"Large Number" of Heirloom Items [Archive] - EQ2 Forum Archive @ EQ2Wire

ashen1973

08-28-2009, 08:41 AM

<cite>thog_zork wrote:</cite><blockquote>overall this is a very bad change for the game as a whole ... it spped up looting however the implications are massive:some are:a.) you screw people with two accounts big time (they pay you twice as much !)b.) (Old) raid loot can now be given to twinks one time (all equiqed items have been un attunend)</blockquote>a) how is it screwing over people with multiple accounts (I have multiple accounts and dont feel screwed over) you can still get loot to an alt the old way, log them in, bring them into the zone and grab it from the chest.b) yes, old loot can be given to alts, but, as you say, this is a one time thing. Have a look at the main char of most players, just how usefull is most of the gear they have going to be to their alts? Most decent gear (especially raid gear) is pretty specific in its usefullness, and most people dont have alt sof the same type (i.e just how usefull is a mains healer ghear goign to be to their alt mages or fighters? and how many people have multiple healers etc..)

Noaani

08-28-2009, 08:49 AM

<cite>lilmohi wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>revren wrote:</cite><blockquote>... but i can almost see the drama in a group when a Dirge rolls on the ring from NHT (if any of t...</blockquote>I know a trouby that has been trying to get the ring for his own use for some time now. And i'm just waiting for the fallout that will ensue if a wizard or some such in the group looses to him.</blockquote>Why on earth would you want it?Do you even know the mechanics behind it, and why it is such a poor item for a bard?

ashen1973

08-28-2009, 08:49 AM

<cite>Wullail@Splitpaw wrote:</cite><blockquote>Waiting for...Mage only Fabled ring dropsTank loots NEEDand wins.Caster : [Removed for Content]!.....why did you loot that ring! , it's mage only!!!!111oneonoenoneTank : I NEED it for my wizard...And the arguments start...</blockquote>I have been discussing this with a couple of my guildies.To us, when we run guild groups/raids etc.. its no problem at all, as we always play fair with loot.With PUGs it could be a problem, but, I already make sure that loot rules are very clear from the start, whenever I run a pick-up group. People are going to have to be sure they set the rules before anything is killed.If the groups loot rules are not to your liking, then leave and find another group.there will always be idiots that agree to the rules, but then loot an item anyway, but these people soon get a bad name, and, I knwo from experience, that as long as yiou all agree to loot rules, set out clearly in text chat, the CSr's are very helpfull in these situations.Myself, I would go for the round-robin all, leader only legendary+ loot settings when running a PUG.Make sure everyone is aware that they can role for one class only (so if player X is bringing his mezzer because the group needs it, but would like to role for his healer, thats fine, as long as its stated at the start of the zone) unless no-one in the group wants it, then it goes to alt rolls.make sure everyone is aware that loot will not be given to a person if the majority of the group agree that its not an item that class would find beneficial.Of course, there will still be disagreements, but no-more than what you already risk when running in a PUG, but, if the rules are clear at the start, then arguments can normally be resolved quickly.

Noaani

08-28-2009, 08:51 AM

<cite>Wullail@Splitpaw wrote:</cite><blockquote>Waiting for...Mage only Fabled ring dropsTank loots NEEDand wins.Caster : [Removed for Content]!.....why did you loot that ring! , it's mage only!!!!111oneonoenoneTank : I NEED it for my wizard...And the arguments start...</blockquote>This is something I see as likely to happen because of this change. All its going to do to me is give me a very big reason to stop running PuGs of any form.

Nathdorl

08-28-2009, 09:10 AM

despite the wahwahwah in here, let me say this:This is the greatest change ever.and im not being sarcastig about that, i really mean it.one thing that needs to be changed along this, tho.since people could now very easily load up with lewt and then transfer to bazaar, the transfer system needs to be changed.i propose to ONLY transfer attuned items to bazaar, all the other gear gets deleted if its not placed in the shared bank before the transfer. this NEEDS to be in there to prevent people from getting lured with huge $$$ to leave their raid buddies with a bag of loot to make fat RL cash from.

Rendoir

08-28-2009, 09:12 AM

My initial reaction is that this is a ludicrious idea. Especially when it comes to no-trade fabled and loot drops.a. Why should somebody who has taken part in contested raids for example then get to send the loot the won via hardearned DKP etc to another toon that has never raoded x 4.b. Why should somebody who has a level 450 transmuter on the same account be able to specify that character at thestart of a group and then just give them everything to mute.c. Why would SOE decide that the game needed to be made any bloody easier to level up in?For example. I have 3 accounts, and PLed a brig to 50 the other day in a few hours. I could then take him to 80 withmy 2 well equipped characters and the gear him up with equipment from instances from the other couple of toons at 80on that account. Together with a crap laod of shards and you have a level 80 toon in just a few days with t2 armor, andpotentially complete fabled/legendary 'unearned' in all other slots.Since having had a 2-3 year break from EQ2, and seeing how incredibly dumbed down it is on my return, can onlywonder at the mentality behind the devs choice on this extra over-simplification.This is not that other game - you missed the boat on making an easy, accessable game to appeal to children and idiot savants, so please don't spoil eq2 even more via dumbing down further content..............................And while we are on the issue of dumbing down... self - mentoring?? Woot, now no need to ever, ever group again.

Vraeth

08-28-2009, 09:18 AM

<cite>Impact@Splitpaw wrote:</cite><blockquote>And while we are on the issue of dumbing down... self - mentoring?? Woot, now no need to ever, ever group again.</blockquote>i dont want to group either so i will just self-mentor to 75 and solo djinn master to get aa

obikenkenobi

08-28-2009, 09:21 AM

I don't see the whole problem with this. Its not as if this isn't the way it was going before as people were bringing alts in all the time to loot stuff. Its easy. If you get into a group just ask everyone what toon they wanna roll for. Then stick to that plan. You can even specify that, "hey, this is a run for alts" right at the start. I don't think this is going to be game breaking. Eq1 back in the day was about the same as you could get chests off of gray mobs. Even the loot from raid mobs dropped if they were gray. Twinking is kind of an eq tradition. Needless to say, all you really gotta do is make sure you set up your groups with the toons they are rolling for in mind. I think this change is awsome because its soooo gonna cut back on wasted time on raids and instances. Nothin worse than standing around with your thumb up yer rear with nothin to do while joe blow gets his alt out and runs ten zones over (even though you tell him to go use your guild hall bell/flag guy) just to loot an item you wouldn't want if your life depended on it.edit: The only bad thing I can see coming from this is the cost of mana's and stuff on the brokers as they may become more rare with things being transmuted less.

Kotomi

08-28-2009, 09:29 AM

<cite>Impact@Splitpaw wrote:</cite><blockquote>a. Why should somebody who has taken part in contested raids for example then get to send the loot the won via hardearned DKP etc to another toon that has never raoded x 4.b. Why should somebody who has a level 450 transmuter on the same account be able to specify that character at thestart of a group and then just give them everything to mute.</blockquote>a. It saves time, people won't have to log their alts, crash, run to the zone and get the loot as often.b. Probably because people aren't too fond of having to level transmuting on all their chars. If the proposed changes to transmuting go through where you can be both transmuter and tinkerer and breaking stuff down is a separate skill that can be maxed from just breaking stuff, I think we'll see a whole lot more people with atleast one capped transmuter. Besides, it's not like this change forces you to allow that, you can still demand that they are only allowed to roll for stuff on the toon they bring if that makes you feel better.

Ballads

08-28-2009, 09:34 AM

<cite>Nathdorl wrote:</cite><blockquote>one thing that needs to be changed along this, tho.since people could now very easily load up with lewt and then transfer to bazaar, the transfer system needs to be changed.i propose to ONLY transfer attuned items to bazaar, all the other gear gets deleted if its not placed in the shared bank before the transfer. this NEEDS to be in there to prevent people from getting lured with huge $$$ to leave their raid buddies with a bag of loot to make fat RL cash from.</blockquote>Transfers to bazaar needs to be suspended from now till after the LU to prevent peopel from moving now or the night before the LU as well, after that should be fine, but any character on bazaar the day this goes in gets sell off their toon piece by piece on lvl 1 toons.

Nathdorl

08-28-2009, 10:02 AM

<cite>Ballads wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Nathdorl wrote:</cite><blockquote>one thing that needs to be changed along this, tho.since people could now very easily load up with lewt and then transfer to bazaar, the transfer system needs to be changed.i propose to ONLY transfer attuned items to bazaar, all the other gear gets deleted if its not placed in the shared bank before the transfer. this NEEDS to be in there to prevent people from getting lured with huge $$$ to leave their raid buddies with a bag of loot to make fat RL cash from.</blockquote>Transfers to bazaar needs to be suspended from now till after the LU to prevent peopel from moving now or the night before the LU as well, after that should be fine, but any character on bazaar the day this goes in gets sell off their toon piece by piece on lvl 1 toons.</blockquote>good addition.

yadlajoi

08-28-2009, 10:06 AM

it should be now time to give exile a shared bank.

Barx

08-28-2009, 10:30 AM

<cite>yadlajoi wrote:</cite><blockquote>it should be now time to give exile a shared bank.</blockquote> No. You chose exile, you deal with the consequences of it. They made it clear when it went in what it would mean if you stayed in exile.

Geothe

08-28-2009, 10:38 AM

so, current gear becoms unattuned.I assume that means all adornments that were on that gear reappear in your inventory as well?Or do they just vanish?

Barx

08-28-2009, 10:51 AM

<cite>Geothe wrote:</cite><blockquote>so, current gear becoms unattuned.I assume that means all adornments that were on that gear reappear in your inventory as well?Or do they just vanish?</blockquote>Why would that happen? I imagine the adornments don't go anywhere, they have nothing to do with the attuned-ness of the item.

Master71

08-28-2009, 10:56 AM

they forget to heirloom the void shard armor, in order to make them for your alt.

Vraeth

08-28-2009, 10:57 AM

last time when they changed some instance notrade drops to attunables the adornments stayed on the items

AvalonSpirit

08-28-2009, 12:37 PM

<cite>obikenkenobi wrote:</cite><blockquote> edit: The only bad thing I can see coming from this is the cost of mana's and stuff on the brokers as they may become more rare with things being transmuted less.</blockquote>not sure i agree. it sounds like all the old legendary and fabled gear thats been rotting in banks of folks who havent gotten around to selling it or dont want to sell it yet, can now be moved over to their transmuters to be broken down. it might actually help the selling of components a bit, for the short term anyway.i could be wrong <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" />edited to add-- i forgot to mention the trash loot from instances that no one wants and no muters around.

Valdaglerion

08-28-2009, 12:42 PM

My toon on test ended up with 6 unequipped slots. 4 of those were fabled drops, 2 were legendary.

Kigneer

08-28-2009, 12:59 PM

<cite>Noaani wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Wullail@Splitpaw wrote:</cite><blockquote>Waiting for...Mage only Fabled ring dropsTank loots NEEDand wins.Caster : [Removed for Content]!.....why did you loot that ring! , it's mage only!!!!111oneonoenoneTank : I NEED it for my wizard...And the arguments start...</blockquote>This is something I see as likely to happen because of this change. All its going to do to me is give me a very big reason to stop running PuGs of any form.</blockquote>You run PuGs, Noaani?lololol

Deson

08-28-2009, 01:01 PM

Not only is Heirlooming so much stuff awesome, Lore-equip is an unmentioned great change too. It's great for sales of lore items and when the heirloom lore-equip tags are applied to shard gear, only one character needs all those books. I like it and it's an excellent in-between loot change between everything tradable and overdone no-trade.

Hirofortis

08-28-2009, 01:07 PM

Been on test and all I can say is thank you SOE for listening. It has always been frustrating to see a piece go to waste and sell to a vendor just becasue no one needs it. Now we can ask group members if they mind us rolling on it for an alt. woohoo. As a side note, maybe a new category on the nbg of bng for alt, which would be one step obive greed but one step below need. <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> As far as people who are just greedy in general and need on everything, It only takes once and they will not be finding groups anymore. <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> This makes it so much nicer to play the game now. Thank You.

and0ra77

08-28-2009, 01:31 PM

/delete

Excalibur1

08-28-2009, 01:44 PM

Would it be possible for sony to "tie" accounts paid in the same name using the same credit card together to act as one account so that my 5 level 80 toons spread across 3 accounts can benefit from the heirloom tag?

Spakka

08-28-2009, 02:14 PM

This change makes me feel uncomfortable on 2 levels,1) I run mostly PUGs on my 80's and I anticipate all sorts of problems with people rolling for alts, especially on highly desired items. At the moment people generally 'play nice' because needing on a non-class item is pointless, but with so many people playing alts now I fear the temptation to roll for alts is going to be too strong and we are going to see a lot of grief and resentment that will detract from our enjoyment of the gaming experience. I would feel a lot happier if Heirloom was not applied to items in the 'current' top Tier i.e. T8 for now and T9 in the next Xpac.2) It doesn't seem 'right' that a player can gear an alt up in Fabled just because he raids on his main. Yes I know that it is technically possible to do this now but this process facilitates the mechanism to the point where it is trivial to do it. I never thought it was intended by SOE that non-raiding characters should get top end raid gear - otherwise what was the whole point of the No-Trade tag in the first place? (although stopping Plat sellers was one good reason for No-Trade I suppose).

Hirofortis

08-28-2009, 02:39 PM

<cite>Spakka wrote:</cite><blockquote>This change makes me feel uncomfortable on 2 levels,1) I run mostly PUGs on my 80's and I anticipate all sorts of problems with people rolling for alts, especially on highly desired items. At the moment people generally 'play nice' because needing on a non-class item is pointless, but with so many people playing alts now I fear the temptation to roll for alts is going to be too strong and we are going to see a lot of grief and resentment that will detract from our enjoyment of the gaming experience. I would feel a lot happier if Heirloom was not applied to items in the 'current' top Tier i.e. T8 for now and T9 in the next Xpac.2) It doesn't seem 'right' that a player can gear an alt up in Fabled just because he raids on his main. Yes I know that it is technically possible to do this now but this process facilitates the mechanism to the point where it is trivial to do it. I never thought it was intended by SOE that non-raiding characters should get top end raid gear - otherwise what was the whole point of the No-Trade tag in the first place? (although stopping Plat sellers was one good reason for No-Trade I suppose).</blockquote>With current mechanics the chance of getting certain drops is very very tough. It is nice that SOE is actually giving people a chance to one work together and two show that they can actually communicate with peeps. Of course if I am in a PuG and someone does that, I just don't group with them any more. A couple groups like that and they realize real quick they don't do that. What your describing happens a lot more in WoW than in EQ just due to the nature of the player base. Thank Goodness. <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />As far as raid items and current tier is concerned, Raids are very very specific on what classes you can get in and be successful. This allows people to play classes that are needed without feeling like they are left out on toons that they really like to play. And lets face it, right now peeps just selling loot rights to the same stuff anyway. This is not going to change anything other than make it nice for those who actually do raid to help out a toon that they would not normally be able to gear up, thus giving a larger base of well equiped toons that you can get groups with. And of course the final thing is it might even speed up groups as people will not be as worried about I have to get this toon in or I am not grouping. You might even see an increase in the amount of people who want to group since they still have a stake in getting some loot.

x82nd77

08-28-2009, 02:43 PM

so SOE listened to the masses and made it so we can trade between alts? I find this a positive change overall. That said... The fact that they did not change LoN or stationcash items really really chapps my furry butt. So you think we should be able to trade items around a bit more but only if we didn't pay real world cash for them? God forbid we be able to share a helm that is decorative and has no real use between alts if we paid $5 for it.

