Twenty Questions with the LOTRO Dev Team - July 2013

[TheMadCat]

The problem is, the same sort of vague non-answers such policies would require are the same exact non-answers that would be used to placate a distressed playerbase by a spokesperson who isn't allowed to tell the entire truth. The answer to question 16 *is* vague, and there's no way we'll know the reason why until either official notice of the extension or notice of shutdown is announced.

I would've much rather seen a straight-out honest answer like "we can't comment on a license extension until it is finalized" instead of what we got. And the worst are the condescending replies from Turbine insisting that it's not vague, and the allusions to tinfoil hats.

All that it takes to see the vagueness is to imagine what the PR comment would be if the game WAS ending and the extension wasn't signed. Pretty much exactly what was said in the Q&A. A non-binding answer followed by a non-sequitur. The relationship with MEE isn't relevant, is it? Turbine holds the option, so the deciding factor in continuing the game would be whether or not WB wants to continue to develop it, not MEE, right?

So either something *actually* got signed/agreed upon and Turbine WILL be developing the game for 3 more years, a brand new contract was signed that actually gives the rights for "many" years, or nothing was signed, and the "plan" is to develop the game for "many more" years. But we still don't know. It's not conspiracy theory, it's just that one shouldn't accept even strong hints (wink wink nudge nudge) as fact.

The problem is an expiring license isn't the only thing that can shut LotRO down and I think that's where the "vagueness" stems from. Reality is WB can shut LotRO and/or Turbine down tomorrow is they wished for a variety of reasons, the game would be gone and it would have zero to do with a licensing agreement. It's never a smart PR move to assure something when there are so many variables at play and almost all of them out of your control. I do think Turbine confirmed that the license will keep going post 2014 while still keeping everything bound to reality.

[Carolas]

Good to see these sort of answers coming from the team; even the fluff question. Some questions and thoughts about the ones that feel relevant.

Q2: Are there any plans to change the RNG? I know a lot of people are beyond frustrated at it, as it doesn’t seem as random for some as it does for others.

A2: We have no plans to update the random number generator (RNG). It’s normal for individuals to receive runs of luck (good or bad) in the short term. The random element of the game, may appear to be broken, but the RNG is running for the entire server instance, not for one player at a time. - Nathan

The problem is not that the RNG is working or not, but that the items that people are trying to get have a low chance of dropping, which leads naturally to a hugely spread distribution of how many runs you are going to have to do to get it to drop.

If say a ring drops from the boss 5% of the time, someone will get it their first time, but nearly 1 in 10 people will still be waiting to see it drop having run the instance 50 times. If its rarer; the spread gets worse. For me that is the irritating thing, the extreme variation between 2 players doing exactly the same thing, and it is WAI. If the drop rates were higher, people would be less frustrated (20% drop rate and you'll be really unlucky not to see it after 15-20 runs, where the difference doesn't feel as bad). I can see the appeal of a token based system, kill the boss 25 times and I can barter for what I want.

Ironically considering all those stats, I have not trusted a computer based RNG for over 10 years. Whenever I hear the 'RNG is working fine,' I mention the WI flag.

Q7: It has been said before that adding a new Freep class isn't on the cards, but why is that so? Is there simply no feasible placement for a new class given the roles of current classes or is it more a case of prioritizing time, resources, etc?

A7: Creating a class from scratch is a big endeavor. Our current class revamps should, in theory, have several beneficial byproducts. First, we are cleaning them up, top-to-bottom. They will be more rewarding and builds will be more defined. They will also be easier for us to maintain. While I can’t say that a new class is in the works (there isn’t) the revamp will make it a lot easier to consider one in the future. - Zimmitti

Cannot comment on the new classes, but would wonder what the time line is for revealing information about the revamp? It was announced almost 6 months ago and almost nothing has appeared since. As a player of one of the Hybrid classes, I'm starting to get twitchy about what you are planning to do to my Loremaster

Q14: Will Chicken Session play ever be extended into new areas, as the game expands .. Possibly with a new skill or 2 to enable better survivability ?

