@Anticlergy
I understand you completely. However, I would give up on instancing if I were you. The devs have said multiple times its just not happening. Rather I would encourage you to do like others have and come up with alternatives to instancing. I have made a few suggestions as well. My main concerns in open world major content (low level or high level, but anything highly sought after) are anti-zerg mechanics or mechanics that stop similar behavior and thereby undermine challenege, software code etc. that stop botting and similar activities, tagging and lockouts or a similar substitutes that prevent monopilization, and a varied approach to content to spread out high end content and make it so Raiding isnt THE sought after activity (group encounters, epic crafts, epic quests, and faction). Ive also suggested that not everything should be contested. There should be quest and item triggered events as well. So I say this with all due respect, but dont focus on instances.
"I am older now as well, with two kids, and not nearly going to have the playtime that I once had. However, I do not want the world to be sanitized to meet my needs, but, rather, it exist, and I either find a way to make it work, or I don't. I'm ok with not having the epic gear anymore. And, I've repeated it ad naseum on these forums and others, it's players expectations that need to change, not, the game itself to meet player desires. "
Well said, Raidan. Perfect.
Amsai said:@Anticlergy
I understand you completely. However, I would give up on instancing if I were you. The devs have said multiple times its just not happening. Rather I would encourage you to do like others have and come up with alternatives to instancing. I have made a few suggestions as well. My main concerns in open world major content (low level or high level, but anything highly sought after) are anti-zerg mechanics or mechanics that stop similar behavior and thereby undermine challenege, software code etc. that stop botting and similar activities, tagging and lockouts or a similar substitutes that prevent monopilization, and a varied approach to content to spread out high end content and make it so Raiding isnt THE sought after activity (group encounters, epic crafts, epic quests, and faction). Ive also suggested that not everything should be contested. There should be quest and item triggered events as well. So I say this with all due respect, but dont focus on instances.
I am starting to believe I am not going to win my fight. However, your idea of something spawning a boss is actually good with me. Tha t way, you can actually schedule it or make sure it is just your raid team.
At the end of the day, there is the possibility that this game is not going to be for me. I actually never played EQ or Vanguard so I don't have that feeling of nostalgia. I am a WoW player though and I know what I like. I do wish that WoW felt more epic outside of raids which is why I have been looking into Pantheon.
Anyhow, I still fully intend to support the creation of this game. Even if I don't play it at launch, I am glad to have played a small part in helping its development. I am just going to sit back and watch as things unfold. Maybe, just maybe, there is hope.
Anticlergy said:
I actually never played EQ or Vanguard so I don't have that feeling of nostalgia. I am a WoW player though and I know what I like. I do wish that WoW felt more epic outside of raids which is why I have been looking into Pantheon.
If Pantheon is anything like EQ, buckle your seatbelt man...
I don't recall a lot of "fighing" over spawns in early EQ. I'm sure there was some but I diden't see it. The one I can think of that sticks to mind the most was Phinigel for my epic... had I sat there and just camped it then I might have had troubles, but instead I would make a run down to Kedge and do a /who and a shout to see if he was camped, if so offer my servises if he popped. If nobody was there I would invis up and go down and check. I met several people this way also needing Phinigel, I marked them down on a note pad and when I did find him they were first on the list to call for help to take him down. He was needed for Bard, Mage, Rogue, and Wiz epics so there was always room for new friends, and them all needing the same mob made it easy to find the group to go down with us... only needed a few to help that way.
That is how I got my piece from Phinny.. I got a /tell from a mage telling me he was up... the mage item diden't drop, the Wiz Item did.
That would all be gone if it was instancing.
Raive said:So raid content will be exactly like it was in Vanguard. Not a bad thing. (Wish I saved a screenshot from VG's lockout screen and/or what a mob that you are "locked-out" against looks like)
Probably something like that, eventually evolving into the advanced encounter system we'd originally planned for VG but didn't get entirely in.
What details behind VG's lockout functionality do you recall? Any details? And yeah, a screenshot would be great.
