Forum Settings
       
1 2 Next »
This Forum is Read Only

Equipment Durability/RepairFollow

#52 Jul 08 2009 at 11:12 PM Rating: Good
**
424 posts
Quote:
It's a bit short sighted to think that saturation will never begin to affect an MMO if the gear that exists in the game today is just repeatedly cycled through the system, and I think that short sightedness may have bit SE in the ****


I think it depends on the game economy as to the viability of recycling gear. In FFXI a new gear purchase from the AH could be viewed as an investment almost. You could buy that piece of gear, and use it... most likely the market value for that gear would depreciate, and you would end up selling it back for a loss. Or that piece of gear could end up to have a constant market value, the kind of item that nobody would want to sell back to the AH unless they drastically changed their gameplay style. Like a mage selling back all their HQ staves because they decided they wanted to be a tank and never be a caster job again.

I like the idea of equipment that is good enough to constantly be bought and sold on the AH. I think the idea of 'bind of equip' gear is good, but it was present in FFXI as 'ex' gear. I think that the 'single character system' then makes FFXI unique will most likely be carried on in FFXI. 'Bind on equip' gear would add to the inventory problems that any MMO faces (and most specifically the inventory problems in FFXI) in a DRASTIC way in a single character system.

I just don't think that having 'bind on equip' gear as a commonplace system would work with the single character system. Inventory problems aside, if you want to switch jobs then you should be able to resell your items in order to afford the basic necessities of a job switch.
____________________________
Administrator Kaolian:
"Quote it correctly or don't quote it. That's called "how people get banned"..."

Actually it's called "Libel"... and only if it is fabricated, but hey, you are the admin.

AureliusSir the Irrelevant:
"They're on a tangent, but they aren't off topic."
#53 Jul 09 2009 at 7:22 AM Rating: Good
*****
11,576 posts
Shazaamemt wrote:
Quote:
It's a bit short sighted to think that saturation will never begin to affect an MMO if the gear that exists in the game today is just repeatedly cycled through the system, and I think that short sightedness may have bit SE in the ****


I think it depends on the game economy as to the viability of recycling gear. In FFXI a new gear purchase from the AH could be viewed as an investment almost. You could buy that piece of gear, and use it... most likely the market value for that gear would depreciate, and you would end up selling it back for a loss. Or that piece of gear could end up to have a constant market value, the kind of item that nobody would want to sell back to the AH unless they drastically changed their gameplay style. Like a mage selling back all their HQ staves because they decided they wanted to be a tank and never be a caster job again.


Itemization in FFXI is exceptionally poor. There is such a limited source for gear (ie. the vast majority of it is crafted until you reach the level cap) that you wind up with parties where half the members are wearing almost exactly the same armor for a given level range. It's not even a case of recycling models so that it looks the same...it is the same, with the occasional exceptions typically limited to the +1 version of a given item. If SE brings their itemization up to par with other MMOs in FFXIV, there won't be any need for recycling gear.

Quote:
I like the idea of equipment that is good enough to constantly be bought and sold on the AH. I think the idea of 'bind of equip' gear is good, but it was present in FFXI as 'ex' gear.


Not exactly. Ex gear in FFXI would fall under the category of bind on pickup. Bind on equip gear can be freely sold/traded until someone decides to equip it at which point it becomes bound to that player. The bind on pickup stuff is typically reserved for quest rewards and boss drops. Bind on equip was typically what you would find on gear that dropped from random mobs or gear that was crafted.

Quote:
I think that the 'single character system' then makes FFXI unique will most likely be carried on in FFXI. 'Bind on equip' gear would add to the inventory problems that any MMO faces (and most specifically the inventory problems in FFXI) in a DRASTIC way in a single character system.


I agree that FFXIV will likely take on the single character system again, and I think it's a good idea. On the other side of the coin is the reality that if you make gear adequately abundant, there's no need to stockpile gear from one progression range in case you decide to revisit that particular range again in the future. I know people might take issue with the notion of "disposable" gear and I wouldn't disagree with them for doing so, but there are just as many (if not more) benefits to ample itemization and keeping only what you're going to use in the short term as there are for an extremely finite selection of options that are repeatedly recycled through the economy.

Honestly, it could go either way. Whether SE goes for the non-binding option or decides to go with the more common systems, my only hope is that they improve upon the overall selection of gear to be had. If they go for the non-binding option, vastly improved diversity would hopefully help to keep crafting from feeling "stagnant" as some others have commented on it as being.

Quote:
I just don't think that having 'bind on equip' gear as a commonplace system would work with the single character system. Inventory problems aside, if you want to switch jobs then you should be able to resell your items in order to afford the basic necessities of a job switch.


I think that's a situation that would be easily addressed by simply providing more options. If you think of it in FFXI terms then yes, it could create a problem because gear was so limited that there was always a demand for pretty much everything. If you create a greater diversity, there would be expensive options and inexpensive options depending on the quality of the gear relative to the level of progression it was intended for, but most of it would be good enough to use.

Edited, Jul 9th 2009 8:23am by AureliusSir
#54 Jul 10 2009 at 12:00 AM Rating: Good
**
424 posts
I wholeheartedly agree with the fact that FFXI offered too few equipment models, and that it was dissapointing to see every melee DPS wearing the same gear and looking so similar that the only way to tell them apart was through their weapons.

I also see what you are saying about the difference between Bind on equip and 'Ex' gear.

Again however, I think there needs to be a change in the inventory system in order to allow for the use of 'bind on equip' gear as a major part of the game given the single character system. If it takes a significant amount of farming for the crafter to make a particular piece of gear, then 'bind on equip' would leave the player with an item taking up inventory space. You wouldn't want to sell it to a vendor because it would truly be a waste, but if you swap jobs then you would have no use for the item and it would just eat up room.

Given the fact that SE likes to reuse old content, you would probably end up holding on to that old piece of bind on equip level 30 gear forever. It would have to sell to a vendor for quite a high price to make it worthwhile selling with the possibility that you may re-buy it. Problem there is that if it fetches a high price from a vendor, then crafters have less of an incentive to sell the gear to another player, and would probably just sell the gear to a vendor for easier gil.

I agree that gear should be more abundant and varied, but I think that the option to sell it back to another player to use on the AH encourages the use of a player economy, and discourages RMT.

Which brings me back to the original sentiment of the post, without having durability on gear, then I think BOE gear is less important. Part of the reason you can't sell gear you have used on the AH in WOW is because dealing with the durability on the gear (and how much durability is left) would be a logistical nightmare. It leads to having BoE gear available so gear can still be sold via AH, without having to worry about the durability problem.

Quite frankly, I see BOE equipment as being a way around the issues involved by having durability in a game economy and a game AH, rather than a solution to game economy and inventory.

____________________________
Administrator Kaolian:
"Quote it correctly or don't quote it. That's called "how people get banned"..."

Actually it's called "Libel"... and only if it is fabricated, but hey, you are the admin.

