In light of Brad's recent post regarding dealing with skeptics, I'm going to take a different approach in this thread and future threads I create (time permitting). I want to focus on controversial game mechanics, features, tenets, etc. and discuss how they can be implemented successfully versus whether or not the established tenet should or should not be permitted (I realize in this case twinking isn't established, but it's definitely controversial). For this specific thread, if you disagree altogether that twinking should not be allowed in-game, please ignore the thread as I don't want to get into arguments that twinking should or should not be allowed because of XYZ.
I'm creating this thread based on the assumption that twinking will be allowed in some form in Pantheon (it's not fully established either way yet), and, I want to brainstorm ways that it could be implemented without being game-breaking, and, maybe give the developers and idea or two.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
There's been a few threads in the past on twinking, which, I believe most are archived, but I'll copy Brad's blog post from March 2014 as reference and a more recent post where we had a brief discussion on twinking as well.
https://www.pantheonmmo.com/content/blogs/151/70/twinking-good-or-evil-or-in-between
In the Non-Linear Gear thread, twinking was briefly discussed:
https://www.pantheonmmo.com/content/forums/topic/1968/non-linear-gear-progression-please/view/page/1
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
With that said, I'll paste my post that I created over at MMORPG with a way I believe twinking could be allowed, be beneficial, but not be game-breaking (with a few added changes from Dullahan's input). I'd be curious to here others thoughts or ideas as well on how twinking could be implemented, be controlled yet still worthwhile, but not gamebreaking in that it trivializes all low-level challenge.
"As for controlling twinking, I had posted some thoughts on the Pantheon official forums awhile back, but I would use a scaling system similar to EQ1 with tweaks (many don't remember that EQ put damage/haste caps on early levels). I'll paste my post below:
...I think there could be a realistic way behind to scenes to control this by creating skill or stat based walls which make sense versus using required levels or bind on equip on gear. Example being, if your weapon skills were less than 50 (level 10) damage max damage cap is 20, less than 100 (level 20), damage cap is 40, etc. It's still artificial, but at least it could be explained that you don't have the skills to command the full potential of that weapon. And, instead of putting raw hps/mana/regen etc. on gear, increase it through stats (Sta/Wis/Int) which would scale in benefit with player level. And, like EQ, with procs, you could have the message that "Your will isn't sufficient to control this weapon" until X level. The only really difficult thing to control would be Armor Class on gear, but, like weapons, you could probably have that skill based as well in that your Defense Skill controlled the AC caps. At level 10 - 50 defensive skill cap and 500 AC cap. At level 50 - 200 defensive skill cap and 2000 AC cap. You'd have to be creative with hp/mana regen, but I'm sure we could brainstorm a way to scale it."
And, with Dullahan's feedback, AC could be scaled through armor proficiency skills in the same manner, and "Regen" type items could be controlled through a scaling recovery skill.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
So, basically, twinking would still be allowable, but controlled. I'd want the "twink gear" to be more in comparison to BIS gear pieces for that level range versus extremely overpowered.
The only MMOs I can think of that do twinking well are EVE and Anarchy Online.
It works in EVE because sure, you can PLEX your way into a tricked out T3 strategic cruiser or other super duper ship, and the instant you undock, you're announcing "please come gank me and make me regret blowing all that twink money and effort" to the entire system, and the gankers will reward you. So in EVE, people tend to de-twink and play in cheap, functional ships that they are OK with losing. The other thing about EVE is not every ship rules all for every situation. Having a tricked out battleship will get you blown up in a tier 2 mission against frigates you can't track, hit, outrun or escape who tackle you to let a bunch of cruisers pound you into space dust.
Title levels and the skill caps is how Anarchy Online makes it work. Around TL3 or TL4, everyone twinks like crazy, but you hit the skill cap within that title level, where the skills can't be increased until the next TL, and twinking ends up basically frontloading the beginning levels of a TL, and then you end up decently geared to average at the back end of the TL. The best example is ttitle level 4 to 6. Around 10 levels in TL4 (level 110), most people are as twinked as they can get before TL5 (150) and around 125, you stop improving any skills, and the next 25 levels are no upgrade in gear, skills, etc. Then you ding TL5, get maybe 15 levels of improvement and a bit of retwink, and then you begin the second hardest slog in AO which is grinding to TL6 (190). At that point, twinking really isn't twinking, it's more gearing for basic survival. And AO has content in some of their zones that even hard twinked max level 220s will get slapped down.
