Let's talk about Item Persistance (Threading, Decay, Etc)

[Corky Thatcher]

Can someone explain how persistent items are?

I've seem references to a goblinworks blog post that no longer exists, re: item decay. I've also seen references to "threading" which seem to only affect whether something is lootable or not. I've also seem mentioning of "item repair" but I'm not sure if that really exists, if there are diminishing returns, etc.

So, in essence...do all items eventually decay into nothing or do they exist indefinitely?

(I ask because, in my experience, a health player-driven economy requires that all items eventually decay to nothing.)

[Dario]

My understanding is that items can leave the game in two ways:

A) Destruction on Death. This can only happen to unthreaded items, but a portion of anything left on the corpse is instantly destroyed as soon as you die.

B) Item Decay. I don't recall reading anything specific about this, other than it was deemed to be necessary to allow for turnover in the types of gear that would commonly be threaded, so that those particular crafts did not stagnate. I've seen a lot of players talking about repairing items, but I'm not sure whether or not that will be possible, or what the cost involved will be, but I expect it will have to be done by the same people capable of crafting the item if they implement repairs.

[Gol Morbis]

Short answer, cause iPad; Items decay. They never actually break, but their durability can drop to the point where they are useless. Crafters can repair such gear, at a similar cost to the initial crafting (50% broken, 50% cost).

I suspect a fair bit of settlement logistics will be reclaiming broken gear and having crafters fix it all up.

[Kobold Catgirl]

All items eventually decay into nothing.

Threading is what keeps you from losing items. It's the equivalent to Runescape's "Keep 3 items on death" mechanic, except each death causes decay. The stuff that ain't threaded can be destroyed, or it gets looted.

Items damaged by decay can be repaired by craftsmen—the same sort of people who made the item in the first place.

[Bringslite of Fidelis]

Some Good Reason for Your Little Black Backpack

[Stephen Cheney]

With the caveat that none of this is in yet:

Every time you die, 25% of your unthreaded items (random chance per item for singles or small stacks, rounded percentage of total items in a stack for stacked items) are destroyed. The remaining unthreaded items are on your corpse and lootable. You respawn with your threaded gear, but it takes a point of durability damage. Not sure yet how many points an item can take before it's nonfunctional.

You can only thread items you have equipped. You will also use threads on discretionary respawn points (i.e., you can allocate threads to have more/closer respawn locations).

You get enough threads at start to bind most pieces of T1 gear you're likely to have (i.e., not enough to bind an item in every slot, but enough for the slots you're likely to be able to fill in the near term). You can increase your threads as you advance. The maximum amount of threads you can have are approximately enough to bind a T3 suit of armor and a weapon (or a larger number of misc T3 in lieu of the armor or weapon).

We're hoping to set up a priority system where you can rank the importance of various gear slots, and the system will try to automatically reallocate threads as you change equipment (e.g., armor is most important to you, and you change a T2 armor to a T3 suit, so a few pieces of misc gear get automatically unthreaded to free threads for the armor). That is, you can rearrange the priorities if you want to micromanage your threads, but even if you never touch the system or just don't want to remember every time you change gear, it will automatically protect you.

The repair system isn't developed yet, but the concept is that a decayed item can be repaired at a relative cost to how much decay it's taken by a crafter that could have made in the first place. For example, if your sword is half destroyed, it costs approximately half as much as it would to craft it in the first place to repair it in materials and time from a Weaponsmith with the recipe for that sword.

[Dario]

Welp, that's about as official as it gets. =P

[Corky Thatcher]

Thanks, Stephen. Very informative.

So, in essence, items do not decay into nothing. You can keep armor/weapons forever.

::sad face::

[First0f0ne]

Corky Thatcher wrote:

You can keep armor/weapons forever.

You can if they are threaded AND if you pay some one to repair them. They still take damage from durability loss on each death even if they are threaded.

[Bringslite of Fidelis]

Corky Thatcher wrote:

Thanks, Stephen. Very informative.

So, in essence, items do not decay into nothing. You can keep armor/weapons forever.

::sad face::

Since the cost of repair is relative to the cost of making the item from scratch, it is exactly the same as if it were destroyed and made anew after "X" number of repairs. Same (for everyone) as a use until destroyed system. Just as much work for the crafter although a bit more annoying for everyone. :)

[KoTC Edam Neadenil]

Current trend seems to be heading towards lotsa nakid ppl running around with just the one massively expensive threaded bow and heaps of ammo kiting.