AureliusSir the Irrelevant:
"They're on a tangent, but they aren't off topic."
#55 Jul 10 2009 at 12:56 AM Rating: Good
***
2,535 posts
Shazaamemt wrote:
Part of the reason you can't sell gear you have used on the AH in WOW is because dealing with the durability on the gear (and how much durability is left) would be a logistical nightmare. It leads to having BoE gear available so gear can still be sold via AH, without having to worry about the durability problem.


Ahhh, but it's possible for gear to lose durability even without ever being equipped. (Reviving at a spirit healer rather that returning to your corpse costs 25% durability from every item in your inventory.)

Even though in theory that's still not a problem (items sold through the AH retain their uniqueness, including gems, enchants, and crafter signature), in practice WoW avoids this issue by simply requiring all gear to be at max durability in order to be listed at the AH; so I don't think it's true that durability concerns at the AH have anything to do with why essentially all useful gear binds.
#56 Jul 10 2009 at 2:06 AM Rating: Default
**
424 posts
I can't think of a single high end item in current WoW that can be worn by a player and then later sold on the AH. Please enlighten me.
____________________________
Administrator Kaolian:
"Quote it correctly or don't quote it. That's called "how people get banned"..."

Actually it's called "Libel"... and only if it is fabricated, but hey, you are the admin.

AureliusSir the Irrelevant:
"They're on a tangent, but they aren't off topic."
#57 Jul 10 2009 at 6:48 AM Rating: Good
*****
11,576 posts
Shazaamemt wrote:
I can't think of a single high end item in current WoW that can be worn by a player and then later sold on the AH. Please enlighten me.


It doesn't have to be high end to illustrate the point. "Common" quality gear can be used and then sold, and it is also affected be durability. If you try to take a piece of common gear that isn't at 100% durability and sell it on auction, it won't let you. Ergo, you can't sell gear on auction unless it is fully repaired.
#58 Jul 10 2009 at 7:11 AM Rating: Decent
Repressed Memories
******
20,804 posts
Shazaament wrote:
Part of the reason you can't sell gear you have used on the AH in WOW is because dealing with the durability on the gear (and how much durability is left) would be a logistical nightmare.

You're so dead set against the idea of durability that you're inventing problems that don't exist. Why are you trying so hard to convince yourself that durability is bad? Why don't you want to like it? Is it because WoW has durability? I think so...
#59 Jul 10 2009 at 10:37 PM Rating: Decent
**
424 posts
Quote:
You're so dead set against the idea of durability that you're inventing problems that don't exist. Why are you trying so hard to convince yourself that durability is bad? Why don't you want to like it? Is it because WoW has durability? I think so...


Please stop interrupting threads with a genuine discourse of ideas with your favoritism. There are aspects of FFXI and WoW that most of us have acknowledged as good or bad. If you bothered to read the thread you would see that my concerns were more than 'WoW did it'. But you don't, you just jump in on any topic and accuse anyone with a differing opinion of 'hating on wow'.

And to be honest, I still don't think anyone has made the argument that 'durability is good'. Most have agreed that it is just a mechanism to get rid of in-game currency and/or serve as a death penalty.

BUT BY ALL MEANS ALLEGORY, CONTRIBUTE SOMETHING USEFUL FOR ONCE AND PLEASE TELL US WHY DURABILITY IS GOOD!


If you make a good point I will respect it, just as I have respected the posts made by other people on this thread.

Back to the actual thread:
Quote:

It doesn't have to be high end to illustrate the point. "Common" quality gear can be used and then sold, and it is also affected be durability. If you try to take a piece of common gear that isn't at 100% durability and sell it on auction, it won't let you. Ergo, you can't sell gear on auction unless it is fully repaired.


I understand that, but it seems that the BoE/BoP effect applies to all the higher end gear in WoW (and justly so, with a single job per character system it makes total sense). But the gear you are most likely to hang onto when swapping jobs is going to be that really high end gear that took effort to obtain. Sure, if we were all wearing greens (or the FFXI equivalent) then it really wouldn't matter if we sold them back to the AH or sold them to a vendor.

Honestly, that 'common' quality gear just isn't going to be an inventory concern, because people won't care about selling it when they switch jobs (unless they are really that OCD). I am more concerned with people being able to sell back that really high end gear on an AH as aside to just tossing it away and hoping it drops some other time when they switch jobs.

Even if an unlimited inventory is possible, I am not sure I would want it, because I would just end up spending as much time sifting through my inventory screen every time I switched as I would spend moving to mules on FFXI or trying to re-talent my character after a major nerf in WoW.




Edited, Jul 11th 2009 5:03am by Shazaamemt
____________________________
Administrator Kaolian:
"Quote it correctly or don't quote it. That's called "how people get banned"..."

Actually it's called "Libel"... and only if it is fabricated, but hey, you are the admin.

AureliusSir the Irrelevant:
"They're on a tangent, but they aren't off topic."
#60 Jul 10 2009 at 10:52 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
4,512 posts
Shazaamemt wrote:
Please stop interrupting threads with a genuine discourse of ideas with your favoritism. There are aspects of FFXI and WoW that most of us have acknowledged as good or bad. If you bothered to read the thread you would see that my concerns were more than 'WoW did it'. But you don't, you just jump in on any topic and accuse anyone with a differing opinion of 'hating on wow'.


You supported your statement with a grossly inaccurate view of WoW. Not sort of inaccurate, not mildly inaccurate, not "Oh I can see why you were confused." It was flat out wrong.

Most upper level gear is bind on pick-up, not bind on equip. It's done this way because Blizzard wants people to invest time into their characters, and not just coast their alts way to 80 and come off as experienced with all the leet gear they got... as another class.

Quest equipment is bind on pick-up because many of the rewards are **** good. There's quite a market for it. I could also just take my level 80 and run to a different starting area to make it super easy for my next character to coast through.

It had nothing to do with logistic nightmares and selling gear on the auction house. At all.

Shazaamemt wrote:
Most have agreed that it is just a mechanism to get rid of in-game currency and/or serve as a death penalty.


Why are those bad?

Shazaamemt wrote:
Back to the actual thread:


Which isn't even addressing durability issues, but rather is focused on inventory concerns with gear stockpiling.

Sheesh.

Edited, Jul 11th 2009 2:53am by CBD
____________________________
Mazra wrote:
When you cast Moonfire on someone, it's not some Druid base on the moon launching a precision deathbeam across space to strike people
#61 Jul 10 2009 at 11:00 PM Rating: Decent
**
424 posts
Quote:


Most upper level gear is bind on pick-up, not bind on equip. It's done this way because Blizzard wants people to invest time into their characters, and not just coast their alts way to 80 and come off as experienced with all the leet gear they got... as another class.

Quest equipment is bind on pick-up because many of the rewards are **** good. There's quite a market for it. I could also just take my level 80 and run to a different starting area to make it super easy for my next character to coast through.

It had nothing to do with logistic nightmares and selling gear on the auction house. At all.


You didn't read the thread. I was talking about the 'logistical nightmare' of selling gear with variable levels of durability on the AH. Which you can't do with the majority of gear in WoW. Bind-on-pickup gear ALSO can't be sold on the AH.

Quote:


Which isn't even addressing durability issues, but rather is focused on inventory concerns with gear stockpiling.
Sheesh.


