Attunable items now have 3 charges on test server (more inside)...

[RioR]

<DIV><STRONG>Thats a dev post I hope to see soon.</STRONG> As suggested by another poster. The attunable items should have 3 charges on them. They can be attuned 3 times. This strikes a good middle ground between crafters and adventurers. It also means that an item still has a limited life. The economy stays stable and the world is happy. This is the real fix to the situation. Let's hope SOE does it soon.</DIV>

[Omnikain]

<DIV>Pass.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Attuneable items are fine the way they are.</DIV>

[SavinDwa]

<DIV>I just don't see having items attunable as a big deal.  Stuff normally lasts me about 10 levels, by the time I'm ready to buy new stuff the stuff I'm wearing is worth about 10% of what I need to upgarde to the new stuff.  Now its worth 2% ... its just not worth worrying about.  If I make an alt unless ats a similar class they can't use all the stuff anyway.  Plus its not hard to generate cash to fit them out better than my original character was.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Without something like this its really nasty for a person joining the server in 2 years because the under level 30 economy will be broken.  In EQ 1 it was really bad, people joining the server 3 years later just could compete with the alts of level 65 players tweaked to the nth degree.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Keep in mind that this change will not help todays crafters.  They are constantly gaining levels.  It helps new crafters and new players that join the server.</DIV>

[Omnikain]

<DIV>The biggest thing I see is people crying about only getting 5s back for an item they sell to a vendor.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>What they seem to fail to realize is that this applies to everyone in the game.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>You sell an item for 5s, and so do I.  We are both "screwed" equally.  What's the big deal?</DIV>

[Lig]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Omnikain wrote:<BR> <DIV>Pass.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Attuneable items are fine the way they are.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <P>Well I can't say I agree with that completely... There should be DECAY people... come on it's as simple as 1, 2, 3 ... things get ruined as they get beat on. A piece of armor can't last forever when it's getting slashed, smashed, stabbed, and burned.... There needs to be decay of some sort.</P> <P>I have been advocating a DAoC type of decay system for a long time now and I think it is the best way to go here since you could do a version of it with relatively simple code (at least I think the change could be coded easily)</P> <P>Just make it so that for every repair you do the max % conditiong goes down by 1% or something... when it hits 0% item is no good anymore. That way you get 100 deaths per item... or make it .5% so it is 200 deaths. Make it so that an armorsmith (for armor) could repare it and it goes down only .25% giving them something else they can make money from.</P> <P>I think it's a simple solution guys. Now get to it hehe <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P>

[theplayer0670]

<DIV><A href="http://eq2.crgaming.com/viewarticle.asp?Article=7760" target=_blank>http://eq2.crgaming.com/viewarticle.asp?Article=7760</A></DIV>

[Lig]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> theplayer0670 wrote:<BR> <DIV><A href="http://eq2.crgaming.com/viewarticle.asp?Article=7760" target=_blank>http://eq2.crgaming.com/viewarticle.asp?Article=7760</A></DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> Thank you. I 5 starred that. Excellent interview and an intersting point of view. I guess I don't agree with him though. Although I do see the rarity problem. Perhaps most equipment should decay but some really rare stuff like the things made from rare harvests and some of the really rare drops should not decay and be attunable. Strike a ballance somehow like that.

[Sulas]

No, I don't want item decay. I'm happy to have to repair it after dying, it's part of the penalty of dying. But decay? No, thanks. If I wanted that I would go to WoW or DAoC. The idea of a 2nd charge of 'Attunement' is intriguing, but as noted before me, by the time I need to replace an item, the replacement is an order of magnitude more expensive.Not that I mean to toe the company line, but I think the changes Sony just made will prove best for the longevity of the economy and the game/players.

[Yama Seish]

Great change. I hope it makes live.Why?It results in the original intended goal: Items will leave the economy. Therefore the market will not get bloated with year-old armor/weapons that would make crafting a waste of time and effort.It also allows for more freedom in how one uses loot/crafted items. Used items can be passed down to a friend in need, can be given as gifts to deserving players, can be swapped for other similar items to allow the player to decide what they want to keep after all (think testing your dps or tactics with different weapons or stats with similar pieces of armor)These are positive changes. They bring more space to play around with items and not waste them outright. They allow for some Roleplay significance in game (my, heavens forbid! Roleplay in a mmorpg? what am I thinking?!)Items will also reflect value according to their remaining uses. If gear has only one "use" left then its value will be lower comparatively to an item that still has two or three "uses" left on it. They will, likely, sell for less than a brand-new piece of armor or weapon.I fail to see any negative downside to this. If you see this as a mistake, Omnikain, explain to me, please, what is not positive about such a change.Peace.

