Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Caster's realm: Disturbing Trends in Massive Online Gaming

Last response: in Video Games
Share
Anonymous
a b 4 Gaming
a b Ý World of Warcraft
May 29, 2005 11:46:02 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

Caster's realm: Disturbing Trends in Massive Online Gaming

Since late last year we have seen big changes in massive online games.
On the surface, many of these changes appear to improve the game and
open it up to a wider audience. Not all of these changes come without
cost, however; and not just financially. Some of these changes miss the
point of why we play massive online games in the first place.

Everquest 2 recently made most of its overland creatures soloable by
all classes. Players can travel all over Thundering Steppes or
Nektulos, and find hundreds of mobs killable by a single character
regardless of class. World of Warcraft included large amounts of solo
content since its release. The vast offering of solo creatures, quests,
experience, and loot often proves too tempting an option when compared
to the difficulty of finding a group with a bunch strangers. If options
exist for a player to level from 1 to 50 without grouping with a bunch
of strangers, players will follow it.

Those strangers, however, are the reason to play. Gameplay, evolving
environments, and character advancement are important features of any
game. There are many single-player games that involve the players in
deep plot lines, offer fast and powerful progression paths, and have an
important feature all massive online games fail to include: a pause
button. It's the thousands of other players that make massive online
games unique. Avoiding them ignores the one thing that sets these games
apart.

The more solo content game designers add, the more they steer players
away from the strength of massive online games.

The shift from Everquest's buffing system to the more rigid system in
Everquest 2 made it much harder for players outside of groups to help
one another. Buffing other players, while overpowering in many
circumstances, created a social community of those who want to help
people and those who seek help. Buffing in Everquest created contact
between players who might never have met eachother before. In Everquest
2 it becomes much more difficult to establish that connection. The
rigid combat and buffing system of Everquest 2 makes it not nearly as
clear how one character can assist another.

Last week, Sony Online Entertainment announced that it would set up a
new set of servers and facilitate the transfer of characters,
equipment, and in-game money in trade for real life currency. The
outside purchase of characters, equipment, and in-game money has gone
on for a long time now, but this is the first time the company of the
game validated the practice.

Players who purchase gear, in-game money, or characters completely miss
the point. Massive online games aren't about gear or level or items,
they're about meeting other people and going on adventures with them.
Players cannot build friendships with other players if they continually
shift from character to character or spend their entire play session
seeking out the rewards that might offer the best cash on Station
Exchange.

These changes points to a disturbing trend. Instead of longer and more
enriching content meant to bring players together, we see games turning
toward instant gratification with large amounts of solo content and
validation for purchasing characters, gear, and in-game money outright
rather than earning it in-game. This may lead to more subscribers for
each game, but it will not help reinforce the main difference between
massive online games and traditional single-player games: the other
players.

There are things we, as players, can do to improve our own played time
and help show others the strength of massive online games. Here are
some examples:

- Go out of your way to group with people. Don't always seek the safest
path for personal gain if it steers you away from other players.

- Remember that the game isn't about levels, gear, or money; its about
the other players. Years from now you won't remember what the ratio was
on your fancy sword or how many hit points your breastplate had. You
will remember your friends and the adventures you shared. Your friends
list is your greatest possession.

- Go out of your way to help new players and show them that not
everyone is out for themselves. Institute a buffing-event or newbie
adoption program for your guild. Set up contests or player-generated
quests that don't just involve killing beasts for experience and coin.

Game producers can also improve the grouping aspects of massive online
games rather than leaping to the easy fixes for solo-play, experience
bonuses, or the real life purchase of in-game resources. Some examples
include:

- Help get groups together faster. Allow group invites across zones.
Focus group content around one-hour play sessions. Widen the level
ranges on group content to allow for a larger pool of players looking
for groups.

- Remove detrimental features of grouping such as group experience debt
and add a significant experience bonus for players who choose to group
instead of soloing.

- Add features that reinforce pickup groups and pickup raids. Reward
all players in a group for their work, not just one player with random
luck.

