Maintenance for the week of October 28:
• PC/Mac: NA and EU megaservers for maintenance – November 1, 4:00AM EDT (8:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EDT (13:00 UTC)
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/668104/
• PC/Mac: NA and EU megaservers for maintenance – November 1, 4:00AM EDT (8:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EDT (13:00 UTC)
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/668104/
ZoS incompetence rears its head again (re: initial champion points nerf)
-
EQBallzz✭✭✭✭✭
✭DanielMaxwell wrote: »DanielMaxwell wrote: »onlinegamer1 wrote: »ZoS decision to give everyone 30 CPs, period, no matter what VR rank you have, no matter how much XP you've earned AFTER BEING TOLD BY ZOS IT WOULD COUNT TOWARDS CPs, no matter how many VRs you've leveled, is a bad decision and shows ZoS utter incompetence.
Imagine for a second that they kept their initial plan (that you have to get XP to earn your inital CP pool, and that there would be a cap on how many you can earn in advance), and set the CP cap at 30.
Would you still be mad today? After all, they did exactly what they promised, so the answer should be no, right?
Fast forward. They "broke their promise" by giving you exactly the same 30 CP you would get above, except that they told you everyone is getting them. And you are mad.
Literally the only difference between these scenarios is that the other players are getting 30 CP as well. And this makes you mad?
Nothing has changed as far as you are concerned, but oh my god, THEY are getting something for free! Burn them, burn them all!
/rollseyes.
It has nothing to do with other players but rather some representation of the XP earned from vet content. If 30 CP was somehow representative of the 20 million XP earned while doing vet content then fine but we all know that is completely untrue. It's not unfair because someone at V1 is getting 30 free CP..nobody cares about that. It's unfair because someone at V1 is getting 30 CP *AND* still has access to 20 million or more XP that is represented by the veteran content. That's it. Nothing else.
would it make you feel better if they choose to instead reset all level 50 and level 50 plus quests and give nobody any champion system points ?onlinegamer1 wrote: »onlinegamer1 wrote: »OrangeTheCat wrote: »onlinegamer1 wrote: »DanielMaxwell wrote: »Grinding includes doing quests.
False. Please don't post incorrect things.
It does include doing quests when you are killing mobs along the way that you might not otherwise do. It's all part of the results of the xp tracking.
Again, 100% false. Grinding is absolutely, completely, mutually exclusive to questing. Please stop posting false information.
It is not false, just subjective. Someone who hates questing, but does quest after quest after quest for hours on end anyway just because it is the fastest way to level and he wants to hit the max asap - this person would subjectively consider his activity to be a grind.
Again, 100% false and not up to interpretation.
Grinding is a term. A defined term. You can't just make up your own definition for it.
Grinding is killing mobs over and over and over in 1 spot or area.. That is all grinding is. If you ride off to a quest giver and then get another quest and then ride to a new location to complete a quest, that's not grinding.
Period.
Its not up for debate.
You are wrong. That is all.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/grindgrind
(grīnd)
v. ground (ground), grind·ing, grinds
4. Informal A laborious task, routine, or study: the daily grind.
17. laborious, usu. uninteresting work.
Grinding in relation to gaming is not a dictionary term it's a gaming term.
If there are multiple possible definitions of grinding then you can not claim people are wrong when they use the other definition than the one you meant. That was my point.
If i say that doing quests repeatedly is grinding for me, nobody is in a position to say i am wrong. Because one of the definitions of grinding equals it to 'repetitive, laborious, uninteresting work', and for some, that's exactly what repetitive questing is.
There are plenty of terms that relate to gaming and don't have the same or identical meaning outside of gaming. If you want to purposely use the term incorrectly for the benefit of proving your point that's your own misinformed decision but it doesn't change the term definition as it relates to gaming.
you can grind quests , mobs , dungeons , or skill lines .
every thing in the game is a grind , that does not mean that every thing in the game is unpleasant .
you grind quests by grabbing every quest in a quest hub doing them then turning them in before moving to the next hub.
you grind dungeons by forming a group and running dungeons back to back .
you grind mobs by finding a location with a high respawn rate of mobs that give a decent amount of XP based on being solo or in a group .
you grind skill lines by using them or focusing on the actions that progress them .
It would make me feel better if they did something fair and proportional and followed through on their promise to reward players who continued to play while waiting for CP system to be released. Some of us knew there was a potential issue with this and it was brought up if vet content should be saved and we were told to go ahead and burn through it because it was being tracked and would be converted to CP later.
You can make declarative statements all you want but that is not grinding. Grinding has nothing to do with pleasant or unpleasant or quests. It's grinding on mobs for XP (or in some cases faction). That's it. It's a term that was coined prior to WoW which is the first real game that leveled by way of questing. Some of the newer MMO players want to attach questing to the term because they don't like questing but that is incorrect. Grinding is grinding on mobs. Period. End of story. Not up for debate.
so then since most other MMO games would give you nothing when they remove one system and replace it with a new system , ZOS giving all VR1 and up accounts 30 points is not fair . be glad they are giving you that much.
as far as grinding goes you have it wrong , grinding is not just farming mobs as I stated how you can do other methods of grinding . grinding in a MMO does not mean just doing activities you do not enjoy , it is all about progressing your character as fast as you can by whatever means are legitimate in the game .
Grinding is a gaming term coined at a time before this "quest grinding" was even an option. How can it be included in that definition if it didn't exist when the phrase was coined? You can try to attach new meaning to the term all you want but that doesn't change the original meaning of the term. I realize you probably grew up with WoW and think that is the dawn of MMOs so your experience is the standard but that is not the case. You don't get to redefine a phrase to suit your personal needs. You can keep claiming that all you want and you will continue to be wrong.4 -
DanielMaxwell✭✭✭DanielMaxwell wrote: »DanielMaxwell wrote: »onlinegamer1 wrote: »ZoS decision to give everyone 30 CPs, period, no matter what VR rank you have, no matter how much XP you've earned AFTER BEING TOLD BY ZOS IT WOULD COUNT TOWARDS CPs, no matter how many VRs you've leveled, is a bad decision and shows ZoS utter incompetence.
Imagine for a second that they kept their initial plan (that you have to get XP to earn your inital CP pool, and that there would be a cap on how many you can earn in advance), and set the CP cap at 30.
Would you still be mad today? After all, they did exactly what they promised, so the answer should be no, right?
Fast forward. They "broke their promise" by giving you exactly the same 30 CP you would get above, except that they told you everyone is getting them. And you are mad.
Literally the only difference between these scenarios is that the other players are getting 30 CP as well. And this makes you mad?
Nothing has changed as far as you are concerned, but oh my god, THEY are getting something for free! Burn them, burn them all!
/rollseyes.
It has nothing to do with other players but rather some representation of the XP earned from vet content. If 30 CP was somehow representative of the 20 million XP earned while doing vet content then fine but we all know that is completely untrue. It's not unfair because someone at V1 is getting 30 free CP..nobody cares about that. It's unfair because someone at V1 is getting 30 CP *AND* still has access to 20 million or more XP that is represented by the veteran content. That's it. Nothing else.
would it make you feel better if they choose to instead reset all level 50 and level 50 plus quests and give nobody any champion system points ?onlinegamer1 wrote: »onlinegamer1 wrote: »OrangeTheCat wrote: »onlinegamer1 wrote: »DanielMaxwell wrote: »Grinding includes doing quests.
False. Please don't post incorrect things.
It does include doing quests when you are killing mobs along the way that you might not otherwise do. It's all part of the results of the xp tracking.
Again, 100% false. Grinding is absolutely, completely, mutually exclusive to questing. Please stop posting false information.
It is not false, just subjective. Someone who hates questing, but does quest after quest after quest for hours on end anyway just because it is the fastest way to level and he wants to hit the max asap - this person would subjectively consider his activity to be a grind.
Again, 100% false and not up to interpretation.
Grinding is a term. A defined term. You can't just make up your own definition for it.
Grinding is killing mobs over and over and over in 1 spot or area.. That is all grinding is. If you ride off to a quest giver and then get another quest and then ride to a new location to complete a quest, that's not grinding.
Period.
Its not up for debate.
You are wrong. That is all.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/grindgrind
(grīnd)
v. ground (ground), grind·ing, grinds
4. Informal A laborious task, routine, or study: the daily grind.
17. laborious, usu. uninteresting work.
Grinding in relation to gaming is not a dictionary term it's a gaming term.
If there are multiple possible definitions of grinding then you can not claim people are wrong when they use the other definition than the one you meant. That was my point.
If i say that doing quests repeatedly is grinding for me, nobody is in a position to say i am wrong. Because one of the definitions of grinding equals it to 'repetitive, laborious, uninteresting work', and for some, that's exactly what repetitive questing is.
There are plenty of terms that relate to gaming and don't have the same or identical meaning outside of gaming. If you want to purposely use the term incorrectly for the benefit of proving your point that's your own misinformed decision but it doesn't change the term definition as it relates to gaming.
you can grind quests , mobs , dungeons , or skill lines .
every thing in the game is a grind , that does not mean that every thing in the game is unpleasant .
you grind quests by grabbing every quest in a quest hub doing them then turning them in before moving to the next hub.
you grind dungeons by forming a group and running dungeons back to back .
you grind mobs by finding a location with a high respawn rate of mobs that give a decent amount of XP based on being solo or in a group .
you grind skill lines by using them or focusing on the actions that progress them .
It would make me feel better if they did something fair and proportional and followed through on their promise to reward players who continued to play while waiting for CP system to be released. Some of us knew there was a potential issue with this and it was brought up if vet content should be saved and we were told to go ahead and burn through it because it was being tracked and would be converted to CP later.
You can make declarative statements all you want but that is not grinding. Grinding has nothing to do with pleasant or unpleasant or quests. It's grinding on mobs for XP (or in some cases faction). That's it. It's a term that was coined prior to WoW which is the first real game that leveled by way of questing. Some of the newer MMO players want to attach questing to the term because they don't like questing but that is incorrect. Grinding is grinding on mobs. Period. End of story. Not up for debate.
so then since most other MMO games would give you nothing when they remove one system and replace it with a new system , ZOS giving all VR1 and up accounts 30 points is not fair . be glad they are giving you that much.
as far as grinding goes you have it wrong , grinding is not just farming mobs as I stated how you can do other methods of grinding . grinding in a MMO does not mean just doing activities you do not enjoy , it is all about progressing your character as fast as you can by whatever means are legitimate in the game .
Grinding is a gaming term coined at a time before this "quest grinding" was even an option. How can it be included in that definition if it didn't exist when the phrase was coined? You can try to attach new meaning to the term all you want but that doesn't change the original meaning of the term. I realize you probably grew up with WoW and think that is the dawn of MMOs so your experience is the standard but that is not the case. You don't get to redefine a phrase to suit your personal needs. You can keep claiming that all you want and you will continue to be wrong.
Everquest was not the dawn of online gaming there where other online games out well before it and many of them included quest grinding along with mob , and dungeon grinding . yes most of them where not as successful as Everquest but that does not negate their exsistance or the impact they have on how games are played or the terms created to express how they are played.
get over the fact that your using a extremely narrow definition of the term only to support your point of view while saying any other definition is wrong , simply because the other definitions reduce your argument .2 -
EQBallzz✭✭✭✭✭
✭DanielMaxwell wrote: »DanielMaxwell wrote: »DanielMaxwell wrote: »onlinegamer1 wrote: »ZoS decision to give everyone 30 CPs, period, no matter what VR rank you have, no matter how much XP you've earned AFTER BEING TOLD BY ZOS IT WOULD COUNT TOWARDS CPs, no matter how many VRs you've leveled, is a bad decision and shows ZoS utter incompetence.
Imagine for a second that they kept their initial plan (that you have to get XP to earn your inital CP pool, and that there would be a cap on how many you can earn in advance), and set the CP cap at 30.
Would you still be mad today? After all, they did exactly what they promised, so the answer should be no, right?
Fast forward. They "broke their promise" by giving you exactly the same 30 CP you would get above, except that they told you everyone is getting them. And you are mad.
Literally the only difference between these scenarios is that the other players are getting 30 CP as well. And this makes you mad?
Nothing has changed as far as you are concerned, but oh my god, THEY are getting something for free! Burn them, burn them all!
/rollseyes.
It has nothing to do with other players but rather some representation of the XP earned from vet content. If 30 CP was somehow representative of the 20 million XP earned while doing vet content then fine but we all know that is completely untrue. It's not unfair because someone at V1 is getting 30 free CP..nobody cares about that. It's unfair because someone at V1 is getting 30 CP *AND* still has access to 20 million or more XP that is represented by the veteran content. That's it. Nothing else.
would it make you feel better if they choose to instead reset all level 50 and level 50 plus quests and give nobody any champion system points ?onlinegamer1 wrote: »onlinegamer1 wrote: »OrangeTheCat wrote: »onlinegamer1 wrote: »DanielMaxwell wrote: »Grinding includes doing quests.
False. Please don't post incorrect things.
It does include doing quests when you are killing mobs along the way that you might not otherwise do. It's all part of the results of the xp tracking.
