Forums » General Pantheon Discussion

Why training and other "bad things" are good for the g

    • 103 posts
    April 15, 2016 9:00 AM PDT

    NoobieDoo said:

     

    Some of you are missing the point. It has nothing to do with 'rose tinted glasses' and nothing to do with burning the agressor at the stake and singing kumbaya with the bros afterwards. And it has everything to do with the lack of hand-holding that EQ and VG did which was a big reason why those games were so great.

    There is a huge difference between setting up rules so that toxic players cannot actively harrass others and convenience hand-holding features like a group finder because players cant be bothered to find groups for something they need or want to do.

    We all live in an actual "living breathing world" yet even there exists rules governing what you can and cannot do to other "players." The only difference being how theyre enforced. It isnt practical for developers to police the actions of every player and dish out punishment accordingly, but they can definitely minimize it by setting rules, as is common in every game, ever, digital or otherwise. Would all of you be ok with FFA PvP with full looting? Id say even most of the more traditionalist EQ player thinks it would be ridiculous. Yet it presents the same problems, and "community solutions" as training, KS, ninja looting, etc. Sure, it may open the door for more player interaction for the "living breathing world" but the point is (which I think youre all missing instead) the trade off isnt worth the hassle. Particularly in a game set to bring back most of the other 'player interaction' requirements which have been lost over the years.


    This post was edited by Kayo at April 15, 2016 9:01 AM PDT
    • VR Staff
    • 167 posts
    April 15, 2016 10:55 AM PDT

    Kayo said:

    There is a huge difference between setting up rules so that toxic players cannot actively harrass others and convenience hand-holding features like a group finder because players cant be bothered to find groups for something they need or want to do.

    We all live in an actual "living breathing world" yet even there exists rules governing what you can and cannot do to other "players." The only difference being how theyre enforced. It isnt practical for developers to police the actions of every player and dish out punishment accordingly, but they can definitely minimize it by setting rules, as is common in every game, ever, digital or otherwise. Would all of you be ok with FFA PvP with full looting? Id say even most of the more traditionalist EQ player thinks it would be ridiculous. Yet it presents the same problems, and "community solutions" as training, KS, ninja looting, etc. Sure, it may open the door for more player interaction for the "living breathing world" but the point is (which I think youre all missing instead) the trade off isnt worth the hassle. Particularly in a game set to bring back most of the other 'player interaction' requirements which have been lost over the years.

     

    I don't think anyone is missing the point, I think it's just a matter of opinion. As for myself (and for some of the others here who have agreed with me) it's a matter of how much we as players want to be governed/policed or how much we care to do ourselves. Not allowing things like training, KSing etc puts that power into the games/devs hands rather than the players. In our opinion, having those things available not only creates another level of exitement, danger, and yes fustration,  but also, that it exists at all, adds another level of player immersion.

    Not to mention guild rivlaries, crushing villans/d-bags, and stories told, makes for good reading on message boards when you're stuck at work :P


    This post was edited by Roenick at April 15, 2016 10:58 AM PDT
    • 999 posts
    April 15, 2016 11:07 AM PDT

    @Kayo

    Throwing out a FFA PvP in comparison isn't an apples to apples comparison.  Of course the majority wouldn't want them here as most want a PvE game with dedicated PvP servers.

    But, I'll stick to your real world - living breathing world example.  There would be rules in Pantheon that govern/restrict training much like laws that make certain actions illegal in the real world.  I'm sure intentional training would be aganist the EULA, and after warnings, repeated offenses, could be bannable.  Would it still occur, sure, but if caught there would be reprecussions either from the community and/or GMs.  Just like in real life, not all crimes are caught or criminals punished equally.

    There has to be controls, but it's a balance of player freedom versus controls.  I think those arguing for it, get your point, we just disagree and would say it is worth the hassle.

    • 769 posts
    April 15, 2016 11:46 AM PDT

    Raidan said:

    There has to be controls, but it's a balance of player freedom versus controls.  I think those arguing for it, get your point, we just disagree and would say it is worth the hassle.

    This right here. To those of us that are arguing for players to control this dynamic, it IS worth the hassle, which I suppose is where the disagreements here are coming from.

    Just like in most other parts of this game that we fight for, it's a risk vs reward situation. Is something as minor as an infrequent griefer worth the reward of having more player driven controls? To us, yes it is.

