EQ2 Forum Archive @ EQ2Wire

 

Go Back   EQ2 Forum Archive @ EQ2Wire > EverQuest II > The Development Corner > In Testing Feedback
Members List Search Mark Forums Read

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 03-04-2005, 11:38 PM   #1
Naggyba

 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 518
Default

If you are going to change it to where grey mobs can agro on the group, then those mobs should drop loot. Why should I suffer the risk, wihtout the reward? I can understand you wanting to fix it to where it's harder for people to use high levels to bypass dangerous content but, by making grey mobs agro the higher levels, you are just adding more risk to the people wihtout any chance of getting reward for defeating them.Instead of agro grey mobs (grey with red border), you could turn them green. That would give the people the chance to get the reward for the risk. Sure, people could use this to farm stuff but, who wants to farm lower level junk for very little loot? Heck, Raid level mobs drop crappy loot (and very little of it). You think normal mobs drop anything of value on a regular basis that could be farmed? I don't think so.ORJust not allow people to group past a certain level range. This would hurt efforts to help guild members recover their shards but, would fix the bypassing content problem. If you added the option of reviving wihtout leaving a shard and more XP debt, on top of the option to revive normally,then people would have shards in dangerous locations. They would have a way out.It's not right to have grey mob agro without the people getting something for defeating the mobs. You shouldn't fix a game mechanics problem by adding yet more game mechanics problems or hassle to the players.

Message Edited by Naggybait on 03-04-2005 01:49 PM

Naggyba is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2005, 11:42 PM   #2
Iseabeil

Loremaster
Iseabeil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Sweden
Posts: 661
Default

there is no reasonable reason to be grouped with someone that is 10 lvls away from you, except shard recovery and harvesting, and those 2 things should be hard anyways if ye are in an area that is bad for ye.
to be honest, i can say i never been in a group that would actually be affected by this, and i played since beta in september. thats pretty long time, and cant see why anyone could have a problem with this.
__________________
Iseabeil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2005, 11:45 PM   #3
Eal

 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 108
Default

Can you think of any reason why grey mobs should be green when they pose no threat?
Eal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2005, 11:52 PM   #4
Naggyba

 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 518
Default


Ealix wrote:
Can you think of any reason why grey mobs should be green when they pose no threat?

Same reason Grey mobs will be agro. If they are now agro, then they pose a threat. If they pose a threat, they should give a reward.The current system is all risk and no reward, on top of the already risk and little reward they have in EQ2. This is just even MORE risk and even LESS reward.Yes, some grey mobs can and do pose a threat.

Message Edited by Naggybait on 03-04-2005 01:53 PM

Naggyba is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2005, 11:52 PM   #5
Magar

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 10
Default

If they pose no threat then why have them aggro?  The point being that this game is a large enough time sink as it stands.  We do not need the added time to deal with no challenge aggro mobs.  Some of those mobs have large hit point values and takes some time to defeat even though there is no challenge.  I  have to agree with the OP. 
 
Gray aggro is a bad idea designed toward a bad game dynamic.  Limit group range and leave the aggro system as it is.
 
One other note.  Does it really make sense that a mob would just attack even though it would be squashed?  I am only lvl 29 but I have yet to see a mob run from me when attacked due to status or what have you.  
 
Don't let this new twist go live.
Magar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2005, 12:01 AM   #6
Eal

 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 108
Default


Ealix wrote:
Can you think of any reason why grey mobs should be green when they pose no threat?





Same reason Grey mobs will be agro. If they are now agro, then they pose a threat. If they pose a threat, they should give a reward.

The current system is all risk and no reward, on top of the already risk and little reward they have in EQ2. This is just even MORE risk and even LESS reward.

Yes, some grey mobs can and do pose a threat
 
 
 
It wasnt a rhetorical question. I am asking you to answer the question.
 
