So, you want to do everything on one character, and basically have it all transfer to an alt?
What would be the point of creating an alt if you get everything handed to you, besides running a different class?
Champion Points are shared from 50. If you want to run with horses, pay for it, cheapskate!
For many of us that is exactly the point of creating an alt, though your generalization up to this admission was a fallacy.
Stating the system as it is, is not a defense of the system - I'm not sure what your last sentence is supposed to bring to the table in that regard?
I'm genuinely curious as to why people think it's a good system?
In my opinion the only reason it works this way is to have people log in every day or pay money. It's not fun, it's not interactive, it's annoying. It's frankly something I expect to see in something like Candy Crush (technically also a fallacy perhaps, but I thought it an interesting comparison).
Some people who have already maxed everything, made the sacrifice, might be annoyed by the thought that it might be changed, but that wouldn't be a very good argument I think.
Alright... so hypothetically speaking... if ZOS did make horse training account wide... would I get all that wasted gold back on my 3 alt characters that have maxed (60/60/60) horses? Or would it just be gone? 45K per character... 135K in total... and growing as I make new alts. And that's just me... what about the people who paid crowns to upgrade their alts? Would they get a crown refund?
Do you think that's fair?
Daemons_Bane wrote: »That could be solved with the skill line suggestionwould also make it feel like older ES games
The more you use something, the better it becomes
A skill line I'd approve of, it just would make sense. But accountwide riding skill? No, thanks. I prefer it to be able to have characters that have maxed different aspects of their horse.
Taleof2Cities wrote: »I
I'm not totally opposed to the change proposed by the OP.
At the same time, I don't have much sympathy for the portion of the player base that: (a) "forgets" about feeding their horse on a daily basis (across all characters), (b) doesn't want to pay crowns for a quicker upgrade, and (c) then comes to the forums to QQ about their slow mount.
Oreyn_Bearclaw wrote: »So, you want to do everything on one character, and basically have it all transfer to an alt?
What would be the point of creating an alt if you get everything handed to you, besides running a different class?
Champion Points are shared from 50. If you want to run with horses, pay for it, cheapskate!
For many of us that is exactly the point of creating an alt, though your generalization up to this admission was a fallacy.
Stating the system as it is, is not a defense of the system - I'm not sure what your last sentence is supposed to bring to the table in that regard?
I'm genuinely curious as to why people think it's a good system?
In my opinion the only reason it works this way is to have people log in every day or pay money. It's not fun, it's not interactive, it's annoying. It's frankly something I expect to see in something like Candy Crush (technically also a fallacy perhaps, but I thought it an interesting comparison).
Some people who have already maxed everything, made the sacrifice, might be annoyed by the thought that it might be changed, but that wouldn't be a very good argument I think.
Actually, I think that is a very compelling argument. I spend 2 years feeding 8 horses to max and then ZOS comes along and gives it to everyone for no effort? Sorry, but that is a problem.
Daemons_Bane wrote: »Alright... so hypothetically speaking... if ZOS did make horse training account wide... would I get all that wasted gold back on my 3 alt characters that have maxed (60/60/60) horses? Or would it just be gone? 45K per character... 135K in total... and growing as I make new alts. And that's just me... what about the people who paid crowns to upgrade their alts? Would they get a crown refund?
Do you think that's fair?
Why is the gold wasted when you have gotten a full riding skill for so long? Secondly, it would only amount to 90K, as you would still have to pay for that first character.. 3rd, no it would not be growing if you made a new alt, which is pretty much the point, which you may have missed..
Yes some people may have lost some crowns, but that's still just crowns.. Some lost some, some saved some.. Is it really that big a deal? Half of those players probably got the crowns in their membership, which they paid for anyway
Oreyn_Bearclaw wrote: »So, you want to do everything on one character, and basically have it all transfer to an alt?
What would be the point of creating an alt if you get everything handed to you, besides running a different class?
Champion Points are shared from 50. If you want to run with horses, pay for it, cheapskate!
For many of us that is exactly the point of creating an alt, though your generalization up to this admission was a fallacy.
Stating the system as it is, is not a defense of the system - I'm not sure what your last sentence is supposed to bring to the table in that regard?
I'm genuinely curious as to why people think it's a good system?
In my opinion the only reason it works this way is to have people log in every day or pay money. It's not fun, it's not interactive, it's annoying. It's frankly something I expect to see in something like Candy Crush (technically also a fallacy perhaps, but I thought it an interesting comparison).
Some people who have already maxed everything, made the sacrifice, might be annoyed by the thought that it might be changed, but that wouldn't be a very good argument I think.
Actually, I think that is a very compelling argument. I spend 2 years feeding 8 horses to max and then ZOS comes along and gives it to everyone for no effort? Sorry, but that is a problem.
That is a problem for you perhaps, but why? Does it make you feel bad? Don't you want others to have it easier than you? Comes across as rather selfish.
Isn't that by analogy similar to feeling what they feel when something goes on sale right after they bought something?
Would you defend a bad company policy because you had to put up with it, so your new colleagues should too?
I'd still like to know why people like this system.