- Improve tools for social connections. Add a notes section to friends
lists. Offer a method for alt tracking. Let players forward tells from
one alternate character to another.

- Add in a system that lets low level players and high level players
group together. Ensure both players earn experience and meet
appropriate challenges. Don't get stingy with the experience they earn,
make it worth while for a high level to group with their low level
friend.

- Do not jump to soloing as a fix for short-time players.

Most importantly, find new ways to get people together in a group, get
hunting, and having fun together in a short period of time.

Massive online games are seeing much greater popularity than ever
before and this trend appears to continue. With a far greater number of
players playing online games, the urge to make quick and easy changes
that might bring in even more subscribers is strong. It is easy to give
players what they ask for but not always easy to look deeper into why
they ask for it and what the real problem is.

Sometimes players forget the real difference between these games and
other RPGs. It is easy to get caught in item statistics or levels. Game
companies should remind them what is important. Game companies should
constantly and continually reinforce the biggest strength of their
games: the massive amount of online players. Players should never
forget why they play. Your greatest rewards aren't gear or levels or
items, they're the people you meet in your adventures.

Loral Ciriclight
24 April 2005
Loral@loralciriclight.com
Anonymous
a b 4 Gaming
a b Ý World of Warcraft
May 30, 2005 11:44:30 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

In article <1117377962.234381.102110@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
Mike Shea <mshea01@gmail.com> wrote:
>Offer a method for alt tracking.

Boo on that! Boo, I say! :-) Hey, if I wanted people to be able
to find me no matter who I was playing I'd name all my character's
JoesAltYesJustSendATellandIllLogMyMainAndComeBuffYouOrWhatever.

>- Add in a system that lets low level players and high level players
>group together.

Now *that's* a good idea.
May 30, 2005 11:55:18 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

In article <d7fqeu$fiq$1@reader1.panix.com>, wrat@panix.com says...
> In article <1117377962.234381.102110@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> Mike Shea <mshea01@gmail.com> wrote:
> >Offer a method for alt tracking.
>
> Boo on that! Boo, I say! :-) Hey, if I wanted people to be able
> to find me no matter who I was playing I'd name all my character's
> JoesAltYesJustSendATellandIllLogMyMainAndComeBuffYouOrWhatever.

Of course, they could let you turn it on and off, perhaps even for
selected alts. Some players like it when people can find them. Some
don't. No reason both players can't have what they want.
Related resources
Anonymous
a b 4 Gaming
a b Ý World of Warcraft
May 31, 2005 12:57:49 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

Mike Shea wrote:
> Caster's realm: Disturbing Trends in Massive Online Gaming

> - Go out of your way to group with people. Don't always seek the safest
> path for personal gain if it steers you away from other players.

That's a great idea if it was that easy. When I played EQ2 I spent
hours with the LFG flag on. Or shouting in a zone for group members.
I'd say an hour spent soloing is an hour better spent than the hour
spent shouting for group members.


> - Remember that the game isn't about levels, gear, or money; its about
> the other players.

The game isn't about other players - its about what EVERY game is
about. Its about having fun. I agree that the presence of other
players and the interaction with them can greatly improve that fun, but
they are just a means to an end. The end being fun.


> - Remove detrimental features of grouping such as group experience debt
> and add a significant experience bonus for players who choose to group
> instead of soloing.

IMO, group experience debt isn't a detrimental feature. Its a group
effort and the group should work to keep all its members alive. The
experience debt HELPS the person who died by splitting the debt between
the whole group. It doesn't add up to much unless there are only a few
people in the group - this should be encouraging larger groups.


> Massive online games are seeing much greater popularity than ever
> before and this trend appears to continue. With a far greater number of
> players playing online games, the urge to make quick and easy changes
> that might bring in even more subscribers is strong. It is easy to give
> players what they ask for but not always easy to look deeper into why
> they ask for it and what the real problem is.

