I said it before and I'll say it again... How is sitting in front of multiple loading screens fun? [Archive]

Nulad

01-19-2009, 07:18 PM

At all?Enchanted lands > (loading) > Nek > (loading) > Thundering Steppes > (loading) > Zek, etc etc.I'm all for making journeying a little dangerous or tricky, I'm even up for making it take time (in game) but click, zone, click, zone, click, zone is just the pinnacle of tediousness and other than annoying the user serves no purpose other than to place extra wear on my hard drive, use bandwidth (well ok, not a lot...) and probably add a little extra overhead to the server.Give us an option to skip the zones in which all I'm going to do is turn 180 degrees or walk 5 meters and zone direct to the destination please.

Windowlicker

01-19-2009, 07:38 PM

There is nothing wrong with loading times in this game, and frankly I don't even notice them. I'd rather see them work on multi-core support tbh.

Yimway

01-19-2009, 07:39 PM

<cite>Nuladen@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote>Give us an option to skip the zones in which all I'm going to do is turn 180 degrees or walk 5 meters and zone direct to the destination please.</blockquote>Weee, here we go again!You'll find this option in your guild hall.

Dasein

01-19-2009, 07:42 PM

<cite>Zahne@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote>There is nothing wrong with loading times in this game, and frankly I don't even notice them. I'd rather see them work on multi-core support tbh.</blockquote>Combining bells is trivially easy compared to adding more multi-core support. There's really no reason not to do this. Just put a single bell for al lthe old-world zones in each major city travel zone.

Spyderbite

01-19-2009, 07:43 PM

It's never really bothered me.. even before the additional bells were introduced. If they add such a feature, great. If not, I'm fine with that too.

Dasein

01-19-2009, 07:44 PM

<cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Nuladen@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote>Give us an option to skip the zones in which all I'm going to do is turn 180 degrees or walk 5 meters and zone direct to the destination please.</blockquote>Weee, here we go again!You'll find this option in your guild hall.</blockquote>Of course, not everyone has a guild hall, so that's really not a valid answer, or are the unguilded hoi polloi not good enough to get faster travel options?

Yimway

01-19-2009, 07:47 PM

<cite>Dasein wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Nuladen@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote>Give us an option to skip the zones in which all I'm going to do is turn 180 degrees or walk 5 meters and zone direct to the destination please.</blockquote>Weee, here we go again!You'll find this option in your guild hall.</blockquote>Of course, not everyone has a guild hall, so that's really not a valid answer, or are the unguilded hoi polloi not good enough to get faster travel options?</blockquote>Hmm, wait, what was the exact arguement in this exact same thread two weeks ago?Oh yeah, changing the bells this way would devalue / eliminate the need for the house amenity.Maybe if we keep trying we can recreate the entire thread again?

Oh

01-19-2009, 07:49 PM

<cite>Nuladen@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote>Enchanted lands > (loading) > Nek > (loading) > Thundering Steppes > (loading) > Zek, etc etc.</blockquote>Call to guild hall, Bell to Zek. Wow I jus turned your set of loading screens into 2 loading screens.. Wee isn't this easy..

Kendricke

01-19-2009, 07:49 PM

<cite>Nuladen@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote>Give us an option to skip the zones in which all I'm going to do is turn 180 degrees or walk 5 meters and zone direct to the destination please. </blockquote>STEP 1: Nuladen tells <a href="http://eq2players.station.sony.com/guilds/guild_profile.vm?guildId=512204" target="_blank">the guild</a>, "Hey guys, I think we should pick up a guildhall."STEP 2: Morgoth purchases guildhall. STEP 3: Nuladen tells the guild, "Hey guys, I think we should pick up a bell for travelling to Zek when I want to get there fast."STEP 4: Morgoth purchases "Mariner's Bell: Shattered Lands" and places it in the guildhall.

Oh

01-19-2009, 07:52 PM

<cite>Dasein wrote:</cite><blockquote>Of course, not everyone has a guild hall, so that's really not a valid answer, or are the unguilded hoi polloi not good enough to get faster travel options?</blockquote>Why wouldn't any guild level 30 not have atleast a T1 guild hall. I mean it's trivial to pay for solo at 80, buying and upkeep I mean. SOOO again what is the issue? (not enough amentity slots, that one I can understand espically for T1 guild hall, but if that's an issue then don't solo pay for the thing and get a T2 or better guild hall.)

interstellarmatter

01-19-2009, 08:03 PM

After finally coming back from playing other MMOs, loading screens have got to be the most annoying feature in the game. EQ2 stands out in many ways but having to stare at 2 or 3 loading screens to get to a zone is not one of them.In places like RoK, it's fine. But the bells around the old zones are just silly. They should offer an increasing amount of currency to be able to zone directly to a certain zone. Eg, TS 60 silver, EL 1 gold, EF 3 gold. That way, you still have value of having a free zone bell in the guild houses.

Dasein

01-19-2009, 08:09 PM

<cite>Ohiv wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Dasein wrote:</cite><blockquote>Of course, not everyone has a guild hall, so that's really not a valid answer, or are the unguilded hoi polloi not good enough to get faster travel options?</blockquote>Why wouldn't any guild level 30 not have atleast a T1 guild hall. I mean it's trivial to pay for solo at 80, buying and upkeep I mean. SOOO again what is the issue? (not enough amentity slots, that one I can understand espically for T1 guild hall, but if that's an issue then don't solo pay for the thing and get a T2 or better guild hall.)</blockquote>Again, not everyone is in a guild, and not every guild is level 30 and many players are not level 80. There seems to be a blindness towards playstyles that do not readily afford such luxuries.

Spyderbite

01-19-2009, 08:12 PM

<cite>interstellarmatter wrote:</cite><blockquote>In places like RoK, it's fine. But the bells around the old zones are just silly. They should offer an increasing amount of currency to be able to zone directly to a certain zone. Eg, TS 60 silver, EL 1 gold, EF 3 gold. That way, you still have value of having a free zone bell in the guild houses.</blockquote>heh.. But, isn't this just the same arguement as "I should be able to buy the same stuff off the city merchants without being in a guild?"? Guilds are rewarded for their teamwork. Those that have no interest in joining a guild or starting a guild, can take public transit. <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

Spyderbite

01-19-2009, 08:15 PM

<cite>Dasein wrote:</cite><blockquote>Again, not everyone is in a guild, and not every guild is level 30 and many players are not level 80. There seems to be a blindness towards playstyles that do not readily afford such luxuries.</blockquote>I can't afford a brand new BMW.. so I have to drive a 1995 model right now. I think its unfair that people who went to school longer, stayed with the same company longer than me, or worked harder than me get to drive one and I don't. Its just unfair. <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

Kendricke

01-19-2009, 08:16 PM

<cite>Dasein wrote:</cite><blockquote>Again, not everyone is in a guild, and not every guild is level 30 and many players are not level 80. There seems to be a blindness towards playstyles that do not readily afford such luxuries.</blockquote>It's not a blindness. I'm just more capitalistic than communistic in my personal beliefs regarding personal entitlement of rewards. I happen to believe that there should be rewards for belonging to a guild that are not available to those who are not guilded. That said, guilding as a concept is hardly exclusive. Anyone in the game can form a guild. There is no limit on who can join a guild. Anyone can level a guild up through any playstyle (status can be earned through soloing, grouping, raiding, tradeskilling, questing, adventuring, and can even be purchased on the broker). Through the options already available in gameplay, anyone can belong to a guild, purchase a guildhall, and purchase the travel amenities.

Dasein

01-19-2009, 08:19 PM

<cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Dasein wrote:</cite><blockquote>Again, not everyone is in a guild, and not every guild is level 30 and many players are not level 80. There seems to be a blindness towards playstyles that do not readily afford such luxuries.</blockquote>It's not a blindness. I'm just more capitalistic than communistic in my personal beliefs regarding personal entitlement of rewards. I happen to believe that there should be rewards for belonging to a guild that are not available to those who are not guilded. That said, guilding as a concept is hardly exclusive. Anyone in the game can form a guild. There is no limit on who can join a guild. Anyone can level a guild up through any playstyle (status can be earned through soloing, grouping, raiding, tradeskilling, questing, adventuring, and can even be purchased on the broker). Through the options already available in gameplay, anyone can belong to a guild, purchase a guildhall, and purchase the travel amenities. </blockquote>Rewards are fine, but those rewards should not be preserved at the cost of gameplay enjoyment for unguilded or lower-level guilded people, and certainly shouldn't be an excuse for not making changes which improve gameplay for everyone.

Spyderbite

01-19-2009, 08:30 PM

<cite>Dasein wrote:</cite><blockquote>Rewards are fine, but those rewards should not be preserved at the cost of gameplay enjoyment for unguilded or lower-level guilded people, and certainly shouldn't be an excuse for not making changes which improve gameplay for everyone.</blockquote>It doesn't improve gameplay. It just makes it easier. Thousands of people enjoyed their gameplay before guild halls. Many more enjoyed game play when even less options for shortened travel was available. For free.. or very cheap. Now, that something is introduced that is expensive people want it too.. but without the hardwork that goes in to obtaining it.It's not a slight against unguilded players... its human nature.

Dasein

01-19-2009, 08:41 PM

<cite>Spyderbite@Venekor wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Dasein wrote:</cite><blockquote>Rewards are fine, but those rewards should not be preserved at the cost of gameplay enjoyment for unguilded or lower-level guilded people, and certainly shouldn't be an excuse for not making changes which improve gameplay for everyone.</blockquote>It doesn't improve gameplay. It just makes it easier. Thousands of people enjoyed their gameplay before guild halls. Many more enjoyed game play when even less options for shortened travel was available. For free.. or very cheap. Now, that something is introduced that is expensive people want it too.. but without the hardwork that goes in to obtaining it.It's not a slight against unguilded players... its human nature.</blockquote>The number of loading screens have been an issue pretty much since launch, and while most people can deal with it, I doubt there would be much complaint if bells were consolidated to eliminate some of the intermediate travel points. The introduction of these consolidated bells in guild halls has brought the issue to the forefront again, but the complaint has always been there.

Spyderbite

01-19-2009, 08:47 PM

<cite>Dasein wrote:</cite><blockquote>The number of loading screens have been an issue pretty much since launch, and while most people can deal with it, I doubt there would be much complaint if bells were consolidated to eliminate some of the intermediate travel points. The introduction of these consolidated bells in guild halls has brought the issue to the forefront again, but the complaint has always been there.</blockquote>Meh.. it's already been added to Guild Hall amenities and not likely to lose its purpose to pay status and plat for each month. As I said in my original post, I wasn't inconvenienced before guild halls. If they add that function.. great.. if not.. I'm still good.Good luck with crusade in any case.

Rijacki

01-19-2009, 09:09 PM

MehTake something from the PvP servers and put it on PvE. In Freeport and Qeynos on PvE you can purchase tickets to Nek Forest or Thundering Steppes only. On PvP servers, those same ticket sellers (and the associated bells) sell tickets to the other Shattered Lands docks.If you want it 'free', guild hall and amenity for which the guild pays for through rent.If you don't want to be in a guild (or don't want to use the hall for some reason), buy a ticket.

Nulad

01-19-2009, 09:49 PM

<cite>Ohiv wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Nuladen@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote>Enchanted lands > (loading) > Nek > (loading) > Thundering Steppes > (loading) > Zek, etc etc.</blockquote>Call to guild hall, Bell to Zek. Wow I jus turned your set of loading screens into 2 loading screens.. Wee isn't this easy..</blockquote>Yes, for 15 minutes you did, but not for the successive return trips while doing oh say... the old Everfrost access quest. Wow I just turned your glib reply into fail. Weee, wasn't that easy...Don't give me crap about guild halls either, many players don't have them and they're no reason to leave pathetic game mechanics like this in place whatsoever especially when all one is doing is loading to click a single item to load yet another zone.<blockquote>STEP 1: Nuladen tells the guild, "Hey guys, I think we should pick up a guildhall."STEP 2: Morgoth purchases guildhall. STEP 3: Nuladen tells the guild, "Hey guys, I think we should pick up a bell for travelling to Zek when I want to get there fast."STEP 4: Morgoth purchases "Mariner's Bell: Shattered Lands" and places it in the guildhall.</blockquote>Tell you what, you get the guild amenity that turns all the crap (and by crap I mean exceedingly well decorated by people with far too much time, platinum and patience on their hands) off in the guild hall so my pc can load it in less time than it takes me to load the three zones I stated above, have SoE fix that bloody memory leak so that I can then actually traverse the guild hall in under 5 minutes without having to restart the client due to it having turned into the slideshow of lag induced by aforementioned memory leak and reduce my call to hall recast to about 2 minutes and I'll take your argument and agree, until then it's almost as annoying as when all you seem to be doing for the better part of half an hour is sitting in front of eq2 loading screens.

Spyderbite

01-19-2009, 09:53 PM

<cite>Nuladen@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote>Tell you what, you get the guild amenity that turns all the crap (and by crap I mean exceedingly well decorated by people with far too much time, platinum and patience on their hands) off in the guild hall so my pc can load it in less time than it takes me to load the three zones I stated above, have SoE fix that bloody memory leak so that I can then actually traverse the guild hall in under 5 minutes without having to restart the client due to it having turned into the slideshow of lag induced by aforementioned memory leak and reduce my call to hall recast to about 2 minutes and I'll take your argument and agree, until then it's almost as annoying as when all you seem to be doing for the better part of half an hour is sitting in front of eq2 loading screens.</blockquote>All of this sounds like a PC problem.. cause I haven't experienced any of that.. and if it was a client or server issue.. everyone, including me, would have the same problem. Upgrade and/or maintain, tech support 101.

Kendricke

01-19-2009, 09:55 PM

<cite>Nuladen@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote>...and by crap I mean exceedingly well decorated by people with far too much time, platinum and patience on their hands...</blockquote>If you have issues with your guildmates, you should take it up within your guild.

Nulad

01-19-2009, 09:57 PM

<cite>Spyderbite@Venekor wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Nuladen@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote>Tell you what, you get the guild amenity that turns all the crap (and by crap I mean exceedingly well decorated by people with far too much time, platinum and patience on their hands) off in the guild hall so my pc can load it in less time than it takes me to load the three zones I stated above, have SoE fix that bloody memory leak so that I can then actually traverse the guild hall in under 5 minutes without having to restart the client due to it having turned into the slideshow of lag induced by aforementioned memory leak and reduce my call to hall recast to about 2 minutes and I'll take your argument and agree, until then it's almost as annoying as when all you seem to be doing for the better part of half an hour is sitting in front of eq2 loading screens.</blockquote>All of this sounds like a PC problem.. cause I haven't experienced any of that.. and if it was a client or server issue.. everyone, including me, would have the same problem. Upgrade and/or maintain, tech support 101.</blockquote>Ahhh, but a lot of people are having the issue, it has just been exhibiting in somewhat different guises, go take a look in the support forums at the threads dealing with the low memory mode which has been dropping texture quality for a lot of people, it's all related I'm willing to bet.It's not a pc issue as I have replicated it on three different pc's, it could be an account issue, will be testing that theory later this week hopefully, it's not a connection issue as I have replicated it on two different connections.

Nulad

01-19-2009, 10:01 PM

<cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Nuladen@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote>...and by crap I mean exceedingly well decorated by people with far too much time, platinum and patience on their hands...</blockquote>If you have issues with your guildmates, you should take it up within your guild. </blockquote>Sorry, I always forget sarcasm doesn't come across well in typed text <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" />I have no issues with them at all, I have issue with the fact that the client is causing me grief.If I load into the guild hall directly I can run around it to my hearts content and it'll run nice and smooth generally above 30fps, if I've been through a couple of zone transitions then my fps will drop to about 8 coupled with big pauses every step while it loads more data, the more zone transitions the worse it gets. Not to mention the increased load time on each successive zone transition.The guild hall is just a very nice place to observe the effect as it is so crowded with objects.

Seidhkona

01-19-2009, 11:10 PM

My guild hall makes travel amenities free to everyone to use. We want visitors to admire our beautiful guild hall.Look around - chances are good a guild hall near you does the same.

liveja

01-19-2009, 11:19 PM

I'm totally in favor of eliminating as many loading screens as possible.That's why I strongly encourage everyone to join a good guild!No, I don't care if you don't want to join one. Makes your choice, takes your consequences./shrug

Oh

01-19-2009, 11:34 PM

<cite>Flaye@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote>I'm totally in favor of eliminating as many loading screens as possible.That's why I strongly encourage everyone to join a good guild!No, I don't care if you don't want to join one. Makes your choice, takes your consequences./shrug</blockquote>Wow I actually agree with flaye.. Man I must be getting ill../em shuffles off to go get some orange juice before he get's worse..

Noaani

01-19-2009, 11:36 PM

<cite>Dasein wrote:</cite><blockquote>Rewards are fine, but those rewards should not be preserved at the cost of gameplay enjoyment for unguilded or lower-level guilded people, and certainly shouldn't be an excuse for not making changes which improve gameplay for everyone.</blockquote>Guild hall bells do not increase gameplay enjoyment, all they do is lower downtime.This is a perfectly valid form of reward, and in fact time saving is the only reason to have a guild hall at all.If traveling was made the way you want, thats fine, but first of all, YOU should come up with ideas for a replacement use for guild halls. If you can't come up with a suitable reason to have a guild hall other than the current status quo, how can you in good consciousness ask for the one reward (time saving) for having a guild hall to be removed?

Leegion

01-19-2009, 11:53 PM

my previous game was a MMO that did not have loading screens. as you traveled to a new location the screen went white for about 5 seconds. there were no loading screens. you could run from one extreme of the map to the other without zoning.when i started playing eq2 zoning was the most annoying part of the game and it still irks me.i think it would be less annoying if while zoning a map of the zone would appear rather than the current artisitic sketches of in game stuff. a map would at least be useful.ideally, you would be able to run from North Qeynos through South Qeynos to Qeynos Harbor without zoning. But that would require much work.

Persi

01-20-2009, 02:29 AM

<cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Dasein wrote:</cite><blockquote>Again, not everyone is in a guild, and not every guild is level 30 and many players are not level 80. There seems to be a blindness towards playstyles that do not readily afford such luxuries.</blockquote>It's not a blindness. I'm just more capitalistic than communistic in my personal beliefs regarding personal entitlement of rewards. I happen to believe that there should be rewards for belonging to a guild that are not available to those who are not guilded. That said, guilding as a concept is hardly exclusive. Anyone in the game can form a guild. There is no limit on who can join a guild. Anyone can level a guild up through any playstyle (status can be earned through soloing, grouping, raiding, tradeskilling, questing, adventuring, and can even be purchased on the broker). Through the options already available in gameplay, anyone can belong to a guild, purchase a guildhall, and purchase the travel amenities. </blockquote>Do you know how ridiculous you sound using the words capitalistic and communistic in regards to zoning in a video game? lol. I will say that zoning screens are annoying, but its not a big deal.

Kendricke

01-20-2009, 03:13 AM

The words reference economic models, which is essentially what we're describing here. At its root, economics is the study of choice (we can get more specific and point out that it's actually the study of choice within a situation where scarcity or constraints exist, if you'd like). Now, generally speaking though, in a more communistic model, everyone involved is given relatively equal rewards. In a more capatilistic model, everyone involved is given relatively equal opportunities for rewards. I believe that the reward (in this case, less zoning screens) is already present in the game for every player provided they are willing to put forth the effort required to earn the reward. What other players seem to advocate is that everyone should simply have the reward without additional effort - a stance I disagree with.You think that sounds ridiculous, and I can only presume that's because you feel I was using the words in some sort of political fashion. This is either because you dont' realize the economic denotations of the words or because you feel the game is somehow too frivilous to <a href="http://www.slate.com/id/2078053/" target="_blank">merit any serious academic economic study</a>.

Alienor

01-20-2009, 05:00 AM

<cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Nuladen@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote>Give us an option to skip the zones in which all I'm going to do is turn 180 degrees or walk 5 meters and zone direct to the destination please.</blockquote>You'll find this option in your guild hall.</blockquote>...every 15mins only. And here we are again, zoning, zoning, zoning.....

scruffylookin

01-20-2009, 07:05 AM

<cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Dasein wrote:</cite><blockquote>Again, not everyone is in a guild, and not every guild is level 30 and many players are not level 80. There seems to be a blindness towards playstyles that do not readily afford such luxuries.</blockquote>It's not a blindness. I'm just more capitalistic than communistic in my personal beliefs regarding personal entitlement of rewards. I happen to believe that there should be rewards for belonging to a guild that are not available to those who are not guilded. That said, guilding as a concept is hardly exclusive. Anyone in the game can form a guild. There is no limit on who can join a guild. Anyone can level a guild up through any playstyle (status can be earned through soloing, grouping, raiding, tradeskilling, questing, adventuring, and can even be purchased on the broker). Through the options already available in gameplay, anyone can belong to a guild, purchase a guildhall, and purchase the travel amenities. </blockquote>First off, I don't really have an issue with the loading screens, but I feel like the OP's point is being completely sidetracked here by the guild perk debate.I may be way off base here (as I often am), but I didn't get the impression that the OP's original suggestion had anything to do with whether or not guilds should have perks. Guild Perks are fine, and certainly should be there. You earned them and deserve them. I saw nothing in the OP that suggested you shouldn't have plenty of guild perks.I think the OP's suggestion was more along the lines of the extra-step bells shouldn't qualify. They're pointless steps that have no in-game purpose. Skipping a loading screen is just a very odd thing to have as a guild perk. It's a mechanic on a very technical level, not an amenity that makes any real sense in-game. And I don't really see a downside to eliminating the bell-hops. Stopping the bell-hopping can only help gameplay for everyone. If someone in a guild is grouping with someone that isn't in a guild, the guilded person will just have to wait on the unguilded person to go through the extra loading screens to meet up. And it's not because of travel time. If the guilded person was waiting on the unguilded person because that person was running across Kylong Plains, that would be different. This isn't that at all. This is simply loading screens. If anything, the extra loading screens hurt interaction between the guilded and the unguilded.Guilds should have tons of perks. I completely agree with this, and I didn't see anything in the OP that suggested otherwise. And I personally don't see a downside to eliminating pointless (truly pointless) loading screens. It's not a good choice for a guild perk. It's not saving travel time. It's saving loading screens, which is completely outside the context of the game.In-game rewards shouldn't be beneficial from a hardware perspective. The OP didn't say that guilds shouldn't have perks. He simply gave feedback saying the bell-hopping is a pointless timesink. I'm okay with timesinks, as they're part of the MMO world. But adding loading screens for no real reason is a little much.Let the guilds get bells and rings to places normal bells can't get to. But having less loading screens is just a very odd perk and has no logic, from an in-game perspective.

zaneluke

01-20-2009, 09:11 AM

<cite>Nuladen@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote>Tell you what, you get the guild amenity that turns all the crap (and by crap I mean exceedingly well decorated by people with far too much time, platinum and patience on their hands) off in the guild hall so my pc can load it in less time than it takes me to load the three zones I stated above, have SoE fix that bloody memory leak so that I can then actually traverse the guild hall in under 5 minutes without having to restart the client due to it having turned into the slideshow of lag induced by aforementioned memory leak and reduce my call to hall recast to about 2 minutes and I'll take your argument and agree, until then it's almost as annoying as when all you seem to be doing for the better part of half an hour is sitting in front of eq2 loading screens.</blockquote>I load a screen in about 45 seconds tops. Does it really take you 5 minutes to load?

zaneluke

01-20-2009, 09:18 AM

<cite>scruffylookin wrote:</cite><blockquote>In-game rewards shouldn't be beneficial from a hardware perspective. The OP didn't say that guilds shouldn't have perks. He simply gave feedback saying the bell-hopping is a pointless timesink. I'm okay with timesinks, as they're part of the MMO world. But adding loading screens for no real reason is a little much.Let the guilds get bells and rings to places normal bells can't get to. But having less loading screens is just a very odd perk and has no logic, from an in-game perspective.</blockquote>You see , here is the problem. Some of these bells did not exist some time ago. You used to have to run across EL to get to the LS bell. Want to go to CL? Going to have to run nek forest.SOE keeps adding and adding EASIER things in to the game, people keep asking for more and more. So this time they added what amounts to a HUGE time saver as a guild hall item. Now everyone knows the mechanics are there and they want it available to ALL!Next will be changing EVERYONES call to home to 15 minutes, just like the call to guild hall. Seriously, join a guild and play the game with people. It really is not that hard. IMHO if someone just does not want to join a guild and interact with other people in an MMO and they get frusterated at the perks GROUP players get. leave the game, good riddance.

Faenril

01-20-2009, 09:20 AM

The OP is right. If you can do antonica > thundering steps > nektulos > lavastorm, how does it hurt anyone if you can go from ant to lavastorm directly ? Because all you did along the way was clicking bell/loading anyway. It's not like if there were real in game travelling time involved (like with boats from bbm to nek for instance). It's just click and load, it brings nothing to the game... Change shattered lands bells to a dropdown menu proposing the whole zone list. Really I don't see that killing guild halls come on <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

Faenril

01-20-2009, 09:24 AM

<cite>zaneluke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>scruffylookin wrote:</cite><blockquote>In-game rewards shouldn't be beneficial from a hardware perspective. The OP didn't say that guilds shouldn't have perks. He simply gave feedback saying the bell-hopping is a pointless timesink. I'm okay with timesinks, as they're part of the MMO world. But adding loading screens for no real reason is a little much.Let the guilds get bells and rings to places normal bells can't get to. But having less loading screens is just a very odd perk and has no logic, from an in-game perspective.</blockquote>You see , here is the problem. Some of these bells did not exist some time ago. You used to have to run across EL to get to the LS bell. Want to go to CL? Going to have to run nek forest.SOE keeps adding and adding EASIER things in to the game, people keep asking for more and more. So this time they added what amounts to a HUGE time saver as a guild hall item. Now everyone knows the mechanics are there and they want it available to ALL!Next will be changing EVERYONES call to home to 15 minutes, just like the call to guild hall. Seriously, join a guild and play the game with people. It really is not that hard. IMHO if someone just does not want to join a guild and interact with other people in an MMO and they get frusterated at the perks GROUP players get. leave the game, good riddance.</blockquote>Yes, back in the days when you actually had to walk to travel, this change would not have made sense and I would have been against it (esp on pvp servers), but nowdays you just jump from zone to zone by clicking bells. This way of travelling is void of any interest or risk, so let's just remove it as it's pointless in today's game.If your call to guild hall is down you don't mind clicking 10 bells and getting 10 loading screens ? That's what you are saying ?

Faenril

01-20-2009, 09:40 AM

<cite>Noaani wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Dasein wrote:</cite><blockquote>Rewards are fine, but those rewards should not be preserved at the cost of gameplay enjoyment for unguilded or lower-level guilded people, and certainly shouldn't be an excuse for not making changes which improve gameplay for everyone.</blockquote>Guild hall bells do not increase gameplay enjoyment, all they do is lower downtime.This is a perfectly valid form of reward, and in fact time saving is the only reason to have a guild hall at all.If traveling was made the way you want, thats fine, but first of all, YOU should come up with ideas for a replacement use for guild halls. If you can't come up with a suitable reason to have a guild hall other than the current status quo, how can you in good consciousness ask for the one reward (time saving) for having a guild hall to be removed?</blockquote>LOL. And all this time I thought a guild hall was a place to meet up and rest with guildies while have all city ammenities at hand ... I thought it was a concrete way to touch and show what your guild accomplished ... Something guildies would be proud of ... their home... While actually guild halls are only a way to travel fast !I feel like such a fool now ! Many thanks for enlighting me <img src="/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />Seriously, if you guild halls crowd feel so unconfortable about giving what you have to the others for free - while you could take advantage of this from time to time but fail to see it btw - just do as was suggested by another poster:Rely on ticket sellers. This way ppl pay for the service. Just place ticket sellers for all shattered lands zones at every bell location / docks. Problem solved and everyone is happy.

Nulad

01-20-2009, 09:48 AM

<cite>zaneluke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>scruffylookin wrote:</cite><blockquote>In-game rewards shouldn't be beneficial from a hardware perspective. The OP didn't say that guilds shouldn't have perks. He simply gave feedback saying the bell-hopping is a pointless timesink. I'm okay with timesinks, as they're part of the MMO world. But adding loading screens for no real reason is a little much.Let the guilds get bells and rings to places normal bells can't get to. But having less loading screens is just a very odd perk and has no logic, from an in-game perspective.</blockquote>You see , here is the problem. Some of these bells did not exist some time ago. You used to have to run across EL to get to the LS bell. Want to go to CL? Going to have to run nek forest.And that used to fine as it involved IN GAME time and difficulty.SOE keeps adding and adding EASIER things in to the game, people keep asking for more and more. So this time they added what amounts to a HUGE time saver as a guild hall item. Now everyone knows the mechanics are there and they want it available to ALL!No, I've wanted it since before guild halls existed.Next will be changing EVERYONES call to home to 15 minutes, just like the call to guild hall. Seriously, join a guild and play the game with people. It really is not that hard. IMHO if someone just does not want to join a guild and interact with other people in an MMO and they get frusterated at the perks GROUP players get. leave the game, good riddance.It's not even close to being the same, maybe you should attempt to seperate in game difficulty and time sinks from technical difficulty and timesinks. As a poster above managed to understand I have no issues with guilds getting benefits, I think they should but this isn't one of them.</blockquote>

Guy De Alsace

01-20-2009, 11:09 AM

I try to avoid going to the GH because it can take almost 5 minutes to load it, followed by another minute or so before I can actually move when zoned in. I've noticed the population in Qeynos has been growing of late maybe for some of the same reasons.The memory leak means that the more I zone the more my computer slows down. If you have plenty of memory I suppose you wont notice too much.Having said that, I've been playing since 2005 and lived with this problem anyway since then. I dont think they should do any more than they already have. It is now ten times faster to get from point A to point B than it used to be. Thats enough IMO.

Zorastiz

01-20-2009, 11:41 AM

<cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote>The words reference economic models, which is essentially what we're describing here. At its root, economics is the study of choice (we can get more specific and point out that it's actually the study of choice within a situation where scarcity or constraints exist, if you'd like). Now, generally speaking though, in a more communistic model, everyone involved is given relatively equal rewards. In a more capatilistic model, everyone involved is given relatively equal opportunities for rewards. I believe that the reward (in this case, less zoning screens) is already present in the game for every player provided they are willing to put forth the effort required to earn the reward. What other players seem to advocate is that everyone should simply have the reward without additional effort - a stance I disagree with.You think that sounds ridiculous, and I can only presume that's because you feel I was using the words in some sort of political fashion. This is either because you dont' realize the economic denotations of the words or because you feel the game is somehow too frivilous to <a href="http://www.slate.com/id/2078053/" target="_blank">merit any serious academic economic study</a>. </blockquote>Kendricke please for the sake of the Overlord get off your high horse.

liveja

01-20-2009, 11:48 AM

<cite>Zorastiz@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote>The words reference economic models, which is essentially what we're describing here. At its root, economics is the study of choice (we can get more specific and point out that it's actually the study of choice within a situation where scarcity or constraints exist, if you'd like). Now, generally speaking though, in a more communistic model, everyone involved is given relatively equal rewards. In a more capatilistic model, everyone involved is given relatively equal opportunities for rewards. I believe that the reward (in this case, less zoning screens) is already present in the game for every player provided they are willing to put forth the effort required to earn the reward. What other players seem to advocate is that everyone should simply have the reward without additional effort - a stance I disagree with.You think that sounds ridiculous, and I can only presume that's because you feel I was using the words in some sort of political fashion. This is either because you dont' realize the economic denotations of the words or because you feel the game is somehow too frivilous to <a href="http://www.slate.com/id/2078053/" target="_blank">merit any serious academic economic study</a>. </blockquote>Kendricke please for the sake of the Overlord get off your high horse.</blockquote>FWIW, Ken's post was entirely correct.

liveja

01-20-2009, 11:51 AM

<cite>Faenril@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote>If your call to guild hall is down you don't mind clicking 10 bells and getting 10 loading screens ? That's what you are saying ?</blockquote>If my Call To Guild is down, I've also got Call To Qeynos -- which puts me in SQ, 1 loading screen from my guild hall -- or Call Of Ro, which puts me in Maj'Dul, & two load screens later I'm in QH. Why would I spend time clicking 10 bells & getting 10 loading screens?

zaneluke

01-20-2009, 12:03 PM

<cite>Faenril@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote>If your call to guild hall is down you don't mind clicking 10 bells and getting 10 loading screens ? That's what you are saying ?</blockquote>LOL 10 loading screens? Ok guild hall call is down I have#1 Call to guild Hall#2 Call to Quenyos#3 Call to Ro#4 Return to splitpaw10 bells. I can get anywhere in game in less than 5 minutes. And the max is going to shard of fear. If you are clicking 10 bells i think you might need to <a href="mailto:L@P">L2P</a>?

