Equipment, a lottery.

[nils]

There is a saying in my language that translates to "Lucky in games, unlucky in love", that we frequently quote with great passion and envy at those who win at games left purely to chance. There are many who enjoy games of chance, and some of them even win often. Me, I never win at games of chance, because I never play them. I never play them because it doesn't involve any skill, attribute, ability, item or what have you. When a game is 100% left to chance, it's a boring game, a game I'd avoid. Like Yahtzee. Fuck Yahtzee.

Genesis is not a game of chance by nature, but I find myself coming up short daily, sometimes many times a day.

Today I've been feeling a little woozy, so I made a mistake. I stupidly left my computer for 13 hours while my character was standing in a room waiting for a mob to spawn. Obviously this was a risky mistake to make, but it nevertheless happened and I felt kinda embarassed.

Anyway, while I was standing there the mob spawned seven times, people came and killed it and got no reward for it. So even if I had sat here on my computer and actively tended the mob's presence as patient as humanly possible, I would still get no reward in 13 hours?

People, this system has got to go! The idea of making equipment hunting a game of chance has been proven to not work. What happened to skill or size requirement, sense of accomplishment, making friends and gather them to form a temporary hunting party to get a legendary item?

All of these reasons to play, reduced to a toss of the dice? No. Bad design. Bad. Bad.

Again, I dislike notes that only point at a problem without suggesting options, so.. here goes:

Increase the difficulty of the mobs themselves while greatly increasing the spawn rate.
But Nils, how difficult should said mobs be then? If they're too easy we'll flood the game with items and if they're too hard then nobody will get their hands on them.

Yes, you're absolutely right. So imagine yourself as a player then (I know this is hard for some..). One of the ground rules for grinding has always been that a team of 3 is perfect, 4 is ok but meh and 5 is too many, but with some exceptions can be made if bringing along one or more much smaller players.

So there's a theoretical minimum requirement. 5 players.
Ofcourse there are variations here too, one could say that size of said 5 players doesn't matter, just that they have to be 5. Another would be that they'd have to be 5, but also myth, depending on the reward. Also, in some cases, the size of the team could dictate the actual item spawned, if said mob had options.

Have the mob spawn only with the item, but spawn less frequently.
I like this one less, for several reasons, many of the mobs being quest-givers is one. It still makes one travel stupid long distances only to find the room empty. Meh. Discard.

Fixed spawn rates
Currently the spawn rate of items is directly related to the amount a mob is killed. In case of very good items, the mob is rarely alive more than a couple minutes before it meets it's maker, and as such the spawn rates plummet and the game becomes a boring game of chance.
Fixed spawn rates, albeit low, at least keeps "campers" from lowering the odds for others. It's still shit, but less shit than the current.

Feel free to agree below! Or not.. Debate is good. Yes.

[Cherek]

Your idea of beefing up bosses is absolutely a reasonable suggestion that could make gear hunting more fun. Of course, some players will likely be upset if we did this, since fewer people will be able to get the best EQ. A change like this would probably benefit the supermyths most, and especially "supermyth groupings" (a bunch of big powergrinders who often play together).

Is that a good thing? Well, you can argue both for and against that, as with anything

While the random chance of today obviously can feel a bit boring and frustrating, at least it opens up elite gear-hunting for a relatively large part of the population. Beefing up the mobs considerably and/or requiring teams and/or myth mortal level would likely be fun for some players, but it might also more or less remove the possibility of getting a piece of great equipment until you're myth (or beyond).

This is of course not a new discussion. Beefing up bosses has been on the table many times in the past, but it never happened for reasons long forgotten... But, let's say we do want to bump up some bosses (hypothetically speaking). Which mob(s) would be good first candidates if we decided to try something like this out?

[Nerull]

To control the inflation of certain items of power, there are other ways to control it while maintaining 100% drops.

1. Rare spawns, 100% dropchance. Spawns x times per armageddon, but always drops x.
2. Often paired with 1, but increased loottable. It always drops _something_ useful for some player in the game, but not necessarily the sword you want.

I'm a fan of both these as regulating inflow of items to the game.


Thoughts?

[nils]

Cherek,

Yes, I'm quite sure I've wallowed in despair over this ludicrous practice before, seeing as with most games, the highest rewards are paid out at the end. Whereas in gene we play the lottery for them, completely omitting any benefit of investments into age, size or skill to access from the top shelf.

As for those who stand to benefit most being "supermyth groupings" I find your tone offensive and derogatory. Genesis must be the only game where the administration and other creators look down upon those who play the game too long or get too good. Like it's self-fucking-evident that a newbie should have equal access to the top shelf as a "supermyth". There is no room for equality here, but do please apply your scandinavian socialist ideals to guild balancing.

Seriously though, simply requiring 5 players and not 5 huge players is really a way to go. Imagine a bunch of cadets kill something great because they were able to just get the numbers! Not all encounters have to be difficult beyond that point!

Moving right on to which mobs can be beefed up as an experiment. The ones that instantly pop into my head as "hot spots of unluck" are:
Emerald/greenie in Flotsam
Eldar in Terel Goblin hideout
Garren in Neraka
Octopus in Avenir
Orc Captain in Emerald
Alert human in Faerun
Abomination in the Necronisi
Barash-Gund in Middle Earth

There are probably many more that I don't frequent very often, so I guess another way of gathering the information you seek is through your actual logs. Since the spawn rate is directly related to the amout of times a mob has been slain it's simply a matter of taking the ten mobs with the lowest chance of spawning a good item and start there.

[Arman]

I find your tone offensive and derogatory.

lol. Pot. Kettle.

If you want to be taken with any seriousness Nils, less of the melodrama.

[nils]

If you want to be taken with any seriousness Nils, less of the melodrama.

That's your contribution?

[Arman]

If you want to be taken with any seriousness Nils, less of the melodrama.

That's your contribution?

I could write a treatise on the topic, but yes.

[nils]

I could write a treatise on the topic, but yes.

Then I urge you to write it in Flames so I can give proper reply.

[Taro]

To control the inflation of certain items of power, there are other ways to control it while maintaining 100% drops.

1. Rare spawns, 100% dropchance. Spawns x times per armageddon, but always drops x.
2. Often paired with 1, but increased loottable. It always drops _something_ useful for some player in the game, but not necessarily the sword you want.

I'm a fan of both these as regulating inflow of items to the game.


Thoughts?

Personally, I'd like this more than what we have now. Even without the guaranteed chance, increasing the loottable will at least make things more flexible in the unluck regard. Regardless, I do think the spawn rartes should be adjusted to be more generous than they are now for certain things.

[nils]

A system where whenever an item breaks forces an increase of the the spawn rate on said item could be a quick and effective band-aid on the current. It could even out some of the differences in regards to dulling.