<DIV><FONT size=2> <P>We've been experimenting on the test and beta servers with the Death and Encounter Locking mechanics. Now that we're able to talk about them, I'd like to describe what it is that we've done and lay out an explanation of the thematic (or game vision, if you prefer) reasons driving them.</P> <P>One of the best things about working on a live MMO is that you can constantly evaluate elements of the game compared to its overall vision and determine whether or not the element fits into the overall picture of what a game is supposed to be.</P> <P>These experiments do not come out of any kind of desire to homogenize EQ2 with other MMOs. This is purely a commentary on existing elements of EQ2 when viewed in comparison to the overall goals of the game.</P> <P>Restrictive elements, or those that <I>subtract </I>moment-to-moment gameplay options, are the ones that must always be evaluated the closest. They present the greatest risk to the overall gameplay "feel" of any MMO. If something restrictive is to exist to address a specific concern, it needs to be justified with the strongest reasoning, and there must (ideally) be no other reasonable alternative solution.</P> <P>For these specific mechanics, we believe that we have less restrictive alternatives that address the core concerns that group death and single-group encounter locking were intended to solve.</P> <P> </P><B> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>The Experiments</FONT></P></B></FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2> <P>*** Death and Experience Debt ***</P></FONT> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr> <P>* There is now a 50% cap for both adventure and tradeskill experience debt. You can no longer accrue more than 50% of your level in experience debt.<BR>* If you have more than 50% experience debt when you log on after this change, any experience debt greater than 50% will be removed.<BR>* You will no longer share experience debt for the deaths of other members of your group. Only the person who dies will gain experience debt.<BR></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>*** Encounter Locking ***<BR><BR>Encounter locking restrictions have been relaxed for <B>non-raid </B>encounters. Non-raid encounters have been changed as follows:</P> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr> <P>* There are no longer lock icons on you or your enemies.<BR>* The first group or person to attack a creature will receive any reward it grants upon death, including loot and experience.<BR>* Other players can assist in your fight by damaging your enemies or healing you.<BR>* You will receive a reduced XP reward if your group contributes less than 50% of the damage needed to kill something.<BR>* You can change group options and add/remove people from groups while fighting (note that fighting raid encounters still prevents this).<BR>* Damage credit is correctly tracked if you add people helping you to the group before something dies.<BR>* Any faction increase or decrease the creature grants will be applied to everyone the creature hates when it dies.<BR>* In an upcoming update: If a group prefers to play by the old rules, they may make their targetted encounter exclusively locked (thus preventing help unless asked for).</P></BLOCKQUOTE><FONT size=2> <P> </P></FONT><B> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>The Reasoning</FONT></P></B> <P>Since the reasoning behind both is tied to the same theme, explaining them in concert makes the most sense.</P> <P>A mechanic in a game is a means to an end - No more, no less. If the goal of a game is "fun in the long term," as it is with EQ2, the mechanics need to support that goal.</P> <P>Once a mechanic exists, it's a matter of observing its effect on people's behavior in conjunction with evaluating how appropriate it is in meeting its intended goal.</P> <P>"Fun in the long term" is a very broad statement. Before anything can be realistically compared, it really needs to be honed slightly. Ideally, to a handful of ways by which this elusive "fun" is expected to be achieved.</P><B> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>* In the long term, the most fun thing is the fact that your experiences are shared with others. People making friends (or enemies) with other people is what makes everyone stay around.</FONT></P></B> <P>It's not an inviolate "prime directive" for MMOs, but things that point people toward that direction can likely be called "generally good" and things that drive people in the opposite direction can likely be called "generally not good."</P><B> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>* Items and levels are great incentives for people to keep enjoying their play, but items and levels without friends to share in (or strangers to simply bear witness to) the accomplishment does not make for a compelling experience.</FONT></P></B> <P>If the experience was nearly as compelling, since we're all rational human beings, we would instead all be playing single-player games and saving the monthly subscription just to level up, see numbers get bigger, get better spells, and obtain newer toys with bigger sparklies, by ourselves.</P><B> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>* People wanting to form groups is a critical part of making friends.</FONT></P></B> <P>Forming a group and wrangling others toward a unified goal is hard enough work as it is, both in terms of time invested and the effort spent. Barriers to grouping, including elements that prevent people from <I>wanting </I>to form (or join) a group need to be examined, as do things that make groups break up faster.</P><B> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>* However, we do not <I>force</I> people to group to have fun.</FONT></P></B> <P>That just makes people resent the game and the experience. Those whom we expect to make friends (and therefore enjoy the game the longest) should have a world in which they <I>want </I>to do this on their own. It is up to us to set the stage by providing positive reinforcement instead of depriving people of gameplay value, if they prefer to play in a manner that doesn't involve grouping.</P><B> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>* In Fantasy, being a hero (or villain) is the base drive that attracts many to the genre.