Now Discussion of "Test Avlis XP and Loot"

[Adm.Venge]

See, you are going about this all wrong.

There is an easy way to completely get rid of "powergamers" once and for all. Get rid of ALL IG sources of XP: DM cookies, Crafting, Quest Rewards, Monsters, etc. Every Monday, you get 3000 XP. If you dont log in on Monday, you get a flag or something in your database. These are cumulative. Then, the next time you log in, you get all your back XP!

NO ONE will level faster then anyone else, because they CANT! If 3000 xp per week is too high, set it for something more palatable to you, like 1000 xp per week. Now, the sleep griefing zombies wont gain more xp then the poor fellow who can only commit 2 hours per week for whatever reason. The other neat bonus is, all your favorite alts will gain levels without you having to actually log them!

Your totally gimped goblin Cleric/Bard/Ranger levels as fast as a half-nymph Sorceress/Paladin! Total and equal fairness for all! Now we can get back to pure roleplay without having to deal with annoying distractions, like crafting or questing or killing monsters.

[GimpGenius]

/crackpot theory mode on

If there's a such a worry for level advancement, then why not set something on our PC hides at creation that prevents leveling past, say, level 15 without a DM flagging that PC? Think Andrinor's Mark, only for leveling.

Would it piss off the powergamers? Absolutely, and that sounds like a good thing for most posters.

Would it prevent level advancement? Yep, but that's not what Avlis or CoPaP is supposed to be about, right?

Would it promote character development and DM interaction with players? Damned straight. Not only would the PC need to do something RP-related (join a guild, make friends, whatever), the DMs would need to interact with characters and see how, if at all, they've fleshed out their characters. If they're not ready to be responsible with the power they're given, don't give it to them.

There're plenty of drawbacks to the above, but if this is really a massive, major, world-threatening issue (Deider has a point, but a PG'er killing/looting an RP'er without some actual RP or a reason for CvC is griefing, IMO) it needs to be addressed for everyone.... and that means new PCs (forced remort, anyone), and the code to stymie the powergamers.

/crackpot theory mode off

[Pathos Street]

I have a better idea on how to get rid of chronic powergamers.

Every time a DM sees them powergaming, they lose 5 or 10 levels. Bang, problem solved.

[chamalscuro]

The Team's plan seems sensible: Increase the xp per kill, but cap the xp per week.

Watching the Test thread, I can see some bugs still need to be worked out. The new loot drops sound fascinating, very clever. And to have the monsters use their own loot, what can I say? Wow.

*thumbs up!*

[Adm.Venge]

I have a better idea on how to get rid of chronic powergamers.

Every time a DM sees them powergaming, they lose 5 or 10 levels. Bang, problem solved.

Hell yeah!

Every DM should enforce their own personal arbitrary system of what consitutes "chronic powergaming" on all of us. If you dont like it, send a letter to the Team. We dont need DMs for plots or events, they should be out there making sure Avlis is equal for ALL of us!

[Nob]

When a thread like this turns up, all of a sudden several people who are good honest Roleplayers suddenly get "Am I powergaming thoughts?" This affects them in-game. It might be completely IC for them to hit dungeons more often but they are concerned about how they will be perceived in the community and chose not to do so.

In other words, the whole powergaming question and the social stigma attached to it causes everyone, powergamers and legitimate roleplayers alike a lot more grief than anyone particularly wants to deal with.

I think this raises a rather good point about the xp cap, in that it basically removes the doubt or ability to be a grinder (at least dungeon wise) and in many respects removes the social stigma of "powergaming" simply by making it impossible.

There's a difference between going to a dungeon because it's IC for you to do so, and simply grinding away at spawns because you want the xp for level advancement.

What might be interesting to consider is perhaps a little bit of "overflow" that's tracked and put into your next week's cap, perhaps upto oh say a thousand xp? You'll not advance any quicker (since the most you can actually recieve per week is 7000xp) but it might lessen concerns about people who binge adventure or gain xp in that way.

But let's bear in mind that this cap isn't really arbitarily set, but simply the product of trying to bring designed systems more in line with the original intentions for advancement.

7000xp/week (and I profess, weekly cap is something I pushed fairly strongly over a daily one) translates to 6 months (on the dot) to reaching level 20. This is in line with the CoPaP regulation that basically states flat out that that's the fastest you should be able to reach level 20 in. This is actually an admission rule into the group.

