|
|
Post by PinkCrown on Feb 2, 2014 7:38:07 GMT
But what if your bestest friend forever is one class, and you are another  |
|
Acappella
Rock Crab
Level 120
Posts: 83 
FO Level Status: Ascended
|
Post by Acappella on Feb 2, 2014 7:44:47 GMT
But what if your bestest friend forever is one class, and you are another You can still have different Classes in a Clan system(FO Guild system) Just like in FO anyone and join with anyone, just like you could party with anyone even outside of your guild! The guild system I described just gives more depth to a game. |
|
|
|
Post by PinkCrown on Feb 2, 2014 7:53:05 GMT
But you said a guild for each class...
Do you mean it as not something you join, but say more of a building in the game, that just gives out quests, bonuses etc related to your class, controlled by npcs and not players?
|
|
Acappella
Rock Crab
Level 120
Posts: 83
FO Level Status: Ascended
|
Post by Acappella on Feb 2, 2014 7:58:49 GMT
But you said a guild for each class... Do you mean it as not something you join, but say more of a building in the game, that just gives out quests, bonuses etc related to your class, controlled by npcs and not players? Yes Also a teleport system for moving quickly from one town's guild building to another town's building could be implamented later in the game for quick traveling. |
|
astrongfishtank
Rock Crab
just caught a pesky misquito in the middle of febuary it was to full of blood to get away this time
Posts: 34
FO Level Status: Rebirth
|
Post by astrongfishtank on Feb 2, 2014 8:25:07 GMT
Also a teleport system for moving quickly from one town's guild building to another town's building could be implamented later in the game for quick traveling-acappella
I agree with the teleport system because it kept traveling times down and people happy I personally hats it when I play a game (im not nameing names) in which you have to go past every single freaking spaceport and then past another one and by the time your at the place you want to be. That friend of yours is sleeping because its 4o cloak
|
|
|
|
Post by minche on Feb 2, 2014 9:07:14 GMT
ah yeah I see now. hm that is interesting, but I dunno if it would add as much to the game as it would take to implement it :/
|
|
|
|
Post by PinkCrown on Feb 2, 2014 9:10:57 GMT
It's maybe something we could add later on, after the main story stuff is done, as sort of a side-storyline for each class. Or it could be the place where you get daily quests, that could fit in well... But again, something that probably won't be in at the start  |
|
Kwentin
Soft-Shelled Crab
Master of the 7 Towers
Posts: 19
FO Level Status: Ascended
|
Post by Kwentin on Feb 2, 2014 9:56:55 GMT
Beyond the most powerful guilds contributing to the servers most influential money sink, guilds had no real purpose. Guild wars, despite the name suggesting combat, was an addition to the game's money sink and truly revolved around who desired to pay the most money for a square section on the map. The result would be a slight xp boost that was rarely taken advantage of due to the higher level players controlling low level terrain. The gold boosts were heavily taken advantage of, however, to collect back on the money invested in purchasing the bonuses and then allowed a generous amount of money to flow back into the monopolizing guilds holding pole positions. This cycle allowed the big players in the guild leagues to remain in the clouds compared to newly formed guilds with casual players. The truth was though, the game had no real purpose for guilds. Common goals were strictly reserved to gold. The sad fact is that there was never any true progression beyond leveling and gearing in the game. Some may argue that statement was never true as there were many goals to be achieved such as defeating that 100 million hp cat. However my claim sums up the entirety of the game for the mass. As leveling took a generous eight months to achieve a somewhat decent account, grinding was the name of the game. With the purpose of the game constricted to just maxing out your character, guilds could never really be a viable option to help with this goal. Parties were in no way beneficial considering experience was deducted and gold was equally split amidst the party. Truthfully, unless you were being carried by the other party members, there was no reason to party up beyond bosses. With the concept of parties reduced to null and void in this thread, guilds were in no way advantageous to personal progression. The construction of guilds left little to no hope for true benefit for players. I have to disagree to a certain level. The highest leveled guilds did not dominate all maps and the bonuses helped a lot to get to lvl 120asc. Especially at the end (before October) a lot of guilds took different maps and I don't see a system, where the most active players won't get the most advantages. Guild war or guilds were never a coin sink, maybe except gw at ToLS - you could retrieve your donations at any time... I know a lot of guild members, who achieved high levels mostly only thanks to guild and guild war efforts. I would have never had hit 120 asc without 60% xp bonus and being partied with 2 other guys. And last but not least - world domination was a guild event as well...  So, the "myth" you are trying to tell is only one part of the picture... |
|
|
|
Post by minche on Feb 2, 2014 10:16:24 GMT
mvp just want to say that you can't make a game that forces people to party or to join a guild. I mean you could, but then there's people who don't like that sort of gameplay. even if you put some extra benefits (like inc xp in party, or guild xp or something) there's people who can't play like that and are gonna be left behind. so there need to be a balance, party -> more xp, but tougher mobs, guild -> guild quests, but add a permanent money sink. stuff like that
|
|
Acappella
Rock Crab
Level 120
Posts: 83
FO Level Status: Ascended
|
Post by Acappella on Feb 2, 2014 12:04:14 GMT
ah yeah I see now. hm that is interesting, but I dunno if it would add as much to the game as it would take to implement it :/ It could add a lot to any game and no less work than any other building/quests only a bit more coding if you want to use it for opening up buffs/use of items as rewards etc. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2014 14:17:06 GMT