Faenril

01-20-2009, 12:07 PM

About the reward thing... Can less load screens really be considered an "in game reward" ? I mean mounts that run faster or a special run speed buff only available in guild hall ... Yeah that's what I would call an "in game reward", but less loading screens ? While a zone is loading I do not consider my toon "in game". I guess it's a matter of definition. If I go from Ant to lavastorm there is almost no "in game" travelling involved, from my point of view, just loading screens <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

Faenril

01-20-2009, 12:10 PM

<cite>zaneluke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Faenril@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote>If your call to guild hall is down you don't mind clicking 10 bells and getting 10 loading screens ? That's what you are saying ?</blockquote>LOL 10 loading screens? Ok guild hall call is down I have#1 Call to guild Hall#2 Call to Quenyos#3 Call to Ro#4 Return to splitpaw10 bells. I can get anywhere in game in less than 5 minutes. And the max is going to shard of fear. If you are clicking 10 bells i think you might need to <a href="mailto:L@P">L2P</a>?</blockquote>LOL. That was obviously exagerated to stress a point, but apparently some ppl lack the slightest beginning of sarcasm or sense of humor on those forums. Just lol.Oh by the way :"Ok guild hall call is down I have #1 Call to guild Hall" -> I think something is messed up with your reasonning sir <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" />

zaneluke

01-20-2009, 12:14 PM

<cite>Noaani wrote:</cite><blockquote>If traveling was made the way you want, thats fine, but first of all, YOU should come up with ideas for a replacement use for guild halls.</blockquote>I got a good one <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />How about if the masses of non guild hall people get a fast travel bell. Guild halls get a new item. New Broker boxes that we can place in our guild hall. They will not count against the item limit and they will have a 10% broker fee attached to them no matter the city the buyer is buiying from. Item limits would be according to guild hall size. <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> 40,60 and 80 items.<img src="/eq2/images/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" />

Yimway

01-20-2009, 12:23 PM

Isn't there some forum policy against duplicating the same thread again to just get it higher on the thread list?Seriously, is there anything new in this version of the thread since the last one?2cp.

Terron

01-20-2009, 12:36 PM

Since I upgraded from 0.5 Gbytes to 2 Gbytes loading rarely takes a long time, except for the guild hall.I do think that the opportunity to by tickets from QH or EF to places like Zek and EL should be a reward for the old access quests for those zones.

liveja

01-20-2009, 01:23 PM

<cite>Faenril@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote>LOL. That was obviously exagerated to stress a point</blockquote>Yes, it was obviously wildly exaggerated -- which is precisely why it didn't stress the point at all.

Faenril

01-20-2009, 01:47 PM

If somebody does not want to hear (read?) an argument I can't force him. Actually the funny part is loading the guild hall takes as long as 3 or 4 zoning in old world zones, so I guess things are fair in the end <img src="/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

Thunndar316

01-20-2009, 05:35 PM

I've already gone round and round with people on this one.I agree with the OP

Thunndar316

01-20-2009, 05:41 PM

<cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote>Isn't there some forum policy against duplicating the same thread again to just get it higher on the thread list?Seriously, is there anything new in this version of the thread since the last one?2cp.</blockquote>They didn't duplicate anything.That was MY thread and you can find it here.<a href="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/posts/list.m?topic_id=435379">http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/...topic_id=435379</a>

Yimway

01-20-2009, 05:47 PM

<cite>Thunndar316 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote>Isn't there some forum policy against duplicating the same thread again to just get it higher on the thread list?Seriously, is there anything new in this version of the thread since the last one?2cp.</blockquote>They didn't duplicate anything.That was MY thread and you can find it here.<a href="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/posts/list.m?topic_id=435379">http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/...topic_id=435379</a></blockquote>Yeap, thats one of them. Not the first, but a more recent one.What new point was brought up in this version of the thread that wasn't discussed ad nausiem in the last 2 versions of it?

agnott

01-20-2009, 06:28 PM

<cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Thunndar316 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote>Isn't there some forum policy against duplicating the same thread again to just get it higher on the thread list?Seriously, is there anything new in this version of the thread since the last one?2cp.</blockquote>They didn't duplicate anything.That was MY thread and you can find it here.<a href="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/posts/list.m?topic_id=435379">http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/...topic_id=435379</a></blockquote>Yeap, thats one of them. Not the first, but a more recent one.What new point was brought up in this version of the thread that wasn't discussed ad nausiem in the last 2 versions of it?</blockquote>Some of us don't get to read every thread. I've been gone a while and learned some new things about guild halls that were posted here.So if you don't mind, if your sick of this subject ...it's not that hard to just ignore this thread and find one that has some interest for you.

Kendricke

01-20-2009, 06:45 PM

<cite>Faenril@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote>About the reward thing... Can less load screens really be considered an "in game reward" ?</blockquote>Yes. It's a convenience that is given to guilds. Before there were guild halls, the convenience did not exist. The convenience was conciously provided as a purchasable amenity for guilds. There is an additional weekly upkeep to maintain the amenity.That said, as stated previously, guild halls are available to every player already. There is no mechanic which prevents any player from joining or creating a guild. There is no mechanic which prevents guilds from purchasing guild halls.

Full_Metal_Mage

01-20-2009, 06:47 PM

<cite>Flaye@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Zorastiz@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote>The words reference economic models, which is essentially what we're describing here. At its root, economics is the study of choice (we can get more specific and point out that it's actually the study of choice within a situation where scarcity or constraints exist, if you'd like). Now, generally speaking though, in a more communistic model, everyone involved is given relatively equal rewards. In a more capatilistic model, everyone involved is given relatively equal opportunities for rewards. I believe that the reward (in this case, less zoning screens) is already present in the game for every player provided they are willing to put forth the effort required to earn the reward. What other players seem to advocate is that everyone should simply have the reward without additional effort - a stance I disagree with.You think that sounds ridiculous, and I can only presume that's because you feel I was using the words in some sort of political fashion. This is either because you dont' realize the economic denotations of the words or because you feel the game is somehow too frivilous to <a href="http://www.slate.com/id/2078053/" target="_blank">merit any serious academic economic study</a>. </blockquote>Kendricke please for the sake of the Overlord get off your high horse.</blockquote>FWIW, Ken's post was entirely correct.</blockquote>Within the context of a world where no one is educated.

Full_Metal_Mage

01-20-2009, 06:48 PM

<cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Faenril@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote>About the reward thing... Can less load screens really be considered an "in game reward" ?</blockquote>Yes. It's a convenience that is given to guilds. Before there were guild halls, the convenience did not exist. The convenience was conciously provided as a purchasable amenity for guilds. There is an additional weekly upkeep to maintain the amenity.That said, as stated previously, guild halls are available to every player already. There is no mechanic which prevents any player from joining or creating a guild. There is no mechanic which prevents guilds from purchasing guild halls.</blockquote>No, it's not a convenience. It's a copout by devs who screwed up the game world in the first place by requiring zone loading.

Guy De Alsace

01-20-2009, 06:58 PM

Copout? How else are you supposed to do it? Vanguard had "seamless zones" that werent seamless. You would walk down a road then freeze for a few moments while it loaded the next part in. One moment there would be an empty field next to you, the next there would suddenly be a bunch of mobs...in 2004 there wasnt much else you could do but use instancing.Its fine as is. Do people really have such little patience these days?

Kendricke

01-20-2009, 07:10 PM

<cite>Guy De Alsace wrote:</cite><blockquote>Copout? How else are you supposed to do it? Vanguard had "seamless zones" that werent seamless. You would walk down a road then freeze for a few moments while it loaded the next part in. One moment there would be an empty field next to you, the next there would suddenly be a bunch of mobs...in 2004 there wasnt much else you could do but use instancing.Its fine as is. Do people really have such little patience these days?</blockquote>It's not even like the decision was made back in 2004. It was made years earlier in the design process. Seriously, how dare those developers in 2001-2002 not have the ability to see into the future! If only they had listened to the players on how easy it would be to do everything they wanted.

Spyderbite

01-20-2009, 07:13 PM

<cite>Guy De Alsace wrote:</cite><blockquote>Its fine as is. Do people really have such little patience these days?</blockquote>That was a rethorical question right?

ke'la

01-20-2009, 07:31 PM

<cite>interstellarmatter wrote:</cite><blockquote>After finally coming back from playing other MMOs, loading screens have got to be the most annoying feature in the game. EQ2 stands out in many ways but having to stare at 2 or 3 loading screens to get to a zone is not one of them.In places like RoK, it's fine. But the bells around the old zones are just silly. They should offer an increasing amount of currency to be able to zone directly to a certain zone. Eg, TS 60 silver, EL 1 gold, EF 3 gold. That way, you still have value of having a free zone bell in the guild houses.</blockquote>They did that, noone used it, so they took it out.Originally you could buy a ticket to any of the "old world" zones from the harbor master, then hit the "Travel By Sea" bell and zone directly to any of the zones, this was back when to get to LS you had to zone Nek->EL-> walk to dock near nightbloods->LS, Or TS->Zek->EFeven when travel was that bad most people did not "Travel By Sea" farther then the Nek/TS docks.They took out the other travel buy sea tickets when they added the LS/EF bells to the Nek/TS docks, cause now even the very few who did use those tickets to get to EL/Zek/EF/LS would not use them.

ke'la

01-20-2009, 07:57 PM

<cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Guy De Alsace wrote:</cite><blockquote>Copout? How else are you supposed to do it? Vanguard had "seamless zones" that werent seamless. You would walk down a road then freeze for a few moments while it loaded the next part in. One moment there would be an empty field next to you, the next there would suddenly be a bunch of mobs...in 2004 there wasnt much else you could do but use instancing.Its fine as is. Do people really have such little patience these days?</blockquote>It's not even like the decision was made back in 2004. It was made years earlier in the design process. Seriously, how dare those developers in 2001-2002 not have the ability to see into the future! If only they had listened to the players on how easy it would be to do everything they wanted.</blockquote>Accually SWG was a rather "Seamless" world... atleast each planet was, and each planet was huge(Far bigger then KP) and flat(no artifical walls(until the edge). And they had major issues in that game with zone lines, Mobs not chasing across them, corpses* dissappearing because you died near them, House items disapearing because the house stratled them, Pets not following across them, and tons more... it took them a long time to clear up most of those issues, some by changing other systems to make it a non-issue.*Originally in SWG they accually had EQ1 style Corpse runs, but they could never get them to work right(your courpse with gear would despawn) in part because of people dieing near zone lines. So they had to turn off that mechanic, it really was only in game for like 2 months total as they continued to try and fix it, and eventually they just gave up on it and went to extreem Item decay as the Death Penalty.

Kizee

01-20-2009, 08:15 PM

Those people that want a seamless world go play around in moors and get a taste of what a seamless world looks like in EQ2.....and thats one 1 darn zone......Can you imagine the lag of a seamless world in EQ2 if moors is that laggy?

Femke

01-20-2009, 08:17 PM

All is good as it is...With my computer that I owned at game lauch, zonning was a bit slow. With my new desktop and laptop it is not much more then changing screens.5 minutes to load when calling a guild hall? You have some upgrading to do... Even with calling to the large Qeynos guildhall doesn't take more then 10 seconds.Point is.... people want it all here and now... I want to be Zek and I want to be there NOW. And now I want to be in the Common Lands and I want to be there NOW. And so on and on...Travelling takes time... simple as that.

Lethe5683

01-20-2009, 08:19 PM

<cite>Kizee wrote:</cite><blockquote>Those people that want a seamless world go play around in moors and get a taste of what a seamless world looks like in EQ2.....and thats one 1 darn zone......Can you imagine the lag of a seamless world in EQ2 if moors is that laggy?</blockquote>It's terrible, I would much rather have it devided into 3 zones; dropship landing, upper moors, lower moors. I still don't see why loading screens are a big deal.. even the slowest zones to load like guildhalls don't take anymore than around 5 seconds. Is 5 seconds really that long to wait?

ke'la

01-20-2009, 08:44 PM

<cite>Lethe5683 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Kizee wrote:</cite><blockquote>Those people that want a seamless world go play around in moors and get a taste of what a seamless world looks like in EQ2.....and thats one 1 darn zone......Can you imagine the lag of a seamless world in EQ2 if moors is that laggy?</blockquote>It's terrible, I would much rather have it devided into 3 zones; dropship landing, upper moors, lower moors. I still don't see why loading screens are a big deal.. even the slowest zones to load like guildhalls don't take anymore than around 5 seconds. Is 5 seconds really that long to wait?</blockquote>Moors has issues I agree, but I think it just needs to be optimized better, cause remember KP had tons of issues too, even after people moved to Fens, and now it is far better... though I agree that both Moors and KP are on the extreem edge of what the EQ2 engine is capable of supporting.

Nulad

01-20-2009, 09:19 PM

<cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Guy De Alsace wrote:</cite><blockquote>Copout? How else are you supposed to do it? Vanguard had "seamless zones" that werent seamless. You would walk down a road then freeze for a few moments while it loaded the next part in. One moment there would be an empty field next to you, the next there would suddenly be a bunch of mobs...in 2004 there wasnt much else you could do but use instancing.Its fine as is. Do people really have such little patience these days?</blockquote>It's not even like the decision was made back in 2004. It was made years earlier in the design process. Seriously, how dare those developers in 2001-2002 not have the ability to see into the future! If only they had listened to the players on how easy it would be to do everything they wanted.</blockquote>EQ2 was originally announced to have a seamless world if I recall correctly.<blockquote>All is good as it is... With my computer that I owned at game lauch, zonning was a bit slow. With my new desktop and laptop it is not much more then changing screens. 5 minutes to load when calling a guild hall? You have some upgrading to do... Even with calling to the large Qeynos guildhall doesn't take more then 10 seconds. Point is.... people want it all here and now... I want to be Zek and I want to be there NOW. And now I want to be in the Common Lands and I want to be there NOW. And so on and on... Travelling takes time... simple as that.</blockquote>No you missed the point, I don't want to be there now, I just don't want to watch several loading screens for no good reason. Travelling taking time is not the issue, the manner in which it takes that time is.As for your upgrade comment, when the memory leak is fixed and I have issues I'll agree, as it stands a fresh load of EQ2 into my guildhall takes under 30 seconds, come back later in the same session it can take up to five minutes due to the already mentioned memory leak.

Vexel

01-21-2009, 02:36 AM

<cite>Nuladen@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote>At all?Enchanted lands > (loading) > Nek > (loading) > Thundering Steppes > (loading) > Zek, etc etc.I'm all for making journeying a little dangerous or tricky, I'm even up for making it take time (in game) but click, zone, click, zone, click, zone is just the pinnacle of tediousness and other than annoying the user serves no purpose other than to place extra wear on my hard drive, use bandwidth (well ok, not a lot...) and probably add a little extra overhead to the server.Give us an option to skip the zones in which all I'm going to do is turn 180 degrees or walk 5 meters and zone direct to the destination please.</blockquote>I have no issues with loading zones, going all the way back to EQ1. I'd much rather wait 2-3 seconds to load a zone and not lag so bad then play in a huge persistant world where everything chugs because of the number of players in the game vs the zone. At least if the zone gets congested you can pick zone2 to reduce the lag some, with a persistant world you don't have that option.If you're worried about zoning, recall to guild hall and use the druid ring NPC and just go straight to the zone you want, or the bell, or the transporter for KoS content etc...Sorry it's frustrating for you, I think it's tolerable and a very nice way to jump around zones.

Full_Metal_Mage

01-21-2009, 02:54 AM

<cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Guy De Alsace wrote:</cite><blockquote>Copout? How else are you supposed to do it? Vanguard had "seamless zones" that werent seamless. You would walk down a road then freeze for a few moments while it loaded the next part in. One moment there would be an empty field next to you, the next there would suddenly be a bunch of mobs...in 2004 there wasnt much else you could do but use instancing.Its fine as is. Do people really have such little patience these days?</blockquote>It's not even like the decision was made back in 2004. It was made years earlier in the design process. Seriously, how dare those developers in 2001-2002 not have the ability to see into the future! If only they had listened to the players on how easy it would be to do everything they wanted.</blockquote>You're acting like a child now. Yes, the decision was made early in the development cycle. It was a very bad decision, just like the decision to split all of the classes in two.I hate to use the comparison, but do you realize that WoW has zones that don't require zone loading screens to handle the transition from one to another? The issue with EQ2 is not that the game is partitioned into zones. The issue is that memory mangement is so pathetic in EQ2.As for the postion you and others have taken that traversing multiple zone lines should be a privilege reserved for those with guild halls, like I said at the start, you're acting like a child. While there are in-game items and amenities that do make sense as guild items (guild halls, guild bank, guild depot, the raid flag, for example) this one does not make sense. It's just the devs making up for not having a long list of really good guild rewards so they give us this, which should be an improvement to the game for everyone instead.

scruffylookin

01-21-2009, 05:26 AM

<cite>zaneluke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>scruffylookin wrote:</cite><blockquote>In-game rewards shouldn't be beneficial from a hardware perspective. The OP didn't say that guilds shouldn't have perks. He simply gave feedback saying the bell-hopping is a pointless timesink. I'm okay with timesinks, as they're part of the MMO world. But adding loading screens for no real reason is a little much.Let the guilds get bells and rings to places normal bells can't get to. But having less loading screens is just a very odd perk and has no logic, from an in-game perspective.</blockquote>You see , here is the problem. Some of these bells did not exist some time ago. You used to have to run across EL to get to the LS bell. Want to go to CL? Going to have to run nek forest.SOE keeps adding and adding EASIER things in to the game, people keep asking for more and more. So this time they added what amounts to a HUGE time saver as a guild hall item. Now everyone knows the mechanics are there and they want it available to ALL!Next will be changing EVERYONES call to home to 15 minutes, just like the call to guild hall. Seriously, join a guild and play the game with people. It really is not that hard. IMHO if someone just does not want to join a guild and interact with other people in an MMO and they get frusterated at the perks GROUP players get. leave the game, good riddance.</blockquote>First and foremost, I am in a guild. We created our guild a few months after EQ2 launched. It is possible to agree with the OP and still be in a guild... because the OP made no statement suggesting guilds shouldn't have rewards. I happen to think the loading screens have nothing to do with guild rewards. There are dozens of other rewards that make much, much more sense.Eliminating loading screens for a guild is like giving guilds a few dollars off their subscription each month. It's a reward that exists outside the context of the game world, which I personally do not believe should be a guild reward. Even though I'm in a guild, I would still LOVE to see those loading screens eliminated for the unguilded.The OP simply stated that extra loading screens is silly. There's no purpose for them anymore. It's not about travelling. It's about loading screens, which do nothing--literally nothing--to enhance the game in any way, shape, or form.... for anyone. They're an unnecessary taxing on everyone involved. They're a necessary evil in an MMO that's constructed the way EQ2 is constructed. There's no reason the extra-step loading screens should remain.Whether you agree with the OP's feedback or not, it's valid feedback, and telling this person to quit the game for giving that feedback is completely unfounded and just mean.. The OP made absolutely no mention of guilds in any way, shape, or form.I want and like extra perks for being in a guild. Guilds absolutely 100% should have extra perks, and I saw nothing in the OP that suggested otherwise. I've been playing since shortly before launch. I played when travel was a lot tougher... and I was fine with that. It was a design choice. But when they added the extra bells, still requiring the extra loading screens (not travel... loading screens) was a poor decision, in my opinion. It is a detriment to the immersion of the game and its absolutely pointless. Give guilds 150 room homes, 500% speed mounts, and free fabled gear for all I care. You'll never see a post from me on these forums that argues against guild rewards. I have always, and will always believe they absolutely belong in this game. I also think that removing loading screens should absolutely be done with those bells. It doesn't remove the perk for the guild. Even if they removed the extra loading screens, would you honestly then remove the bells from your guild? Those bells allow guilds to live completely within their own guild. That's the perk. And removing loading screens for everyone else would have absolutely no impact on those guilds. It would just increase the enjoyment for the playerbase as a whole. I can't think of a single negative impact to removing the extra loading screens. It's not like it forces you to explore a zone. It just forces you to wait longer before you can play the game.And to the person that didn't seem to believe it takes 5 minutes for some people to load... my PC today loads extremely quickly. When I first started playing this game, I had a much lower-end pc, and my loading screens did take 5 minutes (and that is not an exaggeration).

Faenril

01-21-2009, 06:33 AM

<cite>Nuladen@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote><blockquote>All is good as it is... With my computer that I owned at game lauch, zonning was a bit slow. With my new desktop and laptop it is not much more then changing screens. 5 minutes to load when calling a guild hall? You have some upgrading to do... Even with calling to the large Qeynos guildhall doesn't take more then 10 seconds. Point is.... people want it all here and now... I want to be Zek and I want to be there NOW. And now I want to be in the Common Lands and I want to be there NOW. And so on and on... Travelling takes time... simple as that.</blockquote>No you missed the point, I don't want to be there now, I just don't want to watch several loading screens for no good reason. Travelling taking time is not the issue, the manner in which it takes that time is.</blockquote>Spot on IMO. Loading screen is not travelling. You are not in game while loading a zone. I would rather run/fly accross a zone for 5 minutes (enjoying the landscape and watching my surroundings in the process), than watch loading screens for 5 minutes.If it takes 5 minutes to zone ... Yes probably you should upgrade, but the point remains if your computer is low on memory you'd rather get one 5 minutes load screen than several <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> My PC zones decently fast, but I would rather get one 10 seconds screen than several.Yes there should be advantages for owning a guild hall, but not this one. What's coming next ? A different memory load limitation for guilded players and not guilded players ? A better texture compression algorithm, or enhanced multi core support, or extended GPU usage enabled through a guild hall clicky ?I'm in a guild btw and still think the way bells work nowdays makes no sense.

Femke

01-21-2009, 07:08 AM

<cite>Nuladen@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote>No you missed the point, I don't want to be there now, I just don't want to watch several loading screens for no good reason. Travelling taking time is not the issue, the manner in which it takes that time is.As for your upgrade comment, when the memory leak is fixed and I have issues I'll agree, as it stands a fresh load of EQ2 into my guildhall takes under 30 seconds, come back later in the same session it can take up to five minutes due to the already mentioned memory leak.</blockquote>Well, personally I have no problem with the switching of zones as it is now. It is quick and it gives (at least to me) that I am going really to another part of the world.Concerning that memory leak you mention... I am not going to say that there isn't such a thing (I have too less technical knownlegde for that). But what I don't understand is why I am not the problems you describe... and I travel often between my manor, guildhal and the area's that can be reached from our guildhal. It loads always in the same speed... and within 10 seconds.

scruffylookin

01-21-2009, 07:17 AM

<cite>Faenril@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Nuladen@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote><blockquote>All is good as it is... With my computer that I owned at game lauch, zonning was a bit slow. With my new desktop and laptop it is not much more then changing screens. 5 minutes to load when calling a guild hall? You have some upgrading to do... Even with calling to the large Qeynos guildhall doesn't take more then 10 seconds. Point is.... people want it all here and now... I want to be Zek and I want to be there NOW. And now I want to be in the Common Lands and I want to be there NOW. And so on and on... Travelling takes time... simple as that.</blockquote>No you missed the point, I don't want to be there now, I just don't want to watch several loading screens for no good reason. Travelling taking time is not the issue, the manner in which it takes that time is.</blockquote>Spot on IMO. Loading screen is not travelling. You are not in game while loading a zone. I would rather run/fly accross a zone for 5 minutes (enjoying the landscape and watching my surroundings in the process), than watch loading screens for 5 minutes.If it takes 5 minutes to zone ... Yes probably you should upgrade, but the point remains if your computer is low on memory you'd rather get one 5 minutes load screen than several <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" /> My PC zones decently fast, but I would rather get one 10 seconds screen than several.Yes there should be advantages for owning a guild hall, but not this one. What's coming next ? A different memory load limitation for guilded players and not guilded players ? A better texture compression algorithm, or enhanced multi core support, or extended GPU usage enabled through a guild hall clicky ?I'm in a guild btw and still think the way bells work nowdays makes no sense.</blockquote>I completely agree (and, like I said, I've been in a guild since a few months after launch). Guild rewards should be within the context of the game world.I read my post above this one, then I read your reply... and I realized something (for the millionth time).I'm WAY too wordy. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" /> We made exactly the point, but what took me a novel to express, you got it out in a few short paragraphs.Well said.

Shailas

01-21-2009, 07:40 AM

The process of zoning is quite trival. If this is all folks are concerned enough to complain about I'd say the game is doing quite well for itself.

Nulad

01-21-2009, 12:11 PM

<cite>Faenril@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote>If it takes 5 minutes to zone ... Yes probably you should upgrade.</blockquote>I'll say it once more for those that missed it, it only takes that long after the game has been running for a while and the memory leak has reared it's ugly head, a fresh launch takes 30 seconds max with most zones being far far quicker.And even if I did zone in under 5 seconds every time I'd still want to be rid of the multiple loading screens.

Rijacki

01-21-2009, 12:26 PM

<cite>kela wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>interstellarmatter wrote:</cite><blockquote>After finally coming back from playing other MMOs, loading screens have got to be the most annoying feature in the game. EQ2 stands out in many ways but having to stare at 2 or 3 loading screens to get to a zone is not one of them.In places like RoK, it's fine. But the bells around the old zones are just silly. They should offer an increasing amount of currency to be able to zone directly to a certain zone. Eg, TS 60 silver, EL 1 gold, EF 3 gold. That way, you still have value of having a free zone bell in the guild houses.</blockquote>They did that, noone used it, so they took it out.Originally you could buy a ticket to any of the "old world" zones from the harbor master, then hit the "Travel By Sea" bell and zone directly to any of the zones, this was back when to get to LS you had to zone Nek->EL-> walk to dock near nightbloods->LS, Or TS->Zek->EFeven when travel was that bad most people did not "Travel By Sea" farther then the Nek/TS docks.They took out the other travel buy sea tickets when they added the LS/EF bells to the Nek/TS docks, cause now even the very few who did use those tickets to get to EL/Zek/EF/LS would not use them.</blockquote>They still have it, on the PvP servers, but without a 'time-lag' on the ship where you have to fight things while you travel.Part of the reason no one took the 'Travel by Sea' options is that it required finding the ticket seller way off to the side away from the convenient location of the main ticket seller (Nek Forest and Thundering Steppes on PvE, all old world docks on PvP) and then taking possibly more time than zone hopping because you were traveling on a boat instance which would have small battles. The 'Travel by Sea' option was also limited by adventure level; if you were low level or had issues soloing, the mobs would smush you. I think if you died you resurrected at your destination, but I don't recall since I only took it a few times when I saw it was more effort and risk than I wanted to put in going from one place to another.I'll repeat what I said earlier in this thread. I think they should add to the PvE servers what exists on the PvP. The harbor ticket seller should sell tickets to the other docks. The price should, like on the PvP servers, increase depending on the destination. It would be, in my opinion, an ideal option for those who aren't guilded, whose guild is too low for a hall, or otherwise don't want to go into the hall. It puts the payment on the shoulders of the traveler where the payment for the guild amenity is on the guild.

Spyderbite

01-21-2009, 12:31 PM

<cite>Rijacki wrote:</cite><blockquote>I'll repeat what I said earlier in this thread. I think they should add to the PvE servers what exists on the PvP. The harbor ticket seller should sell tickets to the other docks. The price should, like on the PvP servers, increase depending on the destination. It would be, in my opinion, an ideal option for those who aren't guilded, whose guild is too low for a hall, or otherwise don't want to go into the hall. It puts the payment on the shoulders of the traveler where the payment for the guild amenity is on the guild.</blockquote>I wasn't aware that the ticket sellers weren't available on the PvE servers. I can't see a single reason why this shouldn't be implemented on the PvE servers as well in that case. In fact, it should be the other way around, so that more ground travel is encouraged, thus increasing the chance of more PvP.. not less of it.

Faenril

01-21-2009, 12:32 PM

<cite>Rijacki wrote:</cite><blockquote>I'll repeat what I said earlier in this thread. I think they should add to the PvE servers what exists on the PvP. The harbor ticket seller should sell tickets to the other docks. The price should, like on the PvP servers, increase depending on the destination. It would be, in my opinion, an ideal option for those who aren't guilded, whose guild is too low for a hall, or otherwise don't want to go into the hall. It puts the payment on the shoulders of the traveler where the payment for the guild amenity is on the guild.</blockquote>This makes perfect sense. win/win.So probably we will never see it implemented <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

Natturabi

01-21-2009, 12:56 PM

Time is money, so I agree that loading screens are generally a bad thing. However there are in game features that allow you to bypass some of these loading screens. Regardless if your guild has the proper amenities or not, an individual could definitely find a guild that offers these travel amenities to the public, free of charge. If one bell took you to any location in game, there wouldn't be any need to work for and earn these guildhall amenities. Just like buying a nice mount to get around the world easier and faster. Sometimes you have to spend money to improve the quality of your time.

Dasein

01-21-2009, 01:47 PM

<cite>Guillermo@Butcherblock wrote:</cite><blockquote> Time is money, so I agree that loading screens are generally a bad thing. However there are in game features that allow you to bypass some of these loading screens. Regardless if your guild has the proper amenities or not, an individual could definitely find a guild that offers these travel amenities to the public, free of charge. If one bell took you to any location in game, there wouldn't be any need to work for and earn these guildhall amenities. Just like buying a nice mount to get around the world easier and faster. Sometimes you have to spend money to improve the quality of your time.</blockquote>So no guild halls have crafting statiosn, fuel merchants, writ-givers, menders, brokers, bankers, mailboxes and NPC merchants in them because those are all readily available in other zones?

Kendricke

01-21-2009, 02:17 PM

<cite>Dasein wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Guillermo@Butcherblock wrote:</cite><blockquote> Time is money, so I agree that loading screens are generally a bad thing. However there are in game features that allow you to bypass some of these loading screens. Regardless if your guild has the proper amenities or not, an individual could definitely find a guild that offers these travel amenities to the public, free of charge. If one bell took you to any location in game, there wouldn't be any need to work for and earn these guildhall amenities. Just like buying a nice mount to get around the world easier and faster. Sometimes you have to spend money to improve the quality of your time.</blockquote>So no guild halls have crafting statiosn, fuel merchants, writ-givers, menders, brokers, bankers, mailboxes and NPC merchants in them because those are all readily available in other zones?</blockquote>For me, the difference is one of shared value. It's just not quite an apples to apples comparison. If you can show me the zone that allows me to tradeskill while utilizing my guild's harvesting supply depot, I'd perhaps concede that particular point (as one example). As far as guild writ-givers, I found that most members were not utilizing the writ givers we had within our guildhall...and so I removed them, save for the tradeskilling writ givers (which again, are tied to the supply depot usage). Brokers, bankers, and mailboxes are also within our guild due (again) in at least small part due to the tradeskilling area within our guildhall. Since we have those amenities, we're able to tie in merchants as well. The point I'm making here is that most amenities within a guildhall are, in at least some small way, tied to other amenities. The whole becomes greater than the sum of its parts because of the added value these amenities have when used in comination with other amenities. Personally, I'd be more inclined to remove the Shattered Lands bell from our guildhall in favor of a different amenity should such a change as is being proposed here come to pass. I've already removed the Faydwer bell from our hall. So yes, I suppose I do feel the value of the Shattered Lands Mariner Bell amenity would be diminished should this change come to pass. I would feel it diminished enough to probably remove the item outright and shift the burden of travel/zoning screens on to my members for Zek, Enchanted Lands, Feerrot, etc....As far as the difference between the PVP and PVE servers, I thought the bells were consolidated on PVP servers because the Thundering Steppes/Nektulos Forest docks weren't PVP-immune zones, which negated the idea of using them as travel hubs. This obviously isn't the case on PVE servers. Just because something can be done or because it's done on a PVP server doesn't mean it's a good idea. For example, I don't see Qeynosian Shadowknights on PVE servers.

ke'la

01-21-2009, 07:39 PM

<cite>Rijacki wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>kela wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>interstellarmatter wrote:</cite><blockquote>After finally coming back from playing other MMOs, loading screens have got to be the most annoying feature in the game. EQ2 stands out in many ways but having to stare at 2 or 3 loading screens to get to a zone is not one of them.In places like RoK, it's fine. But the bells around the old zones are just silly. They should offer an increasing amount of currency to be able to zone directly to a certain zone. Eg, TS 60 silver, EL 1 gold, EF 3 gold. That way, you still have value of having a free zone bell in the guild houses.</blockquote>They did that, noone used it, so they took it out.Originally you could buy a ticket to any of the "old world" zones from the harbor master, then hit the "Travel By Sea" bell and zone directly to any of the zones, this was back when to get to LS you had to zone Nek->EL-> walk to dock near nightbloods->LS, Or TS->Zek->EFeven when travel was that bad most people did not "Travel By Sea" farther then the Nek/TS docks.They took out the other travel buy sea tickets when they added the LS/EF bells to the Nek/TS docks, cause now even the very few who did use those tickets to get to EL/Zek/EF/LS would not use them.</blockquote>They still have it, on the PvP servers, but without a 'time-lag' on the ship where you have to fight things while you travel.Part of the reason no one took the 'Travel by Sea' options is that it required finding the ticket seller way off to the side away from the convenient location of the main ticket seller (Nek Forest and Thundering Steppes on PvE, all old world docks on PvP) and then taking possibly more time than zone hopping because you were traveling on a boat instance which would have small battles. The 'Travel by Sea' option was also limited by adventure level; if you were low level or had issues soloing, the mobs would smush you. I think if you died you resurrected at your destination, but I don't recall since I only took it a few times when I saw it was more effort and risk than I wanted to put in going from one place to another.I'll repeat what I said earlier in this thread. I think they should add to the PvE servers what exists on the PvP. The harbor ticket seller should sell tickets to the other docks. The price should, like on the PvP servers, increase depending on the destination. It would be, in my opinion, an ideal option for those who aren't guilded, whose guild is too low for a hall, or otherwise don't want to go into the hall. It puts the payment on the shoulders of the traveler where the payment for the guild amenity is on the guild.</blockquote>That second trip was accually added latter as a "Reduced Price" way of going to those zones. Back when the game launched, until they added the Bells to LS/EF in Nek and TS, there was the Harbor Master NPC that you could buy tickets from that zoned you directly to those zones, Infact he is still there, selling tickets to Nek Forest and TS. You did NOT ride any mob fighting boat you went directly to the zone you wanted to. It was never used because people did not want to pay the 1g 60s(EL/Zek) or 3g(LS/EF/Feer)* when they could just pay the 60s to goto Nek/TS, then run to the bells.Maybe now with coin far less valuable they might pay it, but I doupt it.*I could be wrong on the prices, it was a long time ago that this was implimented.