Thinwizzy

08-28-2009, 02:58 PM

It would be nice to see shared banks open up to exiles. There is no real good reason as to why they shouldnt. It would not negatively effect anyone's gameplay. It would simply be a nice addition to make a small area of gameplay a little bit smoother for some people. That isn't to horrible is it? If you wanted to prevent RPers from getting their feelings hurt to much, you could simply make it a purchasable guild hall addition.

Telomir

08-28-2009, 03:25 PM

I am really looking forward to this change.Coming from a low population server (venekor), I often end up playing an alt class I am not fond of, but do so nonetheless for the sakes of enabling a group to venture out at all.I however do share the concerns that have been brought up, mostly that in PUGs this change has the potential to cause lots of drama and grief. In my opinion courtesy calls for people to be able to roll for the toons they are currently on with higher priority then for alts, unless it is previously explicitly stated that one is joining for "item X".To avoid endless discussions at each interesting loot piece, would it be possible to offer a revamped loot selection that adds a more granular selection? Currently we have "Greed", which mostly everyone rolls on either to sell for vendor or offer to one's diety, and "Need". Would it be possible to add a thid option, e.g. "Need for Alt" or "Nice to have" <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" />, which would have a higher priority then Greed rolls, but lower then Need? I think this was one of the reasons the last revamp to the loot options actually took place, when the current NBG was introduced.It also helps with other items when e.g. a healer would like a dps item, but only if the real dps classes don't need it.This shouldnt really be an issue, but once you've run enough PUG's you know that discussing each item drop takes ages in most groups <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/136dd33cba83140c7ce38db096d05aed.gif" border="0" />Anyways just tossing out this idea, don't be too harsh <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" />

feldon30

08-28-2009, 03:40 PM

This is an excellent change. Folks were ALREADY holding up raids to log alts to loot items. This just eliminates an annoying drudgery to something that was already being done. As for groups, I think we're going to see folks communicating AT ZONE IN about what items can be rolled on, by whom, and for what alts. Otherwise, yes there will be hurt feelings. Already folks are using grey mentored shard runs to gear up alts (since a mastercrafted level 80 toon isn't going to get very far in TSO zones).

rednexx

08-28-2009, 03:41 PM

I agree an "Alt-Need" roll with higher priority then "Greed" but less then "Need" sounds like a good solution. Maybe they could even allow during pre-roll and with choice of "Alt-Need" the player to assign which avatar they are rolling the item for so if they win it can drop in that characters mail for pickup, or if it is just for alternate equipment on you current avatar then it would go into your inventory as usual.

Kigneer

08-28-2009, 03:47 PM

<cite>Xalmat wrote:</cite><blockquote>From the August 27, 2009 Test patch notes:The Heirloom flag has been added to a large number of items in the game with the exception of quest items, heritage items, PvP items, and items gained from patterns (but the patterns themselves were flagged as Heirloom). This will allow players to join groups with the character that can help the group the most without the worry of not being able to gear up the character of their choice! As a side effect, items affected by this change will unattune and be sent to overflow initially upon first login.I wonder how much is "a large number", and I wonder what kind of impact this will have on the overall game.</blockquote>Overall, I like this change. It's pretty hard as it is with loot rules in some PuGs to outfit alts (transmuting is being used for "trash" fabled loot that the immediate classes can't use), and this gives an opportunity for that item that can drop for a particular class, can be passed on without that darn no-trade sticker getting in the way. It's still you playing that alt, so the heirloom item isn't going to change the economy.Also, it maybe a good thing overall, as folks may want to revisit lower zones to gear their alts, which is nice as folks may want to hit some 35+ epics again. Fast levelers can finally get those lower tiered epic names they missed.

Hecula

08-28-2009, 03:48 PM

Hmmm, Artifacts being given Heirloom status is interesting.

Ballads

08-28-2009, 03:53 PM

<cite>Hecula wrote:</cite><blockquote>Hmmm, Artifacts being given Heirloom status is interesting.</blockquote>Some are, some were attunable at start so dont get the heirloom.

Quicksilver74

08-28-2009, 03:57 PM

<cite>feldon30 wrote:</cite><blockquote>This is an excellent change. Folks were ALREADY holding up raids to log alts to loot items. This just eliminates an annoying drudgery to something that was already being done. As for groups, I think we're going to see folks communicating AT ZONE IN about what items can be rolled on, by whom, and for what alts. Otherwise, yes there will be hurt feelings. Already folks are using grey mentored shard runs to gear up alts (since a mastercrafted level 80 toon isn't going to get very far in TSO zones).</blockquote>QFE This change is excellent. It has some possible compications, but all in all it's amazingly good.

BleemTeam

08-28-2009, 04:11 PM

This phase of the GU53 is an amazing one.I am really excited for such a feature.

GrunEQ

08-28-2009, 04:51 PM

Approves of this change! <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/e8a506dc4ad763aca51bec4ca7dc8560.gif" border="0" /><img src="/eq2/images/smilies/49869fe8223507d7223db3451e5321aa.gif" border="0" />

Spakka

08-28-2009, 04:51 PM

OK, some good points and suggestions above make me feel a bit better about this idea. An Alt-Need button would help clarify the looting order and identify 'ninja looters' lol.

timetravelling

08-28-2009, 05:35 PM

Glad y'all are excited for it! We're excited to give ya a lot more options when grouping and gearing up your (hopefully) many characters! A few points from the thread:-We are aware of the issues with multiple accounts. However, for pretty apparent technical reasons there was not a good way to overcome this. However, other than the one-time initial unattuning of affected items, this feature does not enable players to do anything that was not already possible with alts and a lot of patient running.-We do not currently have plans to change the looting options. However, it is something to monitor and we'll keep an eye on it.-The change is intended to grab nearly all instance, overland, and contested loots. But not items you can only ever get once such as epics, quest rewards, armor gained from patterns, LoN rewards, Station Cash items, etc.We would greatly appreciate any feedback y'all have of items that may have been missed or flagged and shouldn't have been! If you hadn't noticed, EQ2 has, um, kind of a lot of items and we'd like to be as thorough as possible! =)

Rheem

08-28-2009, 06:07 PM

<cite>timetravelling wrote:</cite><blockquote>Glad y'all are excited for it! We're excited to give ya a lot more options when grouping and gearing up your (hopefully) many characters! A few points from the thread:-We are aware of the issues with multiple accounts. However, for pretty apparent technical reasons there was not a good way to overcome this. However, other than the one-time initial unattuning of affected items, this feature does not enable players to do anything that was not already possible with alts and a lot of patient running.-We do not currently have plans to change the looting options. However, it is something to monitor and we'll keep an eye on it.-The change is intended to grab nearly all instance, overland, and contested loots. But not items you can only ever get once such as epics, quest rewards, armor gained from patterns, LoN rewards, Station Cash items, etc.We would greatly appreciate any feedback y'all have of items that may have been missed or flagged and shouldn't have been! If you hadn't noticed, EQ2 has, um, kind of a lot of items and we'd like to be as thorough as possible! =)</blockquote>Why not LoN rewards and Station Cash items? These items are one time /claim items that you could put on any character, not something you earn in game. My feelings are if I could claim them on any character I should be able to trade them between characters.

Geothe

08-28-2009, 06:10 PM

<cite>Rheem@Blackburrow wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>timetravelling wrote:</cite><blockquote>Glad y'all are excited for it! We're excited to give ya a lot more options when grouping and gearing up your (hopefully) many characters! A few points from the thread:-We are aware of the issues with multiple accounts. However, for pretty apparent technical reasons there was not a good way to overcome this. However, other than the one-time initial unattuning of affected items, this feature does not enable players to do anything that was not already possible with alts and a lot of patient running.-We do not currently have plans to change the looting options. However, it is something to monitor and we'll keep an eye on it.-The change is intended to grab nearly all instance, overland, and contested loots. But not items you can only ever get once such as epics, quest rewards, armor gained from patterns, LoN rewards, Station Cash items, etc.We would greatly appreciate any feedback y'all have of items that may have been missed or flagged and shouldn't have been! If you hadn't noticed, EQ2 has, um, kind of a lot of items and we'd like to be as thorough as possible! =)</blockquote>Why not LoN rewards and Station Cash items? These items are one time /claim items that you could put on any character, not something you earn in game. My feelings are if I could claim them on any character I should be able to trade them between characters.</blockquote>I think you are confused as to what Heirloom actually means.It means you can trade it to any character on your account, but to actually use the item, you must attune it to that character, at which time, it is no longer tradeable.LoN/Station Cash are already "tradeable" in that you can choose which toon on your account you actually want to claim it on. Once claim, they are locked to that character just like attuned heirloom items.

Jonaroth

08-28-2009, 06:10 PM

oOoo.. I look forward to this change.. Sure I have 3 accounts, but with 12+ alts, trading between them will be much easier!

Phaldyne

08-28-2009, 06:12 PM

Brett,I think you all should consider upadating the loot window for this. You could always add a fourth button; Decline, Greed, Need for Alt, Need for Self. This would help to cut down on the people that will hit Need for an item that they want to put on their alt, sell for the cash value or transmute with the alt-transmuter when someone else in the group actually needs it for the character they brought.I'm for this change, I have many alts that I don't get to play as often since my main is much more sought after. However, I don't like the idea of losing out on something because someone else in the group is a bit too greedy or being deceptive.-Phrancie

thog_zork

08-28-2009, 06:14 PM

<cite>timetravelling wrote:</cite><blockquote>-We are aware of the issues with multiple accounts. However, for pretty apparent technical reasons there was not a good way to overcome this. However, other than the one-time initial unattuning of affected items, this feature does not enable players to do anything that was not already possible with alts and a lot of patient running.</blockquote>To accomondate/help customers like me who actually pays for multiple accounts for effective playing; can you consider allowing gms to txf heir-loom items manualy between accounts from tthe same person for a short duration after the patch ?

Excalibur1

08-28-2009, 06:16 PM

<cite>thog_zork wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>timetravelling wrote:</cite><blockquote>-We are aware of the issues with multiple accounts. However, for pretty apparent technical reasons there was not a good way to overcome this. However, other than the one-time initial unattuning of affected items, this feature does not enable players to do anything that was not already possible with alts and a lot of patient running.</blockquote>To accomondate/help customers like me who actually pays for multiple accounts for effective playing; can you consider allowing gms to txf heir-loom items manualy for short duration after the patch ?</blockquote>This seems like a reasonable solution for the time being. I'm sure there are a LOT of multi acount people.

thog_zork

08-28-2009, 06:17 PM

<cite>Excalibur119 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>thog_zork wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>timetravelling wrote:</cite><blockquote>-We are aware of the issues with multiple accounts. However, for pretty apparent technical reasons there was not a good way to overcome this. However, other than the one-time initial unattuning of affected items, this feature does not enable players to do anything that was not already possible with alts and a lot of patient running.</blockquote>To accomondate/help customers like me who actually pays for multiple accounts for effective playing; can you consider allowing gms to txf heir-loom items manualy for short duration after the patch ?</blockquote>This seems like a reasonable solution for the time being. I'm sure there are a LOT of multi acount people.</blockquote>yeah there are like 7 peoples in my guild who have at least two accounts

Korrupt

08-28-2009, 06:27 PM

This change is very nice overall. If people create a reputation for rolling need on everything there are forums where they can be called on it.

Valdaglerion

08-28-2009, 06:27 PM

<cite>Phaldyne wrote:</cite><blockquote>Brett,I think you all should consider upadating the loot window for this. You could always add a fourth button; Decline, Greed, Need for Alt, Need for Self. This would help to cut down on the people that will hit Need for an item that they want to put on their alt, sell for the cash value or transmute with the alt-transmuter when someone else in the group actually needs it for the character they brought.I'm for this change, I have many alts that I don't get to play as often since my main is much more sought after. However, I don't like the idea of losing out on something because someone else in the group is a bit too greedy or being deceptive.-Phrancie</blockquote>So you are saying that Needing for an Alt should rank higher than Greed?I see this would only promote many people in pick ups from rolling "Need for self" more often. After all, someone selling it for coin to gear up their main is more of a need than you needing to outfit an alt that sits in a box more often, IMO anyway.

azraelteir

08-28-2009, 06:28 PM

I have not been able to log into Test Copy yet, my toon hasnt copied.. <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />On items that have been adorned, do the adornments stay on them when they are "unattuned" due to the switch? I have a lot of items that have adornments on them that from what I am hearing will become Heirloom and I would hate to lose all of those adornments.On a side note, with this one time unattuning, I know a certain alt of mine that is going to be getting a lot of hand me downs... <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

Excalibur1

08-28-2009, 06:40 PM

<cite>azraelteir wrote:</cite><blockquote>I have not been able to log into Test Copy yet, my toon hasnt copied.. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" />On items that have been adorned, do the adornments stay on them when they are "unattuned" due to the switch? I have a lot of items that have adornments on them that from what I am hearing will become Heirloom and I would hate to lose all of those adornments.On a side note, with this one time unattuning, I know a certain alt of mine that is going to be getting a lot of hand me downs... <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" /></blockquote>Yes, the adornments stay.

Wildphy

08-28-2009, 06:49 PM

FIRST<cite>Geothe wrote:</cite><blockquote>I think you are confused as to what Heirloom actually means.It means you can trade it to any character on your account, but to actually use the item, you must attune it to that character, at which time, it is no longer tradeable.LoN/Station Cash are already "tradeable" in that you can choose which toon on your account you actually want to claim it on. Once claim, they are locked to that character just like attuned heirloom items.</blockquote>LON items are not attuneable, just like the recruit-a-friend mount is not attuneable, nothing about the LON rewards have a flag on it that locks it to a character. i can use the recruit-a-friend mount one day on one character, and a second day on another character and on another day i can use it on a totally different third character all using the shared bank, there is no reason LON / stationcash items should not work that same way.<cite></cite><cite>timetravelling wrote:</cite><blockquote>Glad y'all are excited for it! We're excited to give ya a lot more options when grouping and gearing up your (hopefully) many characters! A few points from the thread:-We are aware of the issues with multiple accounts. However, for pretty apparent technical reasons there was not a good way to overcome this. However, other than the one-time initial unattuning of affected items, this feature does not enable players to do anything that was not already possible with alts and a lot of patient running.You link accounts for refer a friend, why not for Heirloom? How hard can it be to create a buddy account system with a shared heirloom bank? i'd even go so far as to say - once buddy accounts are linked, they can't be unlinked or linked again to any other account - a one shot deal... imho - the number of multiple account holders that make up eq2 playerbase is underestimated... ......-The change is intended to grab nearly all instance, overland, and contested loots. But not items you can only ever get once such as epics, quest rewards, armor gained from patterns, LoN rewards, Station Cash items, etc.LON and Station cash items that you can only get once??? absolutely not... you can get them MULTIPLE TIMES on any character just like LORE instance loot... if i delete a LORE item from my inventory, run an instance, i CAN pick up the same exact item a second time... this holds true for Station Cash and LON rewards... if i so choose to DELETE one of these items from my inventory... i can absolutely go back and get the item again through those channels. Just like the recruit a friend mount is heirloom, ANYTHING purchase-able out of game and /claimed should be heirloom. it's really a slap in the face to the folks who fund these extra profit avenues of SOE that they are not heirloom... ...</blockquote> edited for font color

Korrupt

08-28-2009, 07:00 PM

Nobody is losing anything with this change unlike severe nerfs happening to people as we speak. It's a bonus for some people, why complain about it?

