account share epic past life

[Readcom]

I know many will say no.
But I still would like to share bonuses account wise.
So I can play my alt and have some bonuses, not that I have to farm all the same again.
Now come post this is a Baaad idea.

[Epicstorms]

The latest developments did force players to focus on 1 toon.

Sharing pastlifes and reaper XP would be a fine solution for me.
I'd probably return to the game if they would reduce the insane grind for every single toon.

But yeah, a lot of people here will disagree. 'easy buttons' and all :)

[ramzes7asit4]

Let me guess, you also want the same for heroic/iconic/racial PL and reaper XP...

So, if this happen in future, what you propose for old player?
I mean next: some player have Triple Epic Completionist on main, and a lot of Epic PL on alts. Would they get some "compensation"?

[Cantor]

As someone with one character that has everything (but racial pasts) what do you do now?

Make an alt? no, it would be just like playing your main.

Sit at cap? not everyone likes to just grind gear.

You don't need everything on every character. That is what makes them different.

[nokowi]

I know many will say no.
But I still would like to share bonuses account wise.
So I can play my alt and have some bonuses, not that I have to farm all the same again.
Now come post this is a Baaad idea.

And here is the obvious extension to the Account wide RXP people.

See what you started?

It won't end here.

[Epicstorms]

Let me guess, you also want the same for heroic/iconic/racial PL and reaper XP...

So, if this happen in future, what you propose for old player?
I mean next: some player have Triple Epic Completionist on main, and a lot of Epic PL on alts. Would they get some "compensation"?

Would have been fine for me to only make reaper XP and racial PLs account shared, as it was new.

But this ship has long sailed and the devs do what they want.

For me personally this was too much and most friends/endgame players all TRed their mains and I didn't enjoy playing anymore.
I love this game, but sadly the latest 2 hamster wheels kill it for me.

[Rys]

And here is the obvious extension to the Account wide RXP people.

See what you started?

It won't end here.

Oh please, don't be shy to name that one person who started it. Me.

[Dragavon]

I know many will say no.
But I still would like to share bonuses account wise.
So I can play my alt and have some bonuses, not that I have to farm all the same again.
Now come post this is a Baaad idea.

Sure, why not.

The same for heroic and iconic past lives too. And fate points.

Also, when I get named raid loot give the same item to all my characters at the same time.

[Qhualor]

This is a baaad idea.

[Vulkoorex]

The added grind did reduce the number of alts I will be playing to maybe 1-2 apart from my main. I'm pretty sure it will be like that for most players as well (from what I read). No point in spending ddo points to upgrade the alt toons. Goodbye tomes, bags, bank space, etc. Translation: lost revenue.

[nokowi]

Oh please, don't be shy to name that one person who started it. Me.

It's the fact that the idea is bad that matters, not who started it.

If we learned anything from elite, it is that caving in to one demand to make something easier leads to 100x more of the same.

You should not have asked for account wide RXP if you don't support the same for every other aspect of the game.


I will again point to your no easy buttons stance that conflicts with many of your recommendations.

[nokowi]

The added grind did reduce the number of alts I will be playing to maybe 1-2 apart from my main. I'm pretty sure it will be like that for most players as well (from what I read). No point in spending ddo points to upgrade the alt toons. Goodbye tomes, bags, bank space, etc. Translation: lost revenue.

Others will be good enough to maintain 6 very good toons by just grabbing a few important things that are low hanging fruit.

It usually takes forumites 1-2 years to figure things out, so I expect comments like this for the next 1-2 years.

DDO players haven't had to learn or adapt in a long time, the game has just been too easy prior to reaper.


In the span of 3 months on the forums, the optimal time for completion for one toon has already dropped by a factor of 10, from 10 years to 1 year.

Spend 6-12 months per character in reaper and call it good. You don't have to have or even need everything.

[Coyopa]

Definitely not signed. I've got several alts that don't even get played anymore (on the order of about 10 of them, as a matter of fact). If I want past lives (of any kind) on those characters, then I should have to play those characters. Characters are individuals and their experiences vary, just like they would if they were real people.

[Rys]

i will again point to your no easy buttons stance that conflicts with many of your recommendations.

s)

[Enoach]

I disagree with the sentiment that people are "forced" to play only one character. This is a choice made by the player.

Even with todays difficulties there isn't a need to have all the bells and whistles to be successful. In fact I would hazard to guess that about 50% of the Past Life available boosts are practically unused by most builds.

Why I like the idea of each character "earning" their own past lives and not sharing. For me each of my six characters only share the shared bank, outside of that they are separate entities. I get this most likely because of my Pen and Paper days of playing Table Top Role Playing games. Each has their own limits based on their own experiences.

In my opinion having shared past lives would cheapen the experience of running each character. Of my six characters only three are epic completionest, One is one life away and the other two are 5+ lives away. However, I really enjoy playing all of them because each is different in how they play. Sharing of Past Lives would create a "sameness". The "sameness" is what I'm working to avoid with my characters.



Of all the XP systems the only one I can see a reason to share is the Unlock of Cosmetic items for Reaper - Such that each vendor bases your Total Reaper XP based on the total Reaper XP of each character. This would help players who feel forced to play only one character because the unlock of Cosmetic items is too high. But I don't think their trees should share the XP.

[Uska]

It's a terrible idea

[nokowi]

I disagree with the sentiment that people are "forced" to play only one character. This is a choice made by the player.

Even with todays difficulties there isn't a need to have all the bells and whistles to be successful. In fact I would hazard to guess that about 50% of the Past Life available boosts are practically unused by most builds.

Why I like the idea of each character "earning" their own past lives and not sharing. For me each of my six characters only share the shared bank, outside of that they are separate entities. I get this most likely because of my Pen and Paper days of playing Table Top Role Playing games. Each has their own limits based on their own experiences.

In my opinion having shared past lives would cheapen the experience of running each character. Of my six characters only three are epic completionest, One is one life away and the other two are 5+ lives away. However, I really enjoy playing all of them because each is different in how they play. Sharing of Past Lives would create a "sameness". The "sameness" is what I'm working to avoid with my characters.



Of all the XP systems the only one I can see a reason to share is the Unlock of Cosmetic items for Reaper - Such that each vendor bases your Total Reaper XP based on the total Reaper XP of each character. This would help players who feel forced to play only one character because the unlock of Cosmetic items is too high. But I don't think their trees should share the XP.

They can and have offered cosmetic rewards through remnant rewards.

There is no reason to do anything special through RXP.

If people want more cosmetic rewards, they should continue threads that ask for them.

[slarden]

It's the fact that the idea is bad that matters, not who started it.

If we learned anything from elite, it is that caving in to one demand to make something easier leads to 100x more of the same.

You should not have asked for account wide RXP if you don't support the same for every other aspect of the game.


I will again point to your no easy buttons stance that conflicts with many of your recommendations.

That's been my approach to everything in this game. Grab the low hanging fruit for all alts then work on improving and optimizing as time permits. I am guessing 30 racial lifes will get you about 50-60 reaper points or so. That is enough for anything important to a build in about 3 months per alt for a true grinder and longer for those with less time.

Over time the trend has been clear. People are focusing more on one character and less on alts.

[Avantasian]

It's the fact that the idea is bad that matters, not who started it.

If we learned anything from elite, it is that caving in to one demand to make something easier leads to 100x more of the same.

You should not have asked for account wide RXP if you don't support the same for every other aspect of the game.


I will again point to your no easy buttons stance that conflicts with many of your recommendations.

Out of curiosity, what are the 100 demands that made elite easier?

[Avantasian]

You should not have asked for account wide RXP if you don't support the same for every other aspect of the game.

The first fact that absolutely demolishes your statement is that we already have account wide aspects of progession, so by your "logic" we should already have account wide everything.
The logical failure of your statement is that you miss the fact that the existance and status of other systems can (and do) motivate the suggestion to change a specific one. IE: There are so many huge character-only grinds that making one of then account wide would benefical for alt-reasons.

You are free to disagree with the benefits of account wide RXP, but to say that if one support it one must also support the same for every aspect of the game is just way beneath you.

[Readcom]

I have got an idea for SS.
Make a new trascendent tr for people like me.
Something you can do account wise.
I'm sick and bored to make tr to one character I cannot think to make all the others..

[Sam-u-r-eye]

That is frankly stupid. The first fact that absolutely demolishes your statement is that we already have account wide aspects of progession, so by your "logic" we should already have account wide everything.
The logical failure of your statement is that you miss the fact that the existance and status of other systems can (and do) motivate the suggestion to change a specific one. IE: There are so many huge character-only grinds that making one of then account wide would benefical for alt-reasons.

You are free to disagree with the benefits of account wide RXP, but to say that if one support it one must also support the same for every aspect of the game is just dumb and way beneath you.

+1

little bit more vitriolic than I would have said but

he's dead right

There is very little incentive to keep more than 2 toons and as a consequence many people limit themselves to ONE toon realistically.
This is a pretty big problem with the game and a major reason I see people give up when they see massive grinds.

Lets say you gave all past lives and rXP shared access across toons.
People would still need to:
1. Buy tomes
2. Fill out destinies
3. Get raid gear
4. Get gear relevant to the class they've now decided to have at cap
5. Buy more character slots

ADDITIONALLY
People could TR a heroic toon to get past-lives while keeping ANOTHER toon at cap.
Isn't that lovely? People don't need to TR their main to keep up with the grind---they can participate in a social community that doesn't exclude people 3 levels different.

You can only be logged into one toon at a time ANYWAY, so its not like there is a problem lore-wise.

[Sam-u-r-eye]

Oh please, don't be shy to name that one person who started it. Me.

I believe I pre-date you by a significant margin....

=p

Compliments pls, thnx

[slarden]

+1

little bit more vitriolic than I would have said but

he's dead right

There is very little incentive to keep more than 2 toons and as a consequence many people limit themselves to ONE toon realistically.
This is a pretty big problem with the game and a major reason I see people give up when they see massive grinds.

Lets say you gave all past lives and rXP shared access across toons.
People would still need to:
1. Buy tomes
2. Fill out destinies
3. Get raid gear
4. Get gear relevant to the class they've now decided to have at cap
5. Buy more character slots

ADDITIONALLY
People could TR a heroic toon to get past-lives while keeping ANOTHER toon at cap.
Isn't that lovely? People don't need to TR their main to keep up with the grind---they can participate in a social community that doesn't exclude people 3 levels different.

I understand where you are coming from but I will share my perspective as someone with 6 strong alts and 6 weaker alts I use for specific purposes.

The most compelling reason I can think of to allow it is so people can stay at cap while their alts earn rxp through TR which benefits from more first time bonuses. I don't see this as a must though I've managed to build up my alts even though the system always favored the one super character model.

Reaper trees are some utterly OP nonsense and I am not sure how fair it is to give that to all characters based on how quickly people are acquiring it today. Within reaper it's extremely powerful and would give people like me the ability to create a first life character that is better prepared for reaper than someone else who worked on completionist outside reaper having only those heroic benefits. That doesn't seem balanced to me.

And yes exactly as Nokowi said, it's simply asking for things to be easier than it is today. Not that I would be opposed, but I generally agree with Nokowi's philosophy that the devs say "no" to every request that makes reaper easier.

I do agree that the devs missed a revenue opportunity by squashing alts as they've done, but some people still managed to make their alts thrive anyhow.

[Blastyswa]

You should not have asked for account wide RXP if you don't support the same for every other aspect of the game.


Just because I buy my granddaughter a pony doesn't mean I have to buy everyone at her school one, much less every child in the world. Buying that pony is because my granddaughter damned well wants a pony, and not that every little boy and girl in the world needs to get the pony treatment. It also doesn't mean that I need to go back and give her mother and father both ponies because they never had ponies before, nor does it mean that giving her a pony is a bad thing; she wants to be in a rodeo, and I'm just giving her something to help her get to the rodeo earlier so she can have more time to grind for medals. If she had to work at a fast food chain for a year to get her pony she'd appreciate it more, unless she realized halfway through that she hates fast food and she turns to drugs and becomes a stripper, just like her grandmother.

That's more or less how I see account-wide rxp, which is to say I support it.

[slarden]

Just because I buy my granddaughter a pony doesn't mean I have to buy everyone at her school one, much less every child in the world. Buying that pony is because my granddaughter damned well wants a pony, and not that every little boy and girl in the world needs to get the pony treatment. It also doesn't mean that I need to go back and give her mother and father both ponies because they never had ponies before, nor does it mean that giving her a pony is a bad thing; she wants to be in a rodeo, and I'm just giving her something to help her get to the rodeo earlier so she can have more time to grind for medals. If she had to work at a fast food chain for a year to get her pony she'd appreciate it more, unless she realized halfway through that she hates fast food and she turns to drugs and becomes a stripper, just like her grandmother.

That's more or less how I see account-wide rxp, which is to say I support it. why did you have to taint your pony story with strippers.

[Epicstorms]

+1

little bit more vitriolic than I would have said but

he's dead right

There is very little incentive to keep more than 2 toons and as a consequence many people limit themselves to ONE toon realistically.
This is a pretty big problem with the game and a major reason I see people give up when they see massive grinds.

Lets say you gave all past lives and rXP shared access across toons.
People would still need to:
1. Buy tomes
2. Fill out destinies
3. Get raid gear
4. Get gear relevant to the class they've now decided to have at cap
5. Buy more character slots

ADDITIONALLY
People could TR a heroic toon to get past-lives while keeping ANOTHER toon at cap.
Isn't that lovely? People don't need to TR their main to keep up with the grind---they can participate in a social community that doesn't exclude people 3 levels different.

You can only be logged into one toon at a time ANYWAY, so its not like there is a problem lore-wise.

+1 This.

Would be great for DDO to have people that play multiple toons, at both endgame as at TR/ER levels.
The Devs destroyed this. The game lost players once again, and by 'forcing' many players to play 1 toon, you could say the population is even lower right now as people are not filling several spots at several levels.

[nokowi]

In less than a few years, people will have multiple alts all benefiting from reaper.

If you feel obligated to develop 1 or 2 mains in the short term, that's your decision.

It's going to take a year or two for players to understand they can play the game just fine with 95% of the available power and that any toon with slightly less can simply play on one reaper setting lower. If/when they wake up to reality, they might even fight a bit of challenge to be enjoyable.

In the short term, they will demand the game be made easier with every post. I refer you to the initial post that it would take 10+ years to complete reaper for one toon. The justifications for increasing RXP game-wide were not factual in nature then, and they are not factual in nature now. They are based on a desire to get every reward for every toon without having to play the game.

If you cared about tomes for alts, you already bought them.
I don't think +8 tomes will be a big seller with nobody at level 30.
Hollow hollow threats based on entitlement.
As long as people are playing, DDO sales will do just fine.
If/When reaper monster manuals appear, they will sell like wildfire.

[nokowi]

+1 This.

Would be great for DDO to have people that play multiple toons, at both endgame as at TR/ER levels.
The Devs destroyed this. The game lost players once again, and by 'forcing' many players to play 1 toon, you could say the population is even lower right now as people are not filling several spots at several levels.

Forming viable reaper groups is what causes players to desire multiple toons.

The me!me!me! crowd has a little to learn about grouping.

Back when we ran shroud all the time, somebody always had an alt and jumped to their healer, for no reward other than completing the content.

Good players will still make sure they have several toons to fill the roles for reaper. Give them 6 months or so to develop their favorite toon first.

[Eryhn]

sry but just no.

I mean, I CAN sorta get behind shared rxp for some very specific reasons having to do with rxp based on quest BASE level and the grind being excessively long ...

but this, this is just kinda cheapening it a bit too much and serves no other purpose other than cutting it short. thx but no thx.

[Wipey]

Good players will still make sure they have several toons to fill the roles for reaper.
So how many do you have ? Like tank, crowd controller or hjealer/divine caster ?

Because Turbine/SSG made keeping stable of alright alts pretty darn difficult. With every single decision and game change.
Two added monstrous grinds is just "nail in the coffin".

And the worst thing is - you get that reaper xp zerging heroics.
Not difficult 6+ skulls in epics.

[scipiojedi]

I don't want all past lives to apply to all my characters. That would take away their uniqueness. Each character I have is on their own journey, for some it wouldn't make sense if they had certain past lives as it just isn't in their character {sic}to have played that class life

/notsigned

[Enoach]

So how many do you have ? Like tank, crowd controller or hjealer/divine caster ?

Because Turbine/SSG made keeping stable of alright alts pretty darn difficult. With every single decision and game change.
Two added monstrous grinds is just "nail in the coffin".

And the worst thing is - you get that reaper xp zerging heroics.
Not difficult 6+ skulls in epics.

I can't answer for Nokowi, but I actually have 6 characters that I can switch to, all have 2+ roles they can fill in difficult content.

[Rys]

you are free to disagree with the benefits of account wide rxp, but to say that if one support it one must also support the same for every aspect of the game is just way beneath you.

^^

[Avantasian]

Back when we ran shroud all the time, somebody always had an alt and jumped to their healer, for no reward other than completing the content.

Wrong. People ran a wide range of alts in shroud exactly because the reward was account wide.




Good players will still make sure they have several toons to fill the roles for reaper. Give them 6 months or so to develop their favorite toon first.

Good players will also not do that.

[Sam-u-r-eye]

Reaper trees are some utterly OP nonsense...

I haven't met a single person who didn't think so. They are heavy-hand, silly, and frankly SAD.


... and I am not sure how fair it is to give that to all characters based on how quickly people are acquiring it today. Within reaper it's extremely powerful and would give people like me the ability to create a first life character that is better prepared for reaper than someone else who worked on completionist outside reaper having only those heroic benefits. That doesn't seem balanced to me.

It seems to me that this is a problem with the reaper tree and not with XP-sharing as a general principle. Right?


And yes exactly as Nokowi said, it's simply asking for things to be easier than it is today. Not that I would be opposed, but I generally agree with Nokowi's philosophy that the devs say "no" to every request that makes reaper easier.

I can't disagree with you being "practical" but I think you should not enable nonsense even if it is "practical" OBVIOUSLY this discussion was in far-fetched land in the first place ^^

[Sam-u-r-eye]

Good players will also not do that.

No lifers have alts. Other good players don't.

[Qhualor]

Wrong. People ran a wide range of alts in shroud exactly because the reward was account wide.

Shards and 20th reward list are not BTA. Before guild ships, you had to bring the character you wanted to upgrade your GS gear in Shroud or could go to the 1 altar in Amrath. Players had alts for different situations back then.

[Sam-u-r-eye]

The massive elephant in the room for DDO is as follows...

1. Korthos is dated, and we need a starter area that keeps people.
2. The WHO-panel needs to be updated so that I don't have to explain that it loads to every returning vet and new player. It is also unprofessional to leave something like that.
3. The gap between an old player and a new player is massive.
4. Leveling needs to include a wider range of players in heroics and epics. Bravery bonus needs to be standardized to the same XP-range as reaper or else you're going to cause confusion.
5. XP bonuses need to be simplified so that people understand how they are calculated, and what penalties ARE or ARE NOT applying.

Unfortunately to play this game ATM for a new player they have to walk around with DDO wiki open and be constantly asking about bugs etc.