    -Tralyan

    • 578 posts
    April 15, 2016 12:33 PM PDT

    Kayo said:

    NoobieDoo said:

    Sure, it may open the door for more player interaction for the "living breathing world" but the point is (which I think youre all missing instead) the trade off isnt worth the hassle. Particularly in a game set to bring back most of the other 'player interaction' requirements which have been lost over the years.



    I understand your point. It's just a matter of opinions and I disagree with what you are calling for. I believe the trade off IS worth the hassle.

    I'm curious, in what ways would you want the devs to handle this? One way that I know how devs have handled this is through instances. These dungeons protect players from any interference from players outside of your group. Instanced dungeons become easy, and usually can be cleared within 20-30 minutes once you know what you're doing. My issue with this is just how monotonous these zones become. Nothing random happens, it is the same 20/30 minute run EVERY single time for the few weeks you run it. Maybe the first few days has some dynamic to it, learning the zone, maybe you wipe a few times, but once you learn the zone it turns into that proverbial hamster wheel. It's the same exact 30 minute run every time you do it. Trains/griefers give this the chance to have some randomness to it and breaks up the monotony. This is why I think griefers/trains/etc are worth the hassle. Because they create unscripted random events. If we go back to the 'real life' scenarios, real life is random. Plus, griefing just doesn't happen all that often. Trains maybe more often, but griefing? No, definitely not as much as some make it out to be.

    Another way I have seen this handled is how EQ2 handled it. Maybe it's different now, but iirc when I played the first person to tag the mob gained ownership and if they lost the mob it would have to reset before it could aggro anybody else. This removed the possibility of anybody training your party. I'm not sure what other ways there would be to handle this but we already know instances are basically out of the question.

    • 30 posts
    April 15, 2016 1:02 PM PDT

    I disagree with the premise that griefing builds community.  What griefing does more than anything is drive people (especially new and/or casual players) away from the game.

    Two examples:

    The flagging/keying mechanics for Elemental planes access in EQ:PoP led to massive griefing on the guild level.  Many progression guilds that wanted exclusive access to elemental planes would police the lower tier content and ensure no guild could catch up to them.  Either by having 1 person start and intentionally fail early events (like the Bertox cycle) to reset the timer and make sure it was never available for anyone.  Or by watching for other guilds and training them during their attempts.  This not only blocked other guilds from getting access to the higher tier zones, it prevented them from getting loot from the lower tier raids as well.

    That is the high end extreme example.  A good example of the opposite end of the spectrum is the Evil Eye camp in the Gorge.  It was a good low level loot camp but the eyes had such low HP that a DD class like wiz or mag could do 50% of the eyes life with 1 spell.  But the camp was too hard to hold alone, so griefers would just invis and sit safely behind groups until the eyes were pulled then do their 1 spell and let the group finish off the pet and roamers.  There was nothing a group could do about this except leave or just stop pulling the eyes and hope the griefer would get bored.

    There is nothing that the "victims" could do about either of those situations.  And those are just the people who were griefing for some reward.  At least good/thoughtful design could dissuade them.  What do you do about the people who like to go out of their way to ruin fun for others even when it does not benefit them?

    When the Play Nice Policy came out and the guide program was going strong that helped a lot, but the developers definitely need to keep griefers in mind and do what they can to reduce the opportunity for it and limit the reward.  

    Maybe I am misreading the thread but it sounds like some of you are arguing that things like this should be allowed and the developers should not try to prevent it?  That mindset would be a big turnoff to a lot of people and would make a niche market even smaller.

    • 999 posts
    April 15, 2016 6:46 PM PDT

    @Flec

    As Noobiedoo said, it's not that anyone wants to be trained or "promote" griefing, it's just that the mechanics that are used to "police" griefing are much worse such as all mobs being leashed, etc.  No one is arguing that there shouldn't be an attempt to prevent griefing, but instead that there shouldn't be excess controls in place to prevent it at the expense of gameplay.  Basically, don't make knee-jerk reactions for a few bad apples at the expense of all players. 

    With Griefers, you start at community controls.  Ostracize from groups/guilds and server reps.  It escalates from there.  /Report, documentation of continued reports, and /banning. 

