You lose a 'few minutes of bashing', and that's enough of a disincentive not to participate? What are you bashing for, if not to earn the requisite experience to get involved in things?
I agree with Juran. We've had these penalties in place for years and everyone has always said something along the lines of, "it only takes a few minutes to gain back anything you lose from dying." Anyway, it seems to me that it's just as easy as ever to reach Aspect - there has to be /some/ kind of motivator to do so (because seriously, unless you're Change, being an Aspect isn't all it's cracked up to be) and the xp loss is just that.
With no experience loss, I would take part in more obelisk and shardfall battles. However, I believe I would be one of the limp-wristed combatants mentioned above. You never know though, it might be the motivation I need to be a little more useful.
Rez idea - as people said above, there needs to be a penalty to use, but its a nice idea in theory.
2) How about instead of removing xp loss on death... remove bashing/farming as a primary means for XP.
- a medley of TCG XP style gameplay (with RNG + skill), xp for new/creative designs, xp for winning elections, xp for running a city successfully for a period (scaling to rating votes), city-wide xp when you keep your townes producing max comms, xp for winning arena events, city-wide xp when you keep the closest horde/undead camp/stronghold below a certain number, xp for harvesting shards, xp for securing outpost/obelisk. Kindly make XP varied and purposeful, not a solo game of how-long-it-takes-for-my-zero-key-to-break. All the variety is already in place.
With that said, I am okay with removing EXP loss because it doesn't affect me at all. I could die hundreds of times without ever feeling the loss, so I don't see why the low-mid levels need to lose big chunks of levels in shardfalls and such.
"On the battlefield I am a god. I love war. The steel, the smell, the corpses. I wish there were more. On the first day I drove the Northmen back alone at the ford. Alone! On the second I carried the bridge! Me! Yesterday I climbed the Heroes! I love war! I… I wish it wasn’t over."
Regarding the 'you can bash it back later in 15 minutes' it feels like that is only really true at the higher levels, where criticals represent a healthy part of your DPS. It is also dependant on your class.
That said, the higher amount of my deaths have been while bashing or things like the undead/demon/orc event, that I'm pretty sure took the whole equivalent of level 92 or so (not important for people beyond 100 but at the time it was kind of depressing for me) and was one of the reasons I just wanted it to end fast.
I still consider that removal of XP loss should work only outside your city walls.
1) @Juran You don't think there's already a lot of stupid zergs? I've seen 12+ people in one circle at one shardfall. Removing XP loss on death won't change that number all that much. It's not like this change is going to happen and all of a sudden 30 people are going to come out of the woodwork and say, "Finally! We can PK now because we don't have to worry about dying!"
I don't think the change would honestly promote unhealthy gameplay at all. I think the mechanic in and of itself is an unhealthy one. The reason to leave XP loss on death is solely because "It's always been there." Look at all current, popular games right now. I haven't seen experience loss on death in -any- game in a long time, aside from IREs, and I think that is specifically because designers of games KNOW that it is a negative mechanic. No one wants to be playing a game and getting punished for it, even if it is minuscule at level 100 (I really don't think it is. I mean yeah 2-3 hours of time lost over 2 weeks isn't that bad, but it's 2-3 hours I don't want to be bashing. I can tell you honestly that I'd be more inclined to go and bash and get my overall level up if it didn't still read under 10%.
Now that we are talking about modifying how experience is handled, would it be an appropriate moment to suggest that, since I remember that PK levels would be still gained/lost as usual (because it is what modifies HP reserves), that the PK experience be shared like bashing/quest is, instead of only for the person that dealt the killing blow? I mean, only when Mena went DK and started getting kills herself is that she started to come positive at all in shard battles, because as Wytch, her chances weren't that high.
Guard rush kills would still not share XP. Go farm somewhere else.
Edit: Since this will likely increase number of people around in shardfalls, why don't you people consider releasing higher levels of stone figurines? 30 enemy slots aren't enough.
I don't understand the crack about 'limpwristed combatants'. The goal here is inclusion, not exclusion. If you get some less than elite combatants involved, that's still people involved? Maybe I'm missing the point. I feel like any possible scenario that gets people off the bench and into the game is absolutely worth looking into.
‘Least I won’t have to carry it no more. You see how bloody heavy it is?’
