@ZOS - Please make crafting research account wide

newtinmpls

Iago wrote: »

No no no........ Keep it the way it is, after all if I go to college to become a doctor my brothers and sisters do not automatically gain all of said knowledge.

Thank you thank you thank you!!!

That is the perfect analogy.

I game pretty much "with" my husband/best friend. He has a head start because 1-he's been playing about 3 months longer than I am, 2-he has a schedule that allows him to play more and 3-he's just plain more organized.

He's also a total sweetheart, so when my Battlemage got to 25th level, he asked what kind of armor I would like (I'll spare you the details of which sets and what traits).

I note that on at least two of my guilds, there are many players with notes saying they are master crafters and will craft whatever for pay and/or materials. So if you don't want to craft at all - there are options.

As for loading screen issues and chat windows - that's what intermet upgrades, game mail and friends lists are for.

NewBlacksmurf

^ It's one person playing as alternate characters. It's not a brother/sister or friend/neighbor. Only one character exists in the world of Tamriel at a time.

The user has learned the trait.

The argument of mounts in your example would mean that the horse purchased is being rode by the whole family...but that's not how it works.

Just as mounts were changed from a per character limit...and then changed to account wide use it puzzled me why the success of any given research wouldn't also follow this type of logic with 1.6 changes.

Perfectly stated by a few earlier, the mount changes is a quality of life benefit. Why not research as well?

newtinmpls

If you can't "get" the difference between the ... macro identity of the player an the micro identity of the character, then I start to understand why this conversation is frustrating to you.

In terms of the game reality - the 'you' who 'rolls up' all these characters is .... um.... like when you put your fingertips into the water. Your hand is a whole hand, but the fingers are only individual fingers.

And the glass of water only holds one finger at a time.

The user has not learned the trait. One character .... one finger has learned the trait.

NewBlacksmurf

newtinmpls wrote: »

If you can't "get" the difference between the ... macro identity of the player an the micro identity of the character, then I start to understand why this conversation is frustrating to you.

In terms of the game reality - the 'you' who 'rolls up' all these characters is .... um.... like when you put your fingertips into the water. Your hand is a whole hand, but the fingers are only individual fingers.

And the glass of water only holds one finger at a time.

The user has not learned the trait. One character .... one finger has learned the trait.

Great explanation and I consider myself very capable of grasping your example above.
What I see, using your example is that 1.6 changes mounts to the whole hand concept. It changes the "finger" point to what will be called riding skill.

CP changes the VR experience gained from a "finger" accomplishment to a CP for the whole hand while keep the VR level as a "finger" accomplishment.

Gold, mats and prior to 1.6 changes follow what you describe as a "finger" effort by a character but a "hand" benefit to the account if a bank is used.

Understanding that mats contribute to the "hand" for crafting and god contributes to the "hand" for buying mounts on any character. Also, most people who play this game may find item with X trait and place it in the bank for character #2, 3 or 4 to research it.

Research today, if used by a common sense approach is a "finger" effort but by using the bank, it becomes a "hand" success. If people are already doing this, which is the case with mounts...why not include this adjustment too.

My conclusion was to point out and ask ZOS this....

using your explanation...If ZOS has decided to take "finger" success and progression and apply it to the "hand" on the items above, considering that research today is a "finger" effort why was this particular progression omitted and/or overlooked? People are using the bank to incorporate "finger" efforts to have an "hand" result already.

People have express points of why it could be good or bad but honestly I'm only pointing out that its no different than the mount skin, gold or mats and re-searchable items found in the world that end up being shared anyways.

People have gone lengths to come up with excel spread sheets to track mount skills and research/crafting on a per character level. Even there are some add-ons that attempt to assist in this tracking.

SO using your example of finger to hand as an explanation....if you are ZOS, why omit the research?

Is it not the same based on the current behavior of how this is being handled?
-A crater who has 3 alts where one is a Heavy armor, one is light/medium and the other wood they are already managing this research progress via the bank and mules. They are putting in the work just as all of us to locate and buy or find these traits.

Just like those who work hard to com up with $42k gold for 3 character x's 3 so that they would have three different mounts with three different utility purposes.

Its all the same...I think many are against the benefits of such a change. But many are against the benefits of the mount changes too considering they spent and loose hundreds of thousands of gold in the progress. yes there are many wasted queues and items but in the end, this becomes a benefit to those who put in the work.

newtinmpls

Okay NewBlacksmurf made some good points:

1-who initially posted a lovely detailed explanation that made it seem that at least for purposes of using the hand/finger analogy we both seemed to understand it.