Kigneer

08-28-2009, 07:01 PM

<cite>Wildphyre wrote:</cite><blockquote>Just like the recruit a friend mount is heirloom, ANYTHING purchase-able out of game and /claimed should be heirloom. it's really a slap in the face to the folks who fund these extra profit avenues of SOE that they are not heirloom... ...</blockquote>Went and bought one of those XP pots for an alt, and sure enough it's stuck on that character with enough NOs on it that it's enough to not buy another. $10 is a tad expensive for 2hrs as well, considering the vitality would be gone before then. So a total cost of $20 to basically power level about 4 levels. For $15 in another MMO, I could get 4 24hr harvest cards (with auto stop to not waste the minutes), instead. RMT in this game is too pricey.Puzzles me why it can't be heirloom, since your alts are you, and you bought the item.

Jonaroth

08-28-2009, 07:09 PM

<cite>Phaldyne wrote:</cite><blockquote>Brett,I think you all should consider upadating the loot window for this. You could always add a fourth button; Decline, Greed, Need for Alt, Need for Self. This would help to cut down on the people that will hit Need for an item that they want to put on their alt, sell for the cash value or transmute with the alt-transmuter when someone else in the group actually needs it for the character they brought.I'm for this change, I have many alts that I don't get to play as often since my main is much more sought after. However, I don't like the idea of losing out on something because someone else in the group is a bit too greedy or being deceptive.-Phrancie</blockquote>That's a really good idea. There should be a an option to make a main's Need more have priority over someone elses Alt's Need.Or atleast make it so if lets say a fabled tower shield marked as heirloom drops and the item is marked as Fighter Only, and a mage/scout/healer needs on it (because he has a fighter alt), the Tank in the group should have first dibs.

Undorett

08-28-2009, 07:32 PM

I don't think we do not need a new loot rolling system around the now large quantity of herloom items there are. People just need to communicate as to how loot should be done in a group. Personally I don't see alt loot as being more important than loot I can give to my god, transmute, or sell on my main. People who bid for everything because they have 12 alts after this change are just plain greedy. If a good/rare item drops and your alt really needs it, just tell the group to change loot rights before everyone clicks need/greed/decline and the loot can be rerolled to the right person.

Eriol

08-28-2009, 07:39 PM

Personally I'm of a "free the economy" type person, so I wonder why quest rewards (many of which are LORE anyways) were made no-drop IN THE FIRST PLACE. If you go back to any of the old-world zones that have NOT had quest overhauls (EL is one of them, and for now, TS), virtually every quest reward you get is fully tradable. This made it "not as bad" when you did a quest with a 100% useless reward, since you could sell it on the broker. The ONLY exception to this IMO is epics, HQs, and Signature quests (including the expansion-long signatures like claymore).It's not "why are quest rewards not heirloom" but rather, "why are quest rewards no-drop at all?"

Achala

08-29-2009, 01:27 AM

I love this change. One of my favorite MMOs before I moved to EQ2 was Final Fantasy XI and part of the reason I loved it was that, because of the job system (your character could change between any of the classes in the game that you had unlocked) no matter what dropped, it was almost always useful. Granted, there was an unwritten rule that you didn't need an item unless it was for your main, but if no one truly needed it, people with alt jobs of the appropriate level could ask for it and use it. Now we can do that in EQ2 as well!I have just a few wish list items:- Allow families that play together, or close friends, or people that dual/triple box to PAY EXTRA to "link" accounts. You already have technology available to link accounts for purposes of determining when someone is mentoring a character on a refer-a-friend referred account. Adapt that to allow us to create a similar link between two (or more!) accounts. Then allow the shared bank to show the slots from both accounts. We should then be able to use these shared bank slots to transfer HEIRLOOM and other items to the other account(s).- Add an additional group option that party leaders can optionally tick that causes the NEED button to gray out if the item is not usable by the currently played class. (You might also consider graying it for things like collection items that the player has already collected.) This is the way the NBG option works in Warhammer Online and the system works fairly well there.

Helanor

08-29-2009, 03:54 AM

I fall into the multiple account category of players. Ive got three accounts with three 80's on one, two on another and one on the third. One in her sixties and then quite a few mid range toons.I spent all yesterday with a pencil working out the maths of paying to move most of my 80's to the one account to take advantage of the heirloom thing, think it came to close on a hundred pounds, which is hmm almost a couple of hundred dollars with the added tax I have to pay. It's a lot of money especially as Ive just paid to move one and Id have to move it back. Plus Id lose the being able to research masters for three of the 80 toons at once which is very nice.Not to mention with my luck Id end up not playing my current main on raids in the future and having to play one of the ones I'd left on the other account and curling up and crying at all that wasted money lol.This is a roundabout way of agreeing with the previous poster that being able to link accounts in some way or have some kind of automatic or manual transfer system between them would be lovely and would save me a few more grey hairs trying to decide what to do. Being able to petition would work I presume, but I should imagine the poor staff might be snowed under with extra requests.The other thing is, I rarely bid for loots on my alts on raids because of the hassle of having to log them in and get them to the zones and people not being happy with having to wait around, this change will make it very easy for people with all their toons on the one account and less easy for those of us with multiple accounts as I should imagine raids are going to become less tolerant of hold ups as more people can use the heirloom system.Oh dear this sounds as though I'm not happy lol.. I actually think its a really good idea, thank you for implementing it. Its just sort of ironic that the more you pay to play the less you can use the lovely new feature <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" />. Hmm.. how about letting us transfer a few toons between accounts for free.. cough.

Yongqi

08-29-2009, 04:57 AM

I like this change as well. Now I can take some fabled items off my old main raiding character and move it to my new one.

Keroywn

08-29-2009, 06:57 AM

Just a guess here, but I'm betting this is a first step to getting rid of the ability to sell loot rights. If you make an item heirloom, then someone in the raid/group has a better chance of needing it for someone. I've heard rumblings that loot is eventually not going to be lootable unless you are in zone for the kill. No more selling loots rights, no more bringing in alts/guildies.Gonna make multiple accounts and raid stand-by interesting, huh?

Haciv

08-29-2009, 02:22 PM

This is pretty much my worst nightmare. All my subclasses are on a different account from their class partner, lol. My crusaders can't share with each other, nor my bards, clerics, brawlers, etc etc. It would cost a fortune to rearrange my accounts to get anything beneficial out of this.Even if they were together, I'm completely against this change. Everyone if going to [Removed for Content] up everything. It'll bring out the worst in everyone when it comes to loot. Why not just make everything Attuneable if we're going this far?

Toughone

08-29-2009, 03:47 PM

I really hope they make loot only lootable if u are in the zone for the kill, sick of seeing tons of crap sold everynite by same few guilds.

revren

08-29-2009, 04:07 PM

<cite>Finae@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote>I really hope they make loot only lootable if u are in the zone for the kill, sick of seeing tons of crap sold everynite by same few guilds.</blockquote>Hey HeyI tihnk this would be the straw that broke the camles back for me. I have allways argued that there should be no more no-trade items, I belive a good economy is paramount in an MMO, and i belive that you should have the freedom to do what you want. I have no alts , and no desire to play another class. So what happens if you are asked to sit , and the patern you need drops , becouse we all know how wonderfull the lack of smart loot is, should i just say "Gee i am glad there is no spaming in lvl , and at least an alt in my guild got the pattern"??Welcome HomeRev

DngrMou

08-31-2009, 11:36 AM

<cite>Haciv wrote:</cite><blockquote>Even if they were together, I'm completely against this change. Everyone if going to [Removed for Content] up everything. It'll bring out the worst in everyone when it comes to loot. Why not just make everything Attuneable if we're going this far?</blockquote>Loot policy for groups should be communicated in advance, "Need rolls for toons in the group ONLY, alt rolls are greed only". 90% of issues will be avoided this way entirely, though there still exists some players that will ignore it....just as some people still roll need on no trade items they can't use now.

Noaani

08-31-2009, 11:52 AM

<cite>timetravelling wrote:</cite><blockquote>-We are aware of the issues with multiple accounts. However, for pretty apparent technical reasons there was not a good way to overcome this. However, other than the one-time initial unattuning of affected items, this feature does not enable players to do anything that was not already possible with alts and a lot of patient running.</blockquote>Allow people to merge their shared banks.I currently have 4 active accounts, and although I do not want nor expect any special treatment for such, I do want and I do expect to not be disadvantaged because of it.

Yimway

08-31-2009, 12:00 PM

<cite>Noaani wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>timetravelling wrote:</cite><blockquote>-We are aware of the issues with multiple accounts. However, for pretty apparent technical reasons there was not a good way to overcome this. However, other than the one-time initial unattuning of affected items, this feature does not enable players to do anything that was not already possible with alts and a lot of patient running.</blockquote>Allow people to merge their shared banks.I currently have 4 active accounts, and although I do not want nor expect any special treatment for such, I do want and I do expect to not be disadvantaged because of it.</blockquote>Already posted in the other thread on this, but WoW allows account linking for similar purposes, we need the same thing in eq2 if we're going to move forward with an Hierloom system.As long as the billing data matches for 12 months or since the account was created, whichever is shorter, then its reasonable that they could/should be linkable via some station.com interface.Just add an extra slot/slots to the bottom of the shared bank that are shareable accross linked accounts. Or, some mail feature enabled between linked accounts.I currently have 7 accounts. I polled my guild last night and around 35% of our members have multiple accounts, in fact if I count the number of 'main acconts' and 'box accounts' a full 50% of the guild and soe's revenue from us is represented in 'boxed accounts'.

thog_zork

08-31-2009, 01:11 PM

<cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Noaani wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>timetravelling wrote:</cite><blockquote>-We are aware of the issues with multiple accounts. However, for pretty apparent technical reasons there was not a good way to overcome this. However, other than the one-time initial unattuning of affected items, this feature does not enable players to do anything that was not already possible with alts and a lot of patient running.</blockquote>Allow people to merge their shared banks.I currently have 4 active accounts, and although I do not want nor expect any special treatment for such, I do want and I do expect to not be disadvantaged because of it.</blockquote>Already posted in the other thread on this, but WoW allows account linking for similar purposes, we need the same thing in eq2 if we're going to move forward with an Hierloom system.As long as the billing data matches for 12 months or since the account was created, whichever is shorter, then its reasonable that they could/should be linkable via some station.com interface.Just add an extra slot/slots to the bottom of the shared bank that are shareable accross linked accounts. Or, some mail feature enabled between linked accounts.I currently have 7 accounts. I polled my guild last night and around 35% of our members have multiple accounts, in fact if I count the number of 'main acconts' and 'box accounts' a full 50% of the guild and soe's revenue from us is represented in 'boxed accounts'.</blockquote>could not agree more .... we need account linking otherwise it would such a big disadvantage !if you push this life please account users which multiple accounts !

Ryptide

08-31-2009, 06:00 PM

Exiles need to be allowed to trade heirloom items. Shared bank, mail, uber long, painful, repeatable quest to get one time access to some secret nuetral bank.. whatever. Unless they want to allow non-exiles to worship evil dieties; then there would be no reason to stay exiled.

Lord Hackenslash

08-31-2009, 07:18 PM

<cite>Haciv wrote:</cite><blockquote> I'm completely against this change. Everyone if going to [Removed for Content] up everything. It'll bring out the worst in everyone when it comes to loot. Why not just make everything Attuneable if we're going this far?</blockquote>There are tradeable items now and I haven't seen this as an issue. Why would heirloom cause more loot issues than Attuneable? Either way people already have alts and the groups i have been in, if a tradeable item drops people ask if they can loot if for an alt and they always specify that only if no one else in group needs it.

timetravelling

08-31-2009, 08:39 PM

Hey folks!Y'all have given some great feedback, and brought up two of the main issues internally and wanted to give you updates:Linking accounts: I spoke with several of our coders and while there are limitations that prevent us from implementing it immediately, they thought it sounded feasible. We will keep it in mind and hopefully add it at some point in the future. No timetable promises, but hopefully we'll be able to get the feature in for those of you with multiple accounts. It may even open up the possibility of some other features as a cool side effect!LoN and SC items: Ye hast swayed us! Or...in less broken english, I am going to be going through our LoN and Stationcash items and--where appropriate--adding the Heirloom flag.A couple of examples of "where appropriate":<ul><li>Items that have charges--such as the potions</li><li>Items that must be equipped--such as appearance armor</li><li>NOT items that can be used from your inventory--such as mounts</li></ul>

Korrupt

08-31-2009, 08:44 PM

<cite>Melina@Splitpaw wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Haciv wrote:</cite><blockquote> I'm completely against this change. Everyone if going to [Removed for Content] up everything. It'll bring out the worst in everyone when it comes to loot. Why not just make everything Attuneable if we're going this far?</blockquote>There are tradeable items now and I haven't seen this as an issue. Why would heirloom cause more loot issues than Attuneable? Either way people already have alts and the groups i have been in, if a tradeable item drops people ask if they can loot if for an alt and they always specify that only if no one else in group needs it.</blockquote>The issue I could see with just making everything attuneable is this. Currently with heirloom you are only gonna roll on items you or an alt of yours can use. Making items just attuneable would promote people to roll need on everything and if they cant use it at all they'll put it on the broker. So while heirloom will make people a little more greedy, attuneable would make it much much worse.

Wilde_Night

08-31-2009, 08:49 PM

We <3 Brett.