A14: I had actually forgotten all about chicken play! I still have the Trollshaws quest in my log...waiting. Waiting. Someday I'll finish the journey. This question is a good reminder; we can't promise new chicken play content, but I promise to look into it! I would actually love to make some new sessions to explore the newer content from the eyes of a chicken. - Lauren

Please. Anything Chicken Play related would be wonderful.

Q15: What is Turbine's process for tuning landscape/quests/instances/raids to an appropriate level of difficulty. Especially considering the huge gulf in the level of equipment within the player base. On group content do you have an ideal class composition in mind when you tune the content?

A15: For landscape, there’s actually an old rule for soloable gameplay of how many monsters an average player should be asked to fight for a quest. 1 signature, 2 normals, 3 swarms. This has needed tweaking as the game changes, especially with the introduction of Mounted Combat, Warbands, and open tapping most of all.
Landscape quest challenge is difficult to put into words because I think a lot of it comes from playing our game and feeling what was too easy, too hard, too grindy, too quick. The balance comes from what we learn while playing, and it becomes something that’s not completely conscious in our design decisions, but instead very ingrained in everything we do.

We do always look for ways to insert challenge into the content, but challenging combat usually takes the form of side quests, since many soloers won’t be able to get through it. In Wildermore, we added a bunch of skills to the new Warbands because we learned that the Rohan Warbands were widely considered too easy. – Lauren

Nice insight to the planned level of opponents, and it certainly feels right from the SOA days. I have to wonder if it has scaled as expected in the last couple of expansions, as the 1 sig/2 norm/3 swarm feels off from where I have felt under threat for a while.

That may come down to the character the content is balanced against. Which leads to the obvious question of any thoughts of more challenging solo content (with appropriate rewards), as now the options are unchallenging landscape content, or group content, with nothing in between.

Q16: Given player concerns about the license and Turbine's relationship with Saul Zaentz/Middle-earth Enterprises, can you say anything about LOTRO ending in 2014 as some have predicted?

A16: We plan to support LOTRO for many more years to come. We are very fortunate in that we enjoy a great relationship with Middle-earth Enterprises. They visit our offices several times a year to check out our upcoming plans for LOTRO and continue to be very supportive. - Sapience

I can understand why this one has got people's hackles up. With no offense meant, it feels like a carefully constructed, almost political answer. As a rabid football fan it triggers the same fear response I get when a player is about to enter the last year of their contract. Invariably all sides release comments with a very similar feel that dance around the answer. Usually as others have mentioned, its because neither side can say anything publicly, or the situation has not yet been resolved. Having seen how it can turn out in other circumstances; it just makes me nervous.

Q20: Why can't we mail more than one item at a time? How hard is it to change this?
A20: This has come up for discussion several times. It’s difficult to concretely answer a question like “how hard is it to…”, but suffice to say this is more than a few days of work – “bigger than a breadbox”, as we like to say. - Nathan

I seem to work around it with a mix of shared storage and Kin chests, but that is really overcoming the deficits in the mail system by not using it. The system is just a nagging reminder of the game's age -- especially when older games have introduced improved systems (EVE's contracts for example; though as an EVE system it has its own uniquely interesting issues).

The thing I mail most these days is money, so with that in mind, any thoughts towards shared/kin banks?

[Elrantiri]

The problem is an expiring license isn't the only thing that can shut LotRO down and I think that's where the "vagueness" stems from. Reality is WB can shut LotRO and/or Turbine down tomorrow is they wished for a variety of reasons, the game would be gone and it would have zero to do with a licensing agreement. It's never a smart PR move to assure something when there are so many variables at play and almost all of them out of your control. I do think Turbine confirmed that the license will keep going post 2014 while still keeping everything bound to reality.