I'm pretty sure that a player will be able to have more characters (different classes too) and that the account (not the character) will be bound to guild - player-made guild. What you described doesn't sound like a guild, but more of a quest/leveling mechanic or something. Actually in terms of description, Guild is the better word for what I've described, someone before used a term "Clan", the term Clan would better describe what a guild was in FO. And a Clan system like the FO Guild system could still be used. And I'm just saying these things could be used in game for more diversity, this guild system would not interfere with a "normal" leveling process A rose smells just as sweet, whatever name you give it. I see what you're suggesting too. But I think that Guilds would be directed by a NPC, while clans "guilds" would be as usual, lead by a player who created it. |
|
|
|
Post by mvp on Feb 2, 2014 16:14:43 GMT
mvp just want to say that you can't make a game that forces people to party or to join a guild. I mean you could, but then there's people who don't like that sort of gameplay. even if you put some extra benefits (like inc xp in party, or guild xp or something) there's people who can't play like that and are gonna be left behind. so there need to be a balance, party -> more xp, but tougher mobs, guild -> guild quests, but add a permanent money sink. stuff like that Actually I was never aiming for that at all. I never joined a guild because I felt I did better on my own. This is probably why some of the information was targeted as misinforming and wrong. Forcing would be having everybody in the same class in a guild. I am against the "forcing" of players to party or join a guild. You then bring players like me who enjoy to play alone or with a couple friends and put us in a mixing pot with users who we may not even get along with. The thought of bonuses is completely out of line and unfair to users who choose to train alone. On the other hand, by saying partied players get a 10% increased bonus on split experience might increase the amount of parties seen. More parties could equal more friends and more friendships could result in users playing the game longer. Just a thought though. The entire point of that post was to aim more towards true progression and incorporating guild competitivity through PvP and PvE. I wish the formula for guild levels was still on here as guilds almost broke into the thousands and I doubt many reclaimed their cash thus confirming it a money sink. I would be interested to see how much money was thrown away to the guilds. |
|
|
|
Post by minche on Feb 2, 2014 16:29:35 GMT
A whole lot. since there wasn't much point to having hundreds of millions of coins on hand a lot of rich players had majority of their coins in guild. So yeah, there's some ideas to try to get that donated money be spent for good, without ability to return it. And the way aca explained guild, it's not like forcing guilds but more like this. So it would just be an association of players of same class with some NPC from that class that tells/gives you stuff. Again, it's an interesting idea, but needs working on what would the guilds in that sense bring to the game and if it would feel forced or confusing in any way. But you could include stuff like crafting class armour, or lvling class skills or passives (or however it works) in there, but I still think calling those quests 'guild quests' would be confusing, because in most games I've played guilds are player-made and for friends and stuff. I quite liked the ideas of housing and guild halls, because everyone loves that and it's a great coin sink. Having something to show to friends and to spend time on, I think that's great, but it's much harder to implement. So yeah, keep on discussing and suggesting |
|
astrongfishtank
Rock Crab
just caught a pesky misquito in the middle of febuary it was to full of blood to get away this time
Posts: 34
FO Level Status: Rebirth
|
Post by astrongfishtank on Feb 2, 2014 17:04:40 GMT
I agree to an extent mvp but exp shouldn't be split the loot should therefore making it so that you have a hardy trust in the person in your party near you who could take your loot before you do thus making a deep mistrust in players outside a guild and to help out lone wolf's lonewolfs. Would run faster and have monsters with shorter range of view then the people in groups thus letting you lone wolf's take on things that the others would take a lot longer to do
|
|
|
|
Post by mvp on Feb 2, 2014 17:25:45 GMT
I agree to an extent mvp but exp shouldn't be split the loot should therefore making it so that you have a hardy trust in the person in your party near you who could take your loot before you do thus making a deep mistrust in players outside a guild and to help out lone wolf's lonewolfs. Would run faster and have monsters with shorter range of view then the people in groups thus letting you lone wolf's take on things that the others would take a lot longer to do "Buffing" players that do not group up: I'm not for that at all. Why penalize the physical movement of grouped up players? What you are suggesting is allow players to quadruple or quintuple their xp rates for being partied up by increasing the rate of kills by adding more players. Truthfully, with this method you would be seeing parties that grind for gear and can disregard loot for that level as they are surpassing that level bracket anyways. I did not understand or catch the drift of what you meant by "have monsters with shorter range of view then the people in groups[...]". I believe you are considering the fact that monsters are aggressive towards players. I can not confirm nor deny the fact that monsters will be aggressive but it does seem a little unlikely to have that coded on first release. By implementing groups, I guess it wouldn't be that hard if you coded a "percentage" system acting as aggro and using mathematics to increase this "percentage" by considering the fact you are grouped up. So that idea is not completely out there. I do like the part about splitting loot though. In FO, groups operated by splitting coins and allowing kills to generate loot for each member of the group (despite even attacking the monster) based on their luck. By ensuring drops and then splitting drops between players, I'm sure we'll be seeing huge changes in economics from FO and a better partying system. However this could lead in a negative direction with trash being grinded for there higher-drop-chance items. Also I would like to know peoples opinions on increasing the party size to around a 5 limit? Benefits and negatives? |
|