Again, you didn't read the thread, just the last post, otherwise you would see EXACTLY why durability lead to a discussion of gear stockpiling.


Quote:

Shazaamemt wrote:
Most have agreed that it is just a mechanism to get rid of in-game currency and/or serve as a death penalty.


Why are those bad?


FFS READ THE **** THREAD! People on both sides of the issue have posted reasons why it is bad.


Quote:


You supported your statement with a grossly inaccurate view of WoW. Not sort of inaccurate, not mildly inaccurate, not "Oh I can see why you were confused." It was flat out wrong.


Yeah... you didn't read the thread.

Edited, Jul 11th 2009 3:01am by Shazaamemt
____________________________
Administrator Kaolian:
"Quote it correctly or don't quote it. That's called "how people get banned"..."

Actually it's called "Libel"... and only if it is fabricated, but hey, you are the admin.

AureliusSir the Irrelevant:
"They're on a tangent, but they aren't off topic."
#62 Jul 10 2009 at 11:22 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
4,512 posts
Shazaamemt wrote:
You didn't read the thread. I was talking about the 'logistical nightmare' of selling gear with variable levels of durability on the AH. Which you can't do with the majority of gear in WoW. Bind-on-pickup gear ALSO can't be sold on the AH.
...
Yeah... you didn't read the thread.


Or I did, and you're not understanding what I'm saying. I'll boil it down a bit.

Your statement was inaccurate. The reason you can't sell bound equipment on the auction house is because Blizzard decided that they want people to earn the majority of the equipment they wear. It had nothing to do with durability. If you have a piece of equipment in your pack that took durability damage, it can't even go on the Auction House. Oh, look at that logistical nightmare solved! The player has to run two seconds away to repair it.

Shazaamemt wrote:
Again, you didn't read the thread, just the last post, otherwise you would see EXACTLY why durability lead to a discussion of gear stockpiling.


You yelled at Allegory for mentioning something that wasn't directly related to the original topic while later discussing something that was... wait for it... not related to the original topic.

Shazaament wrote:
FFS READ THE **** THREAD! People on both sides of the issue have posted reasons why it is bad.


They aren't bad reasons for having durability. They're pretty good reasons, actually, considering both are pretty much necessary for a MMO. Concerns over the implementation of a gold sink in FFXIV tied to character death aren't the same thing as saying gold sinks and death penalties are a bad idea.
____________________________
Mazra wrote:
When you cast Moonfire on someone, it's not some Druid base on the moon launching a precision deathbeam across space to strike people
#63 Jul 10 2009 at 11:27 PM Rating: Decent
**
424 posts
Quote:

Your statement was inaccurate. The reason you can't sell bound equipment on the auction house is because Blizzard decided that they want people to earn the majority of the equipment they wear. It had nothing to do with durability. If you have a piece of equipment in your pack that took durability damage, it can't even go on the Auction House. Oh, look at that logistical nightmare solved! The player has to run two seconds away to repair it.


How do you reconcile this with having a single character system with things like level capped events and level sync?

Just have an unlimited inventory and hundreds of items sitting in it?

Does that really sound like fun? Sifting through an inventory as massive as an AH screen everytime you swap jobs or levels?

That's the logistical nightmare.

Quote:
Concerns over the implementation of a gold sink in FFXIV tied to character death aren't the same thing as saying gold sinks and death penalties are a bad idea.


So gold sinks are a good thing? You are the first person on this thread to say that.

Edited, Jul 11th 2009 3:29am by Shazaamemt
____________________________
Administrator Kaolian:
"Quote it correctly or don't quote it. That's called "how people get banned"..."

Actually it's called "Libel"... and only if it is fabricated, but hey, you are the admin.

AureliusSir the Irrelevant:
"They're on a tangent, but they aren't off topic."
#64 Jul 11 2009 at 1:59 AM Rating: Excellent
******
48,703 posts
Shazaamemt wrote:
So gold sinks are a good thing? You are the first person on this thread to say that.
I'll say it, too. Money sinks are required to remove money from the system to keep hyper inflation from taking hold. The more money that is in the system, the higher the prices will be of the things the players sell to each other. However, if more old money is in the system than can be created through money fountains (IE: NPCs), then you'll be left in a situation where new players will have harder and harder times from starting up.

Before anyone says it: No, inflation isn't a bad thing either, but unchecked inflation is. Inflation indicates that the economy is healthy. However, that money needs to be siphoned to keep the economy healthy. The sinks need to be in sync with the fountains.

Edited, Jul 11th 2009 6:00am by lolgaxe
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#65 Jul 11 2009 at 2:40 AM Rating: Decent
**
424 posts
THANK YOU! Finally someone has posted a valid opposing view that argues for the benefit of a gold sink. I am still opposed to the idea, mind you. At least in the area of equipment repair. I would rather lose my gold/gil by having to resell items at a lower price on the AH or by even having to vendor them via BoE equip as AureliusSir stated than just waste it on a repair bill. Even if it is just spending my gold/gil buying potions so I can play solo (or for a warp item) I would rather spend it on anything that I feel is actually related to gameplay as opposed to just 'the fee for playing'.


Quote:
Money sinks are required to remove money from the system to keep hyper inflation from taking hold. The more money that is in the system, the higher the prices will be of the things the players sell to each other.


One of the discussions on this thread (between myself and AureliusSir primarily) has been the idea of how/if players will be able to sell gear to each other. The BoE/BoP system WoW uses for most of its endgame gear would disallow players the ability to sell gear to each other.

Durability on gear would also disallow player to sell gear to each other, unless it happened to be at fully repaired status. With a varied amount of gear, and varied durability statuses it would create a very difficult situation for the buying/selling of gear.

Quote:
However, if more old money is in the system than can be created through money fountains (IE: NPCs), then you'll be left in a situation where new players will have harder and harder times from starting up.


For certain you are right in this point. But if we don't encourage players to reuse gear and sell it on the AH, then we are also left in a situation where either A) players hold on to gear indefinitely and create inventory issues or B) gear is simply vendored and the AH economy is not gear based, but based on materials and special items and the crafted items that are 'BoE'.

I rarely find FFXI players who are overwhelmed with ingame currency, since the single character/multiple job system encourages spending, whereas in WoW I often find my characters flush with gold that I only spend on repair bills and special items such as mounts.

I would rather use my in-game currency for gameplay purposes, but due to the BoE/BoP system in WoW I really have no options to spend it on gear, but rather on trivial items. Conversely in FFXI it was far to difficult to gain ingame money, and I would end up saving for months just to bid on a 'must have' item in the AH so I could farther my progression on a certain job without feeling gimped.

I am hoping that FFXIV has an easier system for making ingame currency available (such as daily quests), but at the same time I think money sinks for the sake of having a money sink is just punishing the player for playing. Equipment repairs in particular (as pointed out by others in this thread) just end up being a pointless money-sink and time-sink to the endgame player (think of the tank in WoW who has to go repair after a few fights because just one piece has broken), and sometimes a very punishing mechanism towards the new player who has just begun.

If we are going to use money-sinks as a gameplay punishment for death, then just charge us gil to raise after death, don't do the pointless equipment damage mechanism.

