neuroguy wrote: » I think there are 2 concepts that are a bit intertwined in this conversation which are similar but definitely distinct. One is the AQ gate-style once a server, super duper rare 'black qiraji battle tank' idea of server first items, the other a cyclical ladder type system that is rare but recurring. I don't care too much for the former as the flying mounts, legendary items etc already serve as chase items which need to be discovered and only a few exist at a time/ever. Critically, it would be a whole thing to design which will only matter for the first few weeks up to the first year of the game and impact a minimal number of players... it has no longevity and no player engagement once it's done. The latter idea I like because it plays an ongoing role in the history of the server. It encompasses both the cool memory and collector's value of the server first stuff, but also has a repeated and on-going component which makes it more worthwhile to code and gives people goals in order to be a part of the server history in a very tangible way. In short the latter idea engages the server from launch onwards while the other will have its novelty die out quickly and have negligible impact on the game. At least in my opinion. The idea of having the bell from a destroyed metropolis survive for example is cool and people have suggested similar things like having 'ruins' of destroyed nodes exist for a while/permanently until built upon again sort of thing which I'm a fan of but would require a whole set of new assets (burnt/destroyed version of already existing buildings/structures).
Schmuky wrote: » So about the server first items.... I actually think those are the most important ones of the bunch. And the reason is, they don't matter. Flying mounts, legendary items matter. They give an advantage. Server first items only give bragging rights, because they should not have any sort of bonus stat.
Schmuky wrote: » ...Having items like this will let players directly make history.
Schmuky wrote: » Now the seasonal items...its a bit weird. If we say a season would last 1 month (to go together with the mayor system), then as time passes they become less and less valuable as more of them appear in the game. Not only that, but it will force players that want those items to never swap their equipment, as it would be item specific.
Schmuky wrote: » Imagine one of the monthly records being PvE kills. If a lvl 20 start doing it, and does well, how long before they are level 30 (from all the killing of mobs they did) and forced to fight level 30 mobs with a lvl 20 sword. Or they would end up spamming lvl 1 zones to get kills, kinda ruining the experience for new players, as all low level zones will be used by high level characters.
Schmuky wrote: » Again, i am only talking about a note on the weapon. Don't know much about developing a game, but i can't imagine it would take that much dev time to do something like this... ...I am not sure that this system is worth it, very hard to balance, especially on a monthly basis and again, the more months pass, the less valuable each weapon is as there are more of them in the world.
Schmuky wrote: » Now the node ruins..having something in the place of a destroyed node makes no sense in my mind. From what i understand of nodes, if one is max level, the nodes around it cannot get max level, but they can get max level -1. So, if a node is destroyed, then a adjacent node would be able to get max level. However, the destroyed node can get back to max level -1. No? If you had a metropolis somewhere, its bc people liked to play there. Even if the nodes gets destroyed, people will start rebuilding instantly. So ruins in the place? I mean you could have something depending on its size, but its not really that important.
Schmuky wrote: » I would say items from the fight that destroyed the node is more valuable. Make it permanent and tradable. A bell can be traded between nodes, via caravan (and it can be stolen, and then we will wander "Who even steals a massive bell?") Guild banners from both castle fights and guild wars are honestly almost mandatory. Being able to show off your guild achievements with a wall in your guild hall filled with enemy guild banners is insane amounts of bragging rights.
Asgerr wrote: » The only issue I have with some of the ideas from the opening post: You're gonna end up with crappy weapons getting prestigious titles, only to be replaced as soon as you level up, as you'll get a better one. And title for your weapon doesn't kill dragons faster than a better weapon.
neuroguy wrote: » I don't really follow the logic of why they'd be better or worse than flying mounts or legendary items just because they provide no advantage. They are just as rare, well actually rarer since only 1 set would ever exist (and could be hoarded by someone or even just left in a bank of a player who quits) while legendary items will get destroyed and re-made and mounts cycle between players.
neuroguy wrote: » Schmuky wrote: » Now the seasonal items...its a bit weird. If we say a season would last 1 month (to go together with the mayor system), then as time passes they become less and less valuable as more of them appear in the game. Not only that, but it will force players that want those items to never swap their equipment, as it would be item specific. When I said season, I was referring to the seasons of the year and was just saying some arbitrary amount of time which can be variable for different accomplishments. I don't think these items would lose value if they are labelled with the time in which they were named though. Even if there are 100 named swords for killing 100 players, the one labelled for the year 0 after we re-entered Verra would still be one of a kind since as you say these items only have collector's value that is arbitrarily established anyways. And yeah, players play with self-imposed rules for fun all the time like iron-man mode etc. Popular game modes like speed running and solo self found in other genres were self imposed originally. If players want to name an item a particular way, they need to adjust their playstyle as such. I guess your argument here is that they would not be occurring by unknown happenstance? But that feels cheaper imo since you just randomly happened to do something instead of actually striving to do it and out-competing others with the same goal. Isn't it better to set a goal and achieve it than to be handed a random shiny (flavor item with no benefit sure but still a uniquely one of a kind item) just you happened to do some random stuff without meaning to?