I agree with this - the player doesn't always know what is best for the
game. People have a problem soloing when they can't find a group and
so they assume soloing should be made more fun - a better solution
would possibly be to make groups easier to find.

steve.kaye
Anonymous
a b 4 Gaming
a b Ý World of Warcraft
May 31, 2005 12:58:41 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

42 <nospam@nospam.com> writes:
> In article <d7fqeu$fiq$1@reader1.panix.com>, wrat@panix.com says...
> > In article <1117377962.234381.102110@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> > Mike Shea <mshea01@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >Offer a method for alt tracking.
> >
> > Boo on that! Boo, I say! :-) Hey, if I wanted people to be able
> > to find me no matter who I was playing I'd name all my character's
> > JoesAltYesJustSendATellandIllLogMyMainAndComeBuffYouOrWhatever.
>
> Of course, they could let you turn it on and off, perhaps even for
> selected alts. Some players like it when people can find them. Some
> don't. No reason both players can't have what they want.

Yes, they COULD do that. If they do, that would be fine.
There's at least one example of a game where they didn't
think of making it possible for selected alts to opt in or
out of it. My wife plays COH, and she has a lot of toons,
and a lot of online friends. She turned on the feature to
let friends know when any of her characters log in. Alas,
in COH it's all or nothing. This led to some problems
because our daughter has a few characters on the account,
and some of my wife's friends tend to use mature language.
My wife had to send messages to all her friends telling
them not to talk to <list of daughter's characters>, and
tell our daughter what to do if any of <list of people>
started talking to her thinking she was her mother. That's
a lot of hassle that could have been avoided if they'd just
thought to offer the option of leaving selected alts off
the tracking list.

-- Don.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- See the a.g.e/EQ1 FAQ at http://www.iCynic.com/~don/EQ/age.faq.htm
--
-- Sukrasisx, Monk 55 on E. Marr Note: If you reply by mail,
-- Terrwini, Druid 51 on E. Marr I'll get to it sooner if you
-- Wizbeau, Wizard 36 on E. Marr remove the "hyphen n s"
-- Teviron, Knight 19 on E. Marr
Anonymous
a b 4 Gaming
a b Ý World of Warcraft
May 31, 2005 1:23:55 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

I agree, the end goal of a game should be fun.
Too bad, SOE has another agenda. To make you enjoy the game
THEIR way. As a result, they can FEK up any fun to be had, with all
their ludicrous rules, feked up implementations and bugs.
(Zek, for example, putting solo instances in a zone where you have to
take a access quest boat ride... lol)
Anonymous
a b 4 Gaming
a b Ý World of Warcraft
May 31, 2005 4:19:08 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

wrat@panix.com (the wharf rat) wrote in news:D 7fqeu$fiq$1
@reader1.panix.com:

> In article <1117377962.234381.102110@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> Mike Shea <mshea01@gmail.com> wrote:
>>Offer a method for alt tracking.
>
> Boo on that! Boo, I say! :-) Hey, if I wanted people to be able
> to find me no matter who I was playing I'd name all my character's
> JoesAltYesJustSendATellandIllLogMyMainAndComeBuffYouOrWhatever.
>
>>- Add in a system that lets low level players and high level players
>>group together.
>
> Now *that's* a good idea.

See CoH's Sidekicking or Exemplaring for one way that has been implemented.


--
Marcel
http://mudbunny.blogspot.com/
Anonymous
a b 4 Gaming
a b Ý World of Warcraft
May 31, 2005 10:31:28 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

>Everquest 2 recently made most of its overland creatures soloable by
>all classes. Players can travel all over Thundering Steppes or
>Nektulos, and find hundreds of mobs killable by a single character
>regardless of class. World of Warcraft included large amounts of solo
>content since its release. The vast offering of solo creatures, quests,
>experience, and loot often proves too tempting an option when compared
>to the difficulty of finding a group with a bunch strangers. If options
>exist for a player to level from 1 to 50 without grouping with a bunch
>of strangers, players will follow it.