And still, I stick to the argument that Equip Repair is just very 'un-Final Fantasy'. I have already posted my reasons for thinking that is a valid argument.




Edited, Jul 11th 2009 6:43am by Shazaamemt
____________________________
Administrator Kaolian:
"Quote it correctly or don't quote it. That's called "how people get banned"..."

Actually it's called "Libel"... and only if it is fabricated, but hey, you are the admin.

AureliusSir the Irrelevant:
"They're on a tangent, but they aren't off topic."
#66 Jul 11 2009 at 5:46 AM Rating: Default
Scholar
*
70 posts
if u want a good gold sink

y not have that appart of the death penality.

no one wants to lose money so its incentive enough to not die other then spend it on repairs.

what if a noob with little to no cash stumbles apon a decent pair of equips and then dies and can't repair it?
its happend to me b4 and it gets quite annoyning... at times like that id rather just lose a % of my cash.


another good gold sink is making the AH better.
if u want a good ecomony then the player must have access to every item by a AH or something. think about it. the second u take items off the AH players lose that incentive to buy, which means more money sitting in peoples pockets and not exchanging hands.
i always liked the way FF11 did this in the early days. if u got lucky and scored a really powerful item u could use it untill you where done with it then sell it for a quick profit on the AH.

the only problem that i had with it was that most items where not even put up on the AH. there were so many lizard gear sets on the AH and hardly any thing else at that level. you either had to buy the bone harness or the lizard harness, those where your only options. more options would be nice.

back on topic i agree with ^ repairing aint FF enough

Edited, Jul 11th 2009 10:16am by Leyego

Edited, Jul 11th 2009 10:17am by Leyego
#67 Jul 11 2009 at 9:41 AM Rating: Good
*****
11,576 posts
Leyego wrote:
if u want a good gold sink

y not have that appart of the death penality.

no one wants to lose money so its incentive enough to not die other then spend it on repairs.

what if a noob with little to no cash stumbles apon a decent pair of equips and then dies and can't repair it?
its happend to me b4 and it gets quite annoyning... at times like that id rather just lose a % of my cash.


You'd have to be pretty horrible with your currency management in order to not be able to repair your gear in games like WoW or LOTRO. You'd also have to be pretty horrible at the game in general to not be able to earn enough to repair your gear many times over in the time it takes you to grind that gear from 100% to broken. People in WoW or LOTRO who couldn't afford to repair their gear were either terrible players who gave no thought to managing their most basic (and relatively trivial) expenses, or raiders who had a busy week outside the game and didn't have time to farm to cover their repair costs for a progression night.

Quote:
another good gold sink is making the AH better.
if u want a good ecomony then the player must have access to every item by a AH or something. think about it. the second u take items off the AH players lose that incentive to buy, which means more money sitting in peoples pockets and not exchanging hands.


That's sort of a generalized statement that, in the way you phrased it, is fundamentally wrong. The only gold sink associated with the auction is whatever auction tax/fee is applied to each listing and/or sale. The concept of a gold sink revolves around taking currency out of the game, not simply transferring it from one player to another. Buying stuff from an NPC is a gold sink. Auction fees/taxes are a gold sink. Chocobo/airhsip/ferry fees are gold sinks. You don't have to have "every item" come with a gold sink attached. A savvy MMO developer looks at how much currency is entering the economy via items sold to NPCs, direct mob drops, quest/mission rewards, etc. and then implements and tunes the gold sinks to account for it. Repair costs are just another way to accomplish that goal that scales with the level/quality of the gear.


Edited, Jul 11th 2009 10:49am by AureliusSir
#68 Jul 11 2009 at 9:21 PM Rating: Decent
**
424 posts
Quote:

That's sort of a generalized statement that, in the way you phrased it, is fundamentally wrong. The only gold sink associated with the auction is whatever auction tax/fee is applied to each listing and/or sale.


Well, I think what he was referring to was deflation. The longer the game goes on and the old gear becomes aquired by more and more players, the less the AH price will be. In a healthy in-game economy this is inevitably bound to happen, so when you are done using an item (or just decide its not worth the inventory space) then it should sell for less than you paid for it.

Of course this would necessitate the system WoW had for constantly introducing new gear, combined with FFXI's system for introducing gear at lower levels, as well as the FFXI system of having a few items that were simply unreplaceable, be they from old content or new content. (lets just hope they take a nod from WoW there and create a varity of options for this end-game gear, so we don't all look alike, while still wanting to keep the things we gained from older content so as to encourage gamers to still revisit the old content)

Quote:
People in WoW or LOTRO who couldn't afford to repair their gear were either terrible players who gave no thought to managing their most basic (and relatively trivial) expenses, or raiders who had a busy week outside the game and didn't have time to farm to cover their repair costs for a progression night.


Both of which seem to be an unfair justification for equipment repair. Those who are bad at the game cannot get better because they are doubly punished both from the game for being bad, and also from repair bills for being bad.
Whereas the raider are punished simply for playing the game at the level they have achieved, having to go get more gil/gold for repairs, as opposed to being encouraged to experience other areas of the game.

I still stick by 2 arguments here that nobody has really attempted to address:

#1: Equipment Repair is a punishment to players for simply playing the game.

#2 Equipment Repair just doesn't have that 'Final Fantasy' feel.
____________________________
Administrator Kaolian:
"Quote it correctly or don't quote it. That's called "how people get banned"..."

Actually it's called "Libel"... and only if it is fabricated, but hey, you are the admin.

AureliusSir the Irrelevant:
"They're on a tangent, but they aren't off topic."
#69 Jul 11 2009 at 9:22 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
977 posts
Repairing equipment was always annoying as **** in other games I've played. I always thought that the Weakness state in FFXI was a reasonable penalty for death TBH.
____________________________
A drink. A drink. A drink.
#70 Jul 11 2009 at 9:50 PM Rating: Default
**
424 posts
Quote:
Repairing equipment was always annoying as **** in other games I've played. I always thought that the Weakness state in FFXI was a reasonable penalty for death TBH.


I agree. Fair enough penalty to me, but I have said that before.
____________________________
Administrator Kaolian:
"Quote it correctly or don't quote it. That's called "how people get banned"..."

Actually it's called "Libel"... and only if it is fabricated, but hey, you are the admin.

AureliusSir the Irrelevant:
"They're on a tangent, but they aren't off topic."
#71 Jul 11 2009 at 11:25 PM Rating: Good
*****
11,576 posts
Shazaamemt wrote:

Of course this would necessitate the system WoW had for constantly introducing new gear, combined with FFXI's system for introducing gear at lower levels, as well as the FFXI system of having a few items that were simply unreplaceable, be they from old content or new content. (lets just hope they take a nod from WoW there and create a varity of options for this end-game gear, so we don't all look alike, while still wanting to keep the things we gained from older content so as to encourage gamers to still revisit the old content)


I would prefer progression to be tuned in such a way that level 7 boots that last you to level 60+ would have to be so obscenely overpowered on a level 7 toon to be justifiable as an option for a 60+ toon to wear that they couldn't be implemented. I'm hoping that SE has learned that "level" progression in an MMO is only part of the fun. Upgrading gear is a huge, huge part of an entertaining reward system. If you punk the FFXIV equivalent of Leaping Lizzy at such a low level you can barely win and score yourself a pair of boots that lasts you through 2/3 of the rest of the content, something is broken.