Thunndar316

01-21-2009, 07:49 PM

<cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Dasein wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Guillermo@Butcherblock wrote:</cite><blockquote> Time is money, so I agree that loading screens are generally a bad thing. However there are in game features that allow you to bypass some of these loading screens. Regardless if your guild has the proper amenities or not, an individual could definitely find a guild that offers these travel amenities to the public, free of charge. If one bell took you to any location in game, there wouldn't be any need to work for and earn these guildhall amenities. Just like buying a nice mount to get around the world easier and faster. Sometimes you have to spend money to improve the quality of your time.</blockquote>So no guild halls have crafting statiosn, fuel merchants, writ-givers, menders, brokers, bankers, mailboxes and NPC merchants in them because those are all readily available in other zones?</blockquote>For me, the difference is one of shared value. It's just not quite an apples to apples comparison. If you can show me the zone that allows me to tradeskill while utilizing my guild's harvesting supply depot, I'd perhaps concede that particular point (as one example). As far as guild writ-givers, I found that most members were not utilizing the writ givers we had within our guildhall...and so I removed them, save for the tradeskilling writ givers (which again, are tied to the supply depot usage). Brokers, bankers, and mailboxes are also within our guild due (again) in at least small part due to the tradeskilling area within our guildhall. Since we have those amenities, we're able to tie in merchants as well. The point I'm making here is that most amenities within a guildhall are, in at least some small way, tied to other amenities. The whole becomes greater than the sum of its parts because of the added value these amenities have when used in comination with other amenities. Personally, I'd be more inclined to remove the Shattered Lands bell from our guildhall in favor of a different amenity should such a change as is being proposed here come to pass. I've already removed the Faydwer bell from our hall. So yes, I suppose I do feel the value of the Shattered Lands Mariner Bell amenity would be diminished should this change come to pass. I would feel it diminished enough to probably remove the item outright and shift the burden of travel/zoning screens on to my members for Zek, Enchanted Lands, Feerrot, etc.</blockquote><img src="/eq2/images/smilies/2786c5c8e1a8be796fb2f726cca5a0fe.gif" border="0" />Yeah. By the way direct your disgruntled guild members over to my server where I would be happy to let them use our SL bell. People like you crack me up. You sit there and claim that you would purpously go through all the loading screens knowing [Removed for Content] well you are lying through your teeth.

Femke

01-21-2009, 07:54 PM

<cite>Guillermo@Butcherblock wrote:</cite><blockquote> Time is money,</blockquote>May I call that *something censored* ?That may go for RL jobs and alike....But as far as I recall EQII was a game to relax, something you do for your enjoyment.... for me the "time is money" thingy doesn't fit there at all.

Femke

01-21-2009, 08:01 PM

<cite>Nuladen@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Faenril@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote>If it takes 5 minutes to zone ... Yes probably you should upgrade.</blockquote>I'll say it once more for those that missed it, it only takes that long after the game has been running for a while and the memory leak has reared it's ugly head, a fresh launch takes 30 seconds max with most zones being far far quicker.</blockquote>And yet... even after long playing sessions with often going back to the guild hall(s), my houses, zones and whatever.... I never seen any slower zoning at all....So this memory leak that is there according you seems not to threat everyone equally....

Spyderbite

01-21-2009, 08:05 PM

<cite>Femke wrote:</cite><blockquote>And yet... even after long playing sessions with often going back to the guild hall(s), my houses, zones and whatever.... I never seen any slower zoning at all....</blockquote>Agreed. Had a 12 hour session yesterday.. never saw any difference in zoning or rendering. Sounds like a memory leak on the OP computer.. not the game. Not to say one doesn't exist.. just saying it doesn't effect everyone. If it were a problem on the client and/or server side.. then everyone would be effected.

ke'la

01-21-2009, 08:22 PM

<cite>Thunndar316 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Dasein wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Guillermo@Butcherblock wrote:</cite><blockquote> Time is money, so I agree that loading screens are generally a bad thing. However there are in game features that allow you to bypass some of these loading screens. Regardless if your guild has the proper amenities or not, an individual could definitely find a guild that offers these travel amenities to the public, free of charge. If one bell took you to any location in game, there wouldn't be any need to work for and earn these guildhall amenities. Just like buying a nice mount to get around the world easier and faster. Sometimes you have to spend money to improve the quality of your time.</blockquote>So no guild halls have crafting statiosn, fuel merchants, writ-givers, menders, brokers, bankers, mailboxes and NPC merchants in them because those are all readily available in other zones?</blockquote>For me, the difference is one of shared value. It's just not quite an apples to apples comparison. If you can show me the zone that allows me to tradeskill while utilizing my guild's harvesting supply depot, I'd perhaps concede that particular point (as one example). As far as guild writ-givers, I found that most members were not utilizing the writ givers we had within our guildhall...and so I removed them, save for the tradeskilling writ givers (which again, are tied to the supply depot usage). Brokers, bankers, and mailboxes are also within our guild due (again) in at least small part due to the tradeskilling area within our guildhall. Since we have those amenities, we're able to tie in merchants as well. The point I'm making here is that most amenities within a guildhall are, in at least some small way, tied to other amenities. The whole becomes greater than the sum of its parts because of the added value these amenities have when used in comination with other amenities. Personally, I'd be more inclined to remove the Shattered Lands bell from our guildhall in favor of a different amenity should such a change as is being proposed here come to pass. I've already removed the Faydwer bell from our hall. So yes, I suppose I do feel the value of the Shattered Lands Mariner Bell amenity would be diminished should this change come to pass. I would feel it diminished enough to probably remove the item outright and shift the burden of travel/zoning screens on to my members for Zek, Enchanted Lands, Feerrot, etc.</blockquote><img src="/eq2/images/smilies/2786c5c8e1a8be796fb2f726cca5a0fe.gif" border="0" />Yeah. By the way direct your disgruntled guild members over to my server where I would be happy to let them use our SL bell. People like you crack me up. You sit there and claim that you would purpously go through all the loading screens knowing [Removed for Content] well you are lying through your teeth.</blockquote>Did you accually READ his post? heck did you even read the part you put in red?The poster is saying if they allow people to bell directly from QH/EFP to any shadderedlands zone then the poster would remove the bell. So NO the poster would NOT go thought all the load screens because the poster would just use the bell in Q/FP.

Nulad

01-21-2009, 08:45 PM

<cite>Femke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Nuladen@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Faenril@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote>If it takes 5 minutes to zone ... Yes probably you should upgrade.</blockquote>I'll say it once more for those that missed it, it only takes that long after the game has been running for a while and the memory leak has reared it's ugly head, a fresh launch takes 30 seconds max with most zones being far far quicker.</blockquote>And yet... even after long playing sessions with often going back to the guild hall(s), my houses, zones and whatever.... I never seen any slower zoning at all....So this memory leak that is there according you seems not to threat everyone equally....</blockquote>Where did I say it affects everyone? I didn't, I said it affects me, and if you think I'm the only one I suggest you go take a look in the numerous threads dealing with it. I also said that regardless of memory leak or not I still want the multiple loading screens gone, though I noticed you cut that part out when you quoted me.

Nulad

01-21-2009, 08:55 PM

<cite>Spyderbite@Venekor wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Femke wrote:</cite><blockquote>And yet... even after long playing sessions with often going back to the guild hall(s), my houses, zones and whatever.... I never seen any slower zoning at all....</blockquote>Agreed. Had a 12 hour session yesterday.. never saw any difference in zoning or rendering. Sounds like a memory leak on the OP computer.. not the game. Not to say one doesn't exist.. just saying it doesn't effect everyone. If it were a problem on the client and/or server side.. then everyone would be effected.</blockquote>Of course it's on my computer, but only with EQ2 running and as I have just pointed out, I've never once said it affects everyone. As for your last comment, well you clearly have no idea.If you want to continue discussion about the memory leak then I'd suggest moving into one of the numerous threads dealing with it in it's various guises rather than de-railing this discussion which is about the redundancy and pointlessness of multiple loading screens when travelling via the bell system.

Spyderbite

01-21-2009, 09:09 PM

<cite>Nuladen@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote>I also said that regardless of memory leak or not I still want the multiple loading screens gone, though I noticed you cut that part out when you quoted me.</blockquote>But, you still haven't stated a good reason why they should be gone with the exception of eluding that "guilds don't have to so why should you?"If you've played for any extended period of time, then you're used to it by now. My question is.. why does it have to be made easier? There are options if you absolutely can't stand the multiple load times which have been made more than clear here and don't require a change in game mechanics.. join a guild, be-friend a guild or start a guild.Where's the issue?

Nulad

01-21-2009, 09:33 PM

<cite>Spyderbite@Venekor wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Nuladen@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote>I also said that regardless of memory leak or not I still want the multiple loading screens gone, though I noticed you cut that part out when you quoted me.</blockquote>But, you still haven't stated a good reason why they should be gone with the exception of eluding that "guilds don't have to so why should you?"It's in the thread title, maybe you forgot to read it while attempting to derail the thread, here I'll paste it for you, with added emphasis:"How is sitting in front of multiple loading screens fun?" If you've played for any extended period of time, then you're used to it by now. My question is.. why does it have to be made easier?When and where did I say it had to easier? In fact I have already said I don't, but then you stopped reading a while back didn't you.There are options if you absolutely can't stand the multiple load times which have been made more than clear here and don't require a change in game mechanics.. join a guild, be-friend a guild or start a guild.Yep, you really did quit reading.Where's the issue?Ok, last time just for you in the vain hope that you'll actually read this one...How is it fun, entertaining or relaxing to have to do nothing more than sit in front of a pc watching multiple loading screens seperated by a click of the mouse. Maybe you'd like SoE to force people to reboot their pc's inbetween zones so we can up the travel time?Now you'll start spouting about how guilds should have some benefit over non guilds and all that which has already been discussed but you apparently failed to read so this is my last reply to you, for further information I'd suggest going back to page one and actually reading the thread instead of skipping over it.</blockquote>

Spyderbite

01-21-2009, 09:40 PM

<cite>Nuladen@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote><blockquote>How is it fun, entertaining or relaxing to have to do nothing more than sit in front of a pc watching multiple loading screens seperated by a click of the mouse. </blockquote></blockquote>Not applicable. I'm in a guild.You like to question people's literacy a lot don't you?

Nulad

01-21-2009, 09:45 PM

Well, seeing as you just did a grand job of proving my point...Darnit, now I've broken my word in replying.

Spyderbite

01-21-2009, 09:49 PM

<cite>Nuladen@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote>Well, seeing as you just did a grand job of proving my point...</blockquote>What point?! That's all I'm trying to get a grasp of here. I'm not baiting you or anything. I'm seriously trying to understand. You can ask a friend who is in a guild to grant you access to their Guild Hall and have everything that you're asking for. But, you would rather have them change the entire game mechanics instead?Help me understand your logic.

Kendricke

01-21-2009, 10:12 PM

<cite>Thunndar316 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Dasein wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Guillermo@Butcherblock wrote:</cite><blockquote> Time is money, so I agree that loading screens are generally a bad thing. However there are in game features that allow you to bypass some of these loading screens. Regardless if your guild has the proper amenities or not, an individual could definitely find a guild that offers these travel amenities to the public, free of charge. If one bell took you to any location in game, there wouldn't be any need to work for and earn these guildhall amenities. Just like buying a nice mount to get around the world easier and faster. Sometimes you have to spend money to improve the quality of your time.</blockquote>So no guild halls have crafting statiosn, fuel merchants, writ-givers, menders, brokers, bankers, mailboxes and NPC merchants in them because those are all readily available in other zones?</blockquote>For me, the difference is one of shared value. It's just not quite an apples to apples comparison. If you can show me the zone that allows me to tradeskill while utilizing my guild's harvesting supply depot, I'd perhaps concede that particular point (as one example). As far as guild writ-givers, I found that most members were not utilizing the writ givers we had within our guildhall...and so I removed them, save for the tradeskilling writ givers (which again, are tied to the supply depot usage). Brokers, bankers, and mailboxes are also within our guild due (again) in at least small part due to the tradeskilling area within our guildhall. Since we have those amenities, we're able to tie in merchants as well. The point I'm making here is that most amenities within a guildhall are, in at least some small way, tied to other amenities. The whole becomes greater than the sum of its parts because of the added value these amenities have when used in comination with other amenities. Personally, I'd be more inclined to remove the Shattered Lands bell from our guildhall in favor of a different amenity should such a change as is being proposed here come to pass. I've already removed the Faydwer bell from our hall. So yes, I suppose I do feel the value of the Shattered Lands Mariner Bell amenity would be diminished should this change come to pass. I would feel it diminished enough to probably remove the item outright and shift the burden of travel/zoning screens on to my members for Zek, Enchanted Lands, Feerrot, etc.</blockquote><img src="/eq2/images/smilies/2786c5c8e1a8be796fb2f726cca5a0fe.gif" border="0" />Yeah. By the way direct your disgruntled guild members over to my server where I would be happy to let them use our SL bell. People like you crack me up. You sit there and claim that you would purpously go through all the loading screens knowing [Removed for Content] well you are lying through your teeth.</blockquote>As I've said, I've already removed one bell from our guild hall and I've informed our members that I'll be removing the Kunark one as soon as another amenity is brought into the game that has significant value (i.e. - "guild broker"). If the full listing of bells were brought to the harbors, I'd have even less reason to keep the Shattered Lands bell. You can accuse me of "lying through my teeth" if you want. However, if you're going to call me out as such, you'd best be able to back your accusations. Otherwise, you stand the risk of looking a fool when it's easy to disprove such antics.

scruffylookin

01-22-2009, 12:19 AM

Thing is, the loading screens aren't a part of the gameplay. They are--quite literally--an interruption of the game play. And to suggest that you actively want to interrupt other people's gameplay just so the fact that your gameplay isn't interrupted feels more important is a suprising stance (imho). Again, extra loading screens is not a perk that is within the context of the game world.Everyone's treating this issue like it belongs in the "easier gameplay" category. I, for one, do not want easier gameplay. I just believe it's a valid point for the OP to be able to play the game more, whether the extra loading screen costs him 30 seconds or 5 mintues. It's a valid suggestion that doesn't hurt anyone else's gameplay in any way, shape, or form. It just lets him play the game more by looking at less loading screens. That is the only thing removing the unnecessary bell-hops would do. It would allow people to play the game more. I'm in a guild and have been almost as long as I've played EQ2... and I'll tell you, I have absolutely no desire to stand up against a suggestion that is nothing more than a request to be able to play the game more.

Noaani

01-22-2009, 01:11 AM

<cite>scruffylookin wrote:</cite><blockquote>Everyone's treating this issue like it belongs in the "easier gameplay" category. </blockquote>Easier travel, not easier gamplay.I would personally be happy if they removes all bells in all zones and the only way to travel between ports was ride a boat similar to the Butcherblock/Kylong boats. To me, it falls under the heading of easy travel, not easy gameplay.Make the QH boat do a round trip from QH > Ant >TS > Nek > QH, another doing EFP > CL > Nek > TS > EFP, than add a boat doing a round trip going TS > Zek > EF > LS > EL > Nek > TS, another going TS > Feerrott > Mara > SS > Nek > TS. Then have a boat going TS > BB > Gfay (anchor off shore by the Nursrey, use a row boat to get to shore) > Gorowyn > Kylong > Danak shipyard (need faction to land, otherwise another row boat) > Nek > TS. Have two boats on each route, possible with one going the opposite direction, and add an NPC whom you can opt to pay 1g to boot you off the boat at your destination, so you can get on the boat and afk with no fear of missing your port.Do this, and I would happily give up the guild hall bells.

Kendricke

01-22-2009, 03:03 AM

<cite>Noaani wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>scruffylookin wrote:</cite><blockquote>Everyone's treating this issue like it belongs in the "easier gameplay" category. </blockquote>Easier travel, not easier gamplay.I would personally be happy if they removes all bells in all zones and the only way to travel between ports was ride a boat similar to the Butcherblock/Kylong boats. To me, it falls under the heading of easy travel, not easy gameplay.Make the QH boat do a round trip from QH > Ant >TS > Nek > QH, another doing EFP > CL > Nek > TS > EFP, than add a boat doing a round trip going TS > Zek > EF > LS > EL > Nek > TS, another going TS > Feerrott > Mara > SS > Nek > TS. Then have a boat going TS > BB > Gfay (anchor off shore by the Nursrey, use a row boat to get to shore) > Gorowyn > Kylong > Danak shipyard (need faction to land, otherwise another row boat) > Nek > TS. Have two boats on each route, possible with one going the opposite direction, and add an NPC whom you can opt to pay 1g to boot you off the boat at your destination, so you can get on the boat and afk with no fear of missing your port.Do this, and I would happily give up the guild hall bells.</blockquote>Excellent!

sliderhouserules

01-22-2009, 03:33 AM

<cite>Spyderbite@Venekor wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Nuladen@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote>Well, seeing as you just did a grand job of proving my point...</blockquote>What point?! That's all I'm trying to get a grasp of here. I'm not baiting you or anything. I'm seriously trying to understand. You can ask a friend who is in a guild to grant you access to their Guild Hall and have everything that you're asking for. But, you would rather have them change the entire game mechanics instead?Help me understand your logic.</blockquote>How does adding zone destinations to a ticket seller's vendor menu "change the entire game mechanics"? That's rich.This has been a repeated request since as long as I can remember, and if you look at my join date over there <-- under my forum name you should realize that's a long time.Nuladen, don't sweat the attempts by the "forum police" to tell you that if they don't find something "not fun" then you shouldn't either. I've had more than one thread derailed by one or more of the people you're squaring off against in this one. You should consider expressing your concerns and desires in a /feedback and let the developers read it over with their morning coffee, instead of putting it out here for the dogs to chew on like an old bone. There is no reason not to do this, it just hasn't been something they've prioritized on their to-do lists.

Faenril

01-22-2009, 05:12 AM

<cite>Femke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Guillermo@Butcherblock wrote:</cite><blockquote> Time is money,</blockquote>May I call that *something censored* ?That may go for RL jobs and alike....But as far as I recall EQII was a game to relax, something you do for your enjoyment.... for me the "time is money" thingy doesn't fit there at all.</blockquote>Indeed. Sitting in front of loading screens does not contribute to my "enjoyment" of EQ2. But hey to everyone his own I guess ...

Faenril

01-22-2009, 05:46 AM

<cite>Spyderbite@Venekor wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Nuladen@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote>I also said that regardless of memory leak or not I still want the multiple loading screens gone, though I noticed you cut that part out when you quoted me.</blockquote>But, you still haven't stated a good reason why they should be gone with the exception of eluding that "guilds don't have to so why should you?"If you've played for any extended period of time, then you're used to it by now. My question is.. why does it have to be made easier? There are options if you absolutely can't stand the multiple load times which have been made more than clear here and don't require a change in game mechanics.. join a guild, be-friend a guild or start a guild.Where's the issue?</blockquote>Spyder, I suggest next time you feel the need to hit "reply", you read the thread before, as you didn't obviously...The issue is now that you can go from A to E just by clicking bells, never leaving docks, only going throuh B C D loading screens, not providing the possibility to skip B C D entirely makes no sense whatsoever. Basically you are loading a zone just to click a bell. Several persons explained why it makes no sense the way it is currently and how it would improve the game to get this changed, but obviously you don't want to hear/read. Which is especially easy as "it's not your concern", you being in a guild.Actually the OP never brought the argument "guilds don't have to so why should you ?", the "guild hall defenders" army did, but I guess putting words in ppl's mouth does not hurt, right ?Actually, the ONLY argument brought AGAINST the idea is that this would decrease the value of the guild hall amenities. To some extent, this argument is valid, but this can easily be fixed by assigning a cost every time you use the bell service in shattered lands. This way either you pay for the service for all your guildies in your guild hall's upkeep, or you pay for the service everytime you use it individually if you are not guilded or don't want to call guild.This solution sounds fair to me, and should not hurt the toughest capitalism guru's feelings !You may argue "but this makes travelling easier, stop making this game easier, it's dumbing it down !". Well it can be discussed - and has been to some extent - if loading screens are "in game" or not (me think not).I find it quite amusing though that the most hardcore, the tough guys defending harder travelling, are also the first who bought a bell and probably a druid ring for their guild, and probably also the NPC giving guild banners, and that they are heavy users of said guild banners - as we are all, no problem with that, at least on pve. I guess they don't walk with their raid from their guild hall to their raid instance. Talk about hypocracy ?Those - that would include me - who want travelling hard - "realistic" would be more appropriate maybe - lost the war long ago when mage and druid ports got introduced. Now it's pointless. I think putting various travelling amenities in GH was a bad move as it decreased the incentive to interact with druids and mages to port you / your group. What did those classes get to compensate for that change ? This decreased the utility of those classes after all (which is by far worse that decreasing the value of the bell in your guild hall btw). Just some thoughts...

Noaani

01-22-2009, 06:13 AM

<cite>Noaani wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>scruffylookin wrote:</cite><blockquote>Everyone's treating this issue like it belongs in the "easier gameplay" category. </blockquote>Easier travel, not easier gamplay.I would personally be happy if they removes all bells in all zones and the only way to travel between ports was ride a boat similar to the Butcherblock/Kylong boats. To me, it falls under the heading of easy travel, not easy gameplay.Make the QH boat do a round trip from QH > Ant >TS > Nek > QH, another doing EFP > CL > Nek > TS > EFP, than add a boat doing a round trip going TS > Zek > EF > LS > EL > Nek > TS, another going TS > Feerrott > Mara > SS > Nek > TS. Then have a boat going TS > BB > Gfay (anchor off shore by the Nursrey, use a row boat to get to shore) > Gorowyn > Kylong > Danak shipyard (need faction to land, otherwise another row boat) > Nek > TS. Have two boats on each route, possible with one going the opposite direction, and add an NPC whom you can opt to pay 1g to boot you off the boat at your destination, so you can get on the boat and afk with no fear of missing your port.Do this, and I would happily give up the guild hall bells.</blockquote>As an edit to this:Make it work in the same way as the butcherblock boats work currently, where the boat leaves the dock, moves along a designated path and then zones out to a loading screen. Instead of the regular loading screens for this though, set it up so it has an arial cutscene of the boat floating in the water, possibly with the likes of iceberges if you are heading to EF, floatsam for Zek etc... then there are no loading screens left as such, and everyone is happy.

zaneluke

01-22-2009, 08:24 AM

How about this. Put a super duper portal machine operated by the gnome in all 5 cities. Has a portal to all zones equal to the guild hall options. Costs? that is a hard one, but I would say 5-8 gold per use.Also let people "upgrade" their call to home spell. Either via a long sig type quest or a good 50 plat cost. 15 minute timer just like people with guild halls.This will make that sect of population that can not ,choose not to or flat out refuse to join a guild and participate in that portion of this multi player game. Once this happens then we can move on to the next topic. I give it three months here will be the topic if the above takes place."why cant we have harvest bots in our home"? the mechaincs are there, we should not be forced to join a guild to enjoy everything the game has to offer! LOL

Nulad

01-22-2009, 10:18 AM

I am utterly shocked that there is such a problem with people who cannot read, it's absolutely astounding, what are they teaching in schools these days?

Femke

01-22-2009, 10:26 AM

<cite>Nuladen@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Femke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Nuladen@Runnyeye wrote:</cite>And yet... even after long playing sessions with often going back to the guild hall(s), my houses, zones and whatever.... I never seen any slower zoning at all....So this memory leak that is there according you seems not to threat everyone equally....</blockquote>Where did I say it affects everyone? I didn't, I said it affects me, and if you think I'm the only one I suggest you go take a look in the numerous threads dealing with it. I also said that regardless of memory leak or not I still want the multiple loading screens gone, though I noticed you cut that part out when you quoted me.</blockquote>I didn't quote that part because you made your opinion in that perfectly clear.... and I think different. After all, these zoning screens are nothing new, they were there from game launch.The new bells and guildhalls (as already said by others) only made it getting some faster.... and there was more then one thread people complaining that travelling took to long.In the very begin you had to get to the Thundering Steppes docks (starting in Qeynos) you had to port to Antonica, then the griffon to the Steppes station, port to the Steppes and run to the docks.Later they added the tickets NPC's at the harbors and the griffons in the Steppes (and Nek Forest) and all over the game more travel possibilities were created. With as latest the new bells at Antonica docks, Common lands docks and so on.... and the travel functionalities of the guild halls....That all leaded to more zoning in a shorter time. And all of a sudden it is a problem... Zoning was there all the time. You want it as it used to be? You still can travel through the old routes....And concerning that memory leak.... why doesn't it effect me (and as many others) not? Is my memory better? Is my other hardware better? Is my computer better configured? Is my ISP better? Is it because my sign of the zodiac? You tell me...

Nulad

01-22-2009, 11:16 AM

<cite>Femke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Nuladen@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Femke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Nuladen@Runnyeye wrote:</cite>And yet... even after long playing sessions with often going back to the guild hall(s), my houses, zones and whatever.... I never seen any slower zoning at all....So this memory leak that is there according you seems not to threat everyone equally....</blockquote>Where did I say it affects everyone? I didn't, I said it affects me, and if you think I'm the only one I suggest you go take a look in the numerous threads dealing with it. I also said that regardless of memory leak or not I still want the multiple loading screens gone, though I noticed you cut that part out when you quoted me.</blockquote>I didn't quote that part because you made your opinion in that perfectly clear.... and I think different. After all, these zoning screens are nothing new, they were there from game launch.And they've needed changing since launch too.The new bells and guildhalls (as already said by others) only made it getting some faster.... and there was more then one thread people complaining that travelling took to long.Which has what to do with my post? nothing.In the very begin you had to get to the Thundering Steppes docks (starting in Qeynos) you had to port to Antonica, then the griffon to the Steppes station, port to the Steppes and run to the docks.Later they added the tickets NPC's at the harbors and the griffons in the Steppes (and Nek Forest) and all over the game more travel possibilities were created. With as latest the new bells at Antonica docks, Common lands docks and so on.... and the travel functionalities of the guild halls....That all leaded to more zoning in a shorter time. And all of a sudden it is a problem... Zoning was there all the time.All of a sudden? You can go join Spyder in the reading class, the thread title will give you a clue.You want it as it used to be? You still can travel through the old routes....No, quit trying to twist what I said. All I want is this effect of multiple loading screen gone, is it really that hard to comprehend?And concerning that memory leak.... why doesn't it effect me (and as many others) not? Is my memory better? Is my other hardware better? Is my computer better configured? Is my ISP better? Is it because my sign of the zodiac? You tell me...No, you can either go learn more about computers, software and how they work or you could ask in one of the numerous threads dealing with the issue instead of trying to derail this one.</blockquote>

liveja

01-22-2009, 12:37 PM

<cite>Faenril@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote>Sitting in front of loading screens does not contribute to my "enjoyment" of EQ2</blockquote>It does nothing for my enjoyment, either.That's why my guild's guild hall has amenities to eliminate load screens as much as possible. For me, the problem is almost entirely eliminated -- so much so that I'm not sure what the remaining issue is. I guess I just can't read either, because I pretty much entirely agree with Spyderbite <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/2786c5c8e1a8be796fb2f726cca5a0fe.gif" border="0" />If it's the memory leak ... well, that's a different subject, for a different thread.

Femke

01-22-2009, 01:20 PM

<cite>Nuladen@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Femke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Nuladen@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Femke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Nuladen@Runnyeye wrote:</cite>And yet... even after long playing sessions with often going back to the guild hall(s), my houses, zones and whatever.... I never seen any slower zoning at all....So this memory leak that is there according you seems not to threat everyone equally....</blockquote>Where did I say it affects everyone? I didn't, I said it affects me, and if you think I'm the only one I suggest you go take a look in the numerous threads dealing with it. I also said that regardless of memory leak or not I still want the multiple loading screens gone, though I noticed you cut that part out when you quoted me.</blockquote>I didn't quote that part because you made your opinion in that perfectly clear.... and I think different. After all, these zoning screens are nothing new, they were there from game launch.And they've needed changing since launch too.In your opinion, there are enough that don't have this need who travel through the lands because they like so... or use effective clan hallsThe new bells and guildhalls (as already said by others) only made it getting some faster.... and there was more then one thread people complaining that travelling took to long.Which has what to do with my post? nothing.I tried to explain something about how things was and changed.... but that is clearly not allowed.In the very begin you had to get to the Thundering Steppes docks (starting in Qeynos) you had to port to Antonica, then the griffon to the Steppes station, port to the Steppes and run to the docks.Later they added the tickets NPC's at the harbors and the griffons in the Steppes (and Nek Forest) and all over the game more travel possibilities were created. With as latest the new bells at Antonica docks, Common lands docks and so on.... and the travel functionalities of the guild halls....That all leaded to more zoning in a shorter time. And all of a sudden it is a problem... Zoning was there all the time.All of a sudden? You can go join Spyder in the reading class, the thread title will give you a clue.*BIG APPLAUS* Start to play it on the person... You want it as it used to be? You still can travel through the old routes....No, quit trying to twist what I said. All I want is this effect of multiple loading screen gone, is it really that hard to comprehend?No... and is it so hard to understand that I think there is no need for it?And concerning that memory leak.... why doesn't it effect me (and as many others) not? Is my memory better? Is my other hardware better? Is my computer better configured? Is my ISP better? Is it because my sign of the zodiac? You tell me...No, you can either go learn more about computers, software and how they work or you could ask in one of the numerous threads dealing with the issue instead of trying to derail this one.Who started to mention the memory leak? Not me... All I did was mentioning that I never ever noticed something like this concerning zoning</blockquote></blockquote>

Femke

01-22-2009, 01:22 PM

<cite>Flaye@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Faenril@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote>Sitting in front of loading screens does not contribute to my "enjoyment" of EQ2</blockquote> I guess I just can't read either, because I pretty much entirely agree with Spyderbite <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/2786c5c8e1a8be796fb2f726cca5a0fe.gif" border="0" /></blockquote>See you then in the reading class with him <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

Faenril

01-22-2009, 01:34 PM

<cite>Femke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Flaye@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Faenril@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote>Sitting in front of loading screens does not contribute to my "enjoyment" of EQ2</blockquote> I guess I just can't read either, because I pretty much entirely agree with Spyderbite <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/2786c5c8e1a8be796fb2f726cca5a0fe.gif" border="0" /></blockquote>See you then in the reading class with him <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" /></blockquote>And what does your comment have to do this mine ? The 2 sentences do not make any logical connection together.

liveja

01-22-2009, 01:41 PM

<cite>Faenril@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Femke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Flaye@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Faenril@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote>Sitting in front of loading screens does not contribute to my "enjoyment" of EQ2</blockquote> I guess I just can't read either, because I pretty much entirely agree with Spyderbite <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/2786c5c8e1a8be796fb2f726cca5a0fe.gif" border="0" /></blockquote>See you then in the reading class with him <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" /></blockquote>And what does your comment have to do this mine ? The 2 sentences do not make any logical connection together.</blockquote>I think both of us were responding to Nuladen's insistence that those who disagree simply can't read. While I did reply specifically to you, that particular line about reading comprehension was aimed more at Nuladen, & it's my fault I didn't make that clear.My apologies for any confusion.

Faenril

01-22-2009, 01:44 PM

Mmmh while I can understand ppl saying they think there is no need for a change, after all this is subjective of course, I do not get the "it's been there from launch" thing. First the context is very different from launch: at launch you had to walk 5 or 10 minutes between 2 loading screens, so their annoyance was relatively low compared to the time spent physically moving in game. Now that loading screens are more than 50% of the traveling time they became a comparatively bigger issue. Second if we kept all stuff that was there at launch there would be quite a bunch of bugs and broken mechanics still in game. Fortunately the game evolves, not always for the better but at least there are attempts to improve things. I mean this is the same kind of reasonning as "why do you buy a color tv ? You watched a black and white one for 20 years why not continue the same ?" Why do you upgrade your computer while your old one could run EQ2 ? Why a new car when the old one was enough to bring you to the office or school ?