Gungo

08-31-2009, 11:52 PM

<cite>timetravelling wrote:</cite><blockquote>Hey folks!Y'all have given some great feedback, and brought up two of the main issues internally and wanted to give you updates:Linking accounts: I spoke with several of our coders and while there are limitations that prevent us from implementing it immediately, they thought it sounded feasible. We will keep it in mind and hopefully add it at some point in the future. No timetable promises, but hopefully we'll be able to get the feature in for those of you with multiple accounts. It may even open up the possibility of some other features as a cool side effect!LoN and SC items: Ye hast swayed us! Or...in less broken english, I am going to be going through our LoN and Stationcash items and--where appropriate--adding the Heirloom flag.A couple of examples of "where appropriate":<ul><li>Items that have charges--such as the potions</li><li>Items that must be equipped--such as appearance armor</li><li>NOT items that can be used from your inventory--such as mounts</li></ul></blockquote>Could we just remove the notrade tag from all house items obtained via questsl.It would help decorators immensly with out the hassle and house items from quests really dont need it.I can see why stationcash and LON house item require the heriloom tag though. Even though it would be great if all house items were tradable.

Noaani

09-01-2009, 01:40 AM

<cite>timetravelling wrote:</cite><blockquote>Linking accounts: I spoke with several of our coders and while there are limitations that prevent us from implementing it immediately, they thought it sounded feasible. We will keep it in mind and hopefully add it at some point in the future. No timetable promises, but hopefully we'll be able to get the feature in for those of you with multiple accounts. It may even open up the possibility of some other features as a cool side effect!</blockquote>We have no plans for this.We will look in to it.This sounds feasible.We are working out the details.Soon™.This is a list of responces developers use, going from least likely to ever happen to most likely (though still not guarenteed).While its great that it may happen, I would assume by your post that it is a long way off, if it ever happens. Portions of features that are delayed from the main feature itself do have a habbit of slipping through the cracks (still waiting for COD to be added to the mail system from LU#5!), which due to always having something to work on is totally understandable.I just hope this doesn't become one of those features.

RoryBradwarden

09-01-2009, 06:09 AM

My feedback on the subject ( a lot of repeating what has already been said)1. Need button should only work if that character can use the item.2. Alt-Need button is a great idea and should be between Need and Greed.3. Linking accounts is a great idea. Put another shared bank per account. Heirloom/Alt-Need works across all accounts.4. If possible I wish you could play any of the characters on your accounts. Example: I have 2 accounts. I would be great if I could play any 2 of my characters, not just one from each account .... 3 accounts = play any 3 characters etc.

zorkan

09-01-2009, 06:28 AM

I would be very excited about the account linking feature. You should definitely follow up on it!

Barx

09-01-2009, 09:42 AM

<cite>timetravelling wrote:</cite><blockquote>LoN and SC items: Ye hast swayed us! Or...in less broken english, I am going to be going through our LoN and Stationcash items and--where appropriate--adding the Heirloom flag.A couple of examples of "where appropriate":<ul><li>Items that have charges--such as the potions</li><li>Items that must be equipped--such as appearance armor</li><li>NOT items that can be used from your inventory--such as mounts</li></ul></blockquote>Just tell me the house items (Paintings, etc.) will be Heirloom and I'll be a happy guy.

Ryptide

09-01-2009, 11:39 AM

<cite>Barx@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>yadlajoi wrote:</cite><blockquote>it should be now time to give exile a shared bank.</blockquote> No. You chose exile, you deal with the consequences of it. They made it clear when it went in what it would mean if you stayed in exile.</blockquote>As was the case with with good and evil aligned characters as well. However, they changed that status so it wouldn't be any different to change it for exiles.Being in exile should be difficult BUT not impossible. Make us do a repeatable quest that takes 3 days to complete, that would give us a one time access to a special bank. Or make us grind some kind of faction writs for days, where we could spend that faction, as we do with dieties, to buy a one-time use ticket or key from a faction merchant that would allow us access to a special bank. They could even allow heirloom items to be mailed with certain checks in place.

Barx

09-01-2009, 11:46 AM

<cite>Dorrian@Oasis wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Barx@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>yadlajoi wrote:</cite><blockquote>it should be now time to give exile a shared bank.</blockquote> No. You chose exile, you deal with the consequences of it. They made it clear when it went in what it would mean if you stayed in exile.</blockquote>As was the case with with good and evil aligned characters as well. However, they changed that status so it wouldn't be any different to change it for exiles.Being in exile should be difficult BUT not impossible. Make us do a repeatable quest that takes 3 days to complete, that would give us a one time access to a special bank. Or make us grind some kind of faction writs for days, where we could spend that faction, as we do with dieties, to buy a one-time use ticket or key from a faction merchant that would allow us access to a special bank. They could even allow heirloom items to be mailed with certain checks in place.</blockquote>Yes, they opened up mail and shared banks between alignments. But that's still having an alignment. Staying in exile is saying "I don't want to follow the rules of either alignment." It's also a choice that you make. You choose to stay in a place that the Devs have said was originally intended to be a transition state only. The price for staying there is not having a shared bank.

Prrasha

09-01-2009, 02:13 PM

<cite>timetravelling wrote:</cite><blockquote>We would greatly appreciate any feedback y'all have of items that may have been missed [...]</blockquote>/feedback sent on the Test server already, but:Far-Seas-Supply-Division-recipe crafted items.The dungeon-dropped components (frosted rune, bloodwood plank, etc.) are already tradable, but the resulting items (Rune Frosted Barrier Wand, Bloodwood Bow of Sternum Piercing, etc.) are still NO-TRADE, so you can only craft them for the rest of the world and not your own account. Seems this should change if all the dungeon loot is changing; this is just dungeon loot with an extra step involved in "looting" it, after all.There are 18 items like this (2 per crafting class).

NViDiaFReaK

09-01-2009, 05:26 PM

timetravelling

09-01-2009, 05:51 PM

<cite>Prrasha wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>timetravelling wrote:</cite><blockquote>We would greatly appreciate any feedback y'all have of items that may have been missed [...]</blockquote>/feedback sent on the Test server already, but:Far-Seas-Supply-Division-recipe crafted items.The dungeon-dropped components (frosted rune, bloodwood plank, etc.) are already tradable, but the resulting items (Rune Frosted Barrier Wand, Bloodwood Bow of Sternum Piercing, etc.) are still NO-TRADE, so you can only craft them for the rest of the world and not your own account. Seems this should change if all the dungeon loot is changing; this is just dungeon loot with an extra step involved in "looting" it, after all.There are 18 items like this (2 per crafting class).</blockquote>Changing those to Heirloom as well.

CraigH

09-01-2009, 05:59 PM

I wish they'd push this change through now! This is one of the best changes I'm most looking forward too.

NViDiaFReaK

09-01-2009, 06:30 PM

<cite>NViDiaFReaK wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>timetravelling wrote:</cite><blockquote>Hey folks!Y'all have given some great feedback, and brought up two of the main issues internally and wanted to give you updates:Linking accounts: I spoke with several of our coders and while there are limitations that prevent us from implementing it immediately, they thought it sounded feasible. We will keep it in mind and hopefully add it at some point in the future. No timetable promises, but hopefully we'll be able to get the feature in for those of you with multiple accounts. It may even open up the possibility of some other features as a cool side effect!LoN and SC items: Ye hast swayed us! Or...in less broken english, I am going to be going through our LoN and Stationcash items and--where appropriate--adding the Heirloom flag.A couple of examples of "where appropriate":<ul><li>Items that have charges--such as the potions</li><li>Items that must be equipped--such as appearance armor</li><li>NOT items that can be used from your inventory--such as mounts</li></ul></blockquote>And why not mount??? the RAF mount is Heirloom? Why cant the LON mounts be Heirloom as well? Makes no sense...</blockquote>I wish they'd actually explain why LON mounts cannot be heirloom

Zizzu

09-01-2009, 06:51 PM

This is a amazing feature to GU 53.Questions: I see that TSO class armor not heirloom, but level 70 class armor is. Why? And why not make all class armor heirloom? (I cannot see any advantage in this). Plus, I've always wanted to possibly start over with a new race and be able to obtain my hard earned class armors.

Draco the Grey

09-01-2009, 06:53 PM

<cite>NViDiaFReaK wrote:</cite><blockquote>I wish they'd actually explain why LON mounts cannot be heirloom</blockquote>Heirloom will allow you to tranfer items between characters before they are attuned, but to use it, it must still be attuned to a specific character which effectively locks it to that character. The feature isn't meant for transferring old equipment to your other toons when you're done using it on one of them. You can use a mount at any time without equipping or attuning it, so making it Heirloom would make it freely transferrable and usable among all the characters on the account, which is outside the scope of the change. Pretty obvious stuff if you take a second to think about it.

Xalmat

09-01-2009, 07:05 PM

<cite>Zizzu@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>This is a amazing feature to GU 53.Questions: I see that TSO class armor not heirloom, but level 70 class armor is. Why? And why not make all class armor heirloom? (I cannot see any advantage in this).</blockquote>Armor from patterns is not heirloom. However the patterns themselves are.

NViDiaFReaK

09-01-2009, 07:09 PM

<cite>Katryna@Lucan DLere wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>NViDiaFReaK wrote:</cite><blockquote>I wish they'd actually explain why LON mounts cannot be heirloom</blockquote>Heirloom will allow you to tranfer items between characters before they are attuned, but to use it, it must still be attuned to a specific character which effectively locks it to that character. The feature isn't meant for transferring old equipment to your other toons when you're done using it on one of them. You can use a mount at any time without equipping or attuning it, so making it Heirloom would make it freely transferrable and usable among all the characters on the account, which is outside the scope of the change. Pretty obvious stuff if you take a second to think about it.</blockquote>Um wrong.. there is alreay a mount in the game that is heirloom.. it is the RAF mount.. it goes in your inventory, and yet you can freely tansfer it back and forth and is usable by all your characters.. SO not so obvious.. LON mounts are not purchased with ingame money, in game status at all.. SO once again why can they not recieve the heirloom tag just as the RAF monts have??

Zizzu

09-01-2009, 07:19 PM

<cite>Xalmat wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Zizzu@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>This is a amazing feature to GU 53.Questions: I see that TSO class armor not heirloom, but level 70 class armor is. Why? And why not make all class armor heirloom? (I cannot see any advantage in this).</blockquote>Armor from patterns is not heirloom. However the patterns themselves are.</blockquote>I know. The TSO armor cannot be moved, but the patterns can be.But why is the level 70 class armor heirloom then??? And why not the class 80 armor?

Xalmat

09-01-2009, 07:20 PM

Probably because they're not patterns. /shrug

Draco the Grey

09-01-2009, 07:33 PM

<cite>NViDiaFReaK wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Katryna@Lucan DLere wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>NViDiaFReaK wrote:</cite><blockquote>I wish they'd actually explain why LON mounts cannot be heirloom</blockquote>Heirloom will allow you to tranfer items between characters before they are attuned, but to use it, it must still be attuned to a specific character which effectively locks it to that character. The feature isn't meant for transferring old equipment to your other toons when you're done using it on one of them. You can use a mount at any time without equipping or attuning it, so making it Heirloom would make it freely transferrable and usable among all the characters on the account, which is outside the scope of the change. Pretty obvious stuff if you take a second to think about it.</blockquote>Um wrong.. there is alreay a mount in the game that is heirloom.. it is the RAF mount.. it goes in your inventory, and yet you can freely tansfer it back and forth and is usable by all your characters.. SO not so obvious.. LON mounts are not purchased with ingame money, in game status at all.. SO once again why can they not recieve the heirloom tag just as the RAF monts have??</blockquote>Because not giving the tag to LON mounts is consistent with how they're applying the tag to other LON items, and with the mounts current tags. The fact that the RAF mount is Heirloom isn't really applicable.

Zizzu

09-01-2009, 08:08 PM

<cite>Xalmat wrote:</cite><blockquote>Probably because they're not patterns. /shrug</blockquote>Well.....then why are the level 70 class armor sets heirloom and not the 80 class armor sets?The next expansion will just push the 80 class set down anyway.

Yimway

09-01-2009, 08:24 PM

<cite>Zizzu@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Xalmat wrote:</cite><blockquote>Probably because they're not patterns. /shrug</blockquote>Well.....then why are the level 70 class armor sets heirloom and not the 80 class armor sets?The next expansion will just push the 80 class set down anyway.</blockquote>The level 70 armor was not pattern rewarded so its heirloom, the level 80 armor is from patern turn-ins so it isn't heirloom.Not sure where the confusion is on that.The point being the item that dropped at the raid is heirloom, once equiped by whatever player it is no longer tradeable.

Gungo

09-01-2009, 09:14 PM

<cite>NViDiaFReaK wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Katryna@Lucan DLere wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>NViDiaFReaK wrote:</cite><blockquote>I wish they'd actually explain why LON mounts cannot be heirloom</blockquote>Heirloom will allow you to tranfer items between characters before they are attuned, but to use it, it must still be attuned to a specific character which effectively locks it to that character. The feature isn't meant for transferring old equipment to your other toons when you're done using it on one of them. You can use a mount at any time without equipping or attuning it, so making it Heirloom would make it freely transferrable and usable among all the characters on the account, which is outside the scope of the change. Pretty obvious stuff if you take a second to think about it.</blockquote>Um wrong.. there is alreay a mount in the game that is heirloom.. it is the RAF mount.. it goes in your inventory, and yet you can freely tansfer it back and forth and is usable by all your characters.. SO not so obvious.. LON mounts are not purchased with ingame money, in game status at all.. SO once again why can they not recieve the heirloom tag just as the RAF monts have??</blockquote>Um dude thats probably a bug and should be reported and fixed.

NViDiaFReaK

09-01-2009, 09:24 PM

<cite>Gungo wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>NViDiaFReaK wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Katryna@Lucan DLere wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>NViDiaFReaK wrote:</cite><blockquote>I wish they'd actually explain why LON mounts cannot be heirloom</blockquote>Heirloom will allow you to tranfer items between characters before they are attuned, but to use it, it must still be attuned to a specific character which effectively locks it to that character. The feature isn't meant for transferring old equipment to your other toons when you're done using it on one of them. You can use a mount at any time without equipping or attuning it, so making it Heirloom would make it freely transferrable and usable among all the characters on the account, which is outside the scope of the change. Pretty obvious stuff if you take a second to think about it.</blockquote>Um wrong.. there is alreay a mount in the game that is heirloom.. it is the RAF mount.. it goes in your inventory, and yet you can freely tansfer it back and forth and is usable by all your characters.. SO not so obvious.. LON mounts are not purchased with ingame money, in game status at all.. SO once again why can they not recieve the heirloom tag just as the RAF monts have??</blockquote>Um dude thats probably a bug and should be reported and fixed.</blockquote>No its not.. It was intended this way.. heriloom mount: <a href="http://eq2.zam.com/db/item.html?eq2item=811474AF2FEFCD31BA73FC365305E3F5">http://eq2.zam.com/db/item.html?eq2...A73FC365305E3F5</a>

Ryptide

09-01-2009, 09:47 PM

<cite>Barx@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Dorrian@Oasis wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Barx@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>yadlajoi wrote:</cite><blockquote>it should be now time to give exile a shared bank.</blockquote> No. You chose exile, you deal with the consequences of it. They made it clear when it went in what it would mean if you stayed in exile.</blockquote>As was the case with with good and evil aligned characters as well. However, they changed that status so it wouldn't be any different to change it for exiles.Being in exile should be difficult BUT not impossible. Make us do a repeatable quest that takes 3 days to complete, that would give us a one time access to a special bank. Or make us grind some kind of faction writs for days, where we could spend that faction, as we do with dieties, to buy a one-time use ticket or key from a faction merchant that would allow us access to a special bank. They could even allow heirloom items to be mailed with certain checks in place.</blockquote>Yes, they opened up mail and shared banks between alignments. But that's still having an alignment. Staying in exile is saying "I don't want to follow the rules of either alignment." It's also a choice that you make. You choose to stay in a place that the Devs have said was originally intended to be a transition state only. The price for staying there is not having a shared bank.</blockquote>Every exile out there, with a few bits of grey matter left between their ears, knows this company line. The logic behind it is flawed. The lore behind it is flawed. To have an educated opinion on the matter, the question everyone should ask themselves, including the devs, is why do so many people choose to stay in exile status? Dieties.If they eliminate the reason why so many people stay exiled, people will have no reason to stay exiled. They could remove the ability to worship all gods while in exile. Or they could allow worship of any god to any alignment. If Antonia and Lucan can turn a blind eye to their citizens trading money and gear with citizens of their sworn nemisis, then surely they could turn a blind eye to their citizens praying to a less than savory god.Again, I'm not asking for a shared bank, specifically. Specifically, I am only asking for access to heirloom items.