The game's complexity is its strength, but it can also cause confusion---stream-lining unnecessary confusion is IMPORTANT. And ensuring that new players remain competitive is important to the life of the game.

6. Reapers need to spawn with varying models models and attack animations. I'm sorry but they are going to get old once Elite is dead. Ghostbusters Online is bad implementation.

[Avantasian]

They are based on a desire to get every reward for every toon without having to play the game.

No.

[Avantasian]

Shards and 20th reward list are not BTA. Before guild ships, you had to bring the character you wanted to upgrade your GS gear in Shroud or could go to the 1 altar in Amrath. Players had alts for different situations back then.

So what? Alts exploded when shroud came, just because the primary reward was account wide. Do you honestly disagree with that?

[EllisDee37]

Bravery bonus needs to be standardized to the same XP-range as reaper or else you're going to cause confusion.I've decided that it is. There's no detailed list of bonuses and penalties to reaper xp in the xp report, so it really just comes down to how you choose to look at it. I find this way (https://www.ddo.com/forums/showthread.php/485429-Back-after-break-Confused?p=5957826&viewfull=1#post5957826) to be much more palatable.

[Qhualor]

So what? Alts exploded when shroud came, just because the primary reward was account wide. Do you honestly disagree with that?

So it makes a big difference. Back then Shroud wasn't the only raid being run. Many players had alts for different things. GS was considered end game and leveling twink gear.

Hound was common for tank, bard for puppies, healers for group and puppies, dps.

VOD for healers, hagers, dps, WF tank, trapper.

VON 6 for healers, bard for fascinate, dps, hagers.

TOD for healers, light monk, fleshy and WF tank, dps, shadow kiter if they couldn't stand there.

Chronoscope for healers, DC casters, tank, dps.

I think you get the point.

[Enoach]

So what? Alts exploded when shroud came, just because the primary reward was account wide. Do you honestly disagree with that?

There is a bit of a timeline issue. Shroud became available when the max level of a character was 16/18. This was prior to Reincarnation. I agree the ingredients outside of the Power Shards and Cleansers being bound to account did give those that had multiple characters more incentive to run on their alternate character because the group needed a "healing type", "roguish type" or even more dps.

However, it was the addition of TR and Level 20 that made Green Steel even more valuable as it was available to a character at level 11 and 12, which was available before some of the Raid items for that were regularly run.



So it makes a big difference. Back then Shroud wasn't the only raid being run. Many players had alts for different things. GS was considered end game and leveling twink gear.

Hound was common for tank, bard for puppies, healers for group and puppies, dps.

VOD for healers, hagers, dps, WF tank, trapper.

VON 6 for healers, bard for fascinate, dps, hagers.

TOD for healers, light monk, fleshy and WF tank, dps, shadow kiter if they couldn't stand there.

Chronoscope for healers, DC casters, tank, dps.

I think you get the point.

You are correct most people had multiple characters during this time for these raids, this is because most at this time already had multiple characters.

[Dalsheel]

Hm, spit on all those people who grinded ePLs for their alts? Sounds... bad?

[Chai]

Making it less time consuming to obtain in game removes the potential for monetization of grind mitigating mechanics. People defended the gas price trap of TR XP so staunchly that it wont surprise me when reaper XP pots, reaper XP tomes, and Reaper XP boxes, or similar items, get added to the store.

[nokowi]

Making it less time consuming to obtain in game removes the potential for monetization of grind mitigating mechanics. People defended the gas price trap of TR XP so staunchly that it wont surprise me when reaper XP pots, reaper XP tomes, and Reaper XP boxes, or similar items, get added to the store.

You have the direct quotes in this thread that players want to spend money to play many alts, combined with the mistaken idea that reaper will prevent them from doing this.

Instead of buying tomes for all, they can buy their way through reaper rewards.

Those that want to play their way through content without spending money can do so as always.

[nokowi]

No lifers have alts. Other good players don't.

Pretty much everyone on these forums can't make an argument about others not having a life.

Of course you believe the way you play is correct and the way others choose to play is wrong. It's typical of the forums.

I know quite a few great players than maintain many alts. Great players destroy everybody else with only 90% character power - because they know how to play and build a toon.

I know many on the forums that claim things are impossible that are routinely done.

Almost any post on the forums that begins with "xyz" is impossible has a 99% chance of being wrong.

Yours included.

Those that can't go on with life without having every reward on 12 toons in a video game may need to spend some time to think about who really needs a life. Be careful with your accusations about others.

[slarden]

No lifers have alts. Other good players don't. If someone thinks it's not possible to have a life and also have multiple alts it explains why they are incapable of playing alts without the devs making it easier for them.

[Sam-u-r-eye]

If someone thinks it's not possible to have a life and also have multiple alts it explains why they are incapable of playing alts without the devs making it easier for them.

So you think you have a life.
What would you say your play time is per week on average?

I think the issue here isn't the truth of my statement, but the fact that you are defining "no lifer" as someone who spends a lot more time than you personally play.

I would define "no lifer" as someone who plays one day on the weekend (~6-10hrs) and an average of 12 hours during the week. Anything more than that and you're no-lifing it.

[Gremmlynn]

why did you have to taint your pony story with strippers.What's tainted about strippers? Those I've known are very decent people.

[Niminae]

I know many will say no.
But I still would like to share bonuses account wise.
So I can play my alt and have some bonuses, not that I have to farm all the same again.
Now come post this is a Baaad idea.

This is a Baaad idea.

You can already equip your alt with bta/boe/unbound items your main farmed up and make running through heroics on the new character a breeze. Why would you want to make the game even less challenging?

[Astoroth]

I know many will say no.
But I still would like to share bonuses account wise.


Yep, should also make an epic past life, cost 6m exp to match an epic destiny sphere regardless of actual level.


As someone with one character that has everything (but racial pasts) what do you do now?

Make an alt? no, it would be just like playing your main.

Sit at cap? not everyone likes to just grind gear.

You don't need everything on every character. That is what makes them different.

Why not make an alt, one character can't be all builds. Your build is what would make them different. No one has the time to develop more than 1 character as it's become, these things need to be made account wide.

[Gremmlynn]

+1 This.

Would be great for DDO to have people that play multiple toons, at both endgame as at TR/ER levels.
The Devs destroyed this. The game lost players once again, and by 'forcing' many players to play 1 toon, you could say the population is even lower right now as people are not filling several spots at several levels.The only players who are being "forced" to do anything are those more worried about some imaginary score than they are playing the game.

[Niminae]

So you think you have a life.
What would you say your play time is per week on average?

I think the issue here isn't the truth of my statement, but the fact that you are defining "no lifer" as someone who spends a lot more time than you personally play.

I would define "no lifer" as someone who plays one day on the weekend (~6-10hrs) and an average of 12 hours during the week. Anything more than that and you're no-lifing it.

To paraphrase the great George Carlin: Anyone who plays less than me is a casual. Anyone who plays more than me has no life. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XWPCE2tTLZQ)

[Gremmlynn]

3. The gap between an old player and a new player is massive.Sure, given roughly equal intelligence, but it has a lot less to do with the characters they are playing than who's playing it. If they were to swap characters that gap really wouldn't narrow all that much.

About the only way to really narrow that gap is to dumb the game down to the point where there really isn't anything for the new player to learn that the old player already knows.

[Gremmlynn]

Bravery bonus needs to be standardized to the same XP-range as reaper or else you're going to cause confusion.I've always felt this way. Bravery should always have been based on base quest level or been named something else, like "run two levels later on elite bonus". As there is nothing very brave about running at-level quests, even if they generally are the tougher at-level quests.

[slarden]

So you think you have a life.
What would you say your play time is per week on average?

I think the issue here isn't the truth of my statement, but the fact that you are defining "no lifer" as someone who spends a lot more time than you personally play.

I would define "no lifer" as someone who plays one day on the weekend (~6-10hrs) and an average of 12 hours during the week. Anything more than that and you're no-lifing it. lol the bolded part is so ironic coming from some like you that just accused anyone with more alts than you having no life. You made the statement anyone that has more alts than you has no life not me. Don't project your nonsense of defining "no lifer" to me. I never made any defintion.

I average about 12 hours per week although less so now. I play more when I am one of my "sabbaticals" which I take frequently to refresh but I also have more time then. I also have a wife and grown kids, a successful career with the monetary awards that come from it. I focus on other hobbies 3 nights per week and part of the day one weekend day. I usually spend a few hours at the beach every week. I exercise 10 hours per week on top of my daily bike rides into work. I consider it to be a very full and balanced life. What I don't do is spend much time watching tv or movies except when playing DDO I tend to multi-task by catching up on netflix series. Some part of my ddo time is playing with real life friends.

And I manage to do all this with some physical limitations that don't allow me to do everything possible in DDO.

The issue isn't people having more alts than you lacking a life - it's that you want things handed to you easier and you use this lame and false excuse to justify it.

[Sam-u-r-eye]

lol the bolded part is so ironic coming from some like you that just accused anyone with more alts than you having no life.

I have 4 toons.
3 of which are epic completionist without funny business, like boxes.

I also play 40+ hours a week.
I'm a definite no-lifer.

[Viconiax]

Back in the day, people could run multiple alts and swap roles around to fit into group. Now, it's all about 1 char and all DPS.

[Annex]

Oh well. Time to earn some hatred for myself.

It would be a huge win for me. Gigantic.

I have two main characters, my avatar and her sister, each on a different account. I play them 99% of the time. I have 6 others, mostly to keep my Guild at six, but I rarely play them. I refuse to create any more characters because of the tremendous time investment to make a decent character in this game. My avatar cannot perform well in Reaper Difficulty so I do not play that at all. I have no desire to destroy my avatar or her sister so I replay Epic Quests over and over and over. It works for me.

Now, you are probably thinking, "Annex, you nitwit, if you only have one character on each of your accounts. Account wide anything gains you nothing!".

If I could earn Reaper Experience playing another character I would immediately create a brand new healer, equip her as best I may, and send her to join the Reaper 1 groups I see. Since all her Reaper Experience would go to my avatar, my avatar would constantly gain power while remaining a cat burglar, happily permanently borrowing stuff while she remains at Epic levels doing her thing.

Shared Past Life Feats would be even more awesome. At L20 my hypothetical cleric would retire and write her magically enchanted Memoirs of a Beautiful Healer in Distress. For game purposes she would be deleted, but her memories would live on as my avatar reads that book and gains the high points of the cleric's life in the form of a Past Life Feat. Oh my goodness that would be so awesome. Robots. Dwarfs. Half-orcs. Warlocks. All the things I despise channeled to my avatar while she remains at Epic Levels as a cat burglar. That would be so much fun!

It would completely change how I play. Someone in the Harbor needs some help? No problem! I will roll up a new L4 character and play with you! I will play with you all the way to L20 if you like! Need a healer for your Reaper group? No problem! Need a robot? I hate robots but, heck, no problem! All the things I hate? No problem! All the things I cannot spare time for under the current system because it pulls time away from my avatar and her sister? No problem! Make 'em, play 'em, write a book, retire 'em. My avatar would be so well read!

*sighs* It will never happen.

[Gremmlynn]

Why not make an alt, one character can't be all builds. Your build is what would make them different. No one has the time to develop more than 1 character as it's become, these things need to be made account wide.I guess that would depend on one's definition of "develop".

Personally I play 23 on and off, all well developed for what they run.

[Blastyswa]

So you think you have a life.
What would you say your play time is per week on average?

I think the issue here isn't the truth of my statement, but the fact that you are defining "no lifer" as someone who spends a lot more time than you personally play.

I would define "no lifer" as someone who plays one day on the weekend (~6-10hrs) and an average of 12 hours during the week. Anything more than that and you're no-lifing it.

I've always been of the mind that "no lifer" is someone who doesn't have a life outside of DDO. For example, I work every day in the morning, and have a second job in the evenings most days. I still manage to fit in maybe 1-2 hours a day of DDO most days, for a total of close to your 12 hours during the week. I also play 8-10 hours on saturday, and a few hours on sunday, which should put me into no-lifing it zone. I'm also getting married in august, have a date night once a week, go shooting with my buddies, and am planning a long vacation in June. Personally I think I have a life, but I also have responsibilities, so if having a life is defined as "Spending at least 5 hours with friends every day" or something then I'm definitely not meeting that requirement, but even if I wasn't playing DDO I wouldn't be able to meet that requirement. I've always looked at no-lifer as meaning someone who wakes up, plays DDO until noon, yells at their mother to ask what's for lunch, and then goes back in the basement until they go to bed. This cycle repeats itself, uninterrupted by work, friends, family, and loved ones.

[Avantasian]

So it makes a big difference. Back then Shroud wasn't the only raid being run. Many players had alts for different things. GS was considered end game and leveling twink gear.

Hound was common for tank, bard for puppies, healers for group and puppies, dps.

VOD for healers, hagers, dps, WF tank, trapper.

VON 6 for healers, bard for fascinate, dps, hagers.

TOD for healers, light monk, fleshy and WF tank, dps, shadow kiter if they couldn't stand there.

Chronoscope for healers, DC casters, tank, dps.

I think you get the point.

No, I don't get your point. How does that relate to my post? I am talking about shroud and how account wide rewards made people take their alts into shroud. Every single person I knew had some character that they more or less only played in shroud, and most I knew rolled new characters for the sole purpose of using them to far account wide rewards in the shroud. Account wide rewards make people run alts more, that is just a fact. Trying to paint it as though people played alts at that time with no regards for rewards is simply wrong.
The alt focus of the shroud was a big reason people had characters of different roles to jump into when needed for other content.

[Vanhooger]

Not evereyone has 24h/24h to play ddo.

Yes to account wide xp.

I like to min max my toons and the new tr system & rxp basically killed them all, I only play my main with my limited time.

[Qhualor]

No, I don't get your point. How does that relate to my post? I am talking about shroud and how account wide rewards made people take their alts into shroud. Every single person I knew had some character that they more or less only played in shroud, and most I knew rolled new characters for the sole purpose of using them to far account wide rewards in the shroud. Account wide rewards make people run alts more, that is just a fact. Trying to paint it as though people played alts at that time with no regards for rewards is simply wrong.
The alt focus of the shroud was a big reason people had characters of different roles to jump into when needed for other content.

Some did roll up alts to farm Shroud, but so didn't some roll up a bard to maximize selling junk loot. It is a fact also that some did roll up alts for different situations. It was common filling a raid group and than instead of waiting a bit to try a get a specific role, someone would offer to switch characters. For me I had a

Human barb that often tanked Horoth in TOD and eventually was capable tanking Sulu in both VOD and TOD. Sometimes did also in Hound.

A WF fighter that often tanked Sulu

A S&B fighter that often tanked heroic DQ and Hound intimitanking.

A Tempest ranger that was often a support healer in groups.

I had options to choose from. Your point that players didn't roll up alts for different situations is just flat out wrong.

[Uska]

Not evereyone has 24h/24h to play ddo.

Yes to account wide xp.

I like to min max my toons and the new tr system & rxp basically killed them all, I only play my main with my limited time.

That is not a good reason

[Avantasian]

I had options to choose from. Your point that players didn't roll up alts for different situations is just flat out wrong.

I have never made that point. I have personally rolled up alts for different situations, but I never played alts as much as I did in the shroud and the racial PLs and reaper exp made me stop considering starting to play an alt again.

[EllisDee37]

I have never made that point. I have personally rolled up alts for different situations, but I never played alts as much as I did in the shroud and the racial PLs and reaper exp made me stop considering starting to play an alt again.He's saying that account wide rewards aren't the only reason people played alts. His example of a different reason to play alts was to fulfill roles for guild raids.

[nokowi]

Why not make an alt, one character can't be all builds. Your build is what would make them different. No one has the time to develop more than 1 character as it's become, these things need to be made account wide.

We went from "there's nothing to do and not enough new content" to "there is no way anyone can play more than one toon" within the span of a few months.

The forums are pure comedy.

No designer is going to take these comments seriously, in light of what everyone was saying 3 months ago.

[Sam-u-r-eye]

We went from "there's nothing to do and not enough new content" to "there is no way anyone can play more than one toon" within the span of a few months.

The forums are pure comedy.

No designer is going to take these comments seriously, in light of what everyone was saying 3 months ago.

Are you playing again?

[nokowi]

Are you playing again?

Not until they fix assassin.

I currently qualify as having a life with the ability to decide if DDO provides enough enjoyment to be worth the time investment (currently no, because assassin is not very fun at the moment).

It would be odd if you disqualified people who play both more or less than you, but not totally unexpected given your comments.

When you have a good argument, you can use the argument and not judge other people.

I see you are needing to go towards the latter.

[slarden]

Are you playing again? You would have to play Assassin in the current state to truly understand why a top-tier assassin player wouldn't have fun playing the game right now. His opinion shouldn't be discounted because of a poorly implemented change to monster agro.

[SpartanKiller13]

There is very little incentive to keep more than 2 toons and as a consequence many people limit themselves to ONE toon realistically.
This is a pretty big problem with the game and a major reason I see people give up when they see massive grinds.

People could TR a heroic toon to get past-lives while keeping ANOTHER toon at cap.
Isn't that lovely? People don't need to TR their main to keep up with the grind---they can participate in a social community that doesn't exclude people 3 levels different.

You can only be logged into one toon at a time ANYWAY, so its not like there is a problem lore-wise.

You literally contradict yourself a few paragraphs apart.

Somehow I manage to have multiple characters (although I definitely have a main where most of my time goes) at separate levels. If I want to do something that my main isn't level-appropriate for, I can hop onto one of them.

Reaper, RPL's, and everything else does not stop this. Is it less "efficient"? Maybe, but I'm playing DDO for fun, not for fastest xp - if so I'd be working overtime and buying Otto's. It's way more efficient in terms of xp/hour. Or at least constantly running Sovereigns.


why did you have to taint your pony story with strippers.

+1 sir this was an excellent comment and it made my afternoon.

[Enoach]

There is an aspect that I think some people are missing with the idea of Past Lives (any of them) being Account Wide.

This potentially removes a revenue stream. There are Past Lives that some people "pay" through, be it XP potions, XP Stones or other bypass options.

While there is the claim that people only play a single character because... They are not entirely correct as there are people like me that still have multiple characters and play multiple characters.

As a long time player I would benefit from such a system. But then all of my characters would most likely feel the same as they past lives from my six character would make me done with Epic Reincarnation, Heroic would make me a completionist nearly 3x etc.

I don't want this as in my mind that would be the single biggest "power leap" in the game. I just think this is a bad idea. But unless you see that these are not needed you probably won't agree.

[Blastyswa]

That is not a good reason

Counterarguments are nice, as are completing your sentences properly. otherwise it's just

[Blastyswa]

There is an aspect that I think some people are missing with the idea of Past Lives (any of them) being Account Wide.

This potentially removes a revenue stream. There are Past Lives that some people "pay" through, be it XP potions, XP Stones or other bypass options.

While there is the claim that people only play a single character because... They are not entirely correct as there are people like me that still have multiple characters and play multiple characters.

As a long time player I would benefit from such a system. But then all of my characters would most likely feel the same as they past lives from my six character would make me done with Epic Reincarnation, Heroic would make me a completionist nearly 3x etc.