Faenril

01-22-2009, 01:44 PM

<cite>Flaye@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Faenril@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Femke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Flaye@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Faenril@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote>Sitting in front of loading screens does not contribute to my "enjoyment" of EQ2</blockquote> I guess I just can't read either, because I pretty much entirely agree with Spyderbite <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/2786c5c8e1a8be796fb2f726cca5a0fe.gif" border="0" /></blockquote>See you then in the reading class with him <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" /></blockquote>And what does your comment have to do this mine ? The 2 sentences do not make any logical connection together.</blockquote>I think both of us were responding to Nuladen's insistence that those who disagree simply can't read. While I did reply specifically to you, that particular line about reading comprehension was aimed more at Nuladen, & it's my fault I didn't make that clear.My apologies for any confusion.</blockquote>no offense <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

Nulad

01-22-2009, 01:46 PM

<cite>Femke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Nuladen@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Femke wrote:</cite><blockquote><blockquote>I didn't quote that part because you made your opinion in that perfectly clear.... and I think different. After all, these zoning screens are nothing new, they were there from game launch.</blockquote>And they've needed changing since launch too.In your opinion, there are enough that don't have this need who travel through the lands because they like so... or use effective clan halls Of course it's my opinion, what else was it going to be?The new bells and guildhalls (as already said by others) only made it getting some faster.... and there was more then one thread people complaining that travelling took to long.Which has what to do with my post? nothing.I tried to explain something about how things was and changed.... but that is clearly not allowed.I'll ask again, what has it got to do with my post? nothing, it's entirely irrelevant unless you believe I have some hidden agenda other than to reduce the time spent watching loading screens.In the very begin you had to get to the Thundering Steppes docks (starting in Qeynos) you had to port to Antonica, then the griffon to the Steppes station, port to the Steppes and run to the docks.Later they added the tickets NPC's at the harbors and the griffons in the Steppes (and Nek Forest) and all over the game more travel possibilities were created. With as latest the new bells at Antonica docks, Common lands docks and so on.... and the travel functionalities of the guild halls....That all leaded to more zoning in a shorter time. And all of a sudden it is a problem... Zoning was there all the time.All of a sudden? You can go join Spyder in the reading class, the thread title will give you a clue.*BIG APPLAUS* Start to play it on the person... What? You made a statement, I disproved it, your problem if you choose to take it personally.You want it as it used to be? You still can travel through the old routes....No, quit trying to twist what I said. All I want is this effect of multiple loading screen gone, is it really that hard to comprehend?No... and is it so hard to understand that I think there is no need for it?So we can agree to differ then, good.And concerning that memory leak.... why doesn't it effect me (and as many others) not? Is my memory better? Is my other hardware better? Is my computer better configured? Is my ISP better? Is it because my sign of the zodiac? You tell me...No, you can either go learn more about computers, software and how they work or you could ask in one of the numerous threads dealing with the issue instead of trying to derail this one.Who started to mention the memory leak? Not me... Did I say it was otherwise?All I did was mentioning that I never ever noticed something like this concerning zoningNo you didn't, you keep asking questions about it that are better suited to other threads of discussion as I have already pointed out. Did you want me to say something about reading again?</blockquote></blockquote></blockquote>

madha

01-22-2009, 01:47 PM

Ok for every beta that i have been in for eq2 the harbor masters in the cities did indead sell tickets to every shatterd lands zone, some where like 10g to use. Frankly i dont know why the merchants in the cities wouldnt want to expand their trade routs to all the other zones, some good buisness to be had shipping to everfrost and EL. In any case they could at least revamp TS's bell location to be more like neks, i hate zoneing in and having to run to find the bell =P and heck half the time i forget if i need to go to nek to use their bells or ts. Why are nek and ts the hub for shipping anyway they have like 20 peopel on the dock unlike the cities where well there is a city of people there. From a lore standpoint as well as a rp stand point it makes no sence why ts and nek are shipping centers as appose to the citiies where their docks only go 2 places, cant think of a dock in the world that only ships to 2 locations.And for all those pople that say get a guild hall with a bell. um well im trying but its expensive, and i need to save pp for aa respects =/.

Nulad

01-22-2009, 01:55 PM

<cite>Flaye@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote>I think both of us were responding to Nuladen's insistence that those who disagree simply can't read. While I did reply specifically to you, that particular line about reading comprehension was aimed more at Nuladen, & it's my fault I didn't make that clear.My apologies for any confusion.</blockquote>The only people I've said it to are those that have obviously not read the thread, you can disagree with me all you like.

liveja

01-22-2009, 02:05 PM

<cite>Nuladen@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Flaye@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote>I think both of us were responding to Nuladen's insistence that those who disagree simply can't read. While I did reply specifically to you, that particular line about reading comprehension was aimed more at Nuladen, & it's my fault I didn't make that clear.My apologies for any confusion.</blockquote>The only people I've said it to are those that have obviously not read the thread, you can disagree with me all you like.</blockquote>From what I can tell, my area of disagreement is the same one that caused you to accuse Spyderbite of not being able to read.I'll say it again: I don't think sitting in front of multiple loading screens is fun at all, so I joined a guild that has the guild hall amenities that help me cut out as many load screens as possible. IOW, I solved my own issue, & therefore I don't see the point of this thread at all.I don't think the "memory leak" has any place in this thread. I'm not saying it doesn't exist; I'm saying it's irrelevant to this thread.

Nulad

01-22-2009, 02:19 PM

<cite>Flaye@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote>From what I can tell, my area of disagreement is the same one that caused you to accuse Spyderbite of not being able to read.I'll say it again: I don't think sitting in front of multiple loading screens is fun at all, so I joined a guild that has the guild hall amenities that help me cut out as many load screens as possible. IOW, I solved my own issue, & therefore I don't see the point of this thread at all.Because this thread has nothing to do with whether anybody uses guild travel amenities or not, it is about multiple loading screens with no more than a mouse click between them being a pointless waste of time and resources, not to mention being devoid of any gameplay.I don't think the "memory leak" has any place in this thread. I'm not saying it doesn't exist; I'm saying it's irrelevant to this thread.Agreed.</blockquote>

sliderhouserules

01-22-2009, 02:24 PM

<cite>Flaye@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Nuladen@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Flaye@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote>I think both of us were responding to Nuladen's insistence that those who disagree simply can't read. While I did reply specifically to you, that particular line about reading comprehension was aimed more at Nuladen, & it's my fault I didn't make that clear.My apologies for any confusion.</blockquote>The only people I've said it to are those that have obviously not read the thread, you can disagree with me all you like.</blockquote>From what I can tell, my area of disagreement is the same one that caused you to accuse Spyderbite of not being able to read.I'll say it again: I don't think sitting in front of multiple loading screens is fun at all, so I joined a guild that has the guild hall amenities that help me cut out as many load screens as possible. IOW, I solved my own issue, & therefore I don't see the point of this thread at all.I don't think the "memory leak" has any place in this thread. I'm not saying it doesn't exist; I'm saying it's irrelevant to this thread.</blockquote>This is precisely the "forum police" mentality. You admit the game has a short coming, and you have made the choice to do what you can to work around that in the game on your own. Why do you and others think it is appropriate to thread crap on someone who thinks this issue is important enough that the underlying issue should be fixed? I am in a guild with travel bell amenities. I hate the loading screens. I think the developers should fix the underlying issue. Scroll up to madhatr's reply, or read some of what Noaani has posted, and you'll see there is plenty of room for (easy to accomplish IE not much developer time) improvement here.

liveja

01-22-2009, 03:10 PM

<cite>sliderhouserules wrote:</cite><blockquote>Why do you and others think it is appropriate to thread crap on someone who thinks this issue is important enough</blockquote>Because I totally disagree that the "issue" is "important" at all.

liveja

01-22-2009, 03:15 PM

<cite>Nuladen@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Because this thread has nothing to do with whether anybody uses guild travel amenities or not</cite></blockquote>People are telling you how to solve your own problem. That's the whole point of bringing up the guild amenities.Yes, I'd love getting rid of even more pointless load screens, but quite frankly I think there are FAR more important things for the Devs to spend time on. For that reason, & the fact that you can largely fix the problem yourself, I'm not seeing the issue -- or, at least, I'm not seeing it as an important issue.

Zarador

01-22-2009, 03:22 PM

<cite>Flaye@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Faenril@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote>Sitting in front of loading screens does not contribute to my "enjoyment" of EQ2</blockquote>It does nothing for my enjoyment, either.That's why my guild's guild hall has amenities to eliminate load screens as much as possible. For me, the problem is almost entirely eliminated -- so much so that I'm not sure what the remaining issue is. I guess I just can't read either, because I pretty much entirely agree with Spyderbite <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/2786c5c8e1a8be796fb2f726cca5a0fe.gif" border="0" />If it's the memory leak ... well, that's a different subject, for a different thread.</blockquote>So lets look at it from another standpoint:Were a very small family Guild, have been since almost release. Were quite happy to have been able to afford the T-1 Guild Hall. Were level 47 now and mainly focus on crafting which we enjoy. Basically, for us the portals are somewhat out of reach, understandably. So while the situation is almost eliminated for you, it still exists for us.Now I have no qualm whatsoever about having to run to a dock and not being able to use an amenity that our guild has not earned. That, however is where it should end for players who are not in a big enough guild or in any guild for that matter.They should be required to walk up to a dock local to them, then be able to one stop portal to the same locations in my opinion. I don't really mind the screens all that much, but I can sympathize with those that do. If loading screens are immersive and enjoyable, then by all means lets let everyone enjoy them no matter how big the guild is. If not, then why have multiple screens required for anyone at all?

Kendricke

01-22-2009, 03:27 PM

<cite>Nuladen@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote>...it is about multiple loading screens with no more than a mouse click between them being a pointless waste of time and resources, not to mention being devoid of any gameplay.</blockquote>This is why I think they should never have included such bells on the docks in the first place. The bells should be removed again and left out of the game. Travel would then be facilitated on ships/boats, thus adding gameplay to the travels of players outside of guild, retaining the value of the guild amenity, and encouraging more players to join or create guilds.

Thunndar316

01-22-2009, 03:29 PM

<cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Thunndar316 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Dasein wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Guillermo@Butcherblock wrote:</cite><blockquote> Time is money, so I agree that loading screens are generally a bad thing. However there are in game features that allow you to bypass some of these loading screens. Regardless if your guild has the proper amenities or not, an individual could definitely find a guild that offers these travel amenities to the public, free of charge. If one bell took you to any location in game, there wouldn't be any need to work for and earn these guildhall amenities. Just like buying a nice mount to get around the world easier and faster. Sometimes you have to spend money to improve the quality of your time.</blockquote>So no guild halls have crafting statiosn, fuel merchants, writ-givers, menders, brokers, bankers, mailboxes and NPC merchants in them because those are all readily available in other zones?</blockquote>For me, the difference is one of shared value. It's just not quite an apples to apples comparison. If you can show me the zone that allows me to tradeskill while utilizing my guild's harvesting supply depot, I'd perhaps concede that particular point (as one example). As far as guild writ-givers, I found that most members were not utilizing the writ givers we had within our guildhall...and so I removed them, save for the tradeskilling writ givers (which again, are tied to the supply depot usage). Brokers, bankers, and mailboxes are also within our guild due (again) in at least small part due to the tradeskilling area within our guildhall. Since we have those amenities, we're able to tie in merchants as well. The point I'm making here is that most amenities within a guildhall are, in at least some small way, tied to other amenities. The whole becomes greater than the sum of its parts because of the added value these amenities have when used in comination with other amenities. Personally, I'd be more inclined to remove the Shattered Lands bell from our guildhall in favor of a different amenity should such a change as is being proposed here come to pass. I've already removed the Faydwer bell from our hall. So yes, I suppose I do feel the value of the Shattered Lands Mariner Bell amenity would be diminished should this change come to pass. I would feel it diminished enough to probably remove the item outright and shift the burden of travel/zoning screens on to my members for Zek, Enchanted Lands, Feerrot, etc.</blockquote><img src="/eq2/images/smilies/2786c5c8e1a8be796fb2f726cca5a0fe.gif" border="0" />Yeah. By the way direct your disgruntled guild members over to my server where I would be happy to let them use our SL bell. People like you crack me up. You sit there and claim that you would purpously go through all the loading screens knowing [Removed for Content] well you are lying through your teeth.</blockquote>As I've said, I've already removed one bell from our guild hall and I've informed our members that I'll be removing the Kunark one as soon as another amenity is brought into the game that has significant value (i.e. - "guild broker"). If the full listing of bells were brought to the harbors, I'd have even less reason to keep the Shattered Lands bell. You can accuse me of "lying through my teeth" if you want. However, if you're going to call me out as such, you'd best be able to back your accusations. Otherwise, you stand the risk of looking a fool when it's easy to disprove such antics.</blockquote>Of course you remove the Kunark and Faydwer bells. You don't need em if you have the Druid rings <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/2786c5c8e1a8be796fb2f726cca5a0fe.gif" border="0" />

liveja

01-22-2009, 04:04 PM

<cite>Zarador wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Flaye@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Faenril@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote>Sitting in front of loading screens does not contribute to my "enjoyment" of EQ2</blockquote>It does nothing for my enjoyment, either.That's why my guild's guild hall has amenities to eliminate load screens as much as possible. For me, the problem is almost entirely eliminated -- so much so that I'm not sure what the remaining issue is. I guess I just can't read either, because I pretty much entirely agree with Spyderbite <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/2786c5c8e1a8be796fb2f726cca5a0fe.gif" border="0" />If it's the memory leak ... well, that's a different subject, for a different thread.</blockquote>So lets look at it from another standpoint:Were a very small family Guild, have been since almost release. Were quite happy to have been able to afford the T-1 Guild Hall. Were level 47 now and mainly focus on crafting which we enjoy. Basically, for us the portals are somewhat out of reach, understandably. So while the situation is almost eliminated for you, it still exists for us..</blockquote>You posted this like there's some substantial difference between your guild & mine. As I see it, the difference between you & us is exactly 5 guild levels. Personally, I'd put a significant priority on getting to GL50, if I were you.I don't know how many people are in your guild ... but Cygnus Rising is all of 17 unique accounts, most of whom are "crafting nuts" who spend hours in the guild hall, crafting their brains out.This is NOT an issue that only "uber-guilds" can work around -- unless someone wants to claim that my guild is "uber", in which case I'll simply hurt myself laughing.

Femke

01-22-2009, 06:41 PM

<cite>Nuladen@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote><blockquote><blockquote><blockquote>No you didn't, you keep asking questions about it that are better suited to other threads of discussion as I have already pointed out. Did you want me to say something about reading agai</blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote>Which only shows that you like to take things to a personal level and accuse people of being able to read or not. If you like that way of discussion.... great, but I don't... it is just a low way of reacting...But any way, have fun with your thread about zoning screens.... because as far I can see it, they are here to stay.... (specially with the solution guild halls can offer..... ups, I was not allowed to say that!!!!)

1000Words

01-22-2009, 06:49 PM

<cite>Femke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Nuladen@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote><blockquote><blockquote><blockquote>No you didn't, you keep asking questions about it that are better suited to other threads of discussion as I have already pointed out. Did you want me to say something about reading agai</blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote>Which only shows that you like to take things to a personal level and accuse people of being able to read or not. If you like that way of discussion.... great, but I don't... it is just a low way of reacting...But any way, have fun with your thread about zoning screens.... because as far I can see it, they are here to stay.... (specially with the solution guild halls can offer..... ups, I was not allowed to say that!!!!)</blockquote>Thank goodness for loading screens too. The big no-zone areas just don't work for EQ2.

Spyderbite

01-22-2009, 07:05 PM

<cite>Nuladen@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote>The only people I've said it to are those that have obviously not read the thread, you can disagree with me all you like.</blockquote>I'm quite secure with my ability to read.. four years of journalism tends to require a smidgen of reading. <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />And, I mentioned in response to Rijackii's reply earlier in the thread, that I think it'd be great if they brought the ticket sellers to the docks like we have on the PvP servers. In fact, I pointed out, that I would prefer that that you on a PvE server had them, and we did not because more land travel encourages more PvP.Obviously that solution isn't good enough for you. Either that, or perhaps you didn't read my reply?

Nulad

01-22-2009, 07:07 PM

<cite>Flaye@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Nuladen@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Because this thread has nothing to do with whether anybody uses guild travel amenities or not</cite></blockquote>People are telling you how to solve your own problem. That's the whole point of bringing up the guild amenities.No, people are telling me how to solve it every 15 minutes, which as I have ALREADY stated is a poor fix for a poor mechanic.Yes, I'd love getting rid of even more pointless load screens,So you agree then? In which case what are you going on for? but quite frankly I think there are FAR more important things for the Devs to spend time on.Did I say they should drop everything to fix it? For that reason, & the fact that you can largely fix the problem yourself, I'm not seeing the issue -- or, at least, I'm not seeing it as an important issue.Why does something have to be an important issue to be discussed? You are one of the ones who's making this out to be a big deal, all I did was ask a question as to how it was fun and then defend my position from everybody who has attmpted to twist what I said into something completely different.</blockquote>

Nulad

01-22-2009, 07:17 PM

<cite>Femke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Nuladen@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote><blockquote><blockquote><blockquote>No you didn't, you keep asking questions about it that are better suited to other threads of discussion as I have already pointed out. Did you want me to say something about reading agai</blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote>Which only shows that you like to take things to a personal level and accuse people of being able to read or not. If you like that way of discussion.... great, but I don't... it is just a low way of reacting...If you had read the thread I wouldn't have been able to say it, you are the one who made the choice to post without reading, not me, there is nothing low about it, unlike the attempted twisting of my comments.But any way, have fun with your thread about zoning screens.... because as far I can see it, they are here to stay.... (specially with the solution guild halls can offer..... ups, I was not allowed to say that!!!!)Why are you persisting with this argument when I have given my response to it already, you know why I feel it isn't a good solution so either maintain your reasoning with further data or shut up, as currently you sound like a broken record.</blockquote>

Nulad

01-22-2009, 07:26 PM

<cite>Spyderbite@Venekor wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Nuladen@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote>The only people I've said it to are those that have obviously not read the thread, you can disagree with me all you like.</blockquote>I'm quite secure with my ability to read.. four years of journalism tends to require a smidgen of reading. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" />Is that why you feel it's acceptable to skim and then post comments without reading the details?And, I mentioned in response to Rijackii's reply earlier in the thread, that I think it'd be great if they brought the ticket sellers to the docks like we have on the PvP servers. In fact, I pointed out, that I would prefer that that you on a PvE server had them, and we did not because more land travel encourages more PvP.Obviously that solution isn't good enough for you. Either that, or perhaps you didn't read my reply?Lol, just because I didn't reply to it doesn't mean I didn't read it.</blockquote>

Spyderbite

01-22-2009, 07:44 PM

<cite>Nuladen@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote><blockquote>Is that why you feel it's acceptable to skim and then post comments without reading the details?eply?Lol, just because I didn't reply to it doesn't mean I didn't read it.</blockquote></blockquote>That made no sense at all. I did in fact read, and replied with a supportive reply stating that you should have exactly what you are asking for. I said you could have our bells which have access to all the shattered lands from the ticket sellers on the docks, which we dont' want on the PvP servers.Are you just argueing for the sake of arguement now? Or are you not practicing what you preach in regards to the whole "reading" thing?

Nulad

01-22-2009, 08:28 PM

<cite>Spyderbite@Venekor wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Nuladen@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote><blockquote>Is that why you feel it's acceptable to skim and then post comments without reading the details?eply?Lol, just because I didn't reply to it doesn't mean I didn't read it.</blockquote></blockquote>That made no sense at all. I did in fact read, and replied with a supportive reply stating that you should have exactly what you are asking for.Then why did you continue to post questions and statements that had already been addressed, I was not the only one to point out that if you had read the thread you'd not have posted in the manner you did. So while you may have read some parts (ie: skimmed) you clearly did not read it all as you have done a good job of proving.I said you could have our bells which have access to all the shattered lands from the ticket sellers on the docks, which we dont' want on the PvP servers.So just because you had a reasonable reply early on means we should forget your posts later on? You posted them not me.Are you just argueing for the sake of arguement now? Or are you not practicing what you preach in regards to the whole "reading" thing?Are you just attempting to save face by trying to make yourself appear less of a fool? it's not working. We are both looking like fools for continuing this discussion well beyond any reasonable point.</blockquote>

Spyderbite

01-22-2009, 09:34 PM

<cite>Nuladen@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote><blockquote>Are you just attempting to save face by trying to make yourself appear less of a fool? it's not working. We are both looking like fools for continuing this discussion well beyond any reasonable point.</blockquote></blockquote>Wow... I went beyond my original point, in an attempt to understand what you actually want because as a result of my "reasonable response" you decided to tell me instead that I didn't know how to read.And, now I'm a "fool"? Sorry to get all TOS Police on you.. but you're not being coherent, or reasonable, and are just resorting to personal attacks. Might be a good opportunity for you to backtrack and re-read what every one else posted.. and realize that there are many good suggestions there that actually support your situation.On your current path however, you're just looking to get reported for trolling.

Nulad

01-22-2009, 11:21 PM

<cite>Spyderbite@Venekor wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Nuladen@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote><blockquote>Are you just attempting to save face by trying to make yourself appear less of a fool? it's not working. We are both looking like fools for continuing this discussion well beyond any reasonable point.</blockquote></blockquote>Wow... I went beyond my original point, in an attempt to understand what you actually want because as a result of my "reasonable response" you decided to tell me instead that I didn't know how to read.What I actually want is outlined in my opening post, if you still haven't grasped what that is then I'm sorry but I cannot help you. As for your reading you have accused me of having no good reason for wanting a change when it was in the thread title, you have accused me of wanting easier travel when in my opening post I clearly stated that I did not, you told me to 'join a guild, be-friend a guild or start a guild.' when not only do I say 'my guild hall' in a post my avatar has my guild name under it, my signature has my guild name in it, Kendricke even linked my guild station players page in his first reply, complete with having done enough research to know my guild leader and yet you still think I am unreasonable to comment on the fact that you clearly didn't read the thread before making any of those accusations and comments?And, now I'm a "fool"? Sorry to get all TOS Police on you.. but you're not being coherent, or reasonable, and are just resorting to personal attacks.Where have I not been coherent or reasonable? Everytime I have said that you should read the thread it is because you have accused me of saying or intending something that is in opposition to my earlier comments and as such I can only make two assumptions, one being that you did indeed fail to read the thread or two, that you are incapable of understanding it. I chose to assume that you had failed to read the thread as the second option would have been a personal attack based on no knowledge at all of who you are. Was I wrong? How else was I supposed to tell you that the information was already at your disposal other than to endlessly repeat myself? Maybe a quote of my earlier comments for you to have re-read?Might be a good opportunity for you to backtrack and re-read what every one else posted.. and realize that there are many good suggestions there that actually support your situation.I have read every suggestion posted, do I really need to reply to every single one of them for you to be happy? None of them whatsoever have anything to do with your continual de-railing of the thread over firstly the memory leak and secondly, this pathetic argument where you feel I have attacked you personally which couldn't be further from the truth, it is not my fault if you fail to read or mis-read comments and then get upset when somebody points it out to you.On your current path however, you're just looking to get reported for trolling.Keywords: Kettle, Black, Pot, Calling.</blockquote>

sliderhouserules

01-23-2009, 12:40 AM

<cite>Nuladen@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Spyderbite@Venekor wrote:</cite><blockquote>On your current path however, you're just looking to get reported for trolling.Keywords: Kettle, Black, Pot, Calling.</blockquote></blockquote>Nuladen, there's a fine art to trolling that many on this forum have down pat. They beat you over the head with the same retort even though you respond to it, until you get upset or say something that they can report you for. Then they get *you* in trouble for trolling in your own thread.Been there, had it happen to me, not worth it. You've made your case well, this is a valid issue to many others, and all that's going to result from continuing this is your getting suspended because of them.

scruffylookin

01-23-2009, 04:14 AM

<cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Noaani wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>scruffylookin wrote:</cite><blockquote>Everyone's treating this issue like it belongs in the "easier gameplay" category. </blockquote>Easier travel, not easier gamplay.I would personally be happy if they removes all bells in all zones and the only way to travel between ports was ride a boat similar to the Butcherblock/Kylong boats. To me, it falls under the heading of easy travel, not easy gameplay.Make the QH boat do a round trip from QH > Ant >TS > Nek > QH, another doing EFP > CL > Nek > TS > EFP, than add a boat doing a round trip going TS > Zek > EF > LS > EL > Nek > TS, another going TS > Feerrott > Mara > SS > Nek > TS. Then have a boat going TS > BB > Gfay (anchor off shore by the Nursrey, use a row boat to get to shore) > Gorowyn > Kylong > Danak shipyard (need faction to land, otherwise another row boat) > Nek > TS. Have two boats on each route, possible with one going the opposite direction, and add an NPC whom you can opt to pay 1g to boot you off the boat at your destination, so you can get on the boat and afk with no fear of missing your port.Do this, and I would happily give up the guild hall bells.</blockquote>Excellent! </blockquote>Who has asked you to remove the guild bells? Certainly not me.This is from the original post on this thread:"I'm all for making journeying a little dangerous or tricky, I'm even up for making it take time (in game) but click, zone, click, zone, click, zone is just the pinnacle of tediousness and other than annoying the user serves no purpose other than to place extra wear on my hard drive, use bandwidth (well ok, not a lot...) and probably add a little extra overhead to the server"Where in this post does he say he wants easier travel? He just says that the click, zone, click is pointless and serves no purpose. I agree with this. As a matter of fact, the OP actually says above that he's all for making journeying a little dangerous or tricky. I agree with that as well.Maybe the OP has made other posts that say he wants guild bells removed or that he wants easier travel, and I've missed them. If not, I think you're assuming things from this post that simply aren't there. Having to go through several loading screens just to get somewhere (WITHOUT actually doing anything in game) is a pointless feature. It serves absolutely no purpose.Personally, I'd rather see what you propose above than the multiple, pointless clicks and loading screens. At least that would be there for a reason.It's not about easy travel. It's about removing a feature that makes no sense whatsoever. What you suggest adds immersion, and I'm all for that. 100%. Watching multiple loading screens for no reason is the opposite of immersion. I think you're arguing a point that neither the OP nor I actually made.

Faenril

01-23-2009, 05:38 AM

Well, accusing someone of crying, wanted it easier and all, is a cheap, quick, and easy way to discredit a poster, which does not even require you to read, or understand, his point, most likely ending in a derail or flame war. Maybe some over abuse this tactic from time to time ? <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

Kendricke

01-23-2009, 11:43 AM

<cite>scruffylookin wrote:</cite><blockquote>It's not about easy travel. It's about removing a feature that makes no sense whatsoever.</blockquote>The original system in beta was "no bells". No, really. There were going to be boats which moved us from point A to point B. In fact, I think I still have screenshots of myself on a boat heading north along the Antonican coast from Coldwind Point to Thundering Steppes. The original Antonica to Steppes bell didn't exist - you either hoofed it on foot or you waited for the boat. By game launch, we had the original bell system. There were access quests/level restrictions to enter any zones past Steppes/Nektulos at this time. If you wanted to access Enchanted Lands, you had to gather a group and defeat the Maid of the Mist encounter or you waited till you levelled up more. Even then, it's not like you could just bell to Nektulos and just turn around and bell to Lavastorm. Lavastorm's bell was on the far end of Enchanted Lands originally. Eventually, they changed the bell system to turn Steppes and Nektulos docks into a "travel hub". They added in some gigglegibbers and questgivers there, and shifted bells to those docks toward that end.This didn't work out so well on PVP servers, though...so they shifted the "hubs" back to the safezone cities of Qeynos and Freeport. That's why the choice was made specifically and only for PVP servers. It's not as if the developers completely forgot to switch the code on for the PVE servers - it was a conscious decision on their part to make this change only exist on the PVP servers.This is why we have a "feature" that "makes no sense whatsoever". It wasn't in at release. The original system that was being considered wasn't even in at release. It just evolved that way slowly and over time. Yet, as with all things, as the system is made easier over time, more is demanded. It's just never enough, and this is how slippery slopes are created.I remember the old days where you had to run a zone to get to the next bell. The current system is unbelievably faster and easier than the old system. However, it's apparently not easy or fast enough for some. Truly, I look forward to the day where I might log into the game and on my character select screen I choose not only who to play, but what zone to start them in.

Noaani

01-23-2009, 11:49 AM

<cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote>The original system in beta was "no bells". No, really. There were going to be boats which moved us from point A to point B. In fact, I think I still have screenshots of myself on a boat heading north along the Antonican coast from Coldwind Point to Thundering Steppes. The original Antonica to Steppes bell didn't exist - you either hoofed it on foot or you waited for the boat. </blockquote>I just had an idea thats even better than the boats I suggested.Make players swim between islands on their own. Get rid of bells and boats totally, and increase the ocean size around each zone by a significant amount.Maybe add in a few x2 and x4 sharks in the water, just for fun.

Faenril

01-23-2009, 12:32 PM

The original system made more sense <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

liveja

01-23-2009, 12:39 PM

<cite>Spyderbite@Venekor wrote:</cite><blockquote>Or are you not practicing what you preach in regards to the whole "reading" thing?</blockquote>Spyderbite gets a cookie <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" />

Kiara

01-23-2009, 03:57 PM

Everyone has a right to their opinion. Everyone also has a right to disagree with that opinion.However <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> Both the opinion and the disagreements with that opinion need to stay civil and respectful discussion rather than snarky comments impuning the intelligence of the parties involved.So let's play nice, folks. Please and thank you!

scruffylookin

01-23-2009, 04:19 PM

<cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>scruffylookin wrote:</cite><blockquote>It's not about easy travel. It's about removing a feature that makes no sense whatsoever.</blockquote>The original system in beta was "no bells". No, really. There were going to be boats which moved us from point A to point B. In fact, I think I still have screenshots of myself on a boat heading north along the Antonican coast from Coldwind Point to Thundering Steppes. The original Antonica to Steppes bell didn't exist - you either hoofed it on foot or you waited for the boat. By game launch, we had the original bell system. There were access quests/level restrictions to enter any zones past Steppes/Nektulos at this time. If you wanted to access Enchanted Lands, you had to gather a group and defeat the Maid of the Mist encounter or you waited till you levelled up more. Even then, it's not like you could just bell to Nektulos and just turn around and bell to Lavastorm. Lavastorm's bell was on the far end of Enchanted Lands originally. Eventually, they changed the bell system to turn Steppes and Nektulos docks into a "travel hub". They added in some gigglegibbers and questgivers there, and shifted bells to those docks toward that end.This didn't work out so well on PVP servers, though...so they shifted the "hubs" back to the safezone cities of Qeynos and Freeport. That's why the choice was made specifically and only for PVP servers. It's not as if the developers completely forgot to switch the code on for the PVE servers - it was a conscious decision on their part to make this change only exist on the PVP servers.This is why we have a "feature" that "makes no sense whatsoever". It wasn't in at release. The original system that was being considered wasn't even in at release. It just evolved that way slowly and over time. Yet, as with all things, as the system is made easier over time, more is demanded. It's just never enough, and this is how slippery slopes are created.I remember the old days where you had to run a zone to get to the next bell. The current system is unbelievably faster and easier than the old system. However, it's apparently not easy or fast enough for some. Truly, I look forward to the day where I might log into the game and on my character select screen I choose not only who to play, but what zone to start them in.</blockquote>Kendricke, I don't mean this in any disrespectful way, but I really think you're missing the point I'm making here. Maybe I'm just not successfully getting my point across here.I do NOT want easier travel. I prefer longer, harder travel. I was playing the game shortly after launch and I played EQ1 and never minded the boat rides. At all.I would prefer the travel be like it was at launch (or even as you describe in Beta). I loved the fact that Nek and TS had no Griffons, and when my first character went to see the commonlands, the journey took a very, very long time and the journey (especially through Nek forest) was extremely dangerous. I would still prefer there be no Griffons through Nek and I still wish the journey through Nek was more dangerous for lowbies. I am not--in any way, shape, or form--saying I prefer easier travel. I do not want it. I would prefer longer, tougher travel. But I want that travel to be part of the gameplay.But it's here (to my own chagrin). And now travelling isn't anything more than clicking a bell. Before, long and hard travel was a game play element. That made sense and I loved it. Making travel longer to increase immersion = awesome. Making travel longer by having extra, unnecessary loading screens is a cheap and unfun element that should be removed. That's not gameplay. It's a lack of gameplay. Literally.Again, I think you think I'm making a point I'm not making.

Kendricke

01-23-2009, 04:43 PM

<cite>scruffylookin wrote:</cite><blockquote> Before, long and hard travel was a game play element. That made sense and I loved it. Making travel longer to increase immersion = awesome. Making travel longer by having extra, unnecessary loading screens is a cheap and unfun element that should be removed.</blockquote>Travel wasn't "made longer" by having load screens. It's not as if we were able to travel directly without loading screens for some time and the developers came along and said "well, that's enough of that...we need to make travel longer by adding in load screens".The point is that travel was once much longer and was shortened - significantly - through the use of bells. Could they consolidate bells? Sure, but the point I'm making (and others as well) is that the bells which have been consolidated are being treated as rewards - rewards which take a measure of effort to gain and maintain. These bells are available to anyone - ANYONE willing to put forth such effort through gameplay.Introducing bells outside of the guild reward system affects a reward guilds currently have. Obviously this reward has value - apparently significant value for some. Consolidating the bells outside of guildhalls would reduce some/all of the value of the guild purchased bells. Therefore, this isn't so much an question of "are loading screens fun" for many of us, so much as it is an question of "why should we devalue a guild reward?"