I guess the main point is that while it is open world/shared environments (dungeons and outdoors) and not instanced, that doesn't mean there won't be a system of locking out certain mobs in certain circumstances. For example, if a group is taking on a boss/named mob, how much a person not in that group can interfere or influence will likely be more limited than in a regular fight.
Aradune said:Probably something like that, eventually evolving into the advanced encounter system we'd originally planned for VG but didn't get entirely in.
What details behind VG's lockout functionality do you recall? Any details? And yeah, a screenshot would be great.
I guess the main point is that while it is open world/shared environments (dungeons and outdoors) and not instanced, that doesn't mean there won't be a system of locking out certain mobs in certain circumstances. For example, if a group is taking on a boss/named mob, how much a person not in that group can interfere or influence will likely be more limited than in a regular fight.
@Aradune. Hello. It's awesome to see you in this thread. If you could, I have a few questions I would love you to answer. Looking over my post history may give you an idea of what I am talking about, but here are some specific questions.
1. I see you confirmed that there will be no instanced raiding. Since this is the case, will the bosses of dungeons, or raid targets actually have raid-like mechanics? Mechancis similar to something you would see in a game like WoW? Because, I find it hard to beleive that an open world boss, that anyone can be around, is able to provide an engaging encounter with now ay to communicate with the 50 people around you who may all be from different guilds.
2. Will there be horrible things like corpse runs after a wipe? Because, if there is something like this, I wonder how hard an actual raid boss can be. If you make an encounter that could net you 100+ wipes, there is no way people are gonna want to do it and then run back to the boss for 2 hours. Basically, I am thinking that if there are really harsh death penalties, the mobs may not actually have true raid mechanics aside from a 1 shot if you are undergeared.
3. If bosses are in the open world, and probably on a timer, is my guild going to have to compete with other guilds in order to raid? What I mean is two-fold. First, if my guild raids at 7 PM PST, and there are 20 other guilds with the same raid time, will we have to change our raid times? Or, will there be old mechanics like in EQ where you need to camp bosses for 12+ hours and then get a phone call at 4 AM to raid? Please answer no to that last question lol. And finally, if your answer to the first question is yes, how do you see this as being nothing more than tedious? Do you feel that setting up raid times with other guilds builds a community or it makes things more tedious? Do you feel that having another guild be able to screw you out of a raid is fun? Or, does this not sound more like forced PvP?
Anyhow, I want to let you know that I know very well who you are. I also know that you are fully capable of making an amzing game. In no way am I trying to be disrespectful. However, coming from a background of WoW raiding, I like the challenge of wiping on a boss for 200+ wipes. This is why I am a fan of instanced raids. I like that only the best can kill something. I dislike that killing something does not require skill, but it requires a huge timesink. Basically, I feel this is lazy gameplay design masked with a false hardcore mentality.
And finally, I also want to say that I am extremely interested in this game. In no way do I want it to not succeed. Like I mentioned in another post, I did not spend $150 to troll the forums. I am just trying to see if my guild would be interested in what Pantheon has to offer. I want to thank you ahead of time for any responses you may give me.
P.S. My guild did play EQ1 and Vanguard. I did not play on either of those teams due to life issues. My views are based off of raidng in games like WoW, Rift, and FF14.