In either case, the game let's you twink because it has a tangible downside. In EVE, twinking equals firing up a "gank me" beacon, and in AO, it wildly exaggerates the high and low of each title level. EVE and AO also share the IP based skill system, which allows for greater freedom for the devs to be able to create an advanatge/disadvantage give and take with twinking. So twinking, if considered in the design, should come with a downside for every upside. That would make some challenges easier while making other ones harder.
Lots of ways to allow twinking and still retain challenge. Best plate armor in the world = bupkus against a fireball, the best caster robes ever = bupkus against hail of arrows, etc.
Good Points Venjenz,
And, how you are describing the twinking in Anarchy Online is similar to how I'm wanting Pantheon's twinking to work if implemented (a modified EQ system) that would be restricted artifically, but realistically based off player level/skill levels. Example: Fungi Tunic having 1-2 HP regen at level 1-10 versus a game-breaking 15 based off the Recovery skill being at 1-50.
And, compared to EVE, I doubt Pantheon will allow you to lose your gear, so the ganking fear won't be an option (unless possibly on a PVP server?). I remember the first time I lost my gear in Ultima Online though - I definitely changed my play style.
I like you last point as well and made me immediately think of the Fire Emblem (Strategy RPG Console Series) with the Weapon Triangle. Swords were strong aganist Axes, Axes were strong aganist Lances, and Lances were strong aganist Swords. If you took a Triangle system and expanded it to an MMO, you could create an interesting system in which even more situational gear, strategy, and planning would be required before combat.
Tsk Tsk. Posting a well thought out thread and then telling people not to post on it if they disagree is a bit counter productive to the use of these forums, imo. You link Aradune:
"Aradune:
Progeny System? This is something we've wanted to implement going way back to EQ/Vanguard days. It's not set in stone, and it probably won't be there by launch. But I'm still going to talk about it, albeit briefly. The idea is that you can retire a high level character, start an alt, declare that alt as a descendent and heir of the retired character, and then that alt has some advantages a regular new character or alt wouldn't normally have. The trick here is he or she can't be too powerful. But giving him or her some advantages could be cool... maybe a twinked item isn't quite as scaled down as it would normally be if picked up by a true noob character. Maybe skills can go up more quickly. Maybe they have access to certain exotic spells and abilities your first character had to search the world for... but now, you don't have to do it again. Instead, hopefully you can focus on exploring and reaping from other areas of the world you couldn't get to before, or that didn't even exist when you were leveling up your first guy.... In any case, how this relates to slowing MUDflation is that now you've kept your bad-ass items in the family, so to speak. You twinked yourself, which isn't potentially nearly as harmful as twinking a true noob."
I played every class and race combination in EQ. Time varied doing this. While fun, it did not take me long to realize that I did not want to play a troll, orgre, dwarf, or halfling full time. Barbs were fun. I loved the elves. The classes I played were based on their abilities. Hie and De for casters, Orgres for SK, Halfling for rangers (I think been a long time ;) ). Over time, my mains narrowed down to a Tier'dal necro and a human SK.
The point being, by the time year 5 rolled around I was not interested in leveling another all the way up from level 1, I'd seen it all - so to speak. The Seeing was needing shortcuts, so I understand the need for something like twinking to alieveate that need.
The Progency system may be a good compromise.
I just do not want this world to degenerate into what EQ became late in its life: rogues that did not know how to trip traps, shaman who didnt buy their buff spells because 'they wanted to fight', enchanters who couldnt hold cc, and a 2nd tank who said he didnt bother covering the healers, because 'they could cover themselves.' They had the equipment, but no idea how to use it. (and yes some was from 'buying accounts of course). Back when knowing how to use your equipment and how to play your class, was more important than 'knowing the dungeon'.
Raidan said:Good Points Venjenz,
And, how you are describing the twinking in Anarchy Online is similar to how I'm wanting Pantheon's twinking to work if implemented (a modified EQ system) that would be restricted artifically, but realistically based off player level/skill levels. Example: Fungi Tunic having 1-2 HP regen at level 1-10 versus a game-breaking 15 based off the Recovery skill being at 1-50.
