Cutting the mobs leash, why it is important for game play in a zoned game.

Sinist

I have been reading the Pantheon forums on what to carry over from old EQ: http://pantheonmmo.com/content/forums/topic/2314/pantheon-what-to-carry-over-from-original-eq


While there, I noticed some discussion on mob leashing. Some of the comments have been akin to it being "bad AI" or that it would be an "inconvenience"  if someone has to run all the way to the zone to lose a mobs agro.

I think these concerns bring up an important issue of what made EQ different than mainstream games today.

Game play is not about convenience. In fact, convenience is what kills game play. What convenience does is take an obstacle, a risk, or a given effort and removes it so the player does not have to worry about a given feature. Note I say feature, because after all, this is a game and games are bout obstacles, risks, and effort to overcome, rather features of play. It is those things that make succeeding worth the effort and give meaning to game play itself.

What does a non-leashed mob provide as game play? Well... you remember how people go on and on about their first experience in a zone in EQ where they have no idea where they are going, where the next zone is and they are fearful of agroing a mob they can not beat as it would mean there is likely no way to escape with the result of them having to come back and find their corpse? This is what non-leashing mobs provide.

See, this was a constant fear in a new zone. This is why you had no maps or mini-maps in release EQ. You had to learn the area, and it was always nerve wracking because you could get lost easily. Add in the fact that even if you had a run speed spell on, not knowing the zone line could still likely result in your death as you blindly ran through the zone looking for that safe exit constantly agroing new mobs, increasing the number of mobs chasing you and with it the odds of this ending badly (casting mobs snaring you, doing damage, blinding you - this was the best to see your screen shut off where you could see nothing), and even running as fast or faster than you.

Also, this type of travel gave meaning to spells. Invisibility and invisibility to undead were key to have in a zone where powerful mobs lurked and if you didn't have night vision due to your race, you needed some sort of light source. It made travel spells very beneficial (to bypass an area with a port or be able to run at faster speeds). It made other skills such as Feign Death a "get out of jail free card" for those that had it or a rogue valuable due to their ability to sneak through areas. It made getting an item that gave a spell of benefit in such cases quite valuable. It made corpse retrieval spells meaningful to be able to summon or to locate a corpse

This forced people to be careful, to plan as they went through a zone, to constantly be looking over their shoulder. It made learning a zone, its land marks, mob pathing, etc... a truly valuable skill. It made deep exploring into a dungeon or dangerous area an accomplishment because the chances of "running out" to the zone was not likely. It meant... if you pulled it... you owned it.

Now look at all the subtle skills, abilities, spells, and various other features I talked about and how a simple thing as having a mob on a leash completely removes a lot of that game play, that danger, that thrill, that need.

At the end of the day, games are about game play and mob AI is only useful if it adds to game play. So I understand the argument for "realism", but only when adds to game play, not when it takes it away or provides convenience, after all... we want to play a game don't we?

Amathe

I remember running all the way across Western Karana to get away from Chief Goonda and his minions, on occasions when my quarrel with them went awry. The Chief sure ran fast for a fat guy. 

While I enjoyed this game mechanic in EQ, I don't think it is necessary. In my opinion the mobs should pursue for a reasonable distance (enough where you still would have to be on your toes to escape), but not necessarily the entire zone. 

Sinist

Amathe said:

I remember running all the way across Western Karana to get away from Chief Goonda and his minions, on occasions when my quarrel with them went awry. The Chief sure ran fast for a fat guy. 

While I enjoyed this game mechanic in EQ, I don't think it is necessary. In my opinion the mobs should pursue for a reasonable distance (enough where you still would have to be on your toes to escape), but not necessarily the entire zone. 

Which removes the fear, the risk, the need to be careful and making all of the various abilities I mentioned "convenience" tools, not game play ones.

If you allow a mob to rubber band you have created an easy exploit and removed the need. Numerous games over the years have experimented with differing lengths of such and all of them remove that game play element.