WoW seemed to have a pretty good balance of this with instances. Most of the
"good" items do require groups. I play WoW and usually group for quests etc.
it is just more fun, the fact that I CAN solo if I am on for 1 hour that is
nice.
If WoW had the LFG features that EQ1 had then it would greatly increase the
number of groups I would get. It is hard to travel around looking if there
are people looking for a group for instance1 when I am on a character too
high for that in another city all together.

The LFG window in EQ1 is probably the thing I miss the most. It is simple to
look and suggest an alt to someone looking for people.
Anonymous
a b 4 Gaming
a b Ý World of Warcraft
June 1, 2005 3:26:34 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

"steve.kaye" <nospam@giddy-kippers.co.uk> writes:
> IMO, group experience debt isn't a detrimental feature. Its a group
> effort and the group should work to keep all its members alive. The
> experience debt HELPS the person who died by splitting the debt between
> the whole group. It doesn't add up to much unless there are only a few
> people in the group - this should be encouraging larger groups.

Group xp debt CAN be good, if it keep the group concentrating on
making sure everyone survives. But it can also make people far
more wary of grouping. If that stranger you picked up for your
group turns out to be an idiot who gets himself killed, you get
stuck with some of the debt for his idiocy. Far safer to group
with people you already know, or just to solo.

This is compounded if the game also makes it easier to form groups.
I remember reading early reports about EQ2, where you can invite
people from anywhere in the zone (and the zones are big), maybe
even anywhere in the game? Someone had a tradeskiller with stuff
up for sale, and would get tells from potential buyers. To make
it easy for them to find him, he'd invite them into a group so they
could use EQ2's features for helping group members locate each
other. But then, the buyer would sometimes die en route, and he'd
get stuck with some of their debt. Usually followed by the buyer
disbanding the group and never showing up to make the purchase.

-- Don.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- See the a.g.e/EQ1 FAQ at http://www.iCynic.com/~don/EQ/age.faq.htm
--
-- Sukrasisx, Monk 55 on E. Marr Note: If you reply by mail,
-- Terrwini, Druid 51 on E. Marr I'll get to it sooner if you
-- Wizbeau, Wizard 36 on E. Marr remove the "hyphen n s"
-- Teviron, Knight 19 on E. Marr
Anonymous
a b 4 Gaming
a b Ý World of Warcraft
June 1, 2005 5:13:36 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

Don Woods wrote:
> "steve.kaye" <nospam@giddy-kippers.co.uk> writes:
> > IMO, group experience debt isn't a detrimental feature. Its a group
> > effort and the group should work to keep all its members alive. The
> > experience debt HELPS the person who died by splitting the debt between
> > the whole group. It doesn't add up to much unless there are only a few
> > people in the group - this should be encouraging larger groups.
>
> Group xp debt CAN be good, if it keep the group concentrating on
> making sure everyone survives. But it can also make people far
> more wary of grouping. If that stranger you picked up for your
> group turns out to be an idiot who gets himself killed, you get
> stuck with some of the debt for his idiocy. Far safer to group
> with people you already know, or just to solo.

If that idiot gets YOU killed then the experience debt is good. A bad
tank can quite easily kill a healer and vice versa. But either way I
do see that it would put some people off grouping with strangers - not
a good thing as your group of acceptable people to group with will
increase very slowly (if at all)


> This is compounded if the game also makes it easier to form groups.
> I remember reading early reports about EQ2, where you can invite
> people from anywhere in the zone (and the zones are big), maybe
> even anywhere in the game? Someone had a tradeskiller with stuff
> up for sale, and would get tells from potential buyers. To make
> it easy for them to find him, he'd invite them into a group so they
> could use EQ2's features for helping group members locate each
> other. But then, the buyer would sometimes die en route, and he'd
> get stuck with some of their debt. Usually followed by the buyer
> disbanding the group and never showing up to make the purchase.