However, Turbine have done the exact opposite - that's the whole reason there's so much confusion about LotrO post 2014 as I see it.
On Twitter and in this thread, Sapience confirmed LotrO will exist after 2014 for sure:

https://twitter.com/rickheaton/statu...14527734038529

It a very straight forward answer. We can neither support nor develop the game without a license. We will be doing so for many more years. Not a single bit of vagueness there.

Despite those potential issues you mention, Turbine has gone out and assured LotrO will exist after 2014 rather than just stating the license has been extended. Sapience even seems to deliberately avoid stating that the license has been extended, considering how he chose to answer a yes/no question:

The answer to question 16 is very ambiguous and open to interpretation.

Can we have a straight yes or know answer, has Turbine extended the licence to 2017?

It a very straight forward answer. We can neither support nor develop the game without a license. We will be doing so for many more years. Not a single bit of vagueness there.

I have no clue why we're getting this kind of answers, but it seems clear that's all we're getting.

[BadEwok]

with the RNG i have seen some crazy things. i have a hunter friend on dwarro who has run IP close to if not over 1000 times trying to recieve a golden hunters dagger. In fact, he gave up running the instance figuring he would never get it. other hunters have gotten it after only a few runs. I personally feel that it is extremely stupid to have to run the same run a million times with only a CHANCE a getting the item your after. I enjoy most of the different 3m/6m/12m runs, but i really dont enjoy the same run more than 10-20 times in a row. it gets to the point where i am basically sleep running the run as my mind zones out and i become a grinding zombie. I agree with some of the earlier posts that having a system that alows you to barter for the item after so many times running it would be excellent. This would make the grinding easier as the end would be in sight. I dont know how difficult this would be to do, but something needs to be done, as having to run 1000 runs for one gold item ( and still not getting it) is insane.

[TheMadCat]

However, Turbine have done the exact opposite - that's the whole reason there's so much confusion about LotrO post 2014 as I see it.
On Twitter and in this thread, Sapience confirmed LotrO will exist after 2014 for sure:

https://twitter.com/rickheaton/statu...14527734038529



Despite those potential issues you mention, Turbine has gone out and assured LotrO will exist after 2014 rather than just stating the license has been extended. Sapience even seems to deliberately avoid stating that the license has been extended, considering how he chose to answer a yes/no question:


I have no clue why we're getting this kind of answers, but it seems clear that's all we're getting.

Where exactly is the confusion stemming from then? The answer seems pretty clear to me.

[Elrantiri]

Where exactly is the confusion stemming from then? The answer seems pretty clear to me.

You and I have/(had?) very different interpretations of what Turbine has confirmed or not, how does that make the answer seem clear? to me, that's a pretty good hint the answer isn't clear at all.

What confuses me is why Sapience & co choose to communicate as they do - even when given a yes/no question, he chooses to give a longer answer where the reader need to deduce the actual yes/no answer - and even then it will only be an expectation. Then he tops it by saying there's not a single bit of vagueness about that answer.
Granted, I'm no expert in communication and Sapience most likely is, but whether or not an answer is vague or not completely depends on the recipient. If the recipient finds the answer vague/unclear, like this one:

The answer to question 16 is very ambiguous and open to interpretation.

Can we have a straight yes or know answer, has Turbine extended the licence to 2017?

then I find it wrong of the sender to consider the answer clear. If the answer was clear, the recipient would have found the answer to be clear.

[Lohi]

What confuses me is why Sapience & co choose to communicate as they do - even when given a yes/no question, he chooses to give a longer answer

This is because a yes/no answer will be even more confusing! Ie, I think the correct answer is "no", the license renewal contract for next year is not completed and signed. But some players will immediately pounce on that as proof that the game is dead or in imminent danger of termination, or that Turbine is clueless or lazy or something else. There should be zero confusion except that some players are convinced that this new contract must be finished now or else the entire game's future is highly uncertain.

