Tel Var Tombstones - An Alternative to Autolooting

Leandor

@Enodoc & @wraith808 we should start thinking of a stone gain mechanic, not a stone loss mechanic. We play the game to earn stones and making the stone loss mechanics stronger is a bad idea in general. Reasons:

With the 100% loss from PvP deaths, the stones are not really lost, they are redistributed and will be reintroduced into the economy by purchasing materials/equipmemt, which will then (after self-satisfaction) enter the gold cycle.

Increasing PvE death tax makes the stones disappear and again, that is a partially needed mechanism to prevent inflation, but from my point of view a lesser needed one. Remember, the stones will largely lose their value, once higher level content is released. Their only remaining value at that point will be for purchase of crafting materials, a commodity that will be freely available on the gold market with the current mechanic. At that point, the looting mechanic we try to develop is unnecessary, as well as artificial inflation protection.

The time frame for this, according to their latest promise, is 3 months (or maybe 6 if the major extensions are every second update).

We need something for now. Foregoing additional respectively follow-up changes by not disturbing the gain/loss/cost balance as implememted right now, seems to be the defining objective. Remember that a lot of thought has been put into the system (except for craft materials required for V16 stuff - that is just cheap grind) and a big part of that is gain/loss ratio from an overall perspective, not from individual player perspective.

I am arguing against a complete loss from PvP and against an increased loss from PvE, because that would definitely mean that the overall balance of stones needs to be adjusted - too much of a job if they want to release by end of this month. Changing the stone drain (as in unproductive loss) rate is something for the balancing patches further down the road, when and if more data is available. For the time being, we should concentrate on developing ideas to improve the system within the existing framework, keeping the balance as is.

All immersion/realism aside, what do we want to achieve with the stone transfer change?

From what I have read so far (and please correct me if I forgot something) it is four things:

1. A mechanism to prevent "un-endangered gain" from players camping at their own semi-protected spawn point in the districts or fringe camping large battles from safety of stealth.
2. A possibility to regain your stones.
3. A possibility to not lose stones in a group vs group situation, where your own group won but you yourself died.
4. A mechanism to make solo/duo ganking less attractive by having a large chance to not be able to reap the benefits.

The idea to achieve this is the "loot corpse" mechanism. This is - at least in my understanding - the basis of the discussion.

In line with my above thoughts on overall stone economy, I think the following limitations are important (partially copied from earlier posts, just to consolidate):

• Only those that would have gotten the stones in the current iteration system are able to loot them. In addition, one is able to loot ones own tombstone to retake them.
• The split must remain the same: by looting the stone you get the share of stones that you would have gotten in the current iteration system. If you loot your own, you get all stones.
• Everyone needs to loot the stone individually, but similar to PvE corpse looting, you take all stones in a certain radius by using one. Radius size remains to be defined, since too large a radius would fail point (3) of above list .
• Looting the stones takes a couple of seconds and is interruptible. It also breaks stealth on initiation of the looting mechanism.

Adhering to these stipulations, one would achieve all of the 4 requirements above without changing the overall stone economy.

Darlon

Still having doubts about this...

The way I see it this will heavily promote playing in large zergs (and that is something a lot of people here on this board don't want).

An example:

Zerg A is roaming one of the districts. There it encounters (a somewhat smaller) Zerg B. After the confrontation Zerg B is destroyed, but they put up a good fight and a part of Zerg A has also been killed. For the bigger group (A) it is easy to just camp the tombstones of their fallen comrades (so they can reclaim their stones) and loot/camp the enemies tombstones (so they cannot reclaim their stones). Result: no risk for the largest/strongest group (apart from respawning and having to run back to reclaim their stones), and no chance at all for the smaller group.

This would mean running around in large groups would basically be without any risk at all and therefore it will happen eventually.

---

The current system may have its flaws, but at least there's a risk for everyone, even for the people in larger groups.

Leandor

Darlon wrote: »

Still having doubts about this...

The way I see it this will heavily promote playing in large zergs (and that is something a lot of people here on this board don't want).

An example:

Zerg A is roaming one of the districts. There it encounters (a somewhat smaller) Zerg B. After the confrontation Zerg B is destroyed, but they put up a good fight and a part of Zerg A has also been killed. For the bigger group (A) it is easy to just camp the tombstones of their fallen comrades (so they can reclaim their stones) and loot/camp the enemies tombstones (so they cannot reclaim their stones). Result: no risk for the largest/strongest group (apart from respawning and having to run back to reclaim their stones), and no chance at all for the smaller group.