That would be easy to prevent by only sharing the experience debt
between players within a certain distance of the dead guy.

steve.kaye
Anonymous
a b 4 Gaming
a b Ý World of Warcraft
June 1, 2005 9:24:01 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

steve.kaye wrote:
> Mike Shea wrote:
>
>>Caster's realm: Disturbing Trends in Massive Online Gaming
>
>
>>- Go out of your way to group with people. Don't always seek the safest
>>path for personal gain if it steers you away from other players.
>
>
> That's a great idea if it was that easy. When I played EQ2 I spent
> hours with the LFG flag on. Or shouting in a zone for group members.
> I'd say an hour spent soloing is an hour better spent than the hour
> spent shouting for group members.
>
>
>
>>- Remember that the game isn't about levels, gear, or money; its about
>>the other players.
>
>
> The game isn't about other players - its about what EVERY game is
> about. Its about having fun. I agree that the presence of other
> players and the interaction with them can greatly improve that fun, but
> they are just a means to an end. The end being fun.
>
>
>
>>- Remove detrimental features of grouping such as group experience debt
>>and add a significant experience bonus for players who choose to group
>>instead of soloing.
>
>
> IMO, group experience debt isn't a detrimental feature. Its a group
> effort and the group should work to keep all its members alive. The
> experience debt HELPS the person who died by splitting the debt between
> the whole group. It doesn't add up to much unless there are only a few
> people in the group - this should be encouraging larger groups.
>
>
>
>>Massive online games are seeing much greater popularity than ever
>>before and this trend appears to continue. With a far greater number of
>>players playing online games, the urge to make quick and easy changes
>>that might bring in even more subscribers is strong. It is easy to give
>>players what they ask for but not always easy to look deeper into why
>>they ask for it and what the real problem is.
>
>
> I agree with this - the player doesn't always know what is best for the
> game. People have a problem soloing when they can't find a group and
> so they assume soloing should be made more fun - a better solution
> would possibly be to make groups easier to find.
>
> steve.kaye
>
Here's some ideas to make grouping easier:

1) make sharing quests easy.

2) Give people room to describe what sort of group they are lfg.. e.g. I'd like to do quests. As it stands, people in
eq2, for example, just tend to grind xp in groups and do quests solo. It's a lot more fun bashing 40 bears or whatever
in a full group, but getting a group in the dungeons can be quite painful. I hate asking people who are lfg if they want
to help do some quest, they almost never see the point of straying outside the few zones people use for grinding.

3) see 1. I think this would make a huge difference.
Anonymous
a b 4 Gaming
a b Ý World of Warcraft
June 1, 2005 9:27:06 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

>Here's some ideas to make grouping easier:

>1) make sharing quests easy.

>2) Give people room to describe what sort of group they are lfg..
> e.g. I'd like to do quests. As it stands, people in
> eq2, for example, just tend to grind xp in groups and do quests solo.
> It's a lot more fun bashing 40 bears or whatever
> in a full group, but getting a group in the dungeons can be quite painful.
> I hate asking people who are lfg if they want
> to help do some quest, they almost never see the point of straying outside
> the few zones people use for grinding.

> 3) see 1. I think this would make a huge difference.

A reverse LFG flag would be good, ie a group can advertise they are
looking for a player of type X to kill y.

Another simple way would be to have higher server populations. More
people mean more people around looking for groups. When EQ2 launched I
had no problems finding groups to do major quests now I can hang around
for ever waiting for a group. Not surprising I don't bother to wait
and go off to solo elsewhere.
Anonymous
a b 4 Gaming
a b Ý World of Warcraft
June 1, 2005 4:18:21 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

On Tue, 31 May 2005 18:31:28 GMT, "Lorad" <jeff_nospam@hotmail.come>
wrote:

>
>The LFG window in EQ1 is probably the thing I miss the most. It is simple to
>look and suggest an alt to someone looking for people.
>
>

This is true. At least they are trying in WoW though with the standing
stones at dungeon and other instance entrances where you can register
your desire to group for that instance. It's not prefect yet but they
are improving it. Unfortunately a lot of players haven't realised they
exist yet but that will hopefully change as news gets around and more
folks start to use them.