    What would make a niche market even smaller is by changing what would make Pantheon different and instead standardizing it to the norm in today's MMORPGs. 

    • 85 posts
    April 15, 2016 9:33 PM PDT

    Raidan said:

    @Kayo

    Throwing out a FFA PvP in comparison isn't an apples to apples comparison.  Of course the majority wouldn't want them here as most want a PvE game with dedicated PvP servers.

    But, I'll stick to your real world - living breathing world example.  There would be rules in Pantheon that govern/restrict training much like laws that make certain actions illegal in the real world.  I'm sure intentional training would be aganist the EULA, and after warnings, repeated offenses, could be bannable.  Would it still occur, sure, but if caught there would be reprecussions either from the community and/or GMs.  Just like in real life, not all crimes are caught or criminals punished equally.

    There has to be controls, but it's a balance of player freedom versus controls.  I think those arguing for it, get your point, we just disagree and would say it is worth the hassle.

     

    Raidan sums up my feelings pretty well here (and in his other posts in this thread).  Roenick and NoobieDoo also make some excellent points.   

    Also, I, personally, would be okay with full loot FFA PVP.  Even though full loot is a bit hardcore for me, I would choose it any day of the week over an homoginized, over regulated, griefer-safe game that imposes too many restrictions on player actions and impacts my freedom in game.          


    This post was edited by Sylee at April 15, 2016 9:34 PM PDT
    • 578 posts
    April 16, 2016 1:07 AM PDT

    flec said:

    I disagree with the premise that griefing builds community.  What griefing does more than anything is drive people (especially new and/or casual players) away from the game.

    Two examples:

    The flagging/keying mechanics for Elemental planes access in EQ:PoP led to massive griefing on the guild level.  Many progression guilds that wanted exclusive access to elemental planes would police the lower tier content and ensure no guild could catch up to them.  Either by having 1 person start and intentionally fail early events (like the Bertox cycle) to reset the timer and make sure it was never available for anyone.  Or by watching for other guilds and training them during their attempts.  This not only blocked other guilds from getting access to the higher tier zones, it prevented them from getting loot from the lower tier raids as well.

    That is the high end extreme example.  A good example of the opposite end of the spectrum is the Evil Eye camp in the Gorge.  It was a good low level loot camp but the eyes had such low HP that a DD class like wiz or mag could do 50% of the eyes life with 1 spell.  But the camp was too hard to hold alone, so griefers would just invis and sit safely behind groups until the eyes were pulled then do their 1 spell and let the group finish off the pet and roamers.  There was nothing a group could do about this except leave or just stop pulling the eyes and hope the griefer would get bored.



    I understand your concern and there will be some safe guards in place. Using VG as an example, its raiding system was set up in a way that guilds weren't able to 'lock' down other guilds and prevent them from raiding. There were areas that permitted griefing but as a whole guilds could feel rather safe with knowing they could get stuff accomplished without much hinderance.

    I must of put probably 10 years into both EQ and VG playing daily and stuff like you said that happened at the Evil Eye camp just didn't happen that often. What's interesting is that I think there were more griefers in WoW then there ever were in EQ and VG combined (at least in my experience) and WoW had all sorts of safe guards to protect you from griefers.

    A 'virtual world' is different than a game. Virtual worlds are games that behave like real worlds and there are different rules that apply. I feel that some of the things that are being asked for go against what makes these virtual worlds alive and unique. Some of y'all don't want a virtual world imo, you want a game that has no randomness to it, that has no danger from the community.

    Let me say this, as I think I can speak for others, we don't want to be griefed. Not only that, we don't believe that griefing plays a big part in making this game feel like a virtual world. It plays a small part, but it does play a part. And creating these 'virtual worlds' requries many small parts. The better 'virtual worlds' contain as many parts as they can so if you completely remove all community danger then you are removing an integral part of the 'virtual world' because though it may be a small part it is still integral.

