Log Off Mentality

[Archbishop Monk]

48 minutes ago, Trick said:

What if we made losing rewarding? Similar to what f0xx suggested, what if LOSING a fight to a cabal enemy gave you a significant amount of CPs or some similar reward? I know, I know, I know. This is the “everyone gets a trophy” mentality, but if you know you’re going to gain something from a PK defeat instead of just losing your rares, it might incentivize people to stick around. 

Game checks for underdog scenarios. Your cabal enemy has 3 on and you’re the only one? You might get a cabal point immunity if your standard is taken so you don’t stop gaining CPs when it’s gone because you stuck around. Or when you retrieve vs those odds, you get double the CP for returning it, etc. 

These little things might make you stick around. If someone gets more CPs and can afford life insurance a few times, they might be willing to take on the potential altar room gangbang that’s gonna happen.

As a vet and a solid PKer I’ve always advocated for the “harden up princess” ideology, but that way of thinking is just forcing people to leave and find a more rewarding game experience. I think if we made ALL aspects appealing, we might see lesser skilled PKers return.

We need those lower tiers. Lower tiers make the “average” PKers feel successful and thus makes them play more and so on.

Thoughts?

I agree with a lot of these points.  In truth, we all play to get the experiences we enjoy.  Incentives for fighting a losing battles against the odds would definitely go a long way towards having people stick around longer for uphill battles.  It may be hard to determine rules for what is considered an uphill battle, but I think it would benefit all in the long run.  For instance, a decked barbarian dwarf leader sticking around for a 3v1 against Savant inductees is a lesser challenge than a Warmaster inductee sticking around to fight one moderately equiped Savant member. 

Also, there is another incentive not to lose.  If you know that each death you take will make your enemy even stronger to fight, why would you stick around?  Several classes get stronger the more deaths you take to them, looting aside.  Necromancers, dark knights, crusaders and evil clerics all benefit from you dying.  Do you gain anything but experience from fighting them?  No.  But, the next time you fight them they may be that much stronger.

[Trick]

Additional idea:

To make that CP gain meaningful(CPs are kinda worthless as is once you get a certain point) make them exchangeable. 

So, remove the ability to farm CPs via guild quests, put a vendor in the bazaar, and allow people to exchange 1,000 cabal points for 1 RP point. That way, your bonus CP gain from losing that PK helps further your RP point gain. That way, PK and RP are a bit more connected than they are now.

It's a win/win if you ask me.

1. More reason to stay logged in and gain CPs.
2. More reason to engage in PK, even if you lose, because you gain a bunch of CP for the fight.
3. Puts emphasis on cabal warfare and makes the capture the flag style MEAN something other than taking away cabal powers.

" Sucks I lost, but at least I am closer to getting enough RP to buy an empowered necklace. "

That'd incentivize a lot of people, I think..

[f0xx]

15 hours ago, Trick said:

What if we made losing rewarding? Similar to what f0xx suggested...

☹️

I didn't suggest rewards for losing.

I suggested MEGA REWARDS for winning while being the underdog.

The simple task of retrieving your standard is almost impossible if you are against multiple opponents, and If you are a class that can be lagged it's nearly always certain death.

Game can easily check how "underdog"  you are - number of opponents, cabal ranks difference, PK record, bounty and now that we have EQ values, it can even be made to check how under equipped you are.

If you are at super great disadvantage, you should get great rewards for even trying. Not losing though. Death should always be punishing.

[edit] Also RP points should be kept for RP.

[Trick]

4 hours ago, f0xx said:

Also RP points should be kept for RP.

So, remove edges and necklaces since those things cost RP, but affect PK?

[Fool_Hardy]

What if CP could be used to purchase cabal upgrades.

1000 and then 2000cp you can purchase cabal outfit upgrades. Up to level 3 cabal outfits. Better AC at level 2, better adjustments at level 3. Permanent for character.

5000 cp you can upgrade your cabal merchants for a 48 hours. Granting them special gear/consumables for sale.

Just a thought.

Oh and if you eliminate guild quests for cp add in cabal quests. Cabal guard hands out a cabal quest. Go. Do. 

[Atticus]

I think we just need a better time sink than armies tbh. Imo that should be the focus cabal wise

[Trick]

43 minutes ago, Fool_Hardy said:

What if CP could be used to purchase cabal upgrades.

1000 and then 2000cp you can purchase cabal outfit upgrades. Up to level 3 cabal outfits. Better AC at level 2, better adjustments at level 3. Permanent for character.

5000 cp you can upgrade your cabal merchants for a 48 hours. Granting them special gear/consumables for sale.

Just a thought.

Oh and if you eliminate guild quests for cp add in cabal quests. Cabal guard hands out a cabal quest. Go. Do. 

Point of removing CP quests for my idea was to remove the ability to farm them for RP points. 

[Celerity]

I think making fighting a PK a little less mandatory could be a simple answer to a lot of the problem, at least in the short term.

Most of the problem stems from being forced to fight a losing battle, repeatedly. That just leads to log off, character abandonment, and player loss. And it happens a lot...there is a lot of mandatory fighting going on.

Couple that with other, non-PK time sinks and you'll see a noticeable rise in online players. Preferably another way for cabals/players to 'combat' each other.

Long term though, you'll have to address the very difficult and complicated problems of how to balance a PK-centric game and the win/loss incentive structure as above. The importance of gear (and thus losing it) is one of the main issues here, as is the general 'downward spiral' effect: once you lose, you are likely to keep losing due to getting weaker.

On the flip side, rewarding successful characters by making them more PK-powerful only adds to the issue. We can look at gameplay structure on that side too.

[f0xx]

23 hours ago, Trick said:

So, remove edges and necklaces since those things cost RP, but affect PK?

I meant how you gain RP, I think that was clear.

No one would care about RP points if they didn't affect PK.

How you gain RP points though, should be kept strictly via RP.

[Trick]

How would that be clear in the following statement:

RP should be kept for RP.

That, to me, reads: RP points should be kept for the use of RP. Not rewarded for RP only, but yeah, I figured you’d be against the idea lol.

[f0xx]

1 hour ago, Trick said:

How would that be clear in the following statement:

RP should be kept for RP.

I was referring to this idea but forgot to quote it (I'll take the blame for that  ):

On 7/15/2019 at 7:48 PM, Trick said:

...allow people to exchange 1,000 cabal points for 1 RP point.

 

So yeah. I think it's a terrible idea.

There are much more original and fun ways to make fighting as underdog rewarding than to leech on RP points.

Imagine you get tokens, which tokens you can use as brambus enhancements for your custom RP gear. Neat hm?

[Trick]

Not really all that "special" of an idea. I think it's just taking my idea and tweaking it slightly.

My idea doesn't add an additional source of currency, but makes a source of currency that exists feel more meaningful than it does now. Its very, very easy to amass a high amount of CPs with the guild quests and not ever really spending them on anything of value aside from maybe 1-2 pieces of gear. Once you get those two things, you pretty much sit on your CP or use it for life insurance.

Not too creative there, bud. 

[egreir]

2 hours ago, Trick said:

Not really all that "special" of an idea. I think it's just taking my idea and tweaking it slightly.

My idea doesn't add an additional source of currency, but makes a source of currency that exists feel more meaningful than it does now. Its very, very easy to amass a high amount of CPs with the guild quests and not ever really spending them on anything of value aside from maybe 1-2 pieces of gear. Once you get those two things, you pretty much sit on your CP or use it for life insurance.

Not too creative there, bud. 

Worst idea I've ever heard on the internet. So bad I had to come here and comment. But not before I ranked to level 6 and deleted like I've done 10 times in the past couple months lol

[Archbishop Monk]

11 hours ago, Celerity said:

Long term though, you'll have to address the very difficult and complicated problems of how to balance a PK-centric game and the win/loss incentive structure as above. The importance of gear (and thus losing it) is one of the main issues here, as is the general 'downward spiral' effect: once you lose, you are likely to keep losing due to getting weaker.

I think this right here is half the reason people log off.  Combine that with class rock-paper-scissors and you have greater trouble.

If gear mattered less and class skills mattered more, I think you would see less people logging off.  It is not about losing to just the person you fought, but also becoming weaker against any other person you will fight.

['tarako]

I just think alot of people place too much emphasis on losing a fight, and feel it adversely affects them when I genuinely don't believen imms weigh their rewards on being a pk monster too heavily at all. 

 

One thing I will say is you will never be a pk monster if you aren't willing to push yourself hard against people that should be stomping you. Maybe it's frustrating, but once you're done with the char, people will have more respect for the losses you took in stride than the 12 months you spent being as safe as possible to save a few lives. Chars die now when the player is dine. Very very rarely does anyone hit condeath. So why not go have those epic fights? 

[Trick]

Because people like to type EQ and see a badass set, basically. 

[Fool_Hardy]

I think the feeling when losing select pieces causes the issue.

Knowing that you could cabal outfit and really still be competitive would encourage people. I think.

Maybe not only balance cabal outfits against competitive (not god) suits would help. Maybe even create prog lists for characters wearing a full cabal outfit. Not progs for individual items, but progs that fire only when the whole suit is worn.

Just thinking out loud.

[Zylothemadman]

I would like to chime in as one of probably the 5 most junior players I care more for the rp than the PK and there are a million things I would rather do with rp points than buy a PK edge

[Ulmusdorn]

19 hours ago, Celerity said:

Long term though, you'll have to address the very difficult and complicated problems of how to balance a PK-centric game and the win/loss incentive structure as above. The importance of gear (and thus losing it) is one of the main issues here, as is the general 'downward spiral' effect: once you lose, you are likely to keep losing due to getting weaker.

On the flip side, rewarding successful characters by making them more PK-powerful only adds to the issue. We can look at gameplay structure on that side too.

This is part of what the EQ balancing is all about. Making more mid-tier rares comparable to upper end uniques.

 

[aaa]

It's not a single thing that determines the size of the divide, it's the culmination of multiple small things put together. 

Reducing variables is how you make things more comparible. We can quite safely assume no one wants equipment to go completely and most people are content with cabal ranks. This only really leaves rp edges and outlier things like tattoos and other unique or extremely rare boosts like being branded or becoming a familiar etc. 

Once things are "balanced", that's when you carefully introduce new variables if they're required (and they're often not). 

[Archbishop Monk]

Actually, it is not eq itself that is the problem, but availability of eq.   There is a reason we see so many more people playing or coming back at the beginning of the month.  All those rares they couldn't find before or could not get suddenly become available.

I think the eq balance goes a LONG way towards having people be less worried about eq.

['tarako]

Please don't make this about edges again. Noone is logging off because of an edge

[aaa]

28 minutes ago, 'tarako said:

Please don't make this about edges again. Noone is logging off because of an edge

We can make it about your reading comprehension if you'd like? My first sentence literally says it's not just one thing but a combination of many. 

[Fool_Hardy]

4 hours ago, Ulmusdorn said:

This is part of what the EQ balancing is all about. Making more mid-tier rares comparable to upper end uniques.

 

This is the path I like. Change the disparity between top shelf and the next step down. Then we can look at other factors.

I will say that I do not believe any amount of edges compares to the ability of one character to literally be dressed in all of the world's most sought after gear. As we place real numbers on EQ, best in slot becomes easy to determine. One way to reduce disparity is to limit the number of best in slot pieces a character can wear.

Again, just thinking out loud.

Foolish thoughts by an old fool.

[f0xx]

1 hour ago, Wade said:

My first sentence literally says it's not just one thing but a combination of many. 

You are right, it's a combination of skill.

The people who dominated the playerbase before edges  do so after edges.

If a skilled player without edges faces a less skilled with edges, outcome will be the same.

The moment one gets rid of the "I lost because this thing that has nothing to do with me", and understand everything has to do with him, he gets better.

Until then, bad players are gonna find excuse everywhere (be it EQ, life insurance, cabal ranks, bad internet, edges, tattoos, ferals, bards, mages suck) while good players will be finding ways to adapt.