BB.
June 1, 2005 4:59:42 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

"krisia" wrote

>I agree, the end goal of a game should be fun.
> Too bad, SOE has another agenda. To make you enjoy the game
> THEIR way. As a result, they can FEK up any fun to be had, with all
> their ludicrous rules, feked up implementations and bugs.
> (Zek, for example, putting solo instances in a zone where you have to
> take a access quest boat ride... lol)

Except you don't HAVE to do the access quest to access Zek
or any other primary zone - Antonica, Commonlands, Zek,
Enchanted Lands, Rivervale, Feerott, Everfrost, and Lavastorm
(and most of the primary dungeons) are all open access, just
level-restricted. You can get there earlier by doing an access
quest which requires grouping or simply wait until you level.
No big deal.
Anonymous
a b 4 Gaming
a b Ý World of Warcraft
June 1, 2005 7:44:41 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

Marcel Beaudoin <mbeaudoin@scintrextrace.com> wrote in
news:Xns9667546B9E5AAmbeausympaticoca@130.133.1.4:

> wrat@panix.com (the wharf rat) wrote in news:D 7fqeu$fiq$1
> @reader1.panix.com:
>
>> In article <1117377962.234381.102110@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
>> Mike Shea <mshea01@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>Offer a method for alt tracking.
>>
>> Boo on that! Boo, I say! :-) Hey, if I wanted people to be
>> able
>> to find me no matter who I was playing I'd name all my character's
>> JoesAltYesJustSendATellandIllLogMyMainAndComeBuffYouOrWhatever.
>>
>>>- Add in a system that lets low level players and high level players
>>>group together.
>>
>> Now *that's* a good idea.
>
> See CoH's Sidekicking or Exemplaring for one way that has been
> implemented.
>
>

And EQ2s mentoring.

--
On Erollisi Marr in <Sanctuary of Marr>
Ancient Graeme Faelban, Barbarian Soothsayer of 70 seasons

On Steamfont in <Insanity Plea>
Graeme, 28 Dwarven Mystic, 24 Sage, Retired
Aviv, 15 Gnome Brawler, 30 Provisioner, Retired
Anonymous
a b 4 Gaming
a b Ý World of Warcraft
June 1, 2005 7:45:52 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

"krisia" <krisia@mail.com> wrote in news:1117556635.091322.127830
@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com:

> I agree, the end goal of a game should be fun.
> Too bad, SOE has another agenda. To make you enjoy the game
> THEIR way. As a result, they can FEK up any fun to be had, with all
> their ludicrous rules, feked up implementations and bugs.
> (Zek, for example, putting solo instances in a zone where you have to
> take a access quest boat ride... lol)
>

You don't have to do the access quest to get to Zek, that just allows you
to get there at an earlier level.

--
On Erollisi Marr in <Sanctuary of Marr>
Ancient Graeme Faelban, Barbarian Soothsayer of 70 seasons

On Steamfont in <Insanity Plea>
Graeme, 28 Dwarven Mystic, 24 Sage, Retired
Aviv, 15 Gnome Brawler, 30 Provisioner, Retired
Anonymous
a b 4 Gaming
a b Ý World of Warcraft
June 1, 2005 9:59:23 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

Graeme Faelban <RichardRapier@netscape.net> wrote in
news:Xns9668632102ADFrichardrapiernetscap@130.133.1.4:

> Marcel Beaudoin <mbeaudoin@scintrextrace.com> wrote in
> news:Xns9667546B9E5AAmbeausympaticoca@130.133.1.4:
>
>> wrat@panix.com (the wharf rat) wrote in news:D 7fqeu$fiq$1
>> @reader1.panix.com:
>>
>>> In article <1117377962.234381.102110@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
>>> Mike Shea <mshea01@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>- Add in a system that lets low level players and high level players
>>>>group together.
>>>
>>> Now *that's* a good idea.
>>
>> See CoH's Sidekicking or Exemplaring for one way that has been
>> implemented.
>
> And EQ2s mentoring.

Not having played EQ2, how does the mentoring work??