This would mean running around in large groups would basically be without any risk at all and therefore it will happen eventually.

---

The current system may have its flaws, but at least there's a risk for everyone, even for the people in larger groups.

Then make the looting be interrupted by damage. A single player with caltrops could prevent a whole zerg to loot any stone.

Enodoc

Sharee wrote: »

Enodoc wrote: »

Sharee wrote: »

Enodoc wrote: »

ToRelax wrote: »

I don't like it.
Not only for gankers it would be a problem to get stones from their kills before escaping, but anyone fighting outnumbered.

That's the same risk as looting your rewards from mobs. Getting your reward from players shouldn't be any easier than that.

I have to disagree with you there.

Trying to loot a dead corpse in the middle of 4 enemy players is nowhere near the same risk as trying to loot a dead corpse in the middle of 4 mobs.

Maybe so, but that's still the same risk as looting a mob corpse in the middle of 4 enemy players, which was what I was getting at.

I see. However, getting TV stones from mobs does not require you to actually loot them. You get the stones as soon as the mob dies, regardless of whether the corpse has any additional loot on it or not. So getting your TV stone reward from players isn't any easier than getting them from mobs, like you suggested.

No, it doesn't currently, but in combination with player tombstones, per the OP, you would have to loot TV stones from mobs as well.

@Leandor Nice summary. A fifth point that I think needs to be mentioned as a reason for this idea is clarity of gains. Currently, it's not very clear how many stones you're getting per kill unless you're really looking at the counter. This change would mean it would say "100 Tel Var Stones" when you loot the mob/player, and you'd therefore know what you got for that kill. This issue alone could be addressed by having a small UI pop-up (like LootDrop) showing the stone gains, but it together makes up part of the reason for the "looting".

Perhaps, if there is a risk of losing stones from the system through PvP death by them not being looted, then there should also be a way of adding stones to the system through PvP. I don't want to suggest though that each PvP kill should grant the killer a set number of TV stones automatically like AP, as that then negates the looting purpose.

wraith808

@Leandor A good summary, however I disagree with one of your points, i.e.

The split must remain the same: by looting the stone you get the share of stones that you would have gotten in the current iteration system. If you loot your own, you get all stones.

Maybe not be free lootable- you have to have done damage to claim them. But I think that the equal split is one of the worst things about the current system. That means there's no risk to ganging up- you'll always get your stones, and don't have to worry about human nature. With the looter getting the stones, it introduces those human nature aspects back. Will they eventually let the healer get stones? What about that sniper? This one had a LOT of stones... will I take them because it's so many? And cheat the others in the zerg?

Unless there is strict discipline, zergs will break up. And they definitely won't be pick-up zergs, like those that happen now.

olemanwinter

Someone explain to me why this system shouldn't be implemented in Cyrodiil at large for AP if it's such a great idea?

People get ganked in Cyrodiil too. People die to afk. People lag out and die. Yet there were no calls for player-animated-looting there. So what's different? People don't want to lose their stones.

This is just another "I don't want to lose my stones - no player looting!" thread disguised as something different.

Enodoc

olemanwinter wrote: »

Someone explain to me why this system shouldn't be implemented in Cyrodiil at large for AP if it's such a great idea?

People get ganked in Cyrodiil too. People die to afk. People lag out and die. Yet there were no calls for player-animated-looting there. So what's different? People don't want to lose their stones.

This is just another "I don't want to lose my stones - no player looting!" thread disguised as something different.

Depends on your view of what AP is. I see it as an equivalent to XP, not an equivalent to Gold, and you don't loot XP. Sure you can buy stuff with AP, but it's more of a progression marker to me than a currency. TV stones are entirely a currency.
And it's not an "I don't want to lose my stones" thread, it's an "I want to actually see what I earned" and "where's the risk in ganking" thread.

ToRelax

Enodoc wrote: »

olemanwinter wrote: »

Someone explain to me why this system shouldn't be implemented in Cyrodiil at large for AP if it's such a great idea?

People get ganked in Cyrodiil too. People die to afk. People lag out and die. Yet there were no calls for player-animated-looting there. So what's different? People don't want to lose their stones.

This is just another "I don't want to lose my stones - no player looting!" thread disguised as something different.

Depends on your view of what AP is. I see it as an equivalent to XP, not an equivalent to Gold, and you don't loot XP. Sure you can buy stuff with AP, but it's more of a progression marker to me than a currency. TV stones are entirely a currency.
And it's not an "I don't want to lose my stones" thread, it's an "I want to actually see what I earned" and "where's the risk in ganking" thread.

