepark mate and again, it worked very well.
While its true that a themepark is on rails, its also true that themepark by design, promoted accessibility and convenience over realism and competition. That's basically the trademark of themepark games, and manifest in the form of solo content, generally quest based progression, and highly instanced content.
Lockout timers would definitely fall into the accessibility and convenience category.
Lockouts are a mechanic to control the speed and progress of the players, without this mechanic, we would see the farming and lockdown problems arise which while even more sandbox in nature, would unfairly stop many other players even attempting mobs and areas in the game while allowing a very small percent to progress quickly and get the best of the best gear and weapons too quickly.
I can see both sides of this argument but we are comparing two different games, VG's lockouts worked well for VG due to the nature of raiding and the difficulty of the raid content. It promoted guild communication and diplomacy and suited the end game content. If we do something similar for Pantheon, I would like to see a similar mechanic as it worked well.
If we go another route with more EQ or newer mechanics for raiding then of course we would have to adapt a fitting solution to any issues that arose, like camping and locking a mob down.
There's really so much up in the air at this point, its hard to even theorize. I will say, it seems like modern games, Vanguard, progression servers, or Project1999 have clouded people's judgement regarding Pantheon and how player advancement and content accessibility should be handled. Assuming Pantheon will be even somewhat like it's tenets and features (ie. like EQ), things like modern MMOs, stagnant games (Vanguard/Emulators), or replaying old static games (EMU/Progression servers) should have very little bearing on how things work in Pantheon.
If Pantheon is at all like classic EQ, it will take months of grouping, grinding, farming, questing and learning to get to the point where you can even think about raiding. Then you will have to find another ~30 like-minded hardcore players who have accomplished the same things. Meanwhile, new content will already be in development.
This will not (hopefully) be another WoW where you spend a few weeks following the golden path, take another week or two to grind high level dungeons, and then begin raiding. This also will not be an EQ progression server with 2 to 3 times the intended population and where everyone knows every mob, item and encounter. Lastly, end game will not be like P99 or Vanguard where everyone is sitting in the same content for many years at a time, and 90% of the playerbase is max level.
Henceforth working under the aforementioned assumptions, the average player will not be a raider, at least, not a raider of the newest content. Chances are, though many of us (myself included) raided in the past, we may not have the time or fortitude to raid early on, in a modern EverQuest. That was the nature of the beast. Due to the level of challenge, necessary time investment, and the amount of content in EQ, only a fraction of the playerbase was even max level when Kunark came out, let alone slaying dragons and gods. Again, only a fraction were level 60 when Velious came out (would be neat to know that % if Brad remembers). Point being, just because someone was a raider in WoW, Rift, Tera, VG or on P99 (where they've sat in Kunark for 5 years), doesn't mean they will be among that small minority in a NEW game created in the spirit of EQ.
While I don't expect players of Pantheon to be nearly as inexperienced as new players in EQ, I do expect, based on the tenets and features, that the level of challenge and rate of progression will be considerably slower than what people have come to expect from other titles in this genre. I simply don't believe, if things are done right and an appropriate amount of content is in place, that more than a small portion of the overall community will be raid-capable or worrying about whether they will have a shot at the newest raid content. In other words, its likely people are worried for naught, and the need for things like instancing or lockout timers should hypothetically be unnecessary.
Then again, maybe its totally unrealistic for there to ever be a game like EQ where there was a hierarchy or social structure based on skill and time devotion. Perhaps exclusivity is a thing of the past and there is no going back to when a divide existed between the casual and the hardcore and therefore, new mechanics must be introduced to allow everyone to experience everything for fear of alienating a portion of the playerbase.
Dullahan said:
There's really so much up in the air at this point, its hard to even theorize. I will say, it seems like modern games, Vanguard, progression servers, or Project1999 have altered people's perception of Pantheon and how player advancement and content accessibility should be handled. Assuming Pantheon will be even somewhat like it's tenets and features (ie. like EQ), things like modern MMOs, stagnant games (Vanguard/Emulators), or replaying old static games (EMU/Progression servers) should have very little bearing on how things work in Pantheon.
If Pantheon is at all like classic EQ, it will take months of grouping, grinding, farming, questing and learning to get to the point where you can even think about raiding. Then you will have to find another ~30 like-minded hardcore players who have accomplished the same things. Meanwhile, new content will already be in development.