 
 
 
Eal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2005, 12:02 AM   #7
WuphonsReach

Tester
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 558
Default

Let's look at some example numbers where the new rules come into effect.Level 28 player. Mobs will be grey if they are level 24 or below (assuming the average group level is 2SMILEY.Level 28 player groups with a level 14 player. Average level is now 21. Mobs would have to be level 17 or lower to be grey to the group. Level 17 mobs are yellow/orange to the 14 so they would still not aggro.28 with a level 8 player. Avg level drops to 18. Mobs have to be around level 14 to be grey due to avg level, but due to the new rule, level 12-14 mobs will now be aggro. A level 28 player is going to have zero risk at dispatching level 12-14 mobs.The reason this change is being put into effect is as follows:A high-level player parks at the zone line (or elsewhere in the zone) and greys out content for a group of low level players while they (risk-free!) bypass content in order to reach their camp spot. High level player disbands, group hunts from their safe location. Someone needs to go AFK? Low level group invites the high level player (who can be across the zone) for risk-free AFK'ing.The grey aggro change only affects groups with *huge* disparities in levels who were using (abusing) a high level grey shield to trivialize lower-level content. From a realism standpoint... if a group of level 20 mobs sees a level 10 player walk by, without a level 40 player shadowing their every step, why wouldn't the level 20 mob see that level 10 player as a tasty morsel?
__________________
--
Snabbik of Test
Pre-order/account canceled on Sep 8 2005
WuphonsReach is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2005, 12:05 AM   #8
Naggyba

 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 518
Default

Gotta love those 1 star bandit [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] holes that are too childish to debate an issue. Too childish to debate a game mechanics problem or offer solutions.Just to clarify something I think would be a better option.1. Offer another option to reviving. Allow the person to revive with his shard, yet more debt. This would do away with the problem of getting high levels to grey out the mobs so you can get your shard out of a dangerous situation. This would remove oen of the main reasons to group with a high level.2. Now that you fixed one of the reasons of grouping with high levels, limit the ability to group with people outside of a certain level range. If they cannot get experience or quest updates from grouping with the person, then don't allow them to group. With mentoring going in, people can drop down to the level range of the player and help them. Just don't allow them to group if they are past the range that the lower levels no longer gain any benefit.3. Fix other game mechanics issues that cause people to want to group with higher levels to grey out the mobs.To me, this is better than adding more hassle to the players and adding more game mechanics issues and adding more risk with even less reward.

Message Edited by Naggybait on 03-04-2005 02:09 PM

Naggyba is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2005, 12:10 AM   #9
Iseabeil

Loremaster
Iseabeil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Sweden
Posts: 661
Default



Naggybait wrote:
Gotta love those 1 star bandit [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] holes that are too childish to debate an issue. Too childish to debate a game mechanics problem or offer solutions.

Just to clarify something I think would be a better option.

1. Offer another option to reviving. Allow the person to revive with his shard, yet more debt. This would do away with the problem of getting high levels to grey out the mobs so you can get your shard out of a dangerous situation. This would remove oen of the main reasons to group with a high level.

2. Now that you fixed one of the reasons of grouping wiht high levels, limit the ability to group with people outside of a certain level range. If they cannot get experience or quest updates from grouping wiht the person, then don't allow them to group. With mentoring groing in, people can drop down to the level range of the player and help them.

3. Fix other game mechanics issues that cause people to want to group with higher levels to grey out the mobs.

To me, this is better than adding more hassle to the players and adding more game mechanics issues and adding more risk with even less reward.


making it impossible to group outside lvl restrictions would be very bad when not adventuring. if my illusionist is crafting, and i have friends crafting as well, their lvl shouldnt be able to stop me from casting breeze on them. crafting is already slow, the few ways to increase power regen shouldnt be banned from it just to make a few less mechanic issues for adventures.
__________________
Iseabeil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2005, 12:12 AM   #10
Naggyba

 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 518
Default

They could allow grouping in towns and tradeskill instances.
Naggyba is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2005, 12:12 AM   #11
Eal

 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 108
Default

What does 1 star do for me? It doesnt affect my ability to make a point.
 
 
    The whole con system was to separate levels in places where they shouldn't be. I have no business farming mobs 15 levels lower than me just so I recieve loot. Also, Knowing Rare chest may drop from any mob. One could look for the easiest green mob and just sit there. This really sucks if people who are 15 levels lower than you are looking for the same mob. The risk vs reward is thrown out the window.
 
Eal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2005, 12:20 AM   #12
Naggyba

 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 518
Default

That's why I think a better solution would be to fix the game mechanics issues that have people grouping with higher levels (shard recovery being one of them) and just do away with the ability to group with higher levels, outside of towns, if the lower levels cannot get any benefit from the grouping. This would fix all the issues wihtout causing higher levels even more grief with no chance of reward.It would fix the parking of a high level at the zone line while lower levels bypass dangerous content. This is not a game mechanics problem, just people using the game mechanics in the wrong way.It would fix the problem of grouping with a high level to get your shard, if they offer another option to reviving.Etc.
Naggyba is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2005, 12:20 AM   #13
LumpusDaGno

 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 8
Default

Rather than making an incongruous system even moreso, just remove the con shift based on group level range.  What I mean is keep it simple... If you're level 40 and you group with a level 10, mobs that were red to the level 10 are still red to level 10. Mobs that are green to level 40 are deep red to level 10.  Mobs that are grey to level 40 are whatever they are to the level 10 solo. 
 
*Don't change the con just because you're grouped*.  It didn't make sense before and it makes even less sense to have grey cons aggro. 
 
On the live servers, only mobs that con green or higher to the highest level member will con green or higher to the rest of the group.  If they con green or higher, they con whatever is appropriate to each member of the group.  A blue-con to the level 45 in your group is going to con yellow to the 41 in your group.  The only time con shifts is when the mob is grey to the level 45 it becomes grey to the rest of the group.  I presume this was to help groups get to their hunting spots rather than having to wade through miles of too-low content to get there.  Now they propose to make the system more complex in order to unwind the only reason the system existed in the first place?  Bad idea.
 
Don't make greys aggro. Remove the con-shift when grouping.
__________________
----------------------------------------------
Lumpus - Psychiatrist
Grumpus - Norrath's Dumbest Gnome
Fossil - Unholy Hand Grenade
LumpusDaGno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2005, 12:37 AM   #14
Eal

 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 108
Default

Or you could have it where the loot is based on the the highest level in the group versus the level of the mob.  The higher the level of the highest level in group the less probable loot will drop.
 
 
 
For example:
 
a group of 20s who has one 35 in their group fighting a lvl 20 mob.  The difference between mob and player is 15. This has a 1% chance of dropping loot. The reverse scenerio would be group of 35s with one 20. This would yield a 75% chance to drop loot. The higher the ratio of the highest level to mob would be calculated.
 
So you have to options. Add a higher level character in your group attacking smaller mobs for faster exp less loot or visa versa.
Eal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2005, 12:49 AM   #15
Lancealittle

Tester
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 181
Default

If you are in a group that has something that is grey to the highest member but red to the lowest member then you have no legitimate reason to be grouped. The lowests level person is not getting xps or quest rewards in this situation, so they should find people their own levels in a more apropriate area.
 
The new system makes sense and fills a couple holes in an exploitable group system.
 
__________________
Eeek- Ratonga Fury - Test
Gildenrose - High Elf Swashbuckler - Test
Lancealittle - Gnome Guardian - Test
Lancealittle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2005, 12:54 AM   #16
Eal

 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 108
Default

If you are in a group that has something that is grey to the highest member but red to the lowest member then you have no legitimate reason to be grouped. The lowests level person is not getting xps or quest rewards in this situation, so they should find people their own levels in a more apropriate area.
 
The new system makes sense and fills a couple holes in an exploitable group system
 
I assume you are against the mentoring system. Nothing wrong with that. Sony was just trying to find a way so friends and family could play without the level constrictions. If you are strictly into role-playing, levels are just a number.

Message Edited by Ealix on 03-04-2005 11:55 AM

Eal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2005, 12:55 AM   #17
aeio

 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 267
Default


Naggybait wrote:

Ealix wrote:
Can you think of any reason why grey mobs should be green when they pose no threat?

Same reason Grey mobs will be agro. If they are now agro, then they pose a threat. If they pose a threat, they should give a reward.The current system is all risk and no reward, on top of the already risk and little reward they have in EQ2. This is just even MORE risk and even LESS reward.Yes, some grey mobs can and do pose a threat.

Message Edited by Naggybait on 03-04-2005 01:53 PM


They don't pose any REAL threat to the high levels. They should pose a REAL threat to the lower levels though, as they are more than 4 levels higher than them. Your particular group combination has decided to try and reduce their risk to virtually non-existant levels by having much higher people with them. You don't get rewarded, because you are not taking a risk. Killing a grey mob 10 levels lower than you is not risky, it is just annoying. You are being annoyed because you are trying to help someone lower than you by-pass content that should likely kill them in two rounds of combat. That is your reward, helping your lower level friends not die.Either don't group with them, or mentor down to their level and face the appropriate challenge. You should not be rewarded because of your desire to exploit game mechanics.
aeio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2005, 12:57 AM   #18
aeio

 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 267
Default


Magar wrote:
If they pose no threat then why have them aggro? The point being that this game is a large enough time sink as it stands. We do not need the added time to deal with no challenge aggro mobs. Some of those mobs have large hit point values and takes some time to defeat even though there is no challenge. I have to agree with the OP.
Gray aggro is a bad idea designed toward a bad game dynamic. Limit group range and leave the aggro system as it is.
One other note. Does it really make sense that a mob would just attack even though it would be squashed? I am only lvl 29 but I have yet to see a mob run from me when attacked due to status or what have you.
Don't let this new twist go live.

They are a threat though, to the lower levels in the group. In fact they should like wipe the floor with those lower level players. The higher level player, though, is protecting them... All this change does is force them to actually do the protecting instead of having it happen automagically.By-passing content and risk through exploitation of game mechanics is never a good thing.
aeio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2005, 12:59 AM   #19
Robocrot

 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 6
Default

If the mob is level 30
 
The lower level would have to be... 25 -- (?) for the mob to con red. The DUOwould have to be 'level' 35 for the mob to con grey.
 
(Highest level + Level of lower level) / 2 == 35
 
Say the lower level is 25, the higher level would have to be 45 for this to even be in effect ((25+45)/2 = 35) .
If the higher level is anything below 45, the DUO will be less than level 35 which means the level 30 mob will con green.
 
Why would a 45+ group with a lvl 25?
__________________
Robocrot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2005, 01:01 AM   #20
Eal

 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 108
Default

Because they are RL friends or there isnt anyone to group with or they have the same common goal; ie heritage quest.
Eal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2005, 01:04 AM   #21
Lancealittle

Tester
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 181
Default



Ealix wrote:
I assume you are against the mentoring system. Nothing wrong with that. Sony was just trying to find a way so friends and family could play without the level constrictions. If you are strictly into role-playing, levels are just a number.

Message Edited by Ealix on 03-04-2005 11:55 AM



I'm all for the mentoring system. The thing is, if you mentor down to the level of the lowest person the mob will be red to everyone, so that won't help much.
 
If you in a mentoring group, then the entire group should hunt someplace else rather than wander around reds.
 
__________________
Eeek- Ratonga Fury - Test
Gildenrose - High Elf Swashbuckler - Test
Lancealittle - Gnome Guardian - Test
Lancealittle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2005, 01:04 AM   #22
Tradeskill_Addict

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 365
Default

1. As far as i understand (and i might be wrong) in the future grey mobs wont have a red border anymore and wont aggro anyone as long as they look grey to everyone in the group.
 
2. As far as i understand (and i might be wrong) mobs that would con RED to anyone in the group (if soloed) will get a red border and attack the group as long as they are an aggro mob at all.
 
3. That every risk should yield a reward makes the word "challenge" obsolete and turns every player into a mercenary who lives by: "as long as the payment is ok i'll risk my life" (I might not be wrong on this one). I just hope the mercenaries stay of the rpg preferred servers.
__________________
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
native german speaker so don't judge my posts by my grammar or spelling - thank you very much :smileywink:
Tradeskill_Addict is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2005, 01:09 AM   #23
Eal

 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 108
Default

I personally think SOE should have mobs that fly around and look for people cheating. A Bolt of thunder should strike down those that want to CHEAT. Die You CHEATING CHEATER and CHEAT no more so sayeth the Devs.
 
p.s. feel free to one star. I have reached a monumental moment in my posting career.
Eal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2005, 01:12 AM   #24
Xalibur

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 136
Default

they should make it range based, considering having a very high lvl at your side, he is your bodyguard or so, if you move to far away from him, remove the bodyguard status SMILEY
Xalibur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2005, 01:23 AM   #25
Eal

 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 108
Default

they should make it range based, considering having a very high lvl at your side, he is your bodyguard or so, if you move to far away from him, remove the bodyguard status
Rather than changing the system, you added something that would make it better furthering the balance of the game. I wish more people would do this rather than just adding to the problem by not offering a solution.
 
Evolution of problem solving
 
Why can he do that and I can't? = Whine
 
I can't do this because of X and Y and Z. = complaint.
 
I can't do something because of X and Y and Z and this would help to fix it. = Alternative solution.
 
Eal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2005, 01:40 AM   #26
Theramor-GoV

Loremaster
Theramor-GoV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 55
Default

Personally, I think this is the best solution.
 
That way, higher level characters can help those who need it (when recovering shards and what not) and it also stops the loophole of having it work zone wide. 
 
If they make it a "bodyguard" type effect within a certain radius, along with the TLC code (no chests or exp for grey mobs) and possibly extending the No Quest Credit (for example, if there is a person in your group who is 10+ levels higher than your lowest level, then any mob kills can not count for any quest credit), that should fix any real loopholes I can see in the system.
 
If they want to use someone to bypass content to get to a camp spot, that should be their choice.  But they will not be able to keep the bodyguard around if they want any quest or chest drops.
 
Opinions?
 
 
 
T
__________________




Theramor-GoV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2005, 01:42 AM   #27
SideshowBob

Loremaster
SideshowBob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 35
Default

I like the range-based idea! I wonder how hard it would be to implement it? Given the way some of the existing in-game range-based stuff works, perhaps it wouldn't be so difficult? Afterall:
 
Group buffs drop if you get too far from the person who cast them.
You don't get credit for kills if you're too far from the group fighting the mob
 
At least range-based agro would serve to eliminate what it appears the purpose behind the proposed change seeks to correct - lower level characters grouping with significantly higher level characters, who are usually on the complete opposite side of the zone from them, thereby allowing them to avoid situations that would otherwise prove dangerous and challenging to the lower levels characters.
 
The way I think of it is like having a 98-pound weakling strolling some dangerous, really bad part of town all by himself. Chances are, if there's some thief or thug out prowling looking for people to mug, the little guy is gonna get mugged. However, if that same 98-pound weakling found some giant 300-lb armed-to-the-teeth and dressed in full plate bodyguard to accompany him, chances are the muggers are going to find easier pickings and leave him alone.
 
The fact is that people group together for an endless number of reasons, and not all of them are nefarious. If there is a way to get rid of the most common exploits associsted with grouping disproportionate levels together, while still preserving players' rights to group with whoever they want, I'm all for it.  SMILEY  I'd also make the suggestion of a range-based limit to inviting someone into your group (line of sight kind of thing), but I know what a pain in the butt it can be to find the rest of the group you just joined in some rather maze-like  zones, and being able to waypoint them is just too darn nice to want to see go away.
SideshowBob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2005, 02:21 AM   #28
Talo

 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 17
Default

While the range based bodygaurd idea is very interesting, I think it over complicates an already complicated system. I would agree with LumpusDaGnome that removing the con shift completely from grouping is the best and simplest solution to the whole problem.

LumpusDaGnome wrote:
Rather than making an incongruous system even moreso, just remove the con shift based on group level range.  What I mean is keep it simple... If you're level 40 and you group with a level 10, mobs that were red to the level 10 are still red to level 10. Mobs that are green to level 40 are deep red to level 10.  Mobs that are grey to level 40 are whatever they are to the level 10 solo. 
 
*Don't change the con just because you're grouped*.  It didn't make sense before and it makes even less sense to have grey cons aggro. 
 
On the live servers, only mobs that con green or higher to the highest level member will con green or higher to the rest of the group.  If they con green or higher, they con whatever is appropriate to each member of the group.  A blue-con to the level 45 in your group is going to con yellow to the 41 in your group.  The only time con shifts is when the mob is grey to the level 45 it becomes grey to the rest of the group.  I presume this was to help groups get to their hunting spots rather than having to wade through miles of too-low content to get there.  Now they propose to make the system more complex in order to unwind the only reason the system existed in the first place?  Bad idea.
 
Don't make greys aggro. Remove the con-shift when grouping.



__________________
Talone Trailblaze
Ranger of Mistmoore
Talo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2005, 02:24 AM   #29
Almeric_CoS

The L.G.
Almeric_CoS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Southern California
Posts: 381
Default

Con-shifting has nothing to do with helping groups get to a hunting spot, or anything of the sort.  Mobs con grey to a group because of the Trivial Loot Code - grey mobs don't drop chests, which prevents farming.
 
 
__________________
Almeric's Blog: He doesn't know the meaning of the word "concise!"
Almeric_CoS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2005, 02:28 AM   #30
WuphonsReach

Tester
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 558
Default

Range based would be ideal... but it's tricky to program (have to keep track of multiple 'bubbles' of group level aggro) and possibly even easier to exploit then the current system.It probably was considered and tossed based on the complexity issue. Imagine a group of 6, widely-ranged group members who become separated in a dungeon. Who is within range of who? What is the new average level of those who are within range of each other? Can there be weird things where a high level player stays one step away from the shield range?
__________________
--
Snabbik of Test
Pre-order/account canceled on Sep 8 2005
WuphonsReach is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:06 PM.

vBulletin skin by: CompleteGFX.com
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
All threads and posts originally from the EQ2 and Station forums operated by Sony Online Entertainment. Their use is by express written permission.