[Omnikain]

<DIV>In the end it will still come down to an item that you cannot get rid of.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The point of doing this was to ensure that someday down the road, stuff that sells for 1p today won't be selling for 10s in the future.  Stein of Moggok anyone?  It stabilizes the economy.  There will still be an decrease in price as people farm equipment, but it will never be as drastic as games past.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>It also helps crafters by ensuring that the products they produce remain viable and desirable instead of 2nd rate and inefficient.</DIV><p>Message Edited by Omnikain on <span class=date_text>02-18-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:31 PM</span>

[Aval]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> RioRio wrote:<BR> <DIV><STRONG>Thats a dev post I hope to see soon.</STRONG> As suggested by another poster. The attunable items should have 3 charges on them. They can be attuned 3 times. This strikes a good middle ground between crafters and adventurers. It also means that an item still has a limited life. The economy stays stable and the world is happy. This is the real fix to the situation. Let's hope SOE does it soon.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <P>Do not Post Statements like this unless they are actually on the test server please. It is missleading and you did it on purpose to draw attention. </P> <P>Your Post should be titled " I HOPE they make Attunable items 3 charges each ". </P>

[Miral]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> SavinDwarf wrote:<BR> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Without something like this its really nasty for a person joining the server in 2 years because the under level 30 economy will be broken.  In EQ 1 it was really bad, people joining the server 3 years later just could compete with the alts of level 65 players tweaked to the nth degree.</DIV> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>its already like that for a different reason. A high level character can get a bunch of low level jewelery fairly easily for his alt thru tradeskilling and such.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Why dont we just make it so that all items have something like a Trade Once tag? once its been traded it becomes No Trade... this would cut down on twinking a LOT, if thats what we are worried about...</DIV>

[Yama Seish]

Twinking is already curtailed by the core of the game mechanics.That's why items have level restrictions, to prevent having lvl 10 guardians with lvl 50 raid weapons. There is no such thing as twinking in eq2 as it was known in eq1. If you want to make a case against "hand-me-downs" then that is a completely different ball game.Peace.

[Yama Seish]

Omnikain wrote:In the end it will still come down to an item that you cannot get rid of.---------------------------------------------------------------------------How is it that adding three "use" charges does create an item that one cannot get rid of?If they have a limited amount of attuneable charges then they will leave the economy. Same effect as now but with added freedom for players to play around with their items = A good thing.Peace

[Miral]

<DIV>there are a lot of powerful low level items that are almost impossible to obtain at a low level without twinking. this is what I'm talking about. An example would be certain adept and master spells, or items like the lightstone thing...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>btw I agree with the origional idea in this thread incase ya haven't figured it out hehe</DIV><p>Message Edited by Miral on <span class=date_text>02-18-2005</span> <span class=time_text>04:24 PM</span>

[Yama Seish]

Right on, Miral. I understand your view. However, the only way to solve that kind of twinking is to only let one player character per server. There is no other solution.We can already put items in bank to share with other alts, we can give items to a friend to give to our alt if the bank option is taken out, and ,lastly, we can have our guildies/friends make/get items for our alts if the "no-trade" feature were to be implemented after a single transaction. The only way to stop such things is to make items no-trade from the get-go, which is why all heritage quest items are already no-trade, lore, etc, as soon as acquired.Peace.

[Miral]

<DIV>personally I think they should do whatever is needed to stop twinking. Then wipe the servers. reinstate all preorder and collector's edition items, but make them all NO TRADE. Now to compensate us for beta testing this game for 5 extra months and paying to do so, give everyone that has been playing for more than a month or two a free 6 month subscription starting after the wipe. This is the only true way to have a working economy. The damage has already been done thus far, and those who exploited are not being punished at all. Those who decided not to exploit are having it made harder and harder to compete with those who did. This has to change, and a wipe seems to be the only logical solution. I'll probably get 1 stars all over the place here, but oh well. it needs to be said and I have message ratings turned off anyway so I won't even see it.</DIV>

[Wasc]

Why three? Why not five? Or ten? Or fifty? Or two? Or...If SOE set a number of attunable "charges" today, then in two months the forums would be full of people screaming that three is not enough and that they need five charges. In six months, it'll be ten charges. Etc.One attuned item means that this is crafted for, or awarded to, or bonded with, . It works rather well, and I particularly like it. I wouldn't want to see a "three charges" system because then one would have to pay attention to how many charges anything attunable or attuned has left, and pricing would end up inordinately complicated based on how many times something can be used and resold, and so on. It defeats the whole point.Once attuned, an item can no longer be traded, but a merchant will still buy it for a value determined by its fuel cost. This I like, and this makes sense. Kudos to whomever came up with it.