Zarador

01-23-2009, 07:25 PM

<cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>scruffylookin wrote:</cite><blockquote> Before, long and hard travel was a game play element. That made sense and I loved it. Making travel longer to increase immersion = awesome. Making travel longer by having extra, unnecessary loading screens is a cheap and unfun element that should be removed.</blockquote>Travel wasn't "made longer" by having load screens. It's not as if we were able to travel directly without loading screens for some time and the developers came along and said "well, that's enough of that...we need to make travel longer by adding in load screens".The point is that travel was once much longer and was shortened - significantly - through the use of bells. Could they consolidate bells? Sure, but the point I'm making (and others as well) is that the bells which have been consolidated are being treated as rewards - rewards which take a measure of effort to gain and maintain. These bells are available to anyone - ANYONE willing to put forth such effort through gameplay.Introducing bells outside of the guild reward system affects a reward guilds currently have. Obviously this reward has value - apparently significant value for some. Consolidating the bells outside of guildhalls would reduce some/all of the value of the guild purchased bells. Therefore, this isn't so much an question of "are loading screens fun" for many of us, so much as it is an question of "why should we devalue a guild reward?"</blockquote>Do banks have a value? If so what value do they hold to the Guild when any player in the game can walk into just about any city as well as some out posts and bank? Did guild's cheapen the experience of the person who worked hard to gain faction in Kunzar so they could bank there?No I would say that being able to have a Banker in the Guild Hall is a great convenience even if any player can use pretty much any city to bank in. So how does this differ from modifying the dock bells to add a similair system off the docks? Would it still not be a convenience for your players, especially the low level adventure crafters to have that added portability?I think there is some confusion here between the value of having a convienence versey having exclusivity. I prefer to craft in our guild hall because I can use the harvest depot and writ givers to easily level in a nice enviornment; however there is nothing that I can do there that I can't do as a regular adventurer, guilded or not.

Kendricke

01-23-2009, 07:58 PM

Whether they change the bells or not would have a minimal effect on my personal gameplay. As I said earlier, if the bells were changed, I would probably rethink whether or not our guild has such a bell at all, but that would be it. If we kept the bells, I'd use them. If not, I'd go to Qeynos Harbor and use them.That said, even if the bells weren't consolidated within guild halls, I wouldn't feel that the bells should be consolidated. In fact, at one point you could directly zone to Feerrott or Enchanted Lands from the Harbormasters in Qeynos Harbor...but the developers removed this functionality intentionally at one point to shift the "hubs" out to Thundering Steppes and Nektulos Forest. Should they decide to put the tickets back on the Harbormasters (I think they cost a few gold at the time), it's not going to destroy my game, but neither do I feel it's necessary.I think a lot of choices have been made by the developers to shift focus toward guilds. Though I don't have access to the data, I'd be willing to wager that SOE can easily determine that guilded players tend to stick with the game longer than players who do not. I've attended design panels at various conferences which discussed ways in which designers could try to attract guilds to their games. There are more and more articles being written about the importance of guilds in more traditional MMO models. As newer MMOs launch, they release with more and more "exclusive" guild functionality. In Everquest II, any player can join or create a guild. Any player can utilize the existing game mechanics to gain the benefits of guilds. Personally, I don't think it's an accident that the developers removed direct access from the Harbormasters. Personally, I don't think it's an accident that the developers put consolidated bells in the PVP servers but did not for PVE. I don't think it's an accident that guilds have access to a consolidated bell amenity that unguilded players do not. You might, but I do not. I think it was an intentional decision.

Thunndar316

01-23-2009, 08:04 PM

<cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>scruffylookin wrote:</cite><blockquote>It's not about easy travel. It's about removing a feature that makes no sense whatsoever.</blockquote>The original system in beta was "no bells". No, really. There were going to be boats which moved us from point A to point B. In fact, I think I still have screenshots of myself on a boat heading north along the Antonican coast from Coldwind Point to Thundering Steppes. The original Antonica to Steppes bell didn't exist - you either hoofed it on foot or you waited for the boat. By game launch, we had the original bell system. There were access quests/level restrictions to enter any zones past Steppes/Nektulos at this time. If you wanted to access Enchanted Lands, you had to gather a group and defeat the Maid of the Mist encounter or you waited till you levelled up more. Even then, it's not like you could just bell to Nektulos and just turn around and bell to Lavastorm. Lavastorm's bell was on the far end of Enchanted Lands originally. Eventually, they changed the bell system to turn Steppes and Nektulos docks into a "travel hub". They added in some gigglegibbers and questgivers there, and shifted bells to those docks toward that end.This didn't work out so well on PVP servers, though...so they shifted the "hubs" back to the safezone cities of Qeynos and Freeport. That's why the choice was made specifically and only for PVP servers. It's not as if the developers completely forgot to switch the code on for the PVE servers - it was a conscious decision on their part to make this change only exist on the PVP servers.This is why we have a "feature" that "makes no sense whatsoever". It wasn't in at release. The original system that was being considered wasn't even in at release. It just evolved that way slowly and over time. Yet, as with all things, as the system is made easier over time, more is demanded. It's just never enough, and this is how slippery slopes are created.I remember the old days where you had to run a zone to get to the next bell. The current system is unbelievably faster and easier than the old system. However, it's apparently not easy or fast enough for some. Truly, I look forward to the day where I might log into the game and on my character select screen I choose not only who to play, but what zone to start them in.</blockquote>WAH! I had it hard so everybody else must suffer as much loading as possible.The multiple loading screens are stupid and pointless. Click,, zone, click, zone, click, zone, click, zone. It's totally unnecessary and should be removed from the game.

Kendricke

01-23-2009, 08:08 PM

<cite>Thunndar316 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>scruffylookin wrote:</cite><blockquote>It's not about easy travel. It's about removing a feature that makes no sense whatsoever.</blockquote>The original system in beta was "no bells". No, really. There were going to be boats which moved us from point A to point B. In fact, I think I still have screenshots of myself on a boat heading north along the Antonican coast from Coldwind Point to Thundering Steppes. The original Antonica to Steppes bell didn't exist - you either hoofed it on foot or you waited for the boat. By game launch, we had the original bell system. There were access quests/level restrictions to enter any zones past Steppes/Nektulos at this time. If you wanted to access Enchanted Lands, you had to gather a group and defeat the Maid of the Mist encounter or you waited till you levelled up more. Even then, it's not like you could just bell to Nektulos and just turn around and bell to Lavastorm. Lavastorm's bell was on the far end of Enchanted Lands originally. Eventually, they changed the bell system to turn Steppes and Nektulos docks into a "travel hub". They added in some gigglegibbers and questgivers there, and shifted bells to those docks toward that end.This didn't work out so well on PVP servers, though...so they shifted the "hubs" back to the safezone cities of Qeynos and Freeport. That's why the choice was made specifically and only for PVP servers. It's not as if the developers completely forgot to switch the code on for the PVE servers - it was a conscious decision on their part to make this change only exist on the PVP servers.This is why we have a "feature" that "makes no sense whatsoever". It wasn't in at release. The original system that was being considered wasn't even in at release. It just evolved that way slowly and over time. Yet, as with all things, as the system is made easier over time, more is demanded. It's just never enough, and this is how slippery slopes are created.I remember the old days where you had to run a zone to get to the next bell. The current system is unbelievably faster and easier than the old system. However, it's apparently not easy or fast enough for some. Truly, I look forward to the day where I might log into the game and on my character select screen I choose not only who to play, but what zone to start them in.</blockquote>WAH! I had it hard so everybody else must suffer as much loading as possible.The multiple loading screens are stupid and pointless. Click,, zone, click, zone, click, zone, click, zone. It's totally unnecessary and should be removed from the game.</blockquote><a href="http://revolutionef.eq2guilds.org/onepage.vm?articleId=166751&detailed=1" target="_blank">Ask your guild then.</a>

Oh

01-23-2009, 09:41 PM

<cite>scruffylookin wrote:</cite><blockquote>Kendricke, I don't mean this in any disrespectful way, but I really think you're missing the point I'm making here. Maybe I'm just not successfully getting my point across here.I do NOT want easier travel. I prefer longer, harder travel. I was playing the game shortly after launch and I played EQ1 and never minded the boat rides. At all.I would prefer the travel be like it was at launch (or even as you describe in Beta). I loved the fact that Nek and TS had no Griffons, and when my first character went to see the commonlands, the journey took a very, very long time and the journey (especially through Nek forest) was extremely dangerous. I would still prefer there be no Griffons through Nek and I still wish the journey through Nek was more dangerous for lowbies. I am not--in any way, shape, or form--saying I prefer easier travel. I do not want it. I would prefer longer, tougher travel. But I want that travel to be part of the gameplay.But it's here (to my own chagrin). And now travelling isn't anything more than clicking a bell. Before, long and hard travel was a game play element. That made sense and I loved it. Making travel longer to increase immersion = awesome. Making travel longer by having extra, unnecessary loading screens is a cheap and unfun element that should be removed. That's not gameplay. It's a lack of gameplay. Literally.Again, I think you think I'm making a point I'm not making.</blockquote>I think I understand, you just don't want the loading screens or atleast as many. Maybe instead of having all of those "free" bells around they should be removed from the world then you can have your "dangerous" travel back? I don't think that is a good solution either. Right now there is a condrum which simply put one of the perks to owning a guild hall is that your number of "loading screens" are reduced. In order to get this "perk" thou, guilds have to shell out lots of plat and status to get the amentites, and then of course upkeep costs. (read this as a plat and status sink) What I have YET to see as a constructive arguement on removing the number of loading screens is what would you replace that exact same PLAT and status cost for guild halls that would actually be benificial the same way less loading zones is benificial. Oh and when you replace it to make it something that others that don't have a guild hall won't whine about that they have to do it the "hard" or "long" or "lot's of zoneing" way.Today the only solution to the problem of a lot of loading screen's is to simply be part of a guild. Is that the best solution? For me yes, but I can't say that is the same for everyone. Also on a side note, even before guild halls I really didn't mind the amount of zoneing.. You ask why? I will tell you, because I would take that time upfront to get to where I was going to hunt/quest and then I would just stay there till my bags were full, maybe done for the night, or maybe completed the zone. Oh and for me zoneing isn't an issue, really it doesn't take that long per screen, granted it is boring stairing at the screens, but meh it could be that we would have to take the boat which to me is alot worse, then stairing at a screen.

erin

01-23-2009, 09:56 PM

<cite>Thunndar316 wrote:</cite><blockquote>WAH! I had it hard so everybody else must suffer as much loading as possible.The multiple loading screens are stupid and pointless. Click,, zone, click, zone, click, zone, click, zone. It's totally unnecessary and should be removed from the game.</blockquote>How? By putting bells to anywhere in the places where there are bells now? That doesn't exactly answer the OPs request for danger <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />Plus my guild wants their money and status back for the amenities we bought if everyone gets this.And most guild halls have bells, and most are not exclusive to guild members, AFAIK.

Spyderbite

01-23-2009, 10:04 PM

<cite>Ohiv wrote:</cite><blockquote>Today the only solution to the problem of a lot of loading screen's is to simply be part of a guild. Is that the best solution?</blockquote>Thus my solution.. take the Harbormasters off of the PvP servers and put them on the PvE servers and inflate the price for a ticket. Thus the volume of consumers equals the amount a guild invests on the same convenience.

scruffylookin

01-23-2009, 10:13 PM

<cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>scruffylookin wrote:</cite><blockquote> Before, long and hard travel was a game play element. That made sense and I loved it. Making travel longer to increase immersion = awesome. Making travel longer by having extra, unnecessary loading screens is a cheap and unfun element that should be removed.</blockquote>Travel wasn't "made longer" by having load screens. It's not as if we were able to travel directly without loading screens for some time and the developers came along and said "well, that's enough of that...we need to make travel longer by adding in load screens".The point is that travel was once much longer and was shortened - significantly - through the use of bells. Could they consolidate bells? Sure, but the point I'm making (and others as well) is that the bells which have been consolidated are being treated as rewards - rewards which take a measure of effort to gain and maintain. These bells are available to anyone - ANYONE willing to put forth such effort through gameplay.Introducing bells outside of the guild reward system affects a reward guilds currently have. Obviously this reward has value - apparently significant value for some. Consolidating the bells outside of guildhalls would reduce some/all of the value of the guild purchased bells. Therefore, this isn't so much an question of "are loading screens fun" for many of us, so much as it is an question of "why should we devalue a guild reward?"</blockquote>To the first part, I agree with you. That also makes me think that the extra loading screens are either an oversight, a left-over from a past structure, or they were intentionally left to extend the time it takes for a player to get somewhere. I seriously doubt those extra loading screens were left with the explicit purpose of one day giving it exclusively to guilds. Either way, I think it's a mistake. If they're going to commit to easing up on the travel time, they should consolodate those bells. If they want to extend travel time, it should be an in-game mechanic, not an additional loading screen that does nothing to add to the immersion of the game.I don't think this has anything to do with guilds, personally. Unless I'm mistaken, the majority of guild rewards are also available in the cities. The reward isn't the item itself. The reward is the fact that you can make your guild a self-sustaining entity. consolidating the bells won't change or devalue that. If you disagree with that assertion, I certainly don't fault you for it, but I personally don't feel removing an extra loading screen or two would do anything but help the playability of this game, for everyone.And the impact would be very small to everyone that doesn't use them anyway. It would only help the folks that it bothers, and it wouldn't hurt the folks that it doesn't bother. You even stated that the impact to you personally would be very small. I personally want everyone to have as much fun as possible and this would help.

erin

01-23-2009, 10:17 PM

<cite>scruffylookin wrote:</cite><blockquote>That also makes me think that the extra loading screens are either an oversight, a left-over from a past structure, or they were intentionally left to extend the time it takes for a player to get somewhere. I seriously doubt those extra loading screens were left with the explicit purpose of one day giving it exclusively to guilds.</blockquote>I'm sorry, you lost me. What extra loading screens? There's one per zone you pass into...

Zarador

01-24-2009, 02:15 AM

<cite>scruffylookin wrote:</cite><blockquote>I don't think this has anything to do with guilds, personally. Unless I'm mistaken, the majority of guild rewards are also available in the cities. The reward isn't the item itself. The reward is the fact that you can make your guild a self-sustaining entity. consolidating the bells won't change or devalue that. If you disagree with that assertion, I certainly don't fault you for it, but I personally don't feel removing an extra loading screen or two would do anything but help the playability of this game, for everyone.</blockquote>Exactly what I have been trying to express...Lets look at that situation. Your a low level adventurer and a high level crafter like many players in the game. Now, if your in a guild with portals, and that guild hall just happens to be in the opposite alignment (as ours is a T-1 in Freeport); then you simply walk up to a portal and safely get to the destination, non-stop.Now if you happen to not have access to those portals you port home, head out to a dock and head to your destination.So how can guilds with portals respond that making less loading screens eliminates the benifit they received? Clearly there are mail boxes, bankers and brokers available in almost any city zone, yet they seem to be quite popular in guild halls?Their a convienance, not an excluse perk like some other guild rewards. The other factor of course is that both guilded and unguilded players would benefit from less loading screens since your not always using a guild portal to get around.Personally, I would love to see less loading screens or even less bells for that matter in some areas. Raise the ticket price if you like, I would gladly pay extra for a longer trip since it would still be a choice to take the multi-stop route I would imagine. I just don't see how people can say they dislike all the loading screens, but they earned the right to negate them simply because they feel only select players should not be effected by them. If you can't see how having portals and every other amenity imaginable in a central place you call your own is being rewarded for your effort then something is wrong.

erin

01-24-2009, 10:21 AM

<cite>Zarador wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>scruffylookin wrote:</cite><blockquote>I don't think this has anything to do with guilds, personally. Unless I'm mistaken, the majority of guild rewards are also available in the cities. The reward isn't the item itself. The reward is the fact that you can make your guild a self-sustaining entity. consolidating the bells won't change or devalue that. If you disagree with that assertion, I certainly don't fault you for it, but I personally don't feel removing an extra loading screen or two would do anything but help the playability of this game, for everyone.</blockquote>Exactly what I have been trying to express...Lets look at that situation. Your a low level adventurer and a high level crafter like many players in the game. Now, if your in a guild with portals, and that guild hall just happens to be in the opposite alignment (as ours is a T-1 in Freeport); then you simply walk up to a portal and safely get to the destination, non-stop.Now if you happen to not have access to those portals you port home, head out to a dock and head to your destination.So how can guilds with portals respond that making less loading screens eliminates the benifit they received? Clearly there are mail boxes, bankers and brokers available in almost any city zone, yet they seem to be quite popular in guild halls?Their a convienance, not an excluse perk like some other guild rewards. The other factor of course is that both guilded and unguilded players would benefit from less loading screens since your not always using a guild portal to get around.Personally, I would love to see less loading screens or even less bells for that matter in some areas. Raise the ticket price if you like, I would gladly pay extra for a longer trip since it would still be a choice to take the multi-stop route I would imagine. I just don't see how people can say they dislike all the loading screens, but they earned the right to negate them simply because they feel only select players should not be effected by them. If you can't see how having portals and every other amenity imaginable in a central place you call your own is being rewarded for your effort then something is wrong.</blockquote>It had to turn into a guild jealousy thread I guess...

scruffylookin

01-24-2009, 02:47 PM

<cite>erin wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Zarador wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>scruffylookin wrote:</cite><blockquote>I don't think this has anything to do with guilds, personally. Unless I'm mistaken, the majority of guild rewards are also available in the cities. The reward isn't the item itself. The reward is the fact that you can make your guild a self-sustaining entity. consolidating the bells won't change or devalue that. If you disagree with that assertion, I certainly don't fault you for it, but I personally don't feel removing an extra loading screen or two would do anything but help the playability of this game, for everyone.</blockquote>Exactly what I have been trying to express...Lets look at that situation. Your a low level adventurer and a high level crafter like many players in the game. Now, if your in a guild with portals, and that guild hall just happens to be in the opposite alignment (as ours is a T-1 in Freeport); then you simply walk up to a portal and safely get to the destination, non-stop.Now if you happen to not have access to those portals you port home, head out to a dock and head to your destination.So how can guilds with portals respond that making less loading screens eliminates the benifit they received? Clearly there are mail boxes, bankers and brokers available in almost any city zone, yet they seem to be quite popular in guild halls?Their a convienance, not an excluse perk like some other guild rewards. The other factor of course is that both guilded and unguilded players would benefit from less loading screens since your not always using a guild portal to get around.Personally, I would love to see less loading screens or even less bells for that matter in some areas. Raise the ticket price if you like, I would gladly pay extra for a longer trip since it would still be a choice to take the multi-stop route I would imagine. I just don't see how people can say they dislike all the loading screens, but they earned the right to negate them simply because they feel only select players should not be effected by them. If you can't see how having portals and every other amenity imaginable in a central place you call your own is being rewarded for your effort then something is wrong.</blockquote>It had to turn into a guild jealousy thread I guess...</blockquote>I don't see one thing in his post (or mine) that hints at guild jealousy. He talks about his guild in the first paragraph, and raises the point that this suggestion helps guilded players as well. I am, and always have been, a huge supporter in guilds having perks. I have absolutely no idea how you translated what's written above into a post that's about guild jealousy.

Rijacki

01-24-2009, 03:42 PM

PvE server ticket master in Qeynos Harbor and East Freeport:<img src="http://www.eq2alchemy.com/rijacki/SS/PvEtickets.jpg" width="477" height="471" />PvP server ticket master in Qeynos Harbor and East Freeport:<img src="http://www.eq2alchemy.com/rijacki/SS/PvPtickets.jpg" width="483" height="522" />In my opinion, the other tickets should be added to the PvE servers, to the same ticket sellers.Those who want to pay themselves can. Those who want to use a guild amentity can. There would still be a cost for convenience, just a difference in who pays for it.

erin

01-24-2009, 04:33 PM

<cite>Rijacki wrote:</cite><blockquote>PvE server ticket master in Qeynos Harbor and East Freeport:<img src="http://www.eq2alchemy.com/rijacki/SS/PvEtickets.jpg" width="477" height="471" />PvP server ticket master in Qeynos Harbor and East Freeport:<img src="http://www.eq2alchemy.com/rijacki/SS/PvPtickets.jpg" width="483" height="522" />In my opinion, the other tickets should be added to the PvE servers, to the same ticket sellers.Those who want to pay themselves can. Those who want to use a guild amentity can. There would still be a cost for convenience, just a difference in who pays for it.</blockquote>If this was on the PvE server, I suspect most guilds would not put out 10pp initially and 20g per week for just the mariner's bell: shattered lands amenity, not to mention all the others. I'm fine with this being put into the game as long as all guilds get a refund on their travel amenities. That's fair.

madha

01-24-2009, 04:43 PM

<cite>erin wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Rijacki wrote:</cite><blockquote>PvE server ticket master in Qeynos Harbor and East Freeport:<img src="http://www.eq2alchemy.com/rijacki/SS/PvEtickets.jpg" width="477" height="471" />PvP server ticket master in Qeynos Harbor and East Freeport:<img src="http://www.eq2alchemy.com/rijacki/SS/PvPtickets.jpg" width="483" height="522" />In my opinion, the other tickets should be added to the PvE servers, to the same ticket sellers.Those who want to pay themselves can. Those who want to use a guild amentity can. There would still be a cost for convenience, just a difference in who pays for it.</blockquote>If this was on the PvE server, I suspect most guilds would not put out 10pp initially and 20g per week for just the mariner's bell: shattered lands amenity, not to mention all the others. I'm fine with this being put into the game as long as all guilds get a refund on their travel amenities. That's fair.</blockquote>Im fine if guilds get a refund. They should also get a refund if they drop their bank, merchant, wirt npc, aa npc, and well every other amenity that guilds can purchase casue they are in almost every city zone. Just because non guild hall people get a perk thats available on pvp servcers doenst mean guild halls deserver a refund. Heck guild hall users get a extra call home thast what 15min recast, its always up rdy to call home. I say a trade off make guild call 45 min like all the other calls merge the bells and refund guild halls full price if they drop their bells. How many guilds use more then the shatterd lands bell anyway?

Kendricke

01-24-2009, 05:21 PM

<cite>Rijacki wrote:</cite><blockquote>PvP server ticket master in Qeynos Harbor and East Freeport:<img src="http://www.eq2alchemy.com/rijacki/SS/PvPtickets.jpg" width="483" height="522" />In my opinion, the other tickets should be added to the PvE servers, to the same ticket sellers.Those who want to pay themselves can. Those who want to use a guild amentity can. There would still be a cost for convenience, just a difference in who pays for it.</blockquote>We should also have Qeynosian Shadowknights, Guildhalls for Exiles, and PVP-specific gear sets, right? I can take a lot - a LOT of screenshots from PVP servers for PVP-specific items/features/differences. That doesn't mean those changes should exist on PVE servers just because.Honestly, it's not as if those options didn't exist on PVE servers at one point already. The developers made specfic, deliberate, conscious decisions to remove those additional tickets from the harbormasters. I get that some players feel the options should be made more widely available. I guess I personally feel that the options ARE widely available already.

scruffylookin

01-24-2009, 06:35 PM

<cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Rijacki wrote:</cite><blockquote>PvP server ticket master in Qeynos Harbor and East Freeport:<img src="http://www.eq2alchemy.com/rijacki/SS/PvPtickets.jpg" width="483" height="522" />In my opinion, the other tickets should be added to the PvE servers, to the same ticket sellers.Those who want to pay themselves can. Those who want to use a guild amentity can. There would still be a cost for convenience, just a difference in who pays for it.</blockquote>We should also have Qeynosian Shadowknights, Guildhalls for Exiles, and PVP-specific gear sets, right? I can take a lot - a LOT of screenshots from PVP servers for PVP-specific items/features/differences. That doesn't mean those changes should exist on PVE servers just because.Honestly, it's not as if those options didn't exist on PVE servers at one point already. The developers made specfic, deliberate, conscious decisions to remove those additional tickets from the harbormasters. I get that some players feel the options should be made more widely available. I guess I personally feel that the options ARE widely available already.</blockquote>Whether or not the removal of these bells is deliverate is really not relevant to the feedback. The OP isn't pointing out something he believes the devs are unaware of. He's giving his own feedback about the bells. Whether or not it's a deliberate decision has very little bearing on that feedback.And I (very respectfully) disagree with you about guilds removing them if this were added. This is just a guess, as I obviously don't have the numbers to back it up, but I would wager that this is still a widely used perk on those same PVP servers that have these harbor tickets. About the refund suggested by Erin, I think that's fine. If the addition of extra bells really caused a guild to want to get a refund and remove their own bells, I think it should happen.I dont think that request will come through very often. Just out of curiosity, I asked a friend (who's an officer in one of our server's largest raid guilds) if his guild would have a problem with this change. He said there's no way they'd remove their bells, regardless of whether or not they were in the harbors. He added that removing the extra bells on the docks would make it less inconvenient for them to group with (and eventually recruit) unguilded players. As it stands, they rarely group with people who aren't in their guild simply because it's more convenient to meet up with guild members. So the removal of these extra bell-jumps would increase (even if on a tiny level) interaction between the guilded and the unguilded.Bottom line for me: This would have little or no impact on guilds and it would have a positive impact on the unguilded.

Rijacki

01-24-2009, 07:12 PM

<cite>scruffylookin wrote:</cite><blockquote>Bottom line for me: This would have little or no impact on guilds and it would have a positive impact on the unguilded.</blockquote>I agree. I also think anyone who saw adding shattered lands tickets to the docks as threatening to guilds is exagerating more than just a little.The amenity could co-exist nicely with additional tickets being offered as a convenience for unguilded or those not wanting to go to guild hall. It's not on -every- dock, just the Qeynos main dock and the Freeport main dock. It might even encourage a few people to spend time in the original cities, too.

Oh

01-24-2009, 11:19 PM

<cite>Rijacki wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>scruffylookin wrote:</cite><blockquote>Bottom line for me: This would have little or no impact on guilds and it would have a positive impact on the unguilded.</blockquote>I agree. I also think anyone who saw adding shattered lands tickets to the docks as threatening to guilds is exagerating more than just a little.The amenity could co-exist nicely with additional tickets being offered as a convenience for unguilded or those not wanting to go to guild hall. It's not on -every- dock, just the Qeynos main dock and the Freeport main dock. It might even encourage a few people to spend time in the original cities, too.</blockquote>I also agree (not that means anything since it's the developers that would need to agree) that adding these tickets would be a nice inbetween solution to what this thread is about. NOW if you don't have a guild you have an option, that wasn't presented before. I am sure there will be more whine threads about how it costs too much (frankly I think the prices are dirt cheap), or how there are still too many loading screens even if this was made (some folks are never happy). It doesn't infringe on the guild hall one bit, since I still have my 15 minuite guild hall call, and I would still keep the bell that we have just because it's still a very nice perk.

Spyderbite

01-24-2009, 11:47 PM

<cite>Ohiv wrote:</cite><blockquote>I am sure there will be more whine threads about how it costs too much (frankly I think the prices are dirt cheap), or how there are still too many loading screens even if this was made (some folks are never happy). It doesn't infringe on the guild hall one bit, since I still have my 15 minuite guild hall call, and I would still keep the bell that we have just because it's still a very nice perk.</blockquote>Actually, pre-guild halls, we always included "please bring at least <insert gold amount for transport here> before meeting up" in the raid announcements.But, you're right.. there is bound to be people with 12 plat in the bank but complaining that they have to shell out 14 silver for transfer.. it's human nature.

liveja

01-25-2009, 10:39 AM

<cite>Rijacki wrote:</cite><blockquote>In my opinion, the other tickets should be added to the PvE servers, to the same ticket sellers.</blockquote>In my opinion, they should be removed entirely from the PvP servers, which I think are already too much Candy Land as it is.

Lethe5683

01-25-2009, 03:50 PM

<cite>Flaye@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Rijacki wrote:</cite><blockquote>In my opinion, the other tickets should be added to the PvE servers, to the same ticket sellers.</blockquote>In my opinion, they should be removed entirely from the PvP servers, which I think are already too much Candy Land as it is.</blockquote>IMO bells should be removed and tickets should just make it so when you wait for the boat and get on it when your're about to zone it brings you to the destination of whereever you bought a ticket for.

Zarador

01-26-2009, 12:35 AM

<cite>erin wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Rijacki wrote:</cite><blockquote>PvE server ticket master in Qeynos Harbor and East Freeport:<img src="http://www.eq2alchemy.com/rijacki/SS/PvEtickets.jpg" width="477" height="471" />PvP server ticket master in Qeynos Harbor and East Freeport:<img src="http://www.eq2alchemy.com/rijacki/SS/PvPtickets.jpg" width="483" height="522" />In my opinion, the other tickets should be added to the PvE servers, to the same ticket sellers.Those who want to pay themselves can. Those who want to use a guild amentity can. There would still be a cost for convenience, just a difference in who pays for it.</blockquote>If this was on the PvE server, I suspect most guilds would not put out 10pp initially and 20g per week for just the mariner's bell: shattered lands amenity, not to mention all the others. I'm fine with this being put into the game as long as all guilds get a refund on their travel amenities. That's fair.</blockquote>It's fair as you say, but I suspect your wrong in most cases on them not wanting the guild portals. Our Guild Hall is in South Freeport. Most of us can walk out the door and be 5 seconds from a Broker, Mailbox and Banker. I still would have purchased the Broker, Banker and mailbox even if we were all evil aligned characters. Log In to the game and do everything you need in your Guild Hall, gate home out the end of the night, again do everything you need to do in the hall. That's what the halls are all about. It's "our own private city".I would also add that travel expense is hardly an issue for the majority of players who have guild halls. They use the portals because they are convienient, not because they are cheap to use. The goal for most guilds is to have a self sufficient microcosim that they helped to build where they can do almost everything they can do in any city in their own private hall. Look at the "Horse Vendor". Seriously, how often do you purchase a horse for a character? Enough times to make it so you don't wish to travel to that city or zone to make that purchase? Yet, you can purchase a horse vendor for the guild hall and some guilds do.Edit: Almost forgot...What about that little fast refreshing thing that we call "Return to Guild Hall"? "Joe Unguilded" gets out in the middle of no where and a friend logs in. Too bad he just used his "Call of the Overlord" 10 minutes ago. Looks like he's going to have to trek back to the nearest dock and head out to meet his friend. "Joe Guilded" just uses his return to guild hall and hits the portals. Yeah, I still see guilds keeping the portals to keep the members happy.

Faenril

01-26-2009, 06:18 AM

so ... To those against the idea ... Why did you put a banker or broker in your guild hall ? After all those are widely available in the cities and throughout the world...

Rijacki

01-26-2009, 12:14 PM

<cite>Faenril@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote>so ... To those against the idea ... Why did you put a banker or broker in your guild hall ? After all those are widely available in the cities and throughout the world...</blockquote>and mender and status signet seller, etc.

Natturabi

01-26-2009, 12:44 PM

<cite>Faenril@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote>so ... To those against the idea ... Why did you put a banker or broker in your guild hall ? After all those are widely available in the cities and throughout the world...</blockquote> Convenience. I stated before "time is money" which somebody disagreed with, but hey it's just a philosophy. I think it is the ultimate to zone into my guildhall and have all the comforts of town in one location. Note: Oathsworn in my sig is a large guild with a T3 castle and all amenities. I also have a "vanity" guild with a few friends that has a T1 hall and 14 or so amenities. My T1 guildhall is designed for function over style, and has virtually no decoration other than the amenities themselves. It takes less time to zone into this hall then the average loading screen. If there were towns you could zone into and have all meaningful NPCs standing to the left, all forms of transportation straight ahead and fully inclusive crafting area to the right, I doubt I would have spent over 100p to purchase and 150p yearly upkeep to recreate my own town. But you can't, so I am willing to spend what I have earned to simplify my characters existance. Some people are looking for a new amenity to offer guilds should the bells be improved or consolidated. How about one that combines the bells and the rally flag. Like a five slot teleporter you can assign specific locations for. Favorite raiding locations, hard to get to places, etc.

Faenril

01-26-2009, 01:33 PM

<cite>Guillermo@Butcherblock wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Faenril@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote>so ... To those against the idea ... Why did you put a banker or broker in your guild hall ? After all those are widely available in the cities and throughout the world...</blockquote> Convenience. I stated before "time is money" which somebody disagreed with, but hey it's just a philosophy. I think it is the ultimate to zone into my guildhall and have all the comforts of town in one location. Note: Oathsworn in my sig is a large guild with a T3 castle and all amenities. I also have a "vanity" guild with a few friends that has a T1 hall and 14 or so amenities. My T1 guildhall is designed for function over style, and has virtually no decoration other than the amenities themselves. It takes less time to zone into this hall then the average loading screen. If there were towns you could zone into and have all meaningful NPCs standing to the left, all forms of transportation straight ahead and fully inclusive crafting area to the right, I doubt I would have spent over 100p to purchase and 150p yearly upkeep to recreate my own town. But you can't, so I am willing to spend what I have earned to simplify my characters existance. Some people are looking for a new amenity to offer guilds should the bells be improved or consolidated. How about one that combines the bells and the rally flag. Like a five slot teleporter you can assign specific locations for. Favorite raiding locations, hard to get to places, etc.</blockquote>Exactly !Guild amenities are not valuable because of their function, which is not exclusive to guilds for most of them.Guild amenities are valuable because they are centralized, they are convenient, and last but not least they are "yours".

Kendricke

01-26-2009, 01:55 PM

Just so I can keep up on the ever evolving arguments being used here, it seems as though the current arguments for consolidation basically fall back on one of two justifications:<ul><li>1 - PVP servers have it, so PVE should, too.</li><li>2 - Guild halls have it, so non-guilded players should, too.</li></ul>Does that sum it up? I just want to make sure I'm understanding the logic being presented here.

