<p><cite>Rothgar wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>However, we will be diligent in the rewards that we give out to make sure they aren't class-breaking or balance-breaking in some way or another.  We don't want the achievements to be something you have to do in order to be competitive as a player, but we want some of them to have rewards that recognize your achievement.</p></blockquote><p>I think that's all anyone is asking.</p>

<p><cite>Rothgar wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>Some achievements may have more useful and unique rewards like house items or clicky items that give some benefit or visual effect.  These achievements are the ones that take the most time to complete or represent a milestone.</p><p>The important thing to remember is that nothing is set in stone when it comes to rewards.  We want the achievement system to be fun and rewarding but we aren't going to introduce anything that changes the player power level significantly.</p></blockquote><p>As long as the 'rewards' for difficult to achieve tasks are truely a reward, then I'm excited about the system.</p><p>If its more tittles, houseitems, and in general things that don't provide character distinction, you guys will have missed the mark.</p>

<p><cite>Jerokane@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>Sharakari@Unrest wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite></cite></p><blockquote><em>CoLD MeTaL wrote:</em><p>They won't get anyone to participate if they don't add in-game benefits.  It will start as fluff, and then wind up having something very valuable in it.</p></blockquote><p>I couldn't disagree more.  I think TONS of folks will do this just for the fluff items.  Don't base your opinion on the small percentage that post in these forums.  I'll be doing them even if I just get a title because it will be something DIFFERENT and FUN.  And here's the best part..... if I don't like it, I dont HAVE to do it because the rewards ARE fluff.... and don't put any mechanics in the game that I would be discriminated against for not having.  Changing hair colors, giving appearance items, adding titles, makeing appearance  items with sparkly effects, heck... even a non-stat mount with a slight speed increase are all things that I think still will "differentiate" folks.... especially if they can give a couple options to choose from with the fluff rewards.  I can't wait for the next GU!</p><p>But I do respect your opinion.  <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" /></p></blockquote><p>Seriously,</p><p>Why would it matter if you can get a fast mount with nice stats as Achievement that takes lots of effort and time to get?</p><p>What is it with this fluff only crap all the time??</p><p>They have an achievement system in WoW too now for quite some time and people can get some really great rewards (including speedy flying mount for example).</p><p>You don't hear anyone complaining there! No no.... it's only on the EQ2 forums where people have to whine and complain about every idea devs try to put into the game! Seriously, always such a drama about everything! (just like with the RA assistants as most recent example... drama still going on lol)</p><p>Go complain in the item decay and fighter revamp threads. At least you people have then really something worth complaining about!</p><p>An Achievement system.. the name already says it all... it means that plenty of achievements take an achievement aka time aka effort to get!</p><p>Why not being rewarded for it? And not just fluff!</p><p>It should depend on the type of achievement and what reward would fit properly with it.</p><p>With one achievement a fun and fluff item might be a proper reward.</p><p>With another achievement a more serious reward might be appropriate.</p><p>Jer</p></blockquote><p>Jer without trying to sound condescending this is not WoW and people dont want it to be like that. We dont all play for the same reasons or goals.</p><p>Why should we complain about item decay or fighter revamps if they don't mean anything to us...they may to you and your neighbor but they don't to everyone.</p><p>If you don't see something wrong with the research assistance that's great, I see plenty wrong with it, but our goals are different. Doesn't really make anything wrong with either of our views, just that we see things from a different perspective.</p><p>I have seen things change in the past that were pretty messed up because of the snowball effect they would have later on in the game. They put them in then and they will do the same here...I am grateful that they decided to communicate it to us so we could give feedback. That's what this is for, if we want to vent a little then its ok too, or you could just go play WoW where they don't complain.</p>

<p><cite>Animul wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>Jer without trying to sound condescending this is not WoW and people dont want it to be like that. We dont all play for the same reasons or goals.</p><p>Why should we complain about item decay or fighter revamps if they don't mean anything to us...they may to you and your neighbor but they don't to everyone.</p><p>If you don't see something wrong with the research assistance that's great, I see plenty wrong with it, but our goals are different. Doesn't really make anything wrong with either of our views, just that we see things from a different perspective.</p><p>I have seen things change in the past that were pretty messed up because of the snowball effect they would have later on in the game. They put them in then and they will do the same here...I am grateful that they decided to communicate it to us so we could give feedback. That's what this is for, if we want to vent a little then its ok too, or you could just go play WoW where they don't complain.</p></blockquote><p>Because there is a HUGE difference between a full blown out revamp that changes whole classes or a system like Item Decay that has a HUGE impact and rendering hard earned gear useless within a couple levels (and potentially ruining armorers and tailoring profession in upper levels).....</p><p>...then... what are we talking about? An achievement system that rewards you with some nice rewards!</p><p>What the heck does it matter if you can get a fast mount with nice stats as a reward for example for an hard to complete Achievement?</p><p>There are a gazillion mounts already in the game. I can't really see any game breaking harm in adding one or more to the achievement system lol.</p><p>Seriously. People can now get free 20/20 (24hr) mounts (40% spd) with the Moonlight events. You can potentially get 5 whisles a month of you wish too. We gonna complain about that too now then??</p><p>Or what impact would have some Legendary rewards have? You get plenty of Legendary rewards for quest series?? Completing a time consuming Achievement wouldn't be any different!</p><p>Hardly worth to dramatize about.</p><p>I can see harm being done, when they would offer like top RAID like reward items you would normally only get through months of RAID'ing very hard content.</p><p>Then yes... I could see that a lot of people would have a problem with that.</p><p>And, this has nothing to do with WoW. It was just an example in my previous post. There are several other MMO's wich have a similar system.</p><p>Jer</p>

<p><cite>CoLD MeTaL wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>kela wrote:</cite></p><blockquote>{0}</blockquote><p>They won't get anyone to participate if they don't add in-game benefits.  It will start as fluff, and then wind up having something very valuable in it.</p></blockquote><p>Really? So that is why "Noone" participates in the 100s of other Achivement systems out there that also provide no benfit other then to do it. SoE is definatly following the pack with this system. People have dragged a Garden Gnome though the entirety of Half Life 2 for no other reward other then Achivment points... People WILL do this even if no reward at all... other then measurement, is provided.</p>

<p><cite>kela wrote:</cite></p><blockquote>Really? So that is why "Noone" participates in the 100s of other Achivement systems out there that also provide no benfit other then to do it. SoE is definatly following the pack with this system. People have dragged a Garden Gnome though the entirety of Half Life 2 for no other reward other then Achivment points... People WILL do this even if no reward at all... other then measurement, is provided.</blockquote><p>I completely agree. Add in an achievement that requires us to drag a garden gnome through VP (make it a weapon with low damage and require it to be used on all fights in order to get credit for the achievement). Imagine a raid full of garden gnome wielding players.</p>

<p><cite>kela wrote:</cite></p><blockquote>{0}</blockquote><p>Almost all achievement systems out there give a mixture of fluff and more valuable rewards. Like mounts, items, etc.</p><p>Depending on difficulty and amount of time investment needed to complete a sertain achievement.</p><p>Seriously, I still don't see the problem for sertain achievements giving real and more valuable rewards.</p><p>In an essence, the achievement system is just like the quest system. Just in a more open, different jacket!</p><p>So why give a valuable reward for a quest in the game and only a fluff item for an achievement, while this particular achievement took just as much time and was just as difficult as the quest?</p><p>I find that hypocritical thinking. Pure drama over nothing!</p><p>Jer</p>

<p><cite>Jerokane@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>Almost all achievement systems out there give a mixture of fluff and more valuable rewards. Like mounts, items, etc.</p></blockquote><p>They do? I dont think the massively popular achievement systems on consoles do anything of the kind, and they are a success beyond anything anyone could have predicted. People LOVE them.</p>

<p><cite>shaunfletcher wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>Jerokane@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>Almost all achievement systems out there give a mixture of fluff and more valuable rewards. Like mounts, items, etc.</p></blockquote><p>They do? I dont think the massively popular achievement systems on consoles do anything of the kind, and they are a success beyond anything anyone could have predicted. People LOVE them.</p></blockquote><p>Unfortunately for you I happen to have an XBOX360 myself.</p><p>First, in no way can you compare the Xbox Live community with an MMORPG community. It's like compairing apples with oranges.</p><p>Second, the achievement system on Xbox Live serves a complete different purpose and is used by games for various things.</p><p>I played XBOX360 games in wich achievements unlocked sertain content, unlocked new cars, gave new powers, gave item rewards (sertain single player RPG's), titles, etc, etc.</p><p>So sertainly not only fluff and bragging rights on some achievement ladder system page.</p><p>Third, we are talking about an MMORPG game here and so very naturally I refered to other achievement systems like you can find in Warhammer Online, Lord of the Rings Online and World of Warcraft.</p><p>Jer</p>

<p><cite>kela wrote:</cite></p><blockquote>"Hardcore" Raider that = about 5% of the population</blockquote><p>This is demonstratibly not true.</p><p>Count the number of guilds that have killed the snake in Tombs, multiply that by 24, then multiply this number by the number of level 80 alts that a raider, on average, will have. Divide this last number by the number of level 80 toons in the game as reported by EQ2players.</p><p>Using a conservitave estimate of an average raider having 3 level 80 toons (I have 7 currently, and I know many raiders with more), "raiders" make up ~30% of the population of level 80 characters.</p><p>While not a perfect indication of raiders vs non raiders, it is as close as we will ever get without specific statistics from SoE. It doesn't take < level 80 players in to account, but it needs to be remembered that a lot more < level 80 toons are inactive in comparison to level 80, and a lot of raiders have < level 80 alts.</p><p>The number of characters that participate in raids on a regular basis may make up ~5% of the total population, but the number of players that raid make up a far larger portion of the population.</p>

<p><cite>Noaani wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>kela wrote:</cite></p><blockquote>"Hardcore" Raider that = about 5% of the population</blockquote><p>This is demonstratibly not true.</p><p>Count the number of guilds that have killed the snake in Tombs, multiply that by 24, then multiply this number by the number of level 80 alts that a raider, on average, will have. Divide this last number by the number of level 80 toons in the game as reported by EQ2players.</p><p>Using a conservitave estimate of an average raider having 3 level 80 toons (I have 7 currently, and I know many raiders with more), "raiders" make up ~30% of the population of level 80 characters.</p><p>While not a perfect indication of raiders vs non raiders, it is as close as we will ever get without specific statistics from SoE. It doesn't take < level 80 players in to account, but it needs to be remembered that a lot more < level 80 toons are inactive in comparison to level 80, and a lot of raiders have < level 80 alts.</p><p>The number of characters that participate in raids on a regular basis may make up ~5% of the total population, but the number of players that raid make up a far larger portion of the population.</p></blockquote><p>I am sorry, but it is true.</p><p>The 5% figure is even admittately released a long while ago by one of the Blizzard devs for their game WoW.</p><p>95% of the players either don't care about RAIDING, don't have the dedicated time for it, and just happy leveling one or more characters and spend time in less time consuming single group dungeons, crafting, socialising, etc.</p><p>It's pretty much the reason why Turbine isn't putting in lots of RAID content in LOTRO and focusses more on small group content instead, like 2-3 and 6 man dungeons, epic quest lines and faction systems.</p><p>As that is what the vast majority spend their time on playing. Not RAID'ing.</p><p>In EverQuest 2 the percentage of RAID'ers might be a bit higher due to the nature of the game and the, sadly, extreme low retention rate of new players (sigh). But it doesn't deviate from the fact that the vast majority just don't spend their time on RAIDs.</p><p>It just seems that RAIDs are becoming less and less popular. Mainly due to it's very time consuming nature.</p><p>People are getting more and more busier in their lives and just don't have time to spend countless hours in a game in one stretch.</p><p>I just see it myself. Back in 2002-2003 you saw lots of people logging in and playing very long stretches. Day after day.</p><p>Today, people log on and off during the course of a night. They log on for an hour / 90 mins. Do some quests or a group dungeons, log off for dinner or take care of their kid(s) or watch some TV or whatever, log back in for another hour / 90 mins or so.</p><p>That is becoming more the trend these days. And it really shows how dev companies like Turbine are playing into it with games like LOTRO.</p><p>And don't forget the fact, that Blizzard ditched the 40man RAID idea for a reason as well. And now stick to the 5, 10 and 25 man content too.</p><p>Hence, you can pretty much see it in EverQuest 2 as well these last 2 years.</p><p>As you ever wondered why there is so much solo and single group content added to EverQuest 2 lateley and not lot more RAID content (if it's so popular according to you) ?</p><p>I think their (unreleased) statistics will speak for itself and how they build and release the type of content accordingly.</p><p>Jer</p>

<p><cite>Jerokane@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>95% of the players either don't care about RAIDING, don't have the dedicated time for it, and just happy leveling one or more characters and spend time in less time consuming single group dungeons, crafting, socialising, etc.</p></blockquote><p>Your so completely off its not even funny. </p><p>This may have been true in a starter MMO like wow, but is not true of eq2 or the eq family in general.</p><p>At the times I log in, there are generally more players in raid zones than all players in every other zone in the game combined.  I'm also logging in at 'peak' times when more players are online than any other time window durring the day.</p><p>Now, how many are hardcore?  I can't answer that cause you didn't define what hardcore means.</p><p>Hardcore in my mind is a raid guild with a call list, and yes on my server, I think that only represents a total of 40ish accounts.  So yes, by my definition of hardcore, there are very few players at that level.</p><p>Your definition of hardcore might be any raider that has killed the Thet in ToMC, which would open up the player segment to a much larger cross section of players as most casual guilds have made it this far now. </p><p>In short though, this is a derailment of this thread and fairly off target, but I would encourage you not to claim items as fact that are easily refuted.</p>

<p>Regardless, raiders are significantly lower in population than non-raiders, in ALL MMOs.   Money matters.  They will design content and use resources that effects the most users, to retain/bring in more people.  And 24 man high end raiders are not it.    Look at the number of 2 group instances being put in, more content for 6 man groups, etc etc.   Raiding content is 3rd or 4th on the list to get resources devoted to it, and tends to be "weaker" in design than the rest also, or they are re-using the same content, just adding "raid mobs" to it.</p><p>"<span >At the times I log in, there are generally more players in raid zones than all players in every other zone in the game combined.  I'm also logging in at 'peak' times when more players are online than any other time window durring the day."</span></p><p>Gota toss the BS flag at this statement.  This is completely wrong to everything I have experienced in EQ1/2 from day one.</p>

<p>I demand an armored bunny mount as a reward for achievement: being super awesome /thumbsup</p>

<p><cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>Jerokane@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>95% of the players either don't care about RAIDING, don't have the dedicated time for it, and just happy leveling one or more characters and spend time in less time consuming single group dungeons, crafting, socialising, etc.</p></blockquote><p>Your so completely off its not even funny. </p><p>This may have been true in a starter MMO like wow, but is not true of eq2 or the eq family in general.</p><p>At the times I log in, there are generally more players in raid zones than all players in every other zone in the game combined.  I'm also logging in at 'peak' times when more players are online than any other time window durring the day.</p><p>Now, how many are hardcore?  I can't answer that cause you didn't define what hardcore means.</p><p>Hardcore in my mind is a raid guild with a call list, and yes on my server, I think that only represents a total of 40ish accounts.  So yes, by my definition of hardcore, there are very few players at that level.</p><p>Your definition of hardcore might be any raider that has killed the Thet in ToMC, which would open up the player segment to a much larger cross section of players as most casual guilds have made it this far now. </p><p>In short though, this is a derailment of this thread and fairly off target, but I would encourage you not to claim items as fact that are easily refuted.</p></blockquote><p>The about 5% of the population figure was a figure given by Brenlo Himself, at Fan Faire as part of the explanation of why they are trying this selectable difficulty Raid zone, and I believe he was referancing the population that Beats the Expainsion while the expainsion is still relevent. Like the ones who regularly raided Deathtoll back in KoS, or Emerald Halls in EoF, or finish Vashen's Peak. We all know that there really are only 1 or 2 guilds per server capable of defeating those zones on a regular basis. It is THAT population that makes up the 5%, it is not the person who goes on Pick-up Raids, or the Raid Alliances, or even the Farm team guilds that raid 2 or 3 times a week.</p>

<p><cite>kela wrote:</cite></p><blockquote>{0} Stuff that is omitted cause I'm vain.</blockquote><p>Actually, I heard Brenlo's comment to mean those raiders in contested guilds with call lists.  Cause those raiders that lock down contested content are in that <5% number.</p><p>Players who enjoy raiding I'll argue are at nearly 50% or higher in eq2.  At probably 70-80% in eq1.</p>

<p><cite>Jerokane@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite></p><blockquote>The 5% figure is even admittately released a long while ago by one of the Blizzard devs for their game WoW.</blockquote><p>I was unaware we were on the Blizzard forums, I thought this was EQ2.</p><p>You are, I assume, aware that they are not infact the same game, right?</p>

<p><cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite></p><blockquote>Actually, I heard Brenlo's comment to mean those raiders in contested guilds with call lists.  Cause those raiders that lock down contested content are in that <5% number.</blockquote><p>This is a statement I would agree with.</p><p>Specifically, guilds that have call lists and use them for avatars and other contested raid encounters make up < 5% of the total player population of EQ2.</p><p>Players that kill avatars, whether they have call lists or not, are probably closer to a flat 5% of the population, and players that raid instaced content make up a far larger portion than that.</p><p>Seriously, the numbers are there for anyone that wants to look. Count the guilds that have posted a Thet kill on flames server progression threads,multiply by 24 members in the raid, and then multiply that by 3 (which represents both alts of those 24, and other guild members that are not a part of that 24). Compare this to the total number of level 80 toons which is information that can be obtained on EQ2players.</p><p>Add to this the fact that 3 toons per raider in the above is overly conservative, and anywhere from 5 - 8 would be more realistic (since we are only counting the first 24 people in the guild, not the remainder, and both that first 24 and the remainder all have alts), and also the fact that not every guild that has killed Thet has it listed on flames (a small number of guilds simply don't post, and some threads stopped listing guilds after a specific amount).</p><p>Seriously, anyone that thinks players that raid make 5% of the population must either have their eyes closed, or are unable to reason.</p>

<p><cite>Noaani wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite></p><blockquote>Actually, I heard Brenlo's comment to mean those raiders in contested guilds with call lists.  Cause those raiders that lock down contested content are in that <5% number.</blockquote><p>This is a statement I would agree with.</p><p>Specifically, guilds that have call lists and use them for avatars and other contested raid encounters make up < 5% of the total player population of EQ2.</p><p>Players that kill avatars, whether they have call lists or not, are probably closer to a flat 5% of the population, and players that raid instaced content make up a far larger portion than that.</p><p>Seriously, the numbers are there for anyone that wants to look. Count the guilds that have posted a Thet kill on flames server progression threads,multiply by 24 members in the raid, and then multiply that by 3 (which represents both alts of those 24, and other guild members that are not a part of that 24). Compare this to the total number of level 80 toons which is information that can be obtained on EQ2players.</p><p>Add to this the fact that 3 toons per raider in the above is overly conservative, and anywhere from 5 - 8 would be more realistic (since we are only counting the first 24 people in the guild, not the remainder, and both that first 24 and the remainder all have alts), and also the fact that not every guild that has killed Thet has it listed on flames (a small number of guilds simply don't post, and some threads stopped listing guilds after a specific amount).</p><p>Seriously, anyone that thinks players that raid make 5% of the population must either have their eyes closed, or are unable to reason.</p></blockquote><p>Why is it that every thread turns into a raiders vs non-raiders discussion?  <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></p><p>Let's try to keep it on topic about the achievement system. </p>

<p>I don't know if this has been suggested yet, as there are 16 pages of this thread and I have not admittedly read all 16, but I think it would be cool as part of the achievement system if NPC's would react to you differently if you gain certain achievements.  NPC"s of your own alignment may show you greater respect in some manner, and opposite alignment NPC's might hurl an epithet in your direction when they recognize you.  It wouldn't have any real effect on gameplay, but it would add an interesting level of immersion.  Especially if it was a vocalized reaction as opposed to text-only.</p>

<p><cite>Noaani wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite></p><blockquote>Actually, I heard Brenlo's comment to mean those raiders in contested guilds with call lists.  Cause those raiders that lock down contested content are in that <5% number.</blockquote><p>This is a statement I would agree with.</p><p>Specifically, guilds that have call lists and use them for avatars and other contested raid encounters make up < 5% of the total player population of EQ2.</p><p>Players that kill avatars, whether they have call lists or not, are probably closer to a flat 5% of the population, and players that raid instaced content make up a far larger portion than that.</p><p>Seriously, the numbers are there for anyone that wants to look. Count the guilds that have posted a Thet kill on flames server progression threads,multiply by 24 members in the raid, and then multiply that by 3 (which represents both alts of those 24, and other guild members that are not a part of that 24). Compare this to the total number of level 80 toons which is information that can be obtained on EQ2players.</p><p>Add to this the fact that 3 toons per raider in the above is overly conservative, and anywhere from 5 - 8 would be more realistic (since we are only counting the first 24 people in the guild, not the remainder, and both that first 24 and the remainder all have alts), and also the fact that not every guild that has killed Thet has it listed on flames (a small number of guilds simply don't post, and some threads stopped listing guilds after a specific amount).</p><p>Seriously, anyone that thinks players that raid make 5% of the population must either have their eyes closed, or are unable to reason.</p></blockquote><p>Maybe you should accually READ MY POSTS. I have NEVER said the TOTAL raid population is 5%, I have always said the HARDCORE Raid population is about 5%. And I am basing that off of information given out by the GUY WHO RUNS THIS GAME, who has access to FAR more accuarate numbers then your wild guesses.</p><p>My guess is the persent of the population that enjoys an occational raid, depending on the Raid, is about 80+%</p><p>My guess on the % that raid CURRENT CONTENT on a regular baisis but are not a capable of the Hardest CURRENT Raids in game, around 25-50% depending on age of the expainsion.</p><p>What is not a guess is the number of Raiders that can complete the Hardest of the Hard Raid zones, that number is ~5%.</p><p>Back on topicish... the funny thing is I have been in this thread defending those who raid, because many of them have been in favor of having Achivements be meaningful, and not just fluff.</p><p>Back on topic for real...</p><p>Not sure who wich Red Name posted it, but someone said that you would be having some "meaningful" rewards for some of the more difficult to complete Achivments, are you talking about things like really cool looking mounts with a high runspeed but no real stats, or are you talking about things like a clickable Evac... or more like something that can get you to a cap faster like say +150 to a specific resist?</p>

<p><cite>Lightstrider wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>I don't know if this has been suggested yet, as there are 16 pages of this thread and I have not admittedly read all 16, but I think it would be cool as part of the achievement system if NPC's would react to you differently if you gain certain achievements.  NPC"s of your own alignment may show you greater respect in some manner, and opposite alignment NPC's might hurl an epithet in your direction when they recognize you.  It wouldn't have any real effect on gameplay, but it would add an interesting level of immersion.  Especially if it was a vocalized reaction as opposed to text-only.</p></blockquote><p>Now that would be REALLY cool. I would think especally for those that did what it takes to "beat" a particular expainsion.</p>

<p><cite>Rothgar wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>Noaani wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite></p><blockquote>Actually, I heard Brenlo's comment to mean those raiders in contested guilds with call lists.  Cause those raiders that lock down contested content are in that <5% number.</blockquote><p>This is a statement I would agree with.</p><p>Specifically, guilds that have call lists and use them for avatars and other contested raid encounters make up < 5% of the total player population of EQ2.</p><p>Players that kill avatars, whether they have call lists or not, are probably closer to a flat 5% of the population, and players that raid instaced content make up a far larger portion than that.</p><p>Seriously, the numbers are there for anyone that wants to look. Count the guilds that have posted a Thet kill on flames server progression threads,multiply by 24 members in the raid, and then multiply that by 3 (which represents both alts of those 24, and other guild members that are not a part of that 24). Compare this to the total number of level 80 toons which is information that can be obtained on EQ2players.</p><p>Add to this the fact that 3 toons per raider in the above is overly conservative, and anywhere from 5 - 8 would be more realistic (since we are only counting the first 24 people in the guild, not the remainder, and both that first 24 and the remainder all have alts), and also the fact that not every guild that has killed Thet has it listed on flames (a small number of guilds simply don't post, and some threads stopped listing guilds after a specific amount).</p><p>Seriously, anyone that thinks players that raid make 5% of the population must either have their eyes closed, or are unable to reason.</p></blockquote><p>Why is it that every thread turns into a raiders vs non-raiders discussion?  <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" /></p><p>Let's try to keep it on topic about the achievement system. </p></blockquote><p>There definately have to be more than just titles involved in the system.. of all the people I gamed with in SWG, none of them really cared about the achievement flags there until the old man and jedi system were put in place.</p>

<p><cite>kela wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><span ><p>Not sure who wich Red Name posted it, but someone said that you would be having some "meaningful" rewards for some of the more difficult to complete Achivments, are you talking about things like really cool looking mounts with a high runspeed but no real stats, or are you talking about things like a clickable Evac... or more like something that can get you to a cap faster like say +150 to a specific resist?</p></span> <div></div></blockquote><p>Yes and maybe.  <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></p><p>I'm sorry to be vague but the rewards have not been fleshed out for all of the achievements yet.  Thats one of the last things we'll be doing once we have all of the achievements in.  All of those things you mentioned could be reasonable rewards. </p>

<p>I think achievements should be tiered.</p><p>E.g.</p><p><ul><li>Conqueror (prefix title)<ul><li>unlocks with 2 Slayer of X Achievements</li></ul></li><li>Decimator (prefix title) + 2k status redux house item<ul><li>unlocks with 5 Slayer of X Achievements</li></ul></li><li>Annihilator (prefix title) + sweet visual effect item (hand maybe) + unique mount<ul><li>unlocks with 10 Slayer of X Achievements</li></ul></li></ul><div>Just an off-the-cuff example.</div></p>

<p>Another vote for character based achievements. </p><p>My army of 14 are all unique individuals and do different things. </p><p>Some things can and should be done by characters as opposed to the whole account.</p><p>Thanks for listening.</p>

<p><cite>Rothgar wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>The discussion on rewards seems to be the most important thing on everyone's mind when it comes to the achievement system and I just wanted to get a thought out there.</p><p>The complaints I'm hearing on both sides of the argument seem to come from people who assume we are going to go in one extreme or another.</p><p>We are not saying that every reward will be fluff only.  It's important everyone understand this because we may very well give a nice, useful reward for some of the achievements and I don't want anyone saying "You said these rewards would only be fluff!"</p><p>However, we will be diligent in the rewards that we give out to make sure they aren't class-breaking or balance-breaking in some way or another.  We don't want the achievements to be something you have to do in order to be competitive as a player, but we want some of them to have rewards that recognize your achievement.</p><p>Some achievements will have no rewards at all. These will be achievements that are easy to obtain or achievements that you are likely to get "automatically" just by playing the game. </p><p>Some achievements will have minor rewards like titles.  These will be given for achievements that take more work to complete. </p><p>Some achievements may have more useful and unique rewards like house items or clicky items that give some benefit or visual effect.  These achievements are the ones that take the most time to complete or represent a milestone.</p><p>The important thing to remember is that nothing is set in stone when it comes to rewards.  We want the achievement system to be fun and rewarding but we aren't going to introduce anything that changes the player power level significantly.</p></blockquote><p>Just a thought here.</p><p>Whats wrong with rewards that are good but flagged not usable against epics or in epic zones? Then they will not be able to used to make raids easier which will make the raiders not worry about them but be good for group instances and soloing.  How hard would it be to add a "non useable in epic zone flag" to items when they add the system.</p><p>Or is it just a case of those complaining that "I raid so I should always have everything better then someone who doesnt even if they do not affect raiding but the people who get them spend more time and effort to get the achievement then I spend raiding " ?</p><p>Lol. it would be funny if they did make that flag and made all non legendary dropped fabled gear from epic mobs have it. I can imagine the "wailing and gnashing of teeth" from those who raid to "show up" those who don't and not for the challenge of raiding.</p><p>edit: added epic dropped to the last sentence.</p>

<p><cite>Oakum wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>Rothgar wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>The discussion on rewards seems to be the most important thing on everyone's mind when it comes to the achievement system and I just wanted to get a thought out there.</p><p>The complaints I'm hearing on both sides of the argument seem to come from people who assume we are going to go in one extreme or another.</p><p>We are not saying that every reward will be fluff only.  It's important everyone understand this because we may very well give a nice, useful reward for some of the achievements and I don't want anyone saying "You said these rewards would only be fluff!"</p><p>However, we will be diligent in the rewards that we give out to make sure they aren't class-breaking or balance-breaking in some way or another.  We don't want the achievements to be something you have to do in order to be competitive as a player, but we want some of them to have rewards that recognize your achievement.</p><p>Some achievements will have no rewards at all. These will be achievements that are easy to obtain or achievements that you are likely to get "automatically" just by playing the game. </p><p>Some achievements will have minor rewards like titles.  These will be given for achievements that take more work to complete. </p><p>Some achievements may have more useful and unique rewards like house items or clicky items that give some benefit or visual effect.  These achievements are the ones that take the most time to complete or represent a milestone.</p><p>The important thing to remember is that nothing is set in stone when it comes to rewards.  We want the achievement system to be fun and rewarding but we aren't going to introduce anything that changes the player power level significantly.</p></blockquote><p>Just a thought here.</p><p>Whats wrong with rewards that are good but flagged not usable against epics or in epic zones? Then they will not be able to used to make raids easier which will make the raiders not worry about them but be good for group instances and soloing.  How hard would it be to add a "non useable in epic zone flag" to items when they add the system.</p><p>Or is it just a case of those complaining that "I raid so I should always have everything better then someone who doesnt even if they do not affect raiding but the people who get them spend more time and effort to get the achievement then I spend raiding " ?</p><p>Lol. it would be funny if they did make that flag and made all non legendary dropped fabled gear from epic mobs have it. I can imagine the "wailing and gnashing of teeth" from those who raid to "show up" those who don't and not for the challenge of raiding.</p><p>edit: added epic dropped to the last sentence.</p></blockquote><p>Because the majority of Raiders in this thread are FOR powerful Achivments, it is the more casual players, Roleplayers, and such that are against it so your solution won't solve the problem because the Majority of people who are against powerful achivements will still be against it.</p><p>This has NOTHING at all to do with raiding, and everything to do with people not wanting to be forced to have to do specific things to even be consitered for say group content.</p>

<p><cite>Rothgar wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>kela wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><span><p>Not sure who wich Red Name posted it, but someone said that you would be having some "meaningful" rewards for some of the more difficult to complete Achivments, are you talking about things like really cool looking mounts with a high runspeed but no real stats, or are you talking about things like a clickable Evac... or more like something that can get you to a cap faster like say +150 to a specific resist?</p></span></blockquote><p>Yes and maybe.  <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" /></p><p>I'm sorry to be vague but the rewards have not been fleshed out for all of the achievements yet.  Thats one of the last things we'll be doing once we have all of the achievements in.  All of those things you mentioned could be reasonable rewards. </p></blockquote><p>I would suport any one of the items I put in my post as a possable reward, for the hardest to complete Achivements, with the +150 to resists being on the extreemly high end of tough to complete. It is things like + to damage, and such that I would be against.</p>

<p><cite>kela wrote:</cite></p><blockquote>{0} Intersting stuff omitted due to vain name selection</blockquote><p>Actually it has nothing to do with needing something for group/raid/guild invites.</p><p>I want more meaningful rewards to achievements as I want to see more character distinction.  It makes good design sense to me that players who focus on particular content types, zones, quest lines, or whatever in the game would have characters that are slightly different in appearance and possibly minor skill distinctness reflecting what he/she plays most in the game.</p><p>I'm a huge Sanctum fan, I've spent more time in there than nearly anyone.  Its reasonable that by having every achievement centered around this zone, the mobs in it, the quests around it, etc, that might unlock some ability centered around droags or perhaps just the zone itself that allows a 1% chance to make a killing blow against related creatures who are not epic, not named and under 15% health.</p><p>Will this greatly change what my character is capable of?  Hardly.  Will a group not want a tank who lacked this ability and wait aronud for one that did?  Doubtful.  Would this affect my recruitment into a guild / raid?  No.  Would it be an intersting disctinction that makes my toon slightly different from someone that didn't spend 300 hours in this zone?  Yes.</p><p>Other suggestion I made, was an ability that would just change the appearance of  a droag having completed all related achievements to this zone/content.  Ie, an ability that would change a live droag model into a skeleton for 30 seconds, or turn them into a pig, whatever.  It wouldn't affect the encounter at all, but it would provide your character some uniqueness that not many other players would have.</p>