Korrupt

09-01-2009, 09:48 PM

Dude has a point

zimmer

09-01-2009, 10:09 PM

Not sure if someone mentioned this already or not but are the elemental essence's now heirloom? I would assume so was just curious if they are showing up that way on test??that is one item I would like to share as well

Bakual

09-02-2009, 03:00 AM

<cite>NViDiaFReaK wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Katryna@Lucan DLere wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>NViDiaFReaK wrote:</cite><blockquote>I wish they'd actually explain why LON mounts cannot be heirloom</blockquote>Heirloom will allow you to tranfer items between characters before they are attuned, but to use it, it must still be attuned to a specific character which effectively locks it to that character. The feature isn't meant for transferring old equipment to your other toons when you're done using it on one of them. You can use a mount at any time without equipping or attuning it, so making it Heirloom would make it freely transferrable and usable among all the characters on the account, which is outside the scope of the change. Pretty obvious stuff if you take a second to think about it.</blockquote>Um wrong.. there is alreay a mount in the game that is heirloom.. it is the RAF mount.. it goes in your inventory, and yet you can freely tansfer it back and forth and is usable by all your characters.. SO not so obvious.. LON mounts are not purchased with ingame money, in game status at all.. SO once again why can they not recieve the heirloom tag just as the RAF monts have??</blockquote>I'm quite sure they will be changing that heirloom mount. It makes no sense to have a mount heirloom (as explained by Katryna)

Bakual

09-02-2009, 03:08 AM

<cite>Zizzu@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Xalmat wrote:</cite><blockquote>Probably because they're not patterns. /shrug</blockquote>Well.....then why are the level 70 class armor sets heirloom and not the 80 class armor sets?The next expansion will just push the 80 class set down anyway.</blockquote>I guess it is because you obtain them different, and TSO can be upgraded. It would perhaps open up some issues.After all it would only make sense to make T1 heirloom / attunable. Since you could craft it for another Alt. But if you want to upgrad it to T2, you would not be able to do anyway as you need the T1 armor to do it, and this piece will be attuned to the Alt anyway. Same goes for T3 then.

NViDiaFReaK

09-02-2009, 03:22 AM

<cite>Bakual wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>NViDiaFReaK wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Katryna@Lucan DLere wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>NViDiaFReaK wrote:</cite><blockquote>I wish they'd actually explain why LON mounts cannot be heirloom</blockquote>Heirloom will allow you to tranfer items between characters before they are attuned, but to use it, it must still be attuned to a specific character which effectively locks it to that character. The feature isn't meant for transferring old equipment to your other toons when you're done using it on one of them. You can use a mount at any time without equipping or attuning it, so making it Heirloom would make it freely transferrable and usable among all the characters on the account, which is outside the scope of the change. Pretty obvious stuff if you take a second to think about it.</blockquote>Um wrong.. there is alreay a mount in the game that is heirloom.. it is the RAF mount.. it goes in your inventory, and yet you can freely tansfer it back and forth and is usable by all your characters.. SO not so obvious.. LON mounts are not purchased with ingame money, in game status at all.. SO once again why can they not recieve the heirloom tag just as the RAF monts have??</blockquote>I'm quite sure they will be changing that heirloom mount. It makes no sense to have a mount heirloom (as explained by Katryna)</blockquote>And it makes no sense why mounts cant be heirloom... IRL if i own a horse not only can i ride it but so can everyone i let ride it. How in LORE perspective, does it make any sense for a character to not let any of his brothers & sisters use his horse?

Draco the Grey

09-02-2009, 04:33 AM

<cite>NViDiaFReaK wrote:</cite><blockquote>And it makes no sense why mounts cant be heirloom... IRL if i own a horse not only can i ride it but so can everyone i let ride it. How in LORE perspective, does it make any sense for a character to not let any of his brothers & sisters use his horse?</blockquote>Of course mounts *can* be heirloom, but SOE has decided the LON items that give real in-game benefits must be claimed by or attuned to one character, with consumables being the exception. LON mounts fall into this category and since mounts are not attuneable, they will remain no-trade. If they were to be made heirloom, they would probably also make them attunable and require you to attune them before use, in which case you wouldn't be getting what you want anyway.If there's a loot card item you have on one character that you want on another, go into LoN and trade for it. And if the extent of your involvement in LoN is opening your monthly bonus packs (like me), get over your sense of entitlement and let the devs pay attention to more important things.

zorkan

09-02-2009, 04:54 AM

<cite>NViDiaFReaK wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Bakual wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>NViDiaFReaK wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Katryna@Lucan DLere wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>NViDiaFReaK wrote:</cite><blockquote>I wish they'd actually explain why LON mounts cannot be heirloom</blockquote>Heirloom will allow you to tranfer items between characters before they are attuned, but to use it, it must still be attuned to a specific character which effectively locks it to that character. The feature isn't meant for transferring old equipment to your other toons when you're done using it on one of them. You can use a mount at any time without equipping or attuning it, so making it Heirloom would make it freely transferrable and usable among all the characters on the account, which is outside the scope of the change. Pretty obvious stuff if you take a second to think about it.</blockquote>Um wrong.. there is alreay a mount in the game that is heirloom.. it is the RAF mount.. it goes in your inventory, and yet you can freely tansfer it back and forth and is usable by all your characters.. SO not so obvious.. LON mounts are not purchased with ingame money, in game status at all.. SO once again why can they not recieve the heirloom tag just as the RAF monts have??</blockquote>I'm quite sure they will be changing that heirloom mount. It makes no sense to have a mount heirloom (as explained by Katryna)</blockquote>And it makes no sense why mounts cant be heirloom... IRL if i own a horse not only can i ride it but so can everyone i let ride it. How in LORE perspective, does it make any sense for a character to not let any of his brothers & sisters use his horse?</blockquote>Real life is irrelevant to a fantasy game.It is obvious that making reusable LoN items heirloom would diminish potential sales for LoN cards and therefore it makes no sense for SOE to make them Heirloom. Discussing this is therefore moot.It is also irrelevant whether or not the RAF horses are heirloom. There are exceptions to every rule and you can't question the rule because of one exception.In summary, just accept it and use your time for other things instead.

NViDiaFReaK

09-02-2009, 04:59 AM

<cite>Katryna@Lucan DLere wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>NViDiaFReaK wrote:</cite><blockquote>And it makes no sense why mounts cant be heirloom... IRL if i own a horse not only can i ride it but so can everyone i let ride it. How in LORE perspective, does it make any sense for a character to not let any of his brothers & sisters use his horse?</blockquote>Of course mounts *can* be heirloom, but SOE has decided the LON items that give real in-game benefits must be claimed by or attuned to one character, with consumables being the exception. LON mounts fall into this category and since mounts are not attuneable, they will remain no-trade. If they were to be made heirloom, they would probably also make them attunable and require you to attune them before use, in which case you wouldn't be getting what you want anyway.If there's a loot card item you have on one character that you want on another, go into LoN and trade for it. And if the extent of your involvement in LoN is opening your monthly bonus packs (like me), get over your sense of entitlement and let the devs pay attention to more important things.</blockquote>Actually my sense of entitlement comes from the fact that i payed my hard earned money to BUY the booster packs that netted me the Loot card in the first place. (I actually won the mount i didnt trade for it) If they dont want to make them heirloom. then make it so we can PAY to unclaim it / reclaim it. That boost their profits. Yes i could buy more packs or try and trade for it. But the mounts go for rediiclous amounts of boosters... And seriously the stats the LON mounts provide are so minimal they could just take them off and just make them run speed .. and add the hierloom tag... I mean i cant even delete my dirge if i wanted to unless im willing to destroy my LON mount that i payed for via the box of boosters i won it from. This needs to be addressed. The only way to aquire the LON items is through RTM. If SC apperence items can be made heirloom i dont see why LON items cant either. You dont attune the mounts.. once you claim it its no trade/no sellLON Mounts Made Heirloom in '09/ '10

CuCullain

09-02-2009, 11:25 AM

<cite>timetravelling wrote:</cite><blockquote>Hey folks!Y'all have given some great feedback, and brought up two of the main issues internally and wanted to give you updates:Linking accounts: I spoke with several of our coders and while there are limitations that prevent us from implementing it immediately, they thought it sounded feasible. We will keep it in mind and hopefully add it at some point in the future. No timetable promises, but hopefully we'll be able to get the feature in for those of you with multiple accounts. It may even open up the possibility of some other features as a cool side effect!LoN and SC items: Ye hast swayed us! Or...in less broken english, I am going to be going through our LoN and Stationcash items and--where appropriate--adding the Heirloom flag.A couple of examples of "where appropriate":<ul><li>Items that have charges--such as the potions</li><li>Items that must be equipped--such as appearance armor</li><li>NOT items that can be used from your inventory--such as mounts</li></ul></blockquote>Not sure how you compile feedback, but in case number of supporting posts comes into account;I am very much in favor of:1. Linking accounts for purposes such as herloom (even willing to pay a 500-1000 SC fee to do it)2. Adding the Need for Alt option. Though I love the Heirloom changes, I forsee a lot more time being added to loot distribution now, especially in group dungeons.Another idea, please excuse me if this was already mentioned1. Add a means to call up any of your alts loot/bags/bank on the fly. If it takes a lot of effort to do, don't bother.. but I can see it being helpful to check gear on an alt if you are going to now be looting gear for them, especially when it comes to patterns.

feldon30

09-02-2009, 12:32 PM

<cite>Dorrian@Oasis wrote:</cite><blockquote>Every exile out there, with a few bits of grey matter left between their ears, knows this company line. The logic behind it is flawed. The lore behind it is flawed. To have an educated opinion on the matter, the question everyone should ask themselves, including the devs, is why do so many people choose to stay in exile status? Dieties.If they eliminate the reason why so many people stay exiled, people will have no reason to stay exiled. They could remove the ability to worship all gods while in exile. Or they could allow worship of any god to any alignment. If Antonia and Lucan can turn a blind eye to their citizens trading money and gear with citizens of their sworn nemisis, then surely they could turn a blind eye to their citizens praying to a less than savory god.Again, I'm not asking for a shared bank, specifically. Specifically, I am only asking for access to heirloom items.</blockquote>QFEOr better yet, quit pigeonholing deities into tired old alignment stereotypes. Couldn't killing something quickly be merciful? Yet DPS deities are evil and healing deities are good.

yadlajoi

09-02-2009, 12:35 PM

need to add shared bank to exiles

Barx

09-02-2009, 12:35 PM

<cite>feldon30 wrote:</cite><blockquote>Or better yet, quit pigeonholing deities into tired old alignment stereotypes. Couldn't killing something quickly be merciful? Yet DPS deities are evil and healing deities are good.</blockquote>Agreed there.Hopefully they do a revamp of the diety system in general sometime soon, and hopefully that revamp would address that.

Kenban

09-03-2009, 01:10 AM

I noticed that only items which were in my bags or equipped were changed to heirloom. All of the items that are in my bank are already attuned. Is this just a mistake because its the test copy server or will it be the same on live?

Gungo

09-03-2009, 01:18 AM

<cite>NViDiaFReaK wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Gungo wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>NViDiaFReaK wrote:</cite>Um dude thats probably a bug and should be reported and fixed.</blockquote>No its not.. It was intended this way.. heriloom mount: <a href="http://eq2.zam.com/db/item.html?eq2item=811474AF2FEFCD31BA73FC365305E3F5">http://eq2.zam.com/db/item.html?eq2...A73FC365305E3F5</a></blockquote>Just because something is made that way doesnt mean its intended to be that way. Do i need to link the 1000;s of updates where soe has changed items because it wasnt intended as designed. and for further reference I will link the dev qoute of thier INTENTIONS.<cite>timetravelling wrote:</cite><blockquote>Hey folks!Y'all have given some great feedback, and brought up two of the main issues internally and wanted to give you updates:Linking accounts: I spoke with several of our coders and while there are limitations that prevent us from implementing it immediately, they thought it sounded feasible. We will keep it in mind and hopefully add it at some point in the future. No timetable promises, but hopefully we'll be able to get the feature in for those of you with multiple accounts. It may even open up the possibility of some other features as a cool side effect!LoN and SC items: Ye hast swayed us! Or...in less broken english, I am going to be going through our LoN and Stationcash items and--where appropriate--adding the Heirloom flag.A couple of examples of "where appropriate":<ul><li>Items that have charges--such as the potions</li><li>Items that must be equipped--such as appearance armor</li><li>NOT items that can be used from your inventory--such as mounts</li></ul></blockquote>