Again, 100% false. Grinding is absolutely, completely, mutually exclusive to questing. Please stop posting false information.
It is not false, just subjective. Someone who hates questing, but does quest after quest after quest for hours on end anyway just because it is the fastest way to level and he wants to hit the max asap - this person would subjectively consider his activity to be a grind.
Again, 100% false and not up to interpretation.
Grinding is a term. A defined term. You can't just make up your own definition for it.
Grinding is killing mobs over and over and over in 1 spot or area.. That is all grinding is. If you ride off to a quest giver and then get another quest and then ride to a new location to complete a quest, that's not grinding.
Period.
Its not up for debate.
You are wrong. That is all.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/grindgrind
(grīnd)
v. ground (ground), grind·ing, grinds
4. Informal A laborious task, routine, or study: the daily grind.
17. laborious, usu. uninteresting work.
Grinding in relation to gaming is not a dictionary term it's a gaming term.
If there are multiple possible definitions of grinding then you can not claim people are wrong when they use the other definition than the one you meant. That was my point.
If i say that doing quests repeatedly is grinding for me, nobody is in a position to say i am wrong. Because one of the definitions of grinding equals it to 'repetitive, laborious, uninteresting work', and for some, that's exactly what repetitive questing is.
There are plenty of terms that relate to gaming and don't have the same or identical meaning outside of gaming. If you want to purposely use the term incorrectly for the benefit of proving your point that's your own misinformed decision but it doesn't change the term definition as it relates to gaming.
you can grind quests , mobs , dungeons , or skill lines .
every thing in the game is a grind , that does not mean that every thing in the game is unpleasant .
you grind quests by grabbing every quest in a quest hub doing them then turning them in before moving to the next hub.
you grind dungeons by forming a group and running dungeons back to back .
you grind mobs by finding a location with a high respawn rate of mobs that give a decent amount of XP based on being solo or in a group .
you grind skill lines by using them or focusing on the actions that progress them .
It would make me feel better if they did something fair and proportional and followed through on their promise to reward players who continued to play while waiting for CP system to be released. Some of us knew there was a potential issue with this and it was brought up if vet content should be saved and we were told to go ahead and burn through it because it was being tracked and would be converted to CP later.
You can make declarative statements all you want but that is not grinding. Grinding has nothing to do with pleasant or unpleasant or quests. It's grinding on mobs for XP (or in some cases faction). That's it. It's a term that was coined prior to WoW which is the first real game that leveled by way of questing. Some of the newer MMO players want to attach questing to the term because they don't like questing but that is incorrect. Grinding is grinding on mobs. Period. End of story. Not up for debate.
so then since most other MMO games would give you nothing when they remove one system and replace it with a new system , ZOS giving all VR1 and up accounts 30 points is not fair . be glad they are giving you that much.
as far as grinding goes you have it wrong , grinding is not just farming mobs as I stated how you can do other methods of grinding . grinding in a MMO does not mean just doing activities you do not enjoy , it is all about progressing your character as fast as you can by whatever means are legitimate in the game .
Grinding is a gaming term coined at a time before this "quest grinding" was even an option. How can it be included in that definition if it didn't exist when the phrase was coined? You can try to attach new meaning to the term all you want but that doesn't change the original meaning of the term. I realize you probably grew up with WoW and think that is the dawn of MMOs so your experience is the standard but that is not the case. You don't get to redefine a phrase to suit your personal needs. You can keep claiming that all you want and you will continue to be wrong.
Everquest was not the dawn of online gaming there where other online games out well before it and many of them included quest grinding along with mob , and dungeon grinding . yes most of them where not as successful as Everquest but that does not negate their exsistance or the impact they have on how games are played or the terms created to express how they are played.
get over the fact that your using a extremely narrow definition of the term only to support your point of view while saying any other definition is wrong , simply because the other definitions reduce your argument .
WoW was the first quest-centric MMO. If you are going to argue otherwise then name them. Grinding was also a term that was coined in EQ so while EQ may not have been the dawn of online gaming it was the origin of the term in question (unless you can provide information to the contrary which you can't).1 -
Enodoc✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
@Sharee Remind me again how the ground is equal when a VR1 character can earn 78,000 XP in 3 hours, due to all the one-time Cadwell quests they can play through, and a VR14 character can only earn 40,879 XP in the same amount of time because they have already done those quests. That's half the amount of CPs in the same amount of time.(XP calculation)Averya_Teira wrote: »Epsilon_Echo wrote: »onlinegamer1 wrote: »ZoS decision to give everyone 30 CPs, period, no matter what VR rank you have, no matter how much XP you've earned AFTER BEING TOLD BY ZOS IT WOULD COUNT TOWARDS CPs, no matter how many VRs you've leveled, is a bad decision and shows ZoS utter incompetence.
Imagine for a second that they kept their initial plan (that you have to get XP to earn your inital CP pool, and that there would be a cap on how many you can earn in advance), and set the CP cap at 30.
Would you still be mad today? After all, they did exactly what they promised, so the answer should be no, right?
Fast forward. They "broke their promise" by giving you exactly the same 30 CP you would get above, except that they told you everyone is getting them. And you are mad.
Literally the only difference between these scenarios is that the other players are getting 30 CP as well. And this makes you mad?
Nothing has changed as far as you are concerned, but oh my god, THEY are getting something for free! Burn them, burn them all!
/rollseyes.
Give the noobs all the free CPs they want. The issue is that
1. The points are not enough to compensate for time played
2. The time played (questing) cannot be made up.
Unless you want to say we should grind for the rest of the missing points, and we know how ZOS feels about grinding as of late...
You feel the cap is too low. That is your right. I imagine ZOS spent some time evaluating what the cap should be, weighting the pros (more=happy players) and cons (more=too big a gap between the haves and have nots).
As far as grinding - remember there are so many CP points to be earned that it will take years. There will be new opportunities for earning them in those years (new zones etc.)
First, ZOS spending time to actually do something right ? Lol ?
Second, the way champion system works, even if people had 100 points more than you, they wouldn't have that much of an advantage over you, why do you not want them to have the points they deserve exactly ? What does it change for YOU ? (Note that I don't have a VR14, would not gain anything from ZOS actually giving the CPs they said they would)
Just to make things clear, i have four veteran rank characters. That means *I* would likely be the one gaining an advantage over others if ZOS did not decide to go with a flat 30CP starting pool for everyone.
So why am in not fighting tooth and nail for the other side of the argument? Because i believe everyone starting on equal ground is a good thing.
They say they want to make gain of CP more equal across activities, but we know from how they have reduced XP gain for most things other than quests that this is not what they put into practice.
Also, there are people who enjoy questing much more than other sources of XP (such as grinding mobs), and these are the people who are shafted by this flat-rate CP starting point. They've done the one-time quests which they enjoyed, and now cannot get the CP that we were informed would be obtained from the XP being tracked from those quests. (They still enjoy playing their characters in PvP, or Crafting, or Roleplaying, or Gathering, or helping low-level friends, all of which give little to no XP at all, and are not likely to in future [apart from hopefully PvP], so the point that some people have made on the lines of "why are they playing those characters anyway" is null and void.)
Finally:ZOS said there would be a cap, and that's fine. They also said it was unlikely many people would reach it. By reducing the amount of CPs required for one star, they may have been required to reduce the cap accordingly.
But this 30 is not a cap, and I wish people would stop thinking it is. A cap is something you get incrementally closer to until you hit it, based on an increment they themselves said would be from tracked XP. This 30 is a flat rate, not a cap.UESP: The Unofficial Elder Scrolls Pages - A collaborative source for all knowledge on the Elder Scrolls series since 1995
Join us on Discord - discord.gg/uesp1 -
DanielMaxwell✭✭✭
I'll give you one that predates EQ and UODanielMaxwell wrote: »DanielMaxwell wrote: »DanielMaxwell wrote: »onlinegamer1 wrote: »ZoS decision to give everyone 30 CPs, period, no matter what VR rank you have, no matter how much XP you've earned AFTER BEING TOLD BY ZOS IT WOULD COUNT TOWARDS CPs, no matter how many VRs you've leveled, is a bad decision and shows ZoS utter incompetence.
Imagine for a second that they kept their initial plan (that you have to get XP to earn your inital CP pool, and that there would be a cap on how many you can earn in advance), and set the CP cap at 30.
Would you still be mad today? After all, they did exactly what they promised, so the answer should be no, right?
Fast forward. They "broke their promise" by giving you exactly the same 30 CP you would get above, except that they told you everyone is getting them. And you are mad.
Literally the only difference between these scenarios is that the other players are getting 30 CP as well. And this makes you mad?
Nothing has changed as far as you are concerned, but oh my god, THEY are getting something for free! Burn them, burn them all!
/rollseyes.
It has nothing to do with other players but rather some representation of the XP earned from vet content. If 30 CP was somehow representative of the 20 million XP earned while doing vet content then fine but we all know that is completely untrue. It's not unfair because someone at V1 is getting 30 free CP..nobody cares about that. It's unfair because someone at V1 is getting 30 CP *AND* still has access to 20 million or more XP that is represented by the veteran content. That's it. Nothing else.
would it make you feel better if they choose to instead reset all level 50 and level 50 plus quests and give nobody any champion system points ?onlinegamer1 wrote: »onlinegamer1 wrote: »OrangeTheCat wrote: »onlinegamer1 wrote: »DanielMaxwell wrote: »Grinding includes doing quests.
False. Please don't post incorrect things.
It does include doing quests when you are killing mobs along the way that you might not otherwise do. It's all part of the results of the xp tracking.
Again, 100% false. Grinding is absolutely, completely, mutually exclusive to questing. Please stop posting false information.
It is not false, just subjective. Someone who hates questing, but does quest after quest after quest for hours on end anyway just because it is the fastest way to level and he wants to hit the max asap - this person would subjectively consider his activity to be a grind.
Again, 100% false and not up to interpretation.
Grinding is a term. A defined term. You can't just make up your own definition for it.
Grinding is killing mobs over and over and over in 1 spot or area.. That is all grinding is. If you ride off to a quest giver and then get another quest and then ride to a new location to complete a quest, that's not grinding.
Period.
Its not up for debate.
You are wrong. That is all.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/grindgrind
(grīnd)
v. ground (ground), grind·ing, grinds
4. Informal A laborious task, routine, or study: the daily grind.
17. laborious, usu. uninteresting work.
Grinding in relation to gaming is not a dictionary term it's a gaming term.
If there are multiple possible definitions of grinding then you can not claim people are wrong when they use the other definition than the one you meant. That was my point.
If i say that doing quests repeatedly is grinding for me, nobody is in a position to say i am wrong. Because one of the definitions of grinding equals it to 'repetitive, laborious, uninteresting work', and for some, that's exactly what repetitive questing is.
There are plenty of terms that relate to gaming and don't have the same or identical meaning outside of gaming. If you want to purposely use the term incorrectly for the benefit of proving your point that's your own misinformed decision but it doesn't change the term definition as it relates to gaming.
you can grind quests , mobs , dungeons , or skill lines .
every thing in the game is a grind , that does not mean that every thing in the game is unpleasant .
you grind quests by grabbing every quest in a quest hub doing them then turning them in before moving to the next hub.
you grind dungeons by forming a group and running dungeons back to back .
you grind mobs by finding a location with a high respawn rate of mobs that give a decent amount of XP based on being solo or in a group .
you grind skill lines by using them or focusing on the actions that progress them .
It would make me feel better if they did something fair and proportional and followed through on their promise to reward players who continued to play while waiting for CP system to be released. Some of us knew there was a potential issue with this and it was brought up if vet content should be saved and we were told to go ahead and burn through it because it was being tracked and would be converted to CP later.
You can make declarative statements all you want but that is not grinding. Grinding has nothing to do with pleasant or unpleasant or quests. It's grinding on mobs for XP (or in some cases faction). That's it. It's a term that was coined prior to WoW which is the first real game that leveled by way of questing. Some of the newer MMO players want to attach questing to the term because they don't like questing but that is incorrect. Grinding is grinding on mobs. Period. End of story. Not up for debate.
so then since most other MMO games would give you nothing when they remove one system and replace it with a new system , ZOS giving all VR1 and up accounts 30 points is not fair . be glad they are giving you that much.
as far as grinding goes you have it wrong , grinding is not just farming mobs as I stated how you can do other methods of grinding . grinding in a MMO does not mean just doing activities you do not enjoy , it is all about progressing your character as fast as you can by whatever means are legitimate in the game .
Grinding is a gaming term coined at a time before this "quest grinding" was even an option. How can it be included in that definition if it didn't exist when the phrase was coined? You can try to attach new meaning to the term all you want but that doesn't change the original meaning of the term. I realize you probably grew up with WoW and think that is the dawn of MMOs so your experience is the standard but that is not the case. You don't get to redefine a phrase to suit your personal needs. You can keep claiming that all you want and you will continue to be wrong.
Everquest was not the dawn of online gaming there where other online games out well before it and many of them included quest grinding along with mob , and dungeon grinding . yes most of them where not as successful as Everquest but that does not negate their exsistance or the impact they have on how games are played or the terms created to express how they are played.
get over the fact that your using a extremely narrow definition of the term only to support your point of view while saying any other definition is wrong , simply because the other definitions reduce your argument .