    I remember one time in VG where my group did actually get griefed. We were in SoD I believe with the bridges and the towers that had the mini bosses you needed for some whatever drops. My group was working our way up to one of the towers when some other group blasts right by us after we spent our precious time clearing up to the named, and stole our named. Killed em right there before we could get rested up after clearing. Pricks right? The nerve of that group, and was actually some other guild. Too bad there weren't safe guards in place to protect us from that right? NO, heck no! LOL, that night was one my best nights in VG. We called the rest of our guild to come and we created an all out war between that other group/guild. They had other members waiting at another tower waiting to go up to clear and get the named well I went into the water and hotkeyed to target the named in their tower. I played my slow song while targeting their named and locked him down. In my slow song I put water breathing and invis and they must of looked for me for like 30 minutes. They couldn't understand how we were locking it down, and we must of killed like 2 or 3 of their nameds in that manner. Eventually they found me and tried to train me once. And then eventually we dueled and i whooped dat azz!


    But just think if there were safe guards in place that would have prevented all that. Even though we started out griefing each other, it turned out to be a blast and actually no hard feelings afterward. Well, not many at least. Not as much as you would have expected. We handled it ourselves. It was one of those rare occurences that I was griefed but it was also one of those many random moments that created life within the game. Which I appreciated so much.

    Even though I could be wrong I have a feeling that with the crowd in Pantheon you won't have much to worry about griefers. They'll be around but I think that the scenario that plays out afterwards, how your group/guild/players handle it, will be memorable and will be worth it in the long run. Or maybe I'm bat crap crazy and have no clue what I'm talking about. All I know is I really haven't been affected by griefers to the point to really want them to be policed by the game itself.

    • 112 posts
    April 16, 2016 3:56 AM PDT

    I can't help but view this kind of like an issue of being too restrictful towards dev's.  We want them to make a great game... but then we start telling them to not put anything in the game that leads to training, or kill stealing, or any kind of griefing.

     

    If the original dev's knew what training was before creating EQ... would they have implemented feign death?  That allows people to train effectively without dying?

    Would they have put mem wipe into the game so players could try and kill steal a mob without doing the majority of the damage?

    Would they have made bards the way they did if they knew swarm kiting would occur, leading to massive zone hogging/lag, and entirely circumventing the need to group for exp.

     

    I don't know if they would completely remove an ability, from having that knowledge, but it would have swayed their function imo.

     

    I personally don't think training is bad enough to warrant removal.  This is coming from a monk who had to wrestle the idea of returning the favor to those bad apples you speak of.  And for the record, I did retaliate more than a few times over the years, because that's what the game called for: the players handling issues ourselves.

     

    Would eq have been as great of a game class-wise, if the dev's had to balance for pvp simultaneously?  It's something that current mmo's suffer a great deal from imo, because someone finds a way to use an ability to an overpowering effect, and as a result it gets nerfed on both sides.  I see this situation in a similar light, and I want the dev's to blaze an awesome PVE path with creative (and some old) new abilities/spells.  I want them to run screaming ahead with slowing down only occasionally to make sure they are still on-path.  

     

    What I don't want them to do is spend excessive time weighing if/how an ability will be abused.  Because let's be honest, they could release a game where they think nothing can be used negatively, and someone will find a way.  

    • 1434 posts
    April 16, 2016 4:24 AM PDT

    @Lokkan I agree with the sentiment, though some of the things you believe they understood during development have since been referred to as emergent gameplay and behavior.

    I definitely don't believe they should throw caution to the wind, but I think its more important to design things so as not to restrict players. If something must be changed, so be it. However, going into everything attempting to balance and safeguard everyone in all situations will stifle creativity and result in a much less interesting game.

    • 844 posts
    April 16, 2016 1:41 PM PDT

    NoobieDoo said:

    flec said:

    I disagree with the premise that griefing builds community.  What griefing does more than anything is drive people (especially new and/or casual players) away from the game.

    Two examples:

    The flagging/keying mechanics for Elemental planes access in EQ:PoP led to massive griefing on the guild level.  Many progression guilds that wanted exclusive access to elemental planes would police the lower tier content and ensure no guild could catch up to them.  Either by having 1 person start and intentionally fail early events (like the Bertox cycle) to reset the timer and make sure it was never available for anyone.  Or by watching for other guilds and training them during their attempts.  This not only blocked other guilds from getting access to the higher tier zones, it prevented them from getting loot from the lower tier raids as well.

    That is the high end extreme example.  A good example of the opposite end of the spectrum is the Evil Eye camp in the Gorge.  It was a good low level loot camp but the eyes had such low HP that a DD class like wiz or mag could do 50% of the eyes life with 1 spell.  But the camp was too hard to hold alone, so griefers would just invis and sit safely behind groups until the eyes were pulled then do their 1 spell and let the group finish off the pet and roamers.  There was nothing a group could do about this except leave or just stop pulling the eyes and hope the griefer would get bored.