Natturabi

01-26-2009, 02:08 PM

<cite>Faenril@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Guillermo@Butcherblock wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Faenril@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote>so ... To those against the idea ... Why did you put a banker or broker in your guild hall ? After all those are widely available in the cities and throughout the world...</blockquote> Convenience. I stated before "time is money" which somebody disagreed with, but hey it's just a philosophy. I think it is the ultimate to zone into my guildhall and have all the comforts of town in one location. Note: Oathsworn in my sig is a large guild with a T3 castle and all amenities. I also have a "vanity" guild with a few friends that has a T1 hall and 14 or so amenities. My T1 guildhall is designed for function over style, and has virtually no decoration other than the amenities themselves. It takes less time to zone into this hall then the average loading screen. If there were towns you could zone into and have all meaningful NPCs standing to the left, all forms of transportation straight ahead and fully inclusive crafting area to the right, I doubt I would have spent over 100p to purchase and 150p yearly upkeep to recreate my own town. But you can't, so I am willing to spend what I have earned to simplify my characters existance. Some people are looking for a new amenity to offer guilds should the bells be improved or consolidated. How about one that combines the bells and the rally flag. Like a five slot teleporter you can assign specific locations for. Favorite raiding locations, hard to get to places, etc.</blockquote>Exactly !Guild amenities are not valuable because of their function, which is not exclusive to guilds for most of them.Guild amenities are valuable because they are centralized, they are convenient, and last but not least they are "yours".</blockquote> Function is a big part of the allure too. To go directly to say, Everfrost, as opposed to going thru several loading screens is a bonus. It has a cost and a reward. I like to read between the lines and I would wager that the OP is more upset about the length of load screens than the quantity. (i.e. hardware issues). So it comes to a choice of three 2 minute load screens or a five minute zone in to guildhall then 2 minutes to go to where they are headed. Given that choice he would rather say they both are lousy options and come here to complain. So I am presuming that some people don't want to zone into a huge sprawling guildhall just to use the transportation amenities. It stands to reason that these people would still stand on the spires for up to five minutes to get to KoS, or stand on a dock for four minutes to catch a ride (and still get loading screens). These two examples are "features" of the game, and much more annoying than the loading screens themselves. I really don't want to come across as an uncaring individual, and I do understand that downtime in game can drive people away. But travel throughtout the world is a commodity, and as the world expands thru expansions and whatnot, faster steeds and alternate forms of travel will make themselves known I am sure.

Nulad

01-26-2009, 02:35 PM

<cite>Guillermo@Butcherblock wrote:</cite><blockquote> I like to read between the lines and I would wager that the OP is more upset about the length of load screens than the quantity. (i.e. hardware issues). So it comes to a choice of three 2 minute load screens or a five minute zone in to guildhall then 2 minutes to go to where they are headed. Given that choice he would rather say they both are lousy options and come here to complain. </blockquote>You'd be wrong, there is no reading between the lines, I stated what I feel in my post, that doing virtually nothing but clicking between different loading screens is not fun regardless of how long they do or do not take.

Dasein

01-26-2009, 03:17 PM

<cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote>Just so I can keep up on the ever evolving arguments being used here, it seems as though the current arguments for consolidation basically fall back on one of two justifications:<ul><li>1 - PVP servers have it, so PVE should, too.</li><li>2 - Guild halls have it, so non-guilded players should, too.</li></ul>Does that sum it up? I just want to make sure I'm understanding the logic being presented here.</blockquote>No, I'd say that the primary reason is that it cuts down on unnecessary loading, which some people see as having a negative impact on the technical performance of the game. That the same functionality exists on PvP servers and in guild halls is evidence that such a change would be fairly easy to make. However, the primary argument is not that because others have it, everyone should, but that giving it to everyone in the form of a single bell would make the game better overall, and would come at minimal cost (as the code to do this is already in game, just not on every server).

sliderhouserules

01-26-2009, 06:51 PM

<cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote>Just so I can keep up on the ever evolving arguments being used here, it seems as though the current arguments for consolidation basically fall back on one of two justifications:<ul><li>1 - PVP servers have it, so PVE should, too.</li><li>2 - Guild halls have it, so non-guilded players should, too.</li></ul>Does that sum it up? I just want to make sure I'm understanding the logic being presented here.</blockquote>Patronize much?

Rijacki

01-26-2009, 06:53 PM

<cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote>Just so I can keep up on the ever evolving arguments being used here, it seems as though the current arguments for consolidation basically fall back on one of two justifications:<ul><li>1 - PVP servers have it, so PVE should, too.</li><li>2 - Guild halls have it, so non-guilded players should, too.</li></ul>Does that sum it up? I just want to make sure I'm understanding the logic being presented here.</blockquote>PvP servers have an EXAMPLE of what some think would be nice to have on the PvE servers (-not- the PvP servers have it therfore the PvP should).It would be nice to have non-guild options similar to the guild-only options with the difference that the individual, rather than the guild, pay for it (not guild halls have it so non-guilded should, too).THAT sums it up.When I started up a character in Freeport on one of the PvP servers, like Spyder, I saw the various tickets being sold in East Freeport and assumed they'd been put in on all servers (I hadn't been to Qeynos or Freeport in a while... something about Neriak arasai being my most favourite race *laugh*) and thought it was a rather nice addition. I had reason, at one point, to go through Qeynos or Freeport on a PvE character after that and was actually disappointed not to see the other tickets (even though, in both cases, I was going to Nek Forest or Thundering Steppes). This was about 2-3 months or more before Guild Halls made their way even to the Test servers (pretty sure it was even pre-Fan Faire last).The devs have added a Neriak bell to Nek Forest, a Commonlands bell to Nek Forest, an Antonia Bell to Thundering Steppes, a Thundering Steppes Bell to Antonica. Does having those bells negate the convenience of a Shattered Lands bell in a Guild Hall? Do those bells mean the ticket seller in East Freeport/Qeynos Harbor should be removed even though a free bell to their destinations (on PvE servers) is only one zone away?Does having a mendor in Qeynos Harbor, South Qeynos, East Freeport, South Freeport, each of the suburbs, Commonlands, Antonica, the docks in Nek Forest, Thundering Steppes, Butcherblock, Neriak, Garowyn, etc, negate the convenience of having a mender (whether or not the guild has the mender set to the guild paying for repairs) in the guild hall? Why should there be menders in all of those locations if we have the guild hall one? Should non-guilded characters be required to only repair in Qeynos Harbour or East Freeport? why should they need other menders? They could join a guild (now) and mend in their Guild Hall if the guild chose that amenity.

Lethe5683

01-26-2009, 08:42 PM

<cite>Nuladen@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Guillermo@Butcherblock wrote:</cite><blockquote> I like to read between the lines and I would wager that the OP is more upset about the length of load screens than the quantity. (i.e. hardware issues). So it comes to a choice of three 2 minute load screens or a five minute zone in to guildhall then 2 minutes to go to where they are headed. Given that choice he would rather say they both are lousy options and come here to complain. </blockquote>You'd be wrong, there is no reading between the lines, I stated what I feel in my post, that doing virtually nothing but clicking between different loading screens is not fun regardless of how long they do or do not take.</blockquote>Your right, and farming for plat isn't fun either so I think they should give us free plat.

Armawk

01-26-2009, 08:56 PM

I find it desirable to retain a flavour of different areas, distances and of some world structure. Convenience is good, but I do not wish the game to take on the feel of a lobby/select room system, even though in a sense that is what it is.This can be achieved many ways, the ships, carpets, airships etc are one way, and I find they work very well for that purpose (some timing adjustments might be desirable mind). Having some zones accessed through other zones is another way that is quite valid, as it does create a mental sense of a journey, fake as it may be.I do have sympathy for the objection to this becoming something of a 'chain clickfest'. However given that loading screens are not in my experience now an onerous burden, being brief, and given that the number of hops is in fact never very large (I believe 3 is the realistic limit atm?), I think the suggestion of adding all zones to bells in the city is a solution in search of a problem.I could definitely envisage an improved travel system, but I would want some imagination and colour to go into it, not just more zones on the bells. I could also envisage the addition of useful information to zone loading screens (list of your current quests in that zone? layer count in that zone? map of the zone? not sure what really but something)

sliderhouserules

01-26-2009, 09:24 PM

<cite>shaunfletcher wrote:</cite><blockquote>I find it desirable to retain a flavour of different areas, distances and of some world structure. Convenience is good, but I do not wish the game to take on the feel of a lobby/select room system, even though in a sense that is what it is.This can be achieved many ways, the ships, carpets, airships etc are one way, and I find they work very well for that purpose (some timing adjustments might be desirable mind). Having some zones accessed through other zones is another way that is quite valid, as it does create a mental sense of a journey, fake as it may be.I do have sympathy for the objection to this becoming something of a 'chain clickfest'. However given that loading screens are not in my experience now an onerous burden, being brief, and given that the number of hops is in fact never very large (I believe 3 is the realistic limit atm?), I think the suggestion of adding all zones to bells in the city is a solution in search of a problem.I could definitely envisage an improved travel system, but I would want some imagination and colour to go into it, not just more zones on the bells. I could also envisage the addition of useful information to zone loading screens (list of your current quests in that zone? layer count in that zone? map of the zone? not sure what really but something)</blockquote>Because you don't have a problem, no one else does?They need a Logic 101 sticky on these forums, seriously.

Lethe5683

01-26-2009, 09:27 PM

<cite>sliderhouserules wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>shaunfletcher wrote:</cite><blockquote>I find it desirable to retain a flavour of different areas, distances and of some world structure. Convenience is good, but I do not wish the game to take on the feel of a lobby/select room system, even though in a sense that is what it is.This can be achieved many ways, the ships, carpets, airships etc are one way, and I find they work very well for that purpose (some timing adjustments might be desirable mind). Having some zones accessed through other zones is another way that is quite valid, as it does create a mental sense of a journey, fake as it may be.I do have sympathy for the objection to this becoming something of a 'chain clickfest'. However given that loading screens are not in my experience now an onerous burden, being brief, and given that the number of hops is in fact never very large (I believe 3 is the realistic limit atm?), I think the suggestion of adding all zones to bells in the city is a solution in search of a problem.I could definitely envisage an improved travel system, but I would want some imagination and colour to go into it, not just more zones on the bells. I could also envisage the addition of useful information to zone loading screens (list of your current quests in that zone? layer count in that zone? map of the zone? not sure what really but something)</blockquote>Because you don't have a problem, no one else does?They need a Logic 101 sticky on these forums, seriously.</blockquote>Just because you're too lazy to wait an extra few seconds doesn't mean they should change the game either. If it takes you a long time to zone then you need a new computer. If you can't afford a new computer than you can't afford to be spending time playing eq2 and need to get a job.

Armawk

01-26-2009, 09:31 PM

<cite>sliderhouserules wrote:</cite><blockquote>Because you don't have a problem, no one else does?They need a Logic 101 sticky on these forums, seriously.</blockquote>And one on manners too..I said I dont think it is a problem yes. I dont think the original poster described a problem, he described a suggestion that he feels would be an enhancement to the game. Someone who was suffering excessive loading screen times, or dumps to character screen on zoning a lot would have a problem in this area. Someone who would prefer not to have to zone twice does not have a problem.

sliderhouserules

01-26-2009, 10:09 PM

<cite>Lethe5683 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>sliderhouserules wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>shaunfletcher wrote:</cite><blockquote>...I think the suggestion of adding all zones to bells in the city is a solution in search of a problem....</blockquote>Because you don't have a problem, no one else does?They need a Logic 101 sticky on these forums, seriously.</blockquote>Just because you're too lazy to wait an extra few seconds doesn't mean they should change the game either. If it takes you a long time to zone then you need a new computer. If you can't afford a new computer than you can't afford to be spending time playing eq2 and need to get a job.</blockquote>I was waiting for this absurd argument to be posted to this thread. You're yet another example of needing some Logic 101 coaching."Just because you're too lazy to wait an extra few seconds doesn't mean they should change the game either." I'm not admitting to being lazy or agreeing to the absurd suggestion that laziness is the basis of desiring this change, but *even if I was* then it would absolutely be a reason for them to change the game. I am a paying customer, and in the software world you make your software do what your users want it to do. Is this always a good idea? No, but when you have enough people that want some change, or you have a good enough reason to implement a given change when only a few people want the change, then you do it. If you don't follow this general philosophy, then you will soon have no users.There are plenty of "problems" related to back-to-back loading screens as a means to make travel "longer" already posted in this thread that to deny that it is a valid issue for many people is just being purposely obtuse.

sliderhouserules

01-26-2009, 10:19 PM

<cite>shaunfletcher wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>sliderhouserules wrote:</cite><blockquote>Because you don't have a problem, no one else does?They need a Logic 101 sticky on these forums, seriously.</blockquote>And one on manners too..I said I dont think it is a problem yes. I dont think the original poster described a problem, he described a suggestion that he feels would be an enhancement to the game. Someone who was suffering excessive loading screen times, or dumps to character screen on zoning a lot would have a problem in this area. Someone who would prefer not to have to zone twice does not have a problem.</blockquote>I don't feel it is bad manners in the slightest for me to point out that someone does not have a grasp of argumentative logic. A course on Logical Fallacies is required for freshmen in nearly every college in the nation. Why? Because if you want to engage in intelligent discourse you should do yourself the favor of not looking like a fool by arguing from a fallacious perspective.I actually think it's bad manners for someone to try to argue someone else's valid point with faulty arguments.The forum rule "No personal attacks" actually has its roots in logic: <a href="http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/mathew/logic.html#hominem" target="_blank">Argumentum ad hominem</a>. This stuff has been around for centuries. It's not some niche thing only philosophers care about. It's the basis of valid, responsible human conversation and interaction.

Spyderbite

01-26-2009, 10:23 PM

<cite>sliderhouserules wrote:</cite><blockquote>I am a paying customer, and in the software world you make your software do what your users want it to do. Is this always a good idea? No, but when you have enough people that want some change, or you have a good enough reason to implement a given change when only a few people want the change, then you do it. If you don't follow this general philosophy, then you will soon have no users.I want a "Kill Anything/Anybody" sword.. I'm sure I could get enough people behind me to advocate such an idea based on that logic. /blinks I take it back.. that's absurd.There are plenty of "problems" related to back-to-back loading screens as a means to make travel "longer" already posted in this thread that to deny that it is a valid issue for many people is just being purposely obtuse.Not sure what "problems" pepople are experiencing.. but pre-guild halls, I had no issue at all jumping bells and running to my destination. Never crashed, or whatever. So, if this is an issue that is effecting everyone, wouldn't everyone be experiencing it?We're either talking about people who aren't updating their computers/device drivers or a game mechanics issue (which would effect everyone.. not just some) or laziness.</blockquote>

sliderhouserules

01-26-2009, 10:27 PM

<cite>Spyderbite@Venekor wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>sliderhouserules wrote:</cite><blockquote>I am a paying customer, and in the software world you make your software do what your users want it to do. Is this always a good idea? No, but when you have enough people that want some change, or you have a good enough reason to implement a given change when only a few people want the change, then you do it. If you don't follow this general philosophy, then you will soon have no users.I want a "Kill Anything/Anybody" sword.. I'm sure I could get enough people behind me to advocate such an idea based on that logic. /blinks I take it back.. that's absurd.Orange statement above not register for you there? I say again, a Logic 101 sticky would be <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_absurdum" target="_blank">a very good idea</a> around here...There are plenty of "problems" related to back-to-back loading screens as a means to make travel "longer" already posted in this thread that to deny that it is a valid issue for many people is just being purposely obtuse.Not sure what "problems" pepople are experiencing.. but pre-guild halls, I had no issue at all jumping bells and running to my destination. Never crashed, or whatever. So, if this is an issue that is effecting everyone, wouldn't everyone be experiencing it?We're either talking about people who aren't updating their computers/device drivers or a game mechanics issue (which would effect everyone.. not just some) or laziness.Again, check the orange text. How about checking the subject of the thread, where it mentions "fun" just for starters?</blockquote></blockquote>

Spyderbite

01-26-2009, 10:29 PM

Still trying to understand the "fun" aspect.. I love running across a zone to get to a zone in point for a raid or whatever. Why do we want to remove that again?

madha

01-26-2009, 10:49 PM

<cite>Spyderbite@Venekor wrote:</cite><blockquote>Still trying to understand the "fun" aspect.. I love running across a zone to get to a zone in point for a raid or whatever. Why do we want to remove that again?</blockquote>when im on my non guilded toon i dont want to take all day to get somewhere, how many time smust you zone into ts or nek docks before it gets old?

sliderhouserules

01-26-2009, 10:53 PM

<cite>Spyderbite@Venekor ACTUALLY said:</cite><blockquote><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man" target="_blank">I'm going to purposely misrepresent your position in a way that's superficially similar but easily refutable.</a></blockquote>The OP has already said multiple times he likes engaging travel, immersive travel, anything but loading screens for the sake of loading screens.This is tiring. I don't know why I try. I'm doing exactly what I warned Nuladen about earlier in this thread.

Armawk

01-26-2009, 11:48 PM

<cite>sliderhouserules wrote:</cite><blockquote>I don't feel it is bad manners in the slightest .......... It's the basis of valid, responsible human conversation and interaction.</blockquote>And noone here wishes to discuss it in a thread about in game travel.I maintain that while there is a lot of room for improved travel options, the original proposal to just skip intermediate zones and be able to zone directly anywhere from anywhere (which you presumably support, given your aggressive attacks on anyone who disagrees with them) is not a good idea. This is not a very controversial position on the whole.

scruffylookin

01-27-2009, 12:20 AM

<cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote>Just so I can keep up on the ever evolving arguments being used here, it seems as though the current arguments for consolidation basically fall back on one of two justifications:<ul><li>1 - PVP servers have it, so PVE should, too.</li><li>2 - Guild halls have it, so non-guilded players should, too.</li></ul>Does that sum it up? I just want to make sure I'm understanding the logic being presented here.</blockquote>No, Kendricke, that doesn't sum it up at all. Frankly, that's a gross mistatement of their argument. In this thread, I've not seen any suggestion that just because a guild hall has something, non-guilded players should have it. I've not seen a single suggestion in this thread saying that the unguilded should have guild halls, or brokers in their homes, or merchants in their homes.. As a matter of fact, almost everyone in this thread (on both sides) seems to agree that there should be rewards for guilds.The only way guild halls were brought into this was by folks saying that this fix shouldn't go through because it's a guild hall perk. The counter argument (which I think you're referencing) is simply that the vast majority of guild hall perks are available in cities, and that this should be no different. They are simply disagreeing with your assertion that it would devalue that perk for guilds. Most guilds would use them whether they're located in cities or not, because they make guild halls self-sufficient. That is the perk, not the existence of the consolidated bells.The PVP suggestion was brought in to show that this can be done. The suggestion said, "See, they do it here." It wasn't saying the fact that PVP servers have it is the reason PVE servers should have it.My point is very specifically that extra loading screens is a weak way to increase the time sink. That's all. You want longer travel times, add actual travel. Just making someone point, click, and watch a loading screen to increase the travel time is nothing but a detraction from gameplay, and it's a weak feature in a great game. It's not gameplay at all, and has nothing to do with guild halls. I've not seen a single person claiming that the unguilded should have anything just because guild halls have it. I may have missed that part, but I've not seen it suggested once.If you want a summation of my argument, it's this:I don't have a problem with the extra loading screens, and I like immersive travel in these games. However, removing the extra bell hops would (in my opinion) have little to no impact on the guilded and it would help the unguilded, so I support it. It's a positive suggestion that doesn't hurt anyone.

Zarador

01-27-2009, 12:35 AM

<cite>scruffylookin wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote>Just so I can keep up on the ever evolving arguments being used here, it seems as though the current arguments for consolidation basically fall back on one of two justifications:<ul><li>1 - PVP servers have it, so PVE should, too.</li><li>2 - Guild halls have it, so non-guilded players should, too.</li></ul>Does that sum it up? I just want to make sure I'm understanding the logic being presented here.</blockquote>No, Kendricke, that doesn't sum it up at all. Frankly, that's a gross mistatement of their argument. In this thread, I've not seen any suggestion that just because a guild hall has something, non-guilded players should have it. I've not seen a single suggestion in this thread saying that the unguilded should have guild halls, or brokers in their homes, or merchants in their homes.. As a matter of fact, almost everyone in this thread (on both sides) seems to agree that there should be rewards for guilds.The only way guild halls were brought into this was by folks saying that this fix shouldn't go through because it's a guild hall perk. The counter argument (which I think you're referencing) is simply that the vast majority of guild hall perks are available in cities, and that this should be no different. They are simply disagreeing with your assertion that it would devalue that perk for guilds. Most guilds would use them whether they're located in cities or not, because they make guild halls self-sufficient. That is the perk, not the existence of the consolidated bells.The PVP suggestion was brought in to show that this can be done. The suggestion said, "See, they do it here." It wasn't saying the fact that PVP servers have it is the reason PVE servers should have it.My point is very specifically that extra loading screens is a weak way to increase the time sink. That's all. You want longer travel times, add actual travel. Just making someone point, click, and watch a loading screen to increase the travel time is nothing but a detraction from gameplay, and it's a weak feature in a great game. It's not gameplay at all, and has nothing to do with guild halls. I've not seen a single person claiming that the unguilded should have anything just because guild halls have it. I may have missed that part, but I've not seen it suggested once.If you want a summation of my argument, it's this:I don't have a problem with the extra loading screens, and I like immersive travel in these games. However, removing the extra bell hops would (in my opinion) have little to no impact on the guilded and it would help the unguilded, so I support it. It's a positive suggestion that doesn't hurt anyone.</blockquote>QFE!As I thought about it, something seemed strange to me, from an "immersion" standpoint. Your the city of Freeport. You allow a Guild to create a home in your city and reward them with conveniences based on all they have done for you. Somehow, they were able to provide your guild with an upgraded travel system that they have not yet been able to master themselves. Seems a bit odd, does it not?Think about it, everything they have offered you for the most part is offered somewhere else in the game, yet your travel ability is far advanced to what they have to offer the citizens of their realm.

Lethe5683

01-27-2009, 12:39 AM

<cite>Zarador wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>scruffylookin wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote>Just so I can keep up on the ever evolving arguments being used here, it seems as though the current arguments for consolidation basically fall back on one of two justifications:<ul><li>1 - PVP servers have it, so PVE should, too.</li><li>2 - Guild halls have it, so non-guilded players should, too.</li></ul>Does that sum it up? I just want to make sure I'm understanding the logic being presented here.</blockquote>No, Kendricke, that doesn't sum it up at all. Frankly, that's a gross mistatement of their argument. In this thread, I've not seen any suggestion that just because a guild hall has something, non-guilded players should have it. I've not seen a single suggestion in this thread saying that the unguilded should have guild halls, or brokers in their homes, or merchants in their homes.. As a matter of fact, almost everyone in this thread (on both sides) seems to agree that there should be rewards for guilds.The only way guild halls were brought into this was by folks saying that this fix shouldn't go through because it's a guild hall perk. The counter argument (which I think you're referencing) is simply that the vast majority of guild hall perks are available in cities, and that this should be no different. They are simply disagreeing with your assertion that it would devalue that perk for guilds. Most guilds would use them whether they're located in cities or not, because they make guild halls self-sufficient. That is the perk, not the existence of the consolidated bells.The PVP suggestion was brought in to show that this can be done. The suggestion said, "See, they do it here." It wasn't saying the fact that PVP servers have it is the reason PVE servers should have it.My point is very specifically that extra loading screens is a weak way to increase the time sink. That's all. You want longer travel times, add actual travel. Just making someone point, click, and watch a loading screen to increase the travel time is nothing but a detraction from gameplay, and it's a weak feature in a great game. It's not gameplay at all, and has nothing to do with guild halls. I've not seen a single person claiming that the unguilded should have anything just because guild halls have it. I may have missed that part, but I've not seen it suggested once.If you want a summation of my argument, it's this:I don't have a problem with the extra loading screens, and I like immersive travel in these games. However, removing the extra bell hops would (in my opinion) have little to no impact on the guilded and it would help the unguilded, so I support it. It's a positive suggestion that doesn't hurt anyone.</blockquote>QFE!As I thought about it, something seemed strange to me, from an "immersion" standpoint. Your the city of Freeport. You allow a Guild to create a home in your city and reward them with conveniences based on all they have done for you. Somehow, they were able to provide your guild with an upgraded travel system that they have not yet been able to master themselves. Seems a bit odd, does it not?Think about it, everything they have offered you for the most part is offered somewhere else in the game, yet your travel ability is far advanced to what they have to offer the citizens of their realm.</blockquote>True but I don't think that means everyone else should have it too but rather that it should also be removed from guilds.

sliderhouserules

01-27-2009, 02:54 AM

<cite>shaunfletcher wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>sliderhouserules wrote:</cite><blockquote>I don't feel it is bad manners in the slightest .......... It's the basis of valid, responsible human conversation and interaction.</blockquote>And noone here wishes to discuss it in a thread about in game travel.I maintain that while there is a lot of room for improved travel options, the original proposal to just skip intermediate zones and be able to zone directly anywhere from anywhere (which you presumably support, given your aggressive attacks on anyone who disagrees with them) is not a good idea. This is not a very controversial position on the whole.</blockquote>I didn't say your position was controversial. But when you use a faulty argument to back up your disagreement what do you expect?If you had simply stated your disagreement, even laid out your reasons, without resorting to saying "I don't have a problem, so nobody else does" then I would have read your reply, even respected your opinion on the matter, and not bothered to reply. I respect people's opinions. A disagreement doesn't warrant a reply or rebuttal. Faulty arguments do. It's as simple as that.EDIT: You know what? I read your reply I quoted above again, and you just don't get it at all. Nobody has said they want to zone from anywhere to anywhere. Who has said that? If there is a direct travel path from A to B to C and the "to's" in there are nothing more than run 10 feet, click, and watch a loading screen, how is requesting a direct zone from A to C bad in any way, shape, or form?No one wishes to discuss logic in this thread? You're saying "I'm using a flawed argument to make my point, but I don't want to talk about that. You're asking for A to B to C to be consolidated into A to C, and I'm saying I don't think it's a good idea to make zoning from A to Q and P to Z part of the game." [Removed for Content]?

Armawk

01-27-2009, 03:43 AM

<cite>sliderhouserules wrote:</cite><blockquote> Nobody has said they want to zone from anywhere to anywhere. Who has said that?</blockquote>What I was referring to when I referred to 'anywhere to anywhere' was the original request, which was for a feature meaning you can move from any zone to any other zone directly. The poster in fact referred to a case such as enchanted lands -> zek as his example which would indicate he meant any bell in the world to any other bell, no?I can see you could, if you wanted to be depressingly literal, interpret my words to mean any spot in the world to any other spot, in which case I will take this opportunity to clarify them.

sliderhouserules

01-27-2009, 04:34 AM

<cite>shaunfletcher wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>sliderhouserules wrote:</cite><blockquote> Nobody has said they want to zone from anywhere to anywhere. Who has said that?</blockquote>What I was referring to when I referred to 'anywhere to anywhere' was the original request, which was for a feature meaning you can move from any zone to any other zone directly. The poster in fact referred to a case such as enchanted lands -> zek as his example which would indicate he meant any bell in the world to any other bell, no?I can see you could, if you wanted to be depressingly literal, interpret my words to mean any spot in the world to any other spot, in which case I will take this opportunity to clarify them.</blockquote>Depressingly literal, I like that. Anywhere to anywhere is quite a bit different than any bell to any bell, though...In previous threads on this subject I've proposed similar systems to what Noaani and others have described in this thread: making boat trips like the EoF boats the ubiquitous travel mechanism. You would buy a ticket in the harbor, and wait for your boat (everybody gets on the same boat, but you get zoned to the zone you bought your ticket for). Each destination zone would then need a return boat to complete the picture. If it's a major enough destination (city to city) you would need to buy a return ticket, but zones like EL, etc. I'd just like to see a return boat.Sticking with bells is much less glamorous, but seems to be more likely since the boats will take more work, and implementing more bell destinations is actually fairly easy. Expanding the bells only enough to work like the boat scenario above would agree with what you're saying, I believe (that going from EL to zek would require passing through QH). This has enough realism that I've generally felt this would be acceptable, but after having the inner-city bells filled out I have to say I really like it, and EL to zek essentially comes down to the same point anyway: A to B to C? Why not just A to C then?Just to clarify before somebody jumps on something I'm not saying, when I say boats becoming ubiquitous I only mean replacing bells. If you look at the large map of Norrath, any place that requires you to cross or travel on the ocean should require a boat trip. But they deviated from this early with carpets, etc.

Armawk

01-27-2009, 05:26 AM

<cite>sliderhouserules wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>shaunfletcher wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>sliderhouserules wrote:</cite><blockquote> Nobody has said they want to zone from anywhere to anywhere. Who has said that?</blockquote>What I was referring to when I referred to 'anywhere to anywhere' was the original request, which was for a feature meaning you can move from any zone to any other zone directly. The poster in fact referred to a case such as enchanted lands -> zek as his example which would indicate he meant any bell in the world to any other bell, no?I can see you could, if you wanted to be depressingly literal, interpret my words to mean any spot in the world to any other spot, in which case I will take this opportunity to clarify them.</blockquote>Depressingly literal, I like that. Anywhere to anywhere is quite a bit different than any bell to any bell, though...In previous threads on this subject I've proposed similar systems to what Noaani and others have described in this thread: making boat trips like the EoF boats the ubiquitous travel mechanism. You would buy a ticket in the harbor, and wait for your boat (everybody gets on the same boat, but you get zoned to the zone you bought your ticket for). Each destination zone would then need a return boat to complete the picture. If it's a major enough destination (city to city) you would need to buy a return ticket, but zones like EL, etc. I'd just like to see a return boat.Sticking with bells is much less glamorous, but seems to be more likely since the boats will take more work, and implementing more bell destinations is actually fairly easy. Expanding the bells only enough to work like the boat scenario above would agree with what you're saying, I believe (that going from EL to zek would require passing through QH). This has enough realism that I've generally felt this would be acceptable, but after having the inner-city bells filled out I have to say I really like it, and EL to zek essentially comes down to the same point anyway: A to B to C? Why not just A to C then?Just to clarify before somebody jumps on something I'm not saying, when I say boats becoming ubiquitous I only mean replacing bells. If you look at the large map of Norrath, any place that requires you to cross or travel on the ocean should require a boat trip. But they deviated from this early with carpets, etc.</blockquote>I'll hold my hands up to the 'depressingly literal' being a bit of a snark. sorry.I have nothing to disagree with in the rest of your post really, except perhaps ' A to B to C? Why not just A to C then' because I just think its a step too far. The various thoughts on boats and tickets have much potential though.Ive always liked the carpet thing by the way.. it fits in so well with the DoF theme.

Nulad

01-27-2009, 05:27 AM

<cite>Lethe5683 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Nuladen@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Guillermo@Butcherblock wrote:</cite><blockquote> I like to read between the lines and I would wager that the OP is more upset about the length of load screens than the quantity. (i.e. hardware issues). So it comes to a choice of three 2 minute load screens or a five minute zone in to guildhall then 2 minutes to go to where they are headed. Given that choice he would rather say they both are lousy options and come here to complain. </blockquote>You'd be wrong, there is no reading between the lines, I stated what I feel in my post, that doing virtually nothing but clicking between different loading screens is not fun regardless of how long they do or do not take.</blockquote>Your right, and farming for plat isn't fun either so I think they should give us free plat.</blockquote>When farming plat is done outside of the game I'll agree, until then your argument is seriously flawed.

Nulad

01-27-2009, 05:51 AM

<cite>shaunfletcher wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>sliderhouserules wrote:</cite><blockquote> Nobody has said they want to zone from anywhere to anywhere. Who has said that?</blockquote>What I was referring to when I referred to 'anywhere to anywhere' was the original request, which was for a feature meaning you can move from any zone to any other zone directly. The poster in fact referred to a case such as enchanted lands -> zek as his example which would indicate he meant any bell in the world to any other bell, no?Sadly, while I didn't say or intend that it would certainly appear to be the case now that I think on it. I can see you could, if you wanted to be depressingly literal, interpret my words to mean any spot in the world to any other spot, in which case I will take this opportunity to clarify them.</blockquote>

Faenril

01-27-2009, 06:11 AM

<cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote>Just so I can keep up on the ever evolving arguments being used here, it seems as though the current arguments for consolidation basically fall back on one of two justifications:<ul><li>1 - PVP servers have it, so PVE should, too.</li><li>2 - Guild halls have it, so non-guilded players should, too.</li></ul>Does that sum it up? I just want to make sure I'm understanding the logic being presented here.</blockquote>No you are not understanding the logic being presented here. But it's ok mate I'll cut it down for you:1) Either you are trying to get it, but you fail, and if so you can quit trying, because if you didn't get it after 12 pages it's unlikely you will after 50.2) Or you are not wanting to get it.3) Or you are getting it very well but decided you were against the idea because somehow you feel it threatens your beloved guild hall. So you are throwing cheap 2 sentences posts, in order to encourage the ppl representing both point of views in that thread to fight each other, derail this thing in a flame war, and finally get it locked.Assuming you are a smart person - only assuming here - I will guess it's a mix of 2 and 3.Have a nice day.

LoreLady

01-27-2009, 10:45 AM

I am running on a 12 year old machine that can barely run the game right now (good one is having afew problems with it). And I am just playing pinball on the loading screens.. If its that bad make it fun! <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> Second - I barely notice a zone in with my good computer due to having a high amount of ram in it. Zone lines are nearly seamless when you start getting the top end computers.