The correct answer, which is not a yes/no answer, is that yes they plan to keep this game going for a long time and that they are not keeping the imminent demise a secret and they have not mysteriously forgotten that fact that a contract is up for renewal next year.

[Elrantiri]

This is because a yes/no answer will be even more confusing! Ie, I think the correct answer is "no", the license renewal contract for next year is not completed and signed. But some players will immediately pounce on that as proof that the game is dead or in imminent danger of termination, or that Turbine is clueless or lazy or something else. There should be zero confusion except that some players are convinced that this new contract must be finished now or else the entire game's future is highly uncertain.

The correct answer, which is not a yes/no answer, is that yes they plan to keep this game going for a long time and that they are not keeping the imminent demise a secret and they have not mysteriously forgotten that fact that a contract is up for renewal next year.

Well in that case "not yet" would be a much more fitting answer, and much simpler than what they've gone with so far IMO.
Surely some players will pounce on it, but I'm sure it's the very same players as those who are currently pouncing "They haven't said they've signed the renewal yet, game is dying", I don't see any difference.

[Lohi]

Well in that case "not yet" would be a much more fitting answer,

That seems fair.

[JTollers]

Q2: Are there any plans to change the RNG? I know a lot of people are beyond frustrated at it, as it doesn’t seem as random for some as it does for others.[/B][/COLOR]

A2: We have no plans to update the random number generator (RNG). It’s normal for individuals to receive runs of luck (good or bad) in the short term. The random element of the game, may appear to be broken, but the RNG is running for the entire server instance, not for one player at a time. - Nathan

I think the spirit of this question is that in the quest for Golds, they are BoA and we've had players end up with say 3 Warden cloaks (I think it was). Also, on 1st Ages they don't guarantee drop from completed content (and this could be simply done by rewarding 1/12th the cost of a skirm camp TSoEK in seals for a T2C raid).

I believe the desire is that there are multiple ways to earn rewards. Players want progression and they want a sense of how far they are down that road. RNG is fun, if you are lucky (remember the Lothlorian Gift Boxes???), but if you are not, you may jump from a Mallorn...

Deeds are digestible bc you know you have 450 more Snow beasts to kill to get the Tiier 2 version done for that virtue. If you could use Unified currency (spend 90k marks) or deeds (run GB instances 300 times) as different paths toward a reward, then that would be great.

Today, you may just get someone a 1st age if you do a Raid on T2C, but those 7 seals you got for your 20 min run on FoS could be had in about the same time in Fornost (maybe less)

Leave RNG for the 'ooo I got lucky" moments, and let players work toward it otherwise. Generally I think Hytbold is disliked and Forlaw even more, but it would be one step worse if there was just a chance you got 5 tokens for that daily quest...

We're looking for choice and options (as some said for Hytbold, why lock players to a daily lock, if they can only get on a few times a week...maybe don't give them option for 35 quests, but maybe 25 max in a week if you missed 3 days)

[Milithion]

Q2: Are there any plans to change the RNG? I know a lot of people are beyond frustrated at it, as it doesn’t seem as random for some as it does for others.

A2: We have no plans to update the random number generator (RNG). It’s normal for individuals to receive runs of luck (good or bad) in the short term. The random element of the game, may appear to be broken, but the RNG is running for the entire server instance, not for one player at a time. - Nathan

The problem is not the RNG. The problem is the way content is designed with that, and the removal of raid/instances locks.

Lets explain that on some fictitious numbers with a compare to raids before the change.
Raid Tier 2 CM.