    I understand your concern and there will be some safe guards in place. Using VG as an example, its raiding system was set up in a way that guilds weren't able to 'lock' down other guilds and prevent them from raiding. There were areas that permitted griefing but as a whole guilds could feel rather safe with knowing they could get stuff accomplished without much hinderance.

    I must of put probably 10 years into both EQ and VG playing daily and stuff like you said that happened at the Evil Eye camp just didn't happen that often. What's interesting is that I think there were more griefers in WoW then there ever were in EQ and VG combined (at least in my experience) and WoW had all sorts of safe guards to protect you from griefers.

    A 'virtual world' is different than a game. Virtual worlds are games that behave like real worlds and there are different rules that apply. I feel that some of the things that are being asked for go against what makes these virtual worlds alive and unique. Some of y'all don't want a virtual world imo, you want a game that has no randomness to it, that has no danger from the community.

    Let me say this, as I think I can speak for others, we don't want to be griefed. Not only that, we don't believe that griefing plays a big part in making this game feel like a virtual world. It plays a small part, but it does play a part. And creating these 'virtual worlds' requries many small parts. The better 'virtual worlds' contain as many parts as they can so if you completely remove all community danger then you are removing an integral part of the 'virtual world' because though it may be a small part it is still integral.

    I remember one time in VG where my group did actually get griefed. We were in SoD I believe with the bridges and the towers that had the mini bosses you needed for some whatever drops. My group was working our way up to one of the towers when some other group blasts right by us after we spent our precious time clearing up to the named, and stole our named. Killed em right there before we could get rested up after clearing. Pricks right? The nerve of that group, and was actually some other guild. Too bad there weren't safe guards in place to protect us from that right? NO, heck no! LOL, that night was one my best nights in VG. We called the rest of our guild to come and we created an all out war between that other group/guild. They had other members waiting at another tower waiting to go up to clear and get the named well I went into the water and hotkeyed to target the named in their tower. I played my slow song while targeting their named and locked him down. In my slow song I put water breathing and invis and they must of looked for me for like 30 minutes. They couldn't understand how we were locking it down, and we must of killed like 2 or 3 of their nameds in that manner. Eventually they found me and tried to train me once. And then eventually we dueled and i whooped dat azz!


    But just think if there were safe guards in place that would have prevented all that. Even though we started out griefing each other, it turned out to be a blast and actually no hard feelings afterward. Well, not many at least. Not as much as you would have expected. We handled it ourselves. It was one of those rare occurences that I was griefed but it was also one of those many random moments that created life within the game. Which I appreciated so much.

    Even though I could be wrong I have a feeling that with the crowd in Pantheon you won't have much to worry about griefers. They'll be around but I think that the scenario that plays out afterwards, how your group/guild/players handle it, will be memorable and will be worth it in the long run. Or maybe I'm bat crap crazy and have no clue what I'm talking about. All I know is I really haven't been affected by griefers to the point to really want them to be policed by the game itself.

     

    You defintiely have those rose colored glasses on Noobie. In EQ and VG many special "play nice" rules had to be impleneted to keep guilds from dominating and cock-blocking other guilds. Lock-out timers alone were one of the largest mechanisms created to force a guild to play nice. Before lockout timers guilds could easily dominate popular raid content. My guild held the monopoly in VG on Wyverns before lockout timers were added.

    Someone said they played EQ 13 years and only got trained a few times? Were you the only player on the server? I can recall being trained numeorus times in a single day. 

    Training was used to harrass single players, used to steal a popular camp as in FBSS or other in Guk. Used to disrupt an entire guilds raid. Remember in the bad old days of EQ, there was no voip. So coordinating 70 people over a chat channel made it crazy at times. And one Monk that could come and aggro the boss on your raid before you were ready was a disaster.

    It happened in the Planes all the time. Guilds were disbanded by SoE for doing it. One famous event was BotS being disbanded after they were caught doing it in PoF.

    Training was fun when it was an accident, such as "Train to zone left", but all too often now it is just griefing. And jackholes that love to grief are given a litany of ways to do so with no penalties for them. It's as if games were designed to benefit griefers.