WoW was the first quest-centric MMO. If you are going to argue otherwise then name them. Grinding was also a term that was coined in EQ so while EQ may not have been the dawn of online gaming it was the origin of the term in question (unless you can provide information to the contrary which you can't).
NWN accessed through the AOL service . That game was quest centric even more the WoW was . There where several others available via other services that I did not play but where also quest centric , but most of them where text MUD's .
1 -
Muizer✭✭✭✭✭
✭xMovingTarget wrote: »The cap isnt 30. Nobody other than Players ever mentioned the Cap at 30. Only thing that was said is everybody with at least 1 vet char gets 30 points. Nothing else. No word about cap. That word never appeared on the livestream when they talked about the champ system.
Worth repeating. It certainly wasn't used explicitly, nor, I would venture, was it in any way implied. Above all, there's no reason to do so. Reducing the gap? Perhaps they just meant that in the new system, the difference between 0 points and 30 points would be very high indeed, considering the diminishing return they're planning makes the first points count for most.
Please stop making requests for game features. ZOS have enough bad ideas as it is!1 -
EQBallzz✭✭✭✭✭
✭DanielMaxwell wrote: »
I'll give you one that predates EQ and UODanielMaxwell wrote: »DanielMaxwell wrote: »DanielMaxwell wrote: »onlinegamer1 wrote: »ZoS decision to give everyone 30 CPs, period, no matter what VR rank you have, no matter how much XP you've earned AFTER BEING TOLD BY ZOS IT WOULD COUNT TOWARDS CPs, no matter how many VRs you've leveled, is a bad decision and shows ZoS utter incompetence.
Imagine for a second that they kept their initial plan (that you have to get XP to earn your inital CP pool, and that there would be a cap on how many you can earn in advance), and set the CP cap at 30.
Would you still be mad today? After all, they did exactly what they promised, so the answer should be no, right?
Fast forward. They "broke their promise" by giving you exactly the same 30 CP you would get above, except that they told you everyone is getting them. And you are mad.
Literally the only difference between these scenarios is that the other players are getting 30 CP as well. And this makes you mad?
Nothing has changed as far as you are concerned, but oh my god, THEY are getting something for free! Burn them, burn them all!
/rollseyes.
It has nothing to do with other players but rather some representation of the XP earned from vet content. If 30 CP was somehow representative of the 20 million XP earned while doing vet content then fine but we all know that is completely untrue. It's not unfair because someone at V1 is getting 30 free CP..nobody cares about that. It's unfair because someone at V1 is getting 30 CP *AND* still has access to 20 million or more XP that is represented by the veteran content. That's it. Nothing else.
would it make you feel better if they choose to instead reset all level 50 and level 50 plus quests and give nobody any champion system points ?onlinegamer1 wrote: »onlinegamer1 wrote: »OrangeTheCat wrote: »onlinegamer1 wrote: »DanielMaxwell wrote: »Grinding includes doing quests.
False. Please don't post incorrect things.
It does include doing quests when you are killing mobs along the way that you might not otherwise do. It's all part of the results of the xp tracking.
Again, 100% false. Grinding is absolutely, completely, mutually exclusive to questing. Please stop posting false information.
It is not false, just subjective. Someone who hates questing, but does quest after quest after quest for hours on end anyway just because it is the fastest way to level and he wants to hit the max asap - this person would subjectively consider his activity to be a grind.
Again, 100% false and not up to interpretation.
Grinding is a term. A defined term. You can't just make up your own definition for it.
Grinding is killing mobs over and over and over in 1 spot or area.. That is all grinding is. If you ride off to a quest giver and then get another quest and then ride to a new location to complete a quest, that's not grinding.
Period.
Its not up for debate.
You are wrong. That is all.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/grindgrind
(grīnd)
v. ground (ground), grind·ing, grinds
4. Informal A laborious task, routine, or study: the daily grind.
17. laborious, usu. uninteresting work.
Grinding in relation to gaming is not a dictionary term it's a gaming term.
If there are multiple possible definitions of grinding then you can not claim people are wrong when they use the other definition than the one you meant. That was my point.
If i say that doing quests repeatedly is grinding for me, nobody is in a position to say i am wrong. Because one of the definitions of grinding equals it to 'repetitive, laborious, uninteresting work', and for some, that's exactly what repetitive questing is.
There are plenty of terms that relate to gaming and don't have the same or identical meaning outside of gaming. If you want to purposely use the term incorrectly for the benefit of proving your point that's your own misinformed decision but it doesn't change the term definition as it relates to gaming.
you can grind quests , mobs , dungeons , or skill lines .
every thing in the game is a grind , that does not mean that every thing in the game is unpleasant .
you grind quests by grabbing every quest in a quest hub doing them then turning them in before moving to the next hub.
you grind dungeons by forming a group and running dungeons back to back .
you grind mobs by finding a location with a high respawn rate of mobs that give a decent amount of XP based on being solo or in a group .
you grind skill lines by using them or focusing on the actions that progress them .
It would make me feel better if they did something fair and proportional and followed through on their promise to reward players who continued to play while waiting for CP system to be released. Some of us knew there was a potential issue with this and it was brought up if vet content should be saved and we were told to go ahead and burn through it because it was being tracked and would be converted to CP later.
You can make declarative statements all you want but that is not grinding. Grinding has nothing to do with pleasant or unpleasant or quests. It's grinding on mobs for XP (or in some cases faction). That's it. It's a term that was coined prior to WoW which is the first real game that leveled by way of questing. Some of the newer MMO players want to attach questing to the term because they don't like questing but that is incorrect. Grinding is grinding on mobs. Period. End of story. Not up for debate.
so then since most other MMO games would give you nothing when they remove one system and replace it with a new system , ZOS giving all VR1 and up accounts 30 points is not fair . be glad they are giving you that much.
as far as grinding goes you have it wrong , grinding is not just farming mobs as I stated how you can do other methods of grinding . grinding in a MMO does not mean just doing activities you do not enjoy , it is all about progressing your character as fast as you can by whatever means are legitimate in the game .
Grinding is a gaming term coined at a time before this "quest grinding" was even an option. How can it be included in that definition if it didn't exist when the phrase was coined? You can try to attach new meaning to the term all you want but that doesn't change the original meaning of the term. I realize you probably grew up with WoW and think that is the dawn of MMOs so your experience is the standard but that is not the case. You don't get to redefine a phrase to suit your personal needs. You can keep claiming that all you want and you will continue to be wrong.
Everquest was not the dawn of online gaming there where other online games out well before it and many of them included quest grinding along with mob , and dungeon grinding . yes most of them where not as successful as Everquest but that does not negate their exsistance or the impact they have on how games are played or the terms created to express how they are played.
get over the fact that your using a extremely narrow definition of the term only to support your point of view while saying any other definition is wrong , simply because the other definitions reduce your argument .
WoW was the first quest-centric MMO. If you are going to argue otherwise then name them. Grinding was also a term that was coined in EQ so while EQ may not have been the dawn of online gaming it was the origin of the term in question (unless you can provide information to the contrary which you can't).
NWN accessed through the AOL service . That game was quest centric even more the WoW was . There where several others available via other services that I did not play but where also quest centric , but most of them where text MUD's .
I never played UO but I'm fairly sure it didn't use quest hubs for leveling. I believe that was a skills based game so you actually were required to grind on mobs (or do whatever activity is related to the skill) to raise your skills so no that is not a quest-centric game. Some early (barely even graphical) NWN game on the 1991 AoL service hardly resembles anything even remotely close to what you are now calling quest grinding. It was mostly a text game but with some basic graphics. Nice try but fail.0 -
Guppet✭✭✭✭✭
✭DanielMaxwell wrote: »DanielMaxwell wrote: »DanielMaxwell wrote: »onlinegamer1 wrote: »ZoS decision to give everyone 30 CPs, period, no matter what VR rank you have, no matter how much XP you've earned AFTER BEING TOLD BY ZOS IT WOULD COUNT TOWARDS CPs, no matter how many VRs you've leveled, is a bad decision and shows ZoS utter incompetence.
Imagine for a second that they kept their initial plan (that you have to get XP to earn your inital CP pool, and that there would be a cap on how many you can earn in advance), and set the CP cap at 30.
Would you still be mad today? After all, they did exactly what they promised, so the answer should be no, right?
Fast forward. They "broke their promise" by giving you exactly the same 30 CP you would get above, except that they told you everyone is getting them. And you are mad.
Literally the only difference between these scenarios is that the other players are getting 30 CP as well. And this makes you mad?
Nothing has changed as far as you are concerned, but oh my god, THEY are getting something for free! Burn them, burn them all!
/rollseyes.
It has nothing to do with other players but rather some representation of the XP earned from vet content. If 30 CP was somehow representative of the 20 million XP earned while doing vet content then fine but we all know that is completely untrue. It's not unfair because someone at V1 is getting 30 free CP..nobody cares about that. It's unfair because someone at V1 is getting 30 CP *AND* still has access to 20 million or more XP that is represented by the veteran content. That's it. Nothing else.
would it make you feel better if they choose to instead reset all level 50 and level 50 plus quests and give nobody any champion system points ?onlinegamer1 wrote: »onlinegamer1 wrote: »OrangeTheCat wrote: »onlinegamer1 wrote: »DanielMaxwell wrote: »Grinding includes doing quests.
False. Please don't post incorrect things.
It does include doing quests when you are killing mobs along the way that you might not otherwise do. It's all part of the results of the xp tracking.
Again, 100% false. Grinding is absolutely, completely, mutually exclusive to questing. Please stop posting false information.
It is not false, just subjective. Someone who hates questing, but does quest after quest after quest for hours on end anyway just because it is the fastest way to level and he wants to hit the max asap - this person would subjectively consider his activity to be a grind.
Again, 100% false and not up to interpretation.
Grinding is a term. A defined term. You can't just make up your own definition for it.
Grinding is killing mobs over and over and over in 1 spot or area.. That is all grinding is. If you ride off to a quest giver and then get another quest and then ride to a new location to complete a quest, that's not grinding.
Period.
Its not up for debate.
You are wrong. That is all.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/grindgrind
(grīnd)
v. ground (ground), grind·ing, grinds
4. Informal A laborious task, routine, or study: the daily grind.
17. laborious, usu. uninteresting work.
Grinding in relation to gaming is not a dictionary term it's a gaming term.
If there are multiple possible definitions of grinding then you can not claim people are wrong when they use the other definition than the one you meant. That was my point.
If i say that doing quests repeatedly is grinding for me, nobody is in a position to say i am wrong. Because one of the definitions of grinding equals it to 'repetitive, laborious, uninteresting work', and for some, that's exactly what repetitive questing is.
There are plenty of terms that relate to gaming and don't have the same or identical meaning outside of gaming. If you want to purposely use the term incorrectly for the benefit of proving your point that's your own misinformed decision but it doesn't change the term definition as it relates to gaming.
you can grind quests , mobs , dungeons , or skill lines .
every thing in the game is a grind , that does not mean that every thing in the game is unpleasant .
you grind quests by grabbing every quest in a quest hub doing them then turning them in before moving to the next hub.
you grind dungeons by forming a group and running dungeons back to back .
you grind mobs by finding a location with a high respawn rate of mobs that give a decent amount of XP based on being solo or in a group .
you grind skill lines by using them or focusing on the actions that progress them .
It would make me feel better if they did something fair and proportional and followed through on their promise to reward players who continued to play while waiting for CP system to be released. Some of us knew there was a potential issue with this and it was brought up if vet content should be saved and we were told to go ahead and burn through it because it was being tracked and would be converted to CP later.
You can make declarative statements all you want but that is not grinding. Grinding has nothing to do with pleasant or unpleasant or quests. It's grinding on mobs for XP (or in some cases faction). That's it. It's a term that was coined prior to WoW which is the first real game that leveled by way of questing. Some of the newer MMO players want to attach questing to the term because they don't like questing but that is incorrect. Grinding is grinding on mobs. Period. End of story. Not up for debate.
so then since most other MMO games would give you nothing when they remove one system and replace it with a new system , ZOS giving all VR1 and up accounts 30 points is not fair . be glad they are giving you that much.
as far as grinding goes you have it wrong , grinding is not just farming mobs as I stated how you can do other methods of grinding . grinding in a MMO does not mean just doing activities you do not enjoy , it is all about progressing your character as fast as you can by whatever means are legitimate in the game .
Grinding is a gaming term coined at a time before this "quest grinding" was even an option. How can it be included in that definition if it didn't exist when the phrase was coined? You can try to attach new meaning to the term all you want but that doesn't change the original meaning of the term. I realize you probably grew up with WoW and think that is the dawn of MMOs so your experience is the standard but that is not the case. You don't get to redefine a phrase to suit your personal needs. You can keep claiming that all you want and you will continue to be wrong.
Everquest was not the dawn of online gaming there where other online games out well before it and many of them included quest grinding along with mob , and dungeon grinding . yes most of them where not as successful as Everquest but that does not negate their exsistance or the impact they have on how games are played or the terms created to express how they are played.
get over the fact that your using a extremely narrow definition of the term only to support your point of view while saying any other definition is wrong , simply because the other definitions reduce your argument .