I have been watching a growing trend in the Pantheon forums by people who want less of the old features, who keep looking at all these elements as just "inconveniences" rather than integral to the component of play. What we end up with when we remove all those features is just another mainstream game. It was those features that defined EQ, why it provided all of the feeling, the fear, the reward for play.

As I explained, look at all of the intricate and subtle relations between skills, abilities, and various other features that such a simple thing provides. This is what people have to be careful of, it is these subtle things that provide that missing play. Remember, we did remove them all already, we have 100s of games out there that are EQ without all the things people claimed were boring, inconvenient, and cumbersome. Will making yet another one change anything?

Scott23

Interesting topic.  I can see both sides.  Training to zone was an interesting mechanic in EQ.  In today's games getting away from an agro'd mob is trivial.  On the other hand zoning into someone's train was annoying at times - although one of the memories that sticks out from EQ is when Kithicor (?) went deadly at night the first time :awesome: 


I wonder if a variable timer would work...  If you were full health and just moving through the mobs would chase you for a short distance.  If you pulled them (attacked or cast on them) they would follow for a longer time.  If you were injured it would add to the follow time.  If they were injured then it would shorten the time until they reset.  This could effectively curtail kiting as well.

It would probably be too much trouble to code, but it could be cool.

Sinist

Scott23 said:

Interesting topic.  I can see both sides.  Training to zone was an interesting mechanic in EQ.  In today's games getting away from an agro'd mob is trivial.  On the other hand zoning into someone's train was annoying at times - although one of the memories that sticks out from EQ is when Kithicor (?) went deadly at night the first time :awesome: 


I wonder if a variable timer would work...  If you were full health and just moving through the mobs would chase you for a short distance.  If you pulled them (attacked or cast on them) they would follow for a longer time.  If you were injured it would add to the follow time.  If they were injured then it would shorten the time until they reset.  This could effectively curtail kiting as well.

It would probably be too much trouble to code, but it could be cool.

That is the point. Annoying is good in games (of this nature) because it means you can't easily escape the consequences of your actions.

The point is not to allow people to easily traverse a zone. Danger in travel is a part of game play.

filmoret

Honestly I cant see your logic at all here.  You want mobs to ignore each other and mindlessly chase you until they kill you or get killed by another player?  Well for starters if a mob is mad enough to chase you to the end of the earth then what about the other mobs in the area?  Shouldn't they kill each other too?  Do you see the mountain of problems that now appear?  Players could just agro a bunch of mobs into each other and loot their corpses after they kill each other.  Because simply chasing you and ignoring their environment is too unrealistic.  They are suppose to be living and breathing creatures that self preservation comes first and the need to kill someone for walking by is secondary.  The further away from their lair they go the more likely they will die and they really should know this.

CrazKanuk

Sinist said:

Amathe said:

I remember running all the way across Western Karana to get away from Chief Goonda and his minions, on occasions when my quarrel with them went awry. The Chief sure ran fast for a fat guy. 

While I enjoyed this game mechanic in EQ, I don't think it is necessary. In my opinion the mobs should pursue for a reasonable distance (enough where you still would have to be on your toes to escape), but not necessarily the entire zone. 

Which removes the fear, the risk, the need to be careful and making all of the various abilities I mentioned "convenience" tools, not game play ones.

If you allow a mob to rubber band you have created an easy exploit and removed the need. Numerous games over the years have experimented with differing lengths of such and all of them remove that game play element.

I have been watching a growing trend in the Pantheon forums by people who want less of the old features, who keep looking at all these elements as just "inconveniences" rather than integral to the component of play. What we end up with when we remove all those features is just another mainstream game. It was those features that defined EQ, why it provided all of the feeling, the fear, the reward for play.

As I explained, look at all of the intricate and subtle relations between skills, abilities, and various other features that such a simple thing provides. This is what people have to be careful of, it is these subtle things that provide that missing play. Remember, we did remove them all already, we have 100s of games out there that are EQ without all the things people claimed were boring, inconvenient, and cumbersome. Will making yet another one change anything?