neuroguy wrote: » Schmuky wrote: » Imagine one of the monthly records being PvE kills. If a lvl 20 start doing it, and does well, how long before they are level 30 (from all the killing of mobs they did) and forced to fight level 30 mobs with a lvl 20 sword. Or they would end up spamming lvl 1 zones to get kills, kinda ruining the experience for new players, as all low level zones will be used by high level characters. That does sound terrible, so they can just not have a weapon named for shit that will be disruptive to others in a negative way. This is an instance of, well if they don't create the problem for themselves to begin with, we don't have to worry about a solution now do we? On the other hand though if you have only 1 iteration of these events that name weapons/items, all you are doing is rewarding players who jump on the game at the start.
neuroguy wrote: » Schmuky wrote: » Again, i am only talking about a note on the weapon. Don't know much about developing a game, but i can't imagine it would take that much dev time to do something like this... ...I am not sure that this system is worth it, very hard to balance, especially on a monthly basis and again, the more months pass, the less valuable each weapon is as there are more of them in the world. Adding a single 'note' to a weapon manually is trivial but the infrastructure to have it happen automatically is not (I don't know how much work it would take in terms of man hours but in any case). You need to have the capacity and space for a 'note' which is not a stat or item description and is independent of said labels. You need a way to track each weapon's progress towards being named for one purpose or another and all the logic that entails. To have this, just for a handful of flavor items that with your own admission have no inherent value or benefit for players seems unreasonable. On the other hand, if such a system was for a recurring mechanic that generated up to 100s of said items throughout the game's lifespan, I think that's more worthwhile. There would be no balancing required for these items because they are for flavor and have collector's value only. The time span of their occurrence can be as long or short as people/IS want, doesn't need to be a literal month or in-game season. And again, they'd lose no value since they would be marked for the time they occurred (so you'd still be able to identify the server's very first one).
neuroguy wrote: » Schmuky wrote: » Now the node ruins..having something in the place of a destroyed node makes no sense in my mind. From what i understand of nodes, if one is max level, the nodes around it cannot get max level, but they can get max level -1. So, if a node is destroyed, then a adjacent node would be able to get max level. However, the destroyed node can get back to max level -1. No? If you had a metropolis somewhere, its bc people liked to play there. Even if the nodes gets destroyed, people will start rebuilding instantly. So ruins in the place? I mean you could have something depending on its size, but its not really that important. In principle it can get back to max level -1 but highly unlikely. If it is a high level node, like a metro, as you say adjacent nodes can only be -1 level and nodes adjacent to them another -1. Given that it takes months to level up to a metro it is safe to assume the surrounding nodes will also be highly developed (as highly as they can be). Which means that for a destroyed metro to get to city level, it would require the node to accomplish this from lvl 0 (which takes months) before any neighboring node goes from town to city which is incredibly unlikely. In fact, I'd assume that if a metro is destroyed there is almost no chance it would get beyond level 2 (and I think that would be good game design tbh). This is especially true because the higher level the node, the more things there are to do and therefore more xp is generated. A lvl 0 node will not have high lvl mobs and have little to do for most players (in terms of xp/progress) meaning even if people liked to play there, the reasons they liked to play there would likely be gone. Now this node can eventually become a metro again through sieges and out competing neighbors but in the meanwhile, if there was some ruin of the metro, there is definitely an appeal for that. It would be direct evidence of the server's history.
neuroguy wrote: » Schmuky wrote: » I would say items from the fight that destroyed the node is more valuable. Make it permanent and tradable. A bell can be traded between nodes, via caravan (and it can be stolen, and then we will wander "Who even steals a massive bell?") Guild banners from both castle fights and guild wars are honestly almost mandatory. Being able to show off your guild achievements with a wall in your guild hall filled with enemy guild banners is insane amounts of bragging rights. Yeah I absolutely love these ideas but because they are much more similar to the recurring 'seasonal' items than the once a server idea. Metros & cities will get destroyed, so more relics of said nodes will be created, guild wars are recurring so banners will continue to be generated. Now if it was more similar the idea you like, there would only be a relic from the first metro destroyed or banners for the very first castle siege (not saying this is what you're proposing, I'm saying the nature of your ideas play out like this if applied to other things). I find a lot of ideas that involve 'one of a kind' type of items are very short sighted and tend to reward only players who play the game early. If they are a reward for some advertised event, that's a bit different. For a whole new system to be added to the game though, it needs to benefit and engage people more than just the first month post-launch. Having a shiny item (flavor item or otherwise) a year post launch is just a flex and nothing more. Having a soft-competitive system where people can generate and collect flavor items however can be engaged with by many more players in a meaningful way for much longer. Just my thoughts.
George Black wrote: » I think player made this and that (spellcrafting comes to mind), is a balance nightmare. It would create a narrow meta very quickly, ruining the cool visions of uniqueness that you have right now.
George Black wrote: » Many games have Iron Swords "created by George Black". You think we should add a packaging date on the items (relics?) as well?
George Black wrote: » Personally I wouldnt carry too much to carry someone elses name on my items, nor it would mean a big deal if someone carried my name around. Especially if it's the same item in terms of appearance and stats.
Noaani wrote: » I'm just trying to work out how much database space this would require be set aside for every item in the game... I mean, I like the idea, I just don't see it as being technically worth it.