Quote:
Both of which seem to be an unfair justification for equipment repair. Those who are bad at the game cannot get better because they are doubly punished both from the game for being bad, and also from repair bills for being bad.


Not really. In FFXI terms (ie. add the repair cost to the existing penalties) it would be excessive. As the primary consequence of death, it's not that bad. It's enough to make you think twice about charging in like a dunce and getting yourself ganked, but not so onerous that people are unwilling to take risks and learn challenging new content because the consequences for failure are greater than the potential rewards. You have to be really, really bad...not just "oops" bad or "not quite with it today" bad, but almost willfully trying to fail as hard and often as you can in order to have to spend more on repairs than you can easily earn (excluding progression raiding, of course). People who sit around whining that they can't afford to repair their gear are not treated well in MMOs I've played where durability damage was part of the equation. It's looked upon with about the same level of disdain as sitting around town begging anyone/everyone for gold/gil.

Quote:
Whereas the raider are punished simply for playing the game at the level they have achieved, having to go get more gil/gold for repairs, as opposed to being encouraged to experience other areas of the game.


o.O

As a tank in WoW in nearly head-to-toe best in slot raid gear for current content (at the time), I could earn enough to repair my gear form a full break in 20-30 minutes. Compared to how long to grind xp to recover the loss form 10 deaths in FFXI, to include finding the group and traveling to camp...there's no comparison. I think maybe you're overestimating the extent of cost for durability damage in existing games, and I think SE is aiming to keep whatever penalties that might be in place in FFXIV more in line with their statement about how FFXIV will "definitely not be as hard on the players." Properly tuned durability damage and repair costs fits with that goal. That's not to say that that's what they'll do, but it would be a viable alternative.

Quote:
#1: Equipment Repair is a punishment to players for simply playing the game.


And chocobo fees, and airship fees, and all that other stuff. It's a trivial cost if you're just experiencing the durability loss through normal wear-and-tear. It only starts to add up if you're dying...a lot.

Quote:
#2 Equipment Repair just doesn't have that 'Final Fantasy' feel.


That doesn't hold up. Rez sickness doesn't have the FF feel either. I'm not talking about being resurrected with low HP/MP...I'm talking about a timed penalty whereby your stats are lowered. No other FF game has that, but in MMOs you have to think outside the standalone box. XP loss for death was something new to FF genre in FFXI. SE's first attempt at penalizing failure in an MMO was everyone's favorite lost xp scenario. We all know how popular that was with the playerbase at large. It's time for something else.
#72 Jul 11 2009 at 11:37 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
349 posts
Quote:

And chocobo fees, and airship fees, and all that other stuff. It's a trivial cost if you're just experiencing the durability loss through normal wear-and-tear. It only starts to add up if you're dying...a lot.
Its going to add up for any melee class. I have a champion in lotro he doesnt die alot but I spend over 100 silver on repairs even when nothing or a few items are yellow. if theres a few red items it can be twice that. Ive never been all red in that game but I shudder to think of how bad it is. The repair costs are so bad I often find I dont even want to do anything for fear of repairs. I know Ill not be able to buy a horse at 35 because of the constant repair costs. XP loss is out of the question tho... theres no xp to lose or levels to level down in this game. So they need to come up with something else. And skill point loss would royally suck.
____________________________
That was no hemroid doctor. That was an alien hoobajoob
#73 Jul 12 2009 at 5:24 AM Rating: Decent
*****
11,576 posts
mezlabor wrote:
Quote:

And chocobo fees, and airship fees, and all that other stuff. It's a trivial cost if you're just experiencing the durability loss through normal wear-and-tear. It only starts to add up if you're dying...a lot.
Its going to add up for any melee class. I have a champion in lotro he doesnt die alot but I spend over 100 silver on repairs even when nothing or a few items are yellow. if theres a few red items it can be twice that. Ive never been all red in that game but I shudder to think of how bad it is. The repair costs are so bad I often find I dont even want to do anything for fear of repairs. I know Ill not be able to buy a horse at 35 because of the constant repair costs. XP loss is out of the question tho... theres no xp to lose or levels to level down in this game. So they need to come up with something else. And skill point loss would royally suck.


I had a 50 guardian in LOTRO and never had a problem with repair costs. Unless they've retuned it since I stopped playing, vendor trash alone was more than enough to keep my repair costs covered at all times. I had the gold to cover my riding costs long before I needed it. It was just a matter of not spending everything you earn on other things as soon as you earn it.
#74 Jul 12 2009 at 5:34 AM Rating: Decent
I've played a few MMORPGs that have a Durability system, and it's a major annoyance.

Also, it makes the gear I've obtained feel less permanent if I have to worry about it getting broken or whatever constantly.

Not something I want to see, at all.
____________________________
MUTED
#75 Jul 12 2009 at 10:33 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
349 posts
Quote:
I had a 50 guardian in LOTRO and never had a problem with repair costs. Unless they've retuned it since I stopped playing, vendor trash alone was more than enough to keep my repair costs covered at all times. I had the gold to cover my riding costs long before I needed it. It was just a matter of not spending everything you earn on other things as soon as you earn it.
I'm actually a huge tight wad and I dont spend on anything but repairs and skill training. Repairs are annoying tho. They dont bankrupt me but I do spend alot on skill repairs. I have around 800 silver now whenever I go to repair Im spending at least 100 sometimes as much as 200 if its really bad. My GF is a RK she never has to spend alot on repairs and she has 2 gold.
____________________________
That was no hemroid doctor. That was an alien hoobajoob
#76 Jul 12 2009 at 11:32 AM Rating: Decent
*****
11,576 posts
mezlabor wrote:
Quote:
I had a 50 guardian in LOTRO and never had a problem with repair costs. Unless they've retuned it since I stopped playing, vendor trash alone was more than enough to keep my repair costs covered at all times. I had the gold to cover my riding costs long before I needed it. It was just a matter of not spending everything you earn on other things as soon as you earn it.
I'm actually a huge tight wad and I dont spend on anything but repairs and skill training. Repairs are annoying tho. They dont bankrupt me but I do spend alot on skill repairs. I have around 800 silver now whenever I go to repair Im spending at least 100 sometimes as much as 200 if its really bad. My GF is a RK she never has to spend alot on repairs and she has 2 gold.


If you're tanking in a duo setup your repairs will always be higher. LOTRO repairs were more spendy than WoW repairs, but they were still not terrible. I was earning 2-5 gold/day just selling basic crafted armor for 500s each. Stacks of ore were selling for 400-500s. It might have been RMT-triggered inflation, but I remember that for standard solo grinding/questing, my vendor trash always covered my repair costs.
#77 Jul 12 2009 at 11:50 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
349 posts
I am tanking in a duo set up and I'm still 28th level so I havent reached the point where I'm able to bring in 100s of silver from my crafted items. Ore I still ned for skillups so I dont sell stacks of it yet. My point here is that repair costs have been a hindrance to me. At one point I dropped a great barrows party because of repair costs I kept dying my gear went red and I couldnt afford the repairs and I had to drop.