I don't want this as in my mind that would be the single biggest "power leap" in the game. I just think this is a bad idea. But unless you see that these are not needed you probably won't agree.

I personally don't want anything but reaper xp to be changed to account wide, but if normal past lives were changed as well I imagine they wouldn't be retroactive, much like RTR. So if you have one character that's heroic completionist, another character thats an epic completionist, and a third character that has no past lives, they would all stay that same way, but then if you got 30x racial past lives after the change then they would all be triple racial completionists in addition to everything they individually were before.

[Chai]

You would have to play Assassin in the current state to truly understand why a top-tier assassin player wouldn't have fun playing the game right now. His opinion shouldn't be discounted because of a poorly implemented change to monster agro.

That doesnt have anything to do with asking for account wide XP systems however. If they fix the class a year from now, and the player comes off break to start playing again, and demands account wide XP at that time, thats a full year the player could have been playing to gain ETR XP or reaper XP (or whatever else is being asked for to be account wide). Ive taken breaks due to the state of the game too. I just dont ask or demand the system now accommodate catching me up later on when I come back if/when I deem the game interesting enough again (especially without having to pay for it, as that is how the game is monetized, buying past time consumption).

[Enoach]

I personally don't want anything but reaper xp to be changed to account wide, but if normal past lives were changed as well I imagine they wouldn't be retroactive, much like RTR. So if you have one character that's heroic completionist, another character thats an epic completionist, and a third character that has no past lives, they would all stay that same way, but then if you got 30x racial past lives after the change then they would all be triple racial completionists in addition to everything they individually were before.

Racial was a new system which is why it wasn't retro. The others they actually have a way to track, and not doing so would probably raise a huge stink from long time players.

I think they should consider Reaper Cosmetic XP unlocks for Account wide but not the Trees.

I don't want Past Lives or XP like Reaper (for trees) or Crafting XP to be shared. I would prefer those stay at the character level.

[Mglaxix]

I know many will say no.
But I still would like to share bonuses account wise.
So I can play my alt and have some bonuses, not that I have to farm all the same again.
Now come post this is a Baaad idea.


So let me get this straight..... Account wide xp Account wide Past lives Account wide hmmmmm...... I have 40 toons many first lifers with no bonuses of any sort except for my knowledge of the game of course all capable of running First time 120% reaper XP bonus on a single life and share it across my account.... that is the most comical idea I have ever heard. I wonder how quick I could cap my reaper xp in that system. Heck just keep rolling up new toons and keep adding in my reaper first bonus sounds like a great system to me.

Fail Fail Fail

[RobbinB]

I would say no to the suggestion as proposed.

I agree with many of the points from people on both sides of the op. What confuses me is that there only seems to be two distinct sides to the debate. Did I miss it or did anyone sensibly ask if there might be some compromise somewhere in the middle of all this, some grey in between the black and white?

The introduction of reaper followed immediately by racial tr in it's 3 x10 races format is in my mind insane. +1 skill point for 10 different lives the first time you do each race? That's grind to the extreme and really just plain stupid. And frankly I'm surprised there wasn't a whole lot more resistance to that insanity on Lamannia (there was some resistance but there could have been more).

So, no, maybe account wide xp for playing one toon only isn't reasonable, but maybe there could be some changes made. Like xp bonuses after you get 2/3/4/... toons to a certain # of past-lives, or y% of the xp you earned goes to other toons on the same server, or whatever. Something the helps make successive alts not as grindy to level up as the first character(s) you play.

[Avantasian]

He's saying that account wide rewards aren't the only reason people played alts. His example of a different reason to play alts was to fulfill roles for guild raids.

The original statement that he is trying to spin is that people played alts in the shroud for no account wide reward, which is plainly false.

[Vanhooger]

That is not a good reason

For you maybe for me is very good reason.

[Qhualor]

The original statement that he is trying to spin is that people played alts in the shroud for no account wide reward, which is plainly false.

wrong. I responded to this statement you made.


Wrong. People ran a wide range of alts in shroud exactly because the reward was account wide.

I pointed out that players didn't create alts just for unbound ingredients because there were many other raids being played at the same time where many players wanted to have a stable of options depending on the roles needed for these raids. you needed to bring alts into Shroud for BTC shards, to upgrade GS gear and 20th reward lists. players did farm Shroud with alts, but that was not the only reason and its not the only reason why players started alts.

[Avantasian]

wrong. I responded to this statement you made.



I pointed out that players didn't create alts just for unbound ingredients because there were many other raids being played at the same time where many players wanted to have a stable of options depending on the roles needed for these raids. you needed to bring alts into Shroud for BTC shards, to upgrade GS gear and 20th reward lists. players did farm Shroud with alts, but that was not the only reason and its not the only reason why players started alts.

You are even saying yourself that people didn't run it for no reward, you are confirming the post you are trying to counter. Im not disagreeing with what you are saying. Look at the context of the post instead of doing this meaningless forum lawyering.

[Gremmlynn]

No, I don't get your point. How does that relate to my post? I am talking about shroud and how account wide rewards made people take their alts into shroud. Every single person I knew had some character that they more or less only played in shroud, and most I knew rolled new characters for the sole purpose of using them to far account wide rewards in the shroud. Account wide rewards make people run alts more, that is just a fact. Trying to paint it as though people played alts at that time with no regards for rewards is simply wrong.
The alt focus of the shroud was a big reason people had characters of different roles to jump into when needed for other content.The three day waiting period between runs also played a factor there and even if the zoned out before completion, chest ransack also did.

With SSG selling bypasses for that waiting period for newer raids, maybe playing alts isn't something they want to promote. Setting an optional pay game up to support itself seems like it could be fairly tricky with quite a bit of though needed to be put into setting up ways of motivating players to want to pay.

[Avantasian]

Income is gained by making people spend time in the game. The more time they spend the more money they spend.
If encouraging alts makes people spend more time in game it is good for profits. There is no other monetization argument that holds up.

[Gremmlynn]

I have never made that point. I have personally rolled up alts for different situations, but I never played alts as much as I did in the shroud and the racial PLs and reaper exp made me stop considering starting to play an alt again.Because somehow those alts without racial PLs and even reaper xp would be less capable that they are now?

This is what I really don't get. In threads like this I sometimes have to double check to make sure I'm on the DDO forums and not that of some game that is set up to require every possible bonus to be viable in content. While some might make them a little better, most make little or no difference for the task the character is performing.

I mean the very fact that we have people complaining on this forum that 10 Skull Reaper doesn't give enough rxp points out that the hardest setting can be played without the reaper bonuses. That most of this is about getting bonuses for the sake of having bonuses.

[Gremmlynn]

There is an aspect that I think some people are missing with the idea of Past Lives (any of them) being Account Wide.

This potentially removes a revenue stream. There are Past Lives that some people "pay" through, be it XP potions, XP Stones or other bypass options.

While there is the claim that people only play a single character because... They are not entirely correct as there are people like me that still have multiple characters and play multiple characters.

As a long time player I would benefit from such a system. But then all of my characters would most likely feel the same as they past lives from my six character would make me done with Epic Reincarnation, Heroic would make me a completionist nearly 3x etc.

I don't want this as in my mind that would be the single biggest "power leap" in the game. I just think this is a bad idea. But unless you see that these are not needed you probably won't agree.I think some here are of a mind set common in MMOs with actual end games that the real game starts at that end game with the leveling process, in total, some sort of entry cost to playing the real game. So, until a character has every possible past life or other character based bonus (reaper tree, tome, etc.), it is still leveling, rather than actually playing.

Others of us simply see the leveling process as actually playing the game or even as just being a side effect of doing so. With DDO, this could be seen as the more applicable mind set since, what is generally considered "End Game" in many MMOS is actually pretty much the end of the game here due to there really not being much left to play for at that point.

[Gremmlynn]

I don't want Past Lives or XP like Reaper (for trees) or Crafting XP to be shared. I would prefer those stay at the character level.Crafting wouldn't bother me, as that would mostly be a convenience change. Basically just a lot less changing to a different character to craft or deconstruct items.

But I can see why SSG may not want to do that as a single crafter being extremely optimal for those who play multiple characters likely pushes sales of shared banks and shared bank space.

[Gremmlynn]

I pointed out that players didn't create alts just for unbound ingredients because there were many other raids being played at the same time where many players wanted to have a stable of options depending on the roles needed for these raids. you needed to bring alts into Shroud for BTC shards, to upgrade GS gear and 20th reward lists. players did farm Shroud with alts, but that was not the only reason and its not the only reason why players started alts.My memory is that players were much more reluctant to do so in those other raids, due to the rewards not being able to be shared though. If the motivation for running the raid was to get item A for character X, running it on character Y was often seen as being rather pointless.

That's not to say it was never done, but generally it was due to not having anything better to do at the time and character X being on timer. Until timer bypasses came out anyway.

[Gremmlynn]

Income is gained by making people spend time in the game. The more time they spend the more money they spend.
If encouraging alts makes people spend more time in game it is good for profits. There is no other monetization argument that holds up.Except that grind sharing would cause those alts to not really need to play much.

I really don't see how this would cause players to play more. It might cause some players to play different characters in basically the same time span they would have played the one fully maxed out character. But other players without the psychological need to be fully maxed out, would play less due to no longer having to grind out just what they feel an alt may actually need to be good enough for the task.

[GeoffWatson]

Because somehow those alts without racial PLs and even reaper xp would be less capable that they are now?


No, but the devs create new content balanced around the players having the max. In the new raid, the boss has millions of HP, as the devs based it on what maxxed out players can have.
If you just want to do old content, the alts are fine.

[Avantasian]

Because somehow those alts without racial PLs and even reaper xp would be less capable that they are now?

This is what I really don't get. In threads like this I sometimes have to double check to make sure I'm on the DDO forums and not that of some game that is set up to require every possible bonus to be viable in content. While some might make them a little better, most make little or no difference for the task the character is performing.

I mean the very fact that we have people complaining on this forum that 10 Skull Reaper doesn't give enough rxp points out that the hardest setting can be played without the reaper bonuses. That most of this is about getting bonuses for the sake of having bonuses.

What about finishing a character is it you don't get?

[Avantasian]

Except that grind sharing would cause those alts to not really need to play much.

I really don't see how this would cause players to play more. It might cause some players to play different characters in basically the same time span they would have played the one fully maxed out character. But other players without the psychological need to be fully maxed out, would play less due to no longer having to grind out just what they feel an alt may actually need to be good enough for the task.

There is more than enough grinding to keep players busy for years and years. It's not like the majority of players had run out of things to do before racial PLs and RXP.
Causing players to play more characters creates variety.
Look, Im not asking for sharing of all grinds.

If account wide rewards are inherently bad, the same must apply to unbound and BTA loot.

[EllisDee37]

Crafting wouldn't bother me, as that would mostly be a convenience change. Basically just a lot less changing to a different character to craft or deconstruct items.I don't bother changing, since both my crafters (on both accounts) can craft anything bound that I'd ever want, so neither crafter needs more crafting xp. But I can always use essences so I decon everything with whoever I'm on. My non-crafters are around crafter level 100 just from decon.


But I can see why SSG may not want to do that as a single crafter being extremely optimal for those who play multiple characters likely pushes sales of shared banks and shared bank space.You don't need shared bank for crafting. Shared Crafting Storage suffices, and all premium players get 12 slots for free. So a premium player without shared bank can still pass bound crafted shards around. (Just not finished items.)


All that to say that I tend to agree, account-wide crafting xp seems like a reasonable idea.

[Chai]

Income is gained by making people spend time in the game. The more time they spend the more money they spend.
If encouraging alts makes people spend more time in game it is good for profits. There is no other monetization argument that holds up.

Their income model is predicated on spending money to circumvent calendar time playing to attain specific goals. Those who advocated this method and supported it through the years would argue that doesnt make people spend less time in the game. Ive seen evidence of both. Some of those folks who staunchly supported it over the years still play and still pay, however some of them paid their way through the game, then left. A good example of the latter is the guy who created the thread a few years back regarding having spent thousands of dollars attaining completionist, then complained there was nothing to do, then hasnt been heard from since.

This isnt necessarily the argument that would convince SSG however. What could convince them is making a case that the success of this marketing model doesnt justify moving forward with it and monetizing current PLs even more, and also monetizing new XP methods such as reaper XP. Could that case even be made? I highly doubt it. This is the accepted revenue model now.

[Avantasian]

Their income model is predicated on spending money to circumvent calendar time playing to attain specific goals. Those who advocated this method and supported it through the years would argue that doesnt make people spend less time in the game. Ive seen evidence of both. Some of those folks who staunchly supported it over the years still play and still pay, however some of them paid their way through the game, then left. A good example of the latter is the guy who created the thread a few years back regarding having spent thousands of dollars attaining completionist, then complained there was nothing to do, then hasnt been heard from since.

This isnt necessarily the argument that would convince SSG however. What could convince them is making a case that the success of this marketing model doesnt justify moving forward with it and monetizing current PLs even more, and also monetizing new XP methods such as reaper XP. Could that case even be made? I highly doubt it. This is the accepted revenue model now.

The idea is that making some of the grind account wide would lead to an increase in demand for circumventing calendar time. If the hill is slightly less steep more people will travel it.

[Qhualor]

The idea is that making some of the grind account wide would lead to an increase in demand for circumventing calendar time. If the hill is slightly less steep more people will travel it.

the hill was already less steep when new content, reducing the xp required for cap on 2nd and 3rd lifers, adding multiple xp boosts, increasing xp in some quests, pay to bypass and reworking quest xp. account wide is one of the worst forum ideas I have seen without taking into account the negative side affects or if they are, they don't seem to care.

[Chai]

The idea is that making some of the grind account wide would lead to an increase in demand for circumventing calendar time. If the hill is slightly less steep more people will travel it.

Theres also the possibility that if more people will run/walk the marathon for free, that means less people will pay for the taxi to take them to the finish line. If there was an endgame at that finish line waiting for us, that would add incentive to "finish" characters to keep them at cap.

[Epicstorms]

My dream game would be ...

DDO, with:
- Shared heroic, epic, iconic and racial pastlifes,
- Shared reaper XP, but ONLY for cosmetics. Remove the reaper enhancements entirely.

I would play several toons ...
Several at endgame, filling several raid roles, such as DPS, CC etc.
Several in heroic levels to play when I don't feel like raiding or running endgame, to gather those racial pastlifes and easy reaper XP.
Perhaps one in epic levels as I don't have all epic PLs yet.

I'd be so happy to have multiple toons at so many level ranges, the ability to join a lot of LFMs and always able to play with my friends/guildies as I suspect they will also have toons at endgame.
If I want to run heroics, I can actually ask in guildchat if anyone wants to join me (Current situation: You look up the most recent online main toons as those are the only toons people play. If those don't fit the level range, enjoy so)

The game would feel ALIVE again for me. Now it feels like I play solo and only if I'm lucky I can play with some nice people.
When I play alts it won't feel like I miss out on other stuff for my main anymore, as it's all shared for the account.

I don't even care if the devs decide to make this a pay feature. Like 2000 TP per toon that you want to add to the 'shared XP' pool. I'd pay for it.
People that just want to play 1 toon and have all the pastlifes on that toon can still play their single toon.
If you now think: OMG but now you've significantly reduced the grind! Well, do you really think that the devs won't develop some new brilliant hamster wheel before most players finish their 30 racial PLs?
Sure there are some exceptions of people that have 2 completionists, but let's not let that get in the way of the main idea. We can think of something right?

/endofdream

[Avantasian]

the hill was already less steep when new content, reducing the xp required for cap on 2nd and 3rd lifers, adding multiple xp boosts, increasing xp in some quests, pay to bypass and reworking quest xp. account wide is one of the worst forum ideas I have seen without taking into account the negative side affects or if they are, they don't seem to care.

Please point to all the negative effects of unbound and account bound loot and I will listen.

[Vish]

No.
Just earn it on each toon.
Or become your main.

[nokowi]

Please point to all the negative effects of unbound and account bound loot and I will listen.

The flaw in your logic is that assuming because something is OK in limited form, it must be OK when applied everywhere. I could equally argue that there are instances where you have to run a single character and stuff can not be shared, and that therefore doing so everywhere (getting rid of all BTA stuff) would not be a problem. That would be the same flawed logic used by those saying everything BTA would be fine, however. The argument that nothing being BTA would be fine is just as sound, so maybe it would be best to refrain from this type of poor logic that something that appears a few times could appear everywhere without any negative consequences. It can be used against your position as well as for it.

If all account loot was bound there would be negative effects compared to the systems we have now. Having some system requiring a specific character and some allowing shared best meets everyone's preferences.

The problem with shared RXP is all of the people on the forums that find one instance of something and then naturally assume doing it to the 100th power will be great for DDO. The number of threads asking for everything to be shared, along with the history of player requests, shows how what may seem innocent to one person quickly becomes a problem when applied everywhere.

It is exactly how elite became the place for casuals, and it was not good for the game.

[Chai]

People kind of painted themselves into this corner by advocating for account bound loot, and then using their main to farm loot for all characters. The issue is since all character power added after AP and leveling doesnt come from gear, their main ended up being uber while their alts ended up being better than average, but not uber (well geared but minimal PLs). Now they want the rest of the character power to be account bound or account farmed so they can continue to use their main to farm it, and have the power on all characters afterward, including any new characters they might roll up in the future.

Concerning the audience that will pay their way past earning it in game, once that is bought and paid for one time, their entire stable of characters now has it, and theres no reason for them to continue paying for it. SSG is attempting to sell it to them incrementally rather than as a whole, which makes it far less likely to undermine the revenue stream. This creates more consistent revenue rather than a large burst of revenue one quarter, followed by a huge drought of revenue afterward.

Then of course once a significant portion of that population is saturated with that previous level of purchased power, they need to find a means to incentivize continual incremental purchase of it, which includes adding new grind systems into the game. Sooner or later even people who staunchly supported it in the past (both on the forums, and in game through purchases) begin to question how much is too much. Paying to be at the top quickly doesnt provide what is desired as more grind systems are added, making it so the perception is they are no longer at the top again, unless they grind out, or pay for, the new level of character power. Even if its not needed, its the perception that is important here. D&D based games attract min maxers after all, and min maxing does not include striving for (or paying for) mediocrity. The more the goal posts of max character power are moved, the more people will question it.

[Avantasian]

The flaw in your logic is that assuming because something is OK in limited form, it must be OK when applied everywhere.

That is completely false. I have been very clear that I still want it it be limited and that applying it everywhere is a bad idea.
It is my opposition who continously makes the logical error of assuming that because something is bad when applied everywhere it must be bad in limited form.

I do expect an apology.



I could equally argue that there are instances where you have to run a single character and stuff can not be shared, and that therefore doing so everywhere (getting rid of all BTA stuff) would not be a problem. That would be the same flawed logic used by those saying everything BTA would be fine, however. The argument that nothing being BTA would be fine is just as sound, so maybe it would be best to refrain from this type of poor logic that something that appears a few times could appear everywhere without any negative consequences. It can be used against your position as well as for it.

I have never used that argument.
I expect another apology.