    • 1434 posts
    April 16, 2016 2:03 PM PDT

    I also experienced very little training in early EQ, but I didn't play much past Luclin. As time went on, I'm sure players only got better at finding ways to PvP without actual combat. That it supposedly became so prevalent is, to me, only a sign that it wasn't handled very well by SOE.

    Having played p99 which has a higher concentration of hardcores than any EQ server in history, I can tell you that when the powers that be aren't afraid to wield that power, overt attempts to grief other players become fairly uncommon. For all the corruption and drawbacks the server may have, most people will keep their rivalries cordial for the most part. I've seen plenty of trains there over the years, but I've also seen most of those players suspended or permanently banned for doing such things (of course, I record everything ;)

    I'd much rather see exciting game mechanics that could potentially be abused, than to have another boring sunshine and rainbows MMO without even the potential for villains to exist.

    • 5 posts
    April 16, 2016 11:53 PM PDT

    Completely understand the logic. I personally don't need enemies for the game to feel more alive. Those are going to happen naturally anyway :l I'd rather not be trained if I can help it. 

    • 30 posts
    April 17, 2016 1:06 AM PDT

    I played EQ1 for 10 years and it was by far the best gaming experience of my gaming "career".  But I definitely have to agree about the rose-colored glasses comment.  Saying that there was not much training or griefing in EQ1 is surprising.  Hey Zewtastic, were you on Tribunal?  Maybe it was only our servers haha.  

    Anway, I used the 2 examples above because they were both very common and neither could be prevented or resolved by community.  At least on a pve server, and that is all I am talking about.  PvP servers are completely different and griefing there was kindof the equivalent of saying hello haha.  More griefing on wow than on EQ is a pretty big stretch too.  Other than the timeless isle (which was probably the single worst idea in the history of PvE MMOs), there is not really much opportunity for griefing on PvE wow servers.  

    Definitely not saying they should make Pantheon follow wows rules but there has been 15 years of experience since original eq, so certaintly take the things that work.  Personally, I would put mob "tagging" in that catergory to prevent the kill steal style of griefing.  And better design for raid keying/flagging/progression.  

    And the idea that this is too restrictive towards the devs is ironic since there are soo many other threads saying "if feature X is added I will refuse to play!" (i.e. instancing, auction house, lfg tool, etc, etc, etc).  Dont see anyone trying to defend the dev's rights in those threads ;-)

    The last thing I want is for the suggested response to be that I should become a griefer myself like in NoobieDoo's and Lokkan's example.  That mentality is really more appropriate for the PvP servers and I hope that is not the game the developers are aiming for.  The fact that you felt that was the only option IS the exact problem I am talking about Lokkan.  And like Dullahan said, on a server like P99, if retaliation happened then both sides would have been banned.  But it is completely up to the whims of the GMs there and it is hard to quite that ban happy on a commercial server.

     

    • 844 posts
    April 17, 2016 3:03 AM PDT

    I played on The Rathe in EQ1.

    Training is what it is. I doubt it can be "fixed" without breaking game mechanics.

    What I do not like is how in all MMOs, players that like to grief have so many ways they can aggravate others. And griefers can usually be jerks with usually no danger or penalty to themselves.

    It seems as if MMOs are geared toward those that want to grief and exploit game mechanics at times.

    • 1434 posts
    April 17, 2016 3:11 AM PDT

    Oddly enough, the shady type of play we're talking about did not even exist on Rallos zek during my tenure '00-'02. Talk about a reputation, being a jerk there hurt. It basically meant you had to beg for mercy, join a PK guild, or reroll. People fought, or they got along, but there wasn't a lot of disrespect being thrown around. RZ was hardcore with item loot, and players mostly did not bad mouth or even attack each other unless one was in a PK guild or in a guild at war with another. It was mostly in good fun.

    • 30 posts
    April 17, 2016 12:33 PM PDT

    zewtastic said:

    Training is what it is. I doubt it can be "fixed" without breaking game mechanics.

    What I do not like is how in all MMOs, players that like to grief have so many ways they can aggravate others. And griefers can usually be jerks with usually no danger or penalty to themselves.

    It seems as if MMOs are geared toward those that want to grief and exploit game mechanics at times.