This will not (hopefully) be another WoW where you spend a few weeks following the golden path, take another week or two to grind high level dungeons, and then begin raiding. This also will not be an EQ progression server with 2 to 3 times the intended population and where everyone knows every mob, item and encounter. Lastly, end game will not be like P99 or Vanguard where everyone is sitting in the same content for many years at a time, and 90% of the playerbase is max level.
Thus, in Pantheon, the average player will not be a raider, at least, not a raider of the newest content. Chances are, though many of us (myself included) raided in the past, we may not have the time or fortitude to raid early on, in a modern EverQuest. That was the nature of the beast. Due to the level of challenge, necessary time investment, and the amount of content in EQ, only a fraction of the playerbase was even max level when Kunark came out, let alone slaying dragons and gods. Again, only a fraction were level 60 when Velious came out (would be neat to know that % if Brad remembers). Point being, just because someone was a raider in WoW, Rift, Tera, VG or on P99 (where they've sat in Kunark for 5 years), doesn't mean they will be among those "one-percenters" in a NEW game created in the spirit of EQ.
While I don't expect players of Pantheon to be nearly as inexperienced as new players in EQ, I do expect, based on the tenets and features, that the level of challenge and rate of progression will be considerably slower than what people have come to expect from other titles in this genre. I simply don't believe, if things are done right and an appropriate amount of content is in place, that more than a small portion of the overall community will be raid-capable or worrying about whether they will have a shot at the newest raid content. In other words, its likely people are worried for naught, and the need for things like instancing or lockout timers should hypothetically be unnecessary.
Then again, maybe its totally unrealistic for there to ever be a game like EQ where there was a hierarchy or social structure based on skill and time devotion. Perhaps exclusivity is a thing of the past and there is no going back to when a divide existed between the casual and the hardcore and therefore, new mechanics must be introduced to allow everyone to experience everything for fear of alienating a portion of the playerbase.
You are correct in saying that it is too early to theorise, which is why I can't commit to an answer for lockdowns and farming and can only suggest a mechanic that worked well for VG and gave accounts of my hardcore raiding and raid leading experiences in that game. We do need to remember though, VG cannot be disregarded as it was managed poorly and closed due to business mistakes, lack of support, poor communication and a lack of understanding of the core target audience, not because the game was of poor quality or lacked players, there was still thousands of active accounts when the game shut down.
Keep in mind that Pantheon has always been described as a spiritual successor to both EQ and VG, something that leaves us a lot of room to move in terms of using mechanics that worked well in both games and tweaking them to better suit Pantheon. There is no guarantee that we will go with EQ raiding system or VG's; that is something we will continue to work on as we build the game and progress through testing phases.
We do need to try and stop this EQ vs. VG mentality though (not calling you out just a general statement as I see this mindset a lot in people posts), they were both excellent games in their own right and each had its pros and cons, what we are trying to do is use as many pros from both games and blend them into our own style for Pantheon while we create new mechanics to mix well also, this game is not going to be an exact copy of EQ or VG and we really want to get the word out that it is a spiritual successor in its own right, but Pantheon is its own game that wishes to set itself apart from the others.
I hope we can build a game that brings back that old feeling of social interaction, challenge, achievement, promotes player interaction and installs those old school values of hard work and maturity with a lot of teamwork thrown in to achieve anything in game. I know that is what the team is working hard to achieve as they all want to play the same game!
I believe that they can pull it off and I will continue to support them 100% while I watch them achieve their goals :)
I'm not trying to knock Vanguard by any means, but I just don't think its realistic to compare Pantheon to a game that went 7 years without a major expansion. Those circumstances were considerably different, and it was necessary for different measure to be taken.
Just to clarify, my comparisons are in regard to game mechanics like lockout timers, instant boss respawns, instancing and the like. Part of designing and balancing raid content involves consideration of existing content, the rate of consumption, and the development time of future content. I'm not at all suggesting that there aren't things from Vanguard I would like to see in Pantheon, I just don't think many of the references being cited are particularly applicable to a modern EQ or VG with on-going content development. Since EQ had a great deal of expansions, especially early on, I felt like it was more relevant to use it as an example.