as a death penalty, probably not a big enough deterrent on large-scale fights, and too big a deterrent on small-scale ones. it could be added but it wouldn't serve its purpose(protection against zombie tactics)
Games where durability loss has been implemented also implemented other ways to prevent zombie zerging. Typically, this was done by making it so that raise-type spells could not be cast while in combat. (WoW had one notable exception to that rule in the form of the druid's combat rez, but it came with enough restrictions that it didn't allow for zombie zerging.)
normal day-to-day durability loss would be both a) impossible to balance between jobs, and b) impossible to balance financially
That's not true, either. Using WoW as example again (only because it's the MMO with durability loss that I'm the most familiar with), plate cost more to repair from broken, but was far more resilient. A plate wearer could take far more hits before their armor was broken than a clothie, meaning that if a clothie was taking the same number of hits as a plate wearer, the clothie's armor would require more frequent repairs.
a) impossible to balance between jobs
Also not true. Generally speaking, the lighter the armor you wear, the more tools you're given to not get hit. Whether that comes in the form of stuns/roots/snares or high evasion, there are tools in place to offset how much durability damage your gear takes, and it wasn't even for the sake of balancing durability issues; it was for the sake of viable solo play with all classes.
as stated before, how do you deal with the tank vs DD vs mage disparity in duability loss? do you make tank gear cheaper to repair?
The disparity usually wasn't all that bad. Tanks would tend to pay more, but not so much more that they would quickly bankrupt themselves. The tanks who paid significant sums of currency to repair their gear in WoW were the ones in very, very good raid gear and it was not uncommon for guilds to help offset tank repair costs from a pooled fund. Joe Average tank in 5-man and early raid content didn't pay that much more than anyone else that it was an issue. The idea behind durability loss in general but particularly durability loss as a penalty for death wasn't to kick players in the teeth for having failed...it was more a subtle reminder at the end of a session that, "Hey, if you sucked less this would have been cheaper."
anyway, you always have tanks that are the same armor-class as some other dd job so you can't just make tank armor cheaper to repair because that still affects both a tank and a dd job, creating an imbalance when the dd job rarely has to repair while the tank constantly has to.
Exactly. So you don't try. "Tank" armor in WoW (again, familiar example only) didn't cost more than dps plate armor to repair. It cost the same as equivalent iLvl dps armor. There are four tank classes in WoW; 3 wear plate, 1 wears leather. In a game with durability loss, tanking tends to simply cost more. That's just the way it is, and it's no more unfair than jobs that rely on consumables (ie. RNG and NIN in FFXI). The main thing is that it's not a huge discrepancy in cost between tanks and other jobs.
you've created a system whereby people are not playing a job they might desire to play simply because they can't afford to. this is what bolsters RMT. hopefully SE has learned from the "ranger fantasy xi*" days that making finances the primary balance of a job DOES NOT WORK. which ties into point b.
Or, you simply don't append such an enormous cost to repairing gear that it absorbs a substantial amount of funds to keep on top of it.
b) impossible to balance financially
you do not EVER want players to have to "farm" just to maintain basic effectiveness. to buy new things? yes, to restock consumables for major fights? again yes, to be able to help their friends with basic quests? **** NO.
Well, relative to the other alternatives I've seen (particularly around penalties for death), I'd rather front a relatively insignificant amount of currency to repair my gear than have to form a party and go "farm" a relatively insignificant amount of xp to regain the level I lost that is preventing me from equipping my gear in the first place.
as it stands now, I'm a max level ranger on ffxi. But, if you weren't a member of my linkshell, odds are you'd have no clue to that fact. I'm on ranger for 2 reasons... building an xp buffer, or some LS event where the amount of gil I'm about to throw away is worth it. durability expands this to ALL jobs.
No, because SE made the mistake of putting consumables for RNG and NIN in the hands of the player economy instead of controlling the price through NPC vendor sales. The idea of all-things-crafted worked in the scope of FFXI. It doesn't work in the scope of a game that's marketed as being accessible to everyone, casual or hardcore. One of the first things an MMO developer needs to do when tuning a game for casual accessibility is look at all of the things that represent a non-voluntary ongoing cost to players of a particular build and put them in the hands of an NPC. As example only, if SE were to decide they wanted to turn around and make FFXI truly casual-friendly, ammunition, all
spell scrolls, and ninja tools would be available in infinite supplies from NPC vendors. You can't have a class/job reliant on a particular consumable and then make the cost of that consumable subjected to supply and demand and overall market fluctuations if you want that consumable to remain truly accessible.
the first means you've created a penalty that...well...isn't a penalty. if general activities are gonna generate the money to do repairs, the only time anyone will even care about durability is for EXTREMELY long fights where your gear is likely to break before the fight is over.
Exactly. Repair costs only add up if you fail repeatedly. For the average Joe, it means they can afford to die from time to time to a silly mistake, untimely disconnect or other "oops moment" and not feel like their progress from the past half hour has been reset.
When approaching an MMO designed to appeal to the full spectrum of players, you have to consider the impact that a death penalty might have on that entire spectrum. A penalty that makes a hardcore player sit up and take notice is going to seem overwhelming and excessive to a casual player because it's going to represent a much larger setback in terms of what they could hope to accomplish in a session.
third... and the worst of the lot... see "ranger fantasy xi" note.
RNG weren't nerfed because they were generally OP. They were nerfed because the playerbase in general couldn't wrap their heads around the strategies necessary to be successful in CoP missions. Consequently, if you were trying to get a spot in most CoP groups as a DD and you weren't RNG or SMN, you were SOL. Because RNG was easier than SMN to pick up and level (ie. you didn't have to go around and earn your avatars), people who lacked the cookie cutter jobs to get into CoP (specifically, Promyvion Holla/Dem/Mea) started flocking to RNG to level. It created an enormous class imbalance, and that
is why RNG got nerfed. STR did absolutely nothing for RNG who used gun/xbow, and the majority of RNG used those over bow because they were a far more accessible weapon. SE's nerfs did the trick...players abandoned RNG in droves (even the ones who leveled it because they actually liked the job as opposed to leveling it because it got them a spot in a mission party). Ham-fisted class balancing at its finest. Edited, Jul 7th 2009 8:32am by AureliusSir