If all account loot was bound there would be negative effects compared to the systems we have now. Having some system requiring a specific character and some allowing shared best meets everyone's preferences.

That is exactly what I have been saying. We are in perfect agreement except that I don't buy into the slippery slope fallacy.

[Gramh_the_Bard]

That is exactly what I have been saying. We are in perfect agreement except that I don't buy into the slippery slope fallacy.

your whole argument is the very slippery slope you say is fallacy >.> you can't point at BTA items as a platform for RXP to be shared and then turn around and say that slippery slope is a fallacy >.>

[Wonedream]

I support this idea! Alts are pointless mules, good for 1 life on casual at best. Not worth investing a dime in, and it will not happen as it is now.

EPLs of all the PLs possible add the most... and would level alts better then any other. It would make doing racials or complete seem more worth it.


And we see the usual people who support and oppose this idea appearing to make their case.

It doesnt matter who wins, but I can say this, money matters, and as I said before, I wont spend a cent on an alt ever how it is now!!!

[Avantasian]

your whole argument is the very slippery slope you say is fallacy >.> you can't point at BTA items as a platform for RXP to be shared and then turn around and say that slippery slope is a fallacy >.>

Success of BTA items would prove that the argument that any shared rewards are bad is just completely false, and that is so far the most used argument against.

Nowiko said it best:

Having some system requiring a specific character and some allowing shared best meets everyone's preferences.


Since we just got two huge character specific systems, is it really unreasonable to make the claim that it shifted too far in that direction to best meet everyones preferences?


The idea that any move towards more shared reward will result in all being shared is a slippery slope fallacy.

[slarden]

I do expect an apology.

I expect another apology.

Why is it the people that should be apologizing to others are always the ones demanding apologies.

[Qhualor]

Please point to all the negative effects of unbound and account bound loot and I will listen.

I thought the discussion was about account wide xp. What does unbound and BTA gear have to do with it? Had I known that the discussion deviated from the topic my post would have been different.

[Gramh_the_Bard]

Being complicit in it isn't the same as successful when it comes to BTA loot.

[Sam-u-r-eye]

shared power is shared power
shared grind is shared grind

[Avantasian]

I thought the discussion was about account wide xp. What does unbound and BTA gear have to do with it? Had I known that the discussion deviated from the topic my post would have been different.

Are you not claiming that account wide rewards are inherently bad? If not, then what exactly is your argument?

[nokowi]

That is exactly what I have been saying. We are in perfect agreement except that I don't buy into the slippery slope fallacy.

Or really? You didn't see continual requests for the game to be made easier each of them individually not that big a deal?


At the first pass (bard), Sev justified bard by saying that they wanted there to be somewhere easy for new players.

You didn't see this extend to every pass afterward had to be better than bard?

You did't see demands for every build to get some sort of fast movement?

Explain how one pass being an easy button for new players did not turn into every pass needing that level of power.



Explain why your preference for shared rewards is more important than someone else's?

If anything RXP is new and should NOT be the shared resource.

If the argument is actually to help new players (and not to make things easier for vets), older resources have a much better argument for this kind of attention than something new, for which everyone has the same opportunity.


Anyone arguing that a brand new resource should be account shared, and calling this a benefit for new players, while denying new players the things for which they are actually behind, needs to take some serious time to think through their opinion.

[Avantasian]

Or really? You didn't see continual requests for the game to be made easier each of them individually not that big a deal?


At the first pass (bard), Sev justified bard by saying that they wanted there to be somewhere easy for new players.

You didn't see this extend to every pass afterward had to be better than bard?

You did't see demands for every build to get some sort of fast movement?

Explain how one pass being an easy button for new players did not turn into every pass needing that level of power.

The class passes are easy to explain from a balance and meta mix up perspective. It's completely irrelevant to this topic ofcourse, and you know it.

Explain how account wide rewards have been added throught the entire history of the game, yet still the character specific rewards vastly outnumber/power them.




Explain why your preference for shared rewards is more important than someone else's?

Explain why your preference for shared rewards is more important than someone else's. The status quo is not the null hypothesis. Claiming that it is perfect because it's current simply does not hold up.


PS. No apology for the blatant lies about my poisition?

[nokowi]

PS. No apology for the blatant lies about my poisition?

A lie would be if I read your positions and intentionally said something different.

You clarified your position to my satisfaction.

If you can't handle clarifying your position and repeating things from people who don't read multipage threads with little of value, then you shouldn't be on the forums.

Discussion could continue if you were not sidetracking your own efforts.

[Sam-u-r-eye]

A lie would be if I read your positions and intentionally said something different.

You clarified your position to my satisfaction.

If you can't handle clarifying your position and repeating things from people who don't read multipage threads with little of value, then you shouldn't be on the forums.

Discussion could continue if you were not sidetracking your own efforts.

...meanwhile back in dungeons and dragons

Why was the rogue picking at the party's warlock?

BECAUSE ROGUES ARE GREAT AT PICKING LOCKS

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

[nokowi]

The class passes are easy to explain from a balance and meta mix up perspective. It's completely irrelevant to this topic ofcourse, and you know it.

Explain how account wide rewards have been added throught the entire history of the game, yet still the character specific rewards vastly outnumber/power them.

Because loot items are different than account wide character power. You already saw this response.

With shared character power, playing 12 toons is the same as playing 1 toon.

That prevents anyone that plays for power from ever playing more than 1 toon's worth of content from the game.






Explain why your preference for shared rewards is more important than someone else's. The status quo is not the null hypothesis. Claiming that it is perfect because it's current simply does not hold up.

I showed that new players would benefit more from shared xp than shared RXP. Tell me why your request (RXP) is more important to share? (see how I repeated my statement for you?)

My preference would be to stop with this shared rewards nonsense, and have people play the game instead of the forums. I see who it is coming from, and it is asking devs to reduce the life of reaper by those that have played the game a long time - and without any benefits to anyone else.

Purely selfish motivations, false justifications, and no benefit to others.

[Avantasian]

A lie would be if I read your positions and intentionally said something different.

You clarified your position to my satisfaction.

If you can't handle clarifying your position and repeating things from people who don't read multipage threads with little of value, then you shouldn't be on the forums.

Discussion could continue if you were not sidetracking your own efforts.

An apology for the unintentional complete misrepresentation of my position will do.

[nokowi]

An apology for the unintentional complete misrepresentation of my position will do.

I'm sorry.

[Avantasian]

Because loot items are different than account wide character power. You already saw this response.

In principle it's not different at all.



With shared character power, playing 12 toons is the same as playing 1 toon.

That prevents anyone that plays for power from ever playing more than 1 toon's worth of content from the game.

I am not asking for a situation were playing 12 toons is the same as playing 1 toon. You are consitently creating new strawmen to attack. I don't see why you would do that unless you knew that you can't adress the actual argument that's put forward.



I showed that new players would benefit more from shared xp than shared RXP. Tell me why your request (RXP) is more important to share? (see how I repeated my statement for you?)

I am not unwilling to consider that RXP is not the optimal thing to make account wide, not at all.



Purely selfish motivations, false justifications, and no benefit to others.

At this point I will just report your slander.

[nokowi]

At this point I will just report your slander.

You can't slander a position. If you misunderstood my statement, you can apologize to me.


Asking for shared RXP above other things without stating a reason is a lack of a real position.

[Avantasian]

Asking for shared RXP above other things without stating a reason is a lack of a real position.

My position is that the slippery slope arguments and "all account wide is inherently bad" arguments are all wrong and what's left is that making some of the character specific grinds account wide is something that is important to consider.

[nokowi]

My position is that the slippery slope arguments and "all account wide is inherently bad" arguments are all wrong and what's left is that making some of the character specific grinds account wide is something that is important to consider.

Any statement that starts with the word "all" will likely be incorrect. I certainly didn't make that argument.

Some vague statement about considering account wide rewards is fine.

I will add a vague statement about also considering not implementing specific account wide rewards.

[Avantasian]

Any statement that starts with the word "all" will likely be incorrect. I certainly didn't make that argument.

Some vague statement about considering account wide rewards is fine.

I will add a vague statement about also considering not implementing specific account wide rewards.

That's fine.

[Qhualor]

Are you not claiming that account wide rewards are inherently bad? If not, then what exactly is your argument?

Depends on which you are talking about and some of it isn't just black or white. Pick something specific unless you are lumping it all together.

[Avantasian]

Depends on which you are talking about and some of it isn't just black or white. Pick something specific unless you are lumping it all together.

Explain the bolded part below and why loot is exempt but exp is not. I'm all ears.


account wide is one of the worst forum ideas I have seen without taking into account the negative side affects or if they are, they don't seem to care.

[Qhualor]

Explain the bolded part below and why loot is exempt but exp is not. I'm all ears.

account wide xp is the worst idea because it does not incentivize playing alts. it makes it so you can run just 1 character and share your xp rewards with your stable. those characters that are parked doing nothing aren't actually earning anything. eventually when players have their parked characters done with past lives, built up their Reaper xp to unlock more powerful enhancements, finished off their characters off destinies than maybe they will play them. on the business side, SSG doesn't make much money with the wide variety of game bypass, xp boost, cosmetic gear, etc it sells. the idea to share xp actually does the complete opposite of what players think would happen.

first, I never said loot is exempt. I was wondering why the discussion was getting lumped and flip flopped around because loot and xp are not the same.

the bad part of BTA loot is that we are now flooded with this in the game, especially in epics. there used to be an economy with BTCoE or unbound items, but the players pushed suggesting for more BTA items so they could switch characters depending on group needs and because past lives was at that time very popular. imo, this should have been the first real red flag heading towards not playing alts. BTA gear actually lessens the desire to bring alts looking for named loot.

what we need is a selling/trading economy again and players seem to need more reasons to play alts.

[Chai]

That is exactly what I have been saying. We are in perfect agreement except that I don't buy into the slippery slope fallacy.

Identifying something as a slippery slope position doesnt necessarily prove the position wrong. The fallacy is based on identifying a slippery slope not meaning it will automatically happen that way. Evidence is on these very forums that it did happen that way in the past, which is what people are citing, because they dont want it to happen that way again. Even very recently, people asked for reaper Xp to be account wide, and now that it has gained some traction, but hasnt even been implemented or responded to with any affirmation by the company that it will happen, people are already asking for epic reincarnation to ALSO be account wide. That is the slippery slope, already beginning to form, and does at that point merit the question of "how far will this rabbit hole go" if people get what they want on one of those fronts.

Im not even fully against one of those things being made account wide, but I do see the danger of implementing that, and people then demanding more of the same for potentially every other system the game receives, which will undermine the method of revenue generation the company has chosen (which I also do not support, but it is how they chose to monetize the game). When this happens, they will cite the "success" of the last time it happened in order to lobby for more of the same. If this sounds familiar to you, and it should, it is because it has happened a few times before. The forums have gone from "game is boring and theres noting to do" straight to "theres way too much to do and we cant possibly do it all" very quickly, with no gray area in between. We need to be careful of the potential for it to go right back to "zomg theres nothing to do" again.


Explain the bolded part below and why loot is exempt but exp is not. I'm all ears.

This invokes the slippery slope itself. Its the claim that will be used to lobby in more account level stuff in the future. The claim which touts the "success" of a previous account level system, and therefore either claims or implies that this success will be had each time a new account level system is implemented.

The reason why one account level system can be good, is because the entire game is not all account level systems (which as explained above, undermines the revenue generation of the game, and can cause players to not have anything to do once again when it makes it too easy to get everything we want in far too short of a time). If we start using the "success" of one account level system to lobby in more of the same, sooner or later the company can no longer make enough money through selling circumvention of calendar time incrementally, because a large part of the incrementation is the number of characters people want that level of power on, which is voided by giving it to all characters on the account, after only having farmed it on one.

[Avantasian]

account wide xp is the worst idea because it does not incentivize playing alts. it makes it so you can run just 1 character and share your xp rewards with your stable. those characters that are parked doing nothing aren't actually earning anything. eventually when players have their parked characters done with past lives, built up their Reaper xp to unlock more powerful enhancements, finished off their characters off destinies than maybe they will play them. on the business side, SSG doesn't make much money with the wide variety of game bypass, xp boost, cosmetic gear, etc it sells. the idea to share xp actually does the complete opposite of what players think would happen.

Let me ask you this do you believe that Pls and RXP in any sort of way discourages alts?




first, I never said loot is exempt. I was wondering why the discussion was getting lumped and flip flopped around because loot and xp are not the same.

RXP and PLs are not the same, yet you have no problem lumping them together.
The same principles applies with loot. "The parked characters aren't actually earning anything".

[nokowi]

Identifying something as a slippery slope position doesnt necessarily prove the position wrong. The fallacy is based on identifying a slippery slope not meaning it will automatically happen that way. Evidence is on these very forums that it did happen that way in the past, which is what people are citing, because they dont want it to happen that way again. Even very recently, people asked for reaper Xp to be account wide, and now that it has gained some traction, but hasnt even been implemented or responded to with any affirmation by the company that it will happen, people are already asking for epic reincarnation to ALSO be account wide. That is the slippery slope, already beginning to form, and does at that point merit the question of "how far will this rabbit hole go" if people get what they want on one of those fronts.

Im not even fully against one of those things being made account wide, but I do see the danger of implementing that, and people then demanding more of the same for potentially every other system the game receives, which will undermine the method of revenue generation the company has chosen (which I also do not support, but it is how they chose to monetize the game). When this happens, they will cite the "success" of the last time it happened in order to lobby for more of the same. If this sounds familiar to you, and it should, it is because it has happened a few times before. The forums have gone from "game is boring and theres noting to do" straight to "theres way too much to do and we cant possibly do it all" very quickly, with no gray area in between. We need to be careful of the potential for it to go right back to "zomg theres nothing to do" again.

This I agree with. I asked why the push for shared RXP was more important than any other shared request, and I heard crickets.

Recommendations for RXP rewards are based on the idea that everyone should be able to play their preferred number of alts, and preferred hours a day and somehow win DDO.

If you play more than someone else, you don't have a life, if you spend $$, you are P2W, if you play less you are not putting in effort.

Everyone has some excuse why the game should be designed around them.

The game can not be designed around any one player.

The best design gives us too much to do, and let's us decide what portion of that to play.

A rational person might choose the portion of the game they enjoy most.

If you enjoy having lots of alts, go play lots of alts, and please stop asking everything to be designed around your own preferences.

[Qhualor]

Let me ask you this do you believe that Pls and RXP in any sort of way discourages alts?

I don't play Reaper, but I don't see how it discourages it. past lives shouldn't be discouraging playing alts. I still play all of mine and they all have made pretty much equal progress with around 30 past lives each that include epic, Iconic and class that I started mainly back in 2012.


RXP and PLs are not the same, yet you have no problem lumping them together.
The same principles applies with loot. "The parked characters aren't actually earning anything".

Reaper and past lives are not the same, but you progress your characters power with xp that puts them in the same general area. with xp you unlock your enhancements, feats, unlock character power gated by levels, destinies, past lives etc which makes up the majority of a characters power.

BTA gear or any kind of gear only enhances that characters power. only enough incentive to run alts is if you really want an item and your main is ransacked. I actually want there to be a lot less BTA gear in the game and started voicing my opinion on it probably around the time epic 3BC came out.

[Avantasian]

I don't play Reaper, but I don't see how it discourages it. past lives shouldn't be discouraging playing alts. I still play all of mine and they all have made pretty much equal progress with around 30 past lives each that include epic, Iconic and class that I started mainly back in 2012.

So all the noise about it on the forums are just lies? Is that really your conclusion?



Reaper and past lives are not the same, but you progress your characters power with xp that puts them in the same general area. with xp you unlock your enhancements, feats, unlock character power gated by levels, destinies, past lives etc which makes up the majority of a characters power.

BTA gear or any kind of gear only enhances that characters power. only enough incentive to run alts is if you really want an item and your main is ransacked. I actually want there to be a lot less BTA gear in the game and started voicing my opinion on it probably around the time epic 3BC came out.

BTA gear enhances a characters power, XP enhances a characters power. That what we are talking about applies to one but not the other is completely arbitrary. Since you don't even want this much BTA loot you if anyone should see that.

[Astoroth]

If you play more than someone else, you don't have a life, if you spend $$, you are P2W, if you play less you are not putting in effort.

Everyone has some excuse why the game should be designed around them.

The game can not be designed around any one player.

The best design gives us too much to do, and let's us decide what portion of that to play.

A rational person might choose the portion of the game they enjoy most.

If you enjoy having lots of alts, go play lots of alts, and please stop asking everything to be designed around your own preferences.

You're just not seeing the flip side of your own argument. Everything is presently designed around that guy that's pay to win or has no life. You can't balance the grind to fit the extreme end of your player base and expect good results. The casual or guy or alt toon or w/e needs to be competitive as well. And people have earned those past lives or even rxp even if it is on different toons.

So you don't want the game designed around specific playstyles when its a casual or alt player asking for it, but you're fine with a grind that takes years and years designed exclusively for people that just play one toon mostly. Presumably your own preferred play style. The more they balance the game to the extreme the more players will leave.

Oh how's that assassination thing and aggro working out for you? Since you don't want them to balance for a select group of players, I guess you're fine with them never fixing that.

[Qhualor]

So all the noise about it on the forums are just lies? Is that really your conclusion?

no. my conclusion is that players want to take part in all or most of the grind options in the time sink game and they see how long it would take them to get through all those hoops. they don't like how long it would take them and they suggest incredible ideas like account wide xp so their grind is down to 1 character instead of going through the same grinds on multiple characters.


BTA gear enhances a characters power, XP enhances a characters power. That what we are talking about applies to one but not the other is completely arbitrary. Since you don't even want this much BTA loot you if anyone should see that.

xp enhancing a characters power has much greater reward than gear does due to the amount of power it can unlock.

[Avantasian]

no. my conclusion is that players want to take part in all or most of the grind options in the time sink game and they see how long it would take them to get through all those hoops. they don't like how long it would take them and they suggest incredible ideas like account wide xp so their grind is down to 1 character instead of going through the same grinds on multiple characters.

And there is no merit at all to it? Or just a bunch of whiners crying for free stuff?



xp enhancing a characters power has much greater reward than gear does due to the amount of power it can unlock.

Gear gives far more power than most past lives.

[Qhualor]

And there is no merit at all to it? Or just a bunch of whiners crying for free stuff?

its a player issue, not a game issue.


Gear gives far more power than most past lives.

so than the discussion on shared xp with alts is now down to specifically past lives and not all the other things xp can unlock as I pointed out before like enhancements, EDs, etc. that have far greater value and reward?

[Sam-u-r-eye]

And there is no merit at all to it? Or just a bunch of whiners crying for free stuff?

+1

[nokowi]

You're just not seeing the flip side of your own argument. Everything is presently designed around that guy that's pay to win or has no life. You can't balance the grind to fit the extreme end of your player base and expect good results. The casual or guy or alt toon or w/e needs to be competitive as well. And people have earned those past lives or even rxp even if it is on different toons.

Except that I have shown you don't need many past lives, and the time is well within the grasp of those complaining.




So you don't want the game designed around specific playstyles when its a casual or alt player asking for it, but you're fine with a grind that takes years and years designed exclusively for people that just play one toon mostly. Presumably your own preferred play style. The more they balance the game to the extreme the more players will leave.