Zarador

01-27-2009, 12:08 PM

<cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote>Just so I can keep up on the ever evolving arguments being used here, it seems as though the current arguments for consolidation basically fall back on one of two justifications:<ul><li>1 - PVP servers have it, so PVE should, too.</li><li>2 - Guild halls have it, so non-guilded players should, too.</li></ul>Does that sum it up? I just want to make sure I'm understanding the logic being presented here.</blockquote>You convinced me...<ul><li>Loading screens are really not that bad at all, in fact they add flavor to the game.</li><li>Guilds are paying a huge some of coin and status and are cheated out of loading screens for all their efforts.</li><li>We could fix things by having a single "Bell" that takes the guilded player to major city dock of their choice eliminating the expense of multiple portals while enriching their experience once again with the loading screens that they have been cheated out of.</li></ul>Did I get that right? You did mention that you would remove the bells from your guild hall if they took out the loading screens and allowed direct transit from the docks similair to Guild Hall transit so I must really assume that the portals offer no benefit if you can use the regular docks.(whispers) They also have bankers and brokers in town, may want to ditch those as well.You have to forgive me if I come off as being sarcastic, however I also group with non-guilded players in Pick Up Groups that would benefit from more streamlined travel. Many people here have expressed that while the loading screens are not game breaking in any manner, they are unenjoyable. Your response seems to be we know, that's the price for not being in a big guild that can avoid them. It's actually possible to be enjoying the game as a non-guilded or small guild player and at the same time really not enjoy the current travel options. It has nothing to do with "We want what you have" and everything to do with "Were not really happy with the travel options since so many zones have been added to the game".As far as using your two points about players in PvP and Large Guilds having the system that we would like to see in place; it simply means: "We know they have the coding to put it in place, is it possible to concider a change to a system like that?". It was to provide an example of where and how it is working already.

Konahito

01-27-2009, 12:28 PM

Excellent discussion going on here, folks. But let's please put away the debates about how to debate properly. Keep it polite and argue the topic, not the person.Thanks!

Thunndar316

01-27-2009, 12:33 PM

I'm all for the PVP tickets. This game is laggy enough as it is and perhaps a few thousand less unnecessary zones on the server a day would help imoprove performance.Did I mention that it's just stupid loading for the sake of loading? We have a guild hall with the SL bells, and the Druid rings, and the KoS portals and I will still use them. I don't need a refund, nor do I believe it lessens the value of my guild hall. The true value of a guild hall is the CALL TO GUILD HALL combined with the amenities INSIDE for easy access.Even with the tickets you still have to be in Qeynos Harbor or whatever home zone to use them. It's not the same as calling home every 15 minutes and going to another zone instantly. The other call spells have a 1 HOUR reuse.

Rijacki

01-27-2009, 12:50 PM

<cite>Thunndar316 wrote:</cite><blockquote>Even with the tickets you still have to be in Qeynos Harbor or whatever home zone to use them. It's not the same as calling home every 15 minutes and going to another zone instantly. The other call spells have a 1 HOUR reuse.</blockquote>Yet another reason why it would not make the Guild Hall amenity worth less than it is now.Expanding the ticket sellers in East Freeport and Qeysno Harbor would just shifts the cost of travel to the individual (which would actually make it more costly in the end). Being in only 2 places (with the other 3 'starting' cities not getting it), it would also force travel to there for the convenience. Without giving residents of all 5 cities the Call to for those two cities and not reducing the casting time of Call to [city] less than the current, it further keeps the worth of the Guild Hall amenity's convenience factor, it just gives some additional options to the non-guilded or those who don't want to go through a Hall.Options are good. Choices are good.Oh and Druids (and to a lesser extent Wizards) still have the ability to port players to other locations. That doesn't make the druid rings in the Guild Hall meaningless.

Kendricke

01-27-2009, 01:32 PM

<cite>Thunndar316 wrote:</cite><blockquote>Did I mention that it's just stupid loading for the sake of loading?</blockquote>It's not loading for the sake of loading. It's loading a new zone. You've moved from zone A to B to C. You're asking to travel from A to C automatically.If there were NO LOADING screens within the game, would there still be an argument for automatic travel from the cities from A to C just because players in guilds/PVP servers can?

Xil

01-27-2009, 01:56 PM

Why complain about instant travel? It's not instant enough for you?"But...but... I solo in a group focused game I should get all the same benefits people who group and make guilds get.... /cry /[Removed for Content] /moan /emoragequit"Seems kinda silly doesn't it?

interstellarmatter

01-27-2009, 02:01 PM

<cite>Xil wrote:</cite><blockquote>Why complain about instant travel? It's not instant enough for you?"But...but... I solo in a group focused game I should get all the same benefits people who group and make guilds get.... /cry /[Removed for Content] /moan /emoragequit"Seems kinda silly doesn't it?</blockquote>What?

Rijacki

01-27-2009, 02:09 PM

<cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Thunndar316 wrote:</cite><blockquote>Did I mention that it's just stupid loading for the sake of loading?</blockquote>It's not loading for the sake of loading. It's loading a new zone. You've moved from zone A to B to C. You're asking to travel from A to C automatically.If there were NO LOADING screens within the game, would there still be an argument for automatic travel from the cities from A to C just because players in guilds/PVP servers can? </blockquote>It's NOT because PvP has it therefore PvE should. It's PvP has an example of what was being put forth in the request for PvE. The PvP ticket seller is an EXAMPLE of how it has been implemented elsewhere.EXAMPLENot PvP has it therefore PvE should.

Thunndar316

01-27-2009, 02:21 PM

<cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Thunndar316 wrote:</cite><blockquote>Did I mention that it's just stupid loading for the sake of loading?</blockquote>It's not loading for the sake of loading. It's loading a new zone. You've moved from zone A to B to C. You're asking to travel from A to C automatically.If there were NO LOADING screens within the game, would there still be an argument for automatic travel from the cities from A to C just because players in guilds/PVP servers can? </blockquote>When you are traveling you go from A to B to C because you are forced to. There should be no C.Also, you are not traveling anywhere! You are just bell hopping.

Zarador

01-27-2009, 03:11 PM

<cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Thunndar316 wrote:</cite><blockquote>Did I mention that it's just stupid loading for the sake of loading?</blockquote>It's not loading for the sake of loading. It's loading a new zone. You've moved from zone A to B to C. You're asking to travel from A to C automatically.If there were NO LOADING screens within the game, would there still be an argument for automatic travel from the cities from A to C just because players in guilds/PVP servers can? </blockquote>So if they changed the system so the Guilded players in a large enough guild received a trip to the local dock of their alignment, think of the status/coin you would be saving. Not to mention the huge plus of not being cheated out of all that travel immersion that they miss out on. I think that would be a win/win!Think about it, you worked hard for all that status and coin, now you get cheated out of getting to travel with all the bells and excitement. That's the issue right? How PvP and Large Guilds miss out on all that travel fun!So if they allowed you guys the benefit of travel from your very own city docks, would you still complain that you did not get what you earned? I know it can't be that all that loading of screens is boring, if it were, why would you find it an acceptable mechanism for other players in the game?Honestly? Were it an adventure like some choice of a boat ride that takes you on dangerous seas or something with some interesting aspects (maybe interactive NPC's on the boat) it would not be an issue for many. It's not however. It's click the bell, walk ten steps, click another bell, walk a few more steps, maybe another bell... I'm not at all against immersive travel, but this is far from immersive.

Kendricke

01-27-2009, 03:16 PM

<cite>Thunndar316 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Thunndar316 wrote:</cite><blockquote>Did I mention that it's just stupid loading for the sake of loading?</blockquote>It's not loading for the sake of loading. It's loading a new zone. You've moved from zone A to B to C. You're asking to travel from A to C automatically.If there were NO LOADING screens within the game, would there still be an argument for automatic travel from the cities from A to C just because players in guilds/PVP servers can? </blockquote>When you are traveling you go from A to B to C because you are forced to. There should be no C.Also, you are not traveling anywhere! You are just bell hopping.</blockquote>The bells are representative of boat travel. If you feel that bell hopping is the issue, we should be arguing to have the bells removed and boats reinstated on each route. Then you wouldn't just be "bell hopping"...you'd have legitimate, immersive, in-game travel.

Kendricke

01-27-2009, 03:17 PM

<cite>Zarador wrote:</cite><blockquote>Honestly? Were it an adventure like some choice of a boat ride that takes you on dangerous seas or something with some interesting aspects (maybe interactive NPC's on the boat) it would not be an issue for many. </blockquote>They did that once. It didn't work. There were too many complaints from players. The system was largely unused.

Thunndar316

01-27-2009, 03:17 PM

<cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Thunndar316 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Thunndar316 wrote:</cite><blockquote>Did I mention that it's just stupid loading for the sake of loading?</blockquote>It's not loading for the sake of loading. It's loading a new zone. You've moved from zone A to B to C. You're asking to travel from A to C automatically.If there were NO LOADING screens within the game, would there still be an argument for automatic travel from the cities from A to C just because players in guilds/PVP servers can? </blockquote>When you are traveling you go from A to B to C because you are forced to. There should be no C.Also, you are not traveling anywhere! You are just bell hopping.</blockquote>The bells are representative of boat travel. If you feel that bell hopping is the issue, we should be arguing to have the bells removed and boats reinstated on each route. Then you wouldn't just be "bell hopping"...you'd have legitimate, immersive, in-game travel. </blockquote>You would have even more boring and unnecessary time sinks preventing you from actually playing the game.Save that garbage for the RP servers because I'm not interested.

Kendricke

01-27-2009, 03:22 PM

<cite>Thunndar316 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Thunndar316 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Thunndar316 wrote:</cite><blockquote>Did I mention that it's just stupid loading for the sake of loading?</blockquote>It's not loading for the sake of loading. It's loading a new zone. You've moved from zone A to B to C. You're asking to travel from A to C automatically.If there were NO LOADING screens within the game, would there still be an argument for automatic travel from the cities from A to C just because players in guilds/PVP servers can? </blockquote>When you are traveling you go from A to B to C because you are forced to. There should be no C.Also, you are not traveling anywhere! You are just bell hopping.</blockquote>The bells are representative of boat travel. If you feel that bell hopping is the issue, we should be arguing to have the bells removed and boats reinstated on each route. Then you wouldn't just be "bell hopping"...you'd have legitimate, immersive, in-game travel. </blockquote>You would have even more boring and unnecessary time sinks preventing you from actually playing the game.Save that garbage for the RP servers because I'm not interested.</blockquote>Then your issue isn't with "bell hopping". Your issue is with time spent getting from an origin to a destination. If there were no bells, you'd still want the boats to change course just for you and your personal needs, rather than running a route. P.S. - why does it bother anyone here that I disagree with the idea that the bells require consolidation? Are you trying to convince me you're right...or the developers? It's not as if they call me at home to verify each change they decide to consider, you know. You don't need my approval on an idea for it to have merit or not.

sliderhouserules

01-27-2009, 03:39 PM

<cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote>Then your issue isn't with "bell hopping". Your issue is with time spent getting from an origin to a destination. If there were no bells, you'd still want the boats to change course just for you and your personal needs, rather than running a route. P.S. - why does it bother anyone here that I disagree with the idea that the bells require consolidation? Are you trying to convince me you're right...or the developers? It's not as if they call me at home to verify each change they decide to consider, you know. You don't need my approval on an idea for it to have merit or not.</blockquote>It's because you come into a thread and post the same disagreement over and over and over and over. You misrepresent the positions of the people asking for a change, use flawed arguments, and resort to <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_nauseam" target="_blank">Ad nauseam</a> tactics. If you disagree with something you should make your disagreement known, and leave it at that. I don't post my agreement with a change over and over, I only reply when something deserves a reply, like a flawed argument, or your ad naseum postings. You should scroll up and read the reply that gave you a three point list of what your possible motivations are, because he hit your nail right on the head...

Thunndar316

01-27-2009, 04:23 PM

<cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Thunndar316 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Thunndar316 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Thunndar316 wrote:</cite><blockquote>Did I mention that it's just stupid loading for the sake of loading?</blockquote>It's not loading for the sake of loading. It's loading a new zone. You've moved from zone A to B to C. You're asking to travel from A to C automatically.If there were NO LOADING screens within the game, would there still be an argument for automatic travel from the cities from A to C just because players in guilds/PVP servers can? </blockquote>When you are traveling you go from A to B to C because you are forced to. There should be no C.Also, you are not traveling anywhere! You are just bell hopping.</blockquote>The bells are representative of boat travel. If you feel that bell hopping is the issue, we should be arguing to have the bells removed and boats reinstated on each route. Then you wouldn't just be "bell hopping"...you'd have legitimate, immersive, in-game travel. </blockquote>You would have even more boring and unnecessary time sinks preventing you from actually playing the game.Save that garbage for the RP servers because I'm not interested.</blockquote>Then your issue isn't with "bell hopping". Your issue is with time spent getting from an origin to a destination. If there were no bells, you'd still want the boats to change course just for you and your personal needs, rather than running a route. P.S. - why does it bother anyone here that I disagree with the idea that the bells require consolidation? Are you trying to convince me you're right...or the developers? It's not as if they call me at home to verify each change they decide to consider, you know. You don't need my approval on an idea for it to have merit or not.</blockquote>No my issue IS WITH BELL HOPPING.If all I have to do to go from Antonica docks to Lavastorm is click bells then it is totally unnecessary for me or anybody else to click for TS, click Nek, click Lavastorm when all you need to do is one click to Lavastorm.Now IF there is actual travel involved like running from Butcherblock to Gfay or Kylong to Jarsath Wastes, fine no problem. However, don't subject me to totally pointless and time wasting loading screens that do NOTHING but make me stare at unnecessary loading screens.

Zarador

01-27-2009, 04:49 PM

<cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote>Then your issue isn't with "bell hopping". Your issue is with time spent getting from an origin to a destination. If there were no bells, you'd still want the boats to change course just for you and your personal needs, rather than running a route. P.S. - why does it bother anyone here that I disagree with the idea that the bells require consolidation? Are you trying to convince me you're right...or the developers? It's not as if they call me at home to verify each change they decide to consider, you know. You don't need my approval on an idea for it to have merit or not.</blockquote>Since you brought it up, who are you trying to convince that consolidation is wrong? Since, as you stated, the developers don't call you at home to discuss each change, you must be trying to convince those against bell hoping that it's a good thing.I find it ironic that someone who has the option to avoid the bell hoping is all for bell hoping, so long as it's not them doing the bell hoping. Maybe that's what people find bothering? Someone who feels that belonging to a large guild entitles them to skip something that others find anoying, then argue that they don't need that convenience.Lets go back to your other argument earlier. <ol><li>Guild Portals cost a lot of status and coin to "earn". We can agree with that.</li><li>You would remove some of the portals were bells consolidated. That's your choice.</li></ol>So if something costs a lot to purchase and maintain, but is worth having, to provide faster less boring travel, then you all chipped in to be able to avoid something that you tell us is a trivial issue that should have no effect on the average player.So it was worth all that effort and time spent to avoid hopping from zone to zone for your guild; yet not worth our time to discuss how we find bell hoping boring?Yeah, I think I understand now.

Kendricke

01-27-2009, 05:21 PM

<cite>sliderhouserules wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote>Then your issue isn't with "bell hopping". Your issue is with time spent getting from an origin to a destination. If there were no bells, you'd still want the boats to change course just for you and your personal needs, rather than running a route. P.S. - why does it bother anyone here that I disagree with the idea that the bells require consolidation? Are you trying to convince me you're right...or the developers? It's not as if they call me at home to verify each change they decide to consider, you know. You don't need my approval on an idea for it to have merit or not.</blockquote>It's because you come into a thread and post the same disagreement over and over and over and over. You misrepresent the positions of the people asking for a change, use flawed arguments, and resort to <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_nauseam" target="_blank">Ad nauseam</a> tactics. If you disagree with something you should make your disagreement known, and leave it at that. I don't post my agreement with a change over and over, I only reply when something deserves a reply, like a flawed argument, or your ad naseum postings. You should scroll up and read the reply that gave you a three point list of what your possible motivations are, because he hit your nail right on the head...</blockquote>So, you're more interested in arguing how I argue rather than pointing out how my points aren't salient? Look, if you're going to discuss logical fallacies, then you're probably also aware that my "motivations" are irrelevant and to bring them up is basically an ad hominem anyway (unless you feel you can show how my motivations for posting are actually germaine to the points I'm raising). In fact, if you feel you have a strong case for the change you want, then virtually everything I say here would also irrelevant because the developers would likely simply ignore my points in favor of your strong, well crafted argument, correct?The fact is that I'm not posting ad nauseum, though. Simple repetition of a truth or asking the similar questions in differing ways is not an example of ad nauseum. An ad nauseum only exists when there's no substationation presented with the repetition - when the repetition itself is used in place of a cognitive point. If I was simply saying "consolidated bells are bad" over and over without presenting any supporting statements to justify the assertion, then that itself would be an example of the fallacy. Of course, if you're not interested in the facts here and simply more interested in "hitting my nail", then there's no need to worry about whether or not I'm actually guilty of the fallacies you claim I am. You simply have to make the accusation and hope that others buy into the accusation. After all, what possible value could my arguments hold if you're able to skew others into thinking that I'm incapable of choherently making them in the first place - which itself is a slanted, subtle ad hominem. Of course, none of this matters. Not one bit of it. If you do manage to win the debate here, it's irrelevant. You have to convince the developers that they were wrong to remove the consolidated bells from the servers (yes, the bells already existed) and that they were wrong to include them only as guild rewards. Truly, I don't think anyone here argues that the developers are capable of making the change, so examples from the PVP server or guild halls aren't really the issue here, are they? Frankly, the bells ALREADY existed on PVE servers at one point. Whether or not it can be done isn't even a point of contention. The only possible point of contention seems to be whether or not it should be done...and it should be pretty apparant from this thread that there's at least enough contention that the developers will potentially upset as many players as they placate whether they make the change or not. Anything I say won't affect that. Frankly, nothing you say will, either.

Kendricke

01-27-2009, 05:22 PM

<cite>Zarador wrote:</cite><blockquote>Since you brought it up, who are you trying to convince that consolidation is wrong? </blockquote>Developers.

Thunndar316

01-27-2009, 05:31 PM

<cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>sliderhouserules wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote>Then your issue isn't with "bell hopping". Your issue is with time spent getting from an origin to a destination. If there were no bells, you'd still want the boats to change course just for you and your personal needs, rather than running a route. P.S. - why does it bother anyone here that I disagree with the idea that the bells require consolidation? Are you trying to convince me you're right...or the developers? It's not as if they call me at home to verify each change they decide to consider, you know. You don't need my approval on an idea for it to have merit or not.</blockquote>It's because you come into a thread and post the same disagreement over and over and over and over. You misrepresent the positions of the people asking for a change, use flawed arguments, and resort to <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_nauseam" target="_blank">Ad nauseam</a> tactics. If you disagree with something you should make your disagreement known, and leave it at that. I don't post my agreement with a change over and over, I only reply when something deserves a reply, like a flawed argument, or your ad naseum postings. You should scroll up and read the reply that gave you a three point list of what your possible motivations are, because he hit your nail right on the head...</blockquote>So, you're more interested in arguing how I argue rather than pointing out how my points aren't salient? Look, if you're going to discuss logical fallacies, then you're probably also aware that my "motivations" are irrelevant and to bring them up is basically an ad hominem anyway (unless you feel you can show how my motivations for posting are actually germaine to the points I'm raising). In fact, if you feel you have a strong case for the change you want, then virtually everything I say here would also irrelevant because the developers would likely simply ignore my points in favor of your strong, well crafted argument, correct?The fact is that I'm not posting ad nauseum, though. Simple repetition of a truth or asking the similar questions in differing ways is not an example of ad nauseum. An ad nauseum only exists when there's no substationation presented with the repetition - when the repetition itself is used in place of a cognitive point. If I was simply saying "consolidated bells are bad" over and over without presenting any supporting statements to justify the assertion, then that itself would be an example of the fallacy. Of course, if you're not interested in the facts here and simply more interested in "hitting my nail", then there's no need to worry about whether or not I'm actually guilty of the fallacies you claim I am. You simply have to make the accusation and hope that others buy into the accusation. After all, what possible value could my arguments hold if you're able to skew others into thinking that I'm incapable of choherently making them in the first place - which itself is a slanted, subtle ad hominem. Of course, none of this matters. Not one bit of it. If you do manage to win the debate here, it's irrelevant. You have to convince the developers that they were wrong to remove the consolidated bells from the servers (yes, the bells already existed) and that they were wrong to include them only as guild rewards. Truly, I don't think anyone here argues that the developers are capable of making the change, so examples from the PVP server or guild halls aren't really the issue here, are they? Frankly, the bells ALREADY existed on PVE servers at one point. Whether or not it can be done isn't even a point of contention. The only possible point of contention seems to be whether or not it should be done...and it should be pretty apparant from this thread that there's at least enough contention that the developers will potentially upset as many players as they placate whether they make the change or not. Anything I say won't affect that. Frankly, nothing you say will, either.</blockquote>This right here kids. This is why we hate politicians.

sliderhouserules

01-27-2009, 05:51 PM

<cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote>So, you're more interested in arguing how I argue rather than pointing out how my points aren't salient? Why should I waste my time repeating what others have said? Rijacki, among others, has posted very clear responses that refute the claims you've made. What would I add by simply repeating it? It would be akin to what I'm saying you do, which is win your argument by noise.Look, if you're going to discuss logical fallacies, then you're probably also aware that my "motivations" are irrelevant and to bring them up is basically an ad hominem anyway (unless you feel you can show how my motivations for posting are actually germaine to the points I'm raising). In fact, if you feel you have a strong case for the change you want, then virtually everything I say here would also irrelevant because the developers would likely simply ignore my points in favor of your strong, well crafted argument, correct?If your motivation is to derail a thread, or drown out a valid request with noise through thread-crapping, then your motivations are very relevant and very much worth discussing. Ad hominem means I attack *you* in a way that is unrelated to the current discussion. Bringing up your motivations, your methods of arguing, and things that have everything to do with this discussion is not ad hominem in any way. It is relevant.Let me be clear here:"You are a [Removed for Content]" - ad hominem."That response was moronic" - not ad hominem (but quite rude, and probably deserving of the mod's attention)"You're repeating the same point over and over even though people have already refuted it" - not ad hominem, not rude, not personal, very appropriate to a given discussion.The fact is that I'm not posting ad nauseum, though. Simple repetition of a truth or asking the similar questions in differing ways is not an example of ad nauseum. An ad nauseum only exists when there's no substationation presented with the repetition - when the repetition itself is used in place of a cognitive point. If I was simply saying "consolidated bells are bad" over and over without presenting any supporting statements to justify the assertion, then that itself would be an example of the fallacy.Poster1: This isn't a valid request because of A.Poster2: Yeah, but A isn't really true, look at X and Y.Poster1: I'm going to ignore that, and say this isn't a valid request because of B.Poster3: No, not really. B isn't an issue because of Q and P.Poster1: Well, this isn't a valid request, because of C.Tell me that's not repetition ad naseum. You have a valid opinion (no, it is *not* a truth), but you back it up with a point that gets refuted, so you just move onto the next point repeating your objection each time. Or you repeat the same point a time or two, ignoring those that have refuted it before you finally move on to another point to try to back yourself up. But your points continually get refuted. Of course, if you're not interested in the facts here and simply more interested in "hitting my nail", then there's no need to worry about whether or not I'm actually guilty of the fallacies you claim I am. You simply have to make the accusation and hope that others buy into the accusation. After all, what possible value could my arguments hold if you're able to skew others into thinking that I'm incapable of choherently making them in the first place - which itself is a slanted, subtle ad hominem.You have made a very valid argument in this thread: you don't think bell consolidation is good for the game. Why does it take you 15 posts in a thread to make that clear? The only nail I'm trying to hit is resistance to your thread-crapping. If I do nothing, then your subversive tactics are successful, and I'm tired of it. I think it's rude. I don't mind being brusque in response to what I think is undesirable forum behavior.Of course, none of this matters. Not one bit of it. If you do manage to win the debate here, it's irrelevant. You have to convince the developers that they were wrong to remove the consolidated bells from the servers (yes, the bells already existed) and that they were wrong to include them only as guild rewards.It may not matter to you but it matters to me. This is an important topic to me. The fact that the mods are more concerned with my pointing out trolls than they are with the actual trolling and thread-crapping is also very important to me. And I'm not one to not press an issue when it's important to me.</blockquote>

Zarador

01-27-2009, 06:27 PM

So here goes the "Well Crafted Argument" for consolidated bells:<ol><li>Since the bells exist on the PvP side and as Kendrike pointed out have in the past existed on the PvE side, then coding should require little effort.</li><li>Since Guild Halls exist with characters of opposite alignments, they still benefit from the guild hall portals by not having to have those characters with opposing faction alignment have to port to their home city for transportation options.</li><li>Guild members don't always use the guild hall transportation system when out in the field so they would benefit by this change as well.</li><li>Being able to port directly to a location right from your guild hall non-stop still offers an advantage over having to visit a dock in a city.</li><li>Guild Halls have a much faster recall refresh rate than city calls, thus allowing guild's with the amenities more flexible transportation.</li><li>Guild Hall Recall combined with Home City Recall allows a guild member 5 trips per hour to a transportation hub as opposed to the standard 1 trip per hour recall available to the unguilded player.</li><li>Since most guild amenities are redundant of the amenities that most players already have access too, including those specific to guild membership, this redundancy should have no more of a negative effect than the bankers and brokers.</li><li>The consolidation would allow those with less than stellar systems to zone faster and get to their destination quicker. This would also benefit those who are waiting on those players to arrive for a group.</li><li>Since the travel is already meaningless to a great degree (click a bell, land, click again), no immersion is lost by this move. If anything it would make even more sense that transportation hubs offer full travel services. </li><li>Having the Harbor Master charging more based on the distance of the trip would provide another coin sink which would over time benefit the game given how often players travel via the docks. </li></ol>

Kendricke

01-27-2009, 07:41 PM

<cite>Zarador wrote:</cite><blockquote>So here goes the "Well Crafted Argument" for consolidated bells:<ol><li>Since the bells exist on the PvP side and as Kendrike pointed out have in the past existed on the PvE side, then coding should require little effort.</li><li>Since Guild Halls exist with characters of opposite alignments, they still benefit from the guild hall portals by not having to have those characters with opposing faction alignment have to port to their home city for transportation options.</li><li>Guild members don't always use the guild hall transportation system when out in the field so they would benefit by this change as well.</li><li>Being able to port directly to a location right from your guild hall non-stop still offers an advantage over having to visit a dock in a city.</li><li>Guild Halls have a much faster recall refresh rate than city calls, thus allowing guild's with the amenities more flexible transportation.</li><li>Guild Hall Recall combined with Home City Recall allows a guild member 5 trips per hour to a transportation hub as opposed to the standard 1 trip per hour recall available to the unguilded player.</li><li>Since most guild amenities are redundant of the amenities that most players already have access too, including those specific to guild membership, this redundancy should have no more of a negative effect than the bankers and brokers.</li><li>The consolidation would allow those with less than stellar systems to zone faster and get to their destination quicker. This would also benefit those who are waiting on those players to arrive for a group.</li><li>Since the travel is already meaningless to a great degree (click a bell, land, click again), no immersion is lost by this move. If anything it would make even more sense that transportation hubs offer full travel services. </li><li>Having the Harbor Master charging more based on the distance of the trip would provide another coin sink which would over time benefit the game given how often players travel via the docks. </li></ol></blockquote>I dont' refute any of your points regarding whether or not it would make things easier on non-guilded (or even guilded) players. I just happen to disagree that it's a necessary or even good overall change. By the by, if guilds did not have consolidation bells available to them, how many of your points would still hold the same merit? Why are so many of your points based on the fact that guilds have the bells?

sliderhouserules

01-27-2009, 07:50 PM

<cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Zarador wrote:</cite><blockquote>So here goes the "Well Crafted Argument" for consolidated bells:<ol><li>Since the bells exist on the PvP side and as Kendrike pointed out have in the past existed on the PvE side, then coding should require little effort.</li><li>Since Guild Halls exist with characters of opposite alignments, they still benefit from the guild hall portals by not having to have those characters with opposing faction alignment have to port to their home city for transportation options.</li><li>Guild members don't always use the guild hall transportation system when out in the field so they would benefit by this change as well.</li><li>Being able to port directly to a location right from your guild hall non-stop still offers an advantage over having to visit a dock in a city.</li><li>Guild Halls have a much faster recall refresh rate than city calls, thus allowing guild's with the amenities more flexible transportation.</li><li>Guild Hall Recall combined with Home City Recall allows a guild member 5 trips per hour to a transportation hub as opposed to the standard 1 trip per hour recall available to the unguilded player.</li><li>Since most guild amenities are redundant of the amenities that most players already have access too, including those specific to guild membership, this redundancy should have no more of a negative effect than the bankers and brokers.</li><li>The consolidation would allow those with less than stellar systems to zone faster and get to their destination quicker. This would also benefit those who are waiting on those players to arrive for a group.</li><li>Since the travel is already meaningless to a great degree (click a bell, land, click again), no immersion is lost by this move. If anything it would make even more sense that transportation hubs offer full travel services. </li><li>Having the Harbor Master charging more based on the distance of the trip would provide another coin sink which would over time benefit the game given how often players travel via the docks. </li></ol></blockquote>I dont' refute any of your points regarding whether or not it would make things easier on non-guilded (or even guilded) players. I just happen to disagree that it's a necessary or even good overall change. By the by, if guilds did not have consolidation bells available to them, how many of your points would still hold the same merit? Why are so many of your points based on the fact that guilds have the bells?</blockquote>Maybe because here you are, yet again, posting the same thing in this thread that you have already posted? And he is patient enough to post yet *another* reply giving valid retorts to your this-should-be-exclusive-to-guild-halls response that got rebutted long ago?Unbelievable.

Thunndar316

01-27-2009, 07:59 PM

<cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Zarador wrote:</cite><blockquote>So here goes the "Well Crafted Argument" for consolidated bells:<ol><li>Since the bells exist on the PvP side and as Kendrike pointed out have in the past existed on the PvE side, then coding should require little effort.</li><li>Since Guild Halls exist with characters of opposite alignments, they still benefit from the guild hall portals by not having to have those characters with opposing faction alignment have to port to their home city for transportation options.</li><li>Guild members don't always use the guild hall transportation system when out in the field so they would benefit by this change as well.</li><li>Being able to port directly to a location right from your guild hall non-stop still offers an advantage over having to visit a dock in a city.</li><li>Guild Halls have a much faster recall refresh rate than city calls, thus allowing guild's with the amenities more flexible transportation.</li><li>Guild Hall Recall combined with Home City Recall allows a guild member 5 trips per hour to a transportation hub as opposed to the standard 1 trip per hour recall available to the unguilded player.</li><li>Since most guild amenities are redundant of the amenities that most players already have access too, including those specific to guild membership, this redundancy should have no more of a negative effect than the bankers and brokers.</li><li>The consolidation would allow those with less than stellar systems to zone faster and get to their destination quicker. This would also benefit those who are waiting on those players to arrive for a group.</li><li>Since the travel is already meaningless to a great degree (click a bell, land, click again), no immersion is lost by this move. If anything it would make even more sense that transportation hubs offer full travel services. </li><li>Having the Harbor Master charging more based on the distance of the trip would provide another coin sink which would over time benefit the game given how often players travel via the docks. </li></ol></blockquote>I dont' refute any of your points regarding whether or not it would make things easier on non-guilded (or even guilded) players. I just happen to disagree that it's a necessary or even good overall change. By the by, if guilds did not have consolidation bells available to them, how many of your points would still hold the same merit? Why are so many of your points based on the fact that guilds have the bells?</blockquote>Reguardless of Guild Houses, there is no sense in clicking and zoning over and over when 1 click and one zone will give you the same result.