‘Every sword’s a weight to carry. Men don’t see that when they pick ’em up. But they get heavier with time.”
That's why I suggested decoupling overall and pk. If a lowbie wants to join a shardfall fight and start participating regularly in them, I think the 5 minute Dis trip along with the hit to PK experience is enough of a hit without ruining several minutes spent bashing.
Now that we are talking about modifying how experience is handled, would it be an appropriate moment to suggest that, since I remember that PK levels would be still gained/lost as usual (because it is what modifies HP reserves), that the PK experience be shared like bashing/quest is, instead of only for the person that dealt the killing blow? I mean, only when Mena went DK and started getting kills herself is that she started to come positive at all in shard battles, because as Wytch, her chances weren't that high.
Guard rush kills would still not share XP. Go farm somewhere else.
Edit: Since this will likely increase number of people around in shardfalls, why don't you people consider releasing higher levels of stone figurines? 30 enemy slots aren't enough.
To this day, I don't understand why there isn't an upgrade system to that particular artifact. Fifty credits gets me 20 slots, with every 25 credits I can purchase another 10, up to say, 50?
I believe someone official once made the argument that ally/enemy list organization should be something strategic, but there is nothing strategic or enjoyable whatsoever about being in the middle of a fight, seeing a name not show up in red and being forced to either unenemy all, or sift through your list, mid teamfight, trying to figure out which on the list is inactive or no longer a threat.
If @Jeremy really loved us, there'd just be a toggle that auto-enemied everyone from other circles. The toggle would allow you to turn it off, target opposing individuals/teams in the arena, et cetera. It'd be so intuitive. Almost TOO intuitive!
‘Least I won’t have to carry it no more. You see how bloody heavy it is?’
‘Every sword’s a weight to carry. Men don’t see that when they pick ’em up. But they get heavier with time.”
I like the idea of xp loss removed from the game. I've died enough on alts before to turn 'just a few minutes of bashing' into 'whelp, that's an hour at least, if not more'. Squishy classes and I don't get along.
An idle thought I had if people are adamant about no insta-rez thing for everyone - how would people feel about this on novices? Insta-rez at org landmark with a message saying this is why you've been rezzed (you're a newbie), in the future you'll have to deal with Dis though so get ready? It hasn't happened to me, personally, in a while, but I used to get novices stuck in Dis wondering what the crap was going on. I don't know if this is still as much of an issue as I remember it being, though.
FWIW, bearing in mind that I've been out of the game for a long time and only recently back in - I am pro anything that gets people more involved... especially in aspects that they are a little hesitant to dive into. I was never much of a coder when I played last and so combat was always off limits for me because I couldn't get a healing system together to save my soul. (Whyte's helped a bit here, but by that point, I was on my way out the door) The advent of the built-in healing system has changed that pretty substantially. I think removing the XP loss could do a similar thing (albeit, to a much lesser degree). So generally I am for removing the XP loss.
I am against the instant rez for the reasons people have already mentioned - namely the virtually infinite horde you would have to kill if you are raiding. I am not sure what to do here. I think there does need to be some sort of incentive to raid, defend, be involved and that sort of thing, just to keep a bit of the conflict moving in the game (even from and perhaps especially from an RP standpoint) instead of basically having a stale version of the Cold War perpetually going on. The announce post was awesome to help stop on the abuse side of it, but one thing that used to happen (especially in Celidon and Kinsarmar) back in the day was that most of the conflict centered between Antioch and Stavenn as the two extremes in the magick-antimagick conflict and the other two kind of felt more like Switzerland. It all got very stale and boring from an RP stance.
So anyways, I know I strayed a little off topic, but I'm curious to hear your guys' thoughts and interested to see what happens.
EDIT: And perhaps with the shardfalls and obelisks this has been handled... I haven't played long enough to really get a grasp of that yet...
Hate to further derail this discussion, but changes to enemy would be very welcome. Especially since my only way to hold, other than block, is relient on my enemy lost. Would also make it less annoying trying to juggle allies to deal with the small ally/enemy lists.
I like the points made by Aleutia and Josiph. I like the idea of keeping PK XP out of the overall figure of general XP. It doesn't matter that much to my character, but I think it would make the gaming experience better for lower level players, and that's a good thing. Not everyone has the luxury of playing for hours a day like I do, and to lose XP gained from hours of monotonous hunting in the blink of an eye has got to be discouraging.
The only way I can imagine to discourage PK farming is to keep PK gains and losses limited to arena event and ranked spars.
I've been on most sides of the pk wheel. I really just want to debunk the "no xp loss leads to irresponsible behavior." As demonstrated by myself, Juran, Joran, Khizan, Lionas, Bathan, Lorccan, Jagara, Juganothion, Koh, Kildare, Sarrius, Akumu, Siath, Kyrock, Ivellios, Hiramius, Mathiaus, Brishi, Mathiu, Azefel, Dias, Ageranu, Menoch, Trez, Lillabee, Tek, Aronus, Trenon, Orotu, Aakrin, Justus, Eldreth, Seymour, Asyrin, yadda yadda yadda...
None of them have ever let pk loss function as a deterrent to being stupid or irresponsible. They all have one thing in common, which allows them to do what they do.
Once you accept pk loss as a fact of life, it is Nirvana.
(Ring:) Someone says, "You know we are going to die, right?" (Ring:) You say, "Very likely. Does it matter?" (Ring:) Someonelse says, "Nah. Lets roll."
From that mindset is the stuff that stories and legends are made of.
It's a pretty telling point that people who do most of the killing in the game want pk loss upon death to stay.
Interesting point, most of the people on "Keep xp loss on death" were on "Team no global healing (at the time it was proposed)." A trend arrives from ether.
At the high levels, deaths are basically meaningless unless you really really really really really care about your nerdpoints. At the low levels, the deaths have a much larger visceral impact and push newbie/lowbie players further away from the level-based rewards that they need to progress.
This makes the EXP loss on death a messed up sort of punishment, because it hits the less experienced and newer players way harder than the veterans. Going out to the shardfall at 70 and coming back at 68 and change sucks a lot more than going out to the shardfall at 104.94 and coming back at 104.89.
"On the battlefield I am a god. I love war. The steel, the smell, the corpses. I wish there were more. On the first day I drove the Northmen back alone at the ford. Alone! On the second I carried the bridge! Me! Yesterday I climbed the Heroes! I love war! I… I wish it wasn’t over."
Removing exp loss sounds like a no-brainer, you've already went to extraordinary lengths to get more people involved in PVP, ala an autocuring system.
The instant rez idea sounds bad to me, but I have not raided or defended in a year or two.
Regardless, this game has sat hovering with the same population for awhile, new people popping in every so often. Often times just IRE transplants, something like this if advertised correctly could be of great benefit to the game.
The only issue is that once something large like this goes through, you'll never be able to take it back without a fight.
For all the reasons above, xp loss on death can disappear, there's just nothing positive about it.
On the vein of xp though, I'd like to see pvp xp shared between the group, and -significantly- ramped up. I see absolutely no reason why pvp'ing your way to aspect shouldn't be achievable. If we want to encourage involvement in the variety of pvpscentric 'events' Imp has going for it, it makes sense to reward the individuals taking part with more than the "I helped my dudes" feel good factor, not just alleviate the negative aspects.
Unfortunately he said if he takes out XP loss on death, he will be removing any effect PvP XP has on your Overall level to prevent, 'Hey buddy, let me kill and then resurrect you 1000 times so I can get to Aspect, then you can do the same to me.'
I do wish there were more ways then the bash grind to gain any significant XP.
I don't see a conflict on making people not lose xp when they die, and keep the xp gain for the killer. Or as Tek and I mentioned earlier, for the group.
Comments
I'm not really open to letting overbearing people flood my combat groups with limp-wristed combatants.
So XP loss ain't that bad.
All your thoughts are awful.
With that said, I am okay with removing EXP loss because it doesn't affect me at all. I could die hundreds of times without ever feeling the loss, so I don't see why the low-mid levels need to lose big chunks of levels in shardfalls and such.
"On the battlefield I am a god. I love war. The steel, the smell, the corpses. I wish there were more. On the first day I drove the Northmen back alone at the ford. Alone! On the second I carried the bridge! Me! Yesterday I climbed the Heroes! I love war! I… I wish it wasn’t over."
That said, the higher amount of my deaths have been while bashing or things like the undead/demon/orc event, that I'm pretty sure took the whole equivalent of level 92 or so (not important for people beyond 100 but at the time it was kind of depressing for me) and was one of the reasons I just wanted it to end fast.
I still consider that removal of XP loss should work only outside your city walls.
Guard rush kills would still not share XP. Go farm somewhere else.
Edit: Since this will likely increase number of people around in shardfalls, why don't you people consider releasing higher levels of stone figurines? 30 enemy slots aren't enough.
‘Every sword’s a weight to carry. Men don’t see that when they pick ’em up. But they get heavier with time.”
To this day, I don't understand why there isn't an upgrade system to that particular artifact. Fifty credits gets me 20 slots, with every 25 credits I can purchase another 10, up to say, 50?
I believe someone official once made the argument that ally/enemy list organization should be something strategic, but there is nothing strategic or enjoyable whatsoever about being in the middle of a fight, seeing a name not show up in red and being forced to either unenemy all, or sift through your list, mid teamfight, trying to figure out which on the list is inactive or no longer a threat.
If @Jeremy really loved us, there'd just be a toggle that auto-enemied everyone from other circles. The toggle would allow you to turn it off, target opposing individuals/teams in the arena, et cetera. It'd be so intuitive. Almost TOO intuitive!
‘Every sword’s a weight to carry. Men don’t see that when they pick ’em up. But they get heavier with time.”
I'm con raid rez cause I see no real benefit from being able to rez quicker when you can't really do anything behind grace anyways.
An idle thought I had if people are adamant about no insta-rez thing for everyone - how would people feel about this on novices? Insta-rez at org landmark with a message saying this is why you've been rezzed (you're a newbie), in the future you'll have to deal with Dis though so get ready? It hasn't happened to me, personally, in a while, but I used to get novices stuck in Dis wondering what the crap was going on. I don't know if this is still as much of an issue as I remember it being, though.
I like the points made by Aleutia and Josiph. I like the idea of keeping PK XP out of the overall figure of general XP. It doesn't matter that much to my character, but I think it would make the gaming experience better for lower level players, and that's a good thing. Not everyone has the luxury of playing for hours a day like I do, and to lose XP gained from hours of monotonous hunting in the blink of an eye has got to be discouraging.
The only way I can imagine to discourage PK farming is to keep PK gains and losses limited to arena event and ranked spars.
(Ring:) Someone says, "You know we are going to die, right?"
(Ring:) You say, "Very likely. Does it matter?"
(Ring:) Someonelse says, "Nah. Lets roll."
From that mindset is the stuff that stories and legends are made of.
At the high levels, deaths are basically meaningless unless you really really really really really care about your nerdpoints. At the low levels, the deaths have a much larger visceral impact and push newbie/lowbie players further away from the level-based rewards that they need to progress.
This makes the EXP loss on death a messed up sort of punishment, because it hits the less experienced and newer players way harder than the veterans. Going out to the shardfall at 70 and coming back at 68 and change sucks a lot more than going out to the shardfall at 104.94 and coming back at 104.89.
"On the battlefield I am a god. I love war. The steel, the smell, the corpses. I wish there were more. On the first day I drove the Northmen back alone at the ford. Alone! On the second I carried the bridge! Me! Yesterday I climbed the Heroes! I love war! I… I wish it wasn’t over."
Removing exp loss sounds like a no-brainer, you've already went to extraordinary lengths to get more people involved in PVP, ala an autocuring system.
The instant rez idea sounds bad to me, but I have not raided or defended in a year or two.
Regardless, this game has sat hovering with the same population for awhile, new people popping in every so often. Often times just IRE transplants, something like this if advertised correctly could be of great benefit to the game.
The only issue is that once something large like this goes through, you'll never be able to take it back without a fight.
I like it.
On the vein of xp though, I'd like to see pvp xp shared between the group, and -significantly- ramped up. I see absolutely no reason why pvp'ing your way to aspect shouldn't be achievable. If we want to encourage involvement in the variety of pvpscentric 'events' Imp has going for it, it makes sense to reward the individuals taking part with more than the "I helped my dudes" feel good factor, not just alleviate the negative aspects.
I do wish there were more ways then the bash grind to gain any significant XP.
I don't see a conflict on making people not lose xp when they die, and keep the xp gain for the killer. Or as Tek and I mentioned earlier, for the group.
"Hey dude, make an alt and let me kill it."
the claims are stated - it's the world I've created