While I love non-leashed mobs, there are plenty of reasons not to celebrate them, too. I mean as much as I think it would be cool to have something chase me across the entire world, it will ultimately cause problems. That is, unless there is better implementation, like a stamina system, for instance, which doesn't allow you to run across a map indefinitely. Or make monsters faster than you. Just saying, there are two sides to this story, for sure. It can be fun and it can cause havoc. 

Amathe

Sinist said:

I have been watching a growing trend in the Pantheon forums by people who want less of the old features, who keep looking at all these elements as just "inconveniences" rather than integral to the component of play. What we end up with when we remove all those features is just another mainstream game. It was those features that defined EQ, why it provided all of the feeling, the fear, the reward for play.

Brad isn't making EQ. He is making a game inspired and influenced by EQ. If you want to play EQ, it's still up and running.

What I am seeing is not so much a trend, but more specifically you, responding to every post that expresses an opinion different from your own with (i) that player is objectively wrong; (ii) that player wants a "mainstream" game free of "inconveniences"; (ii) that player does not understand what Pantheon is; and (iv) that player does not understand what a "game" is.

And while you are entitled to that opinion, you are not Pantheon. You do not speak for Pantheon. Pantheon only even exists in its most basic alpha and it remains to be seen what, if anything, Pantheon will be. This forum exists for the discussion of Pantheon by players with varying points of view, not merely your own. 

Sinist

filmoret said:

Honestly I cant see your logic at all here.  You want mobs to ignore each other and mindlessly chase you until they kill you or get killed by another player?  Well for starters if a mob is mad enough to chase you to the end of the earth then what about the other mobs in the area?  Shouldn't they kill each other too?  Do you see the mountain of problems that now appear?  Players could just agro a bunch of mobs into each other and loot their corpses after they kill each other.  Because simply chasing you and ignoring their environment is too unrealistic.  They are suppose to be living and breathing creatures that self preservation comes first and the need to kill someone for walking by is secondary.  The further away from their lair they go the more likely they will die and they really should know this.

If you are going to argue realism in the face of game play, then you shouldn't be playing games because for every game you can pick, for every system you can pick I can point out the absurdity of its AI, its nature, its pointless implementation, so I think we can set aside the arguments of trying to argue pure realism. Besides, if you think the rubber band mechanics are realistic, then you aren't being objective. This is a game, not a nature simulator and some things you are going to have to accept for the sake of game play.

As I said, game play is the element here and I listed numerous reasons why this added consequence to play, meaning to spells, abilities, etc... I noticed you didn't even attend to those at all. /shrug

Sinist

Amathe said:

Sinist said:

I have been watching a growing trend in the Pantheon forums by people who want less of the old features, who keep looking at all these elements as just "inconveniences" rather than integral to the component of play. What we end up with when we remove all those features is just another mainstream game. It was those features that defined EQ, why it provided all of the feeling, the fear, the reward for play.

Brad isn't making EQ. He is making a game inspired and influenced by EQ. If you want to play EQ, it's still up and running.

What I am seeing is not so much a trend, but more specifically you, responding to every post that expresses an opinion different from your own with (i) that player is objectively wrong; (ii) that player wants a "mainstream" game free of "inconveniences"; (ii) that player does not understand what Pantheon is; and (iv) that player does not understand what a "game" is.

And while you are entitled to that opinion, you are not Pantheon. You do not speak for Pantheon. Pantheon only even exists in its most basic alpha and it remains to be seen what, if anything, Pantheon will be. This forum exists for the discussion of Pantheon by players with varying points of view, not merely your own. 

So he is making a game that is inspired and influenced by EQ, but has no EQ features. That makes perfect sense.

You argued for tethered mobs. That is a mainstream implementation.

You argued for a RMT store with being able to buy your appearance items. That is a mainstream implementation.

I can also find numerous posts where you have argued the same opposite of EQ features.

So apparently I am the one with the problem because I want a game that is actually inspired and influenced by EQ, not just named it and then turned into a mainstream EQ Next?

Yes, I am being unreasonable here. Forgive me.

Edit:

By the way, Brad has already commented on the fact that most mobs will be free running to the zone, with only special ones being tethered for specific purposes.