NViDiaFReaK

09-03-2009, 02:02 AM

<cite>Gungo wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>NViDiaFReaK wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Gungo wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>NViDiaFReaK wrote:</cite>Um dude thats probably a bug and should be reported and fixed.</blockquote>No its not.. It was intended this way.. heriloom mount: <a href="http://eq2.zam.com/db/item.html?eq2item=811474AF2FEFCD31BA73FC365305E3F5">http://eq2.zam.com/db/item.html?eq2...A73FC365305E3F5</a></blockquote>Just because something is made that way doesnt mean its intended to be that way. Do i need to link the 1000;s of updates where soe has changed items because it wasnt intended as designed. and for further reference I will link the dev qoute of thier INTENTIONS.<cite>timetravelling wrote:</cite><blockquote>Hey folks!Y'all have given some great feedback, and brought up two of the main issues internally and wanted to give you updates:Linking accounts: I spoke with several of our coders and while there are limitations that prevent us from implementing it immediately, they thought it sounded feasible. We will keep it in mind and hopefully add it at some point in the future. No timetable promises, but hopefully we'll be able to get the feature in for those of you with multiple accounts. It may even open up the possibility of some other features as a cool side effect!LoN and SC items: Ye hast swayed us! Or...in less broken english, I am going to be going through our LoN and Stationcash items and--where appropriate--adding the Heirloom flag.A couple of examples of "where appropriate":<ul><li>Items that have charges--such as the potions</li><li>Items that must be equipped--such as appearance armor</li><li>NOT items that can be used from your inventory--such as mounts</li></ul></blockquote></blockquote>for future reference.. read the entire thread.. FIRST.. before trying to corect someone who already brought the obvious to everyones attention.. the whole reason behind my posts are because they said NOT MOUNTs.... heres a quote from page 7 for your reference...<div><cite>NViDiaFReaK wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>timetravelling wrote:</cite><blockquote>Hey folks!Y'all have given some great feedback, and brought up two of the main issues internally and wanted to give you updates:Linking accounts: I spoke with several of our coders and while there are limitations that prevent us from implementing it immediately, they thought it sounded feasible. We will keep it in mind and hopefully add it at some point in the future. No timetable promises, but hopefully we'll be able to get the feature in for those of you with multiple accounts. It may even open up the possibility of some other features as a cool side effect!LoN and SC items: Ye hast swayed us! Or...in less broken english, I am going to be going through our LoN and Stationcash items and--where appropriate--adding the Heirloom flag.A couple of examples of "where appropriate":<ul><li>Items that have charges--such as the potions</li><li>Items that must be equipped--such as appearance armor</li><li>NOT items that can be used from your inventory--such as mounts</li></ul></blockquote>And why not mount??? the RAF mount is Heirloom? Why cant the LON mounts be Heirloom as well? Makes no sense...<div></div></blockquote></div>

Lleren

09-03-2009, 02:48 AM

I would like to see an Alt Button added to the need/greed/decline buttons on the need before greed loot options, in between need and greed. The ability to link accounts I am in favor of, and I run only one account. I could see this as having some possible serious downsides.I would not link my account to anyone elses for the same reasons I do not lend my account info out to anyone else, I cannot control thier actions. I would assume that lnked accounts would all be suspended at the same time if one of them was being a <bleep> in level chat while drunk, or commiting other unsavory actions. This is someting I choose not to risk. Others will though, possibly certain entire raiding guilds if it was easily done.I do have a solution, though its not a very good one. Allow heirloom items to be traded through a guildbank or some other guild function.

Gungo

09-03-2009, 11:53 AM

<cite>NViDiaFReaK wrote:</cite><blockquote>for future reference.. read the entire thread.. FIRST.. before trying to corect someone who already brought the obvious to everyones attention.. the whole reason behind my posts are because they said NOT MOUNTs.... heres a quote from page 7 for your reference...</blockquote>O I read the entire thread. You just seem a little daft. Let me say it slower for you to understand.DEVELOPER SAID..... MOUNTS ARE NOT INTENDED TO BE HEIRLOOM.MANY MANY MANY items in game get released by accident with wrong tags, stats, Etc.It is entirely more likely that this particular mount is bugged and mislabeled then every other mount in game. You are using this particular mount as proof that all mounts should be heirloom when about 200 other mounts in game are NOTRADE. It is freakin obvious why you are not allowed to trade clickable inventory items, because you can exploit them and use them on every toon on you account at the same time. Also I have gone ahead and /bug reported on test that particular mount for you. Have a nice day!**snipped the inappropriate comment - K

Barx

09-03-2009, 12:03 PM

<cite>Gungo wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>NViDiaFReaK wrote:</cite><blockquote>for future reference.. read the entire thread.. FIRST.. before trying to corect someone who already brought the obvious to everyones attention.. the whole reason behind my posts are because they said NOT MOUNTs.... heres a quote from page 7 for your reference...</blockquote>O I read the entire thread. You just seem a little daft. Let me say it slower for you to understand.DEVELOPER SAID..... MOUNTS ARE NOT INTENDED TO BE HEIRLOOM.MANY MANY MANY items in game get released by accident with wrong tags, stats, Etc.It is entirely more likely that this particular mount is bugged and mislabeled then every other mount in game. You are using this particular mount as proof that all mounts should be heirloom when about 200 other mounts in game are NOTRADE. It is freakin obvious why you are not allowed to trade clickable inventory items, because you can exploit them and use them on every toon on you account at the same time. Also I have gone ahead and /bug reported on test that particular mount for you. Have a nice day!**snipped the inappropriate comment - K</blockquote>The RAF mount is intended to be heirloom, and it's a special exception. (The idea being you should be able to play with your referred friend on any of your characters, so you can move the mount between them). Regular mounts are not intended to be hierloom since there is no other way of locking the mount to a character beyond making them attunable and forcing them to be equipped.

Gungo

09-03-2009, 12:13 PM

<cite>Barx@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Gungo wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>NViDiaFReaK wrote:</cite><blockquote>for future reference.. read the entire thread.. FIRST.. before trying to corect someone who already brought the obvious to everyones attention.. the whole reason behind my posts are because they said NOT MOUNTs.... heres a quote from page 7 for your reference...</blockquote>O I read the entire thread. You just seem a little daft. Let me say it slower for you to understand.DEVELOPER SAID..... MOUNTS ARE NOT INTENDED TO BE HEIRLOOM.MANY MANY MANY items in game get released by accident with wrong tags, stats, Etc.It is entirely more likely that this particular mount is bugged and mislabeled then every other mount in game. You are using this particular mount as proof that all mounts should be heirloom when about 200 other mounts in game are NOTRADE. It is freakin obvious why you are not allowed to trade clickable inventory items, because you can exploit them and use them on every toon on you account at the same time. Also I have gone ahead and /bug reported on test that particular mount for you. Have a nice day!*snipped the inappropriate comment - K</blockquote>The RAF mount is intended to be heirloom, and it's a special exception. (The idea being you should be able to play with your referred friend on any of your characters, so you can move the mount between them). Regular mounts are not intended to be hierloom since there is no other way of locking the mount to a character beyond making them attunable and forcing them to be equipped.</blockquote>Then under the current mechanics the mount should be claimable on every toon and no trade which serves the same purpose without exploiting items by keeping the buff up without having the item.

NViDiaFReaK

09-03-2009, 06:56 PM

guess my entire post was deleted.. instead of being sniped*I said LON mounts should be heirloom... not all mounts.

Excalibre33

09-03-2009, 09:18 PM

<cite>timetravelling wrote:</cite><blockquote>Linking accounts: I spoke with several of our coders and while there are limitations that prevent us from implementing it immediately, they thought it sounded feasible. We will keep it in mind and hopefully add it at some point in the future. No timetable promises, but hopefully we'll be able to get the feature in for those of you with multiple accounts. It may even open up the possibility of some other features as a cool side effect</blockquote>My excitement over this statement just about made my wet my pants. Nearly everyone I know plays multiple accounts and I know that I'm not the only person to have their raiding characters separated to different accounts in multiple guilds... I'm sure guilds can enforce policy about gearing toons in different guilds all on their own and I ultimately love this change... like, really love it... I simply can't wait for account linking and when it goes live I might explode with the happy. Right now I love you timetravelling, in a strictly hands-to-yourself and brotherly way of course.

Vraeth

09-08-2009, 07:33 AM

hm, a strange find <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />the unadorned circlet was made tradable too, so i put it into my shared bank. i was on my zerker when i was browsing the bank and thought i check what it does.it doesnt tell me which gems i need, but when i tried to 'insert' the gems, i got a message <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /><blockquote>You are not a mage. How did you acquire this circlet? Fyreflyte is on to you, you dirty dirty cheater!</blockquote>

Calain80

09-08-2009, 10:47 AM

*rofl* nice find!

Taylinn

09-08-2009, 10:55 AM

That is funny!

Bournev

09-10-2009, 11:52 AM

First off, let me say that I love this idea and applaud the devs for doing it. However, I am *not* in favor of making a 'need for alt' button in the loot options. Why? well, unless they can make the "need for alt" button check your account to verify that you actually have the requisite toon AND that it's an upgrade, this quickly becomes the most powerful choice for loot. Example:A bow drops, which is usable for several classes, but is heavily statted to help a ranger (+ranged crit, etc). There are no rangers in the group, but two group members have an alt ranger. I do NOT have an alt ranger.Scenario 1 (current loot roll system): Everyone rolls greed on the item and everyone has a fair chance at it. Alt ranger players can use it if they win it, otherwise it's transmute or sell or save for future alt if a non-ranger alt player wins it. Statistically, a player without a ranger alt, who cannot use the piece of gear has 1/6 chance of winning the piece of gear.Scenario 2 (proposed 'need for alt' loot roll system):Player 1 and 2 who both have ranger alts roll "need for alt". Two other players who do not have ranger alts roll "need for alt" also because they are greedy. Two players are honest and roll greed. Statistically, the non ranger alt players have a 1/4 chance of winning the piece of gear in this scenario. Thus, the popular 'need for alt' system actually rewards players who choose to be dishonest and just roll 'need for alt' on everything. Obviously this affects PUG more than it does good friends who group together on multiple toons, etc.

Barx

09-10-2009, 12:00 PM

<cite>Vraeth@Runnyeye wrote:</cite><blockquote>hm, a strange find <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" />the unadorned circlet was made tradable too, so i put it into my shared bank. i was on my zerker when i was browsing the bank and thought i check what it does.it doesnt tell me which gems i need, but when i tried to 'insert' the gems, i got a message <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" /><blockquote>You are not a mage. How did you acquire this circlet? Fyreflyte is on to you, you dirty dirty cheater!</blockquote></blockquote>LOL. Nice little 'Oh crap something happened that shouldn't have happened' message there Fyreflyte. Much better than '[DeBug] Impossible condition, only Mages can buy this item' <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

Paddyo

09-10-2009, 11:23 PM

I'm not entirely certain WHY LoN or SC stuff needed to be heirloom: you simply claimed the item on the appropriate toon. Unless it was to be able to make them pass back and forth between characters. Nonetheless...My cloak of the speedy bard is now heirloom, lore and attunable. So...I can't place it in the shared bank, which defeats the purpose of the heirloom tag; and if its going to be attunable, then back to my original point.

Ryptide

09-11-2009, 02:55 AM

<cite>feldon30 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Dorrian@Oasis wrote:</cite><blockquote>Every exile out there, with a few bits of grey matter left between their ears, knows this company line. The logic behind it is flawed. The lore behind it is flawed. To have an educated opinion on the matter, the question everyone should ask themselves, including the devs, is why do so many people choose to stay in exile status? Dieties.If they eliminate the reason why so many people stay exiled, people will have no reason to stay exiled. They could remove the ability to worship all gods while in exile. Or they could allow worship of any god to any alignment. If Antonia and Lucan can turn a blind eye to their citizens trading money and gear with citizens of their sworn nemisis, then surely they could turn a blind eye to their citizens praying to a less than savory god.Again, I'm not asking for a shared bank, specifically. Specifically, I am only asking for access to heirloom items.</blockquote>QFEOr better yet, quit pigeonholing deities into tired old alignment stereotypes. Couldn't killing something quickly be merciful? Yet DPS deities are evil and healing deities are good.</blockquote>Second that.

Buneary

09-11-2009, 04:32 AM

<edit>

Zizzu

09-11-2009, 05:10 PM

Any timetable of linking accounts?

Yimway

09-11-2009, 05:51 PM

<cite>Zizzu@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>Any timetable of linking accounts?</blockquote>I know of 3 subs canceled last night as players chose to consolidate rather than wait for whenever they get around to this.

Midsong

09-11-2009, 10:21 PM

Meh, hopfully people don't fight too much if this goes through.

Rahatmattata

09-12-2009, 02:14 AM

Rahatmattata

09-12-2009, 02:17 AM

what?

Xalmat

09-12-2009, 02:41 AM

Hence why you agree ahead of time BEFORE loot drops how you're distributing loot.Of course if I were a Wizard looking for the Najena's Ring, for example, I would be the group leader, and I would make it plain and clear that I will be ninja-looting the Najena's Ring should it drop. Anyone that doesn't agree is free to leave the group.

Ryptide

09-12-2009, 02:51 AM

Guild groups ftw

Kizee

09-12-2009, 01:03 PM

I am not sure if this has been brought up in this thread or others since I don't bother reading this board anymore because of the favoritism some posters get in the modding/banning department.....As good of this change is I am sure the devs have thought about people looting stuff to give to a level 1 alt to sell on the exchange server...right.... I mean something that obvious wouldn't have slipped by...right? =)Will there be a level limit on the items that you can transfer to alts? I hope there is.There probally should be a time limit involved in transfering items to prevent people from hording loot for alts that haven't even been created yet.

Hirofortis

09-13-2009, 01:30 PM

I can see that the LoN items have recieved the Heirloom tag, but I would like to toss something at the devs to think about. They are still tagged as Lore. This effectively negates the heirloom tag.Heirloom = place in shared bank to transfer to alts.Lore = Cannot put in shared bank.Net effect = Heirloom tag is worthless until you put the lore-equip tag on as well.Thanks for your time.

Animul

09-15-2009, 08:08 AM

<cite>timetravelling wrote:</cite><blockquote>Hey folks!Y'all have given some great feedback, and brought up two of the main issues internally and wanted to give you updates:Linking accounts: I spoke with several of our coders and while there are limitations that prevent us from implementing it immediately, they thought it sounded feasible. We will keep it in mind and hopefully add it at some point in the future. No timetable promises, but hopefully we'll be able to get the feature in for those of you with multiple accounts. It may even open up the possibility of some other features as a cool side effect!LoN and SC items: Ye hast swayed us! Or...in less broken english, I am going to be going through our LoN and Stationcash items and--where appropriate--adding the Heirloom flag.A couple of examples of "where appropriate":<ul><li>Items that have charges--such as the potions</li><li>Items that must be equipped--such as appearance armor</li><li>NOT items that can be used from your inventory--such as mounts</li></ul></blockquote>Given the nature of these changes I would like to see the LON Mounts removed and put back into claim status.Now that items will be heirloom I would have probably selected to give a different character the mounts because I am not forced to play a toon that is needed vs a toon that I wanted to, to get items I wanted for a different toon. That make any sense?Also how about letting us Re-Claim those items we destroyed when we deleted our first character...you know the only one per account items. Now would be the perfect time because they will be heirloom.

Gaealiege

09-15-2009, 10:50 AM

I can tell you with 100% guarantee that all my groups will be leader only loot for now on. I have no intention of losing Ring of Readiness to a guardian or brigand because of this poor idea.

