We have detected that cookies are not enabled on your browser. Please enable cookies to ensure the proper experience.
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 38
  1. #1

    Exclamation Why not make everything account bound

    Standing Still Games,

    For a long time I could understand that the stuff we do on landscape while questing should be character bound. But then came the flowers. First they were character bound since they were found on landscape. Then they were account bound after a lot of complaining and feedback. I also understand that they were basically "mined" like ore so it should be only natural that you can send it to another character if needed. So in order for the flowers to stay in the wallet and be account bound, we somehow skipped the "natural" way up untill this point.

    But then you examine more... Emblems of Nimrodel are from an instance. Vile bronze and silver coins are from an instance. Long-lost coins are from an instance. All these, possibly even more, are not account bound, these are character bound. So, in some cases landscape can be account bound and in some cases instance can be character bound? What determines this paradox?

    So, since we already have a lot of grind in the game, which is sometimes also needed, can we then at least consolidate all currency and barter items to be account bound? I would also like to see the gold cap go up by the current base number of 10k gold multiplied by whatever number of free character slots we have available. Then make those slots a little bit more expensive and add a cap raise with every slot purchase. I honestly don't think that some characters Minas Tirith builder token or Host of the West will make a dent in already piled up main character who got the North Ithilien steed. Nor will we have any use of a few more branches from Lothlorien or 30 more leaves from Fangorn (current number on mini, some have 0, warden has around 500). It's just a convenience in a game that loves grind.

    I'm pretty sure that it would be seen as a great quality of life addition even if it would do nothing much. I have been alting 100 times to get recipes with Long-Lost coins, then to craft the essences, then to finally send them all to the character that needs them. I could have done all the recipe barter from 1 character.

    Same goes for taxidermy, festivals and item advancement.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    32

    Thumbs up

    Yes please.
    Valthier -- Landroval Server
    freefolk.enjin.com -- The Free Folk Role-playing Community

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Bristol, England
    Posts
    7,100
    Quote Originally Posted by Gandalphor View Post
    But then you examine more... Emblems of Nimrodel are from an instance. Vile bronze and silver coins are from an instance. Long-lost coins are from an instance. All these, possibly even more, are not account bound, these are character bound. So, in some cases landscape can be account bound and in some cases instance can be character bound? What determines this paradox?
    Simple answer: really, in an MMORPG nothing should be account bound, there should be no such thing. That's because in an RPG it's all about the characters and the game shouldn't recognise the player as an entity at all. The devs have blurred that line a lot over the years but not entirely (or consistently), and it's mistaken to expect it to be.in a game like this. The devs expect you to grind (some) stuff you want for a character with that same character, rather than to (say) grind it all with your main and then twink your alts. The thing you need to bear in mind is how they make money from an F2P game, they can't make things too easy for you. (In other words they like to sell you convenience, and ration it, not just hand it out for nothing).

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by Radhruin_EU View Post
    Simple answer: really, in an MMORPG nothing should be account bound, there should be no such thing. That's because in an RPG it's all about the characters and the game shouldn't recognise the player as an entity at all. The devs have blurred that line a lot over the years but not entirely (or consistently), and it's mistaken to expect it to be.in a game like this. The devs expect you to grind (some) stuff you want for a character with that same character, rather than to (say) grind it all with your main and then twink your alts. The thing you need to bear in mind is how they make money from an F2P game, they can't make things too easy for you. (In other words they like to sell you convenience, and ration it, not just hand it out for nothing).
    Explain to me how you lose money by taxidermy items becing account bound while you were doing slayer deeds in some region or instance, most likely with a deed accelerator you bought from store.
    Explain to me how you lose money by some landscape trading item which is long surpassed, like Lothlorien branches or whatever you want to take as an example.
    How do you lose money if you use Long-Lost coins from all your characters by alting from one to another or just doing it from one?
    This is not losing money, it's players losing time. It's a convenient change, not money losing one. Except if you want to argue they could add something in that time that could bring them money. Then I said, raise the price of character slots and add an account wide gold cap raise to it, since gold would be acc wide too. Money maker.
    The currency is there for you to use. With the inconvenience of logging out and in several times.

    I don't mind the grind that has some purpose. I do my scroll of empowerment grind, gear grind, etc. I do my quests, epics, deeds and what not. I would only like that once I get something I do not have to alt around to every character I have to get a bunch of recipes, for example. I'll get them, one way or another. Acc bound or not, that won't prevent me. It would just make it easier and show a bit of appreciation to the players still sticking around for this game.

    I am not asking for acc wide reputation. Experience the story on another class, get reputation for it, relive it from another perspective, get your reputation standing and become a "Minstrel of no small skill", "Warden of no small skill" or whatever you like. But some things are from some point on more inconvenience than sense and logic.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Bristol, England
    Posts
    7,100
    Quote Originally Posted by Gandalphor View Post
    Explain to me how you lose money by taxidermy items becing account bound while you were doing slayer deeds in some region or instance, most likely with a deed accelerator you bought from store.
    Explain to me how you lose money by some landscape trading item which is long surpassed, like Lothlorien branches or whatever you want to take as an example.
    Because it might be a heck of a lot easier to grind with your main than with your alts. Of course it's about time - if you want this it's to save you time, but they'd rather you pay for the privilege of convenience rather than just handing it to you.

    I don't mind the grind that has some purpose.
    You're not looking at the big picture - what purpose does grind serve from a game design point of view?

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Radhruin_EU View Post
    Because it might be a heck of a lot easier to grind with your main than with your alts. Of course it's about time - if you want this it's to save you time, but they'd rather you pay for the privilege of convenience rather than just handing it to you.


    You're not looking at the big picture - what purpose does grind serve from a game design point of view?
    There's nothing easier about it on the main. You get some stuff while doing slayer deeds, instances, etc. You do it on most characters probably. And all of those can barter it and place it in your home. There is no need for you to alt around to find where that thing is. And you might have a hunter or warden who may travel faster to the region and home. Some of that stuff is so trivial that it should have been acc wide 5 years ago.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Bristol, England
    Posts
    7,100
    Quote Originally Posted by Gandalphor View Post
    There's nothing easier about it on the main.
    Err... rubbish, that depends on the class and level of your main as opposed to the alts you want to twink.

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by Radhruin_EU View Post
    You're not looking at the big picture - what purpose does grind serve from a game design point of view?
    It is not possible for a game design studio like SSG to create enough content to keep us busy. It is not unusual for a customer to burn though all the content that took six months to make in a three days.

    They need a way to keep us busy for the 179 days. Each quarter - 3 months is actually 91 days long with one or two days tacked on the end of the year to get to the 365 or 366 days.

    The way it is done is via a hamster wheel tech. Repeatable Content you have to do over and over and over. Plus making the content only count for the single character that did the content. Some examples:

    1) Deeds
    2) Quests
    3) Reputation
    4) Crafting
    5) Level your Skirmish stats
    6) Level you Epic battle stats
    7) Disposable legendary items that you have to keep replacing
    8) Eventually you get a permanent legendary item. You have to spend time improving it.
    9) All the disposable gear as you level up.

    These games are all designed around hamster wheel tech so that you do not quit and go play something else until the next content update.

    Repeat to improve your character. Repeat for a different class character. On and on and on.
    Unless stated otherwise, all content in this post is My Personal Opinion.

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by Radhruin_EU View Post
    Simple answer: really, in an MMORPG nothing should be account bound, there should be no such thing. That's because in an RPG it's all about the characters and the game shouldn't recognise the player as an entity at all. The devs have blurred that line a lot over the years but not entirely (or consistently), and it's mistaken to expect it to be.in a game like this. The devs expect you to grind (some) stuff you want for a character with that same character, rather than to (say) grind it all with your main and then twink your alts. The thing you need to bear in mind is how they make money from an F2P game, they can't make things too easy for you. (In other words they like to sell you convenience, and ration it, not just hand it out for nothing).
    You are of course wrong. Lotro is not rpg by your own words. lol

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Wales, United Kingdom
    Posts
    7,135
    Quote Originally Posted by Gandalphor View Post
    There's nothing easier about it on the main.
    If I were to take my hunter or minstrel to fangorn to grind out leaves, they can cover tht content in ten mins or less. If I were to take my LM, who is very poorly geared, lacks class skills and I'm not that great at playing, she would take an hour

    That said. I would love to see all landscape barter become account bound. My hunter could still only do dailies once per day, so the amount of speeding up done would be very minimal anyway, and, my hunter can grind leaves for my LM the way it is already if needed, so it makes very little difference.
    Monkeys are superior to man in this . . . . When a monkey looks in a mirror, he sees a monkey.
    Edited, because some folk just can't do wordplay.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Bristol, England
    Posts
    7,100
    Quote Originally Posted by siipperi View Post
    You are of course wrong. Lotro is not rpg by your own words. lol
    By my own words, LOTRO is pretty poor as an RPG because (amongst other things) it already overtly recognises the player account for some things, so the point is not to make that even worse by having a whole bunch more stuff go by account rather than by character.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Bristol, England
    Posts
    7,100
    Quote Originally Posted by Yula_the_Mighty View Post
    It is not possible for a game design studio like SSG to create enough content to keep us busy. It is not unusual for a customer to burn though all the content that took six months to make in a three days.

    They need a way to keep us busy for the 179 days. Each quarter - 3 months is actually 91 days long with one or two days tacked on the end of the year to get to the 365 or 366 days.

    The way it is done is via a hamster wheel tech. Repeatable Content you have to do over and over and over. Plus making the content only count for the single character that did the content. Some examples:

    1) Deeds
    2) Quests
    3) Reputation
    4) Crafting
    5) Level your Skirmish stats
    6) Level you Epic battle stats
    7) Disposable legendary items that you have to keep replacing
    8) Eventually you get a permanent legendary item. You have to spend time improving it.
    9) All the disposable gear as you level up.

    These games are all designed around hamster wheel tech so that you do not quit and go play something else until the next content update.

    Repeat to improve your character. Repeat for a different class character. On and on and on.
    Yup, that's exactly what I was getting at with that rhetorical question. Busywork, timesinks, content rationing. Plus in an F2P game they'll dial up the grind in hopes of selling you stuff to make it less grindy.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,853
    So when Bilbo wanted to give sting to Frodo, he couldn't, as this LI was bound to character.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Bristol, England
    Posts
    7,100
    Quote Originally Posted by thinx View Post
    So when Bilbo wanted to give sting to Frodo, he couldn't, as this LI was bound to character.
    There are good reasons for having character binding as a game mechanic, so deal.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,853
    Quote Originally Posted by Radhruin_EU View Post
    There are good reasons for having character binding as a game mechanic, so deal.
    :-)
    more words.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Orem
    Posts
    971
    Quote Originally Posted by Radhruin_EU View Post
    Because it might be a heck of a lot easier to grind with your main than with your alts. Of course it's about time - if you want this it's to save you time, but they'd rather you pay for the privilege of convenience rather than just handing it to you.


    You're not looking at the big picture - what purpose does grind serve from a game design point of view?
    First off I want to say your not listening he said to make it cost more per character slot because of the change which actually will bring in more money not lose it first off and second off the account wide idea means you can get geared out sooner which will make you able to and want to work on new areas and by this you will need to buy new area which will bring in more money and also it will reduce lag by 10% by my calculations because you will not have 2-40 characters per account worth of access numbers because of not being account bound and if you don't believe numbers of worthless info makes lag then ask in arkenstone about the great goat lag a guy posted goat 4000000000 times into world chat and bogged down the hole server because of typing goat that many time it does cause lag.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Bristol, England
    Posts
    7,100
    Quote Originally Posted by Zepherzaper View Post
    First off I want to say your not listening he said to make it cost more per character slot because of the change which actually will bring in more money not lose it first off and second off the account wide idea means you can get geared out sooner which will make you able to and want to work on new areas and by this you will need to buy new area which will bring in more money and also it will reduce lag by 10% by my calculations because you will not have 2-40 characters per account worth of access numbers because of not being account bound and if you don't believe numbers of worthless info makes lag then ask in arkenstone about the great goat lag a guy posted goat 4000000000 times into world chat and bogged down the hole server because of typing goat that many time it does cause lag.
    The usual half-crazed gibberish from you, whatever it is you want you always say it'll being in more money. Change the record, sick of hearing it

    They do NOT want people getting geared up really fast or ripping through the content faster.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Orem
    Posts
    971
    Quote Originally Posted by Radhruin_EU View Post
    The usual half-crazed gibberish from you, whatever it is you want you always say it'll being in more money. Change the record, sick of hearing it

    They do NOT want people getting geared up really fast or ripping through the content faster.
    ok well when ever you don't like it or someone else says they don't want something they always bring the fact of money into it. so I have to ask what is it about me using your methods against you is it you don't like your trash thrown in your face? or what?

    away I am only countering your bullcrap and everyone else's when they say it will cost to much or take money away from them or any of the other trash you say to hate on a idea because you personally hate the idea.

    not to mention it is true that less problems makes players want to stay and less lag make people want to stay and more people means more money income chance for the company in which is supplying the content whether it be turbine or standing stone games or another company in the future it will always be true.

    ask any internet company what their highest selling point is and they will all say something along the lines of faster internet quicker download rates or no buffer time/little buffer time or lightning fast speeds or high quality if you apply the same things to any internet game or internet program you will get the same results which is more of your product sold and more customers telling others how great the product is bringing friends and family into using it which brings in more money which means better income and less hassle. This Will Always Be True.

    also I can defend this thread even better not using money I just like cramming your trash back in your face. here are some examples.

    this will reduce lag.
    this will help ungrind lotro.
    this will make dealing with sara oakheart walking slow as a turtle bearable.
    this will make redoing the epic line on lower characters funner.
    this will make you have a easier time playing.
    this will make you not have to alt so much.
    this will make you able to enjoy the low level content better.
    this will remove the need of having someone power level you.
    this will make you able to get the gear you want before you out level it on alts.
    this will remove the reason to have money bags in the vault keeper meaning less items needing loaded on the server removing some of the lag.
    this will add a reason to make a alt and enjoy the lower content again.

    I can go on I think that is enough proof though
    Last edited by Zepherzaper; Mar 25 2017 at 08:11 PM.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Bristol, England
    Posts
    7,100
    Quote Originally Posted by Zepherzaper View Post
    ok well when ever you don't like it or someone else says they don't want something they always bring the fact of money into it. so I have to ask what is it about me using your methods against you is it you don't like your trash thrown in your face? or what?

    away I am only countering your bullcrap and everyone else's when they say it will cost to much or take money away from them or any of the other trash you say to hate on a idea because you personally hate the idea.
    No, you're just doing what you always do, trying to use money as an all-purpose clinching argument with not even a shred of evidence. Just plain weak. (And weaker yet was using the word 'proof' when you haven't got any).

    As for the rest, the grind serves a purpose. It's not there 'just because'. it's by design. They're not going to do away with it just to suit you. You think it'd be a great idea to be able to rip through the game really fast - they plainly don't, and it's not hard to figure out why.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    843
    Any item that any characters can place into a house storage or vault shared storage should be account bound. Look at things from a realistic point of view. If a group of adventurers (your characters) can share a house and store items there, then all the adventurers with access to that house can have access to and use all the items stored there. The same goes for items stored in the wallet. Some items that are currently bound to character, should never have been designated as such.

    Take for example a Warden's Shield that is currently bound on acquire. Why is it bound to character? Bound to class and with required level etc I can understand, but are we really supposed to believe that if you don't want it for Warden 'A' you can't let Warden 'B' use it? One of my low level alts acquired a Boar Fountain that he installed in my house. That character was deleted to make room for a new character, but when I moved servers that fountain was no longer available to me because it belonged to a character deleted 3 years ago! WHY??? That was an item that should never have been bound to character. Or in a case that annoyed the hell out of me, opening boxes at a festival, I got THREE of the same horse on one of my characters and none for any other character, so why the hell were they bound on acquire rather than to account?

    The whole system needs to be totally re-examined to see what should actually be bound to character rather than to account!

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Bristol, England
    Posts
    7,100
    Quote Originally Posted by Wof View Post
    Any item that any characters can place into a house storage or vault shared storage should be account bound. Look at things from a realistic point of view. If a group of adventurers (your characters) can share a house and store items there, then all the adventurers with access to that house can have access to and use all the items stored there. The same goes for items stored in the wallet. Some items that are currently bound to character, should never have been designated as such.
    That's totally the wrong way round, items being character-bound predates housing so it's daft to say they should 'never' have been designated that way.

    Really, housing should be character-specific, not tied to account at all. The idea of characters from a given account being a 'group' who know each other is actually mistaken - it was simply expedient for Turbine to treat housing that way, not really the right thing to do in any broader sense.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    843
    Quote Originally Posted by Radhruin_EU View Post
    That's totally the wrong way round, items being character-bound predates housing so it's daft to say they should 'never' have been designated that way.

    Really, housing should be character-specific, not tied to account at all. The idea of characters from a given account being a 'group' who know each other is actually mistaken - it was simply expedient for Turbine to treat housing that way, not really the right thing to do in any broader sense.
    So characters specifically built to work in cooperation with each other, supplying each other with raw materials, crafting items for each other and sharing the same house to store them in is unrealistic? They even combine their gold to pay the rent! So why shouldn't this 'adventurers' cooperative' have all their items bound to account (shared by the cooperative) rather than to character?

    Can you really imagine characters putting up with such an idea as 'bound to character' in the game?
    "Hey Gimli, lend us your sharpening stone, my sword has a nick in it."," Bog off Aragorn, you wouldn't let be borrow your flint and tinder last week. Get you own stone you lazy git!"

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Bristol, England
    Posts
    7,100
    Quote Originally Posted by Wof View Post
    So characters specifically built to work in cooperation with each other, supplying each other with raw materials, crafting items for each other and sharing the same house to store them in is unrealistic? They even combine their gold to pay the rent! So why shouldn't this 'adventurers' cooperative' have all their items bound to account (shared by the cooperative) rather than to character?
    I'm saying that the assumption that your characters all know each other and share all their stuff is bogus. Back in the old days when playing pen-and-paper RPGs, someone would always try to insist that different characters of theirs knew each other so they could use that as an excuse to twink their lower-level character with hand-me-downs. No sensible DM / GM / whatever would allow that - characters aren't meant to be part of some convenient meta-family just because they belong to the same player. That's the thing in an RPG, it should NEVER, EVER acknowledge the existence of the player as an entity. As I said earlier, Turbine have blurred that line quite enough already in the name of convenience; doing away with it entirely would be a nonsense.

    Can you really imagine characters putting up with such an idea as 'bound to character' in the game?
    Like I said, that serves a specific purpose: it's to keep things like quest reward items out of the game economy and is a consequence of having game mechanics where gear is all-important. Don't try to be funny about it, it's there for good reason.

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    59
    Quote Originally Posted by Gandalphor View Post
    . . . can we then at least consolidate all currency and barter items to be account bound? . . . Same goes for taxidermy, festivals and item advancement.
    I support this suggestion with exception of item advancement (tho I would like a means of reducing the grind for alts 2-9 to follow such as reward 5 starlits and 100 soes for the first capped LI with increases for subsequent completions so alt 9 would require minimal grind).

    As others have mentioned grind is designed into mmos to keep players playing the game by slowing down goal progression. There is false presumption that if a grind exists players will spend the time to grind it - this is an entertainment product, many will simply opt out. And out of the game as well. I personally I knew more than 20, and have met 4 since, who like myself left because of the 60 cap radiance and 65 Mirkwood craft plan grinds and stayed away for 3-4 years. It goes both ways, grind can serve to both retain and lose players.

    A far more entertaining and to my mind player-retention friendly model is to encourage the creation of alts to keep people playing (and I don't support increasing cost of char slots for this reason, make them cheaper, or cheaper past 10 or other number purchased to actively encourage the creation of alts). A number of games (eg SWTOR with its Legacy system where numbers of achievements are shared between alts) seek to reduce repetitive grinds which both facilitates and creates incentive for playing alts. Lotro has 10 years of content, 10 classes, regions with overlapping levels which would take at least 3 alts to play on level, the bones with bells on imo for moving away from grind, and yet the grind is of order one player referred to it as "alt-enmity". I play 30 hours a week, have had to abandon 4 characters and am in wait and see mode if I cull my current 3 to 2. There is a Significant Grind Problem imo when someone playing this many hours, who has in past been able to play 6-7 alts, is down to 2. I call it alt-hostile game design, but perhaps the stronger term alt-enmity is indeed merited.

    Shared taxidermy, festival and other barter tokens won't address this per se, but it does help. As one example, the only mini-instruments between lvl 40 and lvl 70 are barter recipes in Lothlorien. I don't make them because my woodworker would have to grind 8 repeatables per craft and which may well fail as a one shot recipe. While I would run out of branches from alts eventually at least some would get made. Grind mechanics can't make us grind - any among you willing to do 24 loth repeatables to finally crit a lvl 51 mini instrument?
    Last edited by Nonde; Mar 26 2017 at 09:44 PM.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    843
    Quote Originally Posted by Radhruin_EU View Post
    I'm saying that the assumption that your characters all know each other and share all their stuff is bogus. Back in the old days when playing pen-and-paper RPGs, someone would always try to insist that different characters of theirs knew each other so they could use that as an excuse to twink their lower-level character with hand-me-downs. No sensible DM / GM / whatever would allow that - characters aren't meant to be part of some convenient meta-family just because they belong to the same player. That's the thing in an RPG, it should NEVER, EVER acknowledge the existence of the player as an entity. As I said earlier, Turbine have blurred that line quite enough already in the name of convenience; doing away with it entirely would be a nonsense.
    Well since my characters were built SPECIFICALLY to share and work together, are all of the same race and whose RP state that they are all family, using the game's built in mechanic to 'adopt' the newer characters into the family, then obviously the game is deficient if they cannot behave as and be treated as a family. If the game is supposed to prevent this from happening then each character should be allowed to buy a separate house and there should be no shared storage available. So make your mind up one way or another. Can they be allowed to share materials, equipment and space? Or are they unknown to each other and not allowed to share anything but must 'trade' with each other as if they were all on different accounts? Because as it stands at the moment they neither one thing nor the other, they are an unrealistic mishmash of both!

    Quote Originally Posted by Radhruin_EU View Post
    Like I said, that serves a specific purpose: it's to keep things like quest reward items out of the game economy and is a consequence of having game mechanics where gear is all-important. Don't try to be funny about it, it's there for good reason.
    It was a light hearted joke to illustrate that fellowships work together and share resources, just as our characters should be allowed to do, whether it is a fellowship of separate players, or a constructed fellowship of characters from the same account working together.
    Last edited by Wof; Mar 27 2017 at 06:40 AM.

 

 
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

This form's session has expired. You need to reload the page.

Reload