Might want to contact him and admonish him for failing to accept your EQ in name only design direction.

Sinist

CrazKanuk said:

Sinist said:

Amathe said:

I remember running all the way across Western Karana to get away from Chief Goonda and his minions, on occasions when my quarrel with them went awry. The Chief sure ran fast for a fat guy. 

While I enjoyed this game mechanic in EQ, I don't think it is necessary. In my opinion the mobs should pursue for a reasonable distance (enough where you still would have to be on your toes to escape), but not necessarily the entire zone. 

Which removes the fear, the risk, the need to be careful and making all of the various abilities I mentioned "convenience" tools, not game play ones.

If you allow a mob to rubber band you have created an easy exploit and removed the need. Numerous games over the years have experimented with differing lengths of such and all of them remove that game play element.

I have been watching a growing trend in the Pantheon forums by people who want less of the old features, who keep looking at all these elements as just "inconveniences" rather than integral to the component of play. What we end up with when we remove all those features is just another mainstream game. It was those features that defined EQ, why it provided all of the feeling, the fear, the reward for play.

As I explained, look at all of the intricate and subtle relations between skills, abilities, and various other features that such a simple thing provides. This is what people have to be careful of, it is these subtle things that provide that missing play. Remember, we did remove them all already, we have 100s of games out there that are EQ without all the things people claimed were boring, inconvenient, and cumbersome. Will making yet another one change anything?

While I love non-leashed mobs, there are plenty of reasons not to celebrate them, too. I mean as much as I think it would be cool to have something chase me across the entire world, it will ultimately cause problems. That is, unless there is better implementation, like a stamina system, for instance, which doesn't allow you to run across a map indefinitely. Or make monsters faster than you. Just saying, there are two sides to this story, for sure. It can be fun and it can cause havoc. 

How will that create the sense of fear as I explained? Maybe give an example of how to achieve the same feeling of play that EQ has because of the features I explained with the solutions you are suggesting that include rubber banding mobs?

I see people go on about how its stupid to have non-leashed and they give lots of reasons why it hampers their "enjoyment", but I don't see aany arguments made that are trying to achieve what EQ had in its feeling, because Pantheon can not achieve EQs feeling of play by relying on modern mainstream implementations.

Now I am not saying, they should disregard mainstream lessons learned, but I am not seeing arguments to support achieving EQ feeling, I am seeing lots of mainstream "convenience" arguments and unsupported "realism" arguments, none of which are concerned about getting back that EQ form of play.

Keep in mind Craz, I have watched this very thing play out game after game where the concern was "my fun", not game play and the result is... what we have today.

Amathe

So you're saying I am objectively wrong lol? By misquoting me as saying I want no EQ features? 

I'm pretty sure Brad has said that nearly everything in the game is still subject to changes and revisions, as you would expect in a game that is not even in beta yet. So we will have to see what happens. 

Besides, if the decision is already inked, and unworthy of discussion, why on Earth did you start a thread to discuss the issue in the first place? 

Sinist

Amathe said:

So you're saying I am objectively wrong lol? By misquoting me as saying I want no EQ features? 

I'm pretty sure Brad has said that nearly everything in the game is still subject to changes and revisions, as you would expect in a game that is not even in beta yet. So we will have to see what happens. 

Besides, if the decision is already inked, and unworthy of discussion, why on Earth did you start a thread to discuss the issue in the first place? 

So, you are saying that given enough time you can change Brad's mind to give you your entertainment simulator over having to play a game?

As for you wanting no EQ features, you have already argued just recently against game play elements (appearance slots RMT and here you want rubber band mobs) and I am pretty sure I can find more where you want none of that old school stuff form EQ, but want it to be EQ like right?

Also, if you paid attention to this thread, It was to try and explain  how non-leashed mobs in EQ had a much larger effect on game play and how people were missing why EQ was the way it was because of those subtle relationship of features. I explained my position in detail, supported it with examples, and reasoning.


 I noticed you didn't comment once on any of that relationship, you didn't try to even reason why you wanted what you wanted. You didn't enter the discussion, you simply came in and said you wanted rubber banded mobs.

You are my point. You aren't interesting in game play, you are interested in getting what you want because you want it for whatever subjective reason. It is that very thing that has led us away from game play in games on to a bunch of glorified chat room entertainment simulators.

What I can't understand is why you people keep going from game to game asking for the same things and then moving on like you want something different only to ask for the same thing that keeps running you off because you aren't willing to seriously look at why you are leaving. Everything is a "I want what I want, because I want it".

Amathe

And there you have it. Dude, I am wrong. Check. I don't want a game, or know what one is. Check. I want a mainstream entertainment simulator, whatever the hell that is. Check. I am part of the evil "you people" lol. Check.

Ok, so now I want a 3 foot leash with an exclamation point over it with a golden "help find it" line on my mini-map, where I can click a teleport circle to escape with no xp loss if I die and glitter sparklies comining out of my RMT purchased cosmetic armor mainstream ass. Grats on outing me!  Oh and I marked a fake mustache on your picture of Brad. Sorry about that one. 

Vada_G

I think the results of 'leashing' a mob would really depend on how 'open' the world is. It really doesn't work in open worlds, even in 'zoned' worlds it had issues as a lot of people felt it detracted from their game experience to be interrupted or downright harassed.

It did lend a lot of atmosphere to the game though, as I can't remember anything quite as nostalgic as my first BB train or the rush beating a 'skellie' across the zone border in Kithicor. Sending one person across the zone line to see if the trains had cleared (you go Mr. Monk), was one of the gameplay elements that really led to EQ being such a social game. I don't think implementing those same elements in a modern game would produce the same results, but would love for someone to innovate some game mechanics that do produce the same community building results.

CrazKanuk

Sinist said:

CrazKanuk said:

Sinist said:

Amathe said:

I remember running all the way across Western Karana to get away from Chief Goonda and his minions, on occasions when my quarrel with them went awry. The Chief sure ran fast for a fat guy. 

While I enjoyed this game mechanic in EQ, I don't think it is necessary. In my opinion the mobs should pursue for a reasonable distance (enough where you still would have to be on your toes to escape), but not necessarily the entire zone. 

Which removes the fear, the risk, the need to be careful and making all of the various abilities I mentioned "convenience" tools, not game play ones.

If you allow a mob to rubber band you have created an easy exploit and removed the need. Numerous games over the years have experimented with differing lengths of such and all of them remove that game play element.

I have been watching a growing trend in the Pantheon forums by people who want less of the old features, who keep looking at all these elements as just "inconveniences" rather than integral to the component of play. What we end up with when we remove all those features is just another mainstream game. It was those features that defined EQ, why it provided all of the feeling, the fear, the reward for play.

As I explained, look at all of the intricate and subtle relations between skills, abilities, and various other features that such a simple thing provides. This is what people have to be careful of, it is these subtle things that provide that missing play. Remember, we did remove them all already, we have 100s of games out there that are EQ without all the things people claimed were boring, inconvenient, and cumbersome. Will making yet another one change anything?

While I love non-leashed mobs, there are plenty of reasons not to celebrate them, too. I mean as much as I think it would be cool to have something chase me across the entire world, it will ultimately cause problems. That is, unless there is better implementation, like a stamina system, for instance, which doesn't allow you to run across a map indefinitely. Or make monsters faster than you. Just saying, there are two sides to this story, for sure. It can be fun and it can cause havoc. 

How will that create the sense of fear as I explained? Maybe give an example of how to achieve the same feeling of play that EQ has because of the features I explained with the solutions you are suggesting that include rubber banding mobs?

I see people go on about how its stupid to have non-leashed and they give lots of reasons why it hampers their "enjoyment", but I don't see aany arguments made that are trying to achieve what EQ had in its feeling, because Pantheon can not achieve EQs feeling of play by relying on modern mainstream implementations.

Now I am not saying, they should disregard mainstream lessons learned, but I am not seeing arguments to support achieving EQ feeling, I am seeing lots of mainstream "convenience" arguments and unsupported "realism" arguments, none of which are concerned about getting back that EQ form of play.