I said that a game that gives everyone something to do is better than one that doesn't. Designing around the least common denominator is not good for an MMO that wants to survive for many years. DDO has the depth of design and character generation to appeal to a higher level of player than those that can't learn the game or don't have the time to play the game - Complexity is it's niche along with D&D branding.



Oh how's that assassination thing and aggro working out for you? Since you don't want them to balance for a select group of players, I guess you're fine with them never fixing that.

Yes, DDO is a business. If they never fix assassin, I am fine never playing again.

I lobbied heavily for challenge and grouping, and I am glad to see reaper show up live, even with its flaws.

I have lobbied for a new player experience, and many other things that don't benefit me directly.

[Avantasian]

its a player issue, not a game issue.

Unhappy players is a game issue.




so than the discussion on shared xp with alts is now down to specifically past lives and not all the other things xp can unlock as I pointed out before like enhancements, EDs, etc. that have far greater value and reward?

Wait, you think that I am advocating an account wide exp pool? I'm not.
I'm discussing validity of making some of the huge character specific grinds account wide to encourage people who want to play alts again. Be it reaper points, past lives, karma or just something. I showed that making a reward account wide is not inherently bad by pointing to BTA and unbound rewards, both of which are generally popular and one of which you even advocate yourself.

[nokowi]

I showed that making a reward account wide is not inherently bad by pointing to BTA and unbound rewards, both of which are generally popular and one of which you even advocate yourself.

You didn't show it was inherently good.

Your position is that it might not be bad, while ignoring the history of similar efforts. It a stance with nothing actionable for devs.

[Avantasian]

You didn't show it was inherently good.

Your position is that it might not be bad, while ignoring the history of similar efforts. It a stance with nothing actionable for devs.

I don't believe it is inherently good.

The history of similar efforts is positive, the account wide rewards in the shroud for example made people play alts like never before or since.

So far the most convincing argument against making some of the grind account wide was that people could run out of things to do too quickly. But with the numbers provided in the other thread about how long lives takes and how many even play elite it's clear that there is no need what-so-ever to worry that running out of things to do will become a noticable problem.

[nokowi]

I don't believe it is inherently good.

The history of similar efforts is positive, the account wide rewards in the shroud for example made people play alts like never before or since.

So far the most convincing argument against making some of the grind account wide was that people could run out of things to do too quickly. But with the numbers provided in the other thread about how long lives takes and how many even play elite it's clear that there is no need what-so-ever to worry that running out of things to do will become a noticable problem.

How exactly does RXP prevent another quest like shroud from being designed?

Maybe you should be asking for better quest design instead of easier shared rewards.

[slarden]

I don't believe it is inherently good.

The history of similar efforts is positive, the account wide rewards in the shroud for example made people play alts like never before or since.

So far the most convincing argument against making some of the grind account wide was that people could run out of things to do too quickly. But with the numbers provided in the other thread about how long lives takes and how many even play elite it's clear that there is no need what-so-ever to worry that running out of things to do will become a noticable problem. Why don't you make a single thread and consolidate all your requests to make the game easier in one thread. And title it appropriately for example "Devs here are my ideas to make reaper easier for me".

[Hydian]

The OP isn't wrong in his general thinking, but it is probably too late to think about retroactively giving out bonuses for past lives, etc. Other games do this sort of thing...giving an account wide bonus for hitting certain milestones. Something like a 5% XP bonus for every level 30 character you have or an additional skill point for every past life on your account/server wouldn't be some ridiculous game breaking thing. The issue is more what we have seen in this thread in that the player base wouldn't go for it because it is a change and they inherently don't like the idea of change, especially some nebulous change undefined beyond a general idea. No, messing with existing systems seems like a difficult road to take.

They could introduce something similar to the monster manual (essentially like the WAR Tome of Knowledge) with achievements beyond simply slaying monsters that give account or server wide rewards among other things. It doesn't all need to be game affecting boosts, or not boosts that affect things for long...something like a free everlasting rod of CLW with 5 charges for every new level 1 character would be nifty. Helpful for the first half dozen levels or so and then forgotten.

Of course, none of that is needed. I have 20 or so alts now so I certainly don't need any incentive. :) That said, if there was a general desire on the part of SSG to use alts as a revenue stream (and there may or may not be any thought on their part in that area) then creating incentives for people to run alts is a good idea. I can see the potential there...buying slots, buying more tomes, buying XP potions, etc...it's where they get a lot of their money out of me. Obviously anything they would do in this area requires resources, so it would need to have a worthwhile ROI.

[Qhualor]

Unhappy players is a game issue.

that is true, but find me a game where there is 100% happy players no matter what the developers do. Reaper made me unhappy. so much that I haven't spent a dime on this game in about 2 months and that unless something drastically changes I will be done with the game by June. account wide xp would also make me unhappy, so much that if it ever happened and I did stay with DDO it would save me a lot of money.


Wait, you think that I am advocating an account wide exp pool? I'm not.

certainly fooled me, especially when that is exactly what I have been discussing with you for the past couple pages. flip flops are best to use at the beach, not here.

[nokowi]

They could introduce something similar to the monster manual (essentially like the WAR Tome of Knowledge) with achievements beyond simply slaying monsters that give account or server wide rewards among other things. It doesn't all need to be game affecting boosts, or not boosts that affect things for long...something like a free everlasting rod of CLW with 5 charges for every new level 1 character would be nifty. Helpful for the first half dozen levels or so and then forgotten.

I suggested a Reaper Monster Manual, and even offered up to those that wanted to spend money for multiple toons, but was ignored by those that just want easier RXP.

The root cause seems to be getting rewards without doing anything to earn them. Without this piece, those that want to do less will always be behind.

There is simply no solution for those that want to do less other than for them to be behind those that do more, or to continually chop off the player base for those that want to do less and less and less until the game shuts down.




Of course, none of that is needed. I have 20 or so alts now so I certainly don't need any incentive. :) That said, if there was a general desire on the part of SSG to use alts as a revenue stream (and there may or may not be any thought on their part in that area) then creating incentives for people to run alts is a good idea. I can see the potential there...buying slots, buying more tomes, buying XP potions, etc...it's where they get a lot of their money out of me. Obviously anything they would do in this area requires resources, so it would need to have a worthwhile ROI.

Alts already can generate mysterious remnants, and get quest rewards much faster. Good players will still do these things (and many others) once they get their RXP fix on their main.

[Chai]

I don't believe it is inherently good.

The history of similar efforts is positive, the account wide rewards in the shroud for example made people play alts like never before or since.

So far the most convincing argument against making some of the grind account wide was that people could run out of things to do too quickly. But with the numbers provided in the other thread about how long lives takes and how many even play elite it's clear that there is no need what-so-ever to worry that running out of things to do will become a noticable problem.

Yet, just a short time ago, the forums were alive with threads regarding not enough to do and game too easy. If reaper XP and ETR both become account wide benefits, theres not much more to do than there was when people were complaining about lack of things to do.

Furthermore, how do you deal with the people who who demand refunds, when it is made an account wide benefit shortly after people spent boxes and XP pots getting it on multiple characters? This is one of the major issues with character power entering the game through out of game means. It becomes real difficult to make changes to that system without invalidating some of the past purchases people made to get ahead in the previous iteration of the system. Once that trust is violated, do you believe there is a way to entice people to continue paying for faster character power gain again? If so, how?

[nokowi]

Furthermore, how do you deal with the people who who demand refunds, when it is made an account wide benefit shortly after people spent boxes and XP pots getting it on multiple characters?

This is a great point.

Don't expect anyone to respond to it, they want their free stuff without considering the negative impacts on others.

[Avantasian]

that is true, but find me a game where there is 100% happy players no matter what the developers do. Reaper made me unhappy. so much that I haven't spent a dime on this game in about 2 months and that unless something drastically changes I will be done with the game by June. account wide xp would also make me unhappy, so much that if it ever happened and I did stay with DDO it would save me a lot of money.

Account wide exp would indeed be a terrible idea. That does not mean that every account wide reward is a terrible idea. Starting to see my actual point now?



certainly fooled me, especially when that is exactly what I have been discussing with you for the past couple pages. flip flops are best to use at the beach, not here.

How could it possibly have occured to you that I advocated that? Point me to any such post.
Hilarious, you insert yourself into an ongoing discussion, completely misunderstands it and now when you are confronted you accuse me of flip floping.

[Avantasian]

Yet, just a short time ago, the forums were alive with threads regarding not enough to do and game too easy. If reaper XP and ETR both become account wide benefits, theres not much more to do than there was when people were complaining about lack of things to do.

I don't recall those complaints. Not taking your word for it.
Reaper made the game harder, so it should be fine.



Furthermore, how do you deal with the people who who demand refunds, when it is made an account wide benefit shortly after people spent boxes and XP pots getting it on multiple characters? This is one of the major issues with character power entering the game through out of game means. It becomes real difficult to make changes to that system without invalidating some of the past purchases people made to get ahead in the previous iteration of the system. Once that trust is violated, do you believe there is a way to entice people to continue paying for faster character power gain again? If so, how?

If all reaper exp was made account wide that would not be a problem. No one would lose anything.

[Avantasian]

How exactly does RXP prevent another quest like shroud from being designed?

Maybe you should be asking for better quest design instead of easier shared rewards.

So you agree that the history of similar efforts are positive? Great!

[Gremmlynn]

What about finishing a character is it you don't get?A reason to play it after that point actually. This game really doesn't offer one, so a 'finished" character is basically a pointless character.

All this game really offers is the journey as the destination is a lot like a grave.

[Gremmlynn]

There is more than enough grinding to keep players busy for years and years. It's not like the majority of players had run out of things to do before racial PLs and RXP.
Causing players to play more characters creates variety.
Look, Im not asking for sharing of all grinds.

If account wide rewards are inherently bad, the same must apply to unbound and BTA loot.There is nothing "inherently" bad about account wide rewards. They just wouldn't do what some here seem to be claiming. Frankly, all the rewards in the game are set up in whatever manner SSG feels they best serve SSG. Not along some subjective scale of good and bad or wrong and right. But by what they feel gets them the best return on their development buck. If that's xp sharing, then it's something we likely will see. I just doubt they feel that way.

[Avantasian]

There is nothing "inherently" bad about account wide rewards. They just wouldn't do what some here seem to be claiming.

Like what?

[Gremmlynn]

No.
Just earn it on each toon.
Or become your main.Or simply use what they have.

[Gremmlynn]

Why is it the people that should be apologizing to others are always the ones demanding apologies.Personally, I think that anyone who expects any sort of apology here is simply guilty of having unreasonable expectations (and likely a thin skin).

[Avantasian]

Personally, I think that anyone who expects any sort of apology here is simply guilty of having unreasonable expectations (and likely a thin skin).

I was surprised that I actually got an apology. I guess he realized that his complete fabrications about my position only served to further poison the disussion climate.
That it's unreasonable of me to expect a honest discussion where people admit when they are wrong and actually change their position based on new information and not turn to fabrications and misrepresentations is sad.

[Gremmlynn]

Explain the bolded part below and why loot is exempt but exp is not. I'm all ears.Loot is simply a different animal. It's specific, where xp is general. Finding an axe that barbarian character A could use while playing cleric character B as an example. While xp is just as useful for every character.

[Avantasian]

Loot is simply a different animal. It's specific, where xp is general. Finding an axe that barbarian character A could use while playing cleric character B as an example. While xp is just as useful for every character.

Crafting material is general.

Now to see if you will ignore the thread, keep trying to spin it or accept the facts and change your mind.

[Chai]

I don't recall those complaints. Not taking your word for it.

Its right here on these forums. No one needs to take my word for it.


Reaper made the game harder, so it should be fine.

Harder game doesnt have a direct link to how fast people get through the content and have nothing left to do afterward, especially with abusable mechanics like limitless res cakes and mana pots. Dying more often in reaper hasnt made the completions happen at a slower pace for instance.


If all reaper exp was made account wide that would not be a problem. No one would lose anything.

I already outlined how it undermines the company's chosen revenue generation system. So - the company loses out for each thing they make less calendar time to attain, as it entices less people to buy their way past the time consumption. Note that I dont even like the fact that it is this way, but since it is, I understand why the company would be reluctant to implement more account systems.

The question also needs to be answered for how the company deals with all those people who paid to make ETRs faster on multiple characters only to find out its no longer needed. Once that trust is violated, how do they entice people to pay for more time circumvention especially when they see new threads advocating for yet another system to be made account wide on the forums.

[Avantasian]

Its right here on these forums. No one needs to take my word for it.

Can't find it.



Harder game doesnt have a direct link to how fast people get through the content and have nothing left to do afterward, especially with abusable mechanics like limitless res cakes and mana pots. Dying more often in reaper hasnt made the completions happen at a slower pace for instance.

Harder game has a direct link to how easy the game is. Which is the complaint it sought to fix.



I already outlined how it undermines the company's chosen revenue generation system. So - the company loses out for each thing they make less calendar time to attain, as it entices less people to buy their way past the time consumption. Note that I dont even like the fact that it is this way, but since it is, I understand why the company would be reluctant to implement more account systems.

The question also needs to be answered for how the company deals with all those people who paid to make ETRs faster on multiple characters only to find out its no longer needed. Once that trust is violated, how do they entice people to pay for more time circumvention especially when they see new threads advocating for yet another system to be made account wide on the forums.

I still hold the position that making RXP account wide would incur no lost investment for anyone and would be a boost to the "company's chosen revenue generation system" by making people not only play more alts which sells more tomes, bank space etc, but also just play more overall because of the increased variety from playing alts.

This position does not require me to answer your question.
My question is how the company deals with all those people who paid to make ETRs faster on multiple characters only to find out its the grind was made even larger and they are further than ever from their goals. Once that trust is violated, how do they entice people to pay for more time circumvention especially when they see new posts advocating for yet another system to never be made account wide on the forums.

[Gremmlynn]

The history of similar efforts is positive, the account wide rewards in the shroud for example made people play alts like never before or since.People played alts mostly as a work around to the 3 day timer game mechanic. Something the devs now sell in the store.

[slarden]

People played alts mostly as a work around to the 3 day timer game mechanic. Something the devs now sell in the store. And the old 1 day epic quest timer so we could acquire 20 tokens more quickly. This was mainly due to the fact that there was a small handful of quests that were run more frequently because they were easier/quicker. So rather than running partycrashers, under the big top, bargain of blood and the sands chain on epic - people would instead of run party crashers, under the big top and bargan of blood x2 with different characters because groups were easier to fill and the quests were scripted, easy and fast.

[Avantasian]

People played alts mostly as a work around to the 3 day timer game mechanic. Something the devs now sell in the store.

Yes, because the rewards were account wide. For people who liked playing alts this was a great thing, because it allowed them to just play whatever alt they wanted with no qualms.

[Chai]

Can't find it.

Not looking hard enough




Harder game has a direct link to how easy the game is. Which is the complaint it sought to fix.

But that doesnt resolve the "theres nothing to do again" issue




I still hold the position that making RXP account wide would incur no lost investment for anyone and would be a boost to the "company's chosen revenue generation system" by making people not only play more alts which sells more tomes, bank space etc, but also just play more overall because of the increased variety from playing alts.

That position is countered by the fact that most of those alts are already tomed out and parked. Activating them again doesnt result in more money in the future. That money was already spent.


This position does not require me to answer your question.

Bolded is why SSG wont consider this. That question absolutely needs to be answered, as revenue generation equates to their livelyhood. They no longer have a parent corporation behind them who can cash fund a loss if/when it occurs. Thus, even though you will dismiss it and not answer it (likely because it cant be answered without poking holes in the "account bound doesnt have a negative affect" claim) the company cannot afford to have the same attitude, and dismiss what cant be answered.

As stated before, im not even against it as a player, but I can wholly refute the claim that it would have no negative effect through understanding the company's chosen revenue generation method, and how this would be negatively affected as more systems become account level. If you claim this is false, please cite evidence that making loot account level didnt affect ASAH sales negatively - the vast majority of shards of course, coming from out of game money transactions.

So I will continue to ask the question.



This position does not require me to answer your question.
My question is how the company deals with all those people who paid to make ETRs faster on multiple characters only to find out its the grind was made even larger and they are further than ever from their goals. Once that trust is violated, how do they entice people to pay for more time circumvention especially when they see new posts advocating for yet another system to never be made account wide on the forums.

Already happened many times now. While people on the forums complain, the players continue to pump money into the system enough to keep the game afloat, and even split off from the parent company, even going as far as starting threads to ask for Otto's boxes to be made available so they can buy a few. Furthermore, we will see if the same response occurs when they attempt to monetize reaper Xp the same way. This doesnt mean its a foolproof system however. If adding grind ever fails, then they will have to come up with a better strategy quickly, or go into the red financially.

Note that this discussion is happening in a "make EPL account wide" thread. EPLs have already been successfully monetized with minimal complaint. Good luck convincing the company this success wont continue by adding more grind and more ways to pay to circumvent it - even if that logic is incorrect. This is the slippery slope of in game power being influenced by out of game means.

[Gremmlynn]

Crafting material is general.

Now to see if you will ignore the thread, keep trying to spin it or accept the facts and change your mind.I have yet to see any facts presented, or even theories really. Just some unverified hypothesis's.

Frankly, I don't even have a horse in this race. I play alts now because I simply find that more fun than not doing so an will continue to do so regardless what the devs feel works best for them with this issue. Whether that increases or decreases the total amount grind in the game makes no difference as I will still only do the amount of grind I eventually get done by the time I quit, die or the game gets shut down. How much of it that is really is of no importance what so ever. Trying to keep up with the Jones's is a fools play as one ends up living the Jones's life satisfying the Jones's desires, or at least trying to, rather than their own.

[Gremmlynn]

Yes, because the rewards were account wide. For people who liked playing alts this was a great thing, because it allowed them to just play whatever alt they wanted with no qualms.But it was still working around the intent of the designed mechanics. Those mechanics were designed that way for a reason despite what people who like playing alts wanted.

The thing you seem to be missing is that there is a way for you to achieve what you desire. It just means playing a lot more and likely spending a lot more on the game than otherwise. Which is what SSG actually wants us to do, which is why they designed it this way in the first place. If that's not something you are willing to do, then it may be best to set goals more in line with what you can expect to achieve within the limits of what you are willing to do.

[Avantasian]

Not looking hard enough


But that doesnt resolve the "theres nothing to do again" issue

I disagree that's is even an issue.



That position is countered by the fact that most of those alts are already tomed out and parked. Activating them again doesnt result in more money in the future. That money was already spent.

That is not a fact. I don't believe it's even remotely true.



Bolded is why SSG wont consider this. That question absolutely needs to be answered, as revenue generation equates to their livelyhood. They no longer have a parent corporation behind them who can cash fund a loss if/when it occurs. Thus, even though you will dismiss it and not answer it (likely because it cant be answered without poking holes in the "account bound doesnt have a negative affect" claim) the company cannot afford to have the same attitude, and dismiss what cant be answered.