People have always suggested that "powergaming" is subjective, which to some degree it is. However the 20 levels/6 months is a fairly objective indicator of what is INTENDED (not necessarily of what might constitute PGing, etc. blah blah blah) by the creators and the community's accepted standard. It's a bit like CAFE standards for fuel efficiency. Sure not everyone will agree that that's the ideal standard, but it's the standard anyway and there should be some way of making it stick. Like the EPA standard mileage testing, an objective way like a hard-coded cap is preferrable to making everyone self-report.

I think it's important that we not look at this as a way to "punish" people but to simply remove the temptation of two fairly detrimental things that have to some degree eroded the sense of community here: 1. the focus/mad dash to level beyond all else because you need to be "strong" to "participate" which tends to create a "me first" outlook and 2. the tendency for players (and I admit to some guilt here) to classify people as a powergamer and shun them.

The xp cap and the changes made to level the way of gaining xp in terms of dungeoning is a bit like vaccination. By preventing the disease in general, you keep people from being classified as lepers, plague carriers, etc, while also keeping the disease itself from appearing.

I think that's a noble goal, don't you?

[Pathos Street]

I have a better idea on how to get rid of chronic powergamers.

Every time a DM sees them powergaming, they lose 5 or 10 levels. Bang, problem solved.

Hell yeah!

Every DM should enforce their own personal arbitrary system of what consitutes "chronic powergaming" on all of us. If you dont like it, send a letter to the Team. We dont need DMs for plots or events, they should be out there making sure Avlis is equal for ALL of us!

The team doesn't do anything arbitrarily or without evidence.

[Kerrick]

I have a better idea on how to get rid of chronic powergamers.

Every time a DM sees them powergaming, they lose 5 or 10 levels. Bang, problem solved.

Hell yeah!

Every DM should enforce their own personal arbitrary system of what consitutes "chronic powergaming" on all of us. If you dont like it, send a letter to the Team. We dont need DMs for plots or events, they should be out there making sure Avlis is equal for ALL of us!

The team doesn't do anything arbitrarily or without evidence.

I think you missed the sarcasm there. (That WAS sarcasm, right? )

7000xp/week (and I profess, weekly cap is something I pushed fairly strongly over a daily one) translates to 6 months (on the dot) to reaching level 20. This is in line with the CoPaP regulation that basically states flat out that that's the fastest you should be able to reach level 20 in. This is actually an admission rule into the group.

I think it's sad that we have to have this cap in the first place, just like they had to make a rule about cybering in public (*shudders*), a whole host of rules about changelings (which still get abused), and changes to the spying rules, among other things. It's sad that we can't trust the playerbase to exercise a little common sense and NOT do the things that cause these rules to be written and enforced.

And a general comment:

When I started, about 16 months ago, it was an accepted standard that it took you about a year to hit 20th level, and that you shouldn't hit 40 in less than 2 years. It wasn't a hard and fast rule, but generally more of an expectation of normal play. Nowadays, I hear things like "The new epic is 30th level", "The new 20 is 30" and "You're not epic until you hit 30" because it's so easy to GET to L30 - people are doing it in a year. You can get to L20 in under a month (no shit - a former DM said he watched someone do it), and people are hitting L40 in 13, 14, 15 months now. Is this a problem? You tell me.

[Calzier]

[quote="Kerrick"] You can get to L20 in under a month (no shit - a former DM said he watched someone do it), and people are hitting L40 in 13, 14, 15 months now. [quote]

HOLY SH*T!

Sorry, but 20 levels in a month. Really? Pick me up off the floor. I can understand if that was from constant DM plot stuff... but ----



My main might hit 20 in the next few weeks. He's only been going about 2 years... :sigh:

[Cerridwyn]

ok, i play basically all the time. i just hit lvl 20. it's taken me 9 months of more or less daily gaming to do so. (and i can honestly say it really doesn't matter that much to me)

i do dungeon crawls periodically, craft, quest and have been involved in a couple of dm plots. and it still took me 9 MONTHS to get here.

if someone can make it to lvl 20 in a month.....they're just playing the wrong game.

[Chasnor]

Folks, I think Nob summed it up well. Despite all other opinions, this is a large step towards one goal.