[Kobold Catgirl]

mo liek PANTSfinder Online

[Crash_00]

I am worried about that trend. I really hope the player community is able to keep up crafting gear with deaths.

[TEO Urman]

KoTC Edam Neadenil wrote:

Current trend seems to be heading towards lotsa nakid ppl running around with just the one massively expensive threaded bow and heaps of ammo kiting.

Sounds like a lot of ammo will drop as loot, then.

edit to add: Near-naked fighting might work in the short run, but damage mitigation will probably be more important when people have better weapons.

In another thread someone was discussing making five +1 swords or one +5 sword. If someone is carrying a +5 sword, she's probably going to be dedicated to melee, because she won't want to risk switching to a missile weapon and dying before she can switch back. Likewise, in some games like Wurm, people switch in and out of armor in chase situations. That might be a fast way to lose a good set of armor that's temporarily unthreaded.

[Jiminy]

Bringslite of Fidelis wrote:

Corky Thatcher wrote:

Thanks, Stephen. Very informative.

So, in essence, items do not decay into nothing. You can keep armor/weapons forever.

::sad face::

Since the cost of repair is relative to the cost of making the item from scratch, it is exactly the same as if it were destroyed and made anew after "X" number of repairs. Same (for everyone) as a use until destroyed system. Just as much work for the crafter although a bit more annoying for everyone. :)

There is a possibility that repairing will use a subset, or different, materials than crafting from scratch does. Repair mats might be more plentiful in some areas of the map, and crafting mats in others.

[Bringslite of Fidelis]

Jiminy wrote:

Bringslite of Fidelis wrote:

Corky Thatcher wrote:

Thanks, Stephen. Very informative.

So, in essence, items do not decay into nothing. You can keep armor/weapons forever.

::sad face::

Since the cost of repair is relative to the cost of making the item from scratch, it is exactly the same as if it were destroyed and made anew after "X" number of repairs. Same (for everyone) as a use until destroyed system. Just as much work for the crafter although a bit more annoying for everyone. :)

There is a possibility that repairing will use a subset, or different, materials than crafting from scratch does. Repair mats might be more plentiful in some areas of the map, and crafting mats in others.

Do you know of information pointing to that or is it a suggestion?

[Kitsune Aou]

KoTC Edam Neadenil wrote:

Current trend seems to be heading towards lotsa nakid ppl running around with just the one massively expensive threaded bow and heaps of ammo kiting.

I would also worry about such a trend, but I think we'd be safe in the long run, as long as Goblinworks is willing to adapt and adjust as needed. For example, in this case, they could do a few things:

1) increase the number of "ranged" mobs (e.g. throw an archer-type into every group pull).
2) increase the damage dealt by ranged mobs somehow
3) otherwise balance the amount of damage mobs do to characters without armor (e.g. increase damage dealt AND the amount of damage mitigated by armor, simultaneously).

Might such for wizards, though. Be sure to bring a tank, then! :P

[Jiminy]

Bringslite of Fidelis wrote:

Do you know of information pointing to that or is it a suggestion?

It's nothing more than hypothesis at this point.

[Wurner]

TEO Urman wrote:

In another thread someone was discussing making five +1 swords or one +5 sword. If someone is carrying a +5 sword, she's probably going to be dedicated to melee, because she won't want to risk switching to a missile weapon and dying before she can switch back. Likewise, in some games like Wurm, people switch in and out of armor in chase situations. That might be a fast way to lose a good set of armor that's temporarily unthreaded.

Seems to me that if we have weapon swapping enabled, both weapon sets should be considered "equipped" in this respect. Swapping to bow during the fight and dying should not mean that you can lose your threaded polearm.

Also, switching out your armor while running and fighting? (^-^) That's a very strange thing to do, the way I see it. I hope they don't make that possible.

[Kemedo]

Will there be a Skill to improved thread itens? Because if the power of the item mensure a quantity of thread used, it's fair to have a skill that could maintain the same level of thread itens through levels.

[Crash_00]

It sounded like it from what Stephen said. You start with enough to thread the T1 items you'll start with and you can get to enough to thread T3 armor and a weapon. Seems like it builds at about the same level.

[Guurzak]

The way I read that was your threading capacity does increase, but not as quickly as the threading requirements of level-appropriate items. So a level 1 with a bunch of T1 gear will have much more of it threaded (almost all) than a L20 with a bunch of T3 gear (just weapon and main armor item).