Items	Before (with raid locks)	After - chance for each player - without raid locks
First Age	1 gurenteed	1/120
Jewelry	2 gurenteed	2/120
EXP Runes	24	2 per player
Relicts	24	2 per player
Special Drops	1% Chance	0.0083 % Chance

Result of that with the new system:
you could get in theory 12 first ages. or 0. but i've never heared from dropping more than 3 in a run. but 0 is the normal case.

the problem with this is: you could not plan your progress at all, and that is a problem. i could not say: ok we(my kin and i) will be able to do this challange mode in 14 weeks if we all have our first ages.
one result of the new random mode loot system is: the intrest overall in raids, especially in T2CM is at a verry low point. from 24 willing people for orthanc there are 8 left for erebor. the other 16 are still playing(more or less) but there is currently no way to get them back to raid. why should they a such a terrible rewarding system.

the current system might look good at the paper, but it is so terrible for grouping players, thats what i could say about the people i play with.

[...] runs of luck(good or bad) in the short term.[...]

i would not speek of a run of luck if someone is getting 16 gold items (and need to throw away 6 of them) and other 0. while in nearly the same group. (over a period of a month)

[Annariel]

That is the way that loot works now, except that the upper and lower bounds are looser. I forget the names applied, but basically you have a look-up table. For example, a number from 0 to 8000 gives you common loot. 8001 to 9000 gives you better loot. 9001 to 9500 gives you even better loot. 9501 to 9750 gives you the next set. 9999 gives you the best loot.

That said, having a barter option based upon Marks, Medallions and Seals would help.

Random means that when an event happens is not predictable, not that it can't happen as long as said event is possible.

No, I really don't think that's the same. Unless there's a way to hand in X common loot items to get the best set, that is.

I didn't really consider that there were different tiers of items one might win, but that is easy to work into the token system: you just have multiple things you can 'buy' with your tokens; indeed, rather similar to Marks, Medallions and Seals.

Basically, instead of winning either common, better, better2, better3, better4 or best loot, you win somewhere between 1 and 100 (but at least one!) tokens. (In general, the minimum number can be larger than 1, but can never be zero - this ensures that eventually, everybody can obtain the rarest reward.) Which number of tokens you receive is determined by the RNG.

You then have the option of handing in your tokens for the same items you might otherwise have won directly: let's say they cost 10, 20, 40, 60 and 100 tokens.

There's still a possibility that you will obtain the best item in one run (if you're awarded 100 tokens), but if you decide from the start that that's what you're working towards, you will never need more than 100 runs (in this example) to obtain it. On the other hand, if you get tired of waiting, you can go for one of the lesser options.

Essentially, this system allows bad luck to be overcome by tenacity.

[ElfLink]

I don`t believe that turbine is neglecting it`s deal with middle earth and like the McDonalds reference you don`t just wait there for the contract to expire, turbine has many other things to worry about and they clearly said that there will be many years of support to come. So to worry about weather or not the contract is done is just silly. Have a little faith and game on!!!!!

[TheMadCat]

You and I have/(had?) very different interpretations of what Turbine has confirmed or not, how does that make the answer seem clear? to me, that's a pretty good hint the answer isn't clear at all.

What confuses me is why Sapience & co choose to communicate as they do - even when given a yes/no question, he chooses to give a longer answer where the reader need to deduce the actual yes/no answer - and even then it will only be an expectation. Then he tops it by saying there's not a single bit of vagueness about that answer.
Granted, I'm no expert in communication and Sapience most likely is, but whether or not an answer is vague or not completely depends on the recipient. If the recipient finds the answer vague/unclear, like this one:

Well, taking a shot in the dark I'd guess Sapience isn't giving a direct answer because he may simply not be allowed to give a direct answer. Companies tend to get very strict when it comes to who can say what, when, and where especially on a subject which involves an outside party, such as what you get in a contract negotiation. So it could simply be a case of WB just not allowing a direct answer right now and Sapience is dancing around the subject because at this point in time it's all he can do. Turbine would obviously know the answer before we do (And Sapience does seem to be trying to give the answer as clearly as possible but within the necessary confines) however until whatever powers may be at WB give the green light to whomever needs the green light all we the public are allowed to get are the cryptic little bread crumbs to follow.

