It"s not the class system, it"s just an alt system. I personally hate the dual (primary/secondary) class system.
Green Monster Games - Curt Schilling
- Thread starter Lord Thanos_foh
- Start date
There is a contingent of people (of whom you may not be one) that want a game to be "hard". They don"t want to make it hard, they just want it hard for everyone. Vanbois, I"m looking at you. The people who call WoW a McMMO or the pop music star of the month. You can make WoW as challenging or moreso as any other game but that"s not what they want. They want it to be challenging for everyone else.Requiem said:
I don"t care about twinking, and I did it plenty in EQ and you can even do it in WoW, you just can"t reuse the same item multiple times. Then again, I don"t care about "challenge" because MMOs aren"t all that challenging, they can just be tedious.. some much moreso than others.
To me, wanting to be able to twink means you don"t think the game should be difficult, or it should only be difficult for anyone without the resources and access to twink. That"s not a very "fair" playing field, and while being a "senior" player should come with certain rewards, having 1k+ more hps at level 1 isn"t necessarily one I think they should have.
Elsebet
Peasant
- 110
- 5
I definitely am all for no-drop items being allowed to be traded to other characters on the same account. Obviously, the other character would have to meet all wear requirements (faction, rank, level, etc) to be able to use said items. Think of how nice it would be to have your raiding core with a second decently geared toon to swap to fill in when needed, or just a fun diversion.
The only thing I can see is possible drama over who gets what for their alts in groups/raids which could be cleared up with a well established loot system. I don"t like alts that much, so I wouldn"t care personally, but we"ve all had "that guy/girl" in a guild or group who tries to claim everything for their stable of alts. "OMG I need that for my *insert class here*!"
The only thing I can see is possible drama over who gets what for their alts in groups/raids which could be cleared up with a well established loot system. I don"t like alts that much, so I wouldn"t care personally, but we"ve all had "that guy/girl" in a guild or group who tries to claim everything for their stable of alts. "OMG I need that for my *insert class here*!"
I"d count myself among those people, but I disagree with the sentiment. I think that the only place that any real problem exists is in the heads of the people who get butthurt over something that has absolutely no impact on them.That bastard who"s probably already done this 3 or 4 times on 3 or 4 different characters that"s been killing all of the raid mobs has a cloak of flames on his level 12 rogue. Who the hell does he think he is to insult(?)ME like that? We are not amused.Twobit Whore said:
I suppose you think everybody should believe that Jesus died for our sins too? I see no difference.
Except it does. It doesn"t have to be direct impact such as in a 1v1 PvP battle to have an effect on the game and the other players. People are often shortsighted though and don"t think past their own enjoyment to realize it. While your own enjoyment is why you pay for and play a game, having it at the expense of other things ultimately leads to no enjoyment for anyone.Requiem said:
If you"re leveling up as a new person and you"re in a place where there are 10 mobs to kill for experience. You can kill 1 every 2 minutes. As you kill one Mr Twink comes along and kills 9 in 2 minutes. Now it affects the new person since you have to compete with that person for spawns, quest mobs or whatever.
It"s not likely that a person with uber twink gear is gonna help a noob out like that either.
It"s not likely that a person with uber twink gear is gonna help a noob out like that either.
Bothers? No. Has an impact on the game and indirectly has an impact on me, or at least the average player? Yes.
Small example: Let"s say you have your level 12 rogue twinked out. The content is mostly group oriented but this rogue can solo it. That is one less player that is participating in a group and if a group is short one level 12 rogue from being able to access content then it is impacting people in a negative way.
Small example: Let"s say you have your level 12 rogue twinked out. The content is mostly group oriented but this rogue can solo it. That is one less player that is participating in a group and if a group is short one level 12 rogue from being able to access content then it is impacting people in a negative way.
This comment and the one before it are assuming that that"s an issue. We aren"t talking about EQ here, we"re talking about a game that doesn"t exist and can be made in any way.Twobit Whore said:
That said, I can"t think of any outdoor zone even in EQ1 where a twink could prevent you from killing as fast as you can manage it, and I"d say that it"s a safe bet that non-instanced dungeons are now officially a thing of the past. Also face facts, if you just HAVE to camp these specific 10 mobs because you"re too lazy to move around, it doesn"t take a twink to fuck that up for you.