[TEO Pino]

Stephen Cheney wrote:

With the caveat that none of this is in yet:

...
You get enough threads at start to bind most pieces of T1 gear you're likely to have (i.e., not enough to bind an item in every slot, but enough for the slots you're likely to be able to fill in the near term). You can increase your threads as you advance. The maximum amount of threads you can have are approximately enough to bind a T3 suit of armor and a weapon (or a larger number of misc T3 in lieu of the armor or weapon).
...

All that T1, T3 talk is confusing my impression that it takes 1 thread per slot, regardless of the gear's tier.

[Guurzak]

TEO Pino wrote:

All that T1, T3 talk is confusing my impression that it takes 1 thread per slot, regardless of the gear's tier.

That impression is definitely incorrect. Threading a higher-tier item costs more threads than a lower-tier item.

If this were not the case, then there would be no interesting decisions to make between fully threading underpowered gear, or equipping a max-capabilities suit and risking most of it unthreaded.

[Tyncale]

All in all, it seems that the current rules concerning death and looting are pretty harsh.

I see a lot of references to doing stuff "naked" in games with harsh loot rules, like Darkfall. And there seems to be a serious chance in PFO too for anyone who does not plan on fighting, to rather thread his pricy harvesting-kit and tool(assuming these can be equipped) and then harvest while in his undies.

Is there even a middle road here, in games that have pretty much all-out item-loss on death?

I would love to hear from PvP-veterans about Games that manage to reward the killer (and fuel the Economy) but at the same time gives enough incentive for people to wear (and care about!) items.

[Nihimon]

Wurner wrote:

TEO Urman wrote:

In another thread someone was discussing making five +1 swords or one +5 sword. If someone is carrying a +5 sword, she's probably going to be dedicated to melee, because she won't want to risk switching to a missile weapon and dying before she can switch back. Likewise, in some games like Wurm, people switch in and out of armor in chase situations. That might be a fast way to lose a good set of armor that's temporarily unthreaded.

Seems to me that if we have weapon swapping enabled, both weapon sets should be considered "equipped" in this respect. Swapping to bow during the fight and dying should not mean that you can lose your threaded polearm.

Also, switching out your armor while running and fighting? (^-^) That's a very strange thing to do, the way I see it. I hope they don't make that possible.

This is indeed the way things work in Alpha.

You must "equip" both weapons, one in your primary slot and the other in your secondary slot. And you can't switch armor (or even open your inventory) during combat.

[Guurzak]

Tyncale wrote:

All in all, it seems that the current rules concerning death and looting are pretty harsh.

I see a lot of references to doing stuff "naked" in games with harsh loot rules, like Darkfall. And there seems to be a serious chance in PFO too for anyone who does not plan on fighting, to rather thread his pricy harvesting-kit and tool(assuming these can be equipped) and then harvest while in his undies.

Is there even a middle road here, in games that have pretty much all-out item-loss on death?

I would love to hear from PvP-veterans about Games that manage to reward the killer (and fuel the Economy) but at the same time gives enough incentive for people to wear (and care about!) items.

This is a definite risk, but it's one that can be mitigated. The way you prevent naked pvp is make pvping while naked unviable. Make a naked vs clothed fight a trivial win for the clothed player.

[Nihimon]

Guurzak wrote:

The way you prevent naked pvp is make pvping while naked unviable.

Ryan Dancey (Goblinworks Blog: Gypsies, Tramps, and Thieves) wrote:

@Elth - the classic problem with naked PK is that it remains a viable tactic over a long period of time.

What we want to do is create a feedback loop where the more you do that, the harder it becomes to do it again, and eventually it becomes so hard that the PKer abandons the tactic.

If that feedback loop operates swiftly enough then the average PK ganker who is just in it for the lulz won't get enough positive reinforcement to do it at all and the problem stops before it starts.

Ryan goes on to discuss the oft-mentioned "Layered Approach".

[Crash_00]

That's really just a stall. The next phase will be people finding the minimum viable "clothing" to minimize risk for their reward. The market will stale for everything other than minimum viable clothing except in heavy PvP areas (competitive). Essentially the minimum viable clothing becomes the new naked (after all, they are running around naked to minimize the risk associated).

So then they make fights against the minimum viable clothing trivial for the next grade up. The process rinses and repeats. If they keep mitigating the issue at that point, the power gap between tiers increases drastically (which is something they were trying to shy away from).

Short term patches are easy, long term is not so much.

We haven't seen the system yet, so I'm holding out hope, but I have the same fear that Tyncale shared. If death becomes too harsh (and profitable), gathering will become naked (or low geared) mobs just "gathering" from the decently geared.

@Tyncale
It's really just going to come down to the economy and GW ability to tweak it as needed. They seem to be proactive, so it's good to remain positive on it. My fear actually comes down to the gatherers themselves. Gathering is a PvE action. Sure, there will be PvP out there too, especially in rarer resource areas, but the key mechanics they've stressed for it are PvE.

Nodes are near PvE mobs and attract PvE mobs when you tap them. Most people I know that enjoy gathering, typically don't like PvP. They also typically don't like item loss on death. The 25% item loss on death while gathering may or may not drive away that par of the player base, which could heavily affect the economy.

Of course, if we see less gatherers stick around, hopefully they'll tweak the system to require less materials to compensate. Similarly, if we see floods of gatherers, they'd need to tweak the system to require more mats to compensate.

The hard test for this will come after OE though, when accounts are much easier to come by. If "gathering" by mobbing higher level players is faster and easier than actual gathering, then there is a high chance of seeing new accounts created just for that type of farming to skirt the rep system.

[Being]

Jiminy wrote:

Bringslite of Fidelis wrote:

Do you know of information pointing to that or is it a suggestion?

It's nothing more than hypothesis at this point.

Recommend posting it as an idea at the IdeaScale site.

[DeciusBrutus]

@Crash: when players have to make a cost/benefit review of what armor to wear, the goal is complete. Ideally, there will be several cheap loadouts that are situationally superior to each other.

[T7V Jazzlvraz]

Recently mentioned in a devpost was using one's threads to maintain "nearby" bind-points. It seems that there could be a worry that naked-gathering people, with their threads used for that purpose, could simply accept their deaths when attacked, lose little in travelling time, and, if they don't care to attempt retrieval of their lost materials, proceed on their merry gathering-way.

It also feels, to me, as if that's a perfectly legitimate way to play PFO. Perhaps the truly clever will find some way of pacifist-griefing the Reputations of those who choose to kill them.

[Tyncale]

Nihimon wrote:

Guurzak wrote:

The way you prevent naked pvp is make pvping while naked unviable.

Ryan Dancey (Goblinworks Blog: Gypsies, Tramps, and Thieves) wrote:

@Elth - the classic problem with naked PK is that it remains a viable tactic over a long period of time.

What we want to do is create a feedback loop where the more you do that, the harder it becomes to do it again, and eventually it becomes so hard that the PKer abandons the tactic.

If that feedback loop operates swiftly enough then the average PK ganker who is just in it for the lulz won't get enough positive reinforcement to do it at all and the problem stops before it starts.

Ryan goes on to discuss the oft-mentioned "Layered Approach".

I think this quote is more about discouraging PK's(that are apparently naked) through reputation and other systems, then a solution for those that are *not* looking for a fight(i.e. want to harvest) and decide to do this naked because they know there is a fair chance they will lose everything. I guess it is a choice for those that are not PvP-adepts and can not or will not always harvest in a combat-ready group. But with these rules it seems to be the only choice for such people.

@Crash_00. The itemloss could be much greater then 25%, I would count on 100% most of the time unless your killer (or killerS) are all encumbered. Do not forget the other 75% can be looted. Or destroyed: some very competitive people have already admitted that they would rather do that then leave it on the corpse(weaken the enemy).

I realize that gear should churn in this game, and that people should have several sets in the bank, of different Tiers. I intend to make a living out of this churn. But the item-loss at death seems so severe that it is going to influence the equip-behaviour in a serious and possibly negative way.

I also do not believe in corpse retrievals in this game(made a long post about that somewhere), if only that there will be killers who would rather destroy stuff then leave it on the corpse. Just does not seem worth the hassle of retrieving your corpse, better go naked right away. Corpse-retrievals are also horribly unfun, even more so in a PvP-game. At least in a PvE game you know that your stuff will actually still be on your corpse.

Personally I think we will see that 25% destroy and 75% loot figure being tweaked to lower numbers, or the mechanics tweaked somewhat in favor of the victim.

Then again maybe not, and instead GW decides to implement a whole line of fancy, statless Harvesting Gear that you can not lose! ( maybe only sustains damage). That would look at least less stupid. :)

[Being]

Character death was called "the poor man's teleport" back in the day.

[Nihimon]

Tyncale wrote:

Nihimon wrote:

Guurzak wrote:

The way you prevent naked pvp is make pvping while naked unviable.