WoW was the first quest-centric MMO. If you are going to argue otherwise then name them. Grinding was also a term that was coined in EQ so while EQ may not have been the dawn of online gaming it was the origin of the term in question (unless you can provide information to the contrary which you can't).
I used to grind on my skateboard in the 80's, them mobs hated me.2 -
Sharee✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭@Sharee Remind me again how the ground is equal when a VR1 character can earn 78,000 XP in 3 hours, due to all the one-time Cadwell quests they can play through, and a VR14 character can only earn 40,879 XP in the same amount of time because they have already done those quests. That's half the amount of CPs in the same amount of time.(XP calculation)
You get ~40K XP as a vr14 just for completing all bruma dailies, and that can be done in about an hour. I know my VR5 DK gets about 4500 xp from each of the dailies, and there are about 10 of them. And then i can move on to chorrol.
[rest edited because it was nonsense]Edited by Sharee on December 21, 2014 11:22PM1 -
DanielMaxwell✭✭✭DanielMaxwell wrote: »
I'll give you one that predates EQ and UODanielMaxwell wrote: »DanielMaxwell wrote: »DanielMaxwell wrote: »onlinegamer1 wrote: »ZoS decision to give everyone 30 CPs, period, no matter what VR rank you have, no matter how much XP you've earned AFTER BEING TOLD BY ZOS IT WOULD COUNT TOWARDS CPs, no matter how many VRs you've leveled, is a bad decision and shows ZoS utter incompetence.
Imagine for a second that they kept their initial plan (that you have to get XP to earn your inital CP pool, and that there would be a cap on how many you can earn in advance), and set the CP cap at 30.
Would you still be mad today? After all, they did exactly what they promised, so the answer should be no, right?
Fast forward. They "broke their promise" by giving you exactly the same 30 CP you would get above, except that they told you everyone is getting them. And you are mad.
Literally the only difference between these scenarios is that the other players are getting 30 CP as well. And this makes you mad?
Nothing has changed as far as you are concerned, but oh my god, THEY are getting something for free! Burn them, burn them all!
/rollseyes.
It has nothing to do with other players but rather some representation of the XP earned from vet content. If 30 CP was somehow representative of the 20 million XP earned while doing vet content then fine but we all know that is completely untrue. It's not unfair because someone at V1 is getting 30 free CP..nobody cares about that. It's unfair because someone at V1 is getting 30 CP *AND* still has access to 20 million or more XP that is represented by the veteran content. That's it. Nothing else.
would it make you feel better if they choose to instead reset all level 50 and level 50 plus quests and give nobody any champion system points ?onlinegamer1 wrote: »onlinegamer1 wrote: »OrangeTheCat wrote: »onlinegamer1 wrote: »DanielMaxwell wrote: »Grinding includes doing quests.
False. Please don't post incorrect things.
It does include doing quests when you are killing mobs along the way that you might not otherwise do. It's all part of the results of the xp tracking.
Again, 100% false. Grinding is absolutely, completely, mutually exclusive to questing. Please stop posting false information.
It is not false, just subjective. Someone who hates questing, but does quest after quest after quest for hours on end anyway just because it is the fastest way to level and he wants to hit the max asap - this person would subjectively consider his activity to be a grind.
Again, 100% false and not up to interpretation.
Grinding is a term. A defined term. You can't just make up your own definition for it.
Grinding is killing mobs over and over and over in 1 spot or area.. That is all grinding is. If you ride off to a quest giver and then get another quest and then ride to a new location to complete a quest, that's not grinding.
Period.
Its not up for debate.
You are wrong. That is all.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/grindgrind
(grīnd)
v. ground (ground), grind·ing, grinds
4. Informal A laborious task, routine, or study: the daily grind.
17. laborious, usu. uninteresting work.
Grinding in relation to gaming is not a dictionary term it's a gaming term.
If there are multiple possible definitions of grinding then you can not claim people are wrong when they use the other definition than the one you meant. That was my point.
If i say that doing quests repeatedly is grinding for me, nobody is in a position to say i am wrong. Because one of the definitions of grinding equals it to 'repetitive, laborious, uninteresting work', and for some, that's exactly what repetitive questing is.
There are plenty of terms that relate to gaming and don't have the same or identical meaning outside of gaming. If you want to purposely use the term incorrectly for the benefit of proving your point that's your own misinformed decision but it doesn't change the term definition as it relates to gaming.
you can grind quests , mobs , dungeons , or skill lines .
every thing in the game is a grind , that does not mean that every thing in the game is unpleasant .
you grind quests by grabbing every quest in a quest hub doing them then turning them in before moving to the next hub.
you grind dungeons by forming a group and running dungeons back to back .
you grind mobs by finding a location with a high respawn rate of mobs that give a decent amount of XP based on being solo or in a group .
you grind skill lines by using them or focusing on the actions that progress them .
It would make me feel better if they did something fair and proportional and followed through on their promise to reward players who continued to play while waiting for CP system to be released. Some of us knew there was a potential issue with this and it was brought up if vet content should be saved and we were told to go ahead and burn through it because it was being tracked and would be converted to CP later.
You can make declarative statements all you want but that is not grinding. Grinding has nothing to do with pleasant or unpleasant or quests. It's grinding on mobs for XP (or in some cases faction). That's it. It's a term that was coined prior to WoW which is the first real game that leveled by way of questing. Some of the newer MMO players want to attach questing to the term because they don't like questing but that is incorrect. Grinding is grinding on mobs. Period. End of story. Not up for debate.
so then since most other MMO games would give you nothing when they remove one system and replace it with a new system , ZOS giving all VR1 and up accounts 30 points is not fair . be glad they are giving you that much.
as far as grinding goes you have it wrong , grinding is not just farming mobs as I stated how you can do other methods of grinding . grinding in a MMO does not mean just doing activities you do not enjoy , it is all about progressing your character as fast as you can by whatever means are legitimate in the game .
Grinding is a gaming term coined at a time before this "quest grinding" was even an option. How can it be included in that definition if it didn't exist when the phrase was coined? You can try to attach new meaning to the term all you want but that doesn't change the original meaning of the term. I realize you probably grew up with WoW and think that is the dawn of MMOs so your experience is the standard but that is not the case. You don't get to redefine a phrase to suit your personal needs. You can keep claiming that all you want and you will continue to be wrong.
Everquest was not the dawn of online gaming there where other online games out well before it and many of them included quest grinding along with mob , and dungeon grinding . yes most of them where not as successful as Everquest but that does not negate their exsistance or the impact they have on how games are played or the terms created to express how they are played.
get over the fact that your using a extremely narrow definition of the term only to support your point of view while saying any other definition is wrong , simply because the other definitions reduce your argument .
WoW was the first quest-centric MMO. If you are going to argue otherwise then name them. Grinding was also a term that was coined in EQ so while EQ may not have been the dawn of online gaming it was the origin of the term in question (unless you can provide information to the contrary which you can't).
NWN accessed through the AOL service . That game was quest centric even more the WoW was . There where several others available via other services that I did not play but where also quest centric , but most of them where text MUD's .
I never played UO but I'm fairly sure it didn't use quest hubs for leveling. I believe that was a skills based game so you actually were required to grind on mobs (or do whatever activity is related to the skill) to raise your skills so no that is not a quest-centric game. Some early (barely even graphical) NWN game on the 1991 AoL service hardly resembles anything even remotely close to what you are now calling quest grinding. It was mostly a text game but with some basic graphics. Nice try but fail.
I never said UO was quest centric , and you just acknowledged that there are other ways to grind with what you said in regards to UO , doing what advances your skill lines . EQ did have a level of questing in it but it was not on the same level of WoW .
NWN was on AOL before 1991 , it was on AOL in 1989 when I started playing it and it had been on AOL for a couple of years before I started playing it .
you asked for a game that was quest centric that predated WoW and i named one . when you dismiss facts that you do not agree with you diminish your own arguments reducing any valid points you wish to make.2 -
EQBallzz✭✭✭✭✭
✭DanielMaxwell wrote: »DanielMaxwell wrote: »
I'll give you one that predates EQ and UODanielMaxwell wrote: »DanielMaxwell wrote: »DanielMaxwell wrote: »onlinegamer1 wrote: »ZoS decision to give everyone 30 CPs, period, no matter what VR rank you have, no matter how much XP you've earned AFTER BEING TOLD BY ZOS IT WOULD COUNT TOWARDS CPs, no matter how many VRs you've leveled, is a bad decision and shows ZoS utter incompetence.
Imagine for a second that they kept their initial plan (that you have to get XP to earn your inital CP pool, and that there would be a cap on how many you can earn in advance), and set the CP cap at 30.
Would you still be mad today? After all, they did exactly what they promised, so the answer should be no, right?
Fast forward. They "broke their promise" by giving you exactly the same 30 CP you would get above, except that they told you everyone is getting them. And you are mad.
Literally the only difference between these scenarios is that the other players are getting 30 CP as well. And this makes you mad?
Nothing has changed as far as you are concerned, but oh my god, THEY are getting something for free! Burn them, burn them all!
/rollseyes.
It has nothing to do with other players but rather some representation of the XP earned from vet content. If 30 CP was somehow representative of the 20 million XP earned while doing vet content then fine but we all know that is completely untrue. It's not unfair because someone at V1 is getting 30 free CP..nobody cares about that. It's unfair because someone at V1 is getting 30 CP *AND* still has access to 20 million or more XP that is represented by the veteran content. That's it. Nothing else.
would it make you feel better if they choose to instead reset all level 50 and level 50 plus quests and give nobody any champion system points ?onlinegamer1 wrote: »onlinegamer1 wrote: »OrangeTheCat wrote: »onlinegamer1 wrote: »DanielMaxwell wrote: »Grinding includes doing quests.
False. Please don't post incorrect things.
It does include doing quests when you are killing mobs along the way that you might not otherwise do. It's all part of the results of the xp tracking.
Again, 100% false. Grinding is absolutely, completely, mutually exclusive to questing. Please stop posting false information.
It is not false, just subjective. Someone who hates questing, but does quest after quest after quest for hours on end anyway just because it is the fastest way to level and he wants to hit the max asap - this person would subjectively consider his activity to be a grind.
Again, 100% false and not up to interpretation.
Grinding is a term. A defined term. You can't just make up your own definition for it.
Grinding is killing mobs over and over and over in 1 spot or area.. That is all grinding is. If you ride off to a quest giver and then get another quest and then ride to a new location to complete a quest, that's not grinding.
Period.
Its not up for debate.
You are wrong. That is all.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/grindgrind
(grīnd)
v. ground (ground), grind·ing, grinds
4. Informal A laborious task, routine, or study: the daily grind.
17. laborious, usu. uninteresting work.
Grinding in relation to gaming is not a dictionary term it's a gaming term.
If there are multiple possible definitions of grinding then you can not claim people are wrong when they use the other definition than the one you meant. That was my point.
If i say that doing quests repeatedly is grinding for me, nobody is in a position to say i am wrong. Because one of the definitions of grinding equals it to 'repetitive, laborious, uninteresting work', and for some, that's exactly what repetitive questing is.
There are plenty of terms that relate to gaming and don't have the same or identical meaning outside of gaming. If you want to purposely use the term incorrectly for the benefit of proving your point that's your own misinformed decision but it doesn't change the term definition as it relates to gaming.
you can grind quests , mobs , dungeons , or skill lines .
every thing in the game is a grind , that does not mean that every thing in the game is unpleasant .
you grind quests by grabbing every quest in a quest hub doing them then turning them in before moving to the next hub.
you grind dungeons by forming a group and running dungeons back to back .
you grind mobs by finding a location with a high respawn rate of mobs that give a decent amount of XP based on being solo or in a group .
you grind skill lines by using them or focusing on the actions that progress them .
It would make me feel better if they did something fair and proportional and followed through on their promise to reward players who continued to play while waiting for CP system to be released. Some of us knew there was a potential issue with this and it was brought up if vet content should be saved and we were told to go ahead and burn through it because it was being tracked and would be converted to CP later.
You can make declarative statements all you want but that is not grinding. Grinding has nothing to do with pleasant or unpleasant or quests. It's grinding on mobs for XP (or in some cases faction). That's it. It's a term that was coined prior to WoW which is the first real game that leveled by way of questing. Some of the newer MMO players want to attach questing to the term because they don't like questing but that is incorrect. Grinding is grinding on mobs. Period. End of story. Not up for debate.
so then since most other MMO games would give you nothing when they remove one system and replace it with a new system , ZOS giving all VR1 and up accounts 30 points is not fair . be glad they are giving you that much.
as far as grinding goes you have it wrong , grinding is not just farming mobs as I stated how you can do other methods of grinding . grinding in a MMO does not mean just doing activities you do not enjoy , it is all about progressing your character as fast as you can by whatever means are legitimate in the game .