</FONT></P></B> <P>Most who join games like this have some experience with one or more kinds of fantasy fiction, whether in the form of classic fairy tales or the latest George R.R. Martin book. Those tales have heroes and villains, and at one point, most of us have identified with one or more of their more notable characters and thought, "Wouldn't it be amazing if…"</P> <P>The advancement and loot present in an MMO needs to sit on top of that feeling, but that base of heroic potential must be present for the experience to not feel hollow.</P><B> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>* The possibility of someone naturally being the hero to another, unasked but welcomed, therefore needs to exist in our world.</FONT></P></B> <P>When combined with the importance of making friends, this becomes a doubly compelling point. A person who has the rare opportunity to be the hero while making a friend in the process essentially wins twice.</P> <P>The case of someone using a "free action" system to be the hero (a lifesaving heal from a stranger) is the exception, not the rule. That is a given. It is therefore the developer's responsibility to ensure that the case that will be more common (paired powerlevelling) is not so powerful that it does harm to the long-term enjoyment value of the game, or detracts from the experience of other players.</P> <P>In most cases some amount of powerlevelling, provided the advancement rates aren't ridiculously fast, is <I>not </I>harmful to the game. In the successful games to date, while it has been officially frowned upon when taken to extremes, it has in reality provided healthy replay value.</P><B> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>* People are more likely to be in a mindset to make friends (and enemies) when they feel they are spending time in a consistent world.</FONT></P></B> <P>An internally consistent world means that actions and reactions of its inhabititants make sense in the setting. The best system is the one that is completely invisible.</P> <P>If I am in a fantasy world and I swing my sword at a vicious orc, I should swing my sword at a vicious orc. The expected reaction is that the orc would uphold its end of the bargain and, in turn, be hit by the sword.</P> <P>That is a highly reasonable expectation for this setting.</P> <P>It is much less immersive to be told by a system that I did not, in fact, swing my sword because I acted out of turn when judged by a set of rules that were not born of the fantasy world in question. It's the real world that that drove that rule; the actions of past players and the attempts to solve issues that resulted from those actions.</P> <P>That is not the world people should need to be immersed in at the time they are swinging a sword.</P> <P>When this occurs, many people are jarred out of the game experience, instead feeling that they're spending time in front of a monitor being prevented from acting in an otherwise fictionally reasonable manner due to artificial restrictions.</P> <P>Even if you're on a Ventrilo or Teamspeak server talking to other real world humans also playing the game, there's still an undeniable attraction to a consistent world, no matter how much people assume that is no longer the case. The mindset <B><I>does </I></B>matter.</P> <P>People still call each other by their character names. People still associate those names with professions in the context of the world, with visuals of characters, with mental pictures of the things they've done together in the past. People still refer to that collection of bits on the server as "Lord Nagafen."</P> <P>There's still an implicit understanding that you're all doing something adventurous together, and that thing you are doing is <B><I>cool</I></B>.</P> <P>Either it's cool because it's cool in the context of the world, or it's cool because of the reaction of other people. Either way, we're back to the consistency of the world and the effect that "other people" have on any given player.</P><B> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>* People are more likely to attempt to help others if they do not feel helpless to act.</FONT></P></B> <P>By preventing the <STRONG>possibility</STRONG> of helpful action, we train people to not care about others because caring takes too much effort.</P> <P>Mechanical reminders that people are actually helpless to affect others is not a way to make them think of other people as potential friends. If there's never an ability to surprise anyone with assistance, why bother seeing if anyone ever needs help?</P> <P>The first time you passed someone who you thought might need help, you probably waited around a minute and asked if they were all right. Then when you saw they weren't, you suggested they yell for it. Then you suggested it again. And maybe again.</P> <P>Then they didn't. Maybe because they didn't think they needed it. Maybe because they'd rather die than give up the <B><I>potential </I></B>for reward. Either way, it doesn't matter. It doesn't take many times before people stop asking and just wait for the yells, when a well-timed hand may have been appreciated and led to a friendship.</P> <P> </P><B> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>In Closing</FONT></P></B> <P>For those who see these experiments and cite a lack of differentiation between EQ2 and other games, there are many more positive ways that EQ2 is different from any other experience out there. Witness Arena Champions and the scaling of walls about to arrive in Desert of Flames. The object and puzzle interactions in The Splitpaw Saga and The Bloodline Chronicles. The way game content integrates with character advancement. Collections. Customizable housing. Guild advancement. Tomes. Tradeskill societies. NPC voices. And so on.</P> <P>In the places where EQ2 is notable for its differences, we prefer when those differentiations are things that enhance the gameplay experience. We continue to innovate, but we prefer to do so with elements that <I>add </I>to gameplay options, as opposed to elements that restrict them in ways that may, in practice, go counter to the idea of a vibrant, exciting fantasy world.</P> <P>These are the standards we set for ourselves, and these are the goals by which the elements of our game must be measured. Nothing more, nothing less.</P> <P> </P> <P>For those not in the Desert of Flames beta, the completed changes should be available for testing on our Test Server this week. As always, please check it out and let us know what you think.</P> <P>Good hunting.</P> <P>- Scott</P> <P> </P></DIV>