I will try and see if I have screenshots of the Raid Lockout UI/lock out mob screenshot when I get home today. Just to post in reference to what I mean by Vanguard's raiding for those who may remember:
APW (18-man, the game's only raid dungeon 18 man, everything was 30m-60m respawn, 6 day individual encounter lockout)
Entrance Wing
The Malfunctioning X-77
The Enraged X-83
Archon Traavix
General Vicus
Zaraax
Library Wing
Librarian Vahsren
Palpenipe the Mastermind
Athris Essal
Admiral Chrykalis
Dread Lord Malazath
Senator Demetrius
Marina Wing
Professor Vercel
Shylosia
Sewers
Siliusarus
Vault Wing
I-99 Shiver
The Exalted X-99
The Core Processor
Basement Wing
Zaygius
Kotasoth
Overland T1 Encounters (18-man, Started at 3-5 day respawn, lowered to 2-3 day respawn, finalized on 3 hour respawn. All with 6 day lockouts, cept for Fumebeso)
Lord Fumebeso (APW Key mob)
Prime Warden of Nusibe (right outside group dungeon area of Nusibe Necropolis)
Jagund the Wavebreaker (lone island)
Nerksawl (roamed lowbie area, added later on, did NOT have a lockout, would shout in zone when he spawns and dies)
Initiate Nenly (in the middle of a bunch of group/solo mobs in Bridge of Destiny, added at the time of T2.5)
Overland T2 Encounters (18-man cept for Karax)
Dresla (lone island)
Fengrot (roamed mid 30-s swamps)
Guar (roamed mid desert near Karrus Hakrel)
Silmr-Li the Harbinger (stationary near city)
Varking (stationary deep in the forest)
Karax Woefather (stationary on platform)
Overland T2.5 Encounters (18-man, 6 day lockout)
Summoner Physik (stationary high above Gazaa)
Summoner Nimaa (stationary high above Gazaa)
Summoner Yerkj (stationary high above Gazaa)
Summoner Rinipin (stationary high above Gazaa)
Overland T3 (I can not speak of these as I was no longer active in the game)
Officer Masuke Whitewind
Belzane
Imperial Devastator War Golem
Archmagus Zodifin
Archmagus Shendu
Archmagus Teraxes
Arachnidon Sunshine
Sparkles
Pantheon of the Ancients
Zaseh the Wise
Artaxis the Devourer
All of the overland raid encounters had mechanics that prevented zerg possibilities along with placing respawn loctions far enough to where one would not be able to successfully re-enter an encounter. APW rarely ran into issues of guilds bumping head thanks to having 6-8 shards for it but even with that it wouldn't be out of place to see 2 guilds being in the library wing at one time. As for overlands for the majority of T1, lesser guilds had to re-adjust their raid schedules to figure when the bigger guilds would not be on specific mobs. (This eventually made the devs to lower respawn timers to be a bit more forgiving because at the time when there was only 4 servers left (Seradon/Xeth/Halgar/Sartok) and both Seradon/Xeth had give or take 7-12 guilds on each, there simply wasn't enough food to go around. I remember vividly as my guild always raided before everyone (@7:00pm EST) but if a contested mob popped before then, we'd mobolize for it (say Dresla, Nerks, Prime, or Jagund) vs say the more difficult encounters of Fengrot, Varking, Slim, or Guar.
I say all of this as I do favor contested content but if raiding isn't going to be a focal point thus there being less raid content in general, then I would highly recommend the VG route as it still shares that open-world feel/rush to content yet understands itself that it will never be abundant enough to satisfy everyone, yet still throws a bone out there.
Amsai said: So far based on info and ideas from folks I think I could be completely on board with open world contested Named with the following things: 1. Evoras's curse type lockout. 2. The low interference Brad just referenced. 3. The anti-zerg and similar behaviors type of mechanics Brad has mentioned. 4. Varied content in varied placed to split up the population (by gear offered, Faction, number of players needed, etc ( 5. Though it might be implied from #2, mob tagging or claiming (first come first served). Or if % damage has to be a thing let there be a short time limit on it. Like first to reach 15% or 5 min whichever comes first I think these steps are perfectly reasonable middle ground between those worried about non-instanced environments and those wanting more immersion or social interaction.
I am actually kind of cool with this. As long as I don't have to schedule my raid times around the times of another guild, or I don't have to PVP to do PVE content, I can totally get down with this stuff. But again, I cannot get down with camping, having to PVP, or having lazy game design that makes encounters more tedious than hard. For example, 2 hour corpse runs on a boss that really has no mechanics. Then, when I finally get back there, andother guild is doing it. That is something that will drive players away. I don't care how much nostalgia people feel for games like EQ. I promise, today's mmo players will leave.