And, compared to EVE, I doubt Pantheon will allow you to lose your gear, so the ganking fear won't be an option (unless possibly on a PVP server?). I remember the first time I lost my gear in Ultima Online though - I definitely changed my play style.
I like you last point as well and made me immediately think of the Fire Emblem (Strategy RPG Console Series) with the Weapon Triangle. Swords were strong aganist Axes, Axes were strong aganist Lances, and Lances were strong aganist Swords. If you took a Triangle system and expanded it to an MMO, you could create an interesting system in which even more situational gear, strategy, and planning would be required before combat.
You say 'compared to EVE, I doubt Pantheon will allow you to lose your gear..."
Why do you doubt this? In EQ we lost our gear if we could not make a successful CR. I'm not positive of the times, its been 15 years since I had a level 10 or under: but if you died too far from bind point and could not run back to your corpse fast enough, the body went 'poof' along with everything on it. I think you had 30 minutes for level 10 and under. As there was no twinking in the early days, this didn't hurt, much. As you leveled, the time went up, Im not sure how high now. But if at level 35 you couldnt get to your corpse and you were wearing quest armor, it poofed, all gone. So did experience.
The only way the GMs would intervene was super extrordinary events, such as server crashes.
CR's have been discussed for Rantheon. I'm expecting lose gear and experience. But we shall see.
Graysilk said:Tsk Tsk. Posting a well thought out thread and then telling people not to post on it if they disagree is a bit counter productive to the use of these forums, imo...
I don't disagree there, and, I like debates. However, there's plenty of discussion on the pros/cons of implementing twinking - I didn't want this discussion to turn into that endless cyclical argument. Based off Brad's recent thread (not sure how long you've been following this site or MMORPG), instead of passionately debating why old school mechanics should be in and potentially turning away new players/supporters when they didn't agree, I wanted to discuss tenets/mechanics/ideas that are already projected to be included in Pantheon (or in this case probably will be with twinking) and how to succesfully implement them and/or improve on the already known methods. I was going to start with a more controversial FAQ item or Tenet such as no instancing, but I decided to go with twinking first.
I played every class and race combination in EQ. Time varied doing this. While fun, it did not take me long to realize that I did not want to play a troll, orgre, dwarf, or halfling full time. Barbs were fun. I loved the elves. The classes I played were based on their abilities. Hie and De for casters, Orgres for SK, Halfling for rangers (I think been a long time ;) ). Over time, my mains narrowed down to a Tier'dal necro and a human SK.
The point being, by the time year 5 rolled around I was not interested in leveling another all the way up from level 1, I'd seen it all - so to speak. The Seeing was needing shortcuts, so I understand the need for something like twinking to alieveate that need.
The Progency system may be a good compromise.
I agree with you on becoming bored leveling alts, but I would see the Progency system as an alternative to twinking or another option in addition to twinking more than a compromise. Some players "may" decide that it's worthwhile to basically reroll their character (I wouldn't after the time commitment), but even as you included in your quote, you didn't want to level another all the way up from 1, and I'm sure that point would be emphasized even more if you were leveling the same class/race if you used the progency system. I would think some sort of mentoring system would be a good compromise (see the discussion in the recent necroed Mentoring: Yay/Nay thread).
I just do not want this world to degenerate into what EQ became late in its life: rogues that did not know how to trip traps, shaman who didnt buy their buff spells because 'they wanted to fight', enchanters who couldnt hold cc, and a 2nd tank who said he didnt bother covering the healers, because 'they could cover themselves.' They had the equipment, but no idea how to use it. (and yes some was from 'buying accounts of course). Back when knowing how to use your equipment and how to play your class, was more important than 'knowing the dungeon'.
Definitely don't disagree there, and I want players to have to learn their class, experience a challenge, and become skilled, which is why I was suggesting scaled twinking, versus partially scaled like it was in EQ. Even with the damage caps, if a Rogue/Warrior etc. was wearing a Fungi Tunic with +15 hp regen and +100 hp/mana items, there was basically no downtime between level 1 till at least 30ish. If Raw hps/mana were removed from items and replaced with Sta/int/wis and a recovery skill (or something similar) was introduced that only allowed you to have +1-2 hp regen, it wouldn't have been as game-breaking. Casters still had "more" downtime as there wasn't as overpowering twink gear for casters until Mana regen items became extremely common.