In CoH, here is how it works:

Sidekicking - This is used when a higher level player wants to play with
a lower level player. The lower level player is brought up to one level
below the higher level player. Their base damage, accuracy, resistances,
and whatever other powers they have are brought up to that level. Their
hitpoints are brought up to what their hitpoints would be at that level.
They also gain experience as if they were that level.

Exemplaring - This is when a lower level player invites a higher level
player to play down at their level. The higher level player has his level
lowered to that of the lower player. Any powers/abilities s/he got above
that level are no longer available. Thier HP, base damage, resistances,
accuracy, are all brought down to the base at that level. Any bonuses
they have remain. In addition, they work off XP debt at twice the rate,
and once their XP debt is all completed, they make influence ($$$) at a
pretty decent rate.

--
Marcel
http://mudbunny.blogspot.com/
Anonymous
a b 4 Gaming
a b Ý World of Warcraft
June 1, 2005 9:59:24 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

Marcel Beaudoin wrote:

> Not having played EQ2, how does the mentoring work??
>
> In CoH, here is how it works:
>
> Sidekicking - This is used when a higher level player wants to play with
> a lower level player. The lower level player is brought up to one level
> below the higher level player. Their base damage, accuracy, resistances,
> and whatever other powers they have are brought up to that level. Their
> hitpoints are brought up to what their hitpoints would be at that level.
> They also gain experience as if they were that level.
>
> Exemplaring - This is when a lower level player invites a higher level
> player to play down at their level. The higher level player has his level
> lowered to that of the lower player. Any powers/abilities s/he got above
> that level are no longer available. Thier HP, base damage, resistances,
> accuracy, are all brought down to the base at that level. Any bonuses
> they have remain. In addition, they work off XP debt at twice the rate,
> and once their XP debt is all completed, they make influence ($$$) at a
> pretty decent rate.
>

The answer would be Exemplaring. The higher level steps down to the
lower levels ah...level. Loosing all the skills learned beyond that point.

--
Fingon Grancoeur, Paladin of Resolute on Lucan D'Lere
Anonymous
a b 4 Gaming
a b Ý World of Warcraft
June 2, 2005 1:11:07 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

ModernCelt <sywscott@ptd.net> wrote in
news:bNKcnQvoFtvUngPfUSdV9g@ptd.net:

> Marcel Beaudoin wrote:
>
>> Not having played EQ2, how does the mentoring work??
>>
>> In CoH, here is how it works:
>>
>> Sidekicking - This is used when a higher level player wants to play
>> with a lower level player. The lower level player is brought up to
>> one level below the higher level player. Their base damage, accuracy,
>> resistances, and whatever other powers they have are brought up to
>> that level. Their hitpoints are brought up to what their hitpoints
>> would be at that level. They also gain experience as if they were
>> that level.
>>
>> Exemplaring - This is when a lower level player invites a higher
>> level player to play down at their level. The higher level player has
>> his level lowered to that of the lower player. Any powers/abilities
>> s/he got above that level are no longer available. Thier HP, base
>> damage, resistances, accuracy, are all brought down to the base at
>> that level. Any bonuses they have remain. In addition, they work off
>> XP debt at twice the rate, and once their XP debt is all completed,
>> they make influence ($$$) at a pretty decent rate.
>>
>
> The answer would be Exemplaring. The higher level steps down to the
> lower levels ah...level. Loosing all the skills learned beyond that
> point.
>

As far as skills and powers go, yes. Also the equipment worn is reduced
in effectiveness to the level in question.

--
On Erollisi Marr in <Sanctuary of Marr>
Ancient Graeme Faelban, Barbarian Soothsayer of 70 seasons

On Steamfont in <Insanity Plea>
Graeme, 28 Dwarven Mystic, 24 Sage, Retired
Aviv, 15 Gnome Brawler, 30 Provisioner, Retired
Anonymous
a b 4 Gaming
a b Ý World of Warcraft
June 2, 2005 5:16:48 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

42 wrote:
> In article <1117628826.093014.147120@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> bombaymix@altavista.co.uk says...
>
> > A reverse LFG flag would be good, ie a group can advertise they are
> > looking for a player of type X to kill y.
>
> EQ1 has that. Does EQ2 really lack it?