Zarador

01-27-2009, 08:02 PM

<cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Zarador wrote:</cite><blockquote>So here goes the "Well Crafted Argument" for consolidated bells:<ol><li>Since the bells exist on the PvP side and as Kendrike pointed out have in the past existed on the PvE side, then coding should require little effort.</li><li>Since Guild Halls exist with characters of opposite alignments, they still benefit from the guild hall portals by not having to have those characters with opposing faction alignment have to port to their home city for transportation options.</li><li>Guild members don't always use the guild hall transportation system when out in the field so they would benefit by this change as well.</li><li>Being able to port directly to a location right from your guild hall non-stop still offers an advantage over having to visit a dock in a city.</li><li>Guild Halls have a much faster recall refresh rate than city calls, thus allowing guild's with the amenities more flexible transportation.</li><li>Guild Hall Recall combined with Home City Recall allows a guild member 5 trips per hour to a transportation hub as opposed to the standard 1 trip per hour recall available to the unguilded player.</li><li>Since most guild amenities are redundant of the amenities that most players already have access too, including those specific to guild membership, this redundancy should have no more of a negative effect than the bankers and brokers.</li><li>The consolidation would allow those with less than stellar systems to zone faster and get to their destination quicker. This would also benefit those who are waiting on those players to arrive for a group.</li><li>Since the travel is already meaningless to a great degree (click a bell, land, click again), no immersion is lost by this move. If anything it would make even more sense that transportation hubs offer full travel services. </li><li>Having the Harbor Master charging more based on the distance of the trip would provide another coin sink which would over time benefit the game given how often players travel via the docks. </li></ol></blockquote>I dont' refute any of your points regarding whether or not it would make things easier on non-guilded (or even guilded) players. I just happen to disagree that it's a necessary or even good overall change. By the by, if guilds did not have consolidation bells available to them, how many of your points would still hold the same merit? Why are so many of your points based on the fact that guilds have the bells?</blockquote>So what is the reasoning behind this not being a "good overall" change?My points would hold the same exact merit were guild halls not to have consolidated bells since everyone in the game utilizes travel and actually guild members with guild hall portals would gain even more with the change.Since were using the chicken and the egg argument here relating to "if guilds did not have consolidation bells available to them, how many of your points would still hold the same merit?" lets ask this. If Guild halls did not exist do you think your members would like consolidated bells on the docks? Seems like the game existed with large guilds just fine before guild halls, so by your reasoning we never needed guild halls because people did without that for years.I like to think however that as the game progresses, we change things for the better to improve the enjoyment of the game. Imagine how the game would be if everything we did back then was kept in place because "that's how we always did it". Remember when small guilds leveled faster than large ones because of the writ system? Remember when loosing members cost you? How about when only a limited amount of players could contribute status? Experience shared debt? Faster leveling? Achievement advancements? All made or changed to make the game friendlier in order to entice more players.I happen to have a small family guild with a guild hall. We passed up those amenities because of the price, opting instead to push for more crafting related amenities. I can fully understand exclusive perks as well as appreciate them, however I think something that effects everyone, almost every session, should not be an exclusive perk.

scruffylookin

01-28-2009, 05:13 AM

<cite>Zarador wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Zarador wrote:</cite><blockquote>So here goes the "Well Crafted Argument" for consolidated bells:<ol><li>Since the bells exist on the PvP side and as Kendrike pointed out have in the past existed on the PvE side, then coding should require little effort.</li><li>Since Guild Halls exist with characters of opposite alignments, they still benefit from the guild hall portals by not having to have those characters with opposing faction alignment have to port to their home city for transportation options.</li><li>Guild members don't always use the guild hall transportation system when out in the field so they would benefit by this change as well.</li><li>Being able to port directly to a location right from your guild hall non-stop still offers an advantage over having to visit a dock in a city.</li><li>Guild Halls have a much faster recall refresh rate than city calls, thus allowing guild's with the amenities more flexible transportation.</li><li>Guild Hall Recall combined with Home City Recall allows a guild member 5 trips per hour to a transportation hub as opposed to the standard 1 trip per hour recall available to the unguilded player.</li><li>Since most guild amenities are redundant of the amenities that most players already have access too, including those specific to guild membership, this redundancy should have no more of a negative effect than the bankers and brokers.</li><li>The consolidation would allow those with less than stellar systems to zone faster and get to their destination quicker. This would also benefit those who are waiting on those players to arrive for a group.</li><li>Since the travel is already meaningless to a great degree (click a bell, land, click again), no immersion is lost by this move. If anything it would make even more sense that transportation hubs offer full travel services. </li><li>Having the Harbor Master charging more based on the distance of the trip would provide another coin sink which would over time benefit the game given how often players travel via the docks. </li></ol></blockquote>I dont' refute any of your points regarding whether or not it would make things easier on non-guilded (or even guilded) players. I just happen to disagree that it's a necessary or even good overall change. By the by, if guilds did not have consolidation bells available to them, how many of your points would still hold the same merit? Why are so many of your points based on the fact that guilds have the bells?</blockquote>So what is the reasoning behind this not being a "good overall" change?My points would hold the same exact merit were guild halls not to have consolidated bells since everyone in the game utilizes travel and actually guild members with guild hall portals would gain even more with the change.Since were using the chicken and the egg argument here relating to "if guilds did not have consolidation bells available to them, how many of your points would still hold the same merit?" lets ask this. If Guild halls did not exist do you think your members would like consolidated bells on the docks? Seems like the game existed with large guilds just fine before guild halls, so by your reasoning we never needed guild halls because people did without that for years.I like to think however that as the game progresses, we change things for the better to improve the enjoyment of the game. Imagine how the game would be if everything we did back then was kept in place because "that's how we always did it". Remember when small guilds leveled faster than large ones because of the writ system? Remember when loosing members cost you? How about when only a limited amount of players could contribute status? Experience shared debt? Faster leveling? Achievement advancements? All made or changed to make the game friendlier in order to entice more players.I happen to have a small family guild with a guild hall. We passed up those amenities because of the price, opting instead to push for more crafting related amenities. I can fully understand exclusive perks as well as appreciate them, however I think something that effects everyone, almost every session, should not be an exclusive perk.</blockquote>Very well said.I, too, don't understand how this would not be a "good overall change." What about the idea isn't good? Who does it hurt?If this idea isn't necessary or good, then how could it possibly devalue the same idea when it's a guild perk? If an idea has no value in the first place, then how can it devalue anything? Kendricke, are you saying that the idea does have merit, but you just think it shouldn't be offered to anyone unless they're in a guild?Again, I think guilds should have many, many perks. I'm a full-on supporter of guild hall perks. This particular piece of feedback about bell consolidation has nothing to do with guild halls or guild hall perks. The OP made no mention of guilds. At all. Nobody did, actually, until it was brought in by 3 people (Atan, Ohiv, and Kendricke... all guilded).Not a single word was mentioned of guild halls until it was brought into this debate.Personally, I think it's a bit unfair to bring a topic into a discussion, then be critical of someone for rebutting the issue that you brought in.I'll say this again: To many players in the game, this idea is trivial and will have no negative impact. At all. To some players, it will have a large positive impact. And we all know it wouldn't eat up much development time to implement (because it's already implemented). So what is it exactly that makes people so opposed to an idea that won't hurt anyone, but will help some?

Faenril

01-28-2009, 06:10 AM

Kendricke, the point is you brought almost no argument WHY this would be a BAD change.Your main defense is that the 'pro' arguments are not "good enough", or that the main *motivation* is jealousy. Treating the issue as a "they have it so I want it too" case is ignoring a lot of content in that thread.The only beginning of a valid argument against the idea I've read so far, is that that it would decrease the value of the guild bell. Which can easily be fixed by:- transfering the travel cost on individuals (the pvp servers bell example)- and/or eventually decreasing the COST of the guild hall bell. Lower value => lower cost, nobody brought that possibility yet I think.But please tell me again, why did you put a banker in your guild hall ? We could bank in Qeynos Harbor since day 1, so what is the value of the banker amenity in your guild hall ? How is the guild hall banker any better that QH banker (only 1 or 2 loading screens away btw...).

zaneluke

01-28-2009, 09:40 AM

<cite>Zarador wrote:</cite><blockquote>So here goes the "Well Crafted Argument" for consolidated bells:<ol><li>Since the bells exist on the PvP side and as Kendrike pointed out have in the past existed on the PvE side, then coding should require little effort. True. but just because something can be done, does not mean it should be done.</li><li>Since Guild Halls exist with characters of opposite alignments, they still benefit from the guild hall portals by not having to have those characters with opposing faction alignment have to port to their home city for transportation options. Yes, a bennie of a guild hall.</li><li>Guild members don't always use the guild hall transportation system when out in the field so they would benefit by this change as well. 15 min recall us transportation system. you are wrong on this assumption.</li><li>Being able to port directly to a location right from your guild hall non-stop still offers an advantage over having to visit a dock in a city.True, but just because a guild hall has it does nto mean it should be available to everyone else.</li><li>Guild Halls have a much faster recall refresh rate than city calls, thus allowing guild's with the amenities more flexible transportation. True again. Guild halls have rewards that are great. Called a perk for people who put in the hard work to get one.</li><li>Guild Hall Recall combined with Home City Recall allows a guild member 5 trips per hour to a transportation hub as opposed to the standard 1 trip per hour recall available to the unguilded player.No, much much more. You forgot call of ro and the return to splitpaw shard. <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></li><li>Since most guild amenities are redundant of the amenities that most players already have access too, including those specific to guild membership, this redundancy should have no more of a negative effect than the bankers and brokers.Wrong, guild hall amenities are PERKS. They should not be available to everyone who has not put in the much needed work.</li><li>The consolidation would allow those with less than stellar systems to zone faster and get to their destination quicker. This would also benefit those who are waiting on those players to arrive for a group.Wrong. Even at a 1 minute loading time you are only looking at 4-8 minutes for someone to get to group. That is minimal.</li><li>Since the travel is already meaningless to a great degree (click a bell, land, click again), no immersion is lost by this move. If anything it would make even more sense that transportation hubs offer full travel services. I disagree, travel time is a minor annoyance if that. </li><li>Having the Harbor Master charging more based on the distance of the trip would provide another coin sink which would over time benefit the game given how often players travel via the docks. Ok this one will be long because i think you 100% fail to see or understand what exactly a coin sink is in an MMO that has been out for 4 plus years. OK you think a 1-3 gold per travel destination is a good coin sink to remove plat from the game. LOL How about this. A guild hall. There is the grand daddy of em all coin sinks. You want a coin sink to make the game healthy. :rollseyes: How about letting people with 3 room homes and above purchase the same guild hall functions and pay the upkeep on them, Say 2-5 things and they can have a call to home bell and all the other perks that the hard working groups of people in guild have gotten? Solo rewards for people who still persist in what is supposed to be a social game.</li></ol></blockquote>

zaneluke

01-28-2009, 09:48 AM

<cite>Faenril@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote>Kendricke, the point is you brought almost no argument WHY this would be a BAD change.Your main defense is that the 'pro' arguments are not "good enough", or that the main *motivation* is jealousy. Treating the issue as a "they have it so I want it too" case is ignoring a lot of content in that thread.The only beginning of a valid argument against the idea I've read so far, is that that it would decrease the value of the guild bell. Which can easily be fixed by:- transfering the travel cost on individuals (the pvp servers bell example)- and/or eventually decreasing the COST of the guild hall bell. Lower value => lower cost, nobody brought that possibility yet I think.But please tell me again, why did you put a banker in your guild hall ? We could bank in Qeynos Harbor since day 1, so what is the value of the banker amenity in your guild hall ? How is the guild hall banker any better that QH banker (only 1 or 2 loading screens away btw...).</blockquote>I think the problem is what is current IMHO running rampant on these boards. People come in and want what others have without having to do the work. The people that have gone the more difficult route get a little upset by the instant gratification crowd that seem to overpopulate these boards.I could list a long long list of changes people want made to the game to back up their solo playstle in what is supposed to be a multi player game. Group and guild behavior is rewarded in this game, as it should be. Always without fail with every change/expansion/patch the benifits group play style, 2 months or so later all the solo people come in a demand they get the same chances and perk too. Some are well thought out posts with some pretty decent ideas, some are just silly. But the fact remains the same. People want what is already available but are UNWILLING to work for it like those that have forged the path before them. Guild hall travel bells,tradeskill tokens,void shards.... Th elist goes on and on and on.Us vets know, yes we really do. That sooner or later if people are vocal enough soe will ease in the changes little by little to make everyone happy.Go look at the tradeskill section and read the post about someone who really honestly 100% thinks that harvesting dummies would be a good idead, since ya know. Guild halls have training dummies.

Faenril

01-28-2009, 10:25 AM

<cite>zaneluke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Faenril@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote>Kendricke, the point is you brought almost no argument WHY this would be a BAD change.Your main defense is that the 'pro' arguments are not "good enough", or that the main *motivation* is jealousy. Treating the issue as a "they have it so I want it too" case is ignoring a lot of content in that thread.The only beginning of a valid argument against the idea I've read so far, is that that it would decrease the value of the guild bell. Which can easily be fixed by:- transfering the travel cost on individuals (the pvp servers bell example)- and/or eventually decreasing the COST of the guild hall bell. Lower value => lower cost, nobody brought that possibility yet I think.But please tell me again, why did you put a banker in your guild hall ? We could bank in Qeynos Harbor since day 1, so what is the value of the banker amenity in your guild hall ? How is the guild hall banker any better that QH banker (only 1 or 2 loading screens away btw...).</blockquote>I think the problem is what is current IMHO running rampant on these boards. People come in and want what others have without having to do the work. The people that have gone the more difficult route get a little upset by the instant gratification crowd that seem to overpopulate these boards.I could list a long long list of changes people want made to the game to back up their solo playstle in what is supposed to be a multi player game. Group and guild behavior is rewarded in this game, as it should be. Always without fail with every change/expansion/patch the benifits group play style, 2 months or so later all the solo people come in a demand they get the same chances and perk too. Some are well thought out posts with some pretty decent ideas, some are just silly. But the fact remains the same. People want what is already available but are UNWILLING to work for it like those that have forged the path before them. Guild hall travel bells,tradeskill tokens,void shards.... Th elist goes on and on and on.Us vets know, yes we really do. That sooner or later if people are vocal enough soe will ease in the changes little by little to make everyone happy.Go look at the tradeskill section and read the post about someone who really honestly 100% thinks that harvesting dummies would be a good idead, since ya know. Guild halls have training dummies.</blockquote>In general I agree.I just happen to think this does not fit the same category as, for instance, soloable quests for void shards, or fabled loot from solo mobs and so on. It's not like if some actual work/effort had to be put to click bells. I just consider bell hopping void of any meaning, or purpose, just a timesink that's not even "in game" from my point of view. It's a bit like if guilds had access to a faster client patcher, I wouldn't think it makes sense, despite I would benefit from it.Anyway there is not much left to say on the topic that wasn't already posted 10 times.Oh I think harvest bots are a very bad idea in general, if they belong to guilds only does not matter <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

Kendricke

01-28-2009, 10:34 AM

<cite>Faenril@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote>Kendricke, the point is you brought almost no argument WHY this would be a BAD change.</blockquote>I've brought up my point several times as to why I feel that way. Apparently if I post my reasoning again, I'm opening myself up to more "ad nauseum" accusations, so at this point, I will simply invite you to read through the first 15 pages to see my reasoning. As far as whether or not the idea was a "good change", perhaps we can try something a bit different. I'd like to hear an explanation - any explanation as to why the developers removed the feature from the game in the first place (because at one point you COULD go to Qeynos Harbormaster and pay for a direct trip to Zek or Enchanted Lands). Perhaps someone can explain why they only reinstated the concept on PVP servers and not on PVE servers. While we're at it, we can try to answer why the developers brought back the concept on PVE servers, but only for guilds.

Faenril

01-28-2009, 11:36 AM

<cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Faenril@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote>Kendricke, the point is you brought almost no argument WHY this would be a BAD change.</blockquote>I've brought up my point several times as to why I feel that way. Apparently if I post my reasoning again, I'm opening myself up to more "ad nauseum" accusations, so at this point, I will simply invite you to read through the first 15 pages to see my reasoning. As far as whether or not the idea was a "good change", perhaps we can try something a bit different. I'd like to hear an explanation - any explanation as to why the developers removed the feature from the game in the first place (because at one point you COULD go to Qeynos Harbormaster and pay for a direct trip to Zek or Enchanted Lands). Perhaps someone can explain why they only reinstated the concept on PVP servers and not on PVE servers. While we're at it, we can try to answer why the developers brought back the concept on PVE servers, but only for guilds.</blockquote>Yes that's a good question and I have no idea about the answer. I only know pvp servers, from my point of view having direct bell access to various zones from the harbor, granted you pay for it, makes perfect sense. It is very convenient and widely used on pvp servers. Well, it was widely used, until guild halls offered the option <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" />You see, we already have the feature on our server, but we still put the amenity in our guild hall, and still preferably use the guild hall bell).[Edit]I browsed quickly your previous posts and here is a summary of what I found:- Join a guild if you want it- I'm capitalist, work for your reward- It's a guild reward- Anyone can have a guild hall, create your guild and get a guild hall- Loading screens are an early design decision and has been like that since launch- Consolidated bells were once in game then were removed by intent (the actual intent being unknown)- This would diminish the value of guild amenity- Just because something exists on PVP does not justify it on PVE- They should never have put bells on docks in the first place- Current bell system is faster than it ever was- You want it because guilds have it (this one recurring on the last pages)- Boat travel is the alternative but it was tried and was unpopular.So obviously you bring a little more than what I said, but I still stand by my point that the only strong argument is the guild hall amenity value, which by itself can be discussed and has been.If I follow your reasonning correctly, ppl should be encouraged to join guilds, there should be incentives to do so, and this is one of those incentives, so this mechanic should not be changed as you see it as something positive for the guilds/game.While I agree with you that the game should encourage you to join a guild, and that guild specific rewards is a way to do so, I think this particular bell mechanic could be changed and that there would be enough incentive left in game for ppl to join guilds, and purchase guild halls, the same way ppl who wanted to have been joining guilds since day 1. Eventually more/different guild rewards could be introduced.Seriously, do you really want ppl to join your guild because their motivation is to take advantage of your bell ?In other words, I do not think basing guild rewards on compensating user unfriendly game mechanics/old design/technical limitations, is smart or good for the game. It's a bit like a guild reward that would decrease lag, improve fps or rendering distance, it wouldn't make sense IMO and I see this issue the same way....

Spyderbite

01-28-2009, 12:01 PM

<cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote>Perhaps someone can explain why they only reinstated the concept on PVP servers and not on PVE servers</blockquote>I'm very curious to hear the answer to this question as well. I'd wager that most people on PvP servers never wanted the bells to begin with since it does not promote more land travel which promotes more PvP as people are forced to expose themselves as potential targets.So, it'd be interested to hear why the ticket travel was introduced on servers where they are counter productive to the play style.

Faenril

01-28-2009, 12:09 PM

<cite>Spyderbite@Venekor wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote>Perhaps someone can explain why they only reinstated the concept on PVP servers and not on PVE servers</blockquote>I'm very curious to hear the answer to this question as well. I'd wager that most people on PvP servers never wanted the bells to begin with since it does not promote more land travel which promotes more PvP as people are forced to expose themselves as potential targets.So, it'd be interesting to hear why the ticket travel was introduced on servers where they are counter productive to the play style.</blockquote>Agreed. I would rather have seen the consolidated bells on PvE only rather than PvP only.Immersive in game travelling makes more sense on PvP than PvE, as travelling IS actually dangerous and requires player's attention on PvP.

zaneluke

01-28-2009, 12:13 PM

Ok I have a solution. Simple.Let people put these in homes. But not just any home. Has to be one of the 5 room homes from one of the major cities. Since there are 6 travel options items available, let large home owners pick 5 of the six and they can purchase them and pay the upkeep on them by themselves.Only one rule. owner of the house is the ONLY person who can use it. No alts ect ect. You want alts to have it, but them their own home. This will prevent people from just having 30 toons with permission to a home just in oder to use the travel system.These "travel bells" will costs 20 plat and 2 million status to buy and 40 gold and 5,000 status a week to maintain.

Rijacki

01-28-2009, 12:35 PM

<cite>Spyderbite@Venekor wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote>Perhaps someone can explain why they only reinstated the concept on PVP servers and not on PVE servers</blockquote>I'm very curious to hear the answer to this question as well. I'd wager that most people on PvP servers never wanted the bells to begin with since it does not promote more land travel which promotes more PvP as people are forced to expose themselves as potential targets.So, it'd be interested to hear why the ticket travel was introduced on servers where they are counter productive to the play style.</blockquote>I vaguely remember when they were put on the PvP servers as a response to the bell clicks from one location to another making someone an open target for campers. The zone immunity timer might not have been in place then, or been shorter, or the zoning time longer, I don't recall. But it does and would suck to be killed while you can do absolutely nothing about it since your screen has a loading picture but your character body is in game in thus and so location available to be ganked.As for why they were taken out on PvE servers. Kendricke has been exceedingly fond of pointing out the change in development team and noting how long ago since thus and so change under thus and so -other- development team. It was a -different- development team at a -different- time with even a partially different player base and definatly a different world layout (I believe we only had, at most, one expansion at the time they were removed).The tickets were MUCH higher priced than the PvP server example at a time when gaining coin was much harder could be a prime reason they were not used so much. Having only the original shattered lands and no additional lands might be why it wasn't used as much, too. The other tickets, the ones which were cheaper, put you on a boat instance where you had to fight through ever increasing waves of targets which could be VERY difficult for some classes and were death traps for those with higher tradeskill level vs adventure level wanting to go to a higher tier to harvest.As to the "Guild Hall" arguements.. Kendricke, since you want counters to your "Guild Halls have them, therefore they are unneeded" agruement to not include any mention of Guild Halls, I challenge you to make an arguement against having additional tickets to the other Shattered Lands without giving any Guild Hall related reason why they shouldn't.But, yes, no matter Kendricke's opinion, no matter Spyder's opinion, no matter Zaneluke's opinion, no matter my opinion, no matter the opinion of -anyone- in this thread, if the DEVELOPMENT TEAM doesn't think this player request and feedbac is a good for the health of the game, it won't be added. If they think it would be good for the health and longevity of the game then this player request and feedback will have alerted them to the possibility of adding something in to the game that is not there now (no matter if it was or was not there before or is on one server type but not the other or in Guild Halls or whatever).

Faenril

01-28-2009, 12:38 PM

<cite>Rijacki wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Spyderbite@Venekor wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote>Perhaps someone can explain why they only reinstated the concept on PVP servers and not on PVE servers</blockquote>I'm very curious to hear the answer to this question as well. I'd wager that most people on PvP servers never wanted the bells to begin with since it does not promote more land travel which promotes more PvP as people are forced to expose themselves as potential targets.So, it'd be interested to hear why the ticket travel was introduced on servers where they are counter productive to the play style.</blockquote>I vaguely remember when they were put on the PvP servers as a response to the bell clicks from one location to another making someone an open target for campers. The zone immunity timer might not have been in place then, or been shorter, or the zoning time longer, I don't recall. But it does and would suck to be killed while you can do absolutely nothing about it since your screen has a loading picture but your character body is in game in thus and so location available to be ganked.</blockquote>Yes, this is probably the explanation. Nowadays it would be irrelevant though, as we have docks immunity.

Natturabi

01-28-2009, 12:45 PM

Going back to the OP here. Guildhall bells were only introduced to this thread as a possible work around for repeated zoning after clicking on various dock bells. The OP did come back and say this is not a solution he was looking for. He also suggested (in the original post) that a boat ride would be preferable. I personally got worked up and got on the offensive, because waiting up to five minutes for a boat or a spire to activate is not desirable in any way shape or form over a couple extra loading screens. I would rather go AFK during a 10-20 second load screen and come back ready to go, than come back to see my boat sailing away and waiting five more minutes. So, long story short, I am all for ease of travel. I think a travel agent in all harbor areas is a fine solution. A slight money sink to get where you want to go, higher costs for further travel. Regardless if this is a PvP feature or not, it makes little sense that these were removed. It would not affect my desire to have a full compliment of travel amenities in my guildhall. As pointed out it is the completeness of amenities that make it an efficient mini-town. Last but not least, travel options such as boats, bells, mounts, carpets, spires etc. seem to get better with every expansion. As the world gets bigger we have less time to devote to get to where we need. SOE knows pretty well that this is one of few areas where they can implement a money sink that people will gladly pay. If they make it so public bells can take you anywhere in an instant, then this money sink would no longer exist. The less options we have to spend earned money on, makes for a loss in desire to even gain wealth in the first place, IMO.

Spyderbite

01-28-2009, 12:48 PM

<cite>Rijacki wrote:</cite><blockquote>But, yes, no matter Kendricke's opinion, no matter Spyder's opinion, no matter Zaneluke's opinion, no matter my opinion, no matter the opinion of -anyone- in this thread, if the DEVELOPMENT TEAM doesn't think this player request and feedbac is a good for the health of the game, it won't be added.</blockquote>You're sort of right. Of course, the developers are not going to add flying unicorn mounts that shoot lasers from their eyes and wipe an entire zone clear of mobs no matter how many people ask for it. Just look at all the people who demand Rick Astely's return to Norrath and the consistent "No" from the development team.However, I guarantee that the development team does listen to player feedback. In fact, they go to great measures to request feedback and ideas from time to time. There are some ideas which may seem undoubtedly "good for the health of the game" from a player's perspective. But, to a developer it may be a huge waste of resources, coding nightmare, or just not in the budget to address at the time.I just don't want your input to be twisted in to "100 pages of feedback from the players.. lets just say no cause we're mean". Which unfortunately, is a wide spread belief by many these days. <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

Kendricke

01-28-2009, 01:54 PM

<cite>Rijacki wrote:</cite><blockquote>As for why they were taken out on PvE servers. Kendricke has been exceedingly fond of pointing out the change in development team and noting how long ago since thus and so change under thus and so -other- development team. It was a -different- development team at a -different- time with even a partially different player base and definatly a different world layout (I believe we only had, at most, one expansion at the time they were removed).</blockquote>Yes, the changes were made some time ago. However, there was a basis for that decision in the first place. It's not as if the developers just woke up one morning and said, "HOLY COW, WHAT WERE WE THINKING!! TURN IT OFF NOW!"Even so, even with different teams, the developers have had plenty of chances to change the system back. It's not as if there's a completely new team filled with recent high school graduates who have no idea what the game was like back in 2005. It's not as if we seen additional changes in the intervening years. Could they change the bells back? Sure, they could. The code's already there. It's been done. It's being done on some servers. So, why haven't they done it? Simple oversight? Completely slipped their collective minds? No one's ever mentioned the idea till this very thread? While we're on the subject, does anyone really think I'm pro-loading screen here? If it was up to me, loading screens would take 20 minutes? That I think we should see a loading screen every time we use a balloon in Moors of Ykesha? That every other player here who isn't jumping up and down in estatic joy at the very idea of more Harbormaster options is likewise pro-loading screen? That it's obvious we're simply elitist jerks who can't stand the ideas of unguilded players daring to play in our private sandbox?

sliderhouserules

01-28-2009, 03:45 PM

<cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote>While we're on the subject, does anyone really think I'm pro-loading screen here? If it was up to me, loading screens would take 20 minutes? That I think we should see a loading screen every time we use a balloon in Moors of Ykesha? That every other player here who isn't jumping up and down in estatic joy at the very idea of more Harbormaster options is likewise pro-loading screen? That it's obvious we're simply elitist jerks who can't stand the ideas of unguilded players daring to play in our private sandbox? </blockquote>Why don't you answer your own questions? Because there's only a couple possibilities here: If you are pro-loading screens then nothing more needs to be said. IE you're an elitist jerk. If you are ambivalent about loading screens, but against this change, then you are ignorant of the people that don't have access to this guild amenity and/or use the harbors a lot, as well as the people that have slow(er) computers and take a long time to load. IE you're an elitist jerk.The other options would put you on the agreement side of this issue.You're obviously not agreeing here, and that only leaves the elitist jerk option. So please enlighten us on your position so we can dispell the elitist jerk perception.[You used the term elitist jerk, so don't get all report happy and bring the mod-wrath down on me.]

Thunndar316

01-28-2009, 04:36 PM

<cite>sliderhouserules wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote>While we're on the subject, does anyone really think I'm pro-loading screen here? If it was up to me, loading screens would take 20 minutes? That I think we should see a loading screen every time we use a balloon in Moors of Ykesha? That every other player here who isn't jumping up and down in estatic joy at the very idea of more Harbormaster options is likewise pro-loading screen? That it's obvious we're simply elitist jerks who can't stand the ideas of unguilded players daring to play in our private sandbox? </blockquote>Why don't you answer your own questions? Because there's only a couple possibilities here: If you are pro-loading screens then nothing more needs to be said. IE you're an elitist jerk. If you are ambivalent about loading screens, but against this change, then you are ignorant of the people that don't have access to this guild amenity and/or use the harbors a lot, as well as the people that have slow(er) computers and take a long time to load. IE you're an elitist jerk.The other options would put you on the agreement side of this issue.You're obviously not agreeing here, and that only leaves the elitist jerk option. So please enlighten us on your position so we can dispell the elitist jerk perception.[You used the term elitist jerk, so don't get all report happy and bring the mod-wrath down on me.]</blockquote><img src="/eq2/images/smilies/e8a506dc4ad763aca51bec4ca7dc8560.gif" border="0" />

scruffylookin

01-28-2009, 04:37 PM

<cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Rijacki wrote:</cite><blockquote>As for why they were taken out on PvE servers. Kendricke has been exceedingly fond of pointing out the change in development team and noting how long ago since thus and so change under thus and so -other- development team. It was a -different- development team at a -different- time with even a partially different player base and definatly a different world layout (I believe we only had, at most, one expansion at the time they were removed).</blockquote>Yes, the changes were made some time ago. However, there was a basis for that decision in the first place. It's not as if the developers just woke up one morning and said, "HOLY COW, WHAT WERE WE THINKING!! TURN IT OFF NOW!"Even so, even with different teams, the developers have had plenty of chances to change the system back. It's not as if there's a completely new team filled with recent high school graduates who have no idea what the game was like back in 2005. It's not as if we seen additional changes in the intervening years. Could they change the bells back? Sure, they could. The code's already there. It's been done. It's being done on some servers. So, why haven't they done it? Simple oversight? Completely slipped their collective minds? No one's ever mentioned the idea till this very thread? While we're on the subject, does anyone really think I'm pro-loading screen here? If it was up to me, loading screens would take 20 minutes? That I think we should see a loading screen every time we use a balloon in Moors of Ykesha? That every other player here who isn't jumping up and down in estatic joy at the very idea of more Harbormaster options is likewise pro-loading screen? That it's obvious we're simply elitist jerks who can't stand the ideas of unguilded players daring to play in our private sandbox? </blockquote>To answer your question, I think it's obvious that the bells were removed to increase travel time in the game. That is precisely the OP's (and most of our) feedback. Extra bells are a bad way to increase travel time. They are the opposite of immersive, it's not gameplay...it's a cheap way to make it take longer to get somewhere.The OPs point specifically stated that he didn't have a problem with immersive or longer travel, but the point, click, point was a terrible idea. I agree.The OP was essentially asking the devs to revisit this decision.Things like this will not change without the feedback from the players. And as for "While we're on the subject, does anyone really think I'm pro-loading screen here?", you have been against this idea from the beginning, for various reasons.So maybe the reason the change has come through is because every time someone has suggested it, someone like you comes in the fourms (that's not an insult... you have every right to come in... I'm just saying it's a posible explanation) and argues against it.It's hard for someone to think you not against loading screens when you argue against the point, and when someone specifcally asks you who you're trying to convince, and your answer is "The Developers."

Zarador

01-28-2009, 04:49 PM

<cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote>Yes, the changes were made some time ago. However, there was a basis for that decision in the first place. It's not as if the developers just woke up one morning and said, "HOLY COW, WHAT WERE WE THINKING!! TURN IT OFF NOW!"Even so, even with different teams, the developers have had plenty of chances to change the system back. It's not as if there's a completely new team filled with recent high school graduates who have no idea what the game was like back in 2005. It's not as if we seen additional changes in the intervening years. Could they change the bells back? Sure, they could. The code's already there. It's been done. It's being done on some servers. So, why haven't they done it? Simple oversight? Completely slipped their collective minds? No one's ever mentioned the idea till this very thread? While we're on the subject, does anyone really think I'm pro-loading screen here? If it was up to me, loading screens would take 20 minutes? That I think we should see a loading screen every time we use a balloon in Moors of Ykesha? That every other player here who isn't jumping up and down in estatic joy at the very idea of more Harbormaster options is likewise pro-loading screen? That it's obvious we're simply elitist jerks who can't stand the ideas of unguilded players daring to play in our private sandbox? </blockquote>So to make sure that I uderstand what you are saying here:<ul><li>The consolidated bells were in the game before.</li><li>They could easily be added to the game now.</li><li>You don't like seeing multiple loading screens, nor do others. </li><li>They are a special rewards for large guilds who can afford them, thats why they should never give them to the masses because it would cheapen that reward.</li><li>We would be wrong in interpreting that as being "elitist" and that your against such a change because you feel it's a guild exclusive, even though that is the only reason you have cited time after time in this thread.</li><li>You went so far to explain that the bells would have no real value as a reward, were others to have them, to an extent where you might even remove some of yours.</li></ul>Summary:<ul><li>Loading screens are boring for almost everyone, but "Us".</li><li>Your not "Us", so loading screens really are not an issue that's important since they already fixed that issue for "Us".</li><li>The developers won't change a thing based on the posts here, they don't care about what you may say in some forum.</li><li>I'm posting here in case a developer thinks this is a good idea, I need to shoot it down.</li></ul>

sliderhouserules

01-28-2009, 05:13 PM

<cite>Zarador wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote>...</blockquote>So to make sure that I uderstand what you are saying here:<ul><li>The consolidated bells were in the game before.</li><li>They could easily be added to the game now.</li><li>You don't like seeing multiple loading screens, nor do others. </li><li>They are a special rewards for large guilds who can afford them, thats why they should never give them to the masses because it would cheapen that reward.</li><li>We would be wrong in interpreting that as being "elitist" and that your against such a change because you feel it's a guild exclusive, even though that is the only reason you have cited time after time in this thread.</li><li>You went so far to explain that the bells would have no real value as a reward, were others to have them, to an extent where you might even remove some of yours.</li></ul>Summary:<ul><li>Loading screens are boring for almost everyone, but "Us".</li><li>Your not "Us", so loading screens really are not an issue that's important since they already fixed that issue for "Us".</li><li>The developers won't change a thing based on the posts here, they don't care about what you may say in some forum.</li><li>I'm posting here in case a developer thinks this is a good idea, I need to shoot it down.</li></ul></blockquote>This is like a piece of art right here. I'm misty-eyed, inspired. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/e8a506dc4ad763aca51bec4ca7dc8560.gif" border="0" />