Keep in mind Craz, I have watched this very thing play out game after game where the concern was "my fun", not game play and the result is... what we have today.

Well I suppose it depends on the penalty for death. I mean I don't mind being punished for sitting out in the wilderness, but if I'm in a city, I'd like to think that I'm safe and I can go make a sandwich. If we're talking full-loot OW PvP then that can be a really shitty thing because people can simply pull mob trains into cities and clean people out. If it's a simple re-rez then go for it. I was simply saying that people will be exploitative either way, it's all about which path is best for the game. 

Sinist

CrazKanuk said:

Well I suppose it depends on the penalty for death. I mean I don't mind being punished for sitting out in the wilderness, but if I'm in a city, I'd like to think that I'm safe and I can go make a sandwich. If we're talking full-loot OW PvP then that can be a really shitty thing because people can simply pull mob trains into cities and clean people out. If it's a simple re-rez then go for it. I was simply saying that people will be exploitative either way, it's all about which path is best for the game. 

I was speaking in context of this game and its purposed features.

Lets say...

Death Penalty is a strong EXP loss (maybe 1/4-1/3 of a level without a rez which would be around 30 mins - 1hour or moreof exping) and a corpse retrieval to get back your gear (part or in whole).

No PvP concern (ie the game isn't being designed for it, so there is no care to how it effects it).

No looting of corpses without the individuals permission (or not at all).


That was basic EQ.

As for trains, it really isn't much of an issue as mobs wouldn't latch on to you unless you cast on them or hit them as they were chasing another and if they had no target on their way back. Point is, a competent player really didn't have issues with this and community policing put abusers on the black list which meant they didn't find groups in a group focused game (which was kind of a death sentence for a player in EQ).

What is best for this game is to achieve a result that is fully in the spirit of EQ/VG because that is what this game is designed around. If it attends to mainstream features, foregoing all of the things that made EQ what it was, people like me and basically everyone that Brad said he was making the game to target won't play it as we can find mainstream games out there without even trying.

Sinist

Amathe said:

And there you have it. Dude, I am wrong. Check. I don't want a game, or know what one is. Check. I want a mainstream entertainment simulator, whatever the hell that is. Check. I am part of the evil "you people" lol. Check.

Ok, so now I want a 3 foot leash with an exclamation point over it with a golden "help find it" line on my mini-map, where I can click a teleport circle to escape with no xp loss if I die and glitter sparklies comining out of my RMT purchased cosmetic armor mainstream ass. Grats on outing me!  Oh and I marked a fake mustache on your picture of Brad. Sorry about that one. 

You are your argument. Look at all your arguments and tell me? I can only form an opinion of your position by the continued statements you make to the features you want and what you argue for is my point. \

Go look what EQ was, not mainstream EQ, but what it was. Read the Pantheon forum from the old schooler's who remember it pre-SOE direction. Read the Tenants of Pantheon, read the discussions about what people are worried about, what VR is concerned about, Brad's blog on aspects of EQ and its relation to gaming today, what Patheon is striving for,  etc...

Now come back here and tell me I am being unreasonable about your desire to push for mainstream features?

Felwit

Leashing and having to run to the zone are the same basic mechanic. At some point, the mob decides you have "gotten away," and won't chase you anymore.

The "problem" is not that newer MMOs have leashing. Seamless MMOs effectively require leashing in order to provide a similar zoning-to-safety experience for getting away.

The "problem" is the length of the leash. By using larger leashes, you get a similar experience. You can still have trains if you design the zone with a few bottlenecks.

I am fine with either. Leashing can be coded to be a more robust, flexible, and better system, but I suspect running to zone will be so much easier to code and not get wrong.

Sinist

Felwit said:

Leashing and having to run to the zone are the same basic mechanic. At some point, the mob decides you have "gotten away," and won't chase you anymore.

The "problem" is not that newer MMOs have leashing. Seamless MMOs effectively require leashing in order to provide a similar zoning-to-safety experience for getting away.

The "problem" is the length of the leash. By using larger leashes, you get a similar experience. You can still have trains if you design the zone with a few bottlenecks.