<div></div>Ohh Nice post, Have you considered the consequences of Trival Loot Code? *edited because i hit enter on accident* <div></div><p>Message Edited by naeldayyan on <span class=date_text>08-21-2005</span> <span class=time_text>04:18 PM</span>

<div></div><font size="2">/agree naeldayyanA very nice post Gallenite<a target="_blank" href="../view_profile?user.id=128"><span></span></a>, thank you.</font><div></div>

<div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div><p>*** Encounter Locking ***Encounter locking restrictions have been relaxed for <b>non-raid </b>encounters. Non-raid encounters have been changed as follows:</p> <blockquote dir="ltr"> <p>* There are no longer lock icons on you or your enemies.* The first group or person to attack a creature will receive any reward it grants upon death, including loot and experience.* Other players can assist in your fight by damaging your enemies or healing you.* You will receive a reduced XP reward if your group contributes less than 50% of the damage needed to kill something.* You can change group options and add/remove people from groups while fighting (note that fighting raid encounters still prevents this).* Damage credit is correctly tracked if you add people helping you to the group before something dies.* Any faction increase or decrease the creature grants will be applied to everyone the creature hates when it dies.<i><u>* In an upcoming update: If a group prefers to play by the old rules, they may make their targetted encounter exclusively locked (thus preventing help unless asked for).</u></i> </p> <p> </p> <p><font color="#ffcc66" size="4">Will the option to keep locked encounters as they are ONLY be for groups? Will Solo players be able to keep their encounters locked to themselves as it is now? <font color="#6633ff">Bascially the same question ^^ but I want to be clear on this.</font><font color="#6633ff"> </font></font></p> <p><font color="#ffcc66" size="4"> How will /yelling and breaking an encounter work unde rthe new system? Will people outside of the group who contribute less than 50% damage receive exp? </font></p> <font size="4">* The first group or person to attack a creature will receive any reward it grants upon death, including loot and experience. </font> <font color="#ffcc66" size="4">So, If I attack something first and a stranger comes along an uninvitedly  does more than 50% damage to the creature I attacked first then I will receive less than full exp?</font><font size="4"> * In an upcoming update: If a group prefers to play by the old rules, they may make their targetted encounter exclusively locked (thus preventing help unless asked for)</font></blockquote> <p><font color="#ffcc66" size="4">          Will this option for going from "locked" to "unlocked" encounter be able to be switch during battle?</font><font size="4"> <span class="time_text"></span></font> </p><p> <span class="time_text"></span></p><p> <span class="time_text"></span></p><p>Message Edited by Warpax on <span class=date_text>08-21-2005</span> <span class=time_text>08:29 PM</span>

<DIV>I am...monumentally disappointed.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I will try to be succint in my critique, and hope you take my feelings to heart:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The locked encounter system is one of EQ2's most admirable traits for some of us.  This is not neccesarily because it stops people from interfering in our own encounters, but also because it upholds a level of integrity in the entire game.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>By allowing external heals and 51%-for-full-exp, you're intoducing EQ1-style powerlevelling into the world.  This, in turn, will almost certainly have the effect that powerlevelling had on EQ1:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ff0000><STRONG>An absolutely trivial low-end game, and high-level characters who know jackall-squat about playing their class.</STRONG></FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I'm really bummed out...I dread having to inform my friends of this news.  If you don't change your mind on this, I will, at this point, just have to cross my fingers that you do not also modify the rules on buffing only those in your group.  Still, I truly, deeply believe that if you put this through, you're going to be ringing the death knell on so much of what I love about EQ2.</DIV>

<P>well, i hope the handful of players you have remaining after the revamp will enjoy this change as well :smileywink:</P> <P> </P>

<span><blockquote><hr>Warpax wrote:<div></div><div></div> <blockquote dir="ltr">* The first group or person to attack a creature will receive any reward it grants upon death, including loot and experience. <font color="#ffcc66">So, If I attack something first and a stranger comes along an uninvitedly  does more than 50% damage to the creature I attacked first then I will receive less than full exp?</font><span class="time_text"></span> </blockquote> <hr></blockquote>Let's say worse case scenario.  SOE decides not to give you the ability to lock your encounters. Yes, then  it could be possible for what you are saying to happen.  But, I'd atleast hope the majority of eq2 players have better things to do than play the kid chasing ants with the magnifying glass, those people have a WHOLE other mmorpg for that.  We tried the locked encounter, padded walls and rubber hammers, it isn't working, and we need something to breath life back into this game, and that is just what this move is aimed at accomplishing. </span><div></div>

<P>I know this will get me lots of 1 stars... but I think these changes are a good idea.</P> <P>Never really been a fan of encounter locking, its always bad to watch someone die knowing that I have heals that could save them. Back in EQ1 I would pop a heal on them. In EQ2 I just watch them die.</P> <P>Getting rid of the group debt is good too. No more moaning when one of the groups squishies dies.</P> <P>All in all this is good stuff.</P>

<div></div><span><blockquote><hr>naeldayyan wrote:<span><blockquote><hr>Warpax wrote:<div></div><div></div> <blockquote dir="ltr">* The first group or person to attack a creature will receive any reward it grants upon death, including loot and experience. <font color="#ffcc66">So, If I attack something first and a stranger comes along an uninvitedly  does more than 50% damage to the creature I attacked first then I will receive less than full exp?</font><span class="time_text"></span> </blockquote> <hr></blockquote>Let's say worse case scenario.  SOE decides not to give you the ability to lock your encounters. Yes, then  it could be possible for what you are saying to happen.  But, I'd atleast hope the majority of eq2 players have better things to do than play the kid chasing ants with the magnifying glass, those people have a WHOLE other mmorpg for that.  We tried the locked encounter, padded walls and rubber hammers, it isn't working, and we need something to breath life back into this game, and that is just what this move is aimed at accomplishing. </span><div></div><hr></blockquote>I have NO doubt whatsoever that this type of person plays eq2 and would love to grief others in this manner.  All other reasons aside I love eq2s locked encounters just for this reason alone. If i wanted to have to deal with thugs, bullys and griefers I would be playing another game...or go to the park or something <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></span><div></div><p>Message Edited by Warpax on <span class=date_text>08-21-2005</span> <span class=time_text>08:37 PM</span>

<DIV><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Spiritunicorn wrote:<BR> <P> Back in EQ1 I would pop a heal on them. In EQ2 I just watch them die.<BR></P> <HR> <P>That's what /yell is for.  You only have to watch them die if they aren't willing to give up their exp.  If a person or group can't win an encounter in the way intended and balanced for, then they shouldn't get any exp for it.</P></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>

<span><blockquote><hr>Almeric wrote:<div></div>  <div><font color="#ff0000"><strong>An absolutely trivial low-end game, and high-level characters who know jackall-squat about playing their class.</strong></font></div> <div> </div><hr></blockquote>I don't intend to post this to disagree with you as I just want to make a point, there is _NO_ low-end game like it is now. I make a new character almost weekly, there is a HUGE problem. I agree that this change to the locking system will probably have negative side effects, but consider the positive ones. You will have a much larger replayability factor, which will put more low level players in the field for newbies to encouner and befriend. It will hopefully replenish the barren low-tier market with items that perhaps someone of that level might be able to afford. Have you tried to get a group to do AQ lately?  It's impossible on my server. Removing restrictive encounter locking good or bad, who can really say for sure until we try, I'm just glad they are doing something because if this keeps up, there won't be any players left. </span><div></div>

<div></div><span><blockquote><hr>naeldayyan wrote:<span><blockquote><hr>Almeric wrote:<div></div>  <div><font color="#ff0000"><strong>An absolutely trivial low-end game, and high-level characters who know jackall-squat about playing their class.</strong></font></div> <div> </div><hr></blockquote>I don't intend to post this to disagree with you as I just want to make a point, there is _NO_ low-end game like it is now. I make a new character almost weekly, there is a HUGE problem. I agree that this change to the locking system will probably have negative side effects, but consider the positive ones. <u> You will have a much larger replayability factor, which will put more low level players in the field for newbies to encouner and befriend. It will hopefully replenish the barren low-tier market with items that perhaps someone of that level might be able to afford. </u> <u> Have you tried to get a group to do AQ lately?  It's impossible on my server. </u> Removing restrictive encounter locking good or bad, who can really say for sure until we try, I'm just glad they are doing something because if this keeps up, there won't be any players left. </span><div></div><hr></blockquote>I see and have experienced these problems as well, but I just cant see how changing the locked encounter system will improve the problems you mentioned. Unless you mean Powerleveling or farming opportunity improvements.</span><div></div><p>Message Edited by Warpax on <span class=date_text>08-21-2005</span> <span class=time_text>08:47 PM</span>

<div></div>Another question to Gallenite. Will we stil have a 5 encounter at once lock? <div></div><p>Message Edited by naeldayyan on <span class=date_text>08-21-2005</span> <span class=time_text>05:56 PM</span>

<span><blockquote><hr>Warpax wrote:<div></div><span><blockquote><hr>naeldayyan wrote:<span><blockquote><hr>Almeric wrote:<div></div>  <div><font color="#ff0000"><strong>An absolutely trivial low-end game, and high-level characters who know jackall-squat about playing their class.</strong></font></div> <div> </div><hr></blockquote>I don't intend to post this to disagree with you as I just want to make a point, there is _NO_ low-end game like it is now. I make a new character almost weekly, there is a HUGE problem. I agree that this change to the locking system will probably have negative side effects, but consider the positive ones. <u> You will have a much larger replayability factor, which will put more low level players in the field for newbies to encouner and befriend. It will hopefully replenish the barren low-tier market with items that perhaps someone of that level might be able to afford. </u> <u> Have you tried to get a group to do AQ lately?  It's impossible on my server. </u> Removing restrictive encounter locking good or bad, who can really say for sure until we try, I'm just glad they are doing something because if this keeps up, there won't be any players left. </span><div></div><hr></blockquote>I see and have experienced these problems as well, but I just cant see how changing the locked encounter system will improve the problems you mentioned. Unless you mean Powerleveling or farming opportunity improvements.</span><div></div><p>Message Edited by Warpax on <span class="date_text">08-21-2005</span> <span class="time_text">08:47 PM</span></p><hr></blockquote>I was just trying to look at the bright side of the changes in contrast to the concerns you have in specific. If I had to name off random other benefits. I used to know of a girl on my server that is level 40 or so that used to sit in the sunken city and heal newbies between encounters. I haven't seen her around in about 3 months now, but some people are very attracted to the idea of helping others. Those types of elements are exactally what I think this game needs. </span><div></div>

Well, another big big change is on the way, and it looks like a good one. Obviously, a change like this is gonna create some outrage, especially from the anit-KS and powerleveling crowd. But before people fly off the handle, take a deep breath a think about a few things. a) KSing, as far as my definition goes, is someone ganking someone else's fight in order to get the loot or exp, or too in general be an [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot]. As long as there is absolutely NO reward given in any form except to the combat initiater, I think most of this won't be a problem. The griefers....well, they would now have a tool to basically deny people a portion of the exp, but I'll talk about that in a second. b) Powerleveling. In EQ1, we all know what powerleveling did, but it really had 3 different forms. 1 - Direct major heals from healers far above a character's level, 2 - Superior buffs for the character's level and 3 - Twinking. In EQ2, the latter two don't exist, most buffs may ONLY be cast in groups and every piece of equipment has level appropriate restrictions. If/when these changes go out, the only factor will really be outside heals from priests. Now that that is outlined, what should be done (I think) before these changes go live? First, DO NOT RELEASE THIS CHANGE UNTIL YOU ADD THE OPTION TO TOGGLE ENCOUNTER LOCKING FOR BOTH GROUPS AND INDIVIDUALS! If you are going to let this option happen, it has to be done at the same time, no promised someday down the road. No one wants to wait a week/month/year for some promised change to avoid any KSing techniques. If people are allowed to willingly subject themselves to an open encounter system, then they can take the good (outside heals, other assistance) with the bad (griefers). This would mostly apply to soloers, since 1 griefer will probably not be able to outdamage an entire group unless they are of much higher level and if that happens, that would probably be considered outright harrasment. The second thing would be to maybe limit the type of heals that may be cast on an open encounter. For instance, maybe only let direct heals and HoT's be cast. Letting big ones through like high level templar reactive heals and major shaman wards  would let people at least survive encounters scaled far above what they should be. This would still allow powerleveling, but it wouldn't turn into something as drastic as a lvl 10 out in Zek with a couple lvl 40 friends that can heal the character and kill the mobs for em. I think open encounters can work really well if it is implemented right. These are just a couple of my suggestions for that. Zylin 44 Ranger 41 Provisioner <div></div>

My initial reaction to the removal of encoutner locking is negative: this is the one feature in this game i really liked because it removed my perpetual gripe from nearly every other mmo out there. After having read the reasonings, and the catches, I'm still not sure what I think about it. Thus, I'll continue my current hiatus from the live game to play on test, until DOF comes out and this rather game altering patch comes out. Once it hits, I'll see what it does to the game play and the community. However, my outlook is fairly negative so far. <div></div>

<P>Okay.</P> <P>I'm not a big fan of powerlevelling, but one thing I do miss from eq1 is being able to help a struggling stranger out in passing, with no thought of reward.  Nowadays I don't even bother asking.  Usually when someone yells, it's too late anyway (they die 2 seconds later), or they are already high-tailing it out of there, and it's either impossible or unnecessary to help them. Yelling for help is now just the mechanism to turn on your out-of-combat regen and run speed buffs, and shorten the pursuit distance.</P> <P>I actually don't accept the argument that PLing leads to a lot of high levels who don't know how to play their char.  We get clueless high levels even without PLing, and even with PLing good players will learn to play their class.  The worst aspect of PLing to me, is when a PL duo camp the 'popular' XP spots and keep them perma-cleared, where a full normal group could be XPing instead.</P> <P>The other thing that concerns me is the potential for griefing.  Sure only the initial group can get the reward, but it sounds like it's possible to block someone from XPing by doing more than 50% damage on the encounter, even outside of group.  This will happen with arguments over camps, or if one of the less considerate PL duos turn up and want you to move on so they can take your camp.</P> <P>I don't think this change should go live until players have the option to turn it on/off.  Other than that, it's probably not such a bad idea.  You have to recognise that the grouping options for low levels starting now are much much less than they were for us back at launch time.</P>

Lots of people will also like this change for faction tagging when building faction in DoF. <div></div>

 oh, a most excellent change! I have felt helpless to many times as I watch someone die. To help again will be a pleasure <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

When I went back to play EQLive and WoW for a while, I realized that one of the most important aspects to me was my ability to affect other people's gameplay and to feel helpful to others.  This is why I play a healer, I prefer to help people instead of endlessly smacking things.  To me, this change is perhaps one of the best things that could happen to EQ2 because it removes the bubble that every other player was stuck in.  As a high level healer right now, I can only heal people my level.  I miss being able to run by and toss a rezz or a heal or two and make somebody's day.  Once people get grouped up, its as if they're sealed off from the rest of the player base, and that's rather bothering.  I seriously hope these changes make it to live, as it would be nice to know that I'm part of the world instead of a groupless healer looking for someone that will group with me so I can cast anything. <div></div>

<DIV><EM>* You will no longer share experience debt for the deaths of other members of your group. Only the person who dies will gain experience debt.</EM><BR></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ff0000>Woot!</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ff0000></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ff0000>I think this was a very well thought out post.  This is the kind of explanatory statements I like to see.  I think it all makes sense and sounds reasonable.  I agree that power leveling can become an issue, but I don't think it will kill the game.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ff0000></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ff0000>What's killing it in my opinion is the way people price items that are intended for low level folks.  Just how much is a T1 or T2 resource worth (REALLY WORTH)...I saw nutmeg for 1G today...and basil for 2G... I mean come on.</FONT></DIV>

<DIV>theres not much i can say that hasnt already been said..the only thing im really concerned about is the ability to powerlevel now, but thats not a big deal because about half the ppl here will use it, the other half will just be annoyed by it, so it just balances out.  the only thing i hope is that sony puts in some nice lvl 60 content besides raiding and the arena, because now that its even easier for ppl to get high lvl, im afraid that it will get boring real quick.  once the number of max lvl ppl jumps up due to powerleveling, it would be fairly easy to set up a raid for almost any mob.  and once you've killed everything...then what?  im not a serious gamer, only play on my free time, but i pay 15 bucks a month because i like the kind of game that you cant beat, so i dont hafta worry bout getting bored and being done with it.  if they were able to add a DAoC style battleground (yeah thats been said plenty of times, but hey, it was pretty [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] fun) then i wouldnt mind everyone bein top lvl.</DIV>

<DIV>Wow, I've enjoyed EQ2 to this date but seeing DoF and probably beyond has dramatically changed the way I view this game. Again this is just an opinion and I'm sure you (SOE) tally things up, if 55% are in favor of keeping things <STRONG>unlocked</STRONG>  and 45% are in favor of the old system <STRONG>locking</STRONG>  you have no choice but to unlock things.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>This game is almost 1 year old and I'm still struggling with the xp debt sytem. Why just today, me being level 32 (Necromancer) I tried to solo a double arrow level 34 Heroic mob, died of course, my stupidity; however it took almost 10 kills of level 34 targets just to get rid of the supposed 2% xp debt; that sucks!!! Most of the time I"m 100% Vitality Bonus so killing 2 mobs (2 levels higher than me) gives me 1% but I just couldnt believe that it takes forever to work off the supposed 2% xp debt penalty.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Even though I'm a 10month Veteran I'm just barely noticing a possible pattern</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Each time you die, you obviously accrue xp debt, however the multitude of deaths mean that much harder work.  For Example if youre just barely starting out on your journey over a weeks vacation of being offline and you have 100% item durabilty and you die, get your shard, you have 2% xp debt, well in order to get rid of that 2% you probably had to kill 10 mobs.  If you die again being out on that journey and accrue another 2% debt (meanwhile your item decay is at 80%, and you havent logged off for a couple days) you know have to kill 15-20 mobs just to get rid of the 2%.  Again to me, what I"m noticing is that for every death you acrrue, you just have to work twice as hard to get rid of it, even if you had already became debt free. (I'm one of the people that doesnt have high xp debt)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Another thing I noticed, like today, I'm thinking if you are killed by a Heroic Encounter (named creature to boot) with double arrows, again you have twice the amount of work cut out for you just to earn your xp back.  I've normally never had much difficulty getting out of debt by being killed by a regular mob.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Ok so the point for the above mentioned.......I'm still learning....</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Now even though I'm a 10month Veteran I have to learn a new combat system and now having my encounters unlocked?? This game is making changes that I never grew up on hehe</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>First off, again not everyone can afford Adept 1 or even Adept 3. So if you take 2 Level 32 Necromancers, one being low geared/spells one being high geared/mostly adept 1 and 3's and have them fight the same creature; the high end geared Necromancer is gonna get the kill.  So obviously if I start against a target (with the supposed no locking encounters) with low level spells and someone wants this creature too but he has Adept 3 spells he can blast him with 500pts of damage, meanwhile I had only given on the target 200 so I get half the xp for it, bleh!!!</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I noticed there was a lot of talk saying "I really hate being the cleric and watching someone kill a creature and the creature has 5% health but the player has 20 hit points, I always love to throw a heal on them to help them out"</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Well clerics let me be the person to say "I dont like that"  When I'm out in the world and think to attack a creature, I'm telling myself, yeah I can do this, I can kill this creature.  When I'm a level 30 Necromancer and was in Enchanted Lands fighting new creatures (being in Nek forever), I was able to solo a 30 creature, 31 creature, 32 creature, 33 creature, 34 creature and even a 35 creature; I didnt find any 36's nearby so I couldnt do that.  But to have the anticipation of soloing a creature all by myself with 0 heals from a cleric is so amazing.  I always love telling the guild; hey guess what I just solod 10 level 10 creatures and I'm level 9 with no heals, I had 32 hit points out of 300 but WOW that was intense.  To have a cleric throw me a heal is like saying "dude, you're never gonna make it, let me help you out"....note the words "never".  To me I love intensity, to be able to scrape off a mob and have 10 hit points out of 1000 is definitely worth it, but to have a heal while I'm fighting (some stranger) doesnt let me experience my full potential as a character.  If I'm in a RL fight, 30 year old man vs 30 year old man, am I gonna have a 40 year old girl bandaging my cut while I"m still fighting?? NO, I'm gonna either get knocked unconscious or have the other person get knocked out THEN I'm gonna get bandaged up <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />  I dont mind drive by heals when I'm done fighting its just the "when I'm fighting" does it make a difference</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>OK enough harping</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I noticed that SOE is trying to develop a way to be able to lock out creatures regardless; well I sincerely hope thats the case.  Not everyone (player) will be like me, not every player likes my ideas/suggestions, "to each his own" a wise man said (who was it?? lol) To be able to customize a gameplay that suits ones own needs <STRONG>that </STRONG>will be fun, <STRONG>that </STRONG>will make/help a character keep on playing</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>PS. On a final note to the above lenghtly paragraph, I remember when I was fighting a creature, him and I were quite about equal when all of a sudden 3 KOS mobs jumped me, so I had 4. I figured I coudlnt handle them all, so I yelled the encounter and ran; however I never touched the ones who jumped me so they were still FFA (Free For All) by the time I ran across zone (literally) my health replenished and my power replenished so I decieded to take them on (they had 1 arrow down). So I fought, meanwhile a higher level character was nearby and when I was low on health, he asked me to yell the encounter so I woudlnt die; well again 1 target was down 1 was at 50% and I had 1 to go, it was my choice to stay in the fight, so I continued, 2nd target down, me being 10% he still continued to tell me to yell for the sake of my death, but I wanted to see if I could kill them all........point closed......I won, I had around maybe 50/3500 hit points but I won the fight and guess who was happy......<STRONG>me</STRONG></DIV>

<DIV><EM>Darkmortis said:</EM></DIV> <DIV><EM></EM> </DIV> <DIV><EM></EM> </DIV> <DIV><EM>if 55% are in favor of keeping things <STRONG>unlocked</STRONG>  and 45% are in favor of the old system <STRONG>locking</STRONG>  you have no choice but to unlock things.</EM></DIV> <DIV><EM></EM> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ff0000>I think if they make the lockout optional for both solo and groups, that will solve the issue of 'doing what the population wants'.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ff0000></FONT> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

<DIV><!--StartFragment --> Plz add an icon to indicate that encounter will not give me any exp and credit First . This will prevent me to help who steal the mob at first strick to kill the mob and i  do not know it . </DIV>

<P>I've read all the post and yet I still don't see the point...</P> <P>What is the statement here? That people want xp so badly they can't hold pulls 5 seconds to invite someone to group up? Or that they are too stupid to yell when they need help?</P> <P>If you really wanna encourage people to create links with other people, then why remove the interdependance in crafting, have you any idea of how much it was creating links between all crafters ?</P> <P>Nothing makes sense to me here, seriously... </P>

<P>IMHO</P> <P>Just like the crafting changes that virtually wiped out the crafting community. SOE is using a sledge hammer to swat a fly.</P> <P>Crafting problems could have been fixed with off-line selling, instead of the removal interdependence.  Most groups will recover quickly from group death debt. Those that just aren't working out will disband anyway. However, under the new system a total goof off can dump a lot of debt on a single player before being kicked out. Plus that player will have no consequence to their actions.</P> <P>The end result, will be instead of people froming groups with other unknowns, they will ONLY form up with people they know to avoid JERKS!  </P>

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Sauryah wrote:<BR> <P>I've read all the post and yet I still don't see the point...</P> <P>What is the statement here? That people want xp so badly they can't hold pulls 5 seconds to invite someone to group up? Or that they are too stupid to yell when they need help?</P> <P>If you really wanna encourage people to create links with other people, then why remove the interdependance in crafting, have you any idea of how much it was creating links between all crafters ?</P> <P>Nothing makes sense to me here, seriously... </P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR><FONT face=Verdana color=#00cc66>my sediments exactly, in all honsty, and this is the sad reality of it, many people arent here for the socialness, specifically in high end game... i love it personally, but i know there are more that dont.. this is absolutely ridiculous, a group of dps'ers could follow you around and get the %age xp if im reading this right.. and what about all the botters?  theyre probably jumping for joy over this nonsense... its easier for people to be villains than it is to be heros.. most people want things for themselves.. this is the tragic reality and why in all honesty i feel its pretty sad this is changing.. </FONT></P> <P><FONT face=Verdana color=#00cc66>horray people can be even more petty and spiteful if they wanted!  Thanks thats just what I wanted to hear... /sarcasm off</FONT></P>

Please do not implement the ability to power-level characters. thanks. <div></div>

<span><blockquote><hr>Almeric wrote:<div></div> <div>I am...monumentally disappointed.</div> <div> </div> <div>I will try to be succint in my critique, and hope you take my feelings to heart:</div> <div> </div> <div>The locked encounter system is one of EQ2's most admirable traits for some of us.  This is not neccesarily because it stops people from interfering in our own encounters, but also because it upholds a level of integrity in the entire game.</div><hr></blockquote>But I like them (using heals/buffs outside of group). As a healer its been frustrating to watch other persons fight and die just because game prevents me from using my heals to that persons. Based on my experiences it feels really good that when you are fighting a losing battle and at last moment someone heals you, tides change and you beat the mob. I would say that over 90% of people do like to be healed while in combat if they are doing not so well. Most of them even thank for that heal. Only thing I would like to know now is that can we also rez people outside of group? It is frustrating to answer other persons that "sorry, cannot rez you as it is group only".</span><div></div>