Graysilk said:You say 'compared to EVE, I doubt Pantheon will allow you to lose your gear..."
Why do you doubt this? In EQ we lost our gear if we could not make a successful CR. I'm not positive of the times, its been 15 years since I had a level 10 or under: but if you died too far from bind point and could not run back to your corpse fast enough, the body went 'poof' along with everything on it. I think you had 30 minutes for level 10 and under. As there was no twinking in the early days, this didn't hurt, much. As you leveled, the time went up, Im not sure how high now. But if at level 35 you couldnt get to your corpse and you were wearing quest armor, it poofed, all gone. So did experience.
The only way the GMs would intervene was super extrordinary events, such as server crashes.
CR's have been discussed for Rantheon. I'm expecting lose gear and experience. But we shall see.
I doubt it because Brad has been on record stating that the Death penalty will be somewhere between EQlaunch and Vanguard. And, the absolute worst (or most punishing feature) of EQ's death penalty was permanent corpse loss (Plane of Fear!). So, somewhere in between EQ to VG would be including at most Corpse Runs, Exp Loss, and De-Leveling. I'd personally be all for death penalties stiffer than EQlaunch, but even I would agree that you'd lose many supporters with that punishing of a penalty.
I tried searching for Brad's post on these forums where he described the death penalty, but I couldn't find it. It may have been a post before 2015 though which is archived.
In modern EQ they implimented a minimal/recommended level for gear which did limit twinking of the late game equipment. I think this is one type of approach, though I really don't like minimal levels but I understand why it's there.
But I do like the suggestion that item power is relevant to your skill levels. This could be a meta-gameplay element where even a player looting the item to equipment for themself may not immediately be able to use the item at it's fullest potential. Of course it would continue scaling down so if a level 1 equiped it the power would be very low but still usable.
@bigdogchris
Yeah, I'm not a fan of minimal/recommended level either, and implementation pretty much restricts the benefit of twinking altogether. And, I think it's pretty unrealistic that someone couldn't hold a sword from level 1 - it's more realistic that they couldn't use that sword skillfully. And, most all gear post Luclin era had required levels as well - like recommend level 50/required level 55. At that point, twinking was pretty much removed from the game with the exception of gear from mainly Launch -> Velious and a few other select pieces. And I agree on the meta-game point; however, I would absolutely not want item levels from gear that would determine how it was scaled, but, rather the player skill level (which is pretty much a behind the scenes recommended level when skill level growth is based on experience level).
Example: if they were to obtain some piece of raid gear at 45 that with 200 1h slash to be able to maximize it's potential (based off innate damage caps that may be in game), I'd be ok with it. But, not some arbitrary item level that is given to gear and based off the item level a players skill/experience level has to be XYZ. I believe EQ removed the damage cap completely at level 40, which, was fine for launch, but in preparation for future expansions, I would look into capping damage at max level (perhaps based off the maximum damage from the available weapon in that expansion) based off skill level, so future expansion weapons don't trivialize previous content - think 200/30+ weapons in EQ now without recommend/required levels.
This way, twinking would still be beneficial throughout progression, and players would have an advantage from playing a max level character, but it wouldn't be extreme.
Another unrelated thought I had as well, in response to Graysilk's idea on the progeny compromise, would be a different take on the system. I know I wouldn't ever retire a max level character with a very slow progression curve; however, I may be more incentivized to start Alts if the progeny bonuses could be transferred to an alt. Again though, the benefits of this system would have to be good enough to justify rerolling, and, if that was the case, I would see a lot of frustration when a player doesn't want to reroll their main, but feels slighted as they aren't as good as the person who continually rerolled. Or, you would have players starting a best/easiest soloing/leveling class and then transferring benefits to a tank/cleric etc. who would be more difficult to level. Pretty OT here, but I'm very skeptical of the Progeny system and look forward to hearing more.
I think that when one is not sure about a solution, the best way is to ask what would happen in a real world.
So you have this young apprentice starting to cast the first candle sorts and you offer him the mystic globe that regenerates mana like crazy.
Well this apprentice would not have the experience, knowledge and the capacity to control the globe.
He could use it but just barely .
Then, as his skills and training increase the globe would work better and better.