     

    General training I agree with you on, but there are lots of ways to minimize the ability for training to be used to harass guilds and prevent progression.  A simple brute force solution would be a door or barrier before a key/flag raid boss that cannot be crossed unless you are out of combat.  But I agree that stuff like that is not needed until it is needed.  As long as the devs and gms are responsive and try to stop griefing when it occurs there is not a problem.

    My concern was that this thread was implying that griefing was actually good for the game and that the devs should not try to stop or prevent it.


    • 86 posts
    August 18, 2016 5:00 AM PDT

    EQ1 is the gold standard.  EQ1 had trains, they were part of the environment, part of the experience.  Do not "fix" trains, do not neutralize the environment.  Let it be dangerous. Let there be fear.

    Punish griefers.  Dont neuter the mechanics.

    Do not sacrifice freedom for security.

    What will you do without freedom? 

     


    This post was edited by Greattaste at August 18, 2016 5:03 AM PDT
    • 793 posts
    August 18, 2016 5:41 AM PDT

    Trying to regulate the bad possibilities, just hinders those playing fairly.

    How many times do you go somewhere and see a sign stating you could not do something (ie: skateboarding in a shopping plaza, playing ball in a public swimming pool, no coolers at a park, no radios in a public space). It's because someone abused the priveledge, so rather than punish the abusers, they change the rules, and the folks who play by the rules end up suffer.

     


    This post was edited by Fulton at August 18, 2016 5:42 AM PDT
    • 151 posts
    August 18, 2016 7:11 AM PDT
    Gotta have trains and all the bad stuff or the good stuff will not matter.

    See a few claiming they want a challenging game but none of the bs that was part of old school eq. They are in the wrong place I hope. They seem to want a sterile gaming experience. No trains, no naked corpse runs, no big xp losses on death ect. They miss the point. Those unpredictable actions of others, those harsh penalties, they make the game real. I think some here really want a lobby game and instancing. Why would you want Pantheon?

    Why play in a world with no instances if all you care about is the challenge of the fight? Here the environment itself, in this case other players, are part of the challenge. If all you care about is getting the mechanic of the fight down things will get stale and boring fast.

    In the end none of the fights matter. None of the loot matters. Years from now all you will have are the memories. I like many of you have hundreds if not thousands of memories from eq1. Vivid amazing memories that make me smile, even the bad ones. You hear this from anyone that played during the frat few expansions. I listen to other people and the pest they can do is some Leeroy Jenkins sort of story how they got some item once. They might have good memories of high end content or some super raid fight but that's it. I have memories of misty thicket at level 8 giving serious thought about entering runny eye before I knew what it really was. Many more lie that.

    If they sanitize this game for the mass it will be just like every other mmo launched since 2004. Might do ok for a spell but will die an early death.
    • 763 posts
    August 18, 2016 7:20 AM PDT

    Many of the (so called) bad things in Eq1 (primarily) were, in hindsight, a good 'teambuilding exercise'.

    With today's hand-holding society there is a grave danger of overinflating the 'problem'...

    1.   'Oh no, somebody got trained! They might rage-quit... what we gonna do??'

    99.9% of all trains were inadvertent, ie accidental or due to stupidity/overconfidence. Since most were unintentional, you were only ever trained infrequently at best. For the *rare* occassion where some ass-hat would repeatedly train you to try clear a camp for themselves, thats what 'petition' was for. Let the Guides/GMs deal with the 0.01% of ass-hats. Don't put in 'locked encouters' etc. Yo are trying to use a sledge-hammer to crack a very very small nut.

    2.   'Oh no, Johnny the DarkElf ran into Felwithe and the guards keep killing him when he tries to get his corpse!'

    99.9% of all deaths happen in relatively easy to find/get to places. You nearly always know where your corpse is. You could ask anyone and find out about 'consent' for dragging, 'invis' for hiding, 'rez' for awkward situations etc. *rarely* did anyone 'lose' their corpse forever. Almost never did anyone end up in death loops etc. The only people who had serious corpse issues were Rqiders in wipes. You *might* think people would be danger-averse and not help out a wiped raid... well - you would be wrong. I have done it, and seen it done, many times.

    3.   'Oh no, I have been playing for 4 hours and haven't got to level 10 yet! Is my exp-meter broken?'