This largely brings Avlis in line with the CoPaP rules for rate of Level advancement. 6 months to 20, 2 years to 40, minimum.

While it will not guarantee that, it is the closest we can come to it at this time without reworking a huge number of systems and quests. We'd have to entirely re-write every quest on Avlis, re-write crafting, and any number of other things. Not going to happen.

We could lower the weekly cap further to say 5000 xp/week to compensate for other sources of XP, but we don't feel that should be necessary.

As has also been pointed out, this is still in the test phase and has bugs to fix. We want this to work well. We want it to be transparent. We hope it will be balanced enough that the playerbase as a whole hardly notices it in a negative manner.

There has been discussion of offering this to all CoPaP worlds for implementation once it has passed testing. I honestly hope that the offer is taken. This removes yet another complaint that the PGers will portal off to grind after they hit the cap. It will also bring all of CoPaP inline with CoPaP rules. (To my knowledge, no world is in compliance. I could be wrong though.)

I am actually enjoying the surprisingly cordial and constructive discussion here. For the most part it is a refreshing change from previous discussions on this divisive subject.

[Zebranky]

Responding to Chas, a few thoughts that come to mind:

I don't think the "2 years to 40" is actually a written requirement anywhere (and I just checked the Ambassadors/WLs forum pretty thoroughly). Correct me if I'm wrong. The 6 to 20 definitely is, though.

Still, 6 to 20 is a pretty hard thing to test. You could playtest to, say, 5-10, and extrapolate, but what if a world has more/less content for teenbies than for lowbies? Also, keep in mind that that's playing 3 hours a day. Actual play times vary hugely, and potential XP gains in that period also vary hugely, depending on what you do.

On Hades, for example, it's almost ridiculously easy to get to level 5, due to a static quest capped at 5. After that, though, the content is considerably thinner. We have several dungeon areas, and I have no idea how our XP or loot compares to Avlis's (or any other world's), but I think it is, for the average player, much less generous. I base that observation mostly on the fact that any powergamers we have seem to go offworld around the mid-teens. (Fastest I've seen from a native PC is 4 to 20, and that involved going offworld).

Judging by the record, though, you're right, all CoPaP worlds are at least on the border of being noncompliant. I'm glad the new system is being tested thoroughly, and I hope it is offered to CoPaP. From my POV, Hades is not where most people will come to grind, even if they've hit the cap. That's purely because we don't have much content for PCs above the teens, and not because of some imagined vastly superior design.

Some final thoughts on the system:

- I've been in CoPaP for almost 2.5 years. In that time, my highest level PC is 10. Besides that, I have a level 9 and a few other lower levels. I'm not exactly the guy to ask about powergaming.
- That being said, if someone manages to hit the 7000 cap every single day for 6 months, I'm a little scared. More likely they have a few days (weekends, etc.) where they would far exceed it. That alone makes the cap a good idea.
- Beyond that, I don't really want to consider the ramifications too much. Change is good for everyone; it keeps people interested. Let's change shit up.

Zebranky
Hades "Chief Management" (that means server host and assistant WL, berks!)

[Zebranky]

Oh, also. Speaking of the Ambassadors/WLs forum. Orl explicitly denied the "level cap without DM approval" idea way back in 2005. It's one extremely dead horse at this point.

[GimpGenius]

Oh, also. Speaking of the Ambassadors/WLs forum. Orl explicitly denied the "level cap without DM approval" idea way back in 2005. It's one extremely dead horse at this point.

The idea was a little bit tongue-in-cheek; I like the idea that things are changing mechanically, but it seems too little too late at this point, IMO. Unless there're still a large number of genuinely new players flooding into CoPaP worlds, the level cap's only going to affect those of us who, for better or worse, know the layout of our respective planes; the quests, who's who, etc. This isn't a bad thing, but I think changes like this can do more harm than good in certain situations.

In fact, I'll even play devil's advocate. The cap's a bad idea because it creates a grind effect. If I, as a player, hit my 7,000 cap for the week, there's no reason whatsoever to do any adventuring; profit's more easily made from crafting/selling, and even if I have friends who want to go out and knock around the baddies, I'm less inclined to go unless there's a quest reward I want or a DM event going on.