[Yama Seish]

Wascen wrote:If SOE set a number of attunable "charges" today, then in two months the forums would be full of people screaming that three is not enough and that they need five charges. In six months, it'll be ten charges. Etc.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Then regardless of wether we have three or one, people will always be complaining? To some extent people will complain, sure. Once the change is semi-permanent, however, the clamor will subside.So, the problem with three charges, or whatever, is that one has to worry about being careful in what one purchases? This is not that big of a problem, in my opinion. We already have a broker system with all sorts of filtering opportunities to make searches simple. Want to add an option to filter items that have been already attuned once, or twice, or thrice? That shouldn't be a problem.In my opinion, the added freedom to play and dispose with one's own items as it is seen fit by the player largely off-sets any "complication" in the pricing system. The "whole point" is not to make trading simpler, but to take items out of the economy. By making everything that gives stats attuneable, the choices available to the player diminished greatly. Giving them some more space to play around while still making sure the items leave the economy is a good balance between both positions: the general and the particular.Peace

[Wasc]

<blockquote><hr>Yama Seishin wrote:By making everything that gives stats attuneable, the choices available to the player diminished greatly. Giving them some more space to play around while still making sure the items leave the economy is a good balance between both positions: the general and the particular.<hr></blockquote>First off, I didn't think that everything that gives stats is now attunable. My impression was that all <i>crafted</i> wearables (other than consumable/wearable, such as poison, potion, totem, ammo, etc.) and most quest rewards had been made attunable. Items that drop (even exceedingly rare ones) that were not yet attunable had not been made attunable. Am I mistaken?The reason why I like ONE wearer for an item more than (potentially) three is two-fold.<font color="green"><u>Reason One</u></font>KISS: Keep It Simple, Stupid. I'm a big fan of KISS, and every time I think about the numbers in supply and demand, the equation gets MUCH more complicated if nearly everything could be sold an extra time without needing to be produced again. I'd much rather see everything attuned only once for a long while, some hard numbers on what that has done for the EQ2 economy, and then a mathematical extrapolation based on those numbers of what would happen if all attuned items could be sold twice instead of once.<font color="green"><u>Reason Two</u></font>From a roleplaying perspective, it makes sense. To me, it is just a bit silly that a halfling fits into the same tunic as could an ogre; however, I recall the frustrating complications involved in "sized" armor and weapons in the original Everquest, and would NOT want to go back to that.Instead, I like the idea of having crafted an item for [potential buyer]. I made this JUST FOR YOU, [my buyer]. Once you buy the item, I fill in your name and now it makes sense why someone else can't use it. The weapon is balanced just for you, the armor is sized to fit you well, and so on. Yes, that means any halfling OUGHT to be able to use the armor that fits my halfling well (to which he has become attuned), but then I shudder at my memory of EQ1 and remember: KISS.I'd rather be biased on this one, relying on my gut feeling that "once is enough," than see an attuned item as capable of being 'detuned' an arbitrary number of three, five or pi times so it can be resold. I think once will work a lot better.

[Yama Seish]