I believe he did. Everybody has the right to choose whether they believe it or not. That doesn"t change the fact (IMO of course). Same as just because you think you twinking doesn"t affect other people playing a game, it doesn"t mean its true.Requiem said:
The devs have to balance content with regard to characters capability. If you can twink that has to be taken into account.
While that point is very valid, I think there are other viewpoints as well. If I were just starting out and I saw this guy killing like that, I would ask him how he did it. So then he links "Blade of Carnage 15/20 +100hp" . I would be like holy shit where did you get that!? He would explain it was off of a high level mob and then, to me at least, it would be another carrot for me to look forward to. I couldnt wait to get that high so I could twink. Most everyone desires power in 1 form or another so this is a way to get it without hurting the gameplay for others anymore so than a lvl 60 running around in a newbie zone in WOW killing all the spawns. It would suck at the time but you move on. Plus the twink would only be there a few minutes at most because he would out level you very quickly and then move on to another zone. Also, if the game has grouping as another adequate leveling option you could go to where the elite mobs or 4 dot mobs are and group while uber warrior stays and kills the 1 dots.Draegan said:
Never once did twinking bother me in EQ.
Oh I know it effects some people, but I believe that it"s only in their heads. That"s the difference. Some people have mad twink hate because it just bothers them that this other character is running around in a ferrari when they have a pinto. I think it"s nothing more than sour grapes in 99.99% of cases.Flight said:
We should baseline here. When you say twink, what kind of releative power to level are you talking about? Do you have equipment meant for twice your level? 3x or 4x? or 1.5x? If you have 150% of your levels power I would think it to be a big deal, but 2 or 4 times the amount? You"re now trivializing the games content which negates the hard work the devs put in to creating that content. Also they are shortening their game at the same time.
i think twinking can affect other people"s game play, but i also think twinking is fun as hell. can"t i have my cake and eat it too?
Uh, did you look at the url? Perhaps take a browse through Furor"s old news posts? Bad form? lawl
That aside, I was being serious. The way I see it, twinking will almost never have any real impact on anybody so I have to assume that those who are vehemently against it are just against it on principle. Therefor, forcing others to conform to their idea of how things should be based on such a baseless concern is pretty parallel.
That aside, I was being serious. The way I see it, twinking will almost never have any real impact on anybody so I have to assume that those who are vehemently against it are just against it on principle. Therefor, forcing others to conform to their idea of how things should be based on such a baseless concern is pretty parallel.
Bad example. Chances are that the person who would have an uber level 12 rogue that"s twinked out would never group with them to begin with. I sure wouldn"t have. EQ was all about cliques for those of us at the top end who could do that kind of stuff.Twobit Whore said:
If none of your clique was rerolling and you wanted to complete some quests or kill some group content you would need others. And even if you didn"t group and just soloed it all, you are taking content meant for multiple people and consuming it all yourself. That may sound great to you, but it sucks for others. If a "normal" player could kill a mob a minute and you were killing 10 a minute and there are limited mobs, is it fair for you to do everything 10x as fast.. meaning it takes even longer than normal for that one poor soul? It could wind up leaving a sour taste in their mouth and ultimately costing the company money. The playing field needs to be somewhat level for all players. Look at all the bs that gets QQ"d about in low level WoW battlegrounds. 150hp enchants, clefthoof armor kits on level 19 items etc. It makes it not-fun for anyone without those and makes it impossible to lose for anyone with. No challenge, no fun, no good for the game overall.Sean said:
You wouldn"t need others, you"d just get someone to PL you - generally one of those people accompanied twinks. Your latter half of the example is the main bad example part:
Someone choosing to not group with them is completely irrelevant and not some negative impact to the game. Monopolizing spawns to a point that the group can"t do anything? Sure - that"s a valid example, even though an incredibly rare one. Not wanting to play with them? That"s something incredibly stupid to try to use as your point. That"s like saying someone not logging in is negatively impacting the game.
People not logging in does negatively impact a game that relies on people logging in. Look at Vanguard. Low pops = hard to find groups = boring ass game.
In this hypothectical group-oriented game, grouping is the core of the gameplay experience. If you give people methods to circumvent that, you negate all the effort that went into making it in the first place. You also prevent people who aren"t in the "vanguard" (no pun intended) from experiencing it in the way it was designed.
In this hypothectical group-oriented game, grouping is the core of the gameplay experience. If you give people methods to circumvent that, you negate all the effort that went into making it in the first place. You also prevent people who aren"t in the "vanguard" (no pun intended) from experiencing it in the way it was designed.