And what about people that log on at odd hours, when the servers only have 1-5 players on? There's no sense in doing any solo adventuring, because it's a resource sink with little to no benefit. Tracking down the other few players on, while not a problem from the team's standpoint, is pretty danged cheesy. They could run a couple of basic quests and get some token XP, sure, but what else is there? Powercrafting, which is frowned upon, or cheesing a random encounter with another PC and forcing character interaction. Powergamer or not, both of those options are more likely to detract from the player base rather than augment it (unless you enjoy clicking on plants, ore veins, and tables for half of your play time).

If the team feels that an XP cap is a necessary evil, fine; for those of us who have higher-level characters and solid RP-mates to fall back on, we're not going to be hurting much. But for any new players and alts? The forced grind just seems unnecessary.





I'm not against the changes, by the way... just trying to present a different view.

[Vergilius]

I agree with Nob's extension of my note above.



Also, the level 20 in a year was based upon 3-4 hours a day for 3-4 days a week. Setting a rough expectation of 6 months is good for those who play more than 3-4 days a week and more than 3-4 hours a day.

[Marleh]

And what about people that log on at odd hours, when the servers only have 1-5 players on? There's no sense in doing any solo adventuring, because it's a resource sink with little to no benefit. Tracking down the other few players on, while not a problem from the team's standpoint, is pretty danged cheesy. They could run a couple of basic quests and get some token XP, sure, but what else is there? Powercrafting, which is frowned upon, or cheesing a random encounter with another PC and forcing character interaction. Powergamer or not, both of those options are more likely to detract from the player base rather than augment it (unless you enjoy clicking on plants, ore veins, and tables for half of your play time).

I don't understand this at all. The new system is trying to encourage a wide variety of characters to party up and they should get more xp for it. I can't see why this would limit them to "a couple of basic quests and get some token xp."

If I can help show a few lower characters some areas they would otherwise not go, then all the better.

[Katroine]

If I can help show a few lower characters some areas they would otherwise not go, then all the better.

This is the only part that mattered to me. I can stop feeling like the party pariah and go out with people other than my familiar. I never get 7k a week anyway so that's rather unimportant me, and I am never the looter so those changes could be in and I'd not notice.

Getting to go adventuring with a group when they ask me is enough to make me give a thumbs up to the changes.

[KinX]

And what about people that log on at odd hours, when the servers only have 1-5 players on? There's no sense in doing any solo adventuring, because it's a resource sink with little to no benefit. Tracking down the other few players on, while not a problem from the team's standpoint, is pretty danged cheesy. They could run a couple of basic quests and get some token XP, sure, but what else is there? Powercrafting, which is frowned upon, or cheesing a random encounter with another PC and forcing character interaction. Powergamer or not, both of those options are more likely to detract from the player base rather than augment it (unless you enjoy clicking on plants, ore veins, and tables for half of your play time).

During the week i probably see a total of about 10 players across the servers. I craft a bit but i do find clicking on placeables and tables incredibly boring. I only do it because i'm semi interested in it. So after about an hour of crafting if there's nothing else to do i'll just log off. This is at my prime playing time. The other option is to go and beat on things. If i do hit the cap, i guess initially i'll keep beating on things, cap or no cap, but i wonder about the long term affect it will have. Maybe eventually i will get bored and just not log on. I'll probably start chest hunting to see what i can find, not that i'll ever find anything useful to me, but my guild can always use more items. Although, generally by the time i log on most of the chests have already been emptied unless it's in an epic area where you'd think people grind for xp anyway.

[KinX]

all that being said though. i don't think an xp cap have too much of an impact on myself. i log on because i'm addicted to the world. even if i take a break here and there.

Be interesting to see implemented.

[DoomsDay1000]

Quote:
DoomsDay1000 wrote:
In my opinion, if you guys are going to do something this major that effects everyone, restart everyone at level 1


Not that I expect this suggestion to be seriously considered, but, to be honest... I would probably simply quit. I have one character, and I've put a lot of work into her. I am not ready to retire her, and I am looking forward to her ongoing development. Putting her back to level one would be tantamount to wiping her from existence in my mind.

Hey, why not just wipe the server vault instead? EVERYONE DIES. Start up new PCs at L1.