Traxor

09-15-2009, 11:06 AM

This is The smartest idea SoE has come up with since coming out with Shards.It boosts players being there. It is obvious if someone is rolling on something for an alt. Same goes with rolling Need on Collection quest items and then seeing that person having them up on broker.People run the TSO heroic zones with alts to get extra shards every day in which stimulates population and player base. The introduction of fabled shard gear just makes even more long term goals for these people. SMART IDEA SOE.People Get to play their mystic instead of their monk. Since healers are needed you tell everyone you will be rolling for your monk and not yourself. Problem Solved. We do this in WoE raids. Grow up about the Ring from NHT. Wait till its a Hot zone and do it on 4 of your 80 toons. Do what ever greedy wiz does. Make the group and dont invite any other mages. Rofl.Point being. This gears up alts way easier then having to log off an log back on your toon, run him to the zone, and loot the item. This is what Shared bank should be for. Very smart Idea just to boost the player base. Everyone needs a dirge they can just log on to that has good gear when you have been looking for a dirge for 30min to run a zone and you can't find one.

TuxDave

09-15-2009, 02:52 PM

<cite>Bournev wrote:</cite><blockquote>First off, let me say that I love this idea and applaud the devs for doing it.However, I am *not* in favor of making a 'need for alt' button in the loot options. Why? well, unless they can make the "need for alt" button check your account to verify that you actually have the requisite toon AND that it's an upgrade, this quickly becomes the most powerful choice for loot.Example:A bow drops, which is usable for several classes, but is heavily statted to help a ranger (+ranged crit, etc). There are no rangers in the group, but two group members have an alt ranger. I do NOT have an alt ranger.Scenario 1 (current loot roll system): Everyone rolls greed on the item and everyone has a fair chance at it. Alt ranger players can use it if they win it, otherwise it's transmute or sell or save for future alt if a non-ranger alt player wins it.Statistically, a player without a ranger alt, who cannot use the piece of gear has 1/6 chance of winning the piece of gear.Scenario 2 (proposed 'need for alt' loot roll system):Player 1 and 2 who both have ranger alts roll "need for alt". Two other players who do not have ranger alts roll "need for alt" also because they are greedy. Two players are honest and roll greed.Statistically, the non ranger alt players have a 1/4 chance of winning the piece of gear in this scenario.Thus, the popular 'need for alt' system actually rewards players who choose to be dishonest and just roll 'need for alt' on everything.Obviously this affects PUG more than it does good friends who group together on multiple toons, etc.</blockquote>From what I gather, your biggest issue is that "need for alt" is hard to verify but a person rolling "need" on something he doesn't need can be immediately determined as false. This is because the current need/greed/decline system already favors dishonest people who roll need on items they don't need because they can jump up to 50% chance of winning. However this is only gated by the fact that we can tell the person doesn't need it and quickly boot him from the group.

Animul

09-15-2009, 04:38 PM

<cite>Traxor@Lucan DLere wrote:</cite><blockquote>This is The smartest idea SoE has come up with since coming out with Shards.It boosts players being there. It is obvious if someone is rolling on something for an alt. Same goes with rolling Need on Collection quest items and then seeing that person having them up on broker.People run the TSO heroic zones with alts to get extra shards every day in which stimulates population and player base. The introduction of fabled shard gear just makes even more long term goals for these people. SMART IDEA SOE.People Get to play their mystic instead of their monk. Since healers are needed you tell everyone you will be rolling for your monk and not yourself. Problem Solved. We do this in WoE raids. Grow up about the Ring from NHT. Wait till its a Hot zone and do it on 4 of your 80 toons. Do what ever greedy wiz does. Make the group and dont invite any other mages. Rofl.Point being. This gears up alts way easier then having to log off an log back on your toon, run him to the zone, and loot the item. This is what Shared bank should be for. Very smart Idea just to boost the player base. Everyone needs a dirge they can just log on to that has good gear when you have been looking for a dirge for 30min to run a zone and you can't find one.</blockquote>I don't think its the smartest idea, I still don't like the shard run thing they have either but its there and this change is coming so we will adapt.The direction the game has turned reminds me of those little carnivals that come to town once a year during a festival. That's the way I view it anyway. I liked the idea of something having a CHANCE to drop during a dungeon crawl that MAY be and upgrade to make my life a tad easier through the rest of the dungeon. Not the current progression the game has where your forced through it at an accelerated pace using nothing but mastercrafted gear till you start the shard runs.Not saying there is anything wrong with what you like, I just remember a time way back when the game wasn't run buy carnies. It doesn't boost the playerbase, it crams them all into the same category so everyone has everything without having to work to get it. Fun? Not

Nakaru-Nitepaw

09-15-2009, 05:33 PM

What do you guys think about if some mounts became heirloom items? I would really enjoy this because my main has about 10 mounts she doesn't use anymore becuase they're slower then the rime horse. I'd love to move them to my littler toons.

Lord Hackenslash

09-15-2009, 06:49 PM

Alot of you are afraid of people taking items for alts in pick up groups but I have to ask, what do you do now when a Master spell drops? Is this any different?

Guy De Alsace

09-17-2009, 07:44 AM

Items freely tradeable didnt seem to be a problem before the addiction to the "no trade" tag arrived. Cant see it being a problem now. People will work it out.Linked accounts rocks on all levels.ROFL though for still having Lore and Heirloom on the same item. Whoops!

Pvpmedic

09-17-2009, 06:30 PM

I read most the posts here and didnt see much about heirloom items getting traded between accounts. All of my alts are on seperate accounts You guys should make a way to verify these accounts are yours like when u transfer a toon from one account to another. If heirloom will only be between alts on the same account iI see Sony loosing alot of money every month. I myself pay for 3 accounts per month. With this update iI will transfer all my alts to one account and close the other 2 accounts. I see many others doing the same. I hope sonySony has thought about this. let me know thanx, I'm on an iPhone so hope i spelled everthing ok.

Guy De Alsace

09-18-2009, 04:13 AM

<cite>Pvpmedic@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote>I read most the posts here and didnt see much about heirloom items getting traded between accounts. All of my alts are on seperate accounts You guys should make a way to verify these accounts are yours like when u transfer a toon from one account to another. If heirloom will only be between alts on the same account iI see Sony loosing alot of money every month. I myself pay for 3 accounts per month. With this update iI will transfer all my alts to one account and close the other 2 accounts. I see many others doing the same. I hope sonySony has thought about this. let me know thanx, I'm on an iPhone so hope i spelled everthing ok.</blockquote>Timetravelling said they were looking into linking multiple accounts so that wont be a problem.

MirageKnight

09-18-2009, 05:35 AM

I strongly disagree of this "large number of Heirloom items" until SOE put new loot setting avairable for players.Loot setting such as: NEED > HEIRLOOM > GREED setting as for my suggestion. if rolling for NEED, player cannot loot items that he/she cannot use, and item will be auto attuned to player after roll. if rolling for HEIRLOOM, player must pay gold which merchant buy that item, and devided to other players in group to prevent someone mis-use this rolling. (if not enough gold to split, will auto downgrade to GREED) if rolling for GREED, same as before, free for all.And also allow loot setting asNEED > HEIRLOOM > GREEDHEIRLOOM > GREED onlysetting depends on group (as some wanted to use other class for instance but group asking for other class.)This is just example, but without this type of prevention, it will spoil PUG grouping in game and arguments will destroy group in middle of instances.

Yimway

09-18-2009, 11:03 AM

I say forget about hierloom and just make it attunable lore-equip.

Wytie

09-18-2009, 11:45 AM

<cite>MirageKnight wrote:</cite><blockquote>I strongly disagree of this "large number of Heirloom items" until SOE put new loot setting avairable for players.Loot setting such as: NEED > HEIRLOOM > GREED setting as for my suggestion. if rolling for NEED, player cannot loot items that he/she cannot use, and item will be auto attuned to player after roll. if rolling for HEIRLOOM, player must pay gold which merchant buy that item, and devided to other players in group to prevent someone mis-use this rolling. (if not enough gold to split, will auto downgrade to GREED) if rolling for GREED, same as before, free for all.And also allow loot setting asNEED > HEIRLOOM > GREEDHEIRLOOM > GREED onlysetting depends on group (as some wanted to use other class for instance but group asking for other class.)This is just example, but without this type of prevention, it will spoil PUG grouping in game and arguments will destroy group in middle of instances.</blockquote>The current looting system is fine, adding another option will do nothing.Alot of people only go to zones on their main because they are specificly asked too, those alt are just as much entitled to loot the players want, as people in the zone, because quite frankly that person wouldnt even be in that zone if he couldnt roll on loot for his alt anyway due to his main being maxed.Why shouldnt that person who was asked to go on their main not be entitled to the same chance at rolling on loot for his alt? your loot option would put that person at a loot disadvantage, though he was needed for him main tho his main needed zero loot from that zone.Adding a another option would just confuse this and it most likely wouldnt get use anyway.I comend Sony for this change and I comend them again for NOT adding another loot option.

Kazgoroth

09-18-2009, 02:07 PM

I have not seen this question asked and I assume the answer is yes but here it is:Do existing patterns get change to have the heirloom flag as well?

timetravelling

09-18-2009, 03:36 PM

<cite>Kazgoroth wrote:</cite><blockquote>I have not seen this question asked and I assume the answer is yes but here it is:Do existing patterns get change to have the heirloom flag as well?</blockquote>They should, yes.

MirageKnight

09-19-2009, 01:15 AM

<cite>Paill@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>MirageKnight wrote:</cite><blockquote>I strongly disagree of this "large number of Heirloom items" until SOE put new loot setting avairable for players.Loot setting such as: NEED > HEIRLOOM > GREED setting as for my suggestion. if rolling for NEED, player cannot loot items that he/she cannot use, and item will be auto attuned to player after roll. if rolling for HEIRLOOM, player must pay gold which merchant buy that item, and devided to other players in group to prevent someone mis-use this rolling. (if not enough gold to split, will auto downgrade to GREED) if rolling for GREED, same as before, free for all.And also allow loot setting asNEED > HEIRLOOM > GREEDHEIRLOOM > GREED onlysetting depends on group (as some wanted to use other class for instance but group asking for other class.)This is just example, but without this type of prevention, it will spoil PUG grouping in game and arguments will destroy group in middle of instances.</blockquote>The current looting system is fine, adding another option will do nothing.Alot of people only go to zones on their main because they are specificly asked too, those alt are just as much entitled to loot the players want, as people in the zone, because quite frankly that person wouldnt even be in that zone if he couldnt roll on loot for his alt anyway due to his main being maxed.Why shouldnt that person who was asked to go on their main not be entitled to the same chance at rolling on loot for his alt? your loot option would put that person at a loot disadvantage, though he was needed for him main tho his main needed zero loot from that zone.Adding a another option would just confuse this and it most likely wouldnt get use anyway.I comend Sony for this change and I comend them again for NOT adding another loot option.</blockquote>As for reply for this comment, many of people who have item they want to loot would never use PUG if you have to worry about someone in group will take that item for their alt with current looting system. And I do understand as so many I have grouped find some class is harder to find group unless well equipped than other class. This new attempt would solve this dilemma, howerver, if NEED > GREED only looting systems there, some can misuse "NEED" as saying he/she wants for alt but selling, or tank form group (having only 1 tank in group) for certain item for his own but someone in group loot that item for his alt tank by NEED roll.And seems you are talking abut your common sense and forcing it that applies to everyone in game. Some people have alt that some group wanted to have for the zone, but he/she might want to use other class for that zone for looting. New Heirloom system, I see as saving this kind of dilemmas.And I don't see any of your point making this out as "disadvantage", unless you can't read mathematic symbols I have use; as making NEED > (wins) HEIRLOOM > (wins) GREED roll, so that group won't allow someone's alt wins whoever in the group (though have to apply NEED rule that state). And adding 1 more HEIRLOOM > (wins) GREED for if group agree to do so as when someone in group already playing in their alt but wanted to loot for his alt.Like I have pointed out, my looting suggestion is only part of suggestion as adding 2 more settings, but I wouldn't invite people from channel if i have something i want (such as Emperer's Athenaeum's charm) in the zone any more, and many and most raiders won't either. Why need to waste time for if need to worry about someone's alt taking loot that not his/er class he/she currently using? My suggested looting only prevent and give option to group decision as how they want to looting for that group. And if they are putting HEIRLOOM with only current NEED > GREED setting, no one would dear to go zone with strangers, that would destroy the community and gaming experience.

snowli

09-19-2009, 02:08 AM

I can see this causing a lot of drama in groups.I'm also of the opinion that a class should be actually played to get geared up. I do admit it saves time on people logging in alts to get a particularly rare drop. I think the best way would be to add an extra loot & rolling options, with some of the caveat's outlined, as others have suggested.NEED > HEIRLOOM > GREED

Kigneer

09-19-2009, 02:35 AM

<cite>MirageKnight wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Paill@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>MirageKnight wrote:</cite><blockquote>I strongly disagree of this "large number of Heirloom items" until SOE put new loot setting avairable for players.Loot setting such as: NEED > HEIRLOOM > GREED setting as for my suggestion. if rolling for NEED, player cannot loot items that he/she cannot use, and item will be auto attuned to player after roll. if rolling for HEIRLOOM, player must pay gold which merchant buy that item, and devided to other players in group to prevent someone mis-use this rolling. (if not enough gold to split, will auto downgrade to GREED) if rolling for GREED, same as before, free for all.And also allow loot setting asNEED > HEIRLOOM > GREEDHEIRLOOM > GREED onlysetting depends on group (as some wanted to use other class for instance but group asking for other class.)This is just example, but without this type of prevention, it will spoil PUG grouping in game and arguments will destroy group in middle of instances.</blockquote>The current looting system is fine, adding another option will do nothing.Alot of people only go to zones on their main because they are specificly asked too, those alt are just as much entitled to loot the players want, as people in the zone, because quite frankly that person wouldnt even be in that zone if he couldnt roll on loot for his alt anyway due to his main being maxed.Why shouldnt that person who was asked to go on their main not be entitled to the same chance at rolling on loot for his alt? your loot option would put that person at a loot disadvantage, though he was needed for him main tho his main needed zero loot from that zone.Adding a another option would just confuse this and it most likely wouldnt get use anyway.I comend Sony for this change and I comend them again for NOT adding another loot option.</blockquote>As for reply for this comment, many of people who have item they want to loot would never use PUG if you have to worry about someone in group will take that item for their alt with current looting system. And I do understand as so many I have grouped find some class is harder to find group unless well equipped than other class. This new attempt would solve this dilemma, howerver, if NEED > GREED only looting systems there, some can misuse "NEED" as saying he/she wants for alt but selling, or tank form group (having only 1 tank in group) for certain item for his own but someone in group loot that item for his alt tank by NEED roll.</blockquote>Many guilds don't have 24 people to fill a x4 roster, so they must rely on PuGs for gear -- why WoE works on such a system.Heirloom gear shouldn't be tradeable anyway (the point of having such a system is to hand it down to alts, but off the market).BUT, if fabled heirloom items can be transmuted, yes that can be a concern as folks will hit need just for that, and transmutables can't be tracked publicly.