Your question was irrelevant to my position because it assumed that trust has been broken while in my position no such thing happens.
But I did answer it, as a counter question that you ignored. Some people will get upset no matter what you do, even if you do nothing.



As stated before, im not even against it as a player, but I can wholly refute the claim that it would have no negative effect through understanding the company's chosen revenue generation method, and how this would be negatively affected as more systems become account level. If you claim this is false, please cite evidence that making loot account level didnt affect ASAH sales negatively - the vast majority of shards of course, coming from out of game money transactions.

So I will continue to ask the question.

My evidence that while account bound loot may harm ASAH sales they are still a net positive for the revenue stream is the fact that very latest pack had BTA loot in it. Or do you believe that you know better and that they are hurting their net revenue with the BTA loot?

I am not claiming that my position has no negative effect, I'm sure it has, but I am claiming that the positive effects far outweigh the negative. We have had discussions based on that concept before.

[Avantasian]

I have yet to see any facts presented, or even theories really. Just some unverified hypothesis's.

Frankly, I don't even have a horse in this race. I play alts now because I simply find that more fun than not doing so an will continue to do so regardless what the devs feel works best for them with this issue. Whether that increases or decreases the total amount grind in the game makes no difference as I will still only do the amount of grind I eventually get done by the time I quit, die or the game gets shut down. How much of it that is really is of no importance what so ever. Trying to keep up with the Jones's is a fools play as one ends up living the Jones's life satisfying the Jones's desires, or at least trying to, rather than their own.

You went for option 2 I see. Too bad that you can't take responsibility for your words.

[Avantasian]

The thing you seem to be missing is that there is a way for you to achieve what you desire. It just means playing a lot more and likely spending a lot more on the game than otherwise. Which is what SSG actually wants us to do, which is why they designed it this way in the first place. If that's not something you are willing to do, then it may be best to set goals more in line with what you can expect to achieve within the limits of what you are willing to do.

Say level 2 on your alt required 4000000000 experience. There would be a way to achieve it, but does that really mean that optimal? If it was lowered to 4000 experience you don't think more people would try to go for it?

There would be more than enough to do on your main and alts after some of the grind is made account wide for the argument that people would run out of things to do to be true. It's not reasonable to expect that people will play more and pay more in a longer grind than in a shorter grind if the shorter grind is still long enough to keep players playing and paying for the desired amount of time.
Creating huge apparent barriers to alts serves no purpose. In the end all it will do is hurt variety.

[Chai]

Say level 2 on your alt required 4000000000 experience. There would be a way to achieve it, but does that really mean that optimal? If it was lowered to 4000 experience you don't think more people would try to go for it?

I said similar things when the "it can be earned in game so its no big deal" position kept being repeated over and over again, and look what happened. +6-7 are like unicorns in game, yet included in many endgame build profiles.

In your example, the culture of feedback will be less influenced by people willing to play for 4000 experience, and more by people willing to buy 4000000000 experience or as close to 4000000000 experience as they can get. While players at times dont seem to care one way or the other about how the revenue is generated, the company has to keep this in mind at all times.

[Avantasian]

I said similar things when the "it can be earned in game so its no big deal" position kept being repeated over and over again, and look what happened. +6-7 are like unicorns in game, yet included in many endgame build profiles.

In your example, the culture of feedback will be less influenced by people willing to play for 4000 experience, and more by people willing to buy 4000000000 experience or as close to 4000000000 experience as they can get. While players at times dont seem to care one way or the other about how the revenue is generated, the company has to keep this in mind at all times.

So you are saying that bad desicions in the past ensures bad descisions in the future? If you believe that, why are you even on the forums?

[Chai]

I disagree that's is even an issue.

THen youre arguing an incomplete player perspective position and not taking what the company has to do into account. Im fine with that, but they wont be, heh.


That is not a fact. I don't believe it's even remotely true.

Read the other feedback being provided in the past few weeks objectively and you will see many claims of lots and lots of alts not being played any more. Its either a fact that you are dismissing or a bunch of people are lying. I highly doubt the people who claim to have 15+ alts and play 1-2 nowdays are all lying about it.


Your question was irrelevant to my position because it assumed that trust has been broken while in my position no such thing happens.
But I did answer it, as a counter question that you ignored. Some people will get upset no matter what you do, even if you do nothing.

Claiming I ignored the question when I refuted it, shows the level of confirmation bias here. It was answered wholly, and in the first post it was quoted in. The effect of your position would equate to that trust being broken. Or are you telling us that you can sell alot of circumvention of character level grind in the recent past, turn around and make it account level, and no one will complain about the amount of investment they put in to get it at the character level previously?


My evidence that while account bound loot may harm ASAH sales they are still a net positive for the revenue stream is the fact that very latest pack had BTA loot in it. Or do you believe that you know better and that they are hurting their net revenue with the BTA loot?

Those two things have zero connection. Zero correlation and zero causation. The fact that the company was willing to give players a taste, but not the entire kitchen, when players asked for account bound loot does not equate to meaning the ASAH is a net positive revenue generation mechanism for the company. Turbine (now SSG) has stated in the past that BTA is their method going forward, and thus the lack of switching back to BTC when they need money having a direct link is wholly refuted.


I am not claiming that my position has no negative effect, I'm sure it has, but I am claiming that the positive effects far outweigh the negative. We have had discussions based on that concept before.

The evidence of most MMOs having 1-2 account bound systems but the rest are BTC, refutes the claim that doing it once having a positive effect means they can continue to make everything else BTA and it will still be a net positive for the company. DDO falls right in line with that. Current and previous meta loot is BTA. Most of the rest of the stuff is BTC.

[Avantasian]

THen youre arguing an incomplete player perspective position and not taking what the company has to do into account. Im fine with that, but they wont be, heh.

I'm fine with you arguing an incomplete player perspective too!



Read the other feedback being provided in the past few weeks objectively and you will see many claims of lots and lots of alts not being played any more. Its either a fact that you are dismissing or a bunch of people are lying. I highly doubt the people who claim to have 15+ alts and play 1-2 nowdays are all lying about it.

People have stopped playing alts =/= People would only start playing alts that are all tomed up.

You are using the word 'fact' wrong.



Claiming I ignored the question when I refuted it, shows the level of confirmation bias here. It was answered wholly, and in the first post it was quoted in. The effect of your position would equate to that trust being broken. Or are you telling us that you can sell alot of circumvention of character level grind in the recent past, turn around and make it account level, and no one will complain about the amount of investment they put in to get it at the character level previously?

Oh please, you know full well that in your first reply you did not answer that question. I bet if we scroll up we can see that you edited the post. I am going to assume that you edited before I posted my reply and that you did not set this up just to throw a cheap personal attack.

No, the effect of my position would not equate any trust being broken as my position would lead to all RXP being merged and thus nothing is lost in any way what-so-ever. Their investment still paid off, infact I even made the return of investment even higher.



Those two things have zero connection. Zero correlation and zero causation. The fact that the company was willing to give players a taste, but not the entire kitchen, when players asked for account bound loot does not equate to meaning the ASAH is a net positive revenue generation mechanism for the company. Turbine (now SSG) has stated in the past that BTA is their method going forward, and thus the lack of switching back to BTC when they need money having a direct link is wholly refuted.

You missed my point. That BTA loot hurts ASAH sales is outweighed by the apparent fact that BTA loot generates more revenue in other ways (player retention, satisfaction or whatever), the evidence for this is the fact that they keep making loot BTA.
If BTA items hurt their bottom line they would not keep making them.



The evidence of most MMOs having 1-2 account bound systems but the rest are BTC, refutes the claim that doing it once having a positive effect means they can continue to make everything else BTA and it will still be a net positive for the company. DDO falls right in line with that. Current and previous meta loot is BTA. Most of the rest of the stuff is BTC.

You are refuting a claim that I never made, good job.
Do you not think the recent addition of huge character specific grinds changed where we are in relation to the optimal BTC/BTA distribution?

[Enoach]

One aspect of shared xp account wide that will hurt a sub-culture of DDO players is the fact that it removes the fun people have simply because they like to level and see progression when they level.

This makes leveling with progression finite.

And yes, I know a few that enjoy DDO for that exact reason, they enjoy the pleasure of leveling up and progressing.

[nokowi]

So you agree that the history of similar efforts are positive? Great!

You are taking two completely different things and equating them.

There is no reason shared RXP is needed if your great example of providing incentives for alts is a raid.

All they need to do is produce new raids that are equally well received.


What we should agree on is that Shared RXP has little to do with the example you cite, and your continual effort to say they are equal is a miserable failure.

Not everybody agrees that shared RXP will make people play alts more. Some say less because those motivated by rewards can just play their best toon.

So of all the ways to increase use of alts, you take one that is unproven and not agreed upon, instead of the proven model.



I repeat, why can't they just add some new content to encourage use of alts?

Why would designers shorten the life of reaper when there is a much better solution?

[Sproutecus]

Putting aside the value of making reaper or racial TR account wide for a second.

If you did do one or the other, you COULD compromise. For instance, you could do one account wide RTR for every 3 on any one character (or one for every race you have 3 completed). That means if you do 30 RTR's on your main, your alts (that existed the entire time) would have the equivalent of 1 RPL for each race. The alt still has to do a LOT of grinding, but there is incentive to play your alts as well.

Or even more restrictive, you could do 1 'free' RPL for a SINGLE character for each race completed on another. That would be less rewarding for people with lots of alts, but it is at least giving players a small reason to have/play alts.

Additionally, for players like myself who have only been playing a (relatively) short while, the mountain you have to climb to come sort of kid of close to be equivilent to long term players would not be quitre as ridiculous. As it is, I have zero reason to spend one dime on my alt right now. I have 9 EPL's, 14 IPL's and 33 HPL's to do. Even assuming 1 per 2 weeks you are talking years of play time. For ONE character. Adding 30 more PL's would add another full year. (and frankly one life is close to 3-4 weeks for me due to RL, so double all of that).


Just a thought.

[nokowi]

I was surprised that I actually got an apology. I guess he realized that his complete fabrications about my position only served to further poison the disussion climate.
That it's unreasonable of me to expect a honest discussion where people admit when they are wrong and actually change their position based on new information and not turn to fabrications and misrepresentations is sad.

I apologized because there was no dishonesty intended, and it was clear the discussion could not move forward for you without one.

If people had to apologize whenever they misstate another persons opinion, 10 pages threads would be 200 pages long. It is often intentional misstatements, in which no apology would ever occur and every thread would need to be closed the moment any misrepresentation was made.

The request was pretty ridiculous (having already admitted I now understood your position), but I complied to move the discussion forward.

Apparently you fail to understand the difference between fabricating a position and not yet understanding a position. I will retract the apology if you are going to make misstatements that I willfully misrepresented your opinion. That would be a willful misrepresentation of me, and would require an apology from you for the discussion to move forward, using your own self created rules of etiquette for the forums.

[Avantasian]

You are taking two completely different things and equating them.

There is no reason shared RXP is needed if your great example of providing incentives for alts is a raid.

All they need to do is produce new raids that are equally well received.


What we should agree on is that Shared RXP has little to do with the example you cite, and your continual effort to say they are equal is a miserable failure.

Not everybody agrees that shared RXP will make people play alts more. Some say less because those motivated by rewards can just play their best toon.

So of all the ways to increase use of alts, you take one that is unproven and not agreed upon, instead of the proven model.



I repeat, why can't they just add some new content to encourage use of alts?

Why would designers shorten the life of reaper when there is a much better solution?

I would prefer both. Content was enough back when we didn't have any past lives, but I don't see how it would be enough now that we have 4000 hours of grinding per character instead of 40.
Do you even see how those 4000 hours can be seen as a barrier for making alts? Hint: All bonuses are not considered to be needed.

[Avantasian]

I apologized because there was no dishonesty intended, and it was clear the discussion could not move forward for you without one.

If people had to apologize whenever they misstate another persons opinion, 10 pages threads would be 200 pages long. It is often intentional misstatements, in which no apology would ever occur and every thread would need to be closed the moment any misrepresentation was made.

The request was pretty ridiculous (having already admitted I now understood your position), but I complied to move the discussion forward.

Apparently you fail to understand the difference between fabricating a position and not yet understanding a position. I will retract the apology if you are going to make misstatements that I willfully misrepresented your opinion. That would be a willful misrepresentation of me, and would require an apology from you for the discussion to move forward, using your own self created rules of etiquette for the forums.

If people didn't misstate other persons opinions 200 page threads would be 20 pages.
Your misstatements were direct contradictions to just about everything I had said, so even if they were not intentional you should not be stating other people opinions without putting in some effort to actually learn what their opinion is. That you didn't know is not an excuse, that just means that you shouldn't have pretended that you knew.

[Enoach]

I would prefer both. Content was enough back when we didn't have any past lives, but I don't see how it would be enough now that we have 4000 hours of grinding per character instead of 40.
Do you even see how those 4000 hours can be seen as a barrier for making alts? Hint: All bonuses are not considered to be needed.

I would pose the question asking if the lack of benefits of the 4,000 hours is a barrier.

Past lives do add bonuses, but I would say outside of a DC type caster build the benefits of Heroic Past Lives are more in the 1% to 5% improvement, maybe 10% with completionest.

Now Epic Past Lives in my opinion do add about 5% to 15% (Epic Completionest) more power.

But even with Reaper mode you don't need all of the power these lives provide in order to complete. Otherwise we would only be seeing Full Completionest (Heroic, Iconic and Epic) in Reaper and we all know that is not true.

The problem with the measurement is most are considering a character that has it all as being the 100% mark and everyone else under that. When really that character is someplace over the 100% mark. But these characters are Excessed Powered compared to the Environment they run in.


If people didn't misstate other persons opinions 200 page threads would be 20 pages.
Your misstatements were direct contradictions to just about everything I had said, so even if they were not intentional you should not be stating other people opinions without putting in some effort to actually learn what their opinion is. That you didn't know is not an excuse, that just means that you shouldn't have pretended that you knew.

One of the first things you learn in basic communication course is that as the presenter you need to know your audience and be responsible for making sure your message is understood by those you are presenting to. This is why you learn how to get feedback to make sure they understand. That is what avoids conversations trailing off and two people agreeing but spending time arguing with each other about how they agree but want the other person to agree with them.

[nokowi]

If people didn't misstate other persons opinions 200 page threads would be 20 pages.
Your misstatements were direct contradictions to just about everything I had said, so even if they were not intentional you should not be stating other people opinions without putting in some effort to actually learn what their opinion is. That you didn't know is not an excuse, that just means that you shouldn't have pretended that you knew.

I already apologized.

Get over it.

[nokowi]

I would prefer both. Content was enough back when we didn't have any past lives, but I don't see how it would be enough now that we have 4000 hours of grinding per character instead of 40.
Do you even see how those 4000 hours can be seen as a barrier for making alts? Hint: All bonuses are not considered to be needed.

If you define an 11 year old game by how much gameplay it has in hours, and then call a large number something negative, the problem is you.

Play the game if you enjoy it and stop complaining about too much to do if you don't.

Play alts if you enjoy alts, and stop crunching numbers on the forums to create a problem.

Too much content is not a problem if you enjoy the game.

[Avantasian]

I would pose the question asking if the lack of benefits of the 4,000 hours is a barrier.

Past lives do add bonuses, but I would say outside of a DC type caster build the benefits of Heroic Past Lives are more in the 1% to 5% improvement, maybe 10% with completionest.

Now Epic Past Lives in my opinion do add about 5% to 15% (Epic Completionest) more power.

But even with Reaper mode you don't need all of the power these lives provide in order to complete. Otherwise we would only be seeing Full Completionest (Heroic, Iconic and Epic) in Reaper and we all know that is not true.

The problem with the measurement is most are considering a character that has it all as being the 100% mark and everyone else under that. When really that character is someplace over the 100% mark. But these characters are Excessed Powered compared to the Environment they run in.

Needing any of it is irrelevant. We don't need it yet we still hunt for it. It's the nature of the game, it's why we are playing.

You cannot be over the 100% mark. "Being able to complete the content" is not a useful measuring stick.




One of the first things you learn in basic communication course is that as the presenter you need to know your audience and be responsible for making sure your message is understood by those you are presenting to. This is why you learn how to get feedback to make sure they understand. That is what avoids conversations trailing off and two people agreeing but spending time arguing with each other about how they agree but want the other person to agree with them.

If someone jumps into the middle of a discussion and makes a statement about ones position that had been directly contradicted a few posts before it's clear where the fault lies. That is the sort of behaivor that makes these forums a toxic mess and I will continue to call it out when I see it.

[Avantasian]

If you define an 11 year old game by how much gameplay it has in hours, and then call a large number something negative, the problem is you.

Play the game if you enjoy it and stop complaining about too much to do if you don't.

Play alts if you enjoy alts, and stop crunching numbers on the forums to create a problem.

Too much content is not a problem if you enjoy the game.

Having some system requiring a specific character and some allowing shared best meets everyone's preferences.

[nokowi]

If someone jumps into the middle of a discussion and makes a statement about ones position that had been directly contradicted a few posts before it's clear where the fault lies. That is the sort of behaivor that makes these forums a toxic mess and I will continue to call it out when I see it.

Forums become toxic when players sidetrack discussions and make things personal attacks.

Clarifying positions, and moving the discussion forward are part of having a discussion.

I suggest you stop with the first sentence and work on the second.

[nokowi]

Having some system requiring a specific character and some allowing shared best meets everyone's preferences.

We already have this. You went on and on about BTA gear, and quest design.

To make an argument, you have to show why we don't have enough shared things, and why RXP is a good choice among the options we have.

Having some water is good. Having too much will kill you. You can't take something good in a certain amount and say we automatically need more of it.

I say we have enough shared stuff, and that shared RXP is a poor choice specifically because it allows players to not use their alts.

You keep ignoring the people that said they would not play alts with shared RXP, and continue with vague statements that are conceptually flawed.

[AbyssalMage]

DDO players haven't had to learn or adapt in a long time, the game has just been too easy prior to reaper.
Honestly I want to know what game you are playing because it isn't DDO.

The only adaption to Reaper has been to not Zerg, and even that is being challenged. Honestly, the only adjustment I make, when I do choose to join a Reaper group, which seems to be the only groups offered (i.e. its the new "Elite", thanks SSG /Heavy Sarcasm), is to bring plenty of scrolls.

So I am trying to figure out why when I read the forums, there are "two" DDO's being discussed because from a pure technical standpoint, r1 - r3 is just Elite. R4 - r7 is for people who know how to "work together" and r8+ is for people who want to use a lot of resources.

[Avantasian]

Forums become toxic when players sidetrack discussions and make things personal attacks.

Making misstatements, clarifying positions, and moving the discussion forward are part of having a discussion.

I suggest you stop with the first sentence and work on the second.

You would perhaps have a point if the most common "tactic" here is to throw **** at the wall to see what sticks and never make any sort of acknowledgement that they were wrong and never change their mind regardless of any facts or new information.

If we go back to were you jumped in:
"The flaw in your logic is that assuming because something is OK in limited form, it must be OK when applied everywhere."

I never assumed that, so the flaw in my logic is simply not there. I told you that. Did it stop you? No, here we are 5 pages later.
Sigh...