Kill everyone start new PC's at level 1. add the new XP system with the cap and its fair for EVERYONE... and if other people level faster than other people, then its there problem... but yet i still going to se this hapen because someone else levels faster then someone else there going to SAY POWER GAMER but there actually not by this new system and the cap. The people say that they would quit after they kill all the players and restarted everyone back to level 1. i dought they would stop playing and the poeple who do are NOT true role players, any TURE role player will still role play no matter what.

There is an easy way to completely get rid of "powergamers" once and for all. Get rid of ALL IG sources of XP: DM cookies, Crafting, Quest Rewards, Monsters, etc. Every Monday, you get 3000 XP. If you dont log in on Monday, you get a flag or something in your database. These are cumulative. Then, the next time you log in, you get all your back XP!

and i like this idea... but everyone's like

We'd have to entirely re-write every quest on Avlis, re-write crafting, and any number of other things. Not going to happen.

you guys are probably writing soo much code to this complaint won't even matter.

[girlysprite]

DoomsDay, too harsh to say that people who quit after a vaultwhipe would not be true roleplayers. Did it occur to you that people get very attached to their characters?
And if you regularly hit the cap and you cant find much else to do, you might reconsider your playstyle or how much time you spend on avlis to start with.

[Jaybob]

The people say that they would quit after they kill all the players and restarted everyone back to level 1. i dought they would stop playing and the poeple who do are NOT true role players, any TURE role player will still role play no matter what.

mebbe they roleplay somewhere else if we kill their character.

and anyways, wouldn't it be ssoooooo OOC to just kill everyone on avlis? i mean, unless you're going to bring in some fancy deus ex machina, how are you going to explain in Avlis 2 why suddenly everyone in Avlis 1 was dead. Not very IC, or very skilled roleplaying.

[DoomsDay1000]

why would you think avlis1 and avlis 2 would be linked? honsetly the only way i would see that happening if they stoped hosting avlis 1 and went to hosting avlis 2?

[Darkfire]

why would you think avlis1 and avlis 2 would be linked? honsetly the only way i would see that happening if they stoped hosting avlis 1 and went to hosting avlis 2?

The IC setting of Avlis 2 takes place in the future of the current Avlis. So in essence Jaybob had a point... but then again, its far enough in the future that even the Avlis 2 people would be like... "hey, didn't that Dameon guy whipe out almost everyone like 2,000 years ago? Who? I dunno, Dameon...? *shrugs* Sounds like a vag. Yeah, probably was... ah well, who cares, it was 2000 years ago."

[Jaybob]

and its fair for EVERYONE...

I'd like to add something about the fairness issue.

It seems to me that in this case, in specific reference to XP, issues with fairness imply a competition over getting to level 40. This may be a source of the problem here. When I log into the game, I am looking for an enjoyable time. Getting stronger and gaining levels serves to increase the fun in the sense that as my PC grows stronger, he'll be able to handle himself in increasingly dangerous situations. It makes it so that I don't have to do the kobold caves for the rest of my life.

For me, OOC there's no real glory in a character just being epic, or level 40 for that matter. a level 40 character who's played shitty is still a shitty character, and a level 5 character that's played really well is impressive, regardless of whether they're killing crop rats or vampire warriors.

Do we want to make Avlis fair for everyone? of course, in the sense that everyone has the ability to gain levels, and everyone is subject to the same rules. However, fairness becomes an issue when people attempt to stack their PC next to someone else's. I play about 5-10 hours a week, and gain precious little XP while I do it. The next person can play a lot more than that. More power to them. I would play more if i could. Add to that the fact that I've been playing here since last October, while others have been playing for years. Resetting the characters to level 1, or killing off everyone and starting all new PC's would have a levelling effect at first, but the same differentiation would immediately begin to take form. My new PC would level slowly, others would level more quickly. I don't like the 3000 xp per week idea because you would have a rank of players that started right away, and all reach levels at the same rate, leaving you with a front-loaded wave of characters that are the exact same "age."

Look around you. do you see this in real life? no. people advance and refine their skills at a rate commensurate with the time they spend on it. I started working at my company at the same time as two other people. One guy spends all his time here, working. Is he better at it than me now? yes. am i willing or able to spend the same time as him? no.

Fairness has its place, and i think that is embodied in the rules and mechanics of the game. That said, resetting the characters would NOT be fair, because all i will have lost is a level 7 character with comparatively little investment. Would that be fair to Nayala or Moira, or Aerill? I submit it would not be fair to do that.

-J