Ryan Dancey (Goblinworks Blog: Gypsies, Tramps, and Thieves) wrote:

@Elth - the classic problem with naked PK is that it remains a viable tactic over a long period of time.

What we want to do is create a feedback loop where the more you do that, the harder it becomes to do it again, and eventually it becomes so hard that the PKer abandons the tactic.

If that feedback loop operates swiftly enough then the average PK ganker who is just in it for the lulz won't get enough positive reinforcement to do it at all and the problem stops before it starts.

Ryan goes on to discuss the oft-mentioned "Layered Approach".

I think this quote is more about discouraging PK's(that are apparently naked) through reputation and other systems, then a solution for those that are *not* looking for a fight(i.e. want to harvest) and decide to do this naked because they know there is a fair chance they will lose everything. I guess it is a choice for those that are not PvP-adepts and can not or will not always harvest in a combat-ready group. But with these rules it seems to be the only choice for such people.

Well, yeah, but it was pretty on-point to Guurzak's post :)

My own take on "naked harvesting" is that it's the kind of thing you do in a murder simulator where you're extremely likely to be killed. I believe it's quite likely that most harvesting (although certainly not the most profitable harvesting) in PFO will occur in the NPC safe areas, or in Settlement-patrolled ares that should be reasonably safe.

[Guurzak]

Safe from pc's doesn't equal safe- we know that monsters will respond to gathering efforts, which should discourage naked harvesting.

[Crash_00]

DeciusBrutus wrote:

@Crash: when players have to make a cost/benefit review of what armor to wear, the goal is complete. Ideally, there will be several cheap loadouts that are situationally superior to each other.

When players have to make a cost/benefit decision, then the goal is complete. I'll agree with that.

However, if the decision becomes a no-brainer, then the goal was missed. It's not really a decision anymore.

If all that is ever worn is cheap loadout by everyone but PvPers wishing to be competitive, then there is an issue in the system. It becomes pointless to have the better loadouts.

If Mobbing decent geared players with low geared players ends up being more efficient than actual gathering, that is what will happen.

@Tyncale
I was actually talking about gatherers dying to PvE events. It's like this.

PvE death = 25% lost loot, possible 100% if you get looted while you're racing back.*
PvP death = 25% lost loot automatic, 100% lost loot likely.* Is there even a point in racing back.
*referring to unthreaded loot

[Bringslite of Fidelis]

Crash_00 wrote:

If all that is ever worn is cheap loadout by everyone but PvPers wishing to be competitive, then there is an issue in the system. It becomes pointless to have the better loadouts.

If those most interested in PVP are wearing great "loadouts" to be competitive and mostly going after others interested in PVP, why would there be a problem? Your best (gear) loot is on your most interested target.

As mentioned above, gatherers will need to be ready for PVE in the best areas to gather. If they are doing it without backup. Probably even if they are.

[Crash_00]

At that point, the PvPers end up in a smaller and smaller pool of competitive players as more and more players take low gear and just farm the high gear players in mobs. It's the peak before the downward spiral. Players that actually want competitive PvP have issues, because no one is on their footing. Which leaves them the option of always dressing down to fight, if they actually want real competition. The only people left are the ones that don't really want competitive PvP, but it doesn't matter because they get mob ganked for their gear.

Fear of losing gear can be a good thing.
Too much fear of losing gear is a very bad thing.
Treading that fine line is the difference between a good game and what me and Tyncale fear might happen if gear loss is too severe.

You'll end up at a point where the only things worn are the cheapest gear and good threaded gear, and at that point, what is the point of player looting?

[Tyncale]

Nihimon wrote:

My own take on "naked harvesting" is that it's the kind of thing you do in a murder simulator where you're extremely likely to be killed. I believe it's quite likely that most harvesting (although certainly not the most profitable harvesting) in PFO will occur in the NPC safe areas, or in Settlement-patrolled ares that should be reasonably safe.

Yes, I certainly agree with that, and hope those areas are indeed relatively safe.

[DeciusBrutus]

Why can't PvP be competitive if there's a meaningful reason to limit exposure to loss?

[Bringslite of Fidelis]

Crash_00 wrote:

At that point, the PvPers end up in a smaller and smaller pool of competitive players as more and more players take low gear and just farm the high gear players in mobs. It's the peak before the downward spiral. Players that actually want competitive PvP have issues, because no one is on their footing. Which leaves them the option of always dressing down to fight, if they actually want real competition. The only people left are the ones that don't really want competitive PvP, but it doesn't matter because they get mob ganked for their gear.

Fear of losing gear can be a good thing.
Too much fear of losing gear is a very bad thing.
Treading that fine line is the difference between a good game and what me and Tyncale fear might happen if gear loss is too severe.

You'll end up at a point where the only things worn are the cheapest gear and good threaded gear, and at that point, what is the point of player looting?

Well I hope that doesn't get too out of hand for a couple of reasons: I really don't want murderers to have a tough time getting gear. I want to craft and sell lots of gear.

One of the above reasons is not really how I feel. ;)

With threading, I don't see how you can avoid it. That is probably why repair could play the most important place. It is annoying and not glamorous, but in a full loot deal it will devolve to "naked" mobs often enough anyway.

Note: The naked hunter-killer or siege soldier was not really a problem in DFUW when I played. They did complain often about the lone naked gatherers though.

[Crash_00]

Naked gatherers are pretty much the end cycle. When you can't loot better gear off of other players, the only ones left to kill are the ones transporting materials. Hence, gatherers needing to negate all risk, because they become the only valuable target.

@Decius
PvP against mismatched opponents is not competitive. For example:

Player A has a full set of Tier 3. Two hundred other players also have Tier 3. They enjoy competitive PvP among each other.

Mobbing becomes more efficient than gathering. No one wears their competitive gear anymore.

The two hundred players shrinks to one hundred, then to 50, finally Player A is only looking at 25 other players willing to wear their Tier 3 to PvP. His only other choice is to dress down to what everyone else wears or PvP within a very small crowd if he wants actual competition.

Loss can be meaningful without being overpowering. Meaningful is good. Overpowering leads people to run around naked.

This is tied directly to economy. If its faster and less risky to gather and have things crafted, than to run around geeking people, then this behavior is less likely to develop. If it isn't, then it will see the same problem as other games once OE starts.

Personally, I'd like to see the system destroy (the 25% upon death) created items with priority rather than materials and recipes. I feel that would help sway the system away from murdering for gear, since you'd have to get the mats crafted into gear, thus somewhat balancing the time factor.

[Guurzak]

I'm not sure where this no-competition anticycle is coming from. One on one is not the only combat dynamic, and duels between equals are not the reason most players will be logging in. If a full party of Tier-3 geared vets is a match for a 20-man formation in Tier 2, that's competition and incentive to gear up.

[Nihimon]

Crash_00 wrote:

If its faster and less risky to gather and have things crafted, than to run around geeking people, then this behavior is less likely to develop. If it isn't, then it will see the same problem as other games once OE starts.

I'm having trouble finding it right now, but I remember Ryan making a post a long time ago about the negative consequences that would result if the most efficient way to get good gear was to find a well-geared player and take it from them. I remember the ideas expressed, but not the words used to express them, and Summon Nihimon is throwing an Invalid Arg0 exception :(

Crash_00 wrote:

Personally, I'd like to see the system destroy (the 25% upon death) created items with priority rather than materials and recipes. I feel that would help sway the system away from murdering for gear, since you'd have to get the mats crafted into gear, thus somewhat balancing the time factor.

This makes a lot of sense to me.

[DeciusBrutus]

If it becomes consistently cost-effective to field characters with maximum-cost equipment, the system has failed in a way similar to and exactly opposite the way it fails if it is consistently cost-ineffective to field characters wearing more than the bare minimum.

The middle ground is where sometimes players choose to use lower quality gear to reduce risk, and sometimes go big for high-risk high-potential activities.

[Kobold Catgirl]

Yeah, I like that idea, too.

[Nihimon]

I hope there's room for some players to consistently wear very valuable gear. I totally get the adage "don't wear what you can't afford to lose" and have a lot of hope I can afford to (infrequently!) lose some really good gear :)

[TEO Urman]

Guurzak wrote:

I'm not sure where this no-competition anticycle is coming from. One on one is not the only combat dynamic, and duels between equals are not the reason most players will be logging in. If a full party of Tier-3 geared vets is a match for a 20-man formation in Tier 2, that's competition and incentive to gear up.

That's my expectation as well. I'm not sure how often combat will be merely for the sake of combat. If some group has the goal of burning down an enemy's Outpost, they'll want to wear enough gear that they can fight off opposition long enough to complete the task. Spending Friday night on multiple respawn runs because naked people die pretty fast might mean that the Outpost isn't destroyed at the end of the night.

[Elorebaen]

I haven't seen it yet, but can you actually wear only underwear? If so, I would hope GW would make "naked" closer to just plain commoner type clothes.