Pvpmedic

09-19-2009, 03:40 AM

You know what would be cool is if you had an in-game toon that we can hail and pay to have items unatuned when somthing gets upgraded. Or maybe somthing we can buy on the marketplace that will unatune items. Like when the new expantion comes out we can unatune old items for lower alts etc... Just a thought

winlight

09-21-2009, 12:29 AM

Aria of MaledictionDropped by <a href="http://www.lootdb.com/eq2/mob/Kpul+D%60Vngur">Kpul D`Vngur</a> (<a href="http://www.lootdb.com/eq2/zone/Shard+of+Hate">Shard of Hate</a>)can change so many quest reward item ,SO RARE it drop and so good quest reward , but quest reward don`t have Heirloom flaghope SOE can add Heirloom flag on this rare drop quest reward , thx

GeForceTony

09-21-2009, 04:57 AM

<cite>winlight wrote:</cite><blockquote>Aria of MaledictionDropped by <a href="http://www.lootdb.com/eq2/mob/Kpul+D%60Vngur">Kpul D`Vngur</a> (<a href="http://www.lootdb.com/eq2/zone/Shard+of+Hate">Shard of Hate</a>)can change so many quest reward item ,SO RARE it drop and so good quest reward , but quest reward don`t have Heirloom flaghope SOE can add Heirloom flag on this rare drop quest reward , thx</blockquote>Not gonna happen. The items are recieved from completing the quest you get upon examining the item.Quest rewards = not heirloom = it won't happen.

Mystfit

09-21-2009, 11:34 AM

I checked my test copy character to see what had changed with this tag and an item I was hoping would go heirloom did not. It's old zone items (KOS) and it got me to wandering, is the new tag mainly in tier 8?

Chelios

09-21-2009, 02:46 PM

<cite>Guy De Alsace wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Pvpmedic@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote>I read most the posts here and didnt see much about heirloom items getting traded between accounts. All of my alts are on seperate accounts You guys should make a way to verify these accounts are yours like when u transfer a toon from one account to another. If heirloom will only be between alts on the same account iI see Sony loosing alot of money every month. I myself pay for 3 accounts per month. With this update iI will transfer all my alts to one account and close the other 2 accounts. I see many others doing the same. I hope sonySony has thought about this. let me know thanx, I'm on an iPhone so hope i spelled everthing ok.</blockquote>Timetravelling said they were looking into linking multiple accounts so that wont be a problem.</blockquote>Another vote for linking accounts. I have several alt accounts and would love to see this happen sooner than later.I think Zizzu said it perfectly: Just make all items attunable at first then heirloom/no-trade afterward. This would allow items to be moved to another alt without the heirloom penalty.

TheVekk

09-22-2009, 11:28 AM

the only problem i could see with this is that u will have those people that will roll on items for there alts and win it over someones main who they where running the zone for, or something along these lines. From my experince in this game is the people are greedy, most wont do anything that doesnt benifit there account in some way and this could turn into a drama fest for alot of grps but i guess we will just have to wait and find out realy. but maybe im wrong and it will turn out fine. i was wrong about the Need-before-greed systems so hope im wrong in this case aswell <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" />

theriatis

09-22-2009, 11:46 AM

Hi,i'm all in for a new Loot Option "Heirloom need" or just gray the Need out if the Item is not usable with the class in the group... if ANYONE loots Najenas Ring with the "But i have a mage alt !" then i surely send him.... my best greetings <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" />Or sell that damned Ring on the Blackshardmerchant - i don't care for how much.Regards,a Wizard, who already has lost Najenas Ring to a Troub and an Illy which didn't now the least of what the effect on it does.

Lord Hackenslash

09-22-2009, 01:06 PM

<cite>TheVekk wrote:</cite><blockquote>the only problem i could see with this is that u will have those people that will roll on items for there alts and win it over someones main who they where running the zone for, or something along these lines. From my experince in this game is the people are greedy, most wont do anything that doesnt benifit there account in some way and this could turn into a drama fest for alot of grps but i guess we will just have to wait and find out realy. but maybe im wrong and it will turn out fine. i was wrong about the Need-before-greed systems so hope im wrong in this case aswell <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" /></blockquote>I personally have had the opposite experience. I found that in general (at least on the European server) that when i group with people they really let the person who needs an item most get it. The box in Mystmyr manor went to a dirge last time i saw it drop even though most of the group could have had a fabled item from it. I personally won the ring from Evernight abbey because we had a second tank in group but because i was the one taking the hits the whole zone he passed on it to me. Last week I won a dirge master in a group because the dirge already had it and rolled greed like everyone else even though no one would have known if they decided to need on it. About 3 weeks ago the Templar group heal master dropped, I have a templar alt I was not playing in that group so I greeded like everyone else and unfortunately lost, Later on the master was being auctioned and when the seller saw I was bidding on it and had been in the group he stopped the auction and gave me the master at half what I had already bid at. This is all pretty common stuff for us.In the past before I fully mastered out my Mystic I would sometimes ask a group that I was tanking for at the beginning of the group if they would mind if I rolled as a mystic if masters dropped instead of as an Sk because i was fully mastered. I suspect the Heirloom thing will work itself out in a similar manner. If someone wants to roll heirloom for an alt they just let the group know in advance and they can go wild on the need button but the group knows this in advance and has the opportunity to say yes or no. Today if a master drops I have 4 alts that are not yet fully mastered but I Don't roll need for them if I am not playing that character unless I agree beforehand with the group. Most people on my server act this way. So really is it a matter of game design that concerns a lot of people here or is it really a matter of not building a community which is entirely the realm of the player.I play this game because it has a far more mature community than I have experienced in other games but that is the result of the player base respecting each other and not allowing the idiocy of games like W.o.W. to gain a foothold. We have managed to work out loot for 5 years now I am sure we can come to an agreement among ourselves on how to deal with this newly implemented convenience in a few days time.

GrunEQ

09-22-2009, 04:50 PM

Why would anyone be more greedy or less greedy than they are now for alts? I think that arguement is flawed.

Oakum

09-22-2009, 04:57 PM

The common NBG has has always been in group first. If someone wanted something for an alt they should have to speak up BEFORE the item is looted or the group started and the other people in the group would have to agree that it is acceptable.If people can't see this as a common sense approach and use the "need for alt" in order to get something then they are just being greedy unless they talked to their group first as above.Thats when you add them and their alts (make sure you ask what their alts name is) on your do not group with list and let your guild and friends know about that person so that they wont group with them unless its set as leader loot or something and they are not the leader.

Animul

09-22-2009, 04:59 PM

<cite>Fenuxx@Nektulos wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>winlight wrote:</cite><blockquote>Aria of MaledictionDropped by<a href="http://www.lootdb.com/eq2/mob/Kpul+D%60Vngur">Kpul D`Vngur</a> (<a href="http://www.lootdb.com/eq2/zone/Shard+of+Hate">Shard of Hate</a>)can change so many quest reward item ,SO RARE it drop and so good quest reward , but quest reward don`t have Heirloom flaghope SOE can add Heirloom flag on this rare drop quest reward , thx</blockquote>Not gonna happen. The items are recieved from completing the quest you get upon examining the item.Quest rewards = not heirloom = it won't happen.</blockquote>Yea?Same thing was said about in game sex changes. now they are talking race changes...Your right of coarse, it won't happen. /rollseyesThe sooner you grasp the concept of most of what the devs say is just a line to appease the playerbase, the sooner you will grasp that if it is possible, it may happen.

bks6721

09-22-2009, 05:14 PM

it seems to be a huge advantage to those with 9 alts imho. A lot of my current income is from winning random /greed roll in groups. Now that people can rolls /need for their dozen alts I think I'll see a lot less random /greed wins. There is also nothing to prevent people from randomly rolling /need for an alt that simply doesn't exist.I think it would be nice if the /need option was able to conduct an account check to see if the item could actually be equiped by a character on that account. Similar to how it works if I try to equip chain on my mage, I get an error sound and it doesn't work. I guess I'm just paraniod that my wiz is going to lose out on the HT ring to a tank that has a lvl 65 mage. As it is now on Live the tank wouldn't roll on it but with the new heirloom tag who wouldn't be tempted to roll on it for future use on an alt?competition for drops is frustrating enough now but when we start to add in alts of everyone in group there's gonna be some drama. People will start making false claims of which character is their main and which is their alt. Dirges that want to roll for their main healer ect, just screws the healer in the group.

Lord Hackenslash

09-22-2009, 07:28 PM

<cite>bks6721 wrote:</cite><blockquote>it seems to be a huge advantage to those with 9 alts imho. A lot of my current income is from winning random /greed roll in groups. Now that people can rolls /need for their dozen alts I think I'll see a lot less random /greed wins. There is also nothing to prevent people from randomly rolling /need for an alt that simply doesn't exist.</blockquote>This is no different from what is currently live.

Nakaru-Nitepaw

09-24-2009, 08:52 PM

Yay my armored pinto whistle (mentoring mount) is heirloom so i can use it on any of my toons now. For that I am a happy rat. I just didn't like logging in after patch to find myself stark naked in the guild hall because everything was moved to overflow lol.

feldon30

09-24-2009, 10:14 PM

wtb Need for Alt button.

thajo

09-25-2009, 05:08 AM

<cite>Animul wrote:</cite><blockquote>Yea?Same thing was said about in game sex changes. now they are talking race changes...Your right of coarse, it won't happen. /rollseyesThe sooner you grasp the concept of most of what the devs say is just a line to appease the playerbase, the sooner you will grasp that if it is possible, it may happen.</blockquote>Oh they could make quest items tradable. But I smell unintended exploits. Like having every item from a quest reward on 1 toon your only suppose to obtain 1 of/for? Of course a quested item like from Mayongs Coin or the Maestro item I think should be tradable since you can already just loot the quest item multiple times. But some things I don't think they want you having multiple of =pJust my guess.

theriatis

09-25-2009, 05:36 AM

<cite>feldon30 wrote:</cite><blockquote>wtb Need for Alt button.</blockquote>I would also buy one - but if i got one free with the next Hotfix... i would not mind <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

Bekkr

09-25-2009, 08:08 AM

<cite>Eschia@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>Yay my armored pinto whistle (mentoring mount) is heirloom so i can use it on any of my toons now. For that I am a happy rat. I just didn't like logging in after patch to find myself stark naked in the guild hall because everything was moved to overflow lol.</blockquote>Haven't those always been heirloom? Mine certainly was before the latest GU.

Nakaru-Nitepaw

09-25-2009, 09:45 PM

<cite>Bekkr@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Eschia@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>Yay my armored pinto whistle (mentoring mount) is heirloom so i can use it on any of my toons now. For that I am a happy rat. I just didn't like logging in after patch to find myself stark naked in the guild hall because everything was moved to overflow lol.</blockquote>Haven't those always been heirloom? Mine certainly was before the latest GU.</blockquote>Mine wasn't. It used to be No-Trade for me. Strange. o.o

denmom

09-25-2009, 10:42 PM

I do really like this new feature...I was able to get a really nice upgrade for my Paladin when my Warden ran Ravenscale last night.As for the whole greed thing, I asked if I could need because my tank could use. The group had no problem, and the leader reset the looting to leader only to make sure I got the item.I know not all players are that courteous, but just showing that it can and does happen. <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

Excalibur1

03-24-2010, 08:32 AM

timetravelling

03-24-2010, 02:07 PM

<cite>Excalibur119 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>timetravelling wrote:</cite><blockquote>Hey folks!Y'all have given some great feedback, and brought up two of the main issues internally and wanted to give you updates:Linking accounts: I spoke with several of our coders and while there are limitations that prevent us from implementing it immediately, they thought it sounded feasible. We will keep it in mind and hopefully add it at some point in the future. No timetable promises, but hopefully we'll be able to get the feature in for those of you with multiple accounts. It may even open up the possibility of some other features as a cool side effect!</blockquote>Bit of a necro, but ..... is this still on your radar and list of things to do?</blockquote>Yes it is.

Jesdyr

03-24-2010, 02:25 PM

about where on the radar is that ?Obviously there are some very important things right now (lag) but, is this like on the edge or more towards the center ?

Fiora

03-24-2010, 03:28 PM

it would be really awesome tbhim waiting for that :p

RafaelSmith

03-24-2010, 03:49 PM

<cite>timetravelling wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Excalibur119 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>timetravelling wrote:</cite><blockquote>Hey folks!Y'all have given some great feedback, and brought up two of the main issues internally and wanted to give you updates:Linking accounts: I spoke with several of our coders and while there are limitations that prevent us from implementing it immediately, they thought it sounded feasible. We will keep it in mind and hopefully add it at some point in the future. No timetable promises, but hopefully we'll be able to get the feature in for those of you with multiple accounts. It may even open up the possibility of some other features as a cool side effect!</blockquote>Bit of a necro, but ..... is this still on your radar and list of things to do?</blockquote>Yes it is.</blockquote>Good to hear.I would think this would be high on your list of things to add to the game as its just a win win for everyone including SOE. I know ALOT of people with multiple accounts. I also know that I have been tempted lately to just merge my characters to a single account.....especially with things like Red Adorns and such. Sure you all would get the $$ from the character transfer but not the continued $$$ for that monthly subscription on the other account =P Pass that along to your bean-counters <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

Trabbart

03-24-2010, 04:11 PM

What i really want is a message that tells you if you allready have the Heirloom lore equip item (before looting it)I have ended up needing or spending dkp on the same items quite a few times by accident.

kelesia

03-24-2010, 04:32 PM

How many accounts would be able to be linked? We have 3 that we run right now. It would also be immensly awesome if somehow you could manage to make it so we didn't have to camp completely out of the client in order to change accounts.*bounce*

Jesdyr

03-24-2010, 05:18 PM

<cite>Lillya@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>How many accounts would be able to be linked? We have 3 that we run right now. It would also be immensly awesome if somehow you could manage to make it so we didn't have to camp completely out of the client in order to change accounts.*bounce*</blockquote>I hear this can be done by modding the character select screen. I think ProfitUI supports this if you launch the game by opening everquest2.exe directly.

Purr

03-24-2010, 06:26 PM

Please let us link at least 6 accounts (that's what our family has). And I can't wait for this feature, it will make life so much easier.Purr~

Tallhart

03-24-2010, 06:47 PM

<cite>imetravelling wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Excalibur119 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>timetravelling wrote:</cite><blockquote>Hey folks!Y'all have given some great feedback, and brought up two of the main issues internally and wanted to give you updates:Linking accounts: I spoke with several of our coders and while there are limitations that prevent us from implementing it immediately, they thought it sounded feasible. We will keep it in mind and hopefully add it at some point in the future. No timetable promises, but hopefully we'll be able to get the feature in for those of you with multiple accounts. It may even open up the possibility of some other features as a cool side effect!</blockquote>Bit of a necro, but ..... is this still on your radar and list of things to do?</blockquote>Yes it is.</blockquote>Yes, but did you mean:'Yes, this post is a bit of a necro.'or'Yes, linking accounts is still on our radar.'???You just have to love pronouns with questionable antecedents! <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" />Edited to say I'm highly in favor of the whole account linking thing, and hope it's not too far out on the radar! <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />