Quest by level summary; lack of high-end content

[Gimpster]

self-ninja!

[Gimpster]

DDO has a problem of insufficient new quest content for high level characters, and it is frustrating to see low and mid-level quests added without addressing the more important shortcomings. In some threads (http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?t=112030), people have denied the existence of this problem, so I shall demonstrate it numerically below.

DDO has had 11 updates since release (counting the 4.2 update which is only on Risia so far, and the 3.3 update which had a new enhancement system but no quests). Let's define "Something to do" as "Quests at or above your level". Thus, for characters at the level cap, things to do include those quests at or above the level cap- of course they technically can do other stuff, but there generally won't be much challenge or reward.

The level cap was 10 at release, and increased to 12 with module 3 and 14 with module 4.

Here is a list of the number of quests at or above the level cap at the time of each update:
Release: 7
Module1: 9
Module2: 14
Update2.1: 14
Update2.2: 16
Module3: 7
Update3.1: 7
Update3.2: 7
Update3.3: 7
Module4: 5
Update4.1: 5
Update4.2: 5

The trend is obvious: as time went on, there were fewer and fewer quests at (or above) level cap. At first, there was a good pattern, where new high-level quests were added at several updates. But with module 3 that stopped, and from then on only modules themselves had quests at level-cap.

[Gimpster]

Here is a list of the number of quests of each level introduced in each update. This includes timed raids, but excludes non-quest exploration areas and 3 solo-only level 1 quests.

Quests in the updates
Release: 11x1, 19x2, 13x3, 10x4, 11x5, 16x6, 9x7, 6x8, 5x9, 7x10
Module1: 1x6, 2x7, 5x8, 4x9, 2x10
Module2: 3x10, 1x11, 1x12
Update2.1: 4x5, 1x6
Update2.2: 2x7, 1x8, 2x12
Module3: 1x10, 6x11, 4x12
Update3.1: 1x9, 6x11
Update3.2: 4x8, 1x9
Update3.3:
Module4: 6x13, 5x14
Update4.1: 2x10
Update4.2: 1x4

(The above is off by 1 in a few places, but you get the point)

Names of the updates
1.0: Vault of the Dragon
2.0: Twilight Forge
2.1: Litany of the Dead
2.2: Stormreach Under Siege
3.0: Demon Sands
3.1: Evil Resurgent
3.2: Litany of the Dead II
3.3: Academy Training
4.0: Reaver's Bane
4.1: Mark of the Dragon
4.2: Searing Heights

Total quests of each level
1: 14
2: 19
3: 13
4: 11
5: 15
6: 18
7: 13
8: 16
9: 11
10: 15
11: 13
12: 7
13: 6
14: 5

Notice that level 12-14 quests are the least numerous, and the higher the level, the rarer the quest. Level 12-14 quests have around 30-50% the number as the other levels. If there was going to be an inequity in this regard, it should be reversed and biased so that the high level quests are over-represented, because it is the level-capped characters who will be stuck playing the quests in one level and be unable to advance to higher ones.

[Turial]

A good summary of what some of the player base has noticed. The smaller number of high level releases is a little disconcerting as there are a number of players that only play one or two capped characters. Such a population maybe in the minority, compared to those in the mid to lower levels, but that would depend largely on server population.

I wonder if the Devs would comment on the relative level that content in the next couple of mods will be. We know at this point that mod 5 will be roughly 8-10 for quest level unless the cap for the necropolis is going to be of much higher level the the rest of it. If things follow along the current trend there won't be much to do on a capped character except raid and loot. (Don't get me wrong I like raiding and looting but questing is my main goal.)

[Gimpster]

We know at this point that mod 5 will be roughly 8-10 for quest level unless the cap for the necropolis is going to be of much higher level the the rest of it.
We know pretty strongly that Litany of the Dead III will be at least level 14, or even prehaps 15-16. It is a "real" module, and it will follow the pattern of module raids being at or above the level cap. (If that wasn't going to happen, I think we'd have been warned)

But you are correct, the high-level end piece will be out of alignment with the level 4 starting sequence. To fix this, they should just boost up the CR on LOTD1 and LOTD2 so they fit neatly in the sequence. Say level 12-16 total, with monsters, traps, and chests all boosted in power.

[MysticTheurge]

Couldn't there be a slight counter argument to your data that suggests that the problem isn't that they're releasing content too slowly, but that they're increasing the level cap too quickly.