Raive said:I will try and see if I have screenshots of the Raid Lockout UI/lock out mob screenshot when I get home today. Just to post in reference to what I mean by Vanguard's raiding for those who may remember:
APW (18-man, the game's only raid dungeon 18 man, everything was 30m-60m respawn, 6 day individual encounter lockout)
Entrance Wing
The Malfunctioning X-77
The Enraged X-83
Archon Traavix
General Vicus
ZaraaxLibrary Wing
Librarian Vahsren
Palpenipe the Mastermind
Athris Essal
Admiral Chrykalis
Dread Lord Malazath
Senator DemetriusMarina Wing
Professor Vercel
ShylosiaSewers
SiliusarusVault Wing
I-99 Shiver
The Exalted X-99
The Core ProcessorBasement Wing
Zaygius
Kotasoth
Overland T1 Encounters (18-man, Started at 3-5 day respawn, lowered to 2-3 day respawn, finalized on 3 hour respawn. All with 6 day lockouts, cept for Fumebeso)
Lord Fumebeso (APW Key mob)
Prime Warden of Nusibe (right outside group dungeon area of Nusibe Necropolis)
Jagund the Wavebreaker (lone island)
Nerksawl (roamed lowbie area, added later on, did NOT have a lockout, would shout in zone when he spawns and dies)
Initiate Nenly (in the middle of a bunch of group/solo mobs in Bridge of Destiny, added at the time of T2.5)Overland T2 Encounters (18-man cept for Karax)
Dresla (lone island)
Fengrot (roamed mid 30-s swamps)
Guar (roamed mid desert near Karrus Hakrel)
Silmr-Li the Harbinger (stationary near city)
Varking (stationary deep in the forest)
Karax Woefather (stationary on platform)
Overland T2.5 Encounters (18-man, 6 day lockout)
Summoner Physik (stationary high above Gazaa)
Summoner Nimaa (stationary high above Gazaa)
Summoner Yerkj (stationary high above Gazaa)
Summoner Rinipin (stationary high above Gazaa)Overland T3 (I can not speak of these as I was no longer active in the game)
Officer Masuke Whitewind
Belzane
Imperial Devastator War Golem
Archmagus Zodifin
Archmagus Shendu
Archmagus Teraxes
Arachnidon Sunshine
Sparkles
Pantheon of the Ancients
Zaseh the Wise
Artaxis the DevourerAll of the overland raid encounters had mechanics that prevented zerg possibilities along with placing respawn loctions far enough to where one would not be able to successfully re-enter an encounter. APW rarely ran into issues of guilds bumping head thanks to having 6-8 shards for it but even with that it wouldn't be out of place to see 2 guilds being in the library wing at one time. As for overlands for the majority of T1, lesser guilds had to re-adjust their raid schedules to figure when the bigger guilds would not be on specific mobs. (This eventually made the devs to lower respawn timers to be a bit more forgiving because at the time when there was only 4 servers left (Seradon/Xeth/Halgar/Sartok) and both Seradon/Xeth had give or take 7-12 guilds on each, there simply wasn't enough food to go around. I remember vividly as my guild always raided before everyone (@7:00pm EST) but if a contested mob popped before then, we'd mobolize for it (say Dresla, Nerks, Prime, or Jagund) vs say the more difficult encounters of Fengrot, Varking, Slim, or Guar.
I say all of this as I do favor contested content but if raiding isn't going to be a focal point thus there being less raid content in general, then I would highly recommend the VG route as it still shares that open-world feel/rush to content yet understands itself that it will never be abundant enough to satisfy everyone, yet still throws a bone out there.
Like I mentioned above, these kinds of things are cool. They give progression raiders something to do while still catering to those not interested. But, I am still not sure I like 2 guilds being able to raid in the same environment. Again, this makes me think that the mechanics are kind of dumbed down. I really want encounters that take 100+ wipes to kill them. And, along with super hard encounters, I don't want to run a 2 hour corpse run. There is no way I can be convinced that is fun. If the boss fight is super hard, there is no reason to punish death so severely. But, if the encounter is poorly designed, then a terrible death penalty can give the illusion of a hard encounter; when in reality, the encounter is not that hard but the death penalty is. Again, this is lazy design in my opinion and it shows design philosphies from 15 years ago.