2-then posted some discussion about how some skills in 1.6 will be 'per finger' and others 'per hand' - and I was still following along.

and then.....

NewBlacksmurf wrote: »

Is it not the same based on the current behavior of how this is being handled?
-A crater who has 3 alts where one is a Heavy armor, one is light/medium and the other wood they are already managing this research progress via the bank and mules. They are putting in the work just as all of us to locate and buy or find these traits.

And then I banged my figurative head against the figurative wall.

Yes, I can suspect (though not having explored the champion system or new horse rules) that some skills might be 'hand' based. The bank is an example of a 'hand' trait (it's difficult if not impossible to 'separate' each characters' "share" of the bank).

Different characters doing different craftings? No. All just fingers.

NewBlacksmurf

newtinmpls wrote: »

Okay NewBlacksmurf made some good points:

1-who initially posted a lovely detailed explanation that made it seem that at least for purposes of using the hand/finger analogy we both seemed to understand it.

2-then posted some discussion about how some skills in 1.6 will be 'per finger' and others 'per hand' - and I was still following along.

and then.....

NewBlacksmurf wrote: »

Is it not the same based on the current behavior of how this is being handled?
-A crater who has 3 alts where one is a Heavy armor, one is light/medium and the other wood they are already managing this research progress via the bank and mules. They are putting in the work just as all of us to locate and buy or find these traits.

And then I banged my figurative head against the figurative wall.

Yes, I can suspect (though not having explored the champion system or new horse rules) that some skills might be 'hand' based. The bank is an example of a 'hand' trait (it's difficult if not impossible to 'separate' each characters' "share" of the bank).

Different characters doing different craftings? No. All just fingers.

Sorry if I caused you to bang your head.....

Just look at the research only and not the per character at first.
-the "finger" that today allows another "finger" to benefits from "finger" efforts can also be managed as a "finger" to "hand" result as far as research is concerned.

Second
-If a account holder chooses to use one character to craft all or if they use one character per crafting type, this is still a "hand" result that is by way of a "finger" effort.

If the crafting character goes out and gathers equipment with traits to research (whatever means they use) or if a character shares the equipment found that meet a research need of another character.... this "finger" effort will always have a "hand" result. A character will find equipement with traits that bnefit their own research as well as benefiting another character on their account. OR they just sale it on the AH, or do as crafting guilds do today. Place the item in the guild bank or personal bank.

The "finger" effort continues to benefit the "hand" In some guild, there are hundreds of fingers and many hands.

Knowing this, and because no one can prevent this by design, why does research not follow the "finger" to "hand" benefit that was described earlier?

newtinmpls

Okay….
Speaking from the old style role playing, by which I mean paper and pencils and character sheets and dice (and I know I’m dating myself … deal).
The best analogy I could use (and thanks to my beloved for coming up with it) is that when I “Play” more than one character, it is like me being an actor in more than one play. The guy who plays Romeo in one venue and King Lear in another – Romeo and King Lear (the characters) do not share knowledge or hang out. What you propose is like having Lear research a trait and then saying that Romeo could/should know it.

That being said, I concede that the bank is a weak spot. In my understanding it is only there as a concession to record-keeping by the game designers. No, it’s not realistic. And for that matter old style players like myself sometimes come up with elaborate explanations of why/how this group of disparate characters would be sharing an account. It’s an extended (adopted) family, or a guild or something like that (long as this post is I won’t go into that here).
There are many things that ‘have to be done’ in order to translate not only role play into computer play, but single player games into MMO. If someone beats me to a resource it’s gone (for a while), and the fact that it “comes back” is at once unrealistic in its specificity but realistic in that if I found an alchemical quality nirn root in such and so area and harvested carefully, there would likely be more in the future. I’m actually quite impressed at how well the designers managed that balance.

The hallmark of ES games in the role play. You (the character “played” by the player) are the sum of your heritage (race) choices (class – and presumably other things after the justice system gets going). In this sense, the whole idea of having “alts” or “mules” seems akin to slavery or indentured servitude to me and using them that way creeps me out big time. Because if any one particular “character” is real, they all are.

And on the role-playing front, because my Altmer Hisa Ni (sorcerer) was peeved at my Orc Urgash gra Sharn (crafter who made Hisa an orc style curiass instead of an altmer one ‘because it was more attractive and a certain elf could use some lightening up and getting in touch with her sensual side’), she (Hisa Ni) did something magical about it; back when the dye stations first came out I played Urgash wearing lurid pink armor for a week to role play Hisa’s revenge.

My beloved points out that you seem to want to talk game systems whereas I am more focused on game play. Our mileage will vary. A lot.

NewBlacksmurf

newtinmpls wrote: »

Okay….
Speaking from the old style role playing, by which I mean paper and pencils and character sheets and dice (and I know I’m dating myself … deal).
The best analogy I could use (and thanks to my beloved for coming up with it) is that when I “Play” more than one character, it is like me being an actor in more than one play. The guy who plays Romeo in one venue and King Lear in another – Romeo and King Lear (the characters) do not share knowledge or hang out. What you propose is like having Lear research a trait and then saying that Romeo could/should know it.

That being said, I concede that the bank is a weak spot. In my understanding it is only there as a concession to record-keeping by the game designers. No, it’s not realistic. And for that matter old style players like myself sometimes come up with elaborate explanations of why/how this group of disparate characters would be sharing an account. It’s an extended (adopted) family, or a guild or something like that (long as this post is I won’t go into that here).
There are many things that ‘have to be done’ in order to translate not only role play into computer play, but single player games into MMO. If someone beats me to a resource it’s gone (for a while), and the fact that it “comes back” is at once unrealistic in its specificity but realistic in that if I found an alchemical quality nirn root in such and so area and harvested carefully, there would likely be more in the future. I’m actually quite impressed at how well the designers managed that balance.

The hallmark of ES games in the role play. You (the character “played” by the player) are the sum of your heritage (race) choices (class – and presumably other things after the justice system gets going). In this sense, the whole idea of having “alts” or “mules” seems akin to slavery or indentured servitude to me and using them that way creeps me out big time. Because if any one particular “character” is real, they all are.

And on the role-playing front, because my Altmer Hisa Ni (sorcerer) was peeved at my Orc Urgash gra Sharn (crafter who made Hisa an orc style curiass instead of an altmer one ‘because it was more attractive and a certain elf could use some lightening up and getting in touch with her sensual side’), she (Hisa Ni) did something magical about it; back when the dye stations first came out I played Urgash wearing lurid pink armor for a week to role play Hisa’s revenge.

My beloved points out that you seem to want to talk game systems whereas I am more focused on game play. Our mileage will vary. A lot.

OK. You hit my weak spot. I love players from this point of view!

And this was a good read...your prob like OMG to 90% of all forum threads :-).

Does it bother you that crafting skills have no gain of skills by means of crafting but instead by character level progression?

The skills are unlocked but no skill points are awarded.

None of this would matter to me if the mounts hadn't changed but that was the last straw for me

newtinmpls

I admit there are a LOT of things that bother me. The limit of 5 boxes (at a time, yes I know I know) on the skill bar is a big one - on the other hand, when I swtich characters I have about a 2-hour lag in adjusting to my "current" bar.

I also think that to better reflect the ES progress-as-you-play, there should be NO groups of assigned 'class' trees, but you should just be able to pick up to (let's say 3) specialist skill trees along with the generic/potential skills.

This would mean a lot more balancing work on the part of the developers (and cries of agony when something got adjusted) but it would be a better fit to an ES game/universe.

And, yes, it is frustrating to have a character (I'll use my clothier Hisa Ni Caemaire as an example) who has been deconstructing and researching to umpty-high level, but I haven't been able to actually PLAY her in a while, so her skill at clothier is much higher than her "points" in clothier.

She's also carrying around something like 400 each of the materials for the first three levels (my highest level characters are 20's-30's and even now I'm starting new characters). So I'm really looking forward to "stacks" of 200.

I recently re-did her point allocation (funded by my sweetie, who tends to accumulate money, whereas I do not), and now instead of having 1 point in each hireling she has two in clothier. Which I'm not sure I like. The average of basic materials is higher (mostly higher than I can use), but the number of items per delivery is down, compared to the longer-standing level 1 hirelings from other characters.

Which goes back to how I view my "group" of characters. They benefit from her work as a clothier, so they feel responsible to contribute to her supplies (and she would probably have no qualms about browbeating most of them to insure this).