Grinding is a gaming term coined at a time before this "quest grinding" was even an option. How can it be included in that definition if it didn't exist when the phrase was coined? You can try to attach new meaning to the term all you want but that doesn't change the original meaning of the term. I realize you probably grew up with WoW and think that is the dawn of MMOs so your experience is the standard but that is not the case. You don't get to redefine a phrase to suit your personal needs. You can keep claiming that all you want and you will continue to be wrong.
Everquest was not the dawn of online gaming there where other online games out well before it and many of them included quest grinding along with mob , and dungeon grinding . yes most of them where not as successful as Everquest but that does not negate their exsistance or the impact they have on how games are played or the terms created to express how they are played.
get over the fact that your using a extremely narrow definition of the term only to support your point of view while saying any other definition is wrong , simply because the other definitions reduce your argument .
WoW was the first quest-centric MMO. If you are going to argue otherwise then name them. Grinding was also a term that was coined in EQ so while EQ may not have been the dawn of online gaming it was the origin of the term in question (unless you can provide information to the contrary which you can't).
NWN accessed through the AOL service . That game was quest centric even more the WoW was . There where several others available via other services that I did not play but where also quest centric , but most of them where text MUD's .
I never played UO but I'm fairly sure it didn't use quest hubs for leveling. I believe that was a skills based game so you actually were required to grind on mobs (or do whatever activity is related to the skill) to raise your skills so no that is not a quest-centric game. Some early (barely even graphical) NWN game on the 1991 AoL service hardly resembles anything even remotely close to what you are now calling quest grinding. It was mostly a text game but with some basic graphics. Nice try but fail.
I never said UO was quest centric , and you just acknowledged that there are other ways to grind with what you said in regards to UO , doing what advances your skill lines . EQ did have a level of questing in it but it was not on the same level of WoW .
NWN was on AOL before 1991 , it was on AOL in 1989 when I started playing it and it had been on AOL for a couple of years before I started playing it .
you asked for a game that was quest centric that predated WoW and i named one . when you dismiss facts that you do not agree with you diminish your own arguments reducing any valid points you wish to make.
I don't think you understand what "quest-centric" means. It means quests are central to the leveling in the game. That was the design. WoW designed the leveling experience around the quests not around killing things specifically. Yes, there were quests in EQ but they were not central to the leveling experience and there was no way you could use quests to level your character. They didn't even play a minor role in experience required for leveling.
An MMO that has quests is not the same as a game that revolves around questing. You don't seem to have a grasp of the subject matter which is probably why you believe questing is the same as grinding. I said name a quest-centric MMO that predates WoW and you named two games that were not quest-centric.3 -
xaraan✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭SuraklinPrime wrote: »I'm sure those players that don't play much or level slowly are loving this, but in the end, it's really not fair to some of us.
Anyone who grinded xp in the hope of gaining an initial advantage in the CP amount knew he is risking being over the cap already and not getting anything from his grind(since the actual cap was unknown).
I have four veteran characters and i am not bothered by this.
What about those of us that didn't grind? I have completed the quests on all my guys, I have no content to go back and do for points. My choices are PvP (which I don't like) or grinding for points (which isn't what I pay a sub for). I'd love to just do quests and earn points. I now have two non vet characters that I can do that with, that's it, until they add more content to the game. Or slowly walk my way up the ladder with daily pledges (a little slower than being able to spend a few hours questing).
They mentioned in the live that they aim for all activities in the game to award champion points at roughly the same rate. So whatever your favorite activity is, chances are you will be able to gain CP through it.
I like questing. But with only two non vets and one half way through vet ranks, the amount of quests I have available is MUCH less than someone whose first character just hit v1.
Unless they plan on giving us a million points every time we do an undaunted pledge or run the arena, my v14s aren't going to earn that many points.
They said that they want all activities to award roughly the same amount of champion points. I am fairly sure that includes the activities done by veteran rank 14 characters who already did the majority of quests.
They also said they were tracking xp past v14 so that when you earned xp you'd still get credit for it when the champion system rolled out.
But, let's be real, when they say that, they mean they want pve and pvp to award the same amount of points per hour played. But anyone that has leveled even one character should know that there is a big difference between points earned from killing a dungeon boss and from turning in quests (huge difference actually). Those that still have questing, especially main story questing, will have a huge advantage in the rate they gain points over a PvEr that has completed most of the content and just running a pledge a day.
Yes, assuming we are reading this right a VR1 who actively quests couls soon surpass a VR14 who has completed questing especially if they do not have access to good groups.
Seems like a rushed and ill considered u-turn.
No.
A VR 14 will gain the same amount of XP as a VR 1. You can do AVA as Maria said, or you kill mobs or do dungeons.
Your story might be over after you did the Cadwells, but there are equally good ways to get XP.
Why do you guys ignore all of that? She answered that question very well during ESO live.
One point can be acquired by playing 4 hours, what you do is totally up to you. Its not that quest xp is the only way to get XP.
This is not true.
I prefer questing for the most part, doing dungeons is fun, but that is mostly group content, and I'm not always on with a group.
I have no more quests to do on my 5 characters that are v14. I do not enjoy PvP that much (will do some, but that's not what I pay my sub for) and I do not like grinding. This means the one part of the game I enjoy, I cannot continue to do to earn points until more single player content is released. If I didn't have two more characters that haven't hit vet yet, I'd be completed scrwd.
Well,
you are one of a few there.
I don't say this to be rude, but most players do various things. I don't do dungeons much, but I craft and do the writs or level alts (I have a few), do some AVA or do the world bosses. ZO doesn't force anyone into one particular thing, but they do expect that we do a few things.
If your focus is only on the solo quests in story mode, then yes this is a pity and I understand your situation, even though I wonder how someone can get 5 Chars to VR 14 in such a short amount of time. I play since Beta, and started on the presale server opening and still don't have nearly that much amount of Char progression.
However,
what do you want them to do? Give you all the points now that someone could in theory achieve?
How would this be fair and justified?
Some players start out with 2000 points, while others with 30? This doesn't sound like a good idea. They had to find a middle way and a fixed amount of points seems very plausible.
Worthgar is also coming soon, so I would assume that once your last three chars are VR 14, Worthgar is already released.
As said, I understand your issue, but I also think that the amount of mass VR 14 accounts is very slim and not important enough to screw the majority of the gamers, especially if we know how many exploits allowed xp grinding in a few hours to VR 14 once.
I've explained in these threads countless times what I expect would be fair and it's not that someone in my position get hundred of points.
Even if they did something like give every 15 + 1 for each vet level up to V15 (since they said they tracked xp past v14) or give everyone 3 points per vet level since a v1 still has tons to do to earn more points quickly. Just a couple ideas that it took two seconds to think of that is a bit more even than what they are doing. I, in now way, expected to get points for all my vets, I knew I'd be at whatever cap, but I thought the cap would be a v15 cap (for reasons I pointed out above), not a v1 cap.
I don't think being fair to the minority of players that have played a lot screws over anyone else. Plus, if we are such a minority, then there aren't enough of us to throw things out of balance.-- @xaraan --
nightblade: Xaraan • templar: Xaraan-dar • dragon-knight: Xaraanosaurus • necromancer: Xaraan-qa • warden: Xaraanodon • sorcerer: Xaraan-ra
AD • NA • PC2 -
Unlikely_Ghostbuster✭✭✭✭I thought this thread might benefit from the exact transcript of what was said during ESO Live from 1:06 to about 1:09, word for word. The other thread managed to get civil after it posted.Unlikely_Ghostbuster wrote: »lordrichter wrote: »Unlikely_Ghostbuster wrote: »@manny254 raised the important point that ZOS would have "put out this fire" already, if our concerns were unfounded. So despite being able to fill the Grand Canyon with all the things that *weren't* explicitly said during the ESO Live broadcast, I'll remain justifiably concerned until I hear otherwise about this "flat 30" nonsense.
All we know is that we don't know *anything* definitively until ZOS responds. With that uncertainty comes all the bad feelings that typically follow. Those bad feelings won't go away until ZOS gives us a definitive answer to this question.
No one who has been around Zenimax for any significant length of time would expect them to put out this fire, especially not on the weekend.
There have been more serious fires than this that were allowed to burn a lot longer. Each time, I watched in amazement as they did nothing. Total silence.
In time, we will find out the answer to these issues, and they know it. I don't expect that responding to rumors generated in the forum, whether true or false, is a priority that they have. They know that if they say nothing, we will eventually get the answer anyway. They also know that the Great Cookie Panic will burn out of its own accord after a few days.
The Great Cookie Panic, which is the removal of earned Veteran XP, goes back to forum comments from just two people. None of this has any concrete basis at all in anything that was actually said in ESO Live. They never even got close to talking about the previously earned VR experience and how that works in the Champion System. No amount of "but they didn't say otherwise" changes that.
The "30 cookie cap" is something that they did not say attributed to something that they did say. They actually talked about 30 cookies. At no time did they say anything about a cap, or even say that 30 cookies was an absolute. It was specifically mentioned as a reward in the context of rewarding different styles of play.
I'm not sure calling them "cookies" gives the case people are trying to make adequate credibility -- it's as if you're trying to automatically assign the people on one side of this potential problem the role of petulant children by relabeling Champion Points as "cookies." Yes, I'm sure it's a lot of fun when you're the one using the term and you're not the one whose position is being undermined, but can we just call them Champion Points, please?
I'm one of many people who watched ESO Live specifically looking for numbers on XP --> CP conversions. After the discussion of the flat 30 points (between 1:06 and 1:09 in the YouTube rebroadcast with the twitch chat -- the portion in which Stiffler/Wrobel kept interrupting), Maria Aliprando says the following, word for word:
Maria: "It's about an hour of, uh, ya know experience gaining playtime, uh, to get a champion point while you're enlightened, it's Ok, we'll talk about enlightenment in a second. Umm. (Wrobel interrupts her) And because the points are so much more powerful than they originally were in the original system, uh, and, uh, we want to make sure that we're rewarding different styles of, uh, play, uh, what we're gonna do is as long as you have a veteran character, you will be rewarded with 30 champion points on the onset of the system.
Uh, so as soon as you log in (Wrobel interrupts "Nice" + "Nice"), day one, you get 30 points, you'll have 30 points, that gives three of the ten point unlocks, 'cause you have to go around the constellations and we'll talk about that in a second. Um, and there's several reasons we did that (Wrobel interrupts: "It's like you have a lot to tell us or something") I do, Eric! (Wrobel: "Tell me faster, talk really quickly!") You should tell us about every single ability that got changed. (Wrobel: "I need a bigger notepad.")
We'll talk about it in a second. I got an excel, (Gina interrupts: "Maria, you can just hold up your notes and let people read it all.") I got a, I got an excel sheet with me we can talk about. (Wrobel: "ooooh, that is lookin' good.") But, but uh, what it'll let you do is, um, it makes it so players aren't so, umm, radically, uh, separated from each other at the onset of the system. The other thing we want to make sure with the rebalancing of everything is we went and re-we rebalanced all the, uh, the monsters, and uh, trials was a huge thing, uh, and we wanna make sure (Wrobel talks over her: "Dungeons, over world, we did some stuff.") Everything. Ya, everything. And we-we...ya. And we wa... (Gina: "So...") And we wanna make sure that you're able to continue doing the content that you already know you can do. (Gina: "Right.") So on the onset of this system, we don't want you to, you know, I was able to beat the mage, and now I can't, you know, like, what's up with that? Uh, so we, we really wanted to avoid that."
Gina: "So when this comes out, umm, you said as long as you have a character that's at least veteran rank one (Maria: "Yup."), you get 30 points (Maria: "Yup"), is that then all of your other characters, too? (Maria: "Yes. So...") Excellent."
Maria: "So all of your -- well, it's account-wide, right? So all the characters on your account will have 30 points to spend. So your level 20 character will have 30 points to spend and your veteran five character will have 20 points to spend. (Gina: "So it's not a shared pool.") No, it's not a shared pool."
Jason: "No one likes a shared pool."
That's all the dialogue from ESO Live germane to the current discussion, verbatim. The next minute or so was just banter about the pug shirt.
Other than the accidental slip of the tongue about the VR5 character having 20 points (she intended to say 30, I'm certain), unless she was just shooting from the hip and/or not thinking about her word choice very carefully, she said a VR5 character will have 30 points to spend (just like your level 20 alt) from the onset of the Champion System. That's why everyone is upset -- were we getting our XP translated into Champion Points, the VR5 would arguably be getting more than 30 points from the onset.
Not to mention what she said, earlier on, about ensuring players aren't "radically separated" from each other at the onset of the system. It's hard to piece it all together, precisely, given the broken sentences, unspecified pronouns, and Eric Wrobel constantly interrupting, but the impression the above dialogue gave me was that we're only getting 30 points, regardless of the XP they claimed they were tracking.
Please, read it -- watch the video, double-check my transcription. The people who are concerned have reason to be. Given what was said Friday compared to what we were told in October (XP will be tracked and CP's awarded, accordingly), players have a right to be angry, and I honestly don't understand the one or two people blindly defending ZOS's unconfirmed "flat 30" position. If 30 points is indeed the "cap," how/why is it fair to reward 30 champion points to players who beat Molag Bol the day before 1.6 goes live, while simultaneously invalidating hundreds of hours of gameplay by max-level player accounts that was "as intended" (no grinding, no exploits, no funny business, at all -- just loyal play) since release?