I'm sure there will be some addon devs integrate a counter if they really care.
If it's just to see what you earned, a simple number on your screen would be sufficient.

wraith808

olemanwinter wrote: »

Someone explain to me why this system shouldn't be implemented in Cyrodiil at large for AP if it's such a great idea?

People get ganked in Cyrodiil too. People die to afk. People lag out and die. Yet there were no calls for player-animated-looting there. So what's different? People don't want to lose their stones.

This is just another "I don't want to lose my stones - no player looting!" thread disguised as something different.

This is not an I don't want to lose my stones thread, it's a put in player looting more hardcore thread. At least from my particular view of when the idea was proposed.

Personally, I love the stones... even when I'm on the losing part of the equation. I just think that taking out the actual looting of the stones is counterintuitive. And I view AP as more of an alliance reputation, in all honesty, not some sort of actual currency, even if it's represented as such.

olemanwinter

Enodoc wrote: »

Depends on your view of what AP is. I see it as an equivalent to XP, not an equivalent to Gold, and you don't loot XP.

I strongly disagree with this. AP is a currency. That is it's function.

You buy siege, repair walls, buy gear, soul gems, you can even buy armor and weapon glyphs. You buy the most powerful sets in the game with AP and AP only. Raveging, Morag Tong, Cyrodiil's Light, etc. etc.

AP is almost exactly like Tel Var stones. Calling AP the equivalent to XP seems really strange to me.

Enodoc wrote: »

"I want to actually see what I earned"

UI changes are what you should be asking for then imo. Also addons.

Enodoc wrote: »

"where's the risk in ganking" thread.

THIS really gets me. The risk in ganking IS GANKING. Ganking builds were always risky because they rely on burst damage at the expense of sustainability and defense. I kill tons of failed gankers on live and on the PTS.

But what really gets me here is they are NOW reducing the global damage to extend TTK, and still you ask where's the risk in ganking?

The risk in ganking IS GANKING. It's been made more difficult than it ever was by 2.1 changes that are already definite and yet people in this thread are asking for the entire system that effects all players to be changed (for the worse imo) to compensate against ganking which has already been nerfed.

Leandor

@wraith808 equal split is consistent for everything related to PvP, which is why my stomach feeling tells me it is the way to go. Also, first come first serve will be the most toxic emvironment possible, since it will destroy faction spirit and degenerate PvP to a land of egoists.

@olemanwinter You do not lose your AP if you die. Your whole post is invalid.

ToRelax

Leandor wrote: »

[...]

olemanwinter You do not lose your AP if you die. Your whole post is invalid.

But that is not the point of this thread anyway. No one here is afraid of losing his stones... !

Enodoc wrote: »

[...]
And it's not an "I don't want to lose my stones" thread, it's an "I want to actually see what I earned" and "where's the risk in ganking" thread.

wraith808

Leandor wrote: »

@wraith808 equal split is consistent for everything related to PvP, which is why my stomach feeling tells me it is the way to go. Also, first come first serve will be the most toxic emvironment possible, since it will destroy faction spirit and degenerate PvP to a land of egoists.

@olemanwinter You do not lose your AP if you die. Your whole post is invalid.

@Leandor

Right now, what is the largest problem with PvP? I don't think it's the fact that people run in packs- but that it's not a tactical decision. The zergs are mindless, and you see people whirling around in them willy nilly, or lifting their staff, or calling down a meteor, or whatever the FOTM ability is. What do they all have in common? They're indiscriminate, and easy to pop off. And you can join any zerg, because you're guaranteed as long as you're in the mix, you're going to get your split.

If, all of a sudden, that wasn't the case... what would be the change, based on human nature?

"I'm not guaranteed to get my split- so why I am I here?"

This isn't to say that this isn't a valid tactic- it's the mindlessness of it that really irks me. If there is a well put together group that runs together and has their tactics down, I'll give them all the props in the world. I've seen some that work together more than my guild and are more effective in the delves where I frequent, and I don't mind losing to them. Some of the funniest moments for us as a guild have been when we were on the losing side because of our own inability to respond in force, or falling for inspired tactics.

But when it's just a group that builds in size as it goes over the map, devouring anything in the way... what skill does that take? And even split is what causes that. I don't have to know you to get my split- it just happens automagically.

bleh.

wraith808

olemanwinter wrote: »

The risk in ganking IS GANKING. It's been made more difficult than it ever was by 2.1 changes that are already definite and yet people in this thread are asking for the entire system that effects all players to be changed (for the worse imo) to compensate against ganking which has already been nerfed.

It's not to compensate against ganking in and of itself. It's to compensate for that mentality combined with other mentalities- Gank Squads, mindless zergs that just locust through everything, with no organization or communication. It's like a mindless body moving through the environment.

Tavore1138

olemanwinter wrote: »

Someone explain to me why this system shouldn't be implemented in Cyrodiil at large for AP if it's such a great idea?

People get ganked in Cyrodiil too. People die to afk. People lag out and die. Yet there were no calls for player-animated-looting there. So what's different? People don't want to lose their stones.

This is just another "I don't want to lose my stones - no player looting!" thread disguised as something different.

Because you do not 'loot' AP from someone else's supply of AP it is more like a specific version of XP - but I do sort of see your point as it is also a currency of sorts.

I think it does come down to not wanting to lose stones to particular types of game problems and to particular types of play.

While I have been against the whole system from day 1 because I don't want to loot (or be looted) some players are clearly on board because they want the added thrill of risking genuine loss themselves to add to their rush of combat - winning being sweeter for keeping their own loot as much as in looting that of others... not for me but I respect the desire.

For other people, exemplified by the spawn campers and macro gankers, the rush is not from taking risk but from the kill and loot without taking the risk and the 'fun' of spoiling someone else's game time... I have no time for these people and I don't see why anyone else would either.

By making you have to loot a corpse by actually looting a corpse I think you would probably add to the adrenaline rush of those who are willing to take the risks to gain their rewards while making the game less palatable for the grief players.

You would also add a whole meta around team play and aiding other players which the existing system seems to discourage.

In short you reward positive play and genuine risk taking and reduce ways that players can simply spoil the game for others.

All this assumes that the devs aren't actively trying to create a griefing environment which is something they have been very reticent to confirm or deny.

P.S. On a personal note I'd be a lot more likely to participate if this system seemed to be more genuinely designed to reward good positive play rather than negative play.

Darlon

I am getting the feeling the 'solution' presented here only serves to over complicate things...

Xsorus

Yea..cause the one thing I really wanted from GW2 was me having to stop actively PvP to loot my PvP Currency...because that was SOOOO much fun.

olemanwinter

Leandor wrote: »

@olemanwinter You do not lose your AP if you die. Your whole post is invalid.

Uhuh. Uhuh. LIKE I SAID:

olemanwinter wrote: »

This is just another "I don't want to lose my stones - no player looting!" thread disguised as something different.

Enodoc

olemanwinter wrote: »

Enodoc wrote: »

Depends on your view of what AP is. I see it as an equivalent to XP, not an equivalent to Gold, and you don't loot XP.

I strongly disagree with this. AP is a currency. That is it's function.
You buy siege, repair walls, buy gear, soul gems, you can even buy armor and weapon glyphs. You buy the most powerful sets in the game with AP and AP only. Raveging, Morag Tong, Cyrodiil's Light, etc. etc.
AP is almost exactly like Tel Var stones. Calling AP the equivalent to XP seems really strange to me.

AP marks your progression through Alliance Ranks, AP is required to level up AvA skills, AP determines your position on the leaderboards. That's why I think of AP as a comparative thing to XP.

Leandor

@ToRelax I'm very aware of that, it's that other guy who brought it up.

@wraith808 but "zerging" is in fact a part of the game, and rightly so. To change things to make it completely unfeasible is wrong and should not be part of any thoughts on improving the system. It should not be the best or only valid way, but that will never be done by TV stones. That task should be part of other changes.

@Xsorus & @Darlon which is why I try to propose measures that try to resolve the identified issues without making it overly complicated compared to now. Maybe I'm not completely successful with it, try to give us better ideas

wraith808

@Leandor

Leandor wrote: »

@wraith808 but "zerging" is in fact a part of the game, and rightly so. To change things to make it completely unfeasible is wrong and should not be part of any thoughts on improving the system. It should not be the best or only valid way, but that will never be done by TV stones. That task should be part of other changes.

Note, that I didn't say Zerging wasn't a valid part of the game. I said 'mindless'. Without any tactical thought nor collaboration. That's the kind of behavior- the one that rewards you not for anything you're really doing (other than pressing a button), but rather just being in the right place at the right time.

UrQuan

olemanwinter wrote: »

Someone explain to me why this system shouldn't be implemented in Cyrodiil at large for AP if it's such a great idea?