It does lack it and I found that to be very annoying because I used it
a lot in EQ1. When you can't find a group but you have found one other
player you have a choice - group and effectively remove yourself from
the list of people LFG or don't group in the hopes that you can find a
larger group. If you do the first you have the option of shouting in
OOC every now again to find more but that's not ideal.

Maybe they thought that nobody ever used it. It was certainly less
used than LFG when I played EQ1.

steve.kaye
June 2, 2005 11:50:47 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

In article <1117628826.093014.147120@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
bombaymix@altavista.co.uk says...

> A reverse LFG flag would be good, ie a group can advertise they are
> looking for a player of type X to kill y.

EQ1 has that. Does EQ2 really lack it?
June 2, 2005 1:32:10 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

In article <1117700208.746337.214680@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
nospam@giddy-kippers.co.uk says...
>
>
> 42 wrote:
> > In article <1117628826.093014.147120@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> > bombaymix@altavista.co.uk says...
> >
> > > A reverse LFG flag would be good, ie a group can advertise they are
> > > looking for a player of type X to kill y.
> >
> > EQ1 has that. Does EQ2 really lack it?
>
> It does lack it and I found that to be very annoying because I used it
> a lot in EQ1. When you can't find a group but you have found one other
> player you have a choice - group and effectively remove yourself from
> the list of people LFG or don't group in the hopes that you can find a
> larger group. If you do the first you have the option of shouting in
> OOC every now again to find more but that's not ideal.

Of course, you can check the lfg tool every few minutes to find more. It
beats OOC... barely. (depending on its usage level.)


> Maybe they thought that nobody ever used it. It was certainly less
> used than LFG when I played EQ1.

That's true, but I've never understood why. The LFP tool was in some
ways better than LFG. Someone could login, check the LFP, and fire off a
tell to join a group... instead of passively waiting to get picked up.

It was also more effective, because asking to join a group is far more
likely to get you into a group then waiting to be asked, just in
general, especially for more generic "dps/utility" classes... like
bards, rogues, necros, mages, druids, ... anyone but clerics really
;) ... they get tapped for group invites even when they're obviously busy
to anyone with half a brain. "Hi there, I failed completely to see that
your non-anon cleric is in an instanced raid zone. Want to join a BoT
group??"

For my part I would often see people wandering around passively LFG but
didn't need them and didn't care enough to ask them join. But if they
actually came up and politely asked to join, or even just sent a tell...
I almost never turned someone down.
Anonymous
a b 4 Gaming
a b Ý World of Warcraft
June 2, 2005 8:05:48 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

"steve.kaye" <nospam@giddy-kippers.co.uk> wrote in
news:1117700208.746337.214680@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

>
>
> 42 wrote:
>> In article <1117628826.093014.147120@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
>> bombaymix@altavista.co.uk says...
>>
>> > A reverse LFG flag would be good, ie a group can advertise they are
>> > looking for a player of type X to kill y.
>>
>> EQ1 has that. Does EQ2 really lack it?
>
> It does lack it and I found that to be very annoying because I used it
> a lot in EQ1. When you can't find a group but you have found one other
> player you have a choice - group and effectively remove yourself from
> the list of people LFG or don't group in the hopes that you can find a
> larger group. If you do the first you have the option of shouting in
> OOC every now again to find more but that's not ideal.
>
> Maybe they thought that nobody ever used it. It was certainly less
> used than LFG when I played EQ1.
>

Personally, I found the LFP to be pretty much useless, as almost noone
seems to use it, at least on EMarr.

--
On Erollisi Marr in <Sanctuary of Marr>
Ancient Graeme Faelban, Barbarian Soothsayer of 70 seasons

On Steamfont in <Insanity Plea>
Graeme, 33 Dwarven Mystic, 24 Sage, Treasure Hunter
Aviv, 15 Gnome Brawler, 30 Provisioner
!