Before anyone else engages in more speculative contortionism for the sake of giving ZOS the most charitable benefit of the doubt possible on this issue, remember, the transcription is right there. No need to mince any more words over this on ZOS's behalf -- we need to hear back from ZOS, directly. They need to say it in print that either this whole mess is just a misunderstanding or that the assurances given in October were (charitably) "rethought" by ZOS.
The extremely uncharitable interpretation is that ZOS never intended to track XP for Champion Points -- that was simply a deliberate LIE they told us in October to keep us placated, expecting, subscribed, and paying mothly while they developed the Champion and Justice Systems. I, for one, would have unsubscribed the day Dragon Age was released had ZOS not disingenuously teased that they would track XP for future Champion Points. THAT game keeps getting crazy-good reviews (while gaming sites hardly mention ESO anymore), but I haven't played Dragon Age yet (despite having played the first two) because I was trying to earn Champion Points with a Templar alternate.
The honest truth is that I'm considering unsubscribing now, playing Dragon Age until February, and then *maybe* I'll come back to ESO -- maybe. Real life always takes priority, so my time for epic gaming is very precious to me. I'm denying myself the chance to play a "game of the year" during these winter holidays because I'm sitting here, sifting forums, hoping ZOS will not arbitrarily invalidate hundreds and hundreds of hours of my legit, as-intended gameplay (I do not grind/exploit).2 -
xaraan✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭The new zones that are coming out in (i guess) a few months should also alleviate some of the concern that 'i have no more quests to do to gain champion points'.
Remember that earning champion points is a marathon, not a sprint. It's not something you can grind for a month or two and then be done. It will take the average player years to max them out. There should be plenty of content coming out in meantime to give players new ways of obtaining CP.
One new zone months away is waaaaaaaay different than having 10+ zones to quest through and earn points with now.-- @xaraan --
nightblade: Xaraan • templar: Xaraan-dar • dragon-knight: Xaraanosaurus • necromancer: Xaraan-qa • warden: Xaraanodon • sorcerer: Xaraan-ra
AD • NA • PC4 -
Enodoc✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
While that is true (49,900 XP is what you get per quest hub in Cyrodiil; 10 quests at 4990 each), what about the people who stay out of Cyrodiil at all costs, or go there just for the PvP, or simply do not do the dailies because they are rubbish? (And therefore doing them just for the XP would be a grind, not because they are actually enjoyable, and is against the spirit of my post.) These people had a lot to get XP from when they were VR1, as they had all the Cadwell quests, but at VR14, the time spent on crafting, roleplaying, gathering, wandering the world, etc gives no XP at all.@Sharee Remind me again how the ground is equal when a VR1 character can earn 78,000 XP in 3 hours, due to all the one-time Cadwell quests they can play through, and a VR14 character can only earn 40,879 XP in the same amount of time because they have already done those quests. That's half the amount of CPs in the same amount of time.(XP calculation)
You get ~40K XP as a vr14 just for completing all bruma dailies, and that can be done in about an hour. I know my VR5 DK gets about 4500 xp from each of the dailies, and there are about 10 of them. And then i can move on to chorrol.
[rest edited because it was nonsense]UESP: The Unofficial Elder Scrolls Pages - A collaborative source for all knowledge on the Elder Scrolls series since 1995
Join us on Discord - discord.gg/uesp1 -
DanielMaxwell✭✭✭DanielMaxwell wrote: »DanielMaxwell wrote: »
I'll give you one that predates EQ and UODanielMaxwell wrote: »DanielMaxwell wrote: »DanielMaxwell wrote: »onlinegamer1 wrote: »ZoS decision to give everyone 30 CPs, period, no matter what VR rank you have, no matter how much XP you've earned AFTER BEING TOLD BY ZOS IT WOULD COUNT TOWARDS CPs, no matter how many VRs you've leveled, is a bad decision and shows ZoS utter incompetence.
Imagine for a second that they kept their initial plan (that you have to get XP to earn your inital CP pool, and that there would be a cap on how many you can earn in advance), and set the CP cap at 30.
Would you still be mad today? After all, they did exactly what they promised, so the answer should be no, right?
Fast forward. They "broke their promise" by giving you exactly the same 30 CP you would get above, except that they told you everyone is getting them. And you are mad.
Literally the only difference between these scenarios is that the other players are getting 30 CP as well. And this makes you mad?
Nothing has changed as far as you are concerned, but oh my god, THEY are getting something for free! Burn them, burn them all!
/rollseyes.
It has nothing to do with other players but rather some representation of the XP earned from vet content. If 30 CP was somehow representative of the 20 million XP earned while doing vet content then fine but we all know that is completely untrue. It's not unfair because someone at V1 is getting 30 free CP..nobody cares about that. It's unfair because someone at V1 is getting 30 CP *AND* still has access to 20 million or more XP that is represented by the veteran content. That's it. Nothing else.
would it make you feel better if they choose to instead reset all level 50 and level 50 plus quests and give nobody any champion system points ?onlinegamer1 wrote: »onlinegamer1 wrote: »OrangeTheCat wrote: »onlinegamer1 wrote: »DanielMaxwell wrote: »Grinding includes doing quests.
False. Please don't post incorrect things.
It does include doing quests when you are killing mobs along the way that you might not otherwise do. It's all part of the results of the xp tracking.
Again, 100% false. Grinding is absolutely, completely, mutually exclusive to questing. Please stop posting false information.
It is not false, just subjective. Someone who hates questing, but does quest after quest after quest for hours on end anyway just because it is the fastest way to level and he wants to hit the max asap - this person would subjectively consider his activity to be a grind.
Again, 100% false and not up to interpretation.
Grinding is a term. A defined term. You can't just make up your own definition for it.
Grinding is killing mobs over and over and over in 1 spot or area.. That is all grinding is. If you ride off to a quest giver and then get another quest and then ride to a new location to complete a quest, that's not grinding.
Period.
Its not up for debate.
You are wrong. That is all.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/grindgrind
(grīnd)
v. ground (ground), grind·ing, grinds
4. Informal A laborious task, routine, or study: the daily grind.
17. laborious, usu. uninteresting work.
Grinding in relation to gaming is not a dictionary term it's a gaming term.
If there are multiple possible definitions of grinding then you can not claim people are wrong when they use the other definition than the one you meant. That was my point.
If i say that doing quests repeatedly is grinding for me, nobody is in a position to say i am wrong. Because one of the definitions of grinding equals it to 'repetitive, laborious, uninteresting work', and for some, that's exactly what repetitive questing is.
There are plenty of terms that relate to gaming and don't have the same or identical meaning outside of gaming. If you want to purposely use the term incorrectly for the benefit of proving your point that's your own misinformed decision but it doesn't change the term definition as it relates to gaming.
you can grind quests , mobs , dungeons , or skill lines .
every thing in the game is a grind , that does not mean that every thing in the game is unpleasant .
you grind quests by grabbing every quest in a quest hub doing them then turning them in before moving to the next hub.
you grind dungeons by forming a group and running dungeons back to back .
you grind mobs by finding a location with a high respawn rate of mobs that give a decent amount of XP based on being solo or in a group .
you grind skill lines by using them or focusing on the actions that progress them .
It would make me feel better if they did something fair and proportional and followed through on their promise to reward players who continued to play while waiting for CP system to be released. Some of us knew there was a potential issue with this and it was brought up if vet content should be saved and we were told to go ahead and burn through it because it was being tracked and would be converted to CP later.
You can make declarative statements all you want but that is not grinding. Grinding has nothing to do with pleasant or unpleasant or quests. It's grinding on mobs for XP (or in some cases faction). That's it. It's a term that was coined prior to WoW which is the first real game that leveled by way of questing. Some of the newer MMO players want to attach questing to the term because they don't like questing but that is incorrect. Grinding is grinding on mobs. Period. End of story. Not up for debate.
so then since most other MMO games would give you nothing when they remove one system and replace it with a new system , ZOS giving all VR1 and up accounts 30 points is not fair . be glad they are giving you that much.
as far as grinding goes you have it wrong , grinding is not just farming mobs as I stated how you can do other methods of grinding . grinding in a MMO does not mean just doing activities you do not enjoy , it is all about progressing your character as fast as you can by whatever means are legitimate in the game .
Grinding is a gaming term coined at a time before this "quest grinding" was even an option. How can it be included in that definition if it didn't exist when the phrase was coined? You can try to attach new meaning to the term all you want but that doesn't change the original meaning of the term. I realize you probably grew up with WoW and think that is the dawn of MMOs so your experience is the standard but that is not the case. You don't get to redefine a phrase to suit your personal needs. You can keep claiming that all you want and you will continue to be wrong.
Everquest was not the dawn of online gaming there where other online games out well before it and many of them included quest grinding along with mob , and dungeon grinding . yes most of them where not as successful as Everquest but that does not negate their exsistance or the impact they have on how games are played or the terms created to express how they are played.
get over the fact that your using a extremely narrow definition of the term only to support your point of view while saying any other definition is wrong , simply because the other definitions reduce your argument .
WoW was the first quest-centric MMO. If you are going to argue otherwise then name them. Grinding was also a term that was coined in EQ so while EQ may not have been the dawn of online gaming it was the origin of the term in question (unless you can provide information to the contrary which you can't).
NWN accessed through the AOL service . That game was quest centric even more the WoW was . There where several others available via other services that I did not play but where also quest centric , but most of them where text MUD's .
I never played UO but I'm fairly sure it didn't use quest hubs for leveling. I believe that was a skills based game so you actually were required to grind on mobs (or do whatever activity is related to the skill) to raise your skills so no that is not a quest-centric game. Some early (barely even graphical) NWN game on the 1991 AoL service hardly resembles anything even remotely close to what you are now calling quest grinding. It was mostly a text game but with some basic graphics. Nice try but fail.
I never said UO was quest centric , and you just acknowledged that there are other ways to grind with what you said in regards to UO , doing what advances your skill lines . EQ did have a level of questing in it but it was not on the same level of WoW .
NWN was on AOL before 1991 , it was on AOL in 1989 when I started playing it and it had been on AOL for a couple of years before I started playing it .
you asked for a game that was quest centric that predated WoW and i named one . when you dismiss facts that you do not agree with you diminish your own arguments reducing any valid points you wish to make.
I don't think you understand what "quest-centric" means. It means quests are central to the leveling in the game. That was the design. WoW designed the leveling experience around the quests not around killing things specifically. Yes, there were quests in EQ but they were not central to the leveling experience and there was no way you could use quests to level your character. They didn't even play a minor role in experience required for leveling.
An MMO that has quests is not the same as a game that revolves around questing. You don't seem to have a grasp of the subject matter which is probably why you believe questing is the same as grinding. I said name a quest-centric MMO that predates WoW and you named two games that were not quest-centric.
EQ did have quest hubs but you are right that questing was not the only way to level you did have options (mainly mob grinding) , but you could level by questing even if if was slow and boring (EQ had some of the dullest quests at the time) .
you apparently never leveled a character in NWN since you had to do every quest to level at a decent rate (you know that quest grinding I refferred to) making it a very quest centric game . This means that NWN meets what you asked for .
1 -
DanielMaxwell✭✭✭Unlikely_Ghostbuster wrote: »I thought this thread might benefit from the exact transcript of what was said during ESO Live from 1:06 to about 1:09, word for word. The other thread managed to get civil after it posted.Unlikely_Ghostbuster wrote: »lordrichter wrote: »Unlikely_Ghostbuster wrote: »@manny254 raised the important point that ZOS would have "put out this fire" already, if our concerns were unfounded. So despite being able to fill the Grand Canyon with all the things that *weren't* explicitly said during the ESO Live broadcast, I'll remain justifiably concerned until I hear otherwise about this "flat 30" nonsense.
All we know is that we don't know *anything* definitively until ZOS responds. With that uncertainty comes all the bad feelings that typically follow. Those bad feelings won't go away until ZOS gives us a definitive answer to this question.
No one who has been around Zenimax for any significant length of time would expect them to put out this fire, especially not on the weekend.
There have been more serious fires than this that were allowed to burn a lot longer. Each time, I watched in amazement as they did nothing. Total silence.
In time, we will find out the answer to these issues, and they know it. I don't expect that responding to rumors generated in the forum, whether true or false, is a priority that they have. They know that if they say nothing, we will eventually get the answer anyway. They also know that the Great Cookie Panic will burn out of its own accord after a few days.
The Great Cookie Panic, which is the removal of earned Veteran XP, goes back to forum comments from just two people. None of this has any concrete basis at all in anything that was actually said in ESO Live. They never even got close to talking about the previously earned VR experience and how that works in the Champion System. No amount of "but they didn't say otherwise" changes that.
The "30 cookie cap" is something that they did not say attributed to something that they did say. They actually talked about 30 cookies. At no time did they say anything about a cap, or even say that 30 cookies was an absolute. It was specifically mentioned as a reward in the context of rewarding different styles of play.
I'm not sure calling them "cookies" gives the case people are trying to make adequate credibility -- it's as if you're trying to automatically assign the people on one side of this potential problem the role of petulant children by relabeling Champion Points as "cookies." Yes, I'm sure it's a lot of fun when you're the one using the term and you're not the one whose position is being undermined, but can we just call them Champion Points, please?
I'm one of many people who watched ESO Live specifically looking for numbers on XP --> CP conversions. After the discussion of the flat 30 points (between 1:06 and 1:09 in the YouTube rebroadcast with the twitch chat -- the portion in which Stiffler/Wrobel kept interrupting), Maria Aliprando says the following, word for word:
Maria: "It's about an hour of, uh, ya know experience gaining playtime, uh, to get a champion point while you're enlightened, it's Ok, we'll talk about enlightenment in a second. Umm. (Wrobel interrupts her) And because the points are so much more powerful than they originally were in the original system, uh, and, uh, we want to make sure that we're rewarding different styles of, uh, play, uh, what we're gonna do is as long as you have a veteran character, you will be rewarded with 30 champion points on the onset of the system.
Uh, so as soon as you log in (Wrobel interrupts "Nice" + "Nice"), day one, you get 30 points, you'll have 30 points, that gives three of the ten point unlocks, 'cause you have to go around the constellations and we'll talk about that in a second. Um, and there's several reasons we did that (Wrobel interrupts: "It's like you have a lot to tell us or something") I do, Eric! (Wrobel: "Tell me faster, talk really quickly!") You should tell us about every single ability that got changed. (Wrobel: "I need a bigger notepad.")
We'll talk about it in a second. I got an excel, (Gina interrupts: "Maria, you can just hold up your notes and let people read it all.") I got a, I got an excel sheet with me we can talk about. (Wrobel: "ooooh, that is lookin' good.") But, but uh, what it'll let you do is, um, it makes it so players aren't so, umm, radically, uh, separated from each other at the onset of the system. The other thing we want to make sure with the rebalancing of everything is we went and re-we rebalanced all the, uh, the monsters, and uh, trials was a huge thing, uh, and we wanna make sure (Wrobel talks over her: "Dungeons, over world, we did some stuff.") Everything. Ya, everything. And we-we...ya. And we wa... (Gina: "So...") And we wanna make sure that you're able to continue doing the content that you already know you can do. (Gina: "Right.") So on the onset of this system, we don't want you to, you know, I was able to beat the mage, and now I can't, you know, like, what's up with that? Uh, so we, we really wanted to avoid that."
Gina: "So when this comes out, umm, you said as long as you have a character that's at least veteran rank one (Maria: "Yup."), you get 30 points (Maria: "Yup"), is that then all of your other characters, too? (Maria: "Yes. So...") Excellent."
Maria: "So all of your -- well, it's account-wide, right? So all the characters on your account will have 30 points to spend. So your level 20 character will have 30 points to spend and your veteran five character will have 20 points to spend. (Gina: "So it's not a shared pool.") No, it's not a shared pool."
Jason: "No one likes a shared pool."
That's all the dialogue from ESO Live germane to the current discussion, verbatim. The next minute or so was just banter about the pug shirt.
Other than the accidental slip of the tongue about the VR5 character having 20 points (she intended to say 30, I'm certain), unless she was just shooting from the hip and/or not thinking about her word choice very carefully, she said a VR5 character will have 30 points to spend (just like your level 20 alt) from the onset of the Champion System. That's why everyone is upset -- were we getting our XP translated into Champion Points, the VR5 would arguably be getting more than 30 points from the onset.
Not to mention what she said, earlier on, about ensuring players aren't "radically separated" from each other at the onset of the system. It's hard to piece it all together, precisely, given the broken sentences, unspecified pronouns, and Eric Wrobel constantly interrupting, but the impression the above dialogue gave me was that we're only getting 30 points, regardless of the XP they claimed they were tracking.
Please, read it -- watch the video, double-check my transcription. The people who are concerned have reason to be. Given what was said Friday compared to what we were told in October (XP will be tracked and CP's awarded, accordingly), players have a right to be angry, and I honestly don't understand the one or two people blindly defending ZOS's unconfirmed "flat 30" position. If 30 points is indeed the "cap," how/why is it fair to reward 30 champion points to players who beat Molag Bol the day before 1.6 goes live, while simultaneously invalidating hundreds of hours of gameplay by max-level player accounts that was "as intended" (no grinding, no exploits, no funny business, at all -- just loyal play) since release?
Before anyone else engages in more speculative contortionism for the sake of giving ZOS the most charitable benefit of the doubt possible on this issue, remember, the transcription is right there. No need to mince any more words over this on ZOS's behalf -- we need to hear back from ZOS, directly. They need to say it in print that either this whole mess is just a misunderstanding or that the assurances given in October were (charitably) "rethought" by ZOS.
The extremely uncharitable interpretation is that ZOS never intended to track XP for Champion Points -- that was simply a deliberate LIE they told us in October to keep us placated, expecting, subscribed, and paying mothly while they developed the Champion and Justice Systems. I, for one, would have unsubscribed the day Dragon Age was released had ZOS not disingenuously teased that they would track XP for future Champion Points. THAT game keeps getting crazy-good reviews (while gaming sites hardly mention ESO anymore), but I haven't played Dragon Age yet (despite having played the first two) because I was trying to earn Champion Points with a Templar alternate.
The honest truth is that I'm considering unsubscribing now, playing Dragon Age until February, and then *maybe* I'll come back to ESO -- maybe. Real life always takes priority, so my time for epic gaming is very precious to me. I'm denying myself the chance to play a "game of the year" during these winter holidays because I'm sitting here, sifting forums, hoping ZOS will not arbitrarily invalidate hundreds and hundreds of hours of my legit, as-intended gameplay (I do not grind/exploit).
your transcript looks to be pretty accurate from what remember watching the live stream i wish you had included the beginning of her segment , but trying to pick out what she tried to say in that segment is a labor I would not ask of any body on either side of this debate. Stiffler/Wrobel need to learn how to shut up and let somebody present the information they are there to present , with out interruption or being talked over. if Maria Aliprando would write up what she was trying to present during the live stream and post it here in the forums it might clear things up for everyone .3 -
Sharee✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭The new zones that are coming out in (i guess) a few months should also alleviate some of the concern that 'i have no more quests to do to gain champion points'.
Remember that earning champion points is a marathon, not a sprint. It's not something you can grind for a month or two and then be done. It will take the average player years to max them out. There should be plenty of content coming out in meantime to give players new ways of obtaining CP.
One new zone months away is waaaaaaaay different than having 10+ zones to quest through and earn points with now.
The average player will be collecting champion points for years. 3600 points take 3600 hours to get even if we assume 100% enlightement. At 2 hours per day, that's 1800 days. Almost 5 years. What quests are available NOW is almost irrelevant in this timeframe.2 -
xaraan✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭The new zones that are coming out in (i guess) a few months should also alleviate some of the concern that 'i have no more quests to do to gain champion points'.
Remember that earning champion points is a marathon, not a sprint. It's not something you can grind for a month or two and then be done. It will take the average player years to max them out. There should be plenty of content coming out in meantime to give players new ways of obtaining CP.
One new zone months away is waaaaaaaay different than having 10+ zones to quest through and earn points with now.
The average player will be collecting champion points for years. 3600 points take 3600 hours to get even if we assume 100% enlightement. At 2 hours per day, that's 1800 days. Almost 5 years. What quests are available NOW is almost irrelevant in this timeframe.
It's certainly not irrelevant when there seem to be a great many people concerned about the issue. In fact, that's a ridiculous statement. If a v1 has the ability to pass up my v14 within a couple of months by doing content I don't have available, then it's an issue, whether or not I can earn those points eventually "years" down the road or not lol.
-- @xaraan --
nightblade: Xaraan • templar: Xaraan-dar • dragon-knight: Xaraanosaurus • necromancer: Xaraan-qa • warden: Xaraanodon • sorcerer: Xaraan-ra
AD • NA • PC2 -
Sharee✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
While that is true (49,900 XP is what you get per quest hub in Cyrodiil; 10 quests at 4990 each), what about the people who stay out of Cyrodiil at all costs, or go there just for the PvP, or simply do not do the dailies because they are rubbish?@Sharee Remind me again how the ground is equal when a VR1 character can earn 78,000 XP in 3 hours, due to all the one-time Cadwell quests they can play through, and a VR14 character can only earn 40,879 XP in the same amount of time because they have already done those quests. That's half the amount of CPs in the same amount of time.(XP calculation)
You get ~40K XP as a vr14 just for completing all bruma dailies, and that can be done in about an hour. I know my VR5 DK gets about 4500 xp from each of the dailies, and there are about 10 of them. And then i can move on to chorrol.
[rest edited because it was nonsense]
What about people who don't like normal quests? Should we adjust the game to cater to them too? What about people who can't stand leaving glenumbra for roleplaying reasons? We need to put high XP quest in glenumbra! What about the kitchen sink?
...
Look. There are activities available to players that allow them to get the XP they need. If they choose to not take advantage of that - their fault.
1 -
xaraan✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
While that is true (49,900 XP is what you get per quest hub in Cyrodiil; 10 quests at 4990 each), what about the people who stay out of Cyrodiil at all costs, or go there just for the PvP, or simply do not do the dailies because they are rubbish?@Sharee Remind me again how the ground is equal when a VR1 character can earn 78,000 XP in 3 hours, due to all the one-time Cadwell quests they can play through, and a VR14 character can only earn 40,879 XP in the same amount of time because they have already done those quests. That's half the amount of CPs in the same amount of time.(XP calculation)
You get ~40K XP as a vr14 just for completing all bruma dailies, and that can be done in about an hour. I know my VR5 DK gets about 4500 xp from each of the dailies, and there are about 10 of them. And then i can move on to chorrol.
[rest edited because it was nonsense]
What about people who don't like normal quests? Should we adjust the game to cater to them too? What about people who can't stand leaving glenumbra for roleplaying reasons? We need to put high XP quest in glenumbra! What about the kitchen sink?
...
Look. There are activities available to players that allow them to get the XP they need. If they choose to not take advantage of that - their fault.
Again, you exaggerate or build straw men to make your arguments. Expecting to be able to quest in a game about questing isn't as restrictive as just making up random things like "I don't wanna leave Glenumbra."
If a player loves to grind - they still can to earn points.
If a player loves to pvp - they still can to earn points.
If a player loves to quest - they might be out of luck.
Edit: also, in your example they are making a choice, in mine, my choice isn't there. There may very well not be enough quests/dailies/etc. for me to earn points at the same rate as someone who has all those quests ahead of them. You're telling me to find another way to make xp in a game that's played for fun... so, find ways that I don't have fun to play the game? That will keep customers rolling in and paying subs!Edited by xaraan on December 22, 2014 12:54AM-- @xaraan --
nightblade: Xaraan • templar: Xaraan-dar • dragon-knight: Xaraanosaurus • necromancer: Xaraan-qa • warden: Xaraanodon • sorcerer: Xaraan-ra
AD • NA • PC3 -
Sharee✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
While that is true (49,900 XP is what you get per quest hub in Cyrodiil; 10 quests at 4990 each), what about the people who stay out of Cyrodiil at all costs, or go there just for the PvP, or simply do not do the dailies because they are rubbish?@Sharee Remind me again how the ground is equal when a VR1 character can earn 78,000 XP in 3 hours, due to all the one-time Cadwell quests they can play through, and a VR14 character can only earn 40,879 XP in the same amount of time because they have already done those quests. That's half the amount of CPs in the same amount of time.(XP calculation)
You get ~40K XP as a vr14 just for completing all bruma dailies, and that can be done in about an hour. I know my VR5 DK gets about 4500 xp from each of the dailies, and there are about 10 of them. And then i can move on to chorrol.
[rest edited because it was nonsense]
What about people who don't like normal quests? Should we adjust the game to cater to them too? What about people who can't stand leaving glenumbra for roleplaying reasons? We need to put high XP quest in glenumbra! What about the kitchen sink?
...
Look. There are activities available to players that allow them to get the XP they need. If they choose to not take advantage of that - their fault.
Again, you exaggerate or build straw men to make your arguments. Expecting to be able to quest in a game about questing isn't as restrictive as just making up random things like "I don't wanna leave Glenumbra."
If a player loves to grind - they still can to earn points.
If a player loves to pvp - they still can to earn points.
If a player loves to quest - they might be out of luck.
... right up to the point when new quests are introduced into the game. Which, i guess, will be in the very next update after champion point goes live.
And besides, how many players in the TESO playerbase do you think have completed every single pve quest available?
If it is more than 0.5% i'll eat my hat.
1 -
EQBallzz✭✭✭✭✭
✭DanielMaxwell wrote: »DanielMaxwell wrote: »DanielMaxwell wrote: »
I'll give you one that predates EQ and UODanielMaxwell wrote: »DanielMaxwell wrote: »DanielMaxwell wrote: »onlinegamer1 wrote: »ZoS decision to give everyone 30 CPs, period, no matter what VR rank you have, no matter how much XP you've earned AFTER BEING TOLD BY ZOS IT WOULD COUNT TOWARDS CPs, no matter how many VRs you've leveled, is a bad decision and shows ZoS utter incompetence.
Imagine for a second that they kept their initial plan (that you have to get XP to earn your inital CP pool, and that there would be a cap on how many you can earn in advance), and set the CP cap at 30.
Would you still be mad today? After all, they did exactly what they promised, so the answer should be no, right?
Fast forward. They "broke their promise" by giving you exactly the same 30 CP you would get above, except that they told you everyone is getting them. And you are mad.
Literally the only difference between these scenarios is that the other players are getting 30 CP as well. And this makes you mad?
Nothing has changed as far as you are concerned, but oh my god, THEY are getting something for free! Burn them, burn them all!
/rollseyes.
It has nothing to do with other players but rather some representation of the XP earned from vet content. If 30 CP was somehow representative of the 20 million XP earned while doing vet content then fine but we all know that is completely untrue. It's not unfair because someone at V1 is getting 30 free CP..nobody cares about that. It's unfair because someone at V1 is getting 30 CP *AND* still has access to 20 million or more XP that is represented by the veteran content. That's it. Nothing else.
would it make you feel better if they choose to instead reset all level 50 and level 50 plus quests and give nobody any champion system points ?onlinegamer1 wrote: »onlinegamer1 wrote: »OrangeTheCat wrote: »onlinegamer1 wrote: »DanielMaxwell wrote: »Grinding includes doing quests.
False. Please don't post incorrect things.
It does include doing quests when you are killing mobs along the way that you might not otherwise do. It's all part of the results of the xp tracking.
Again, 100% false. Grinding is absolutely, completely, mutually exclusive to questing. Please stop posting false information.
It is not false, just subjective. Someone who hates questing, but does quest after quest after quest for hours on end anyway just because it is the fastest way to level and he wants to hit the max asap - this person would subjectively consider his activity to be a grind.
Again, 100% false and not up to interpretation.
Grinding is a term. A defined term. You can't just make up your own definition for it.
Grinding is killing mobs over and over and over in 1 spot or area.. That is all grinding is. If you ride off to a quest giver and then get another quest and then ride to a new location to complete a quest, that's not grinding.
Period.
Its not up for debate.
You are wrong. That is all.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/grindgrind
(grīnd)
v. ground (ground), grind·ing, grinds
4. Informal A laborious task, routine, or study: the daily grind.
17. laborious, usu. uninteresting work.
Grinding in relation to gaming is not a dictionary term it's a gaming term.
If there are multiple possible definitions of grinding then you can not claim people are wrong when they use the other definition than the one you meant. That was my point.
If i say that doing quests repeatedly is grinding for me, nobody is in a position to say i am wrong. Because one of the definitions of grinding equals it to 'repetitive, laborious, uninteresting work', and for some, that's exactly what repetitive questing is.
There are plenty of terms that relate to gaming and don't have the same or identical meaning outside of gaming. If you want to purposely use the term incorrectly for the benefit of proving your point that's your own misinformed decision but it doesn't change the term definition as it relates to gaming.
you can grind quests , mobs , dungeons , or skill lines .
every thing in the game is a grind , that does not mean that every thing in the game is unpleasant .
you grind quests by grabbing every quest in a quest hub doing them then turning them in before moving to the next hub.
you grind dungeons by forming a group and running dungeons back to back .
you grind mobs by finding a location with a high respawn rate of mobs that give a decent amount of XP based on being solo or in a group .
you grind skill lines by using them or focusing on the actions that progress them .
It would make me feel better if they did something fair and proportional and followed through on their promise to reward players who continued to play while waiting for CP system to be released. Some of us knew there was a potential issue with this and it was brought up if vet content should be saved and we were told to go ahead and burn through it because it was being tracked and would be converted to CP later.
You can make declarative statements all you want but that is not grinding. Grinding has nothing to do with pleasant or unpleasant or quests. It's grinding on mobs for XP (or in some cases faction). That's it. It's a term that was coined prior to WoW which is the first real game that leveled by way of questing. Some of the newer MMO players want to attach questing to the term because they don't like questing but that is incorrect. Grinding is grinding on mobs. Period. End of story. Not up for debate.
so then since most other MMO games would give you nothing when they remove one system and replace it with a new system , ZOS giving all VR1 and up accounts 30 points is not fair . be glad they are giving you that much.
as far as grinding goes you have it wrong , grinding is not just farming mobs as I stated how you can do other methods of grinding . grinding in a MMO does not mean just doing activities you do not enjoy , it is all about progressing your character as fast as you can by whatever means are legitimate in the game .
Grinding is a gaming term coined at a time before this "quest grinding" was even an option. How can it be included in that definition if it didn't exist when the phrase was coined? You can try to attach new meaning to the term all you want but that doesn't change the original meaning of the term. I realize you probably grew up with WoW and think that is the dawn of MMOs so your experience is the standard but that is not the case. You don't get to redefine a phrase to suit your personal needs. You can keep claiming that all you want and you will continue to be wrong.
Everquest was not the dawn of online gaming there where other online games out well before it and many of them included quest grinding along with mob , and dungeon grinding . yes most of them where not as successful as Everquest but that does not negate their exsistance or the impact they have on how games are played or the terms created to express how they are played.
get over the fact that your using a extremely narrow definition of the term only to support your point of view while saying any other definition is wrong , simply because the other definitions reduce your argument .
WoW was the first quest-centric MMO. If you are going to argue otherwise then name them. Grinding was also a term that was coined in EQ so while EQ may not have been the dawn of online gaming it was the origin of the term in question (unless you can provide information to the contrary which you can't).
NWN accessed through the AOL service . That game was quest centric even more the WoW was . There where several others available via other services that I did not play but where also quest centric , but most of them where text MUD's .
I never played UO but I'm fairly sure it didn't use quest hubs for leveling. I believe that was a skills based game so you actually were required to grind on mobs (or do whatever activity is related to the skill) to raise your skills so no that is not a quest-centric game. Some early (barely even graphical) NWN game on the 1991 AoL service hardly resembles anything even remotely close to what you are now calling quest grinding. It was mostly a text game but with some basic graphics. Nice try but fail.
I never said UO was quest centric , and you just acknowledged that there are other ways to grind with what you said in regards to UO , doing what advances your skill lines . EQ did have a level of questing in it but it was not on the same level of WoW .
NWN was on AOL before 1991 , it was on AOL in 1989 when I started playing it and it had been on AOL for a couple of years before I started playing it .
you asked for a game that was quest centric that predated WoW and i named one . when you dismiss facts that you do not agree with you diminish your own arguments reducing any valid points you wish to make.
I don't think you understand what "quest-centric" means. It means quests are central to the leveling in the game. That was the design. WoW designed the leveling experience around the quests not around killing things specifically. Yes, there were quests in EQ but they were not central to the leveling experience and there was no way you could use quests to level your character. They didn't even play a minor role in experience required for leveling.
An MMO that has quests is not the same as a game that revolves around questing. You don't seem to have a grasp of the subject matter which is probably why you believe questing is the same as grinding. I said name a quest-centric MMO that predates WoW and you named two games that were not quest-centric.
EQ did have quest hubs but you are right that questing was not the only way to level you did have options (mainly mob grinding) , but you could level by questing even if if was slow and boring (EQ had some of the dullest quests at the time) .
you apparently never leveled a character in NWN since you had to do every quest to level at a decent rate (you know that quest grinding I refferred to) making it a very quest centric game . This means that NWN meets what you asked for .
No. EQ did not have quest hubs. The quests in EQ were largely found by probing NPCs for text that would generate more text and might give you clues as to some quest. It was not an alternate form of leveling. You could not level your character with quests. Not even remotely close. Sorry but you are wrong. The questing in EQ is absolutely nothing like it is in WoW or most other MMOs now.
The AoL NWN game is essentially a text based game so how would you grind mobs exactly? Sorry but those are not valid games that meet the criteria. Fail.2 -
This is stupid. You guys realize VR isn't leaving yet, right? No one is losing anything there yet. When those are gone, higher level vets deserve some compensation. But it's not be case now. It would be like them introducing a new weapon and people demanding a head start on the weapon because they've been playing longer. Who cares? Every advantage you currently have now you will still have in 1.6 (minus skill "nerfs", which isn't the topic here).2
-
xaraan✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
While that is true (49,900 XP is what you get per quest hub in Cyrodiil; 10 quests at 4990 each), what about the people who stay out of Cyrodiil at all costs, or go there just for the PvP, or simply do not do the dailies because they are rubbish?@Sharee Remind me again how the ground is equal when a VR1 character can earn 78,000 XP in 3 hours, due to all the one-time Cadwell quests they can play through, and a VR14 character can only earn 40,879 XP in the same amount of time because they have already done those quests. That's half the amount of CPs in the same amount of time.(XP calculation)
You get ~40K XP as a vr14 just for completing all bruma dailies, and that can be done in about an hour. I know my VR5 DK gets about 4500 xp from each of the dailies, and there are about 10 of them. And then i can move on to chorrol.
[rest edited because it was nonsense]
What about people who don't like normal quests? Should we adjust the game to cater to them too? What about people who can't stand leaving glenumbra for roleplaying reasons? We need to put high XP quest in glenumbra! What about the kitchen sink?
...
Look. There are activities available to players that allow them to get the XP they need. If they choose to not take advantage of that - their fault.
Again, you exaggerate or build straw men to make your arguments. Expecting to be able to quest in a game about questing isn't as restrictive as just making up random things like "I don't wanna leave Glenumbra."
If a player loves to grind - they still can to earn points.
If a player loves to pvp - they still can to earn points.
If a player loves to quest - they might be out of luck.
... right up to the point when new quests are introduced into the game. Which, i guess, will be in the very next update after champion point goes live.
And besides, how many players in the TESO playerbase do you think have completed every single pve quest available?
If it is more than 0.5% i'll eat my hat.
Well, no matter how many zones get added a month and a half to two months after 1.6, I'd be money it won't be equivalent to 10+ zones of existing content that a v1 has ahead of them
Also, it only takes about a week to get through silver and another through gold if a player goes at it - so that's a lot of points earned in less than half the time before the update after 1.6 would land. Points that I have no ability to earn that fast, meaning now, that "even start" has be behind.
They also have another 7 character slots to make up and advance if they wish (I have two left, hoping those guys will be enough for me to earn points with, but the math isn't looking good).
Also - if you haven't done 100% of quests - it doesn't matter. The "main questline" is the line that awards decent XP. Go back and find some missed sidequests and you'll see how worthless they are. I did one the other day - had to round up 6 of those giant grasshopper looking things, got 499 xp for the quest I spent like 10 minutes doing. Turned around, killed two more of them and got 415 xp each - so it was actually a waste of time and xp to do that quest instead of just kill them all. Same for most side quests - open a chest and get more than double the xp of doing a side quest. So the issue isn't really going to be helped by finding out someone still has a few side quests left to do -- if they've done most of the big quest and main quests for silver/gold, they are done earning significant xp by questing.-- @xaraan --
nightblade: Xaraan • templar: Xaraan-dar • dragon-knight: Xaraanosaurus • necromancer: Xaraan-qa • warden: Xaraanodon • sorcerer: Xaraan-ra
AD • NA • PC2 -
manny254✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭
He doesn't want to be at max level when the system is released. That would be insane. What heis trying to explain to you is that a new player has a greater pool of things to earn champion points from. It is one thing to start everyone at the same point, but that is not the case here. Players who have ever completed a quest in any veteran zone are at a disadvantage. This is the opposite of how a sane person would want this to start.Edited by manny254 on December 22, 2014 1:16AM- Mojican4 -
xaraan✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
1. That's given an assumed play rate... I might play a bit more than whatever time limit they are figuring. It's also not a one time deal, it's an 8 time deal and I only have 2 more character slots that haven't done the quests (and another half for my v5 that hasn't done it all yet).
2. It's a diminishing returns system, so a player that's able to earn 14 million xp going from v1 to v14 will see much more out of that than someone slowly pulling ahead of another a couple years down the road when hundreds of points are already used.
3. If it's ok to let that v1 have more options available to pass me up, then why isn't it ok for me to start 10 or 20 points ahead of them at the start? Especially as they, as I've pointed out, will have more ways to catch up to me than I'll have to stay ahead.-- @xaraan --
nightblade: Xaraan • templar: Xaraan-dar • dragon-knight: Xaraanosaurus • necromancer: Xaraan-qa • warden: Xaraanodon • sorcerer: Xaraan-ra
AD • NA • PC4 -
helediron✭✭✭✭✭
✭Let me check one thing. Because veteran ranks still stay, we have significantly higher resource pools and more attribute points, compared to VR1. If this difference stays, is there actually anything to reward on top of the 30 points yet for VR14 characters?
So, the 30 point are initial toy points to start playing with CS, i think. I know this is speculation, because of lacking information. I am just assuming this now.
It would be really nice to see a good documentation of the new system, or Maria having a new live presentation alone.On hiatus. PC,EU,AD - crafting completionist - @helediron 900+ cp, @helestor 1000+ cp, @helestar 800+ cp, @helester 700+ cp - Dragonborn Z Suomikilta, Harrods, Master Crafter. - Blog - Crafthouse: all stations, all munduses, all dummies, open to everyone3