@Anticlergy
The only problem with that line of thinking is the lack of a feeling of danger. Oh death where is thy sting? Frustration from defeat is different, and rising to the challenge are different from a feeling of danger with real teeth. Im not saying it has to be corpse runs, but how would you do this if not corpse runs?
Anticlergy said:Like I mentioned above, these kinds of things are cool. They give progression raiders something to do while still catering to those not interested. But, I am still not sure I like 2 guilds being able to raid in the same environment. Again, this makes me think that the mechanics are kind of dumbed down. I really want encounters that take 100+ wipes to kill them. And, along with super hard encounters, I don't want to run a 2 hour corpse run. There is no way I can be convinced that is fun. If the boss fight is super hard, there is no reason to punish death so severely. But, if the encounter is poorly designed, then a terrible death penalty can give the illusion of a hard encounter; when in reality, the encounter is not that hard but the death penalty is. Again, this is lazy design in my opinion and it shows design philosphies from 15 years ago.
I dont want to be overly harsh here, but on the topic of 2 guilds sharing the same environment, that ship is sailed. That is one of the core tenents of Pantheon. There will be very few if any instanced combat spaces.
But to help convince you why there is support for such a notion:
No one said that doing a corpse run for 2 hours was fun. That completely misses the point. It's not fun at all. And that is the point. The known pain and not-fun of a 2 hour corpse run generates fear. Fear is a powerful emtion, one wholly lacking from a game that allows you to just plop in another virtual quarter and try again. Fear creates respect for the game, it compels you to seak allies, and it requires you to cooperate with a much higher degree of care. And in the end it makes the elation of conquering not just the encounter but the fear associated with it exponentially more intense.
Feyshtey said:I dont want to be overly harsh here, but on the topic of 2 guilds sharing the same environment, that ship is sailed. That is one of the core tenents of Pantheon. There will be very few if any instanced combat spaces.
But to help convince you why there is support for such a notion:
No one said that doing a corpse run for 2 hours was fun. That completely misses the point. It's not fun at all. And that is the point. The known pain and not-fun of a 2 hour corpse run generates fear. Fear is a powerful emtion, one wholly lacking from a game that allows you to just plop in another virtual quarter and try again. Fear creates respect for the game, it compels you to seak allies, and it requires you to cooperate with a much higher degree of care. And in the end it makes the elation of conquering not just the encounter but the fear associated with it exponentially more intense.
I am already over any chance of trying to convince people of why I feel instances are better for a raid environment. But, since you brought up having fear of an encounter, I will try to show you where your thinking is wrong.
So, you say that the fear of being defeated, because of a harsh penalty, should make you a better player. Now, I actually do agree with you to an extent. But, like many people I have spoken to in love with type of game design, you are not open to the fact that you may just be wrong. Basically, if you design an encounter to be super harsh, and the penalty is something like a 2 hour corpse run, that is not a raid encounter. What that tells me is that there is a mob that has the potential to kill you. But, like I mentioned multiple times already, you cannot actually have a mechanically challenging encounter that has a penalty as sever as a 2 hour corpse run. For example, if we look at a mythic raid from a game like WoW that has encounters that you may wipe 200+ times, you cannot have a severe penalty for death. Could you even imagine wiping 200+ times and every time you had to do a corpse run. I am willing to bet a small fortune you won't last long. Nobody would last long really.
The point I have been trying to make, which so many people here are completely blind to, is that having a severe penalty for death is not the same as designing an epic encounter. Furthermore, it really is lazy design on the part of the Devs. It may seem like the encounter is challenging because of the fear of a harsh death penalty. When, in reality, the mob you are fighting has absolutely no mechanics and just may be more powerful than you. That does not drive fear into my heart. The things that so many people here are asking for is the thing that I fear may hurt this game. I promise you that the demand for non-engaging encounters, that require 2 hour corpse runs if you happen to die, will not be well-liked.