[Elrantiri]

Well, taking a shot in the dark I'd guess Sapience isn't giving a direct answer because he may simply not be allowed to give a direct answer. Companies tend to get very strict when it comes to who can say what, when, and where especially on a subject which involves an outside party, such as what you get in a contract negotiation. So it could simply be a case of WB just not allowing a direct answer right now and Sapience is dancing around the subject because at this point in time it's all he can do. Turbine would obviously know the answer before we do (And Sapience does seem to be trying to give the answer as clearly as possible but within the necessary confines) however until whatever powers may be at WB give the green light to whomever needs the green light all we the public are allowed to get are the cryptic little bread crumbs to follow.

Indeed it can be very strict - which is why it does not make any sense Turbine publicly says LotrO will exist post 2014 if they can't say the license is extended. As Sapience says, having the license is a requirement for keeping LotrO alive, so if they can say LotrO will exist post 2014 they should only be able to say so if the license is extended - but they won't directly confirm that the license is extended.

[5644htggggg]

1s off for gev my spelly ples

2 im a big time pvp plaer im a rank 12 all most rank 13 im the hiest ranky cappy on my sover

and stell i see lvl 40 julry in the moors that lvl 85 run in and you all took cer of the problum of lvl 40 to 48 not a lowed in stell the low lvl stell find a way in lol but ha wunt to go in to that lvl 85 place get hit 1 die dont cumplan in ooc abart die

rell resun im on her is wundry if and how you all or going to balens stufe out not gust for freeps but creeps as well thow thay dont need the creep that mush to shanst maby there spamy stun on a bit of a cool down lool stell have a foow bums on my head gety shild bach 30 time in less then 30sec lool thenk it wood be cool if freeps that cood stun might have a better stun or a how you say it upgrad there stun wer thay can us it weth out a defet like cappy of to have for there 3 sec stun cumperd to a wlstun that last 10 to 15 sec pot it and thay gust hafe to stun you a gan then you cant pot it o and see the cappy shild you mad for us out in the moors cool look smoll and has a tatkel mastry raty for a clos rang fighty class not so good cappy or clos rang fighter thenk that might need to be sweshed to mpaktel mastry and maby a bit biger to the look is osume thow

o and most of all or hunters runceeper and mistrels out there in pvp we reliy on them a lot out in the moors there a bit to soft i see them get slad ever day out there and wesh thay had a better defenst at lest abel to hander 4 5 creeps on them and not die in 45 sec or less wunder if you have ing idels on helpy them out sume

and ples get red of the op buffs senst thows came in theres ben op war but rely a fight over the op liked it befor thows op wer it wust bast on the skills and xps you gan on fight a creep or freep now both sid fight for the op but not relly fight for the op see put it thes way i solo thows op so say i took 1 i lev not even 30sec of me levey that op grup of creep can com in there and take it backe gust that fast its like that on both sid so in a way theres less pvp and more pve out there be cus of thows op

[Lohi]

so if they can say LotrO will exist post 2014 they should only be able to say so if the license is extended - but they won't directly confirm that the license is extended.

But they also can not confirm with absolute certainty that the economy will completely collapse before then either which would also put them out of business... It would be odd if they said sorry but they can't confirm that the game will exist in 2014 because of extremely unlikely events. The license not getting renewed is also an unlikely event, but I'm pretty sure they're going ahead with business as usual anyway instead of putting all plans on hold.

[IttleBubba]

The problem is, the same sort of vague non-answers such policies would require are the same exact non-answers that would be used to placate a distressed playerbase by a spokesperson who isn't allowed to tell the entire truth. The answer to question 16 *is* vague, and there's no way we'll know the reason why until either official notice of the extension or notice of shutdown is announced.

All that it takes to see the vagueness is to imagine what the PR comment would be if the game WAS ending and the extension wasn't signed. Pretty much exactly what was said in the Q&A. A non-binding answer followed by a non-sