Equipment, a lottery.

[Dan]

So 15 in 300 kills, which of all breaks in 2-10 hours, which also is what i've been seeing.

Relying on using dulling weaponry I had to change to different weapontypes as it was physically impossible to keep up with weapons breaking. 225 weapons broken 20 new ones found by myself, rest bought on AH or stockpiled before changing to that weapon type, finally after 2 month ran totally dry on the weapontype and was forced to change.

10 hours for a dull to break vs nondulls 90 hours + imbueworthyness, the dulling weaponry should either be made to be more durable and last longer than today or their droprates 9 doubled compared to nondulls.

Dulling weaponry has become 'too dull'....

[Cherek]

Riva: I see. Well, that's certainly an option.

Dan: I do agree that unbrekable vs not unbreakable stuff is problematic, and droprates should perhaps take this into account more too. (I believe it already does, at least in some cases). Personally, I don't really like the _concept_ of unbreakable stuff, but when I play as a mortal I love using unbreakable stuff... Although, the unbreakable stuff doesn't lasts 90 days if actually used. But, 96 hours (4 days) vs 10-12 hours is still a big difference.

[Dakhor]

To keep levels more or less steady, droprates for these kind of items need to be lower than 5%... and with such low droprates, you can kill something 30, 40, 50, even more times, without getting your sought after item. Which of course is frustrating for the individual player...

From my conversations with players it is clear that many of them are actually convinced that the drop rate for items of worth is in all practical accounts 0% and that lasts until an item or two of worth already in the game breaks.

So when items in the game are at their "cap" it is pointless to kill the boss as it will in practical terms "never" drop the item you want.

Another solution is the decrease the gap between tier 1 and tier 2, 3, etc items. Because what piece of equipmen is so good that without it the game is "almost unplayable"? If we have items that are so far superior to any other alternatives, so that a player feel they _HAVE_ to use it, or the game is not worth playing, then I think perhaps the problem is with those items, and the big gap between the best EQ and the rest of the pack?

This I agree with

/DaK

[Tapakah]

A way to go could be disallowing two pieces of the same equipment in the same container (of a certain type).
E.g. a guild sword rack can't hold more than one FBB. If a second is added, it is rejected by the rack.

Would only apply to containers that are not on players or mounts.

[Drazson]

There's the floor, cheapo bags to put 1 item into each, etc.

[Tapakah]

floors and bags do not save.

[Cherek]

To keep levels more or less steady, droprates for these kind of items need to be lower than 5%... and with such low droprates, you can kill something 30, 40, 50, even more times, without getting your sought after item. Which of course is frustrating for the individual player...

From my conversations with players it is clear that many of them are actually convinced that the drop rate for items of worth is in all practical accounts 0% and that lasts until an item or two of worth already in the game breaks.

So when items in the game are at their "cap" it is pointless to kill the boss as it will in practical terms "never" drop the item you want.

That is how it was many years ago, and many players probably still believe that is how it works. Apart from the common board posts about the subject when things have been adjusted, me and other wizards try to explain that the old truth isn't true anymore when this discussion comes up - but it's obviously hard to get the message across to all players, so the old truths live on.

The old system was changed several years ago to prevent "recycling" of items.

Most of you reading this probably know what "recyling" means, but for any new players who weren't around back then, I'll briefly explain it. So, in the old system there was a maximum number of allowed copies of the best stuff. For example, for crystal axes I think the number was 5. When there were 5 copies in the game, no more would drop until a copy was removed from the game. When something was about to break, the old way of getting a new copy was to drop it in the lake in Sybarus, and then go camp the NPC who has it until you get a new one. This strategy meant a guild, or a player, could keep things almost indefinitely. For example, if the maximum number of allowed crystal axes was 5, the Neidars could successfully keep all five by "recycling" them at the end of their life, not allowing anyone else a chance to ever get one. This wasn't a good system, because then the droprate would indeed be 0% if all 5 axes were alreadly cloned. It also gave guilds a way to prevent other players from ever getting the sought after item.

And just to be clear, I am just using Neidars and crystal axe as example here, everyone did this, myself included, and it was of course perfectly fine to do so. It was good strategy. But from a game design point, not very fun for anyone who didn't possess these coveted items...

So, a bunch of years ago the system changed, and now there is no limit on the number of copies of items, and whether it breaks or not has no effect on the chance a new one will drop. So, removing a copy of an item from the game doesn't increase the chance of getting a new one.

The rate is somewhat variable, though, but it has to do with how often something is cloned rather than how many copies are present. Basically, if ZERO sword X has been cloned in a long time, you might have a bigger chance of getting one for a time, but if you get three in a row all of a sudden, the chance might decrease a bit for some time after that. This is to get a more even distribution of items over time rather than relying on random chance completely.