This is a new idea my wife and I came up with as an answer to the end-game content dilemma. We've gotten some feedback from friends but I'd like to have your assistance in fleshing it out and shooting holes in it. Note that numbers, percentages, etc. in this proposal are rough placeholders.
New Advancement System: Veterancy
Purpose: Provide measurable progression for level-capped players. Provide an "end-game" activity. Provide incentives for level-capped players to assist lower-level players with fellowship quests.
Summary: The veterancy system would allow level-capped players to accumulate "Veterancy Experience" which, at the completion of a modified color-coded experience bar, awards a "Veterancy Token". These tokens can be traded via the barter system to specific NPCs for veteran rewards.
Gaining Veterancy Experience: Level capped players would gain "veterancy experience" in the same way that normal experience is awarded -- through the killing of mobs and completion of quests and deeds. Players could also acquire experience by providing "Veteran Quest Assistance".
Veteran Quest Assistance: Fellowship leaders would be allowed to designate one level capped player in a fellowship as a "Veteran" for a designated fellowship quest. Once designated, the specified veteran would be given the quest as if shared. The veteran, like the fellowship leader, would be required to complete all objectives of the quest. Once the fellowship leader has completed the objectives of the quest and turned it in to the appropriate NPC, the Veteran would be allowed to "turn-in" the same quest for money (in lieu of equipment rewards) and a percentage of the experience gained by the fellowship leader (based on the relative level of the quest to the veteran):
Quest # of Levels Below Cap / Veterancy Experience Gained (% of fellowship leader)
10 or less / 100%
11-20 / 80%
21-30 / 60%
30-40 / 40%
41 or more / 20%
For example: A level 50 veteran assists a fellowship in completing a lvl 35 fellowship quest. The fellowship leader is level 33 and receives 4000 experience for quest completion. The veteran is 17 levels above the quest and would receive 80% of the fellowship leader's experience reward, which would be 3200 veterancy experience.
Veterancy Token Acquisition: Tokens are obtained at veterancy experience bar completion from an NPC like Aragorn or perhaps via the in-game mail system. Tokens would also be rewarded by a designated turn-in NPC at the completion of special "Veteran of Instance" quests.
Veteran of Instance Quests: Tokens could also be awarded for veteran assistance in the completion of instances such as The Great Barrow, Garth Agarwen, and Fornost. A system would have to be implemented to ensure that a level capped player actually participates in the relevant parts of the instance.
For example: A player is invited to be a veteran for a group entering Fornost. At the entrance of the instance, the fellowship leader makes the invitation. Upon acceptance the veteran is offered a special quest called "Veteran of Fornost". This quest would require that the veteran loot certain bosses or objects to obtain specific objects indicating the veteran's presence in certain areas and during certain key events (like the boss fights). Once the final boss is killed, the veteran could loot it for his final drop. This quest could be turned in at any time following completion and would not require the fellowship leader to turn in anything first. Leaving the instance would automatically cancel the quest and delete any veterancy quest items already obtained. One or more Veterancy Tokens, money, and/or veterancy experience would be rewarded for quest completion.
Veterancy System Provisions and Limitations: Player must be at level-cap to receive tokens. Rest experience will not apply to veterancy experience. Tokens are bind on acquire. Rewards are bind on acquire. Rewards cannot alter game economy or affect balance. Players may be designated as the "Veteran" of a fellowship quest only if they have completed the quest. Player may be designated as a "Veteran" for one quest or instance at a time and must complete or drop that quest or instance quest before accepting another veterancy invitation. Veterancy experience is suspended, but not lost, when the game's level cap is increased; and may be continued once the player returns to the level cap.
Veterancy Token rewards: Veterancy rewards are designed to be highly visible and to make it easier for level-capped players to get around in order to help others, complete deeds, etc. Reward turn-in NPCs are distributed to encourage players to visit different zones. Only rewards entitled "Veterancy ..." would be exclusively available from this system.
1 token
5000 Destiny Points - Available from Gandalf or Elrond
2500 Reputation points with any faction - Available from Tier 1 reputation barter NPC
Pack of 5 unique Veterancy Pipeweed Pouches - Available from Peregrin Took
Pack of 5 unique Veterancy Fireworks - Available from Hyacinth Took
2 Tokens
Pack of 5 consumable Return to Campfire maps¹ (select any visited campfire in Middle Earth) - Available from a notable ranger like Calenglad, Saeradan, Candaith, or Halros
Pack of 5 consumable Return to Outpost maps¹ (select any visited outpost in Middle Earth) - Available from a notable ranger like Calenglad, Saeradan, Candaith or Halros
5 Tokens
Veterancy Banner for House (several styles for each profession) - Available from a notable tailor
Unique Veterancy Pose Emote - Available from a notable bard
Unique Veterancy Dance Emote - Available from a notable bard (would spawn a festival-like follow the leader dance sequence)
Unlock 1 unpurchased Vault Storage Container - Available in storage vault UI
10 Tokens
Veterancy Cosmetic Cloak (several styles for each profession) - Available from a notable tailor
War Banner for Horse¹ (several styles for each profession) - Available from a notable tailor
Dance Emote for Horse¹ - Available from a stablemaster in Elrond's stables
15 Tokens
Tie Post for horse¹ (requires standard or deluxe house) - Available from a notable woodworker
Stable (requires Deluxe or Kinship house) - Available from a notable woodworker
Inventory Saddlebag for Horse¹ (2 maximum) - Available from a stablemaster in Elrond's stables
20 Tokens
Basement¹ (requires house) - Available from a notable dwarf builder
Basement Storage Container (requires Basement) (2 maximum) - Available in housing UI
Pack Animal - (additional storage, mobile and available in instances and certain interiors) - Available from a notable stablemaster
50 Tokens
Statue of Character - Available from a notable dwarf artisan
Statue of Character on Horse - Available from a notable dwarf artisan
Statue of a famous character of Middle Earth - Available from a notable elven artisan
200-300 Tokens
House in landscape¹² - Available from Eru
_____________________
¹ These items and/or features do not appear to exist in the current game and would require more significant new technology and/or art assets to be developed.
² I don't think the last one is a good idea, but I'm including it anyway!
Other Thoughts:
1. Veterans participating in Veteran Assistance could have an option (selected by the fellowship leader or the veteran) to enter a stats-adjusted mode. This mode, while maintaining the veteran's build, would limit damage, buff, healing and other skill statistics to level appropriate numbers.
2. Other possible rewards could be potions and consummables that are bind on acquire like the ones in the Ettenmoors.
3. Certain high-level deeds could award tokens.
4. The "Veteran of Instance" system could employ session play to allow veterans to enter instances as other characters or as other levels.
5. Veterans participating in a "Veteran of Instance" quest could have quest failure tied to the reset of the instance (after all fellowship members leave the instance) instead of simply leaving the instance. This would allow a veteran to leave for repairs as long as he or she returned to join his or her fellows in the same instance.
6. Players providing Veteran Assistance could earn titles for their efforts based on the number of times they've completed an instance or the number of quests they've assisted with.
Questions to the community:(please answer some or all of these if you reply to the thread)
1. Would this system encourage you to continue to play after reaching the level cap?
2. Would this system encourage you to run lower-level quests and instances with other players?
3. What other accomplishments could award tokens?
4. How should tokens be delivered? Mail? NPC? Appear in inventory?
5. How fast does a hardcore player level? Are rewards too easy or too hard to get?
6. What would you add or change to this system to make it better?
7. Will the exclusive veteran rewards proposed by this system unduly foster or intensify elitism from level-capped players?
8. Should a veteran be able to complete "Veteran of Instance" quests even after leaving the instance (by going back at a different time or with a different fellowship) or should the veteran be required to stay with his original group until completion?
-Forjo
Last edited by Forjo; Jul 10 2008 at 09:15 PM.
Forjo Atinxan - Elven Guardian, Forjjo Atinxan - Hobbit Minstrel, Forjorin Atinxan - Dwarven Champion, Forjoros Atinxan - Human Captain Amistad del Otro, A Casual Arkenstone Kinship - 2 Chalk Street, Derndelf, Shire Homesteads See the world - play casually! Now Recruiting! | Support Veterancy!
Hmm... considering that lv 60 is only a few months away from us, I do think it is to early to talk about AA ideas... However I am intrigued by the possibility of adding extensions on your home....
That said, people will power game through anything.
I like this idea and the rewards you mentioned seem fair too. This would be a good system to implement at every cap starting from 60. Incentive to help people on quests you have already completed is a good idea. When I'm running through North Downs, I am not gonna be helping a bunch of random people in Dol Dinen for the hell of it. But, if it gets me closer to my Veteran emote, decoration, title, travel options etc. I will definitely think about it.
This solves the problem of something to do at endgame as well as alleviate some of the "Can't find groups" problems.
It's a neat system with good intentions, but I don't like it. When levelling another alt through the story, I don't want to be in the situation where I can't find any level-appropriate groups because they're all full of L50 ringers looking for veterancy points.
Something like your stats-adjusted mode could work, but it has to apply to equipment, too. Not sure what it'd take to implement such a system.
The smallest mimes of the gods of snow do not wish at all in their life that the great duty of the defences of the wine be diminished.
It's a neat system with good intentions, but I don't like it. When levelling another alt through the story, I don't want to be in the situation where I can't find any level-appropriate groups because they're all full of L50 ringers looking for veterancy points.
Something like your stats-adjusted mode could work, but it has to apply to equipment, too. Not sure what it'd take to implement such a system.
So you'd rather be in the current situation where in many cases there are no groups?
Remember, it is the choice of the fellowship leader, with feedback from the members of the fellowship, that a level capped player even be invited, much less desinated as a veteran. No doubt there would be groups that want to take their time and do the content as intended. But if you just can't get past a certain quest or instance, having a veteran along could serve as last resort.
I'm interested in your thoughts on equipment. If a veteran is limited in how much damage or healing or buffs he can do, what difference does it make (to the rest of the fellowship) if he's nearly invulnerable due to his equipment? The primary idea behind stat-adjusted mode is to keep the content from being trivialized by players plowing through the mobs. Restoring the "challenge" of the instance for the veteran is a secondary concern. And when you consider that the veteran is being well rewarded for his assistance, the challenge factor seems less important than getting people to help with fellowship quests and instances. How many people do you think find the hardest level mobs on which to grind out deeds? I personally got my dwarf port trait by killing goblins in the Shire (and got it in less than half an hour).
But please, do make a case for equipment limitations. I'll certainly include it in the proposal if it makes sense.
Finally, if the two points you bring up are addressed, do you like the system? Or do you not like it at all AND wanted to point out these potential flaws?
Thanks for your feedback!
-Forjo
Forjo Atinxan - Elven Guardian, Forjjo Atinxan - Hobbit Minstrel, Forjorin Atinxan - Dwarven Champion, Forjoros Atinxan - Human Captain Amistad del Otro, A Casual Arkenstone Kinship - 2 Chalk Street, Derndelf, Shire Homesteads See the world - play casually! Now Recruiting! | Support Veterancy!
The stat adjusted would be ok, if it was exactly that, adjusting your existing stats. I would be completely against what FFXI does, where you can enter a lv20 dungeon as a lv60 and you will be lowered to lv20 for that dungeon, but it means you have to have lv20 gear as well or be naked. I definitely don't want to have to hang on to full armour and weapon sets for multiple level intervals.
Very fabulous ideas! Well thought-out and delivered.
In answer to your community questions: 1. Would this system encourage you to continue to play after reaching the level cap?
Absolutely! I'm very reward-driven so if the token rewards were significant enough (like many of the ones you proposed), i would be very happy to continue questing, helping and doing whatever else it takes to earn those tokens. I'd be even more ecstatic if recipies could be aquired for tokens (although they'd have to be BoA).
2. Would this system encourage you to run lower-level quests and instances with other players?
Yes! Even moreso if the quest/tokens aquired were most rewarding when grouped with lower levels.
3. What other accomplishments could award tokens?
Reputation - After reaching "Kindred", the reputation items could be turned-in for tokens, say.. every 50,000 reputation earned a token, for example.
4. How should tokens be delivered? Mail? NPC? Appear in inventory?
I think they should just appear in inventory.
5. How fast does a hardcore player level? Are rewards too easy or too hard to get?
If the "level grind" was equivalent to that of someone leveling from 49-50, it would probably be sufficient to provide added incentive without promoting constant power-tokening. Some of the rewards you listed would be a matter of choosing to save for a long long time, but they represent "Veterancy" afterall.
6. What would you add or change to this system to make it better?
Maybe add a "reverse rest experience", that makes it so you can only earn upto a certain amount of veteran experience each day; to hopefully prevent hardcore farming. Although if most of the rewards were BoA it probably wouldn't matter too much.
7. Will the exclusive veteran rewards proposed by this system unduly foster or intensify elitism from level-capped players?
It all depends on the rewards IMO. If they're simply stuff like statues and other non-character-enhancing rewards, then No. If it was stuff that provided a signficant edge over non-veterancy-contributing players, then Yes. There would have to be a good balance without watering-down the rewards.
8. Should a veteran be able to complete "Veteran of Instance" quests even after leaving the instance (by going back at a different time or with a different fellowship) or should the veteran be required to stay with his original group until completion?
I like your idea of "losing" or "failing" the quest if they don't follow-through and complete. This would mean that they might need a quest-per-lock to avoid having to commit to hours on-end to complete them, but there should be incentive to play-through with the group.
So you'd rather be in the current situation where in many cases there are no groups?
That's not been my experience. YMMV, of course.
Remember, it is the choice of the fellowship leader, with feedback from the members of the fellowship, that a level capped player even be invited, much less desinated as a veteran. No doubt there would be groups that want to take their time and do the content as intended. But if you just can't get past a certain quest or instance, having a veteran along could serve as last resort.
Even without the veterancy system, that's not how it currently works, in my experience. So-and-so from SomeGuild gets one of his L50 buddies to come along, then starts advertising in LFF. By the time you know there's a ringer, you've already been invited into the group, and then you get to be the jerk by saying that you're not interested in running the encounter as a walk-along.
The primary idea behind stat-adjusted mode is to keep the content from being trivialized by players plowing through the mobs. Restoring the "challenge" of the instance for the veteran is a secondary concern. And when you consider that the veteran is being well rewarded for his assistance, the challenge factor seems less important than getting people to help with fellowship quests and instances.
Couldn't care less about challenge level for the ringer. I care about the challenge level for the rest of the group that hasn't run this quest before. I'd have to see numbers to see how much 'effective level' + stats affects the veteran with his Rift gear still on.
Finally, if the two points you bring up are addressed, do you like the system? Or do you not like it at all AND wanted to point out these potential flaws?
I love the idea of 'mentoring' a group, and I love the idea of having some sort of an award for doing so. There's already some benefit to running with a capped character to run the encounter for you, though, and I find it really annoying - I'd hate to see a codified reward system in addition to that. Some way of allowing the veteran to come in as a character at the same level as the quest would be ideal, IMO.
Last edited by atteSmythe; May 30 2008 at 02:09 PM.
The smallest mimes of the gods of snow do not wish at all in their life that the great duty of the defences of the wine be diminished.
I'm not sure of the way stat bonuses are applied, but they are very much a result of some type of level formula. For example, look at items giving a morale boost. At L50, the max morale boost is +90. So, that means 4.5 morale per level. It might be that the item database dynamically calculates stats based upon item level and which bonuses should be applied. If not, such a system would be needed before a level scaling system could be instituted. Anyway, that's a side-track.
In general, I like this idea. However, I don't see how it advances my character, such that he is distinguishable from other level 50s. I might have some more consumables or trophies, but that doesn't change what my character is capable of doing. So, I propose an expansion to your idea.
Skill Tree
I suggest introducing a way to expand the trait system so that players can further tailor their characters. Essentially, this could be implemented through a way a trait-tree (similar to the spec tree from WoW). However, in order to open up certain top-level branches of the tree, certain conditions must be met.
1: Level - you must reach L50 to open up the specialization tree
2: Pre-req traits: Certain regions of the tree will only open up after completing the existing skill traits. For example, a Burglar that wants to specialize as a trickmaster, would have to complete all 4 of the existing trick trait deeds.
3: Quest completion: A specific class advancement quest (solo instance type, as with L15, L30 class quests) needs to be completed. This would open up the trait tree (however you cannot immediately upgrade you skills!)
4: Veteran Tokens: Once the trait tree has been opened, you can turn in a certain number of tokens to unlock a branch of the tree
Skill advancement
Advancement occurs by spending an equivalent to destiny points (ie skill points). Skill points can be acquired through a variety of means
1: Exchanging veteran tokens.
2: Completing repeatable high-level quests (ie from gather quests (which would offer the least amount, to group instance quests, which would give the most).
3: A set amount per level gained after L50 (applied retroactively if you wait until L60 to complete your skill advancement quest).
As each class can serve multiple roles, there should be between 3-4 separate paths (each path has branches, but will not intertwine). For example, a minstrel could have a healing path, a DPS path, and a buff path. But the 3 paths would not overlap (however some traits could complement each other nicely).
Each path should have between 12-15 possible traits that can be purchased, arranged something like 2-3 traits per level of the path (for between 4 and 6 levels). A L1 trait would cost n points, a L2 trait, 2n points, and so on, where a L6 trait would cost 6n points. (n is some unknown point value, but would be measured in "skill points.")
Now, with regards to your open questions:
1. Would this system encourage you to continue to play after reaching the level cap?
The combined systems would offer multiple advancement paths. First, I can advance my character's ability to function, which will distinguish me from all the other player's of my class. (important!) It also gives you the ability to obtain unique consumables and appearance items, which further allows you to distinguish yourself.
2. Would this system encourage you to run lower-level quests and instances with other players?
Definitely. The trophy drops from the bosses already had me running through them again to help out, this would certainly encourage me, as my own advancement would be tied to helping the community.
3. What other accomplishments could award tokens?
I would love some type of peer to peer based system, but it would be very open to abuse. (You would essentially need a diminishing returns based system, but it gets tricky trying to implement such a thing.)
However, I see problems with tying it only to the full completion of an instance. Places like GB take you out of the instance before you can fight the final boss. Such a system would then not work if you had to complete the entire instance or lose your bound veteran items. Instead, I would say make the vet items be unique (so you can only collect one), and once you have that item, even if you leave you can turn it in. If you managed to take down a boss to get the item, obviously you helped out... Why get penalized for not turning everything in at once?
4. How should tokens be delivered? Mail? NPC? Appear in inventory?
Through the same NPC that gave the quest you were helping out with.
5. How fast does a hardcore player level? Are rewards too easy or too hard to get?
Assume they will finish any content in 3 days, whether that is realistic or not. They will always finish content faster than you anticipate.
6. What would you add or change to this system to make it better?
See above skill advancement.
7. Will the exclusive veteran rewards proposed by this system unduly foster or intensify elitism from level-capped players?
As proposed by you, the rewards are mostly cosmetic, so elitism should not be a problem.
8. Should a veteran be able to complete "Veteran of Instance" quests even after leaving the instance (by going back at a different time or with a different fellowship) or should the veteran be required to stay with his original group until completion?
Make required items unique, BoA. The way you had it set up, you were only a veteran for one specific quest, so once that quest is done, you should not lose your completion status. However, once it has been completed, you should be allowed to become a veteran for another quest even without turning in your previous vet. quest.
You could also make it such that a player has to complete a certain number of quests in an area through the veteran mode before the veteran of ___ title will be applied. So for GB, for example, a player would need to assist maybe 20 times before getting the Vet. of GB title.
3. What other accomplishments could award tokens?
Reputation - After reaching "Kindred", the reputation items could be turned-in for tokens, say.. every 50,000 reputation earned a token, for example.
I really like this idea, but you'd be introducing a way of buying veterancy tokens. Still, a way of interacting with the factions after one has reached Kindred level would be a great addition. Perhaps a reputation capped (and level capped) player could accept a repeatable quest from a faction representative that would specifically reward veterancy experience or, if the quest were significant enough, a token. What do you think about that?
Originally Posted by atteSmythe
That's not been my experience. YMMV, of course.
Even without the veterancy system, that's not how it currently works, in my experience. So-and-so from SomeGuild gets one of his L50 buddies to come along, then starts advertising in LFF. By the time you know there's a ringer, you've already been invited into the group, and then you get to be the jerk by saying that you're not interested in running the encounter as a walk-along.
As of book 13 you can now see who's in a group when you are invited before you accept. After that, I'd just suggest you state your opinion. The concern you raise already exists -- it will still exist whether this system is implemented or not. Veterancy isn't intended to reward players for doing something that the group doesn't want to do; it's intended to give level-capped players incentive to keep playing and to help others. But it's up to the others being helped to make their desires known and make them stick -- even if it means leaving the group and "being the jerk".
Originally Posted by delphinius81
In general, I like this idea. However, I don't see how it advances my character, such that he is distinguishable from other level 50s. I might have some more consumables or trophies, but that doesn't change what my character is capable of doing.
This idea, as stated in the Provisions section, is specifically and deliberately designed not to result in players who are more powerful than others as a result of the system. The idea is to provide visibility and convenience, not additional effectiveness in battle (except for getting to the battle faster).
That said, you have some VERY interesting ideas of your own. I certainly think they deserve consideration, but I'd suggest that they form a separate system available to all players, not only those who can grind levels at an amazing rate.
Originally Posted by delphinius81
I see problems with tying it only to the full completion of an instance. Places like GB take you out of the instance before you can fight the final boss. Such a system would then not work if you had to complete the entire instance or lose your bound veteran items. Instead, I would say make the vet items be unique (so you can only collect one), and once you have that item, even if you leave you can turn it in. If you managed to take down a boss to get the item, obviously you helped out... Why get penalized for not turning everything in at once?
The Great Barrow requires that players doing the Ancient Story of Evil questline exit and return to Bree in order to forge their Skull key; but it would not require the veteran to leave the instance. And if the veteran
is participating in that particular quest, then his rewards are not tied to the intance, but to the quest itself; so we could enter and exit without penalty.
My concern is that a veteran could come in, help only on the part that he or she needs, and then leave. If they are helping a group that is under level or who could otherwise not complete the instance then that group is screwed. Conceptually, I think a veteran should help his comrades to the bitter end.
Originally Posted by delphinius81
You could also make it such that a player has to complete a certain number of quests in an area through the veteran mode before the veteran of ___ title will be applied. So for GB, for example, a player would need to assist maybe 20 times before getting the Vet. of GB title.
I hadn't thought of actually awarding a title. This is a good idea too!
Thanks a lot for the replies all!
-Forjo
Last edited by Forjo; May 30 2008 at 03:23 PM.
Forjo Atinxan - Elven Guardian, Forjjo Atinxan - Hobbit Minstrel, Forjorin Atinxan - Dwarven Champion, Forjoros Atinxan - Human Captain Amistad del Otro, A Casual Arkenstone Kinship - 2 Chalk Street, Derndelf, Shire Homesteads See the world - play casually! Now Recruiting! | Support Veterancy!
As of book 13 you can now see who's in a group when you are invited before you accept. After that, I'd just suggest you state your opinion. The concern you raise already exists -- it will still exist whether this system is implemented or not. Veterancy isn't intended to reward players for doing something that the group doesn't want to do; it's intended to give level-capped players incentive to keep playing and to help others. But it's up to the others being helped to make their desires known and make them stick -- even if it means leaving the group and "being the jerk".
I think it's important to take a step back for a moment. If it is too difficult at the moment to find groups, then the only way that the veteran system will have an impact on this problem will be that it will be even more difficult to find a group that is comprised of level-appropriate members. This will make the experience worse for people who are leveling up unless they really want to be power-leveled. Normally, if someone wants to be power-leveled, he/she can just play with some higher level friends or join a kin and go bananas.
That being said, I do think that there are two main problems:
1. It tends to still be tough to find groups.
2. It is even harder to find a level-appropriate group so that the quest/instance will be challenging, but not impossible.
So, I think that a scaling factor would be really nice. This could be made optional, but it could be made as a setting for the group. For example, you could see the following in the LFF channel: "Level 25 group LFF for various Lone Lands quests." This would mean that the group level would be set at level 25, and that all players over level 25 would be scaled down to level 25 equivalent for skills, attributes, gear, and level while in the group. However, the benefit would be that the level of the group would be the level that all experience would be calculated at. So, if a level 25 group went around doing quests in a level 28 area, each member would get significantly more experience for taking out mobs and for completing quests than if the group was a level 30 group. Group members at the level cap could bank the experience points (which means that they would get more experience points if the group level was lower and therefore they didn't just walk the group through) and would get their veteran's rewards faster this way.
These are sick idea's! Im getting bored with my lvl 50 and this would really re spark my interest
/signed
right up there with the Tavern Suggestions
Thank you! This is high praise!
Originally Posted by mikey9
If it is too difficult at the moment to find groups, then the only way that the veteran system will have an impact on this problem will be that it will be even more difficult to find a group that is comprised of level-appropriate members. This will make the experience worse for people who are leveling up unless they really want to be power-leveled.
I really don't understand your reasoning for this statement. Since this whole system is hypothetical, there is no evidence to support this claim. Veterancy, if implemented, will add players to the pool of people looking to do fellowship quests. And a great number of these players will be thoughtful, reasonable people who will be more than happy to help out without blowing through the content and ruining it for everyone. All you'll have to do is ask them.