I am fine with either. Leashing can be coded to be a more robust, flexible, and better system, but I suspect running to zone will be so much easier to code and not get wrong.

Why should the leash be shorter than the zone line?

filmoret

It causes too many problems and isn't worth the harassment.  You want danger go play  pvp server.

Raidan_EQ

I'd prefer Trains to Zone as I do believe they add to the risk/challenge; however, I think a compromise can be made based off Mob AI as well.  A human mob would hopefully have more intelligence and not choose to follow you miles from their camp as opposed to a mindless zombie who is only seeking blood.  

But, as others have said, I think it would be easier to just code the /catch all train to zone versus trying to be mob specific.

Another option would be similar to Skyrim in that perhaps a mob would chase you all the way to the zoneline, unless you are able to hide from the mob to clear agro, in which, at that point it would be up to the player if they want to "risk" hiding versus running (and classes could have skills to help out - like a Rogue with hide/sneak).

Sinist

filmoret said:

It causes too many problems and isn't worth the harassment.  You want danger go play  pvp server.

No it doesn't. EQ had it for years. You want a mainstream game, go play one.

Sinist

Raidan_EQ said:

I'd prefer Trains to Zone as I do believe they add to the risk/challenge; however, I think a compromise can be made based off Mob AI as well.  A human mob would hopefully have more intelligence and not choose to follow you miles from their camp as opposed to a mindless zombie who is only seeking blood.  

But, as others have said, I think it would be easier to just code the /catch all train to zone versus trying to be mob specific.

Another option would be similar to Skyrim in that perhaps a mob would chase you all the way to the zoneline, unless you are able to hide from the mob to clear agro, in which, at that point it would be up to the player if they want to "risk" hiding versus running (and classes could have skills to help out - like a Rogue with hide/sneak).

Here is the problem though Raidan,  If you leash before the zone line, you remove the need to know where the zone line is. So, all you need to know then is that if you run long enough, the leash breaks and you are safe. I think realism is nice when it does not conflict with game play, but if realism only ends up giving people a freebie, reducing risk and removing the point of the danger in the game play, well... game play should then win out over realism.

Wizardry

All i need is for the design to make sense and if you had hate from a family/race member it makes sense the rest of the family might follow as well.What i like is when hate is not steadfast permanent numbers,hate should slowly fade but never completely disappear.

Ranged puller hits target and draws 500 hate,by time he gets back to camp it is only maybe 200-300 hate,making it easy for a Tank to grab hate off him.

What i liked about FFXI was the depth of ideas,sometimes when a mob was chasing you through water it would lose your scent and stop chasing you.Some mobs relied on sight only or hearing only.

Yes as in FFXI a Rogue/Thief could Hide as well but ONLY from a sight mob,if the mob relied on hearing,he could still hear you ,then hide would not work.it takes more effort by the developer to put all these systems in place,but that si what i appreciate from game design.

waynejr2

filmoret said:

Honestly I cant see your logic at all here.  You want mobs to ignore each other and mindlessly chase you until they kill you or get killed by another player?  Well for starters if a mob is mad enough to chase you to the end of the earth then what about the other mobs in the area?  Shouldn't they kill each other too?  Do you see the mountain of problems that now appear?  Players could just agro a bunch of mobs into each other and loot their corpses after they kill each other.  Because simply chasing you and ignoring their environment is too unrealistic.  They are suppose to be living and breathing creatures that self preservation comes first and the need to kill someone for walking by is secondary.  The further away from their lair they go the more likely they will die and they really should know this.

They mindless stand around until players aggro them so why not?  These are abstractions so whatever rules the devs want to apply are valid.   I'd say if you aggro a mob and it chases you a long way passing other mobs that could fight with it you earned it. That simple.  Or are you looking to find a way to avoid combat by getting npcs to fight each other?  CLever? no, just boring.

Leashing all mobs seems like throwing out the baby with the bath water.  There could be exceptional cases such as vampire leashed to underground lest they chase you into the sunlight and die.  Unleashing is more fun and interesting that static mobs.