Even if it's not "too quickly" for us, it may simply be "too quickly" for them to keep up with. If the level cap were still 10 wouldn't there be about 22+ "things to do" for level capped characters nowadays?

I'm not suggesting that that would be ideal, I'm just suggesting that there are two ways to look at this data.

On another note, you tend to like pointing out that XP is worthless to capped characters, which means the whole "at or above your level" parameter really only matters if you're looking for (the maximal opportunities for) loot. If you just want to do quests and have fun, then you've got a much wider array of "things to do" available. If it's a question of challenge, at that point, there are pretty simple ways to manage that too. 2 or 3 man level 10 quests and you'll probably find yourself as challenged (if not more) than you are in a full group running Gianthold Elite quests.

Which I think is why some people have issue with your analysis Gimpster (and the conclusions you draw). It pretty much shows that you're only interested in maximizing your highest-possible-level chest to time ratio. The flaw isn't in your numbers, which are, as you point out, irrefutable. The flaw is in your presupposition, the assumption that "things to do" needs to be limited to quests at or above one's level.

[Gimpster]

If you just want to do quests and have fun, then you've got a much wider array of "things to do" available.
The proposition that content such as level 10 Atraxia's Haven quests or level 4 Searing Height exploration can entertain level 14 characters as anything but a brief sightseeing tour is too weak to bear refuting.


If it's a question of challenge, at that point, there are pretty simple ways to manage that too.
That would be game design: creating a new, more challenging game on top of DDO by imposing additional limitations on the player. For example, permadeath players are engaging in game design by inventing their own more-restrictive rules.

For general players, however, there is supposed to be paid professionals doing the game design- it should not be up to the players to say "Hey, lets run the new lowbie quests with no weapons or armor, so we can pretend they're higher-level adventures".


2 or 3 man level 10 quests and you'll probably find yourself as challenged (if not more) than you are in a full group running Gianthold Elite quests.
Actually no. Soloing them isn't too challenging. In fact, I soloed the Atraxia's Haven quests with my level 8 barbarian (which was pretty difficult).


It pretty much shows that you're only interested in maximizing your highest-possible-level chest to time ratio.
It certainly doesn't. What I want is to see the range of possible quests with a high chest/effort ratio to expand beyond only one.

The problem with loot runs is not that they exist, but that they are distinct from other quests. Quests with an inordinately high loot/minute level concentrate attention on the small part of the game that is rewarding to the characters. A better game design would minimize the difference between "Let's get loot!" and "Hey, let's run a few quests".

Ideally, "looting" and "questing" should be roughly synonymous.

[Gimpster]

Couldn't there be a slight counter argument to your data that suggests that the problem isn't that they're releasing content too slowly, but that they're increasing the level cap too quickly.
The fact that the level cap is increasing is a given. Because of customer pressure they had no real option to raise the cap slower than they have been, so rate of cap increase isn't really a variable under consideration.


Even if it's not "too quickly" for us, it may simply be "too quickly" for them to keep up with. If the level cap were still 10 wouldn't there be about 22+ "things to do" for level capped characters nowadays?
In a way it would, but "things to do" decays over time regardless of the level cap going up. It's true that level X quests are obseleted when the cap goes to X+2, but even without a cap raise the same-old things become worn out by time.

Yes, maybe it is too fast for them to keep up with. But if they have insufficient dev resources to produce a stream of quests at or above level cap, then they could have skipped some of the low-level quests which are unpopular anyhow.

[Lillitheris]

We know pretty strongly that Litany of the Dead III will be at least level 14, or even prehaps 15-16. It is a "real" module, and it will follow the pattern of module raids being at or above the level cap. (If that wasn't going to happen, I think we'd have been warned)

According to the story there are 3 vampires, each scribing a tome to aid their lich-lord ascent to godhood. So we still have to do LotD3 before we can get our hands on the big bad guy.

Mod5 will probably include the following:
LotD3 (the last vampire): between levels 12-13, which would be perfectly in tune with the earlier parts (#1 4-5, #2 8-9).
AND
LotD4 (the lich), at the new level cap 15-16, with a high likelyhood of a grande finale raid.

Come to think of it, I'm fairly sure I've seen a Dev refer to Mod5 as LotD3&4.

[Riggs]

Ideally, "looting" and "questing" should be roughly synonymous.

That concept, if ever implemented, would improve DDO gameplay, group dynamics, variety of quests played....fun...by at least an order of magnitude.

Quests of any given level should be giving XP and treasure that is appropriate to that level - and right now that is far from the case. There is a huge variety in rewards for time/effort/challenge put in. Which is why 90% of groups lfm for level 11-14 are for one quest only. Because the other quests at that level take three times as long to get the same rewards. The same holds true for lower level quests - which is also why 90% of people only run say - 10-20% of the quests, because the other 80% give out extremely poor rewards in terms of XP/treasure for the time and effort put in.

[MysticTheurge]

The proposition that content such as level 10 Atraxia's Haven quests or level 4 Searing Height exploration can entertain level 14 characters as anything but a brief sightseeing tour is too weak to bear refuting.

I wasn't suggesting that Searing Heights could ever be more than a quick tour for a level 14 character.

But there's no reason (except that the chests are lower level) that you couldn't run the Ataraxia's quests more often. Or any of the other 15+ level 10-13 quests in the game. Your numbers imlpy that there are only 6 "things" for a 14th level character "to do." My point is simply that that's not entirely accurate.


Actually no. Soloing them isn't too challenging. In fact, I soloed the Atraxia's Haven quests with my level 8 barbarian (which was pretty difficult).

We're really all well aware of how uber you are, and we're quite glad for you. I attempted to solo these quests on Risia with my level 13 cleric and found I wasn't quite up to the task. So, I suppose my point is, there's likely to be a fair number of people (not the uber leet power gamers like yourself of course) who would find themselves challenged by solo'ing or duo'ing quests a bit below their level.

To turn another one of your favorite arguments around, people who play so much that they've mastered all the content and have all the loot aren't really indicative of what the Devs should be building for. Not only do you not necessarily representative of the majority of the player base, but there's really nothing they'll be able to do to ever keep you happy.


It certainly doesn't. What I want is to see the range of possible quests with a high chest/effort ratio to expand beyond only one.

I'm not sure how this refutes my statements.


Ideally, "looting" and "questing" should be roughly synonymous.

This is, simply put, impossible. People will always find the one or two scenarios that give them the best rewards with the least amount of effort. It's just not possible to make absolutely sure that every single quest ever has the exact same loot-to-time ratio. Even if they were closer, people would still find the ones that were slightly better and just do those. It's our responsibility as players to not participate in that kind of mentality, if we don't want it to exist.

[tihocan]

I tend to agree. Even if I consider myself to be rather casual, I just rolled a new character this week just because I had nothing to do in the time I had available (and I'm a bit sick of running PotP...). Unfortunately, once you're capped, either you do loot runs (which I'm not too fond of), or you do raids (but not always easy to organize, except for the Reaver, which can only be repeated every 2-3 days). I do have a few more quests to grind for favor, but they are the longest ones and also require some preparation...

[The_Cataclysm]

According to the story there are 3 vampires, each scribing a tome to aid their lich-lord ascent to godhood. So we still have to do LotD3 before we can get our hands on the big bad guy.

Mod5 will probably include the following:
LotD3 (the last vampire): between levels 12-13, which would be perfectly in tune with the earlier parts (#1 4-5, #2 8-9).
AND
LotD4 (the lich), at the new level cap 15-16, with a high likelyhood of a grande finale raid.

Come to think of it, I'm fairly sure I've seen a Dev refer to Mod5 as LotD3&4.

Pretty sure it is listed as LotD3&4 in the newsletter. Of course, they have also said that Mod 5 will not include a level cap increase.

[Gennerik]

I think Gimpster does bring up at least one good point, and MysticTheurge illustrates why it is. There are a severe lack of different quests to run once you hit level 14 that are at your level without being on Hard or Elite. We got 6 new quests to get us from level 12 (capped) to 14, then 5 new ones to get us from 14 to 14 (capped). However, of those 5, one of them is a raid and can only be done so often and isn't worth that much XP relationally. Another is the pre-raid, and while it's only required to be run once, half of the quest actually takes place after you finish it, and therefore isn't worth that much XP in relation to the others. So basically, we end up with 9 new quests to take us from level 12 to capped again.

Now, this isn't a lot of new content as far as leveling should go, so the Devs made each of those quests give entirely too much XP for what they were, since they wanted to ensure that we could actually reach the level cap based on the quests available, and therefore we level up too quickly, meaning that we're soon without any quests to run for anything but treasure. And that's the mistake. By making Gianthold so amazingly lucridous for XP AND treasure, as soon as you can get there, there is no point in going anywhere else. The Menechtaraun Desert still has quests that are level 14 on Elite, but they pail in comparison to Gianthold for XP.