Originally Posted by mikey9
That being said, I do think that there are two main problems:
1. It tends to still be tough to find groups.
2. It is even harder to find a level-appropriate group so that the quest/instance will be challenging, but not impossible.
So, I think that a scaling factor would be really nice. This could be made optional, but it could be made as a setting for the group. For example, you could see the following in the LFF channel: "Level 25 group LFF for various Lone Lands quests." This would mean that the group level would be set at level 25, and that all players over level 25 would be scaled down to level 25 equivalent for skills, attributes, gear, and level while in the group. However, the benefit would be that the level of the group would be the level that all experience would be calculated at. So, if a level 25 group went around doing quests in a level 28 area, each member would get significantly more experience for taking out mobs and for completing quests than if the group was a level 30 group. Group members at the level cap could bank the experience points (which means that they would get more experience points if the group level was lower and therefore they didn't just walk the group through) and would get their veteran's rewards faster this way.
A couple of points here. I don't think that the entire group should be stats-adjusted, but if Turbine wants to make it an option, I'm sure some people will use it. Personally, I don't want to lose three of four levels just because I'm doing a quest late.
Also, I don't think that stats-adjustment should be a mechanism for increasing the experience that veterans (or the rest of the party) get for doing a quest. Something like this would be a boon for power-levellers as they could just accept a quest and grind mobs at enhanced experience.
Still, a stats-adjusted mode that is party wide might be a good idea. I leave it for the community and Turbine to decide.
-Forjo
Last edited by Forjo; Jun 04 2008 at 10:14 AM.
Forjo Atinxan - Elven Guardian, Forjjo Atinxan - Hobbit Minstrel, Forjorin Atinxan - Dwarven Champion, Forjoros Atinxan - Human Captain Amistad del Otro, A Casual Arkenstone Kinship - 2 Chalk Street, Derndelf, Shire Homesteads See the world - play casually! Now Recruiting! | Support Veterancy!
1. Would this system encourage you to continue to play after reaching the level cap?
Most definitely. It is a well thought out system, though there are some things I dont like about it.
2. Would this system encourage you to run lower-level quests and instances with other players?
Yes
3. What other accomplishments could award tokens?
So many kills without a death, or so many levels without a death.
4. How should tokens be delivered? Mail? NPC? Appear in inventory?
Inventory would probably be the best method.
5. How fast does a hardcore player level? Are rewards too easy or too hard to get?
I think that this system would offer a short benefit for alot of work, and that benefit wouldnt really represent dedication the way it should. I like the idea of temporary enhancements, but as a veteran of WoW those kind of things never interested me. The level cap still felt like a level cap, and that is why I left the game.
6. What would you add or change to this system to make it better?
Well, a death penalty for one. Would be hard to implement in this system though.
7. Will the exclusive veteran rewards proposed by this system unduly foster or intensify elitism from level-capped players?
I believe this system would serve to imbalance the game...the rewards are too easy to get for hardcore players, to difficult for casuals IMO.
8. Should a veteran be able to complete "Veteran of Instance" quests even after leaving the instance (by going back at a different time or with a different fellowship) or should the veteran be required to stay with his original group until completion?
I dont think so.
I like your system. In alot of ways it is better than my idea. But IMO in alot of ways it is not. Let me talk about what I like and dont like, perhaps that would be bettter.
What I like
It is an encouragement to group, and god knows this game needs that. At least at my level it is next to impossible to get a group for anything, you just have to be lucky.
It rewards veterans for helping lower players, a definite plus in my book.
Your rewards are spelled out clearly and seem appealing.
What I dont like
The token system. I would rather see a leveling system with points, moving you up physical levels.
The lack of a penalty for death. Without this, people theoretically could eventually create god-like characters, which is really not fair to others.
The name. I dont like Veterancy, I would rather the name fits the genre more, like Legend or Epic, along with titles to demonstrate this.
Perhaps we should pool resources and combine our ideas into one. All in all this is a great suggestion, but of course you and I disagree on the death penalty.
Never let your ego think or act for you.
SERVANTS OF SAURON - Faithfully serving Sauron since May 2008...
I think that this system would offer a short benefit for alot of work, and that benefit wouldnt really represent dedication the way it should. I like the idea of temporary enhancements, but as a veteran of WoW those kind of things never interested me. The level cap still felt like a level cap, and that is why I left the game.
Our system was specifically designed to only offer convenience and cosmetic benefits. The idea was to encourage play while not creating more power players which would require Turbine to rebalance all level 50 and PvMP content.
Originally Posted by RavenNightNS
I believe this system would serve to imbalance the game...the rewards are too easy to get for hardcore players, to difficult for casuals IMO.
This seems contrary to your previous statement about a lack of benefits. The rewards don't grant any tactical benefit of any kind -- simply appearance, the ability to get around, and the ability to carry more stuff. If there is an imbalance that I'm not seeing, though, please give more details.
Originally Posted by RavenNightNS
What I dont like
The token system. I would rather see a leveling system with points, moving you up physical levels.
The token system was designed to leverage the existing barter system. The game does support a points sytem method of rewards, in the form of the Destiny Points system, but abandoning tokens would require that NPCs trade for points when bestowing rewards. This could be done, but it seems to make more sense to use the system that is already in place.
Originally Posted by RavenNightNS
The lack of a penalty for death. Without this, people theoretically could eventually create god-like characters, which is really not fair to others.
None of the rewards given as examples give any player any additional power. delphinius81 had some really cool ideas about how tactical advancement could be worked into this sytem, but as I replied, I wouldn't want to see these kinds of benefits rewarding grinding. Please refer to his post earlier in this thread for more details.
If alternative an advancement system that actually improves the tactical effectiveness of the character were implemented, I'd much prefer it to be available to all characters including slow-levellers. If you tie the power of the character to length of time played LotRO will no longer be casual-friendly.
Originally Posted by RavenNightNS
The name. I dont like Veterancy, I would rather the name fits the genre more, like Legend or Epic, along with titles to demonstrate this.
What's in a name? I obviously don't have a problem with the name. Websters doesn't have it, but it has been used in the gaming industry -- mainly in RTS games when referring to the levelling of units. Legendary is already used in LotRO as a special type of skill so there is ample precedent. Still, I think Veteran works better as this system does reward time-spent. And while some Legends are Veterans, not all Veterans are Legends. I would be open to suggestions, of course.
Originally Posted by RavenNightNS
Perhaps we should pool resources and combine our ideas into one. All in all this is a great suggestion, but of course you and I disagree on the death penalty.
This is a great idea! I've already incorporated several ideas from this thread and from discussions with other friends. I had some thoughts about your death-penalty provision. These are just off-the-cuff shots, but see what you think:
1. What if tokens/points could be used to barter for/purchase (oh, heck, for now I'm sticking with tokens and bartering!) a special BoA consumable that would eliminate the dread suffered from a death? These could have a long cooldown (like a day) and would provide a sink for tokens that could be used right away.
2. Completing one or more bars of veterancy experience without dying might reward an additional token. Deaths while designated a veteran would not count so people would still be encouraged to group.
What do you think?
-Forjo
Last edited by Forjo; Jun 01 2008 at 01:22 PM.
Forjo Atinxan - Elven Guardian, Forjjo Atinxan - Hobbit Minstrel, Forjorin Atinxan - Dwarven Champion, Forjoros Atinxan - Human Captain Amistad del Otro, A Casual Arkenstone Kinship - 2 Chalk Street, Derndelf, Shire Homesteads See the world - play casually! Now Recruiting! | Support Veterancy!
1. What if tokens/points could be used to barter for/purchase (oh, heck, for now I'm sticking with tokens and bartering!) a special BoA consumable that would eliminate the dread suffered from a death? These could have a long cooldown (like a day) and would provide a sink for tokens that could be used right away.
2. Completing one or more bars of veterancy experience without dying might reward an additional token. Deaths while designated a veteran would not count so people would still be encouraged to group.
What do you think?
-Forjo
First, let me point out that I was the bozo that didnt read the suggestion more closely, losing the overall gist of it because I was stretched on time. Now that I look at it more closely, I agree it doesnt add in any imbalance, and I retract my statements to that effect...sorry.
I am, however, stuck on the name, probably nitpicking there. I dont much care for veterancy, but really this is just a nitpick. As I have indicated, I like the names Epic or Legendary better. I guess what I mean is that using the name Veteran, in this case a common term speaking of game veterans, is like using the name "Gold Farmer" or "PVP champion" in the game.
Veteran is a word we use, but it would probably not exist in the LotR universe unless you had fought a war. Using it as a generic term for the basis of a reward system at level cap seems to introduce too much of RL into the fantasy realm IMO...again, its just a small pet peve, would like to see some kind of "Legend" or "Epic" system in place more fitting of the genre.
But yes, I think you and I came up with the idea at the same time...allowing the spending of points to buy tokens, or just straight spending of points to gain the rewards you indicate.
Since your suggestion is much more thorough, I would propose this to combine the two, something for you to chew on.....
As I had said in my thread, you have legend points granting levels just like regular leveling, but you can lose levels by dying, especially if you die over and over (the penalties grow depending on the frequency of deaths within a certain period), so simply stated, if combined with your idea, this is the way you could lose Legend points:
1) By death, ratios to be determined after discussion.
2) By spending the points to either gain tokens for redemption later (the rewards listed above) or just straight spending the points like the destiny system
The destiny system remains in place as points that cannot be lost, but also have no effect on stats.
How does that sound as the base? If you like that, then we can find a way to combine the two...and perhaps I can persuade you to change the name
Never let your ego think or act for you.
SERVANTS OF SAURON - Faithfully serving Sauron since May 2008...
This idea, as stated in the Provisions section, is specifically and deliberately designed not to result in players who are more powerful than others as a result of the system. The idea is to provide visibility and convenience, not additional effectiveness in battle (except for getting to the battle faster).
I must have interpreted the provisions section differently then, or just did my normal not paying attention to detail on first reads thing. =)
That said, you have some VERY interesting ideas of your own. I certainly think they deserve consideration, but I'd suggest that they form a separate system available to all players, not only those who can grind levels at an amazing rate.
I agree and would intend for all players to have access to the system. But, alternate advancement is, from my understanding, intended for those players at level cap. Those players pre-cap still have access to the existing trait and deed system. With that said, I would have no problem lowering the level requirement by which you can start to differentiate your character from other characters of the same class. Perhaps L40 would be better? Still, I think that access to the full advancement tree should be locked until certain level and quest conditions are fulfilled.
The Great Barrow requires that players doing the Ancient Story of Evil quest line exit and return to Bree in order to forge their Skull key; but it would not require the veteran to leave the instance. And if the veteran
is participating in that particular quest, then his rewards are not tied to the instance, but to the quest itself; so we could enter and exit without penalty.
My concern is that a veteran could come in, help only on the part that he or she needs, and then leave. If they are helping a group that is under level or who could otherwise not complete the instance then that group is screwed. Conceptually, I think a veteran should help his comrades to the bitter end.
A valid concern, but one that stems from only being able to be "Veteran" for a single quest at a time. Should the Veteran stay for the entire instance, and help with An Ancient Story of Evil, but then not receive credit for Evil's Final Chapter because he was not allowed to leave the instance to turn in the first quest? While it runs against the spirit of what the veterancy system intends, you have to treat each quest as a contract. Once that quest is complete, the veteran must be contracted again for another quest.
Plus, being L50, they are likely to take the brunt of the damage from MOBs, should the veteran not be allowed to return to town to repair? What of being a veteran for group quests that are not instance based? In this case, there is nothing stopping the veteran from joining the group and whisking away to town in the middle of say the elite goblin area in the lone-lands. Consistency should be achieved between instance and non-instance based questing.
So, I'd think you have to allow a veteran to assist on more than one quest at a time. After all, if a player can complete 3 unique quests killing the same MOB (think wargs in the north downs), why can't a veteran helping out get credit for assisting on 3 quests as well? At least then if they are made to just sit in an instance, they know they will be getting credit for completing everything in there.
With regards to level scaling:
I'm against party-wide level adjustment. Because I hit L26 and the quest is rated 25, I can't use my new L26 skill? Uh-uh. I'd think that so long as a quest is not gray, no adjustments should ever happen. Even after that point, I don't think level adjustment should be forced on you. Now, as part of a veteran system, I could understand imposing restrictions to an extent.
First, all skills would remain available, however their effective use would be reduced to the level for which the quest would still grant some experience on turn in (ie for a quest rated L25, all skills would have an effective level of 31 or 32). The same would apply to all equipment, stat bonuses from equipment, and basic stats gained through leveling. This way you do not have to change your equipment or even keep extra gear lying around, nor do you have to change your play style because a skill is no longer available to use. The only thing that is adjusted is your effective <whatever you class excels at> output, and it is done so automatically.
Last edited by delphinius81; Jun 01 2008 at 02:15 PM.
Mostly the idea has potential and the only things I see it not really benefiting is simply my own game-play.
a) Been around since beta and had to work through most areas and difficult quests with hard work and very few higher levels to benefit from.
Now there seems to be a expectancy from newer players to "get a hand" with this or that, "only take a minute" type stuff. The Veterancy may contribute to this new movement (don't worry, I'm a big kid now and can say no when I want to).
b) The idea of carrying yet another token in my bag or storing in my vault just makes my eyes roll... back into my head.
c) I am geared towards helping ( I think so anyway) but making it where a lvl 50 HAS to help out newbs is not a benefit to everyones play style. I don't want to run with someone that doesn't genuinely care if I get through the quest. In a full fellowship, only one has to make it to the end for the capped player to get his bonus.
I genuinely like the idea though, of benefiting from anything that I may do in the game. I have found that the game really starts at lvl 50, but I know many don't. I think something like this should be implemented.
My suggestion - Tweak the restrictions on how a veteran can receive points. (open it up a bit more) so maybe even finishing their own quests that they did not finish before hitting the cap gives benefit towards this, grouped or ungrouped. Gives players a reason to go back and finish all the little areas. That in itself would create more opportunity for the capped players to help the uncapped. It also gives those that simply want to play the game, free of any social contact, the ability to be a part of this system.
I am, however, stuck on the name, probably nitpicking there. I dont much care for veterancy, but really this is just a nitpick. As I have indicated, I like the names Epic or Legendary better. I guess what I mean is that using the name Veteran, in this case a common term speaking of game veterans, is like using the name "Gold Farmer" or "PVP champion" in the game.
Veteran is a word we use, but it would probably not exist in the LotR universe unless you had fought a war. Using it as a generic term for the basis of a reward system at level cap seems to introduce too much of RL into the fantasy realm IMO...again, its just a small pet peve, would like to see some kind of "Legend" or "Epic" system in place more fitting of the genre.
Well, I'm not going to debate you on the name -- this is all hypothetical anyway and it could all be moot unless Turbine decides to do any of this. Since Veterancy in principle does not improve the character, I really don't see the applicability of terms such as "Legend" or "Epic", but I'll just leave it to the community, and Turbine, to decide what these ideas are called.
Originally Posted by RavenNightNS
As I had said in my thread, you have legend points granting levels just like regular leveling, but you can lose levels by dying, especially if you die over and over (the penalties grow depending on the frequency of deaths within a certain period), so simply stated, if combined with your idea, this is the way you could lose Legend points:
1) By death, ratios to be determined after discussion.
2) By spending the points to either gain tokens for redemption later (the rewards listed above) or just straight spending the points like the destiny system
I saw your post in the Tavern Revelries thread and along with this one and your avatar I think you might have a thing about penalties. Battle fatigue? (not a bad idea, though)
Just a little jab, but I think we might have a difference in ideology here. I think it's a good idea to recognize players who haven't died, or who don't die often. But I am skeptical about basing a rewards system around it, which your system appears to be. I'd like to understand why it's necessary to take anything away when a player dies. Rewarding someone with something extra if they don't die I'm fine with, but why does something need to be taken away?
As I've written, I don't think an alternative advancement system that makes players afraid of dying to they point where they avoid certain types of gameplay is going to be good for the game. I've already read messages where people avoid grouping with people going for "survivor"-type titles because those players will do anything to preserve their title including logging out or running away. If your system can be designed in such a way that it does not discourage grouping in this way then this concern of mine would go away.
Originally Posted by delphinius81
I agree and would intend for all players to have access to the system. But, alternate advancement is, from my understanding, intended for those players at level cap. Those players pre-cap still have access to the existing trait and deed system. With that said, I would have no problem lowering the level requirement by which you can start to differentiate your character from other characters of the same class. Perhaps L40 would be better? Still, I think that access to the full advancement tree should be locked until certain level and quest conditions are fulfilled.
This sounds like a good idea. Just remember that my original concept was not to have any tactical benefits to the character other than convenience. This is why I suggested that your ideas, which would provide tactical benefits, should be available to all. I see your ideas more as an "specialization system" than an "alternate advancement system". I don't think it's a good idea for people who have the time or the interest in continuing to grind levels past the cap should be granted rewards that make them more powerful than other players. If this were the case, why not just eliminate the level cap altogether?
Originally Posted by delphinius81
A valid concern, but one that stems from only being able to be "Veteran" for a single quest at a time. Should the Veteran stay for the entire instance, and help with An Ancient Story of Evil, but then not receive credit for Evil's Final Chapter because he was not allowed to leave the instance to turn in the first quest? While it runs against the spirit of what the veterancy system intends, you have to treat each quest as a contract. Once that quest is complete, the veteran must be contracted again for another quest.
If the veteran was offering "Veteran Assistance" on "An Ancient Story of Evil", there is nothing preventing him from leaving the instance. Only "Veteran of Instance" has that requirement. He would be free to leave, turn-in, and accept the new quest without penalty.
But consider:
A veteran running an instance like the Great Barrow would have two choices:
1. The veteran provides "Veteran Assistance" on one quest a time, and get the custom veteran rewards of that quest. The Veteran then takes the next quest after the fellowship leader gets it, completes it, and then turns in for his rewards. These rewards would be a certain amount of money and a number of experience points as indicated by the formula I provided.
2. The Veteran accepts a "Veteran of Instance" quest, which would reward him directly with a token.
Option 1 would grant the veteran experience on the way to his next token, and perhaps a little coin. Option 2 gives the equivalent of a whole level's worth of experience since it rewards a token.
Why would anyone chose option one when one of the requirements I set forth was that the veteran must have completed these quests already in order to be designated for assistance? Whether you've completed them or not you can still accept the "Veteran of instance" quest and go straight to a token.
Originally Posted by delphinius81
Plus, being L50, they are likely to take the brunt of the damage from MOBs, should the veteran not be allowed to return to town to repair? What of being a veteran for group quests that are not instance based? In this case, there is nothing stopping the veteran from joining the group and whisking away to town in the middle of say the elite goblin area in the lone-lands. Consistency should be achieved between instance and non-instance based questing.
How to handle repairs is a good point. While it could be argued that a veteran doing an instance for which all the mobs are grey should be able to go in fully repaired and not have to exit to repair, things happen. The veteran could die several times and end up with broken equipment.
What about this: some short time after the last member of a fellowship leaves an instance, the instance resets. What if the veteran's stick-with-it requirement was tied to this? This would prevent a veteran from going in, getting a few rewards, then joining another fellowship later to get a few more, then repeating until complete and turning in. If the rewards are tied to a specific running of an instance this would solve both problems. Do you agree?
Originally Posted by delphinius81
So, I'd think you have to allow a veteran to assist on more than one quest at a time. After all, if a player can complete 3 unique quests killing the same MOB (think wargs in the north downs), why can't a veteran helping out get credit for assisting on 3 quests as well? At least then if they are made to just sit in an instance, they know they will be getting credit for completing everything in there.
Quests whose areas overlap are a nice thing about levelling in this game. But in my opinion, Veterans should not be able to take advantage of that. The idea here is to provide help -- not to create an engine whereby a lower level character can "power-level" a veteran.
Besides, while a lot of solo content overlaps this way, how many areas are there where fellowship content does? Remember, you could be designated as a veteran for a fellowship quest.
Originally Posted by Smiling_Bandit
I am geared towards helping ( I think so anyway) but making it where a lvl 50 HAS to help out newbs is not a benefit to everyones play style. I don't want to run with someone that doesn't genuinely care if I get through the quest. In a full fellowship, only one has to make it to the end for the capped player to get his bonus.
Veterans are not required to group in order to gain veterancy experience. They still get experience from uncompleted quests near the level cap as well as killing non-grey mobs. Since a veteran's actual level doesn't change, they'd get the same experience from killing those 50+ mobs for as long are they'd be willing to kill them. There are a lot of quests out there that would give rewards to level-capped players under this sytem. Veterancy Assistance would only provide additional quests from which one could gain experience. And Veteran of Instance quests would be a more direct way to get a token without grinding a level.
Originally Posted by Smiling_Bandit
My suggestion - Tweak the restrictions on how a veteran can receive points. (open it up a bit more) so maybe even finishing their own quests that they did not finish before hitting the cap gives benefit towards this, grouped or ungrouped.
The system, as designed, already does this (so long as the quest isn't grey).
Originally Posted by Smiling_Bandit
Gives players a reason to go back and finish all the little areas. That in itself would create more opportunity for the capped players to help the uncapped. It also gives those that simply want to play the game, free of any social contact, the ability to be a part of this system.
Again, you don't need to group to get experience under this system.
Great feedback all! I'm making a change to the original post to reflect the repair issue.
-Forjo
Last edited by Forjo; Jun 03 2008 at 04:50 PM.
Forjo Atinxan - Elven Guardian, Forjjo Atinxan - Hobbit Minstrel, Forjorin Atinxan - Dwarven Champion, Forjoros Atinxan - Human Captain Amistad del Otro, A Casual Arkenstone Kinship - 2 Chalk Street, Derndelf, Shire Homesteads See the world - play casually! Now Recruiting! | Support Veterancy!
What if gaining the "veteran of ___" instance title/status was tied to completing each quest in an instance, kind of like the title for completing epic books now. The veteran receives credit for helping on each of the quests, so leaving and returning isn't an issue as far as getting the title. Also, you can tie having to complete a quest multiple times into that process.
IE for GB:
Assist with chalices: 3 times
Assist with killing 20 wights: 10 times
Ancient Story of Evil: 8 times
Evil's Final Chapter: 5 times
Where as for Veteran of an entire zone:
Maybe, assist with 100 quests
As far as receiving tokens, I think certain quests would have to be marked as giving a token reward, others would just give you vet experience and credit for the veteran deed. Upone completing each deed, you could receive a token. In order to keep things balanced, you could up the token requirements for receiving rewards.
Also, as far as repairs are concerned, for an instance like GB, repairs would be nominal. But for Fornost, they would be much higher. And what of a L50 that is assisting groups in Urugarth, Carn Dum, or Book 7 and on? There, repairs will be high, so keeping someone in an instance can have detrimental effects.
What if gaining the "veteran of ___" instance title/status was tied to completing each quest in an instance, kind of like the title for completing epic books now. The veteran receives credit for helping on each of the quests, so leaving and returning isn't an issue as far as getting the title. Also, you can tie having to complete a quest multiple times into that process.
IE for GB:
Assist with chalices: 3 times
Assist with killing 20 wights: 10 times
Ancient Story of Evil: 8 times
Evil's Final Chapter: 5 times
Where as for Veteran of an entire zone:
Maybe, assist with 100 quests
As far as receiving tokens, I think certain quests would have to be marked as giving a token reward, others would just give you vet experience and credit for the veteran deed. Upone completing each deed, you could receive a token. In order to keep things balanced, you could up the token requirements for receiving rewards.
Also, as far as repairs are concerned, for an instance like GB, repairs would be nominal. But for Fornost, they would be much higher. And what of a L50 that is assisting groups in Urugarth, Carn Dum, or Book 7 and on? There, repairs will be high, so keeping someone in an instance can have detrimental effects.
Again, more good ideas.
As for the higher-level instances, I don't see a lvl 50 being able to do much there. I don't think I'd allow someone to be designated a "Veteran" if the quest/area was not grey to them. Now level 60's, yes. I think tying the token-awarding instance completion quest to the instance reset event is a good solution.
I really like having deeds associated with these places too. Being able to get a title or maybe (violating my own rules here) a trait for providing veteran assistance many times could be another nice incentive.
-Forjo
Forjo Atinxan - Elven Guardian, Forjjo Atinxan - Hobbit Minstrel, Forjorin Atinxan - Dwarven Champion, Forjoros Atinxan - Human Captain Amistad del Otro, A Casual Arkenstone Kinship - 2 Chalk Street, Derndelf, Shire Homesteads See the world - play casually! Now Recruiting! | Support Veterancy!
If you don't allow veterancy to apply to all instances, it could be interpreted that only some group content is important for one to help with, while other content is not. That might not be a bad idea, mind you, but it has the effect of saying that even if you are a veteran, you receive no credit for being a veteran. If that makes any sense.
As I think on this some more, I wantto throw out another idea. What if instead of tying veterancy to L50s, it was opened up to characters of any level. Ideally, what you want are level appropriate characters running through an instance, helping out other characters in a way that the intended challenge isn't degraded. Having only capped players be able to help out is essentially fostering power-leveling unless a de-leveling system is implemented. That would probably require far too much of a change to the core programming, so a system that utilizes mostly already implemented systems probably has a better chance of succeeding.
So, take veterancy, and open it to all levels, where you gain veterancy rank much like you do in the Moors. You receive veterancy points for helping players to complete quests as you already have outlined. As you progress in veterancy ranks, you are allowed to purchase new items from vendors. This reduces the need to have a lot of tokens stored in your inventory/bank, as it is a point only system. In addition, you can trade in accumulated veterancy points for specific items that can be used with a special veterancy renown NPC (think exchanging destiny points, only you get an item instead of a skill/buff). You keep your attained veterancy rank, you just lose the amount of points you have available to spend at the current time.
In addition to needing certain rank to obtain items, each item for a rank has an associated region. You must have assisted on a set number of quests in that region to purchase these region items. So, you now have an overall rank, and then a region rank. However, the region locked items would be special region specific cosmetics and decorations. Not all items will be region locked.
More difficult quests award more points, so it becomes more fruitful to help with group quests than solo quests. There must be a significant difference in awarded points. So, BG for example takes about 2 hours. That's a fair number of solo quests at that level. One could probably knock off a dozen solo quests easy at the proper level, let alone in a group. Were you to offer say 10 veterancy points per quest, giving a total of 120 points for those two hours, you would have to in contrast offer ~400 points for helping with the GB instance. This could aid in promoting players to redo instances, if the veterancy rewards are made to be in a high enough demand.
I also think something should be done to make specifying what quests a veteran is assisting with more automatic would be good. However, I don't have any ideas on that at the moment.
Anyway, as I think about it more, opening up the system to all levels would really foster more of the grouping that you are trying to bring into the game. It also obviates the need for additional systems to handle dynamically altering character stats and equipment to become an arbitrary level. All of the components suggested have previous implementations as well, making it a system that would allow for more time to be spent on the content design side of it, versus coding (which is always a plus).
Thoughts?
Last edited by delphinius81; Jun 04 2008 at 01:11 AM.
Forjo, again, remember that your system does not really boost anything tactically in the game, it is basically a benign system, which has merit of its own.
My system was a leveling system past level cap. It provided an actual boost to stats, like a buff of sorts, except this one is lasting as long as you have the points.
Now, I had considered having the points slowly tick down over time, but I thought it would be better to have death as a point sink instead...this prevents god toons, because if there was no way to remove points other than using them as currency, eventually players would have outrageous stats.
However, I may be open to considering the diminishing points idea again...the idea that points tick down over time, so you have to keep playing to retain your level, but grouping, grinding, whatever.
That might be an idea, and one to actually ENCOURAGE grouping.
Never let your ego think or act for you.
SERVANTS OF SAURON - Faithfully serving Sauron since May 2008...
As I continue to say, these are good ideas. However they are pretty far from my original stated goal: "Provide measurable progression for level-capped players. Provide an "end-game" activity. Provide incentives for level-capped players to assist lower-level players with fellowship quests."
Opening the system to all players would be granting additional rewards for something people should already be doing. And allowing Veterancy rewards on non-grey instances and quests does the same thing. I don't think Turbine would go for that. There are already repeatable quests in Forochel and I'll bet there will be more in the coming books. Making existing quests repeatable with rewards wouldn't require such a complex system as Veterancy -- it could just be done with an NPC and the existing ways to repeat a quest (joining someone doing the quest or visiting a reflecting pool).
I actually believe that your two ideas, Legendary Points and an expanded trait system would be a happier marriage than either system with Veterancy. Incorporating either idea would contradict the premise of Veterancy; and since I believe the idea is sound as it is, I don't think there is reason to do that.
RavenNightNS, you were right about collaboration, but I think you got the wrong guy. Both you and delphinius81 have ideas for a system that enhances the tactical capabilities of the character -- and alternate advancement system that actually advances the character. I suggest you two work together and put together a proposal with details, suggested game mechanics, rewards, etc.
I'd love to see something polished from you guys that the community could comment on.
-Forjo
Forjo Atinxan - Elven Guardian, Forjjo Atinxan - Hobbit Minstrel, Forjorin Atinxan - Dwarven Champion, Forjoros Atinxan - Human Captain Amistad del Otro, A Casual Arkenstone Kinship - 2 Chalk Street, Derndelf, Shire Homesteads See the world - play casually! Now Recruiting! | Support Veterancy!
Good idea, bad rewards/implementation. People don't need help the most at low levels. Why would a capped character be punished for helping someone in the Tomb of Elendil instance--an extremely hard instance--compared to helping someone complete The Vigil? And some of the rewards just don't really spell out "this is worth grinding." It just looks like it's rep all over again where you need to go beyond the call of duty to get something that isn't really that worth the time spent trying to get it.
What do you base this on? People are always asking for help with fellowship quests -- they're designed to require help.
Originally Posted by Agamemnon582bc1
Why would a capped character be punished for helping someone in the Tomb of Elendil instance--an extremely hard instance--compared to helping someone complete The Vigil?
How is a Veteran punished? What do you mean by this?
Originally Posted by Agamemnon582bc1
And some of the rewards just don't really spell out "this is worth grinding." It just looks like it's rep all over again where you need to go beyond the call of duty to get something that isn't really that worth the time spent trying to get it.
Others have stated that they would really like to have some of these rewards. If you find none that you would find worth it please list some things that you would like to see; as long as they fit within the provisions of the proposal.
-Forjo
Forjo Atinxan - Elven Guardian, Forjjo Atinxan - Hobbit Minstrel, Forjorin Atinxan - Dwarven Champion, Forjoros Atinxan - Human Captain Amistad del Otro, A Casual Arkenstone Kinship - 2 Chalk Street, Derndelf, Shire Homesteads See the world - play casually! Now Recruiting! | Support Veterancy!
It's a neat system with good intentions, but I don't like it. When levelling another alt through the story, I don't want to be in the situation where I can't find any level-appropriate groups because they're all full of L50 ringers looking for veterancy points.
Something like your stats-adjusted mode could work, but it has to apply to equipment, too. Not sure what it'd take to implement such a system.
I think a lot of people would tned not to agree. How many people get someone from their kinship to power them trhough an instance or wahtever to acomplish a quest? al ot so it would not matter. many want to complete it whether becasue they want to level, receive a reward, progress the story, etc whatever. Few are in it to go "Hmm lets try this and it will be fun if we have to bust our humps or burn through pots to do this" Why do you think many that are in groups advertise if they have a high level with them? Becasue low risk high gain. But to each their own.
As I continue to say, these are good ideas. However they are pretty far from my original stated goal: "Provide measurable progression for level-capped players. Provide an "end-game" activity. Provide incentives for level-capped players to assist lower-level players with fellowship quests."
Opening the system to all players would be granting additional rewards for something people should already be doing.
First, in my experience few people have gone back while they are of level to help players complete instances they have already completed. In fact, I have heard complaints from people that group mates won't help with previous parts of a quest chain. So there is a problem as far as promoting players to help out others. As much as we'd like to think it weren't the case, people tend to be selfish. While your system was intended to be for level-capped players, its implementation screams as being a solution to promoting of-level help for grouping.
The beauty of the system though, is that even upon reaching level cap, you can still help out. Honestly, I would expect most players would not want to spend 2 weeks running GB to get a deed and some cosmetic items at the GB level. There is just newer content for them to move on and level with. So much like current deeds, most people will revisit the system upon reaching the level-cap, when they run out of things that make their xp bar go tick.
As far as character advancement, I'm content to leave that to another thread. At some point I'll get around to writing up a design for it. But I do like the veterancy idea a lot, and see it as a possible incentive to promote group play. I just think that locking it to level-capped players only would not be nearly as helpful to the community. You have to weigh things as far as what is good for the entire community versus what is good for level capped players only. Veterancy could have a much higher community impact if applied to everyone.
What do you base this on? People are always asking for help with fellowship quests -- they're designed to require help.
How is a Veteran punished? What do you mean by this?
Others have stated that they would really like to have some of these rewards. If you find none that you would find worth it please list some things that you would like to see; as long as they fit within the provisions of the proposal.
-Forjo
First, look up the word 'concise.' You could've responded to my post in two sentences instead of being overtly redundant. Second, I already listed examples of how useless or nonsensical the rewards are compared to the difficulty of getting one over the other (2,500 reputation versus a dance emote? Is that a joke? With the five tokens you can earn 12,500 rep--much more valuable than an emote.). I do see now that I read the experience table wrong (I thought you wanted to reward people more for doing lower leveled quests).
Overall the rewards look mostly cosmetic than anything else. For most cappers they're looking for ways to improve their characters, i.e. no one is going to bother to take advantage of a system like this unless there is an actual incentive other than pretty cosmetics. Adding bonuses to virtues or adding permanent boosts to your attributes or basic resistance types for turn in to tokens would actually have people helping out others.
First, look up the word 'concise.' You could've responded to my post in two sentences instead of being overtly redundant. Second, I already listed examples of how useless or nonsensical the rewards are compared to the difficulty of getting one over the other (2,500 reputation versus a dance emote? Is that a joke? With the five tokens you can earn 12,500 rep--much more valuable than an emote.). I do see now that I read the experience table wrong (I thought you wanted to reward people more for doing lower leveled quests).
Overall the rewards look mostly cosmetic than anything else. For most cappers they're looking for ways to improve their characters, i.e. no one is going to bother to take advantage of a system like this unless there is an actual incentive other than pretty cosmetics. Adding bonuses to virtues or adding permanent boosts to your attributes or basic resistance types for turn in to tokens would actually have people helping out others.
You've "listed" no examples prior to this message. You've answered none of my questions. You choose to make broad statements with no provided reasoning or evidence. And you choose to comment on how concise my message wasn't rather than addressing the questions it raised.
I tried to be diplomatic in responding to what looked like little more than a trolling message. Now I see I was wasting my time.
Many of the rewards are SUPPOSED to be cosmetic, others provide convenience. But above all, these are SAMPLE REWARDS. You are entitled to your opinion. It's unfortunate that you choose to express it in the way that you do.
-Forjo
Last edited by Forjo; Jun 04 2008 at 12:56 PM.
Forjo Atinxan - Elven Guardian, Forjjo Atinxan - Hobbit Minstrel, Forjorin Atinxan - Dwarven Champion, Forjoros Atinxan - Human Captain Amistad del Otro, A Casual Arkenstone Kinship - 2 Chalk Street, Derndelf, Shire Homesteads See the world - play casually! Now Recruiting! | Support Veterancy!
You've "listed" no examples prior to this message. You've answered none of my questions. You choose to make broad statements with no provided reasoning or evidence. And you choose to comment on how concise my message wasn't rather than addressing the questions it raised.
I tried to be diplomatic in responding to what looked like little more than a trolling message. Now I see I was wasting my time.
Many of the rewards are SUPPOSED to be cosmetic, others provide convenience. But above all, these are SAMPLE REWARDS. You are entitled to your opinion. It's unfortunate that you choose to express it in the way that you do.
-Forjo
Get over yourself. This isn't a sociology paper. There are no "recorded facts" in a video game. This comes from experience--having played enough characters through enough time to see that the majority of low level players I run in to are actually just someone's alt. I have a LV10 Captain still in the intro instance and every time I log in I get stopped by at least five or six people asking me why I haven't led the instance yet, giving me advice that I should continue with the instance. So you have your answer to what people do once they reach the cap. I can guarantee that useless cosmetics of immense proportions isn't going to be a very big incentive, example or not. So don't perceive me as a "troll" or as "hostile" simply because I don't like your idea's rewards.
Then propose some awards that would make it worth you participating. Knocking an entire system because you don't like the rewards is silly, especially when the original post mentions that the rewards listed could be changed. The only stipulation was that the rewards not adversely affect game-balance or the game-economy. So, be constructive and offer some suggestions as to what type of rewards would make the system more appealing. Constructive criticism is always appreciated, but be constructive.
I never knocked the entire idea--my first post said I liked the idea but not the rewards. I also listed some examples for adequate rewards--permanent boosts to your attributes or resistances. I definitely like the idea of being able to buy rep. Grinding for rep is just so depressing and an absolute bore. But these permanent boosts wouldn't be immense so as to battle people running around with 15,000 morale--that's something I would never want to see someone sporting around. Just small boosts that give an incentive to group with others because the boosts would eventually stack well enough (+2 will for 1 token and then curving the next +will token at 2 tokens, then 3, 4, and so on and so forth).
Just small boosts that give an incentive to group with others because the boosts would eventually stack well enough (+2 will for 1 token and then curving the next +will token at 2 tokens, then 3, 4, and so on and so forth).
I think you might be underestimating how hard people will grind for stat increases. I've seen people go to the Rift a few times in a row for one drop... An actual, permanent stat increase? That fits the definition of imbalancing the game, I think.
For a +2? And then needing double the token to earn to get another +2 for the same attribute? You would need 16 tokens alone to get +10 for one attribute. In case you haven't notice either, +10 is not a "game-breaking" dealie, not to mention you would need 32 tokens just to get another +2 in the same attribute. The same would go with resistances and evade/block/parry as well. 0.2% increase and the same deal with the token increase. Eventually getting pluses in all these attributes would be the nice bonus of things--hardly game-breaking but a great incentive to still be able to improve your character. And then there's the whole plus rep deal. Seriously, that is a great idea. Hitting the level cap would have us doing something other than begging for high-level raid content.
I think you might be underestimating how hard people will grind for stat increases. I've seen people go to the Rift a few times in a row for one drop... An actual, permanent stat increase? That fits the definition of imbalancing the game, I think.
Thank you for pointing that out, again.
RavenNightNS and delphinius81 have some good ideas for an advancement system that would award trait increases. They propose to balance it with either or a combination of death penalties and inactivity penalties.
As for Veterancy, I believe that since the system does not have any penalties and is limited only by how much grinding people want to do, it should only have cosmetic or convenience rewards. Enough people have stated that the sample rewards would be sufficient incentive to continue playing and getting experience and helping out. It boggles my mind that anyone could suggest that people wouldn't grind a few levels to increase both housing AND mobile storage.
Heck, one of the things I'm not looking forward to is turning 50 and no-longer getting experience for my quests. I probably won't turn anything in if I can help it after 50 and wait until Moria. At least with Veterancy, quest turn-ins after 50 would move me along to my first token.
-Forjo
Last edited by Forjo; Jun 05 2008 at 01:25 PM.
Forjo Atinxan - Elven Guardian, Forjjo Atinxan - Hobbit Minstrel, Forjorin Atinxan - Dwarven Champion, Forjoros Atinxan - Human Captain Amistad del Otro, A Casual Arkenstone Kinship - 2 Chalk Street, Derndelf, Shire Homesteads See the world - play casually! Now Recruiting! | Support Veterancy!
For a +2? And then needing double the token to earn to get another +2 for the same attribute? You would need 16 tokens alone to get +10 for one attribute. In case you haven't notice either, +10 is not a "game-breaking" dealie, not to mention you would need 32 tokens just to get another +2 in the same attribute. The same would go with resistances and evade/block/parry as well. 0.2% increase and the same deal with the token increase. Eventually getting pluses in all these attributes would be the nice bonus of things--hardly game-breaking but a great incentive to still be able to improve your character. And then there's the whole plus rep deal. Seriously, that is a great idea. Hitting the level cap would have us doing something other than begging for high-level raid content.
I don't want to hijack this thread to talk about character advancement, but I do want to point out a flaw in just giving skill increases. One, as you said, getting +10 does nothing. So, why bother? I'll just use some L20 food instead, get the same effect, and spend 1/100th of the time. Although, increases for parry/block/evade and resistances, since those can't be raised with food, might be worth it. However, if you want better resistances, you could just work on your deeds and slot them. But this leads to #2, it does nothing to really differentiate one character from another.
A requirement for a stat/skill changing system must be that it allows a player to become distinguishably different from the next guy. There might be flavor of the month builds, but there need to at least be options available for those that want to try something new. Every hunter getting +10 to agility, doesn't do that. So, there would need to be a complementary system that would deal with these things, that *could* be tied into the veterancy system, but operates with a different core set of beliefs.
It was just a basic suggestion, not a set in stone system. Something that would work so you aren't a god after grinding a few quests but not that there's no considerable change if you grind your heart out.
True, and there is some resistance tied to vitality and will(?) as well, however at .1-.2% or something, it really isn't an appreciably useful amount. You are far better off slotting a deed. So really, it seems to me safe to say that any type of stat changes should be in conjunction with a system focused on character progression, and not on promoting grouping in general.
New Advancement System: Veterancy
Grand Member Online status:
Reputation:
Senior Member Online status:
Originally Posted by atteSmythe
Senior Member Online status:
I would be open to suggestions, of course.
Never let your ego think or act for you.
Senior Member Online status:
SB
www.LotRO-KinFinder.com "We are all in it together."
Reply With Quote
Posting Permissions