People get ganked in Cyrodiil too. People die to afk. People lag out and die. Yet there were no calls for player-animated-looting there. So what's different? People don't want to lose their stones.

This is just another "I don't want to lose my stones - no player looting!" thread disguised as something different.

I very much don't agree. For myself, anyway, I'm perfectly fine with losing my stones if I'm killed. It's risk/reward, and it only happens in IC, and I'm perfectly fine with that. I like this tombstone idea purely because it's a far more interesting mechanic than simply automatically getting them, it adds an additional layer of tactics, and it adds an additional layer of realism. In contrast, you don't loot AP from the corpses of the dead, so making the process of getting AP more like the actual process of looting corpses on battlefields throughout history doesn't make much sense to me.

Xsorus

Leandor wrote: »

@ToRelax I'm very aware of that, it's that other guy who brought it up.

@wraith808 but "zerging" is in fact a part of the game, and rightly so. To change things to make it completely unfeasible is wrong and should not be part of any thoughts on improving the system. It should not be the best or only valid way, but that will never be done by TV stones. That task should be part of other changes.

@Xsorus & @Darlon which is why I try to propose measures that try to resolve the identified issues without making it overly complicated compared to now. Maybe I'm not completely successful with it, try to give us better ideas

I don't believe there is an issue to solve in the first place. I just know stopping to loot in pvp isn't fun and isn't a solution to anything

Leandor

@Xsorus

A "problem" I see only in one context: The issue with spawn points in the districts. They have to be protected to prevent spawn camping. The protection on the other hand allows safe TV farming without risk of loss. Unless the mechanic of stone transfer is modified, these two points stand in direct opposition to each other.

I see a benefit in making a bait role in group pvp attractive by giving a chance to recover ones own stones, if their sacrifice helps the group win. This is more to give an incentive for those players that take on the role of tank for the prevalent pve encounters in there.

If it were not for these two points, I actually would not partake in the discussion at all, since I do agree that ESO pvp is too fast-paced for that mechanic. Nonetheless, I can see the point the other participants are making and thus have included them in my argumentation.

@wraith808

You are right to point out this distinction. But even from this point of view, I'd say that other mechanisms are much better suited to enforce that behaviour, compared to TV loot mechanics. The risk is too high for that blowing up in our faces.

But maybe we just have to agree to disagree on that point.

Xsorus

Leandor wrote: »

@Xsorus

A "problem" I see only in one context: The issue with spawn points in the districts. They have to be protected to prevent spawn camping. The protection on the other hand allows safe TV farming without risk of loss. Unless the mechanic of stone transfer is modified, these two points stand in direct opposition to each other.

I see a benefit in making a bait role in group pvp attractive by giving a chance to recover ones own stones, if their sacrifice helps the group win. This is more to give an incentive for those players that take on the role of tank for the prevalent pve encounters in there.

If it were not for these two points, I actually would not partake in the discussion at all, since I do agree that ESO pvp is too fast-paced for that mechanic. Nonetheless, I can see the point the other participants are making and thus have included them in my argumentation.

@wraith808

You are right to point out this distinction. But even from this point of view, I'd say that other mechanisms are much better suited to enforce that behaviour, compared to TV loot mechanics. The risk is too high for that blowing up in our faces.

But maybe we just have to agree to disagree on that point.

As someone who pvped at those spawn points on pts I can tell you making the entire game worse based on that small section of the game (and frankly not a good area to get stones anyway) would be silly

wraith808

Leandor wrote: »

You are right to point out this distinction. But even from this point of view, I'd say that other mechanisms are much better suited to enforce that behaviour, compared to TV loot mechanics. The risk is too high for that blowing up in our faces.

But maybe we just have to agree to disagree on that point.

@Leandor - Perhaps we are at that point on that regards. But thanks for the conversation- it gave me a lot to think about in regards to this idea. Perhaps they will implement something- perhaps not. But it was definitely a good conversation to have.

Drawberrry

With this type of system in place; the Player taking from Player that is, I don't think there's really a solid answer on how make thing's 'fair' in an even split. But I do like the general idea's going on and would like to see something implemented even if it's just for testing.

Perhaps a combination of some ideas could be having the 'loot timer' similar to resurrecting companions, so a player is still vulnerable to attack before looting of an enemy player is complete, but with the multi-character radius of looting NPC mobs so the timer does not need to be repeated for each different player and would encompass a set number or radius?

For NPC enemies I don't see a need to enact this system and would limit it specifically to PVP actions.