[nokowi]

You would perhaps have a point if the most common "tactic" here is to throw **** at the wall to see what sticks and never make any sort of acknowledgement that they were wrong and never change their mind regardless of any facts or new information.

If we go back to were you jumped in:
"The flaw in your logic is that assuming because something is OK in limited form, it must be OK when applied everywhere."

I never assumed that, so the flaw in my logic is simply not there. I told you that. Did it stop you? No, here we are 5 pages later.
Sigh...

We already have shared resources. You can leave the thread if you only contribution is that we should have shared resources.

Talking about shroud and RXP are irrelevant to the point you are saying you are trying to make.

Your actions show their is some effort to say why shared RXP is good, and to link this to having shared RXP.

You are passively arguing for implementation of shared RXP while hiding behind your statement that you are not.

Pick one or the other, but stop doing both.

[Chai]

You would perhaps have a point if the most common "tactic" here is to throw **** at the wall to see what sticks and never make any sort of acknowledgement that they were wrong and never change their mind regardless of any facts or new information.

If we go back to were you jumped in:
"The flaw in your logic is that assuming because something is OK in limited form, it must be OK when applied everywhere."

I never assumed that, so the flaw in my logic is simply not there. I told you that. Did it stop you? No, here we are 5 pages later.
Sigh...

Actually there are multiple posts now where you cite loot being BTA being positive, and imply that since that was positive other systems being BTA also will be positive.

In the past hours some of my associates and I have talked about numerous MMOs which have a BTA system or two, but the rest is BTC. Personally we all agreed that we'd be fine if it was all BTA in any of the games we play, but understand why the respective companies who produce these games do not switch all of their systems over to BTA. When the company throws the players a bone and makes one system BTA, that is not an indication they can do so for all systems while not seeing a negative impact in revenue generation.

In this particular thread regarding EPLs being account wide, SSG already successfully monetized this at the character level, so now that its been established and accepted, why would they turn around and make it account level?

[Avantasian]

We already have this. You went on and on about BTA gear, and quest design.

To make an argument, you have to show why we don't have enough shared things, and why RXP is a good choice among the options we have.

Having some water is good. Having too much will kill you. You can't take something good in a certain amount and say we automatically need more of it.

I say we have enough shared stuff, and that shared RXP is a poor choice specifically because it allows players to not use their alts.

You keep ignoring the people that some people said they would not play alts with shared RXP, and continue with vague statements that are conceptually flawed.

I find it unreasonable that the implementation of thousands of hours of new character specific grinding did not change were we are in relation to optimal BTA/BTC distribution. That there are constant threads about it now confirms that.
RXP is a good choice because it leaves no ones investments ruined, no trust broken and has a significant impact on the characters. With that said I will add that I am more than willing to consider alternatives, I'm all ears. My posts in this thread has been in oppostion to those who argue against the concept of shared rewards by citing slippery slope fallacies and/or painting it as something inherently bad.

[nokowi]

Honestly I want to know what game you are playing because it isn't DDO.

The only adaption to Reaper has been to not Zerg, and even that is being challenged. Honestly, the only adjustment I make, when I do choose to join a Reaper group, which seems to be the only groups offered (i.e. its the new "Elite", thanks SSG /Heavy Sarcasm), is to bring plenty of scrolls.

So I am trying to figure out why when I read the forums, there are "two" DDO's being discussed because from a pure technical standpoint, r1 - r3 is just Elite. R4 - r7 is for people who know how to "work together" and r8+ is for people who want to use a lot of resources.

In the DDO I play, not long ago people were literally asking to not have to open doors because the game was so unchallenging that it was just a run to the end, even on elite.

The adaption for reaper would be to learn to play the way you enjoy and not require the game be built around your individual preferences for number of alts, number of hours per week, and efficiency (at the expense of everyone else's preferences).

The adaption is to figure out that "getting everything" out of reaper is a really really stupid decision for 99.9%+ of players.

Demanding the game be designed so players can do so (when it was intentionally designed so players can't do so) is pure failure.

[nokowi]

I find it unreasonable that the implementation of thousands of hours of new character specific grinding did not change were we are in relation to optimal BTA/BTC distribution. That there are constant threads about it now confirms that.
RXP is a good choice because it leaves no ones investments ruined, no trust broken and has a significant impact on the characters. With that said I will add that I am more than willing to consider alternatives, I'm all ears. My posts in this thread has been in oppostion to those who argue against the concept of shared rewards by citing slippery slope fallacies and/or painting it as something inherently bad.

The adaption for reaper would be to learn to play the way you enjoy and not require the game be built around your individual preferences for number of alts, number of hours per week, and efficiency (at the expense of everyone else's preferences).

The adaption is to figure out that "getting everything" out of reaper is a really really stupid decision for 99.9%+ of players.

Demanding the game be designed so players can do so (when it was intentionally designed so players can't do so) is pure failure.

Showing how difficult it is for a new player is pure failure.

Showing how much work it is on your alt is pure failure.


The game changed when reaper was implemented. Learn to adapt.

[Avantasian]

Actually there are multiple posts now where you cite loot being BTA being positive, and imply that since that was positive other systems being BTA also will be positive.

More misrepresentation...
Citing BTA being positive proves that BTA is not inherently bad. Nothing else. I made it abundantly clear that it does not mean that all BTA is good. The reason I believe some more BTA will be good at this point is because we just got a huge additon of BTC.

Quote those posts, if you don't mind.



In the past hours some of my associates and I have talked about numerous MMOs which have a BTA system or two, but the rest is BTC. Personally we all agreed that we'd be fine if it was all BTA in any of the games we play, but understand why the respective companies who produce these games do not switch all of their systems over to BTA. When the company throws the players a bone and makes one system BTA, that is not an indication they can do so for all systems while not seeing a negative impact in revenue generation.

In this particular thread regarding EPLs being account wide, SSG already successfully monetized this at the character level, so now that its been established and accepted, why would they turn around and make it account level?

If you believe I disagree then please link the post that makes you believe that. Clearly something is not getting through and I do want to improve.

[nokowi]

More misrepresentation...
Citing BTA being positive proves that BTA is not inherently bad. Nothing else.

When you cite positives but not negatives, your posts are biased.

We are asking you to be unbiased in your posts, and in the discussion, by admitting negatives.

Saying you are unbiased (that you have no agenda) while posting in a biased manner does not make you unbiased.

I look forward to your posts on why too many shared rewards can also be a negative.

[Avantasian]

The adaption for reaper would be to learn to play the way you enjoy and not require the game be built around your individual preferences for number of alts, number of hours per week, and efficiency (at the expense of everyone else's preferences).

The adaption is to figure out that "getting everything" out of reaper is a really really stupid decision for 99.9%+ of players.

Demanding the game be designed so players can do so (when it was intentionally designed so players can't do so) is pure failure.

Showing how difficult it is for a new player is pure failure.

Showing how much work it is on your alt is pure failure.


The game changed when reaper was implemented. Learn to adapt.

Who would be hurt exactly?

You need to understand that I am not asking for players to be able to "get everything", I am asking for players to have the option to get the exact same as they would have otherwise but in an alternative, more varied, way.
"Adapting" by abandoning alts is exactly what has happened. That is not a good thing.

[nokowi]

Who would be hurt exactly?

You should try to answer this question yourself. If you can't come up with any negatives (some of them already posted in the thread), you are in fact biased and have an agenda.




You need to understand that I am not asking for players to be able to "get everything", I am asking for players to have the option to get the exact same as they would have otherwise but in an alternative, more varied, way.

I already said you need to show why more is better (and specifically why RXP is the best choice) instead of this type of response, which is just hiding behind all or none statements.

The fact that you didn't take the idea to 11 doesn't mean that taking it to 6 or 7 is good.



"Adapting" by abandoning alts is exactly what has happened. That is not a good thing.

Reading failure. I told you to stop trying to get 100% of reaper on your toons, which would allow you to play your alts.

You haven't even looked at what rewards you can get with your preferences. You look at the very last reward, and if that is too far away you don't even see the rewards sitting right in front of you, consistent with your own preferences.

You continue to demonstrate a failure of logic by demanding your alt get 100% of reaper.

[Avantasian]

When you cite positives but not negatives, your posts are biased.

We are asking you to be unbiased in your posts, and in the discussion, by admitting negatives.

Saying you are unbiased (that you have no agenda) while posting in a biased manner does not make you unbiased.

I look forward to your posts on why too many shared rewards can also be a negative.

What bias? Throughout the entire thread I have been advocating finding the middle ground. That explicitly means that I don't want it to go too far in the BTA direction.

[nokowi]

What bias? Throughout the entire thread I have been advocating finding the middle ground. That explicitly means that I don't want it to go too far in the BTA direction.

The bias where you wont list negatives, ask others to do so, and then ignore them.

Read page 1 of the thread and see if anybody said anything that would make shared RXP bad, in their opinion.

Tell us why we are this far in the thread and you act as if nobody has said any negatives.

You have a responsibility to read the entire thread after demanding the same from others.

[Avantasian]

You should try to answer this question yourself. If you can't come up with any negatives (some of them already posted in the thread), you are in fact biased and have an agenda.

You calling me biased and claiming that I have an "agenda" (what ever that means) does not make it so.
I am convinced after following the discussion for over a month, I'll give you that, but I'm not biased.

Please explain what you believe my bias is exactly, and how it relates to my playstyle etc.



I already said you need to show why more is better (and specifically why RXP is the best choice) instead of this type of response, which is just hiding behind all or none statements.

The fact that you didn't take the idea to 11 doesn't mean that taking it to 6 or 7 is good.

I have already done that.



Reading failure. I told you to stop trying to get 100% of reaper on your toons, which would allow you to play your alts.

You haven't even looked at what rewards you can get with your preferences. You look at the very last reward, and if that is too far away you don't even see the rewards sitting right in front of you, consistent with your own preferences.

You continue to demonstrate a failure of logic by demanding your alt get 100% of reaper.

I don't want to stop climbing up the reaper trees. I have already told you that I play a game that is based on min/maxing and character progression because I like min/maxing and character progression. That people are abandoning alts to focus on their main confirms that I am not alone (real shock, huh). You need to drop the idea that people are just "doing it wrong" and that you know how they can maximize their enjoyment better.

[nokowi]

You calling me biased and claiming that I have an "agenda" (what ever that means) does not make it so.
I am convinced after following the discussion for over a month, I'll give you that, but I'm not biased.

When you list the positives but can't or won't list the negatives of a change, you are biased. When you are asked to do so as part of a discussion, and you fail to respond, you are biased. When players list negatives of shared RXP, and you only talk about the positives, you are biased.

Have you ever seen a politician talk only about the positive things that happened during their administration? Listing only positives is a textbook sign of bias.

A non-biased opinion would list the positives and negatives, even the ones that hurt ones preferred change.

Hiding behind the idea that you have no biases with respect to this thread is quite humorous.

If you tried to be unbiased, you failed.




I have already told you that I play a game that is based on min/maxing and character progression because I like min/maxing and character progression.

So what we see from you is the push for shared RXP is about every character needing to have everything rather than a desire to be rewarded for playing alts.

You are exactly the type of player that the game can not be designed around without hurting other peoples preferences.

You think 4000 hours is too much, but someone else with the same preference as you thinks 1000 hours is too much. Someone else likes to min/max and plays 12 hours a week, but only 3 hours of those involve leveling. They want 12 toons fully maxed at 3 hours a week, because they like alts.

Bowing to your min/max preference for RXP either means that shared resources needs to happen everywhere (to meet the preference of all min/maxers), or that you are allowed to min/max while others with the same preference are not.

[nokowi]

I have already done that.


Show me the post where you listed positives and negatives of shared RXP, where you showed that there is a need to have more shared resources, and that RXP was a better choice than other shared options.

[Avantasian]

When you list the positives but can't or won't list the negatives of a change, you are biased. When you are asked to do so as part of a discussion, and you fail to respond, you are biased. When players list negatives of shared RXP, and you only talk about the positives, you are biased.

Have you ever seen a politician talk only about the positive things that happened during their administration? Listing only positives is a textbook sign of bias.

A non-biased opinion would list the positives and negatives, even the ones that hurt ones preferred change.

Hiding behind the idea that you have no biases with respect to this thread is quite humorous.

If you tried to be unbiased, you failed.

To quote my very first post in this thread: You are free to disagree with the benefits of account wide RXP.
There is no bias. I am simply not that interested in discussing the merits of any specific change when people are still making statements in the line of

You should not have asked for account wide RXP if you don't support the same for every other aspect of the game.
and

Account wide is one of the worst forum ideas I have seen

[Avantasian]

So what we see from you is the push for shared RXP is about every character needing to have everything rather than a desire to be rewarded for playing alts.

No. That is factually incorrect at every level.



You are exactly the type of player that the game can not be designed around without hurting other peoples preferences.

You think 4000 hours is too much, but someone else with the same preference as you thinks 1000 hours is too much. Someone else likes to min/max and plays 12 hours a week, but only 3 hours of those involve leveling. They want 12 toons fully maxed at 3 hours a week, because they like alts.

I think 4000 hours is too much for what now?

You are also missing the entire point.
I am not demanding the game to be changed so that I can fully max out X number of characters. I will likely never max out even a single character and if I start playing alts I will be even further from that even if I get what I want here, so that is simply not my motivation at all. Drop that idea, it is simply wrong.

I am asking for a change because I see that a whole bunch of people are abandoning their alts and I can see why they are doing so. The result of the change is not to for anyone to reach their goals faster, but to have alts to actually be included in their goals at all. This is important for you to understand. You flail at me for not talking specifics when you don't even understand my goals and motivations. I have learned from experience that jumping into specifics is pointless if the basics are not cleared up first.

[Chai]

If you believe I disagree then please link the post that makes you believe that. Clearly something is not getting through and I do want to improve.

So you agree then, and understand why SSG, like other MMOs, have 1-2 account level progression systems, with the majority of systems still being character bound, and this pattern throughout the MMO industry is likely for the specific reasons outlined earlier on in the thread.

Great. Have a nice day. /waves

[Avantasian]

So you agree then, and understand why SSG, like other MMOs, have 1-2 account level progression systems, with the majority of systems still being character bound, and this pattern throughout the MMO industry is likely for the specific reasons outlined earlier on in the thread.

Great. Have a nice day. /waves

While the "1-2" are completely arbitrary numbers that mean nothing to me, I do agree with the principle it's exactly what I've been arguing for the entire thread.
Glad you see it too! /waves

[nokowi]

I am asking for a change because I see that a whole bunch of people are abandoning their alts and I can see why they are doing so. The result of the change is not to for anyone to reach their goals faster, but to have alts to actually be included in their goals at all. This is important for you to understand. You flail at me for not talking specifics when you don't even understand my goals and motivations. I have learned from experience that jumping into specifics is pointless if the basics are not cleared up first.

I don't think your argument is around your concern for others.

You spent a good deal of time in this thread willfully and repeatedly ignoring the statements of others and pretending they didn't exist.

The majority of players voted against account wide RXP.

If you were concerned for others, you would spend time trying to find a better alt solution without shared RXP, rather than ignoring anything outside of the change that you want.

It seems to me that you want a change because you only play maxxed out toons.

You seem to think you are representative of everyone in the game, and you are not.

Players will return to alts once they get their fix of RXP on their main(s).

You act like new content is played the same way as 2 year old content, which is completely false.

Dev's need to wait at least a year, and look at data, before they even consider any of your ideas.

Any decisions should be based on observing player behavior when there is significant new content (where players have traditionally used alts), and after reaper is no longer shiny and new.

[Livmo]

Would this thread exist if Reaper Mode ever came to be?

Perhaps some folks things the way they are and would rather have developer times spent on other things instead of this type of sharing?

I say no, because I want time spent on other things like bug fixing, continuing the Class Enhancement passes. With all the game changes, or if you prefer nerfs, my poor pure arty is feeling left very far behind in epics. Arty is supposed to be a premium class. Dog needs work too. Developer times cost $. Working on X can mean delaying other things or not having new content to play, etc.

Forget this jive and just ask for pay to play Reaper Boxes.

[Avantasian]

I don't think your argument is around your concern for others.

You spent a good deal of time in this thread willfully and repeatedly ignoring the statements of others and pretending they didn't exist.

The majority of players voted against account wide RXP.

If you were concerned for others, you would spend time trying to find a better alt solution without shared RXP, rather than ignoring anything outside of the change that you want.

It seems to me that you want a change because you only play maxxed out toons.

You seem to think you are representative of everyone in the game, and you are not.

Players will return to alts once they get their fix of RXP on their main(s).

You act like new content is played the same way as 2 year old content, which is completely false.

Dev's need to wait at least a year, and look at data, before they even consider any of your ideas.

Any decisions should be based on observing player behavior when there is significant new content (where players have traditionally used alts), and after reaper is no longer shiny and new.

I don't know what to tell you, you are simply wrong. You have created an image of me and my motivations that is simply not even close to real, and you are viewing my posts through that lense.
Your constant personal attacks and derailments are tiersome.

I will repeat the simple point I've been trying to get across one more time:
Having some system requiring a specific character and some allowing shared best meets everyone's preferences. We just had a huge addition to the character specific side, and with that lots of threads and posts popped up saying that they are abandoning their alts. That lead me to the conclusion that we have are too far from the optimal point in terms of character specific vs shared.

/waves

[slarden]

Having some system requiring a specific character and some allowing shared best meets everyone's preferences.



So it meets EVERYONE'S preferences does it? Certainly not based on any of these threads or the recent poll

https://www.ddo.com/forums/poll.php?pollid=175&do=showresults (https://www.ddo.com/forums/poll.php?pollid=175&do=showresults)

This effort would replace other work that the devs would be doing and the large # of people that don't support the idea would lose that and instead get easiness they didn't request and didn't want. Why would the devs spend so much time on an effort that is likely to disappoint as many people as it would please.

[Chai]

While the "1-2" are completely arbitrary numbers that mean nothing to me, I do agree with the principle it's exactly what I've been arguing for the entire thread.
Glad you see it too! /waves

1-2 is not a completely arbitrary number however. Its a pattern among many MMOs.

We can already see how "too much grind" is used to monetize the game, by enticing people to buy their way past it, but how does lowering the grind cause more revenue to come in. Even if it means more player retention, those players playing through the now lessened grind rather than paying through it doesnt equate to more revenue generation. Personally Id rather see more players, but the company has to look at it in terms of revenue generation.

[Gremmlynn]

Say level 2 on your alt required 4000000000 experience. There would be a way to achieve it, but does that really mean that optimal? If it was lowered to 4000 experience you don't think more people would try to go for it?

There would be more than enough to do on your main and alts after some of the grind is made account wide for the argument that people would run out of things to do to be true. It's not reasonable to expect that people will play more and pay more in a longer grind than in a shorter grind if the shorter grind is still long enough to keep players playing and paying for the desired amount of time.
Creating huge apparent barriers to alts serves no purpose. In the end all it will do is hurt variety.I'm saying it could be an endless grind and the situation would be the same as far as I'm concerned. How big the potential grind is shouldn't make any difference. Simply play how you want to play. If that's one character do that. If it's alts, as it is for me, then play alts. Worrying about where you are on a hamster wheel is mostly pointless, simply concentrate on taking the next step, whatever that may be, on whichever character you happen to be playing at the time.

The only way what we have hurts variety is if one is unwilling to play a character unless it no longer has much reason to be played. In which case SSG would be happy to sell that situation to them.

[Avantasian]

1-2 is not a completely arbitrary number however. Its a pattern among many MMOs.

We can already see how "too much grind" is used to monetize the game, by enticing people to buy their way past it, but how does lowering the grind cause more revenue to come in. Even if it means more player retention, those players playing through the now lessened grind rather than paying through it doesnt equate to more revenue generation. Personally Id rather see more players, but the company has to look at it in terms of revenue generation.

I'm not taking your word for "1-2 systems per MMO" and frankly the number of systems means little without knowing the extent of the systems.

As for the monetization the idea is that the result of the change is not to for anyone to reach their goals faster, but to have alts to actually be included in their goals at all. That is an important distinction.

[Avantasian]

I'm saying it could be an endless grind and the situation would be the same as far as I'm concerned. How big the potential grind is shouldn't make any difference. Simply play how you want to play. If that's one character do that. If it's alts, as it is for me, then play alts. Worrying about where you are on a hamster wheel is mostly pointless, simply concentrate on taking the next step, whatever that may be, on whichever character you happen to be playing at the time.

The only way what we have hurts variety is if one is unwilling to play a character unless it no longer has much reason to be played. In which case SSG would be happy to sell that situation to them.

That people have stopped playing alts and thus their variety has been hurt thanks to a too large character specific grind is a fact. Ignore it or dissmiss it as a "player problem" if you want to, but that doesn't change the fact that it has negative consequences in the game.

[Avantasian]

So it meets EVERYONE'S preferences does it? Certainly not based on any of these threads or the recent poll.

Best meet everyones preferences. It seems pointless to have a discussion with someone who intentionally or not leaves out words from my statements, but whatever.
Also, what you quoted had nothing to do with that poll, as I said nothing about any specific change.
If what I said is false it must mean that somehow all BTA systems are inherently bad, and that it's best for the game if all loot became BTC.

[Qhualor]

That people have stopped playing alts and thus their variety has been hurt thanks to a too large character specific grind is a fact. Ignore it or dissmiss it as a "player problem" if you want to, but that doesn't change the fact that it has negative consequences in the game.

It's important to point out that these playes are the ones choosing not to play alts and than asking or suggesting the game change for them because of their choice. They would rather blame the game than blame themselves.

[Avantasian]

It's important to point out that these playes are the ones choosing not to play alts and than asking or suggesting the game change for them because of their choice. They would rather blame the game than blame themselves.

Ignore it or dissmiss it as a "player problem" if you want to, but that doesn't change the fact that it has negative consequences in the game.

[Gramh_the_Bard]

I'm not taking your word for "1-2 systems per MMO" and frankly the number of systems means little without knowing the extent of the systems.

As for the monetization the idea is that the result of the change is not to for anyone to reach their goals faster, but to have alts to actually be included in their goals at all. That is an important distinction.

Why should people who play alts have their playstyle made easier when the devs haven't done anything to make single toon play easier?

[Sam-u-r-eye]

It's important to point out that these playes are the ones choosing not to play alts and than asking or suggesting the game change for them because of their choice. They would rather blame the game than blame themselves.

Don't hate the player, hate the game.

Seriously this is like kids stuff.

Expect people to use tax-loops, and be obsessed with their stock portfolio---since that's what's rewarded.
There's a parallel in DDO....

We had this discussion in the Reaper forums but honestly you didn't understand it there to....

...you can't go against human nature.
1. people have keeping up with the "jone's syndrome", i.e., people are competitive
2. people will be rules lawyers when it suits them, and free-thinkers when they don't
3. people love hamster wheels, as long as they don't cause despair.

[Avantasian]

Why should people who play alts have their playstyle made easier when the devs haven't done anything to make single toon play easier?

The reality is that playing alts have become "harder" which has made people stop playing alts and thus hurt their variety. Ignore it or dissmiss it as a "player problem" if you want to, but that doesn't change the fact that it has negative consequences in the game.

[Gramh_the_Bard]

It doesn't have any negative consequences in game. Outside of those that people bring into it with them.

[Sam-u-r-eye]

It doesn't have any negative consequences in game. Outside of those that people bring into it with them.

two words: player retention

Same reason we needed reaper.

[Enoach]

...
I will repeat the simple point I've been trying to get across one more time:
Having some system requiring a specific character and some allowing shared best meets everyone's preferences. We just had a huge addition to the character specific side, and with that lots of threads and posts popped up saying that they are abandoning their alts. That lead me to the conclusion that we have are too far from the optimal point in terms of character specific vs shared.

/waves

Keep in mind that many of these posts that popped up were basing the RXP hunt on the assumption it would take them years to earn all the RXP.

With people changing how they play to earn Racial Past Lives - doing 1 to 20 and running quests at the quests base level instead of base + 2, has changed the knowledge on how long it could take.

However, there is still an issue with earning RXP at the Epic Levels which is currently exasperated for Level 30 characters due to lack of content where penalties are not applied.

Because of this, I find your conclusion was flawed based on the new information. It does have merit if based on the original assumptions.

-----
However, the OP actually started out with sharing Epic Past Lives and not RXP (RXP sharing is more a side track). But even here I don't see a need.

My preference is to keep anything that develops a character at the character level. Anything that is convenients (like racial and class unlocks, starting at level 4/7 etc.) as Account.

I base this on the fact that while these character specific developments can add power, these are not needed to be successful in completing content. I do believe character power should be measured by the context of the Environment and not based on what is available for development.


The reality is that playing alts have become "harder" which has made people stop playing alts and thus hurt their variety. Ignore it or dissmiss it as a "player problem" if you want to, but that doesn't change the fact that it has negative consequences in the game.

I think using the word "harder" is a misnomer. Playing alts now has new opportunity cost then it had before. Players abandoning alts are doing so because they feel putting time in on alts not as valuable as getting a single character more bells and whistles.

[Gramh_the_Bard]

People left BECAUSE of Reaper, so that can't be a very good basis that change is good for player retention.

[slarden]

Best meet everyones preferences. It seems pointless to have a discussion with someone who intentionally or not leaves out words from my statements, but whatever.
Also, what you quoted had nothing to do with that poll, as I said nothing about any specific change.
If what I said is false it must mean that somehow all BTA systems are inherently bad, and that it's best for the game if all loot became BTC. Adding the word "best" changes nothing. If the devs invest time doing something half the population is for and half against - the payback isn't there. Worse yet, something the entire community would embrace could have been done with that time.

This whole thread is about sharing xp account-wide and so was the poll. It's all directly related.

BTA gear and shared xp aren't the same regardless of how many times you say they are.

[Avantasian]

Adding the word "best" changes nothing. If the devs invest time doing something half the population is for and half against - the payback isn't there. Worse yet, something the entire community would embrace could have been done with that time.

This whole thread is about sharing xp account-wide and so was the poll. It's all directly related.

BTA gear and shared xp aren't the same regardless of how many times you say they are.

If you need edit my statements and put your own context and meaning into them that only confirms my position. Thank you.

[Avantasian]

My preference is to keep anything that develops a character at the character level. Anything that is convenients (like racial and class unlocks, starting at level 4/7 etc.) as Account.

I base this on the fact that while these character specific developments can add power, these are not needed to be successful in completing content. I do believe character power should be measured by the context of the Environment and not based on what is available for development.

I respect your opinion, but the success and continued use of non-BTC loot and crafting materials reveals that your opnion is not consistent with the devs revenue goals.

Your opinion that character power should be measured in the context of enviorment also conflicts with everyone who has ever gotten a single past life to gain more power.

[Gremmlynn]

That people have stopped playing alts and thus their variety has been hurt thanks to a too large character specific grind is a fact. Ignore it or dissmiss it as a "player problem" if you want to, but that doesn't change the fact that it has negative consequences in the game.While going the direction you suggest would likely cause me to lose the motivation to play alts, simply because they would no longer be alternate characters, but alternate versions of the same character in my mind. Possibly even to lose interest in playing the game at all due to that increased degree of shallowness being added.

So negative consequences either way.

[Gramh_the_Bard]

If you need edit my statements and put your own context and meaning into them that only confirms my position. Thank you.

You don't have a position, you're just stirring up arguments and then pointing to your lack of position when people argue against you.

[Avantasian]

You don't have a position, you're just stirring up arguments and then pointing to your lack of position when people argue against you.

The notion that one must know the optimal solution in order to identify a problem is quite ridiculous.

[Avantasian]

While going the direction you suggest would likely cause me to lose the motivation to play alts, simply because they would no longer be alternate characters, but alternate versions of the same character in my mind. Possibly even to lose interest in playing the game at all due to that increased degree of shallowness being added.

So negative consequences either way.

Why didn't BTA and unbound loot do that already? It's the same direction.

[Enoach]

I respect your opinion, but the success and continued use of non-BTC loot and crafting materials reveals that your opnion is not consistent with the devs revenue goals.
Loot is a totally different animal, first it is not guaranteed (most that is guaranteed is BTC). Binding of Crafting systems ranges from Not Bound to Bound to Account (Such as the Legendary Shroud) and Bound to Character (Thunderforge and Heroic Shroud have partial elements)

I'm not seeing the inconsistency. One for character development there is the sales of XP boosts - direct (Temp/Perm) and indirect (slayer boosts), Tomes (Attribute/Skill), Reincarnation (sure there are ways to earn some of them, but LR+s are store bought with LR+1 being common with Iconics) and even tools for skipping through epic destinies to get to the one you want.


Your opinion that character power should be measured in the context of enviorment also conflicts with everyone who has ever gotten a single past life to gain more power.

How does a single past life on a character conflict with the measurement? You don't need the past life to complete the quest, character most likely completed the same quest before they got the past life.

Past lives provide more than power. Heroic Past Lives actually benefit a build more through flexibility then they do power. Epic Past Lives have more power, but even these are not needed to complete the quests. Sure they make things easier.

Based on how you appear to be looking at the system using the character's potential they can get would be like saying that a character only needs approximately 50% of the available power to be successful.

[Enoach]

Why didn't BTA and unbound loot do that already? It's the same direction.

Actually its not.

Loot can be very specific for builds. Say an item that boosts Melee Alacrity is not useful to a spell chucker/thrower/bow user, loot items also can only be on one character at a time, for all characters to benefit you would need to leave these items in a place where the character you are playing can pick them up. But past lives passive bonuses are useful to more builds and is always available.

[Avantasian]

Loot is a totally different animal, first it is not guaranteed (most that is guaranteed is BTC). Binding of Crafting systems ranges from Not Bound to Bound to Account (Such as the Legendary Shroud) and Bound to Character (Thunderforge and Heroic Shroud have partial elements)

I'm not seeing the inconsistency. One for character development there is the sales of XP boosts - direct (Temp/Perm) and indirect (slayer boosts), Tomes (Attribute/Skill), Reincarnation (sure there are ways to earn some of them, but LR+s are store bought with LR+1 being common with Iconics) and even tools for skipping through epic destinies to get to the one you want.

In principle it's not a totally different animal at all.
There is no logical reason why the following statement does not equally apply to BTA/unbound loot.
"My preference is to keep anything that develops a character at the character level. Anything that is convenients (like racial and class unlocks, starting at level 4/7 etc.) as Account."





How does a single past life on a character conflict with the measurement? You don't need the past life to complete the quest, character most likely completed the same quest before they got the past life.

Exactly, people don't need the past lives but they get it for the power increase anyways. So what is the point of using "being able to complete content" as some sort of measuring stick when that is simply not the goal?

[Avantasian]

Actually its not.

Loot can be very specific for builds. Say an item that boosts Melee Alacrity is not useful to a spell chucker/thrower/bow user, loot items also can only be on one character at a time, for all characters to benefit you would need to leave these items in a place where the character you are playing can pick them up. But past lives passive bonuses are useful to more builds and is always available.

Crafting materials are not "build specific". It's the same direction.

[Gremmlynn]

Why didn't BTA and unbound loot do that already? It's the same direction.Because that's something I have the option to choose not to use. Hell, for about three years I didn't even have the option to use BTA due to a lack of share bank. Characters automagically gaining xp despite not being played doesn't offer that choice.

[Avantasian]

Because that's something I have the option to choose not to use. Hell, for about three years I didn't even have the option to use BTA due to a lack of share bank. Characters automagically gaining xp despite not being played doesn't offer that choice.

I am more than willing to consider optional methods. I have nothing against it at all. Infact it sounds perfectly reasonable.

[Gramh_the_Bard]

Try accepting the fact that non-BTC loot is the "meeting player's halfway" on alts and let this conversation die.

[Chai]

two words: player retention

Same reason we needed reaper.

We have seen instances where people have "finished" the new progression system and then gone on extended break until the next update arrives. Do we believe full progression systems that were designed as character based on purpose changing to account based, is actually going to retain those players, or will the same happen, where theres a void of players between updates as usual once people finish the progression on one character and it carries over to all their characters?

[nokowi]

I don't know what to tell you, you are simply wrong. You have created an image of me and my motivations that is simply not even close to real, and you are viewing my posts through that lense.
Your constant personal attacks and derailments are tiersome.

I will repeat the simple point I've been trying to get across one more time:
Having some system requiring a specific character and some allowing shared best meets everyone's preferences. We just had a huge addition to the character specific side, and with that lots of threads and posts popped up saying that they are abandoning their alts. That lead me to the conclusion that we have are too far from the optimal point in terms of character specific vs shared.

/waves

I have created an image of your posts that is quite accurate.

I also told you how to make posts that would be unbiased, and asks for specifics that you simply chose to ignore, because they hurts your argument.

Why is shared RXP better than other choices that we know already work?

Arguing a general idea why mentioning only one specific (RXP), and refusing to look at other specifics is really a perfect model of bias.

You may not be biased, but your posts and responses (and lack thereof) certainly are.

[nokowi]

Don't hate the player, hate the game.

Seriously this is like kids stuff.

Expect people to use tax-loops, and be obsessed with their stock portfolio---since that's what's rewarded.
There's a parallel in DDO....

We had this discussion in the Reaper forums but honestly you didn't understand it there to....

...you can't go against human nature.
1. people have keeping up with the "jone's syndrome", i.e., people are competitive
2. people will be rules lawyers when it suits them, and free-thinkers when they don't
3. people love hamster wheels, as long as they don't cause despair.

You forgot
4. Giving players what they ask for creates a terrible game. What they desire (easy rewards while complaining about things being too easy) often conflicts with good game design.

Shared RXP is an effort for easy rewards.

If it was about helping alts people advocating RXP would be interested in talking about all the changes that would help alts. They are not.

If it was about helping alts people advocating RXP would be willing to wait until we get a bunch fo new content (what has helped alts in the past). They will not.

Actions speak much louder than words. They want their easy rewards NOW!

[zehnvhex]

What I'd like even more is to just have my character and select what build I want to play that day. IE: I pick my character Zehnpai and then I select which build I want to play. Perhaps today I pick the 8/6/6 sorc/fighter/paladin build today. Maybe tomorrow I pick a 20 warlock. Oh hey, my friend wants to play, we can pick up from where we left off on my level 7 rogue build.

I imagine that would solve a lot of issues.

It won't happen of course. Too many grumbletooks who would go on and on about how you can't do that because the "LOLOLORE!"

[Chai]

What I'd like even more is to just have my character and select what build I want to play that day. IE: I pick my character Zehnpai and then I select which build I want to play. Perhaps today I pick the 8/6/6 sorc/fighter/paladin build today. Maybe tomorrow I pick a 20 warlock. Oh hey, my friend wants to play, we can pick up from where we left off on my level 7 rogue build.

I imagine that would solve a lot of issues.

It won't happen of course. Too many grumbletooks who would go on and on about how you can't do that because the "LOLOLORE!"

I tried to initiate a discussion a while back about scaling the character to the content, like modern MMOs do. It was shot down with the regular list of first ballot hall of fame player excuses. Example: When I log into GW2 on a max level character and see an LFM up, character level is not part of the decision making process. I can just join.

[Avantasian]

I have created an image of your posts that is quite accurate.

Trust me, it's not accurate. Every assumption you made about me in that post was false.



Arguing a general idea why mentioning only one specific (RXP), and refusing to look at other specifics is really a perfect model of bias.

No it's not. You see me as some staunch defender of account wide RXP, but if you read the thread you can see that I told you on the first page that disagreeing with account wide RXP does not affect my argument at all, I have also repeatedly said that I am more than willing to consider any and all methods for achieving the same effect and my references to RXP have been to refute arguments that any change must come with specific consequenses.

It's not bias to try to convince people about the general principle before going into specifics.

[nokowi]

Trust me, it's not accurate. Every assumption you made about me in that post was false.



No it's not. You see me as some staunch defender of account wide RXP, but if you read the thread you can see that I told you on the first page that disagreeing with account wide RXP does not affect my argument at all, I have also repeatedly said that I am more than willing to consider any and all methods for achieving the same effect and my references to RXP have been to refute arguments that any change must come with specific consequenses.

It's not bias to try to convince people about the general principle before going into specifics.

No, I see you as someone not willing or even interested in discussing what would actually help people with alts. You say your willing to consider things, but you never actually do it, even when it is requested. There is a good reason you have avoided specifics, and it has to do with the weakness of your own beliefs.

I'm out of this thread, because it can't go anywhere if your argument is that everyone must agree with your generalizations before you offer any specifics. Posting a precondition that can never happen reveals you have no desire for discussion. I am beginning to believe your demand for apology was just such another tactic to prevent having to offer specifics.

Avoiding discussion is an effective tactic for saving face from a weak position. It is not a good tactic for getting a change enacted. Best of luck with your desire for alts.

[Sproutecus]

Putting aside the value of making reaper or racial TR account wide for a second.

If you did do one or the other, you COULD compromise. For instance, you could do one account wide RTR for every 3 on any one character (or one for every race you have 3 completed). That means if you do 30 RTR's on your main, your alts (that existed the entire time) would have the equivalent of 1 RPL for each race. The alt still has to do a LOT of grinding, but there is incentive to play your alts as well.

Or even more restrictive, you could do 1 'free' RPL for a SINGLE character for each race completed on another. That would be less rewarding for people with lots of alts, but it is at least giving players a small reason to have/play alts.

Additionally, for players like myself who have only been playing a (relatively) short while, the mountain you have to climb to come sort of kid of close to be equivilent to long term players would not be quitre as ridiculous. As it is, I have zero reason to spend one dime on my alt right now. I have 9 EPL's,


Just a thought.

[Uska]

What I'd like even more is to just have my character and select what build I want to play that day. IE: I pick my character Zehnpai and then I select which build I want to play. Perhaps today I pick the 8/6/6 sorc/fighter/paladin build today. Maybe tomorrow I pick a 20 warlock. Oh hey, my friend wants to play, we can pick up from where we left off on my level 7 rogue build.

I imagine that would solve a lot of issues.

It won't happen of course. Too many grumbletooks who would go on and on about how you can't do that because the "LOLOLORE!"

That is the worst idea I have ever read or ever will read