    Yeah .... I don't see this as a problem. Unless their exp-meter *is* broken of course.

    4.   'Oh no, I cann't find 'Burned Woods' ... and the glowey path thingy to show me the way is broke too!

    Nope, still not a problem. Does he not know 'They moved Burned Woods' though?

    5.   'Oh no, I picked DarkElf and all this merchant does is complain about 'ruined lands'. Is he broken?'

    Yeah, factions matter. Go figure.

    6.   'Oh no, I pulled 5 yellow mobs and I died! WTF? is my class gimped?'

    How do you spell 'challenging' again?

    I am sure you guys have more.... and more....

    EDIT: Typos to the left of me, typos to the right...


    This post was edited by Evoras at August 18, 2016 7:22 AM PDT
    • 200 posts
    August 18, 2016 7:34 AM PDT

    If the world is huge enough then training should not be a big problem.

     

    Greetings

    • 1303 posts
    August 18, 2016 8:46 AM PDT

    I appologize for going back in the conversation a bit here, but I'm coming in late.

    Kayo said:

    NoobieDoo said:

     Some of you are missing the point. It has nothing to do with 'rose tinted glasses' and nothing to do with burning the agressor at the stake and singing kumbaya with the bros afterwards. And it has everything to do with the lack of hand-holding that EQ and VG did which was a big reason why those games were so great.


    There is a huge difference between setting up rules so that toxic players cannot actively harrass others and convenience hand-holding features like a group finder because players cant be bothered to find groups for something they need or want to do.

    We all live in an actual "living breathing world" yet even there exists rules governing what you can and cannot do to other "players." The only difference being how theyre enforced. It isnt practical for developers to police the actions of every player and dish out punishment accordingly, but they can definitely minimize it by setting rules, as is common in every game, ever, digital or otherwise. Would all of you be ok with FFA PvP with full looting? Id say even most of the more traditionalist EQ player thinks it would be ridiculous. Yet it presents the same problems, and "community solutions" as training, KS, ninja looting, etc. Sure, it may open the door for more player interaction for the "living breathing world" but the point is (which I think youre all missing instead) the trade off isnt worth the hassle. Particularly in a game set to bring back most of the other 'player interaction' requirements which have been lost over the years.

    It's possible to make things so that no player can ever create a negative impact on any other player. It's called a single-player game.

    Your comparison to the real world is interesting. Exactly as it is in the real world, attempting to craft ways in which people cannot be guilty inherently revokes freedoms from those people. That's why America was established not to assume everyone is guilty and prevent them from acting in a particular way, but rather establish that they have acted improperly and in a way that creates harm and punish them accordingly. 

    In a gameworld I will grant that there needs to be certain controls. It's necessary for balance and to establish a consistent game experience. However, the more you restrict things to prevent harmful interactions between players, the more you put the game on rails. And the game will feel like it's on rails. It will be frustrating because you're hitting artificial walls that dont make any sense. And most commonly the same mechanics that mean to prevent harmful interactions also prevent helpful interactions. If there's a agro lock mechanic, for instance, that prevents a player from kill stealing a mob that another player pulled, it also prevents a player from saving someone who is obviously deeply in trouble. 

    There are very simple, historically provable, and very easily accessible ways to report abusive players and to punish them in appropriate ways. In a very real way this is a better way of ensuring a good and healthy personality of the community that gimmicks that prevent abuse. Rather than those abusive players remaining in the gameworld and spreading their generally negative attitude, their very actions which would have otherwise been prevented are brought to the attention of the community and the game administrators, and if they cannot change their behavior they are removed.

    Bottom line is, it's better to have a great gaming experience for the majority by providing them freedom to act in creative ways, than to substantially reduce the experience for everyone because you dont want to police and punish a minority who act inappropriately. And this too can be applied to the real world....

     

    • 793 posts
    August 18, 2016 8:49 AM PDT

    Evoras said:

     

    4.   'Oh no, I cann't find 'Burned Woods' ... and the glowey path thingy to show me the way is broke too!

    Nope, still not a problem. Does he not know 'They moved Burned Woods' though?

     

     

    ROFL, ahh the memories of the old days.  Every once in a while that one pops up somewhere, and I still LMAO when I read it.

    GO GO GOOD TEAM!!!!