I always tank for my wife so I'm always going to have to worry about repairs its something Id like to not have to worry about.
____________________________
That was no hemroid doctor. That was an alien hoobajoob
#78 Jul 12 2009 at 12:15 PM Rating: Decent
*****
11,576 posts
mezlabor wrote:
I am tanking in a duo set up and I'm still 28th level so I havent reached the point where I'm able to bring in 100s of silver from my crafted items. Ore I still ned for skillups so I dont sell stacks of it yet. My point here is that repair costs have been a hindrance to me. At one point I dropped a great barrows party because of repair costs I kept dying my gear went red and I couldnt afford the repairs and I had to drop.

I always tank for my wife so I'm always going to have to worry about repairs its something Id like to not have to worry about.


I'm not suggesting you should have to like the durability system. In the context of other options, however, I'll take durability over lost xp or mandated downtime while rez sickness wears off any day.
#79 Jul 12 2009 at 12:23 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
349 posts
lost xp wont be a problem according to the devs theres no xp to lose nor levels to level down. In the games Ive noticed that use durability repair theres also a debuff. Lotro inflicts a debuff and durability repair and wow does as well if you spirit rez. Id rather deal with downtime then be forced to drop parties because I cant afford repairs. It only happened to me once in lotro but once is still too many times.
____________________________
That was no hemroid doctor. That was an alien hoobajoob
#80 Jul 12 2009 at 12:37 PM Rating: Decent
**
456 posts
Quote:
lost xp wont be a problem according to the devs theres no xp to lose nor levels to level down. In the games Ive noticed that use durability repair theres also a debuff. Lotro inflicts a debuff and durability repair and wow does as well if you spirit rez. Id rather deal with downtime then be forced to drop parties because I cant afford repairs. It only happened to me once in lotro but once is still too many times.


Just because there is no exp or traditional levels, doesn't mean there wont be something similiar you can lose when dieing.
#81 Jul 12 2009 at 10:06 PM Rating: Decent
**
424 posts
Quote:
As a tank in WoW in nearly head-to-toe best in slot raid gear for current content (at the time), I could earn enough to repair my gear form a full break in 20-30 minutes. Compared to how long to grind xp to recover the loss form 10 deaths in FFXI, to include finding the group and traveling to camp...there's no comparison. I think maybe you're overestimating the extent of cost for durability damage in existing games, and I think SE is aiming to keep whatever penalties that might be in place in FFXIV more in line with their statement about how FFXIV will "definitely not be as hard on the players." Properly tuned durability damage and repair costs fits with that goal. That's not to say that that's what they'll do, but it would be a viable alternative.


I am a tank in endgame Wow right now, its the only MMO I have played for the last 8 months, and while I agree that it is easy enough to get the gold to repair my equipment, I just don't want a system where I have to spend that time farming just for playing the game. If I have to pay for travel etc, then I guess I could understand it, as WoW gives me many options to travel, but I will usually just take the flight path to Scholozar Basin as opposed to using my Albino drake to fly around the long way if I just want to do the fishing daily or pick up a new mysterious egg. I am hoping travel in FFXI is superior to travel in FFXIV (and I am pretty sure it will be), so travel as a gold sink is ok in my eyes as long as it is a choice with many options available.

That said, there are no options available to equipment repair, aside from not playing. It isn't a player choice to repair equipment, it is just something that has to be done.

Quote:
. Compared to how long to grind xp to recover the loss form 10 deaths in FFXI, to include finding the group and traveling to camp...there's no comparison. I think maybe you're overestimating the extent of cost for durability damage in existing games


You are absolutely right, there is no comparison to the loss of exp in FFXI and equipment durability as death penalties, FFXI's exp loss was a terrible time sink and I don't think any of us on this forum would like to see it make a return. In talking about equipment durability I have completely ignored the death penalty from FFXI and just focused on equipment durability. I don't think I have been overestimating the cost of equipment durability repair in existing game because I have purposely ignored the comparison with exp loss (in FFXI). Perhaps you think I am overestimating the costs from repair because you have the exp loss death penalty in mind.

I don't despise the whole equipment repair thing, but it certainly isn't something that I like. I think there are better game mechanics that can be implemented in its place.

Quote:

That doesn't hold up. Rez sickness doesn't have the FF feel either. I'm not talking about being resurrected with low HP/MP...I'm talking about a timed penalty whereby your stats are lowered. No other FF game has that, but in MMOs you have to think outside the standalone box. XP loss for death was something new to FF genre in FFXI. SE's first attempt at penalizing failure in an MMO was everyone's favorite lost xp scenario. We all know how popular that was with the playerbase at large. It's time for something else.


At least the rez sickness has some sort of tie to the Final Fantasy ethos, whereas equipment repair (although it has been used in many standalone RPGs akin to FF) has never had a place in a Final Fantasy game.

As I have said many times on this thread, I agree, XP loss is a terrible mechanic.


Quote:
It's time for something else.


I agree wholeheartedly, and seeing as I can't imagine anyone wanting the old penalties from FFXI to continue, I also would not like the penalties from every other MMO to continue (which for the most part is equipment durability). That is the whole reason I created this thread. Certainly it would not be a point of interest if I said 'XP loss, I don't like it' because nobody really likes it. I also don't like equipment durability.

As to the posters here who have said that a rez sickness is a time waster, well consider how much time would be wasted on that gold spent on your repairs, or even the total gold lost and the added Rez sickness from a 'spirit run' in WoW.

PS: I apologize for the excessive 'WoWness' of the first part of my post, it was just used to illustrate a point, and I appreciate the fact that this is a FFXIV thread, and the specifics of WoW (such as my mention of the scholozar flight path) are pretty unimportant here. The generalities are very relevant though.

____________________________
Administrator Kaolian:
"Quote it correctly or don't quote it. That's called "how people get banned"..."

Actually it's called "Libel"... and only if it is fabricated, but hey, you are the admin.

AureliusSir the Irrelevant:
"They're on a tangent, but they aren't off topic."
#82 Jul 12 2009 at 10:19 PM Rating: Decent
*****
11,576 posts
Shazaamemt wrote:

As to the posters here who have said that a rez sickness is a time waster, well consider how much time would be wasted on that gold spent on your repairs, or even the total gold lost and the added Rez sickness from a 'spirit run' in WoW.


The main thing for me is that whatever the penalty might be, I prefer a system where death doesn't mean "go afk for 5-10 minutes because that's how long it will be before you can resume" or "spend 5-30 minutes running back from <wherever> because getting punted halfway across the globe for dying without a rez is the standard".

A "graveyard" type system would be ideal, IMO. Rather than being bounced back to your home point, you're simply sent to a more local spot within the zone if you die without the option of a raise. Whether you automatically appear there ready to go and have to work your way back to where you died to carry on (similar to LOTRO) or have the option to run (aggro-free) back to your corpse to revive with reduced HP/MP (that you can then immediately top up and carry on) or something else entirely, the local "restore point" is a great idea that wouldn't go against the nature of the FF genre at all.

From there, whether it's durability or some other penalty, I'll leave it up to SE to decide. With durability, it represented an ongoing cost but at the same time, you were paying for it as you were playing the game. With things like rez sickness, you're down and out with nothing to do until it wears off. Go ahead and penalize me for dying, but it all boils down to the risk of the excessive time sink no matter how you slice it.
#83 Jul 12 2009 at 10:30 PM Rating: Decent
**
424 posts
Quote:
simply sent to a more local spot within the zone if you die without the option of a raise. Whether you automatically appear there ready to go and have to work your way back to where you died to carry on (similar to LOTRO) or have the option to run (aggro-free) back to your corpse to revive with reduced HP/MP (that you can then immediately top up and carry on) or something else entirely, the local "restore point" is a great idea that wouldn't go against the nature of the FF genre at all.


I would prefer a combination of both a local area to resurrect and the raise sickness. I forget who mentioned it, and in which thread, but someone mentioned a raise sickness that improved with time after raised. For the first minute you were alive after the raise you had say, 30% of your stats and hp/mp, the second minute you got 60%, the third minute you had all your stats and hp/mp back. The run back from a local raise area should probably take about 3 minutes as well.

I am not arguing for an option where you go afk for 10 minutes because you died, but often those deaths serve as a natural breaking point for a group to go to the bathroom, reconsider their strategy, re-buff, etc. The problem just comes when players use a death to go afk for 10 minutes even though they know it won't take that long to get back into the fight, and that's just human nature.

Quote:
the local "restore point" is a great idea that wouldn't go against the nature of the FF genre at all.


I agree, it is a great idea, and it wouldn't go against the nature of the FF genre, especially if it was a crystal (just for aesthetics).
____________________________
Administrator Kaolian:
"Quote it correctly or don't quote it. That's called "how people get banned"..."

Actually it's called "Libel"... and only if it is fabricated, but hey, you are the admin.

AureliusSir the Irrelevant:
"They're on a tangent, but they aren't off topic."
#84 Jul 13 2009 at 3:31 PM Rating: Decent
*
169 posts
AureliusSir wrote:
The main thing for me is that whatever the penalty might be, I prefer a system where death doesn't mean "go afk for 5-10 minutes because that's how long it will be before you can resume" or "spend 5-30 minutes running back from <wherever> because getting punted halfway across the globe for dying without a rez is the standard".


Agreed. Maybe something like a short "muster your strength"-themed minigame or solo instance (where you have to literally fight your way back to consciousness), after which you just wake up from being KO'd with low vitals, but otherwise ready to go. Sorta like the system Prey had, but not lame.
#85 Jul 14 2009 at 12:24 AM Rating: Decent
**
424 posts
HUH? Was that a joke?

Edited, Jul 14th 2009 4:25am by Shazaamemt
____________________________
Administrator Kaolian:
"Quote it correctly or don't quote it. That's called "how people get banned"..."

Actually it's called "Libel"... and only if it is fabricated, but hey, you are the admin.

AureliusSir the Irrelevant:
"They're on a tangent, but they aren't off topic."
#86 Jul 14 2009 at 10:15 AM Rating: Decent
Having played several MMOs from FFXI to WoW and even AO and Age of Conan...

I have to say I have seen a number of attempts at putting together a suitable "death penalty" over the years.

Durability/Repair, to me, seems an unfair process at best as it generally costs a lot more for "tank" type characters and soloists than for "caster" type characters and non-tank party members. Problem here is if you make it too inexpensive it's hardly a deterrent and if you make it too expensive then nobody wants to level a "tank"...

Rez Sickness is a reasonable penalty, really, compared to many alternatives because at worst you spend 3-4 minutes or so recovering and can get back into things without THAT much interruption to your play.

XP loss is one of the worst methods (and most commonly implemented) that I've seen. However, some games have been better at handling it 'fairly' than others. Anarchy Online, for example, offered a save point system where you could more or less lock in a certain amount of xp at the cost of in-game currency. In addition to that, any XP lost between save points was added to a pool which was added to your new xp gain until depleted (I believe it was a 50% bonus to xp gain until all pooled xp was recovered).

One method that I strongly loathed was the WoW death process where you got to run back to your dead body to resurrect or take a penalty if you resurrected to the nearest graveyard. The first option usually resulted in you arriving at low health in the middle of the monsters that killed you in the first place and the 2nd option resulted in you usually being in some out of the way graveyard that was not always a safe place to be either as well as receiving a penalty to your gear for using this 'service'.

To be totally honest, I'd have to say that a Rez Sickness (alone) *or* the Anarchy Online XP Pool method are the best of the options available to MMO developers but *shrug* we'll see what they come up with when they launch I guess.
#87 Jul 14 2009 at 10:26 AM Rating: Good
Scholar
****
4,512 posts
Shazaamemt wrote:
That said, there are no options available to equipment repair, aside from not playing. It isn't a player choice to repair equipment, it is just something that has to be done.


I don't want a game where there isn't some form of negative feedback for dying, and there really won't be a form of negative feedback that is "optional." All death just has to be taken care of.

Shazaamemt wrote:
PS: I apologize for the excessive 'WoWness' of the first part of my post


I wish people would stop acting like WoW is a taboo subject. If EQ2 was more popular than WoW, we'd see people drawing comparisons to that instead. When discussing a game that doesn't even exist, the majority of the conversation will focus around what other games do right that we would like to see in FFXIV.

This forum has some of the most consistently in-depth threads I have ever seen on Alla, and I'd rather they didn't stop being that because "THIS IS THE FFXIV FORUM!!" FFXIV is but a twinkle in our eye right now. When the game is released and there's actual in-game content that the majority of posters are able to take part in, discussing WoW will be inappropriate. But not now.

Nightwired wrote:
The first option usually resulted in you arriving at low health in the middle of the monsters that killed you in the first place


I really wish they implemented a short "OK YOU'RE BACK NOW MOVE TO SAFETY" immunity, much like how teleports, etc. make you useless to kill on PvP servers. If FFXIV chooses to do something similar to WoW (honestly, having shrines to a goddess that spirits go to isn't very far-fetched for FF at all), I'd hope they fix that aspect of it.
____________________________
Mazra wrote:
When you cast Moonfire on someone, it's not some Druid base on the moon launching a precision deathbeam across space to strike people
#88 Jul 14 2009 at 9:13 PM Rating: Decent
**
424 posts
An off-topic response.
Quote:

This forum has some of the most consistently in-depth threads I have ever seen on Alla, and I'd rather they didn't stop being that because "THIS IS THE FFXIV FORUM!!" FFXIV is but a twinkle in our eye right now. When the game is released and there's actual in-game content that the majority of posters are able to take part in, discussing WoW will be inappropriate. But not now.


I agree, but what I was apologizing for was my reference to picking up a mysterious egg and doing my fishing daily. Things that are entirely WoW-centric and are probably hard to relate to for those who don't play WoW.

Like I said in my last post :

Quote:
PS: I apologize for the excessive 'WoWness' of the first part of my post, it was just used to illustrate a point, and I appreciate the fact that this is a FFXIV thread, and the specifics of WoW (such as my mention of the scholozar flight path) are pretty unimportant here. The generalities are very relevant though.


The generalities of WoW are VERY important to these threads. But where we derail into discussions about Boomkin specs and raid setups (which has happened here) then it is no longer a facet of discussing MMO development, but rather just talking about WoW and nothing else. It has caused me to lose interest in some very good threads, even as a WoW player.

Sorry for the off topic post. Hoping AureliusSir responds to my last on-topic post. Just because I like a good argument.
____________________________
Administrator Kaolian:
"Quote it correctly or don't quote it. That's called "how people get banned"..."

Actually it's called "Libel"... and only if it is fabricated, but hey, you are the admin.

AureliusSir the Irrelevant:
"They're on a tangent, but they aren't off topic."
#89 Jul 15 2009 at 6:02 AM Rating: Decent
*
169 posts
Shazaamemt wrote:
HUH? Was that a joke?


No. In-line thought. Anything has to be better than "****. ... AFK 10 min.", and that was the first thing I thought of.
#90 Jul 22 2009 at 8:32 PM Rating: Decent
**
424 posts
Bumping the thread so the other thread on equipment repair and durability can read it.
____________________________
Administrator Kaolian:
"Quote it correctly or don't quote it. That's called "how people get banned"..."

Actually it's called "Libel"... and only if it is fabricated, but hey, you are the admin.

AureliusSir the Irrelevant:
"They're on a tangent, but they aren't off topic."
#91 Jul 23 2009 at 5:26 PM Rating: Decent
******
22,699 posts
Quote:
Thieves could put up huge numbers and I can remember a DRK in one LS I was in busting off a 2k WS (forget which one) while trigger farming in Sky and I couldn't manage a 2k Slugshot with a Culverin + Berserk on bees in S.Gustaberg.


Besides the fact that berserk is completely worthless on those bees because your pDIF is already capped. [[Culverin(50)+Silver Bullet(81)+fSTR(26)+WSC(??)]*5]*3 = 2355, even without factoring in WSC you'd easily break 2k damage.

Quote:
When everyone and their dog started leveling DRG/SAM for Penta-Thrust spam, DRG got obliterated with the nerf bat and stayed down for years after.


Nope. Drg/sam penta-spam getting nerfed was just a byproduct of another nerf. When dynamis was added the relic weapons were added. All had DMG:1 Delay:999, except for the hand to hand which was DMG+1. Because of how hand to hand base damage was calculated this wasn't really that horrible. What monks were doing were getting to 100+ tp, and then when they used asuran fists(8hit) they'd always end up with 100+ tp and they'd just use asuran fists again. That's why SE nerfed all weapon skills to only give 1 tp for all hits except the first hit and the dual wield hit in multihit weaponskills.

Edited, Jul 23rd 2009 9:29pm by Deadgye
____________________________
Dear people I don't like: 凸(●´―`●)凸
#92 Jul 23 2009 at 6:12 PM Rating: Decent
The One and Only Deadgye wrote:
Quote:
Thieves could put up huge numbers and I can remember a DRK in one LS I was in busting off a 2k WS (forget which one) while trigger farming in Sky and I couldn't manage a 2k Slugshot with a Culverin + Berserk on bees in S.Gustaberg.


Besides the fact that berserk is completely worthless on those bees because your pDIF is already capped. [[Culverin(50)+Silver Bullet(81)+fSTR(26)+WSC(??)]*5]*3 = 2355, even without factoring in WSC you'd easily break 2k damage.


You're overlooking one critical part of that whole scenario. I'm curious as to whether or not you can figure out what it is.

Quote:
Quote:
When everyone and their dog started leveling DRG/SAM for Penta-Thrust spam, DRG got obliterated with the nerf bat and stayed down for years after.


Nope. Drg/sam penta-spam getting nerfed was just a byproduct of another nerf. When dynamis was added the relic weapons were added. All had DMG:1 Delay:999, except for the hand to hand which was DMG+1. Because of how hand to hand base damage was calculated this wasn't really that horrible. What monks were doing were getting to 100+ tp, and then when they used asuran fists(8hit) they'd always end up with 100+ tp and they'd just use asuran fists again. That's why SE nerfed all weapon skills to only give 1 tp for all hits except the first hit and the dual wield hit in multihit weaponskills.


MNK abuse of Asuran Fist + relic was what pushed SE over in deciding to go forward with the nerf, and it wasn't something that impacted MNK negatively as a whole...they were still extremely viable in a dps role. DRG/SAM were the ones benefiting most from the TP gain with /SAM, and for a while they were the most overpowered dps setup in the game where their damage output was limited only by how much hate the tank could build and even then it started to become a matter of, "How long do I have to wait before I can afford to start spamming and count on dropping the mob before the mob can drop me?"
#93 Jul 23 2009 at 7:31 PM Rating: Decent
******
22,699 posts
Quote:
You're overlooking one critical part of that whole scenario. I'm curious as to whether or not you can figure out what it is.


I overlooked a whole lot of ******** in your post as well, because I don't feel like debating what may or may not be true, your own personal opinions, your memories, or stuff that's controversial. I only disputed the pure facts.
____________________________
Dear people I don't like: 凸(●´―`●)凸
#94 Jul 23 2009 at 7:44 PM Rating: Decent
The One and Only Deadgye wrote:
Quote:
You're overlooking one critical part of that whole scenario. I'm curious as to whether or not you can figure out what it is.


I overlooked a whole lot of bullsh*t in your post as well, because I don't feel like debating what may or may not be true, your own personal opinions, your memories, or stuff that's controversial. I only disputed the pure facts.


Defensive much?
#95 Jul 24 2009 at 7:30 PM Rating: Decent
******
22,699 posts
AureliusSir the Irrelevant wrote:
The One and Only Deadgye wrote:
Quote:
You're overlooking one critical part of that whole scenario. I'm curious as to whether or not you can figure out what it is.


I overlooked a whole lot of bullsh*t in your post as well, because I don't feel like debating what may or may not be true, your own personal opinions, your memories, or stuff that's controversial. I only disputed the pure facts.


Defensive much?


Smiley: dubious
____________________________
Dear people I don't like: 凸(●´―`●)凸
#96 Jul 24 2009 at 9:21 PM Rating: Decent
**
424 posts
Well, usually these threads devolve into an argument on WoW mechanics that are waay too game-specific to be relevant.

Here it has been a FFXI mechanic that has devolved the thread into being waay too game specific to be relevant.

FFS QUIT THE OVER ABUNDANCE OF FFXI CRAP IN THIS THREAD! (yes I know that is not what I usually say) THE THREAD IS ABOUT THE MECHANICS OF EQUIPMENT DURABILITY/REPAIR.

____________________________
Administrator Kaolian:
"Quote it correctly or don't quote it. That's called "how people get banned"..."

Actually it's called "Libel"... and only if it is fabricated, but hey, you are the admin.

AureliusSir the Irrelevant:
"They're on a tangent, but they aren't off topic."
1 2 Next »
This forum is read only
This Forum is Read Only!
Recent Visitors: 21 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (21)