Honestly, Gianthold XP should probably be halved (not a blanket halving, but on average about half). For Module 5, if they don't raise the level cap, it should also not give stupid amounts of XP for each quest, but needs to be more in line with the other quests. When the level cap does increase, we need quests to get us there, but not at high XP values. Make them moderate, like all the quests before Module 4, where the only way you cap a character is buy running basically ALL the new quests to death. Then in the next update, you release a few more quests level 15-16, and the next update a few more. That way, for characters that aren't capped (which will probably be maybe half) you have actually given them something to run for a reason other than just because it's new. They can use them to level. And for newer characters, they'll actually have a reason to try out the variety of quests that are there, since they won't be able to run 3 of the 9 new quests a couple times and get from level 11 to 14.

[Claver]

IThis is, simply put, impossible. People will always find the one or two scenarios that give them the best rewards with the least amount of effort. It's just not possible to make absolutely sure that every single quest ever has the exact same loot-to-time ratio. Even if they were closer, people would still find the ones that were slightly better and just do those. It's our responsibility as players to not participate in that kind of mentality, if we don't want it to exist.

I just had an idea that might partially address this and promote the exploration of more content. I'm just shooting from the hip so please use this as a springboard for other, better ideas.

What if every quest had a multiplier based on popularity of weekly usage. Turbine would collect data on the frequency in which players on each server ran a particular quest or wilderness area. It would work like the stock market in reverse.

As more and more people ran Prison of the Planes the "Market Index Multiplier" for XP and loot for that quest would get lower and lower until other quests began to look more attractive by comparison. Less popular quests like Litany of the Dead 2 would go up in value as fewer people play those quests until the XP/loot multiplier was high enough to balance the risk/reward calculus that humans invariably make.

If implemented properly, the game would reach a state of equilibrium for XP vs. quest difficulty length. Just think of it, people probably go a full 24 hours without playing The Pit on any given server. If its "Market Index Multplier" climbed to 1000% of the existing XP someone might give it a shot. In effect, this would give us more content by making unpopular quests playable.

The details would need to be ironed out i.e, should the "Market Index Multiplier" be taken from all servers to prevent guilds from manipulating the market, should data update daily, weekly, monthly etc.

What do you think?

[Frodo_Lives]

When we talk about balanced risk/reward for quests I hope people don't mean simply bring up the low reward/high risk quests to on par with the high reward/low risk ones.

It's about balancing the quests so that we tone down the loot runs (PotP), and bump up the rather unimpressive risk/reward quests.

Average it out and make it not just possible to level up many different ways, make it viable as well.

[Gimpster]

This is, simply put, impossible. People will always find the one or two scenarios that give them the best rewards with the least amount of effort. It's just not possible to make absolutely sure that every single quest ever has the exact same loot-to-time ratio.
A pathetic strawman. The impossibility of doing something 100% magically perfect forever doesn't invalidate sizable incremental adjustments towards a goal.


I'm not sure how this refutes my statements.
It doesn't need to, since your statement was your own unsupported invention about what my motive might be.

[FoxOne]

The necropolis.Perhaps the most hated quest chain/location in the game.The loot sucks badly & xp is ****.If they create the new quests there,whoopee doo,another serie to run once & never again.Problem stands.

[Gimpster]

But there's no reason (except that the chests are lower level) that you couldn't run the Ataraxia's quests more often. Or any of the other 15+ level 10-13 quests in the game. Your numbers imlpy that there are only 6 "things" for a 14th level character "to do."
Have you met a DDO player? Go in-game and try to convince one or two level 14 characters to come with you for Atraxia's Haven. See how eager they are- if they go at all, it will be because they are trying to be generous and help you earn some favor.


We're really all well aware of how uber you are, and we're quite glad for you. I attempted to solo these quests on Risia with my level 13 cleric and found I wasn't quite up to the task.
It's not something particular to me; all high-level characters on Risia are substantially weaker than they are on live servers, because the Risia characters are a stale copy.

That is, Risia's copy dates back to around the introduction of Module 3, before there were any level 14 quests in the game, and especially before there was a +1 loot holiday injecting a supply of gear from level 17 treasure tables into the economy. The amount of high-level looting that has gone on since the Risia copy was made has pulled up the power level of most characters significantly.

[Gimpster]

What if every quest had a multiplier based on popularity of weekly usage.
That is a reasonable approach, and with the right tuning has functioned acceptably in other games before. However it does bring its own set of problems, which are subtle.