So for twinking purposes I think the best is to have a function which ties a skill to the performance of an item.
It starts say at 10% efficiency and then at some much higher skill it reaches 100 %.
It seems the simplest and most realist solution to me.
If the game ends up implimenting the progeny system perhaps your character can be 'trained by' or 'mentored by' your main charcter which may give a boost to your skills. That way if skill based items are used you twink your own character you can take more advantage of the item than someone who just bought it through gray markets or something.
@Bigdogchris
I would like that idea for the Progeny system better - instead of adding a permanent bonus to a character (which would be extremely frustrating as someone would want to keep rerolling to get more and more bonuses), you could basically improve your by unlocking "more potential" basically quicker, and, ultimately, at max level there would be no major bonus. It would just be another benefit of having played a max level character.
Maybe a higher damage cap for progeny alts? Or if Skill progression was 5 per level till maxed at 200, maybe 6 per? I don't know, but you could be pretty creative with that idea in mind - I like it, and like it much more than thinking of having to retire my main character.
Raidan said:Graysilk said:Tsk Tsk. Posting a well thought out thread and then telling people not to post on it if they disagree is a bit counter productive to the use of these forums, imo...
I don't disagree there, and, I like debates. However, there's plenty of discussion on the pros/cons of implementing twinking - I didn't want this discussion to turn into that endless cyclical argument. Based off Brad's recent thread (not sure how long you've been following this site or MMORPG), instead of passionately debating why old school mechanics should be in and potentially turning away new players/supporters when they didn't agree, I wanted to discuss tenets/mechanics/ideas that are already projected to be included in Pantheon (or in this case probably will be with twinking) and how to succesfully implement them and/or improve on the already known methods. I was going to start with a more controversial FAQ item or Tenet such as no instancing, but I decided to go with twinking first.
I played every class and race combination in EQ. Time varied doing this. While fun, it did not take me long to realize that I did not want to play a troll, orgre, dwarf, or halfling full time. Barbs were fun. I loved the elves. The classes I played were based on their abilities. Hie and De for casters, Orgres for SK, Halfling for rangers (I think been a long time ;) ). Over time, my mains narrowed down to a Tier'dal necro and a human SK.
The point being, by the time year 5 rolled around I was not interested in leveling another all the way up from level 1, I'd seen it all - so to speak. The Seeing was needing shortcuts, so I understand the need for something like twinking to alieveate that need.
The Progency system may be a good compromise.
I agree with you on becoming bored leveling alts, but I would see the Progency system as an alternative to twinking or another option in addition to twinking more than a compromise. Some players "may" decide that it's worthwhile to basically reroll their character (I wouldn't after the time commitment), but even as you included in your quote, you didn't want to level another all the way up from 1, and I'm sure that point would be emphasized even more if you were leveling the same class/race if you used the progency system. I would think some sort of mentoring system would be a good compromise (see the discussion in the recent necroed Mentoring: Yay/Nay thread).
I just do not want this world to degenerate into what EQ became late in its life: rogues that did not know how to trip traps, shaman who didnt buy their buff spells because 'they wanted to fight', enchanters who couldnt hold cc, and a 2nd tank who said he didnt bother covering the healers, because 'they could cover themselves.' They had the equipment, but no idea how to use it. (and yes some was from 'buying accounts of course). Back when knowing how to use your equipment and how to play your class, was more important than 'knowing the dungeon'.
Definitely don't disagree there, and I want players to have to learn their class, experience a challenge, and become skilled, which is why I was suggesting scaled twinking, versus partially scaled like it was in EQ. Even with the damage caps, if a Rogue/Warrior etc. was wearing a Fungi Tunic with +15 hp regen and +100 hp/mana items, there was basically no downtime between level 1 till at least 30ish. If Raw hps/mana were removed from items and replaced with Sta/int/wis and a recovery skill (or something similar) was introduced that only allowed you to have +1-2 hp regen, it wouldn't have been as game-breaking. Casters still had "more" downtime as there wasn't as overpowering twink gear for casters until Mana regen items became extremely common.
To answer: I've been in the Kickstarter for about a year and a half. I've been following Brad since EQ launch. I have been waiting for Pantheon thru EQ's end with PoK, to EQII second iteration, thru alph/beta VG and the present. I am very much interested in this world.