Now, I know all the fan boys will tell me how amaizng the encounters were in EQ and how epic the fights were. So, I watched a crap-ton of videos. Pretty much every video I watched was a tank and spank fight. I could not even imagin how you could die in a fight like those. Now, if we take alook at a fight from, say WoW WOLTK, you will see what real mechanics are. Sure, there are not severe death punishments, but you will still need to sink months into the content to finish it. That alone should be motivation enough.
But again, I have basically given up on trying to convince people. When people believe something strongly enough, they are usually blind to the truth. Now, I am not saying your way is wrong and mine is right. But, I am saying that what you all are describing will not be as engaging as a raid in another game. Now, if this game offers up so much more, than who really cares. But, for many people, raiding is enjoyable.
Anyhow, I am not trying to argue. I just wish people would stop defending things that are not true. And finally, I actually have faith that Brad and his team will prove me wrong. Maybe they will design epic encounters and rethink the horrible death penalty stuff. Maybe they will design raids that are mechanically sound and take a ton of time to beat. Not taking time to beat because they are gated, have to fight another guild for it, or need to schedule raid times around 50 other guilds raid times. I am hoping to all that is holy, or unholy depending on how you get down, that I am proven wrong.
Amsai said:@Anticlergy
The only problem with that line of thinking is the lack of a feeling of danger. Oh death where is thy sting? Frustration from defeat is different, and rising to the challenge are different from a feeling of danger with real teeth. Im not saying it has to be corpse runs, but how would you do this if not corpse runs?
My personal opinon is that a harsh death penalty cannot have an engaging encounter go along with it. If the encounter is so designed so well, that it could take over 100+ attempts, there is not a snowballs chance in hell that people stick around for something like that if they need to run back for 2 hours after each wipe. Basically, I am cool with being bad and dying being something frowned upon. But, they need to seperate something like that from hard encounters. And, I don't mean hard because it ougears you, I mean hard because it takes your raid 100+ wipes to kill it. There is a difference between designing a challenging encounter and masking a challenging encounter with an awful death penalty.
Anticlergy said:Amsai said:@Anticlergy
The only problem with that line of thinking is the lack of a feeling of danger. Oh death where is thy sting? Frustration from defeat is different, and rising to the challenge are different from a feeling of danger with real teeth. Im not saying it has to be corpse runs, but how would you do this if not corpse runs?
My personal opinon is that a harsh death penalty cannot have an engaging encounter go along with it. If the encounter is so designed so well, that it could take over 100+ attempts, there is not a snowballs chance in hell that people stick around for something like that if they need to run back for 2 hours after each wipe. Basically, I am cool with being bad and dying being something frowned upon. But, they need to seperate something like that from hard encounters. And, I don't mean hard because it ougears you, I mean hard because it takes your raid 100+ wipes to kill it. There is a difference between designing a challenging encounter and masking a challenging encounter with an awful death penalty.
EverQuest you didnt run back everytime in a raid wipe, most of the time someone survived. They would res a cleric and then get the rest up, regroup an make another attempt. You spent more time waiting on a Res than running back really.
You would do most CR's from the group content, wasnt that rough really.
Run back with everyone and go get your gear, made some really cool friends doing corpse runs.
I hope its EQ level death penalty, Vanguards DP was rather weak really.
Anticlergy said:I am already over any chance of trying to convince people of why I feel instances are better for a raid environment. But, since you brought up having fear of an encounter, I will try to show you where your thinking is wrong.
So, you say that the fear of being defeated, because of a harsh penalty, should make you a better player. Now, I actually do agree with you to an extent. But, like many people I have spoken to in love with type of game design, you are not open to the fact that you may just be wrong. Basically, if you design an encounter to be super harsh, and the penalty is something like a 2 hour corpse run, that is not a raid encounter. What that tells me is that there is a mob that has the potential to kill you. But, like I mentioned multiple times already, you cannot actually have a mechanically challenging encounter that has a penalty as sever as a 2 hour corpse run. For example, if we look at a mythic raid from a game like WoW that has encounters that you may wipe 200+ times, you cannot have a severe penalty for death. Could you even imagine wiping 200+ times and every time you had to do a corpse run. I am willing to bet a small fortune you won't last long. Nobody would last long really.
The point I have been trying to make, which so many people here are completely blind to, is that having a severe penalty for death is not the same as designing an epic encounter. Furthermore, it really is lazy design on the part of the Devs. It may seem like the encounter is challenging because of the fear of a harsh death penalty. When, in reality, the mob you are fighting has absolutely no mechanics and just may be more powerful than you. That does not drive fear into my heart. The things that so many people here are asking for is the thing that I fear may hurt this game. I promise you that the demand for non-engaging encounters, that require 2 hour corpse runs if you happen to die, will not be well-liked.
Now, I know all the fan boys will tell me how amaizng the encounters were in EQ and how epic the fights were. So, I watched a crap-ton of videos. Pretty much every video I watched was a tank and spank fight. I could not even imagin how you could die in a fight like those. Now, if we take alook at a fight from, say WoW WOLTK, you will see what real mechanics are. Sure, there are not severe death punishments, but you will still need to sink months into the content to finish it. That alone should be motivation enough.
But again, I have basically given up on trying to convince people. When people believe something strongly enough, they are usually blind to the truth. Now, I am not saying your way is wrong and mine is right. But, I am saying that what you all are describing will not be as engaging as a raid in another game. Now, if this game offers up so much more, than who really cares. But, for many people, raiding is enjoyable.
Anyhow, I am not trying to argue. I just wish people would stop defending things that are not true. And finally, I actually have faith that Brad and his team will prove me wrong. Maybe they will design epic encounters and rethink the horrible death penalty stuff. Maybe they will design raids that are mechanically sound and take a ton of time to beat. Not taking time to beat because they are gated, have to fight another guild for it, or need to schedule raid times around 50 other guilds raid times. I am hoping to all that is holy, or unholy depending on how you get down, that I am proven wrong.
Gamey mechanics vs worldly mechanics.
WoW mechanics were gamey. It did nothing but remind you it was just a game. You die, you respawn at the dungeon, buff and retry. It bears no semblance to reality. There was no real loss involved and recuperation was a trivial matter.
On top of that, the fight mechanics themselves were gamey in that a small misstep of a single player in the DDR format of raiding often meant a complete wipe. To me, that doesn't mean raiding is fun. To me that is just as tedious as a corpse recovery is for you.
Raiding in EQ was more about preparation and knowledge rather than dexterity and pattern memorization. Time was the biggest challenge, not how well you executed the dance steps. Doesn't mean I don't want more skill involved than raids in early EQ, but if you are really such a fan of WoW, they just dropped a new expansion.
Also, its not about being right or wrong. To me, your opinion is clearly wrong but thats just subjective based on my desire for a virtual world, not a fantasy lobby game.
Anticlergy said:Amsai said:@Anticlergy
The only problem with that line of thinking is the lack of a feeling of danger. Oh death where is thy sting? Frustration from defeat is different, and rising to the challenge are different from a feeling of danger with real teeth. Im not saying it has to be corpse runs, but how would you do this if not corpse runs?
My personal opinon is that a harsh death penalty cannot have an engaging encounter go along with it. If the encounter is so designed so well, that it could take over 100+ attempts, there is not a snowballs chance in hell that people stick around for something like that if they need to run back for 2 hours after each wipe. Basically, I am cool with being bad and dying being something frowned upon. But, they need to seperate something like that from hard encounters. And, I don't mean hard because it ougears you, I mean hard because it takes your raid 100+ wipes to kill it. There is a difference between designing a challenging encounter and masking a challenging encounter with an awful death penalty.
The issue at hand is you have no actual knowledge of how a raid worked in EQ other than what you saw on Youtube. I never once spent 2 hours in a CR back to a raid in any form of EQ. I never met any guild, even the newest of new guilds, who did as a raid. Many of the old EQ vets recently completed another tour of duty on P99. Personally, I'd love it (as well as many other people I know - as this is something we discussed a lot during raids - and it's more common place than you think, like casuals enjoying Dark Souls) if they would implement WoW type encounters with EQ death mechanics (a given based on the fact we were playing those death mechanics already). Everyone wanted more of a raid challenge, but we were already knew how to deal with death, so it was a non-issue for us and will be a non-issue for any raid in Pantheon as long as there are rez mechanics.
At level 51+ in EQ, death became trivial on raids. A back up cleric was always camped at every raid and on wipe everyone would protect the clerics while they camped. The epic weapon rez at that point is 96% experience return. Getting back in the action took less than 10 minutes in most cases (with a raid force of 50-80) as the monks would pull trains away while everyone camped after the clerics. If you were that bad, you could die 20-30 times during the raid and never care, many guilds did this. Raiding on EQ was easy (if you could had the raid force to down the mob and knew the fight/mob positioning), the only way death becomes hard or tedious is when you die alone, or in a group and you don't have a cleric, which is why you take your time and are generally a LOT more cautious than anyone ever was when I played WoW.
Everything was gravy in the end because everyone knew what to do to be effecient. What you are debating is really a non-issue.
I don't recall having to run back on raid wipes all that often. Even if everyone died there would be a break in / rez crew that would get everyone going again. And I don't recall it taking 2 hours except in some extreeme cases where our raid had to call in favors from other guilds to get bodies back, that was unusual but it could and did happen ocassionally.
Death in EQ, while we all talk about how horrible it was, really wasn't all that bad generally. But it did make you cautious enough to avoid death and if you were going to die, to die in a place you could get back to. Or for deep dungeon dives to die in the company of those you trusted. Invariably though somone would flat out panic and put themselves into a worse position for corpse retreival :P but hey live and learn.
Now EQ was a game of preparation for sure, so while death sucked and you lost some xp, you got 96% of it back on rez. The real time sync was rebuffing and setting up for the next attempt. But all of that was a huge social experience that brought people together.
I found connections there that exist to this day, in fact people I raided with over 10-15 years ago on live, I found again in P99 and they still remembered me. I don't think I can say that about any other game I've ever played. Was it the scary harsh death penalty that made that possible? Maybe so.
Anticlergy said:So, you say that the fear of being defeated, because of a harsh penalty, should make you a better player. Now, I actually do agree with you to an extent. But, like many people I have spoken to in love with type of game design, you are not open to the fact that you may just be wrong. Basically, if you design an encounter to be super harsh, and the penalty is something like a 2 hour corpse run, that is not a raid encounter. What that tells me is that there is a mob that has the potential to kill you. But, like I mentioned multiple times already, you cannot actually have a mechanically challenging encounter that has a penalty as sever as a 2 hour corpse run.
The rest of your post really isnt applicable, so I'll just stick with this.
I never associated the difficulty of the encounter with the punishment for failure. What I said was that if the penalty sucks, you will fear it. When you fear it, you appreciate success more. It's not complicated.
azaya said:I don't recall having to run back on raid wipes all that often. Even if everyone died there would be a break in / rez crew that would get everyone going again. And I don't recall it taking 2 hours except in some extreeme cases where our raid had to call in favors from other guilds to get bodies back, that was unusual but it could and did happen ocassionally.
Mostly you're right and the corpse run is being blown a bit out of proportion. Although I do remember at least 2 wipes in Plane of Fear that we completely failed to recover from and had to wait 24 hours for another guild to clear the zone in to get our corpses out.
Feyshtey said:azaya said:I don't recall having to run back on raid wipes all that often. Even if everyone died there would be a break in / rez crew that would get everyone going again. And I don't recall it taking 2 hours except in some extreeme cases where our raid had to call in favors from other guilds to get bodies back, that was unusual but it could and did happen ocassionally.
Mostly you're right and the corpse run is being blown a bit out of proportion. Although I do remember at least 2 wipes in Plane of Fear that we completely failed to recover from and had to wait 24 hours for another guild to clear the zone in to get our corpses out.
LOL Fear was exactly what I was thinking of there. Breaking into that place at level appropraite was, well fearful. I recall the first time actually getting jumpy as we were waiting to do our break in. Good times.
It got easier of course over time, but it was always a tense moment when everyone went piling into the zone for a break in.