Note that what you are proposing is basically a "shared ransack" effect.

[Lorien_the_First_One]

That is a reasonable approach, and with the right tuning has functioned acceptably in other games before. However it does bring its own set of problems, which are subtle.

Note that what you are proposing is basically a "shared ransack" effect.

I don't think the problem is so subtle. Those people with no lives outside the game will continue to ransack and have an increased chance of finding the rare items. (That includes farmers BTW).

Casual gamers on their 1 day a week may well show up on a ransack day and have even less chance than before of finding something useful.

Doesn't seem fair and I don't see what it solves.

[Lorien_the_First_One]

I tend to agree. Even if I consider myself to be rather casual, I just rolled a new character this week just because I had nothing to do in the time I had available (and I'm a bit sick of running PotP...). Unfortunately, once you're capped, either you do loot runs (which I'm not too fond of), or you do raids (but not always easy to organize, except for the Reaver, which can only be repeated every 2-3 days). I do have a few more quests to grind for favor, but they are the longest ones and also require some preparation...

You help your friends and/or you roll something new that you have never played before... That's the D&D way.

I don't get this MMO "reach the top where the real endgame action is" thinking.

[MysticTheurge]

Casual gamers on their 1 day a week may well show up on a ransack day and have even less chance than before of finding something useful.

Doesn't seem fair and I don't see what it solves.

It's less like ransack if things don't "regenerate." That is, if they simply used it as a mechanism to balance quests out (i.e. PotP goes down and never goes back up again), then there wouldn't be the imbalance that you're talking about. Or at least it would be less.

It'd be more like the Whisperdoom loot fiasco in perpetuity. The first people in would get all the good stuff and then everyone who came along later would get ****, relatively speaking. But at least things would be more evenly balanced. ;)

[Thrudh]

DDO has a problem of insufficient new quest content for high level characters, and it is frustrating to see low and mid-level quests added without addressing the more important shortcomings. In some threads (http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?t=112030), people have denied the existence of this problem, so I shall demonstrate it numerically below.

DDO has had 11 updates since release (counting the 4.2 update which is only on Risia so far, and the 3.3 update which had a new enhancement system but no quests). Let's define "Something to do" as "Quests at or above your level". Thus, for characters at the level cap, things to do include those quests at or above the level cap- of course they technically can do other stuff, but there generally won't be much challenge or reward.

The level cap was 10 at release, and increased to 12 with module 3 and 14 with module 4.

Here is a list of the number of quests at or above the level cap at the time of each update:
Release: 7
Module1: 9
Module2: 14
Update2.1: 14
Update2.2: 16
Module3: 7
Update3.1: 7
Update3.2: 7
Update3.3: 7
Module4: 5
Update4.1: 5
Update4.2: 5

The trend is obvious: as time went on, there were fewer and fewer quests at (or above) level cap. At first, there was a good pattern, where new high-level quests were added at several updates. But with module 3 that stopped, and from then on only modules themselves had quests at level-cap.

These are BS numbers since you don't include level 13 quests (and I'm assuming level 11 and level 9 quests)...

Module 4 did not give us 5 quests for capped players to play, instead it gave us 11 quests... which is a lot... And they are all very different quests... very well done...

They DO need to match up exp/treasure with risk... PoP should give less exp and less treasure than the Crucible and Madstone for instance. I kinda like the idea of the the dynamic exp/loot based on how many times an instance is run... not sure how/if that should be implemented.

The problem is simple... You play too much.

You'll never be happy... Stop playing so much...

I went into that Mine quest in the Haven with 6 level 9s and 10s... it was hard... We nearly wiped at least once... I'm glad you could solo it with your 8th level twinked out barbarian...

You are a victim of your own success... Your builds and/or your equipment are so freaking awesome that nothing is fun for you anymore...

I'm all for more high-end content... The fact that you ignored the 6 very well done 13th level quests in Gianthold tells me you're dishonest...

I'm sorry the game isn't progressing fast enough for ya... maybe you should get a second hobby....

[Gimpster]

These are BS numbers since you don't include level 13 quests (and I'm assuming level 11 and level 9 quests)...
You're saying quests at cap-1 should count as content appropriate for capped characters? In reality, they're better for characters who are still on their way to being capped (especially since the level 13 Gianthold quests have turned out to be popular with level 10 characters on normal mode). Fine, I'll recount for that condition.

Here is a list of the number of quests at or above the level cap minus one at the time of each update:
Release: 12
Module1: 18
Module2: 23
Update2.1: 23
Update2.2: 25
Module3: 14
Update3.1: 20
Update3.2: 20
Update3.3: 20
Module4: 11
Update4.1: 11
Update4.2: 11

Any way you slice it, there is less variety in content for capped characters. The number of quests at cap is now around 50% of what it was for most of the previous game lifespan. From this perspective, there has never been as few choices for capped characters as there is now.

[MysticTheurge]

Any way you slice it, there is less variety in content for capped characters. The number of quests at cap is now around 50% of what it was for most of the previous game lifespan. From this perspective, there has never been as few choices for capped characters as there is now.

Which means this is just another complaint that they haven't released high level content in the last two updates. And while I agree, it doesn't really say anything, except they should get on the ball and release some more high-level content.

That said, I can understand, to a degree, that they're working on getting the wilderness area quest thing rolled out and retrofitted. It might've been smarter to retrofit two old areas and release a couple high-level quests instead of retrofitting two old areas and release some mid- and low-level stuff, but it's just plain too late for that to change.

[Lillitheris]

Of course, they have also said that Mod 5 will not include a level cap increase.

I stand corrected, thanks.

[Pecky]

Another is the pre-raid, and while it's only required to be run once, half of the quest actually takes place after you finish it, and therefore isn't worth that much XP in relation to the others.

Gianthold Tor is worth... around 40k XP your first time through. I wouldn't say its not worth much XP. Each dragon is 7k and then you have the main quest itself. Even after multiple runs its still worth 20k and is a very, very easy way to level with a good group.

[tihocan]

You help your friends and/or you roll something new that you have never played before... That's the D&D way.

I don't get this MMO "reach the top where the real endgame action is" thinking.
I'm not willing to "reach the top where the real endgame action is", I just want to have some fun with my two favorite characters, who happen to be capped. But they have very little to do now.

[Solik]

This is why I spend most of my DDO time with lower-level characters that I'm rerolling that are very modestly "twinked" and frequently sub-optimal (although far from pathetic).

I mean, I'm still having a lot of fun, and I've never even run the Titan, Demon Queen, or Stormreaver. Or the Crucible. Only ran PoP elite like three times.

I consider reaching the endgame "winning" that character. Time to make a new one!

[GeneralDiomedes]

When Mod 5 is released the balance will be restored and then some IMO. Releasing a couple of level 14 quests now would keep people's attention for about an hour or two. There is just no point. Let the bored capped players take a month or two off.

The fact of the matter is DDO has so much room to grow in terms of subscription numbers that devoting all of their development resources to capped players that only want to play their capped players probably isn't their best ROI.

And I like the idea of a server wide ransack .. except I think it should be in the risk side as well as the reward side. If more people run the quests, they get harder.

[Lorien_the_First_One]

It's less like ransack if things don't "regenerate." That is, if they simply used it as a mechanism to balance quests out (i.e. PotP goes down and never goes back up again), then there wouldn't be the imbalance that you're talking about. Or at least it would be less.

It'd be more like the Whisperdoom loot fiasco in perpetuity. The first people in would get all the good stuff and then everyone who came along later would get ****, relatively speaking. But at least things would be more evenly balanced. ;)

But that wouldn't balance things. It would benefit the long time players who got their first, and all future players would get ****. How is that balance?

Now if ransacking pop meant I could never again get a named item out of pop (or a chests were L-3 or whatever) for that char then I could see the point. But nothing I should do should ever disadvantage another player who joins the game tomorrow or has a different play style than I do.

[GeneralDiomedes]

But that wouldn't balance things. It would benefit the long time players who got their first, and all future players would get ****. How is that balance?

Now if ransacking pop meant I could never again get a named item out of pop (or a chests were L-3 or whatever) for that char then I could see the point. But nothing I should do should ever disadvantage another player who joins the game tomorrow or has a different play style than I do.

Um .. so run the quests that currently have the good loot?

But having the loot never regenerate is a really bad idea tho you are right.

[ahpook]

But that wouldn't balance things. It would benefit the long time players who got their first, and all future players would get ****. How is that balance?

Now if ransacking pop meant I could never again get a named item out of pop (or a chests were L-3 or whatever) for that char then I could see the point. But nothing I should do should ever disadvantage another player who joins the game tomorrow or has a different play style than I do.

All you are really saying is that if they implement it badly it will be bad. I will grant you that truism.

However, there are a number of things they can do to implement it well that will solve the problem of single quests becoming the standard loot run. Excluding a users first ransack set of pulls from the downgrading, limit the maximum downgrading and having a sufficient time duration before downgrading are a fwe things they will need to do to balance. And as GD said, if this quest has been downgraded you can always go do the one that hasn't.

[ahpook]

Which means this is just another complaint that they haven't released high level content in the last two updates. And while I agree, it doesn't really say anything, except they should get on the ball and release some more high-level content.

Well that was the whole point of this thread according to the OP. Gimpster was merely trying to provide data to back up this claim since posters in other threads did not agree with that view point.

[Kawiki]

Let me get this straight, some of you are actually proposing that the loot quality of a quest should be based on how many times that quest has been run globally? That may be the most ignorant idea I have ever heard on these forums.

To fundamentally change the process in this way would be on of the worst things you can do to get people to stop running PoP.

Ummm... why wouldn't Turbine just rebalance the quest in question?

or let time solve the problem, once the level CAP goes up people are not going to be running PoP anyway. When was the last time you saw an LFM for Giant Caves??

To even suggest something that is so game changing because one quest currently is not balanced and over run is ludicrous.

[Berjik]

I agree that they should implement more higher level quests, my reasoning is that at level 11-14 I am utterly bored with Gianthold quests as myself and most here have run them into the ground. I haven't been playing much lately because I feel like I am running on auto-pilot through these quests (as I am sure others are), I'm a huge challenge junkie and auto-pilot is not challenging.

It would be nice to see more questing options for people who like to be challenged. Going with this is that since Level 14 Gianthold quests have such hot XP rewards(loot and end rewards), 99%(yeh yeh it was made up but you get my point) of groups 11-14 will run these quests for exp and loot.

Even though adding more high level quests = more looting options = more Monty haul while I think this is a valid argument against adding higher level quests at the same time I think it isn't (sorry if this doesn't make sense I'll try to explain).

It's all about time invested. Whether you running potp 10 times to ransack in 4 hours or a new high level quest 10 times to ransack in 4 hours, it's still an equal time investment, which is what MMO's are all about, time-investment = more sub money.

From experience most players have more then one high level character and will run and ransack those, which is more time invested, so really what's the difference in the 2 scenarios above? None, at least I think there isn't.

Wouldn't it be nice that there was enough content that when you logged in you could see:

LFM
11-14 - Gianthold Quests
11-14 - New high level content
11-14 - Antaraxia Haven Q's
11-14 - More new High Level Content
11-14 - Wiz King(even though it's rare to see this run nowadays)

Rather then groups competing for the few players lfg all trying to do Potp or some other gianthold quest? Why not give the LFG a choice...hmmm do I want to do X or Y today.. or maybe Z. Choices aren't a bad thing!

Which brings up another point/siderant.

TURBINE your QUESTS ARE TOO EASY!!!!!

Scale Elite Mobs level by 2 additional levels and Hard(is a joke cuz it ain't hard) into the current Elite difficulty, Leave normal as is.

Norm- As is
Hard Level +2
Elite Level +4

When I play in a guild group there is almost no challenge to this game. I don't mind party wipes because it inspires tactics (remember when invaders first came out..OMFG)

I am so bored running the same content at high level over and over that I have canceled my subscription(end aug.4) and have gone back to playing NWN2 pw's for now, this isn't permanent and chances are I'll be back sometime. It's not because I hate this game or have problems with gameplay or getting into groups or anything like that, it's just plain ol' boring now with the high elvel content available.

I want to add that I don't fault Turbine for this, 100% likely is that they don't have the money or man/woman power to do this which is such a pity for the Best MMO I've ever played.

So to sum it up.....

/signed

Berj.

****...this turne out a lot longer then I planned.

[Talson]

Let me get this straight, some of you are actually proposing that the loot quality of a quest should be based on how many times that quest has been run globally? That may be the most ignorant idea I have ever heard on these forums.

To fundamentally change the process in this way would be on of the worst things you can do to get people to stop running PoP.

Ummm... why wouldn't Turbine just rebalance the quest in question?

or let time solve the problem, once the level CAP goes up people are not going to be running PoP anyway. When was the last time you saw an LFM for Giant Caves??

To even suggest something that is so game changing because one quest currently is not balanced and over run is ludicrous.


I have to agree with you on this one.... As a gamer that works full time and is shortly getting hitched a change like that would kill my interest in the game. I might only get a couple of hours every other night to play so to find out that quests x, y, z were globaly ransacked while I was at work or spending time with the significant other would not sit well with me...

Take it easy
Tal

[OKCRandy1]

Gimpster, thanks for posting the numbers for our discussion, great topic for development discussion as evidenced by the detailed responses.

It's apparent to me that it's time now for more high-end content. The argument that high end content and corresponding loot destroys the economy is bogus. The economy needs tweaking only, just bring the upper level content and let's have some fun. More variety for capped toons is a good thing, it's ridiculuous to argue otherwise. Some might say it's a useless endeaver adding upper level content because you'll never make enough high end content to keep the uber players happy, but don't we all get to enjoy the variety of content? I'd like to have so much new to do that I can't possibly find the time to get to it!

I'd have to agree with a statement earlier calling out that many great additions have come to the game (perhaps instead of higher end content), but probably worth the trade off. Enhancement system, wilderness areas, AH, mail system, were worth the trade off for me. Yes it is time for new high end content, but let's not forget we've gotten some great new additions and changes to the game. Also worth remember, when we get new races/classes that will help put new characters into the population and make all the mid-level content that was added a great boon for us all.

[Boulderun]

"Global ransack" sounds a lot like something Turbine has done before - spell economy in AC1. But it was so weak that even after every character in the game took some kind of magic and during peak pop times, the worst that spells did was their base effect; at all other times spells had bonuses.

If it had been more severe from the start the game may have taken a much different course (a shallower power curve, anyway). I think we're way past that point in DDO, and global ransack would just punish those who don't play 24/7. In this game there's no way to compete for the good loot spawns other than doing POP faster than anyone else. In other games you can just kill the other players and take their stuff, or at least lead a train of mobs in to scare them off.

[Ron]

Gimpster, if you are bored and don't want to reroll just to rush back to the level cap again, might I make a suggestion?

There are many ways to play DDO. I myself play it 4 different ways.

1) Normal play - Probably the same way you do, with guildies and PUGs and so on. This, I expect, is the way you are bored with.

2) Solo play - Take a character, don't twink. Go through every quest at every difficulty level exactly one time (or one successful time anyway). Never group, do all quests entirely on your own. For extra challenge, do all optionals, get Ransack and full aggression bonus. HIGHLY challenging, and slows the advancement to a crawl (esp because figuring out the exact right generalist build to pull it off is really hard, heh).

[Ron]

3) Dedicated group - Similar to 1, but generally with no twinking (up to the group). Pretty slow, since you usually only meet once a week. Different than 1 because it's fun to play and advance with the same group of friends every week.

4) Permadeath. 'nuff said :)

I play all 4 of those ways, and each is a totally different experience, even if I am doing the same dungeons. Because of that, DDO has PLENTY of content for me. Hell, I've never even gotten to any of the quests above level 10 (looking forward to them though).

[sorry for the two posts, the connection I'm on at the moment is really bad]

[MysticTheurge]

[sorry for the two posts, the connection I'm on at the moment is really bad]

I was going to say "That's only two!" ;)

[joker965]

Wouldn't it just be enough if there wasn't such a huge difference in the loot/time ratio between supposedly equaly level quests? It does not have to be 1-1 but there needs to be some adjustment.

If level 14 quest A gives me 4 chests and takes about 40 minutes and level 14 quest B gives 2 chests and takes at least an hour there will always be a problem.

[ahpook]

Let me get this straight, some of you are actually proposing that the loot quality of a quest should be based on how many times that quest has been run globally? That may be the most ignorant idea I have ever heard on these forums.

To fundamentally change the process in this way would be on of the worst things you can do to get people to stop running PoP.

Ummm... why wouldn't Turbine just rebalance the quest in question?

First of all chill man, this will never get implemented and it was just an idea. Second, if Turbine drops the chest level by 1 because the quest is too easy there is far too large of a contingent of the player base that will scream nerf. However, if the mechanics of the game re-balance the rewards because we the players have found the quest too easy....



or let time solve the problem, once the level CAP goes up people are not going to be running PoP anyway. When was the last time you saw an LFM for Giant Caves??

To even suggest something that is so game changing because one quest currently is not balanced and over run is ludicrous.
Well, POP is not the first quest nor will it be the last quest where the devs miscalculated and created a quest that was simply too easy for the rewards. A solution to solve the problem now and in the future is not that unreasonable. I don't think we are talking about a ransack so nobody gets anything, just a decrease in XP by 25% and a drop in chest level by one or two. The fact you don't like it doesn't make the suggestion of the idea ludicrous.