As to this discussion. I am aware of it. If the archives were open to the public my views are there, as are perhaps yours.
I do understand not wanting it to turn into a rant. Howerver, if your experience in the game world is extensive, then you know that this is one of the more civilized forums on the web :)
I really have enjoyed following almost every idea and question and topic presented here. Some I comment on or offer suggestions of my own. Some I do not.
I agree that replacing the raw mana with stats would have been a very good solution. Hope that this type of thing is considered for our world now. The Fungi Tunic was Op and for such low levels....
Generally speaking. I am not a fan of the mentoring system. I feel that each atavar should level on their own merits, not on the coattails of a higher level.
In ref. to re-rolling vs alts. When I said that I didnt like leving all over again from 1 on up, I didn't clarify that. My main(s) in EQ were a Tier'Dal Necro and a Human SK. I also had a HiE wizard and an enchanter that I only leveled high enough to make the charmed mug. Each of these were fun to play, fun to level, and I was not bored with them at any point. I tried all class/race combos just to get the feel of the class and what it could do. A good precursor to facing them in pvp.
However, after 5 years, and leveling 4 characters to end game: the idea of doing it again from scratch was boring. I never had 2 of the same character such as 2 DE necros, would have been way too boring. But, the progency system may have interested me in that I could pass down items to a brand new character/race combo within the game limits. And each new character was a new game in itself, with their own set of skills, areas of play and quest lines.
Edited: can't spell
Raidan said:In light of Brad's recent post regarding dealing with skeptics, I'm going to take a different approach in this thread and future threads I create (time permitting). I want to focus on controversial game mechanics, features, tenets, etc. and discuss how they can be implemented successfully versus whether or not the established tenet should or should not be permitted (I realize in this case twinking isn't established, but it's definitely controversial). For this specific thread, if you disagree altogether that twinking should not be allowed in-game, please ignore the thread as I don't want to get into arguments that twinking should or should not be allowed because of XYZ.
I'm creating this thread based on the assumption that twinking will be allowed in some form in Pantheon (it's not fully established either way yet), and, I want to brainstorm ways that it could be implemented without being game-breaking, and, maybe give the developers and idea or two.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
There's been a few threads in the past on twinking, which, I believe most are archived, but I'll copy Brad's blog post from March 2014 as reference and a more recent post where we had a brief discussion on twinking as well.
https://www.pantheonmmo.com/content/blogs/151/70/twinking-good-or-evil-or-in-between
In the Non-Linear Gear thread, twinking was briefly discussed:
https://www.pantheonmmo.com/content/forums/topic/1968/non-linear-gear-progression-please/view/page/1
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
With that said, I'll paste my post that I created over at MMORPG with a way I believe twinking could be allowed, be beneficial, but not be game-breaking (with a few added changes from Dullahan's input). I'd be curious to here others thoughts or ideas as well on how twinking could be implemented, be controlled yet still worthwhile, but not gamebreaking in that it trivializes all low-level challenge.
"As for controlling twinking, I had posted some thoughts on the Pantheon official forums awhile back, but I would use a scaling system similar to EQ1 with tweaks (many don't remember that EQ put damage/haste caps on early levels). I'll paste my post below:
...I think there could be a realistic way behind to scenes to control this by creating skill or stat based walls which make sense versus using required levels or bind on equip on gear. Example being, if your weapon skills were less than 50 (level 10) damage max damage cap is 20, less than 100 (level 20), damage cap is 40, etc. It's still artificial, but at least it could be explained that you don't have the skills to command the full potential of that weapon. And, instead of putting raw hps/mana/regen etc. on gear, increase it through stats (Sta/Wis/Int) which would scale in benefit with player level. And, like EQ, with procs, you could have the message that "Your will isn't sufficient to control this weapon" until X level. The only really difficult thing to control would be Armor Class on gear, but, like weapons, you could probably have that skill based as well in that your Defense Skill controlled the AC caps. At level 10 - 50 defensive skill cap and 500 AC cap. At level 50 - 200 defensive skill cap and 2000 AC cap. You'd have to be creative with hp/mana regen, but I'm sure we could brainstorm a way to scale it."And, with Dullahan's feedback, AC could be scaled through armor proficiency skills in the same manner, and "Regen" type items could be controlled through a scaling recovery skill.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
So, basically, twinking would still be allowable, but controlled. I'd want the "twink gear" to be more in comparison to BIS gear pieces for that level range versus extremely overpowered.