Yes. All armor and weapons that give stats are attuneable: crafted, quested and dropped alike.Ok, I hear your first reason. I like KISS too, but I am not sure if I am willing to take a sweeping solution over a more nuanced approach in order to allow players to feel a greater degree of freedom. Which is, imho, something much needed in games, of any kind, not just mmorpgs. Choices stimulate thinking and creativity and playfulness. I fear that some aspects of EQ2 are already too linear.For example: Locked encounters. Level being, bar none, the most important element in weighing the outcome of encounters. Trivial loot code. Item usage restrictions. Not being able to buff players if ungrouped. Etc.I realize that most of these measures were taken to prevent potential exploits, wether there are better solutions to these conundrums is an entirely different issue. I feel that specific changes, rather than general, are best to accomodate both freedom and the necessary restrictions required for a game (a system of rules after all) However, the former approach takes much more ingenuity and hard work to develop and test. So I am willing to live with sweeping changes, to a point.Second reason: A kind of "realism". Sure, odd that an ogre can wear what your halfling had for gear. As you point out, however, it is just as odd to not be able to pass your halfling armor to another halfling. I personally didn't find EQ1 system of sizes too troublesome, but that is because I played a human. It had its problems, but it could be tolerated. I am not advocating for that change here, but we cannot claim that because it is unrealistic that an ogre can wear what halfling wears we should make armor attuneable. Why? because from the other standpoint it is just as "silly" not to be able to hand down armor to someone the same race, class and level as you may be.Ultimately, I think that confusion in purchasing armor may be the best argument against making items thrice-attuneable (isn't item condition also a nuisance but one that we've learned to live with by spotting it in the broker? who wants to pay extra to fix an item after buying it?) Yet, when all is said and done, this argument does not counter, to my mind, the benefits of greater creativity available to players if they are given a little more of room to play with their hard earned items.

[aeio]

<blockquote><hr>RioRio wrote:<DIV><STRONG>Thats a dev post I hope to see soon.</STRONG> As suggested by another poster. The attunable items should have 3 charges on them. They can be attuned 3 times. This strikes a good middle ground between crafters and adventurers. It also means that an item still has a limited life. The economy stays stable and the world is happy. This is the real fix to the situation. Let's hope SOE does it soon.</DIV><hr></blockquote>The attune issue is not between crafters and adventurers.. It benefits them both equally...People keep acting like this change benefits crafters at the behest of adventurers and that is simply not true.

[Dimidri]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> RioRio wrote:<BR> <DIV><STRONG>Thats a dev post I hope to see soon.</STRONG> As suggested by another poster. The attunable items should have 3 charges on them. They can be attuned 3 times. <EM><U><FONT color=#cc0000>This strikes a good middle ground between crafters and adventurers.</FONT></U></EM> It also means that an item still has a limited life. The economy stays stable and the world is happy. This is the real fix to the situation. Let's hope SOE does it soon.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>It already does. It makes commonly dropped items have value in the future as well as commonly crafted items. Both benefit, and it also encourages the circulation of money between people rather than the inflation of money because everything has to be sold to NPCs since the server is THAT flooded. Everyone benefits.</DIV>

[batter_then]

<DIV>screw it all lets go back to the eq1 system it worked fine. like say you were an oger then you could only wear larg gear and so on.... it was a good system that made sence</DIV>

[Jin]

<blockquote><hr>aeiouy wrote:<blockquote><hr>RioRio wrote:<DIV><STRONG>Thats a dev post I hope to see soon.</STRONG> As suggested by another poster. The attunable items should have 3 charges on them. They can be attuned 3 times. This strikes a good middle ground between crafters and adventurers. It also means that an item still has a limited life. The economy stays stable and the world is happy. This is the real fix to the situation. Let's hope SOE does it soon.</DIV><hr></blockquote>The attune issue is not between crafters and adventurers.. It benefits them both equally...People keep acting like this change benefits crafters at the behest of adventurers and that is simply not true.<hr></blockquote>How does having farm greys all day benefit me, aeiouy?! How? Tell me how being broke all the f'n time from now now will benefit me?Tell me how being at the mercy of crafters in a QUESTING game benefits me?Go on, i'm listening.Oh wha? buahahauuaha wha? Nothing? Hartsman paying for your subscription?

[CerraWhisperwind]

It was already explained in this thread. Go read it.(hint, it was something to do with the fact that both crafted AND dropped items will retain value now in the future....)

[Jin]

was i talk to you?She didnt' answer the question, because she can't. she's too busy adjusting her macrobot for optimal performance, or finishing up with her "how to be a spinless shill for soe" handbook.

[Vergin]

<DIV>Ouch</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[Jan It]

1 star for a crappy, deceiving, topic. Attunable items is fine as is.

[BlackHa]

<DIV>It is another nerf on crafters. The attune-all idea was put in place to induce crafters with the belief that sales to other players would replace sales to NPCs. Unfortunately, the adventuring side got so uptight the Devs compromised. Crafters are not suppose to be able to create "new money" and they certainly are never given  the benefit of a compromise. Let's face it...crafting is not viable nor desireable in this game anymore. Word of mouth spreads quick and there is no amount of marketing that will sell this crafting system in it's current sorry albeit broken state.</DIV>