Raidan,
I think a decent way to handle twinking (which I enjoy BTW) is if you trade an Item to a chartacter on your account that item no matter what the level will degrade until it breaks without possibility of repair. So if you do twink a character you can no longer sell said item after its used by the twink. The rate at which it degrades needs to be determined obviously but if you want to equip twinks it comes with a cost and that should keep everyone happy including the economy.
I personally hate level restriction on items and I hate No Drop items as well IMHO the only items that shopuld be no drop or character bound are Quest rewards. If you want the Item the option is simple do the quest.
So if i have a level 20 twink and I want to give him a sword I looted off a mob at level 50 I can do so but it will break much sooner than the norm.
Now when it comes to this twink rule it should only apply to weapons traded within an account and thats where it gets confusing or difficult to implement. I mean I can always ask a friend to trade with my trwink circumventing the mechanic so.... how to we specify a "twink" ?
I don't really see a purpose. EQ didn't do twinking intentionally as far as I know, which is why later expansions started having recommended/required levels. Designing the game from the ground up to have twinking seems kind of silly to me.
EQ did a lot of things accidentally that people see as cool. I see them as idiotic. Hard coding your game for low level content to be trivialized with disgusting amounts of gear seems kind of silly to me. I'd rather just not see much tradeable equipment, or have all equipment require a specific level to use so it just never happens.
Twinking can come in the form of having a ton of plat and buying level-appropriate crafted gear or something. Not "I have a Fungus Covered Scale Tunic stacked with a Fungus Covered Great Staff, let's go pull the entirety of a zone and take no damage".
@Liav,
I honestly know better than to respond, but, I'll take the bait anyhow. As Dullahan said, EQ did intentionally have twinking, and wanted characters to be able to pass down items or pass items to other characters, or be able to sell items to those who may not have been level appropriate to buy them. Where the developers may not have realized the repercussions is on items like the Fungi tunic - which, if you had read my OP versus just stating your opinion, you would have had your unfounded concerns addressed. In addition to you ignoring my very clear point of ignoring the thread if you disagree with twinking.
And, to your "as far as I know" point, that's where I can't take any arguments you present about EQ launch seriously. You self-admittedly didn't play till 2001 - Luclin era, and you were 7-8 years old at launch, and 9-10 during Luclin. It is not meant to be offensive, but you can't have an intelligent discussion about systems as a 7-8 year old, especially, when you didn't experience EQlaunch first-hand. They added recommended levels later because it was a different development team than at launch and it was easier to slap on recommended/required levels. It's why every expansion post Luclin/Omens of War was a gear treadmill - because it was easier to just add stats each level than create meaningful itemization - the same could be seen with spell sets.
And, back to twinking, the purpose of twinking is there's no reason that gear usuable by a level 50 shouldn't be able to be usable by a level 1. It allows gear to be more meaningful as it's not solely restricted to a specific level range only, but it could be retained by the person and used by the person (or alt) for many levels. The difference being is the level 1 may not be as skillful as the level 35-45 person using the item. Or, perhaps the level 1 couldn't use the full potential (procs) of the weapon. If you want to explain away certain magical properties like procs by not having a certain skillset or power - so be it, but unless items are restricted based off stats - i.e. needing 100 STR versus 50 STR to equip an item (which EQ didn't and Pantheon hasn't claimed it will), there's no reason a level 1 should be restricted.
______________________________________________
@Crypton
You're not the first person that I've seen suggest that system of diminishing returns - but, I just think it's more realistic personally to restrict off a player's skill set than have an item magically decrease in power everytime it changes hands. And, like you said, how would the system be controlled if someone was legitimately trying to sell an item to another? Or, if a player traded the item to another level appropriate player?
Twinking, when it completely overpowers the character, is at odds with group play.
Thats why Raidan suggested scaling down things like recovery gained from items like a fungi tunic. Fungi made individual characters a one man wrecking crew for like the first 30 levels. Not only did that discourage group play, but it also creates a content shortage.
Raidan said:/snip
"As for controlling twinking, I had posted some thoughts on the Pantheon official forums awhile back, but I would use a scaling system similar to EQ1 with tweaks (many don't remember that EQ put damage/haste caps on early levels). I'll paste my post below:
...I think there could be a realistic way behind to scenes to control this by creating skill or stat based walls which make sense versus using required levels or bind on equip on gear. Example being, if your weapon skills were less than 50 (level 10) damage max damage cap is 20, less than 100 (level 20), damage cap is 40, etc. It's still artificial, but at least it could be explained that you don't have the skills to command the full potential of that weapon. And, instead of putting raw hps/mana/regen etc. on gear, increase it through stats (Sta/Wis/Int) which would scale in benefit with player level. And, like EQ, with procs, you could have the message that "Your will isn't sufficient to control this weapon" until X level. The only really difficult thing to control would be Armor Class on gear, but, like weapons, you could probably have that skill based as well in that your Defense Skill controlled the AC caps. At level 10 - 50 defensive skill cap and 500 AC cap. At level 50 - 200 defensive skill cap and 2000 AC cap. You'd have to be creative with hp/mana regen, but I'm sure we could brainstorm a way to scale it."And, with Dullahan's feedback, AC could be scaled through armor proficiency skills in the same manner, and "Regen" type items could be controlled through a scaling recovery skill.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
So, basically, twinking would still be allowable, but controlled. I'd want the "twink gear" to be more in comparison to BIS gear pieces for that level range versus extremely overpowered.
Great ideas, Raidan and Dullahan! Love the thread format as well.
I would take what you have started and add the following input:
About handling AC: Expand AC formula to include base AC cap by player level with other variables. AC cap calculated with the following variables: player level base AC cap, race modifier, class modifier and defense/armor proficiency skill. Race and class modifiers could be removed if desired, or additional modifiers added. The weighted values for each variable could be adjusted independantly for balancing purposes. This provides major benefits over flat item scaling (player level vs recommended item level, as seen in EQ) in providing a single point of management for balancing, and would avoid extra work during item implementation by removing the need to place a recommended level on each item. The formula could also be applied backwards to equipped items on your avatar to show how much of the item you're using. Item stat display similar to scaled EQ items comes to mind: AC 50 (23) where (23) is what you're receiving from the item out of 50 total available. The number displayed on each item would vary based on the other items you have equipped, but could serve as a barometer for where your AC cap is at, if displaying the actual number as a character stat is deemed undesirable.
About hp/mana regen: This was one of the most popular things to look for when twinking in EQ (think: fungi tunic, obsidian death shroud, et al). Adding level caps to hp and mana regen would be a fine solution, in my opinion. The cap would need to be high enough to provide a noticable benefit and thus remain a stat worth twinking, but not so much that its gamebreaking. If the benefit is too minor, it wouldn't be worth investing in regen stats. This could be tricky to balance.
Other solutions: Rather than hard caps by level, soft caps by level with aggressive diminishing returns could also work. This way, the above-and-beyond min/max twinker would still find satisfaction in being techinically superior, although the real world difference would be very minor. This would also allow twinking to feel less boxed in and rigid, while still providing a "skys the limit" feeling that makes twinking so attractive. Diminishing returns could scale down to a zero return (hard cap) or scale down to infinitely smaller returns (no hard cap). When set correctly, both would ultimately serve the same purpose with the difference simply being flavor and player perception.
Dullahan said:Of course EQ intended for there to be twinking, or else they'd have done something to prevent it. The concept predates EQ, and even the term was used in MUDs.
Hmm so I guess EQ also allowed you to exploit because after all they would of done something about it to prevent it right??? That arguement is in line with your comment. Chances are they didnt think people would do that to alts and it slipped in just like a lot of things did in MMO.
Twinking is used because Subpar players find where there toon is most powerful and then lock and use insame amounts of gear to make them seem better then they really are. EQ2 had twinking that wasnt intentional as they added level limits but what they didnt notice was when players could stop XP lock they would do the same thing. Lock at a certain level and just horde gear and be OP all day pretending to be good at there class .
I can't be asked to respond to everyone individually so I'll just say "TL;DR: Stat scaling."
While not a bad solution I still think that it will just trivialize itemization at low levels. You saturate the game with all of this endgame gear at lower levels and what happens? You spend tons of developer time balancing gear every single time a new piece gets added.
Invariably, one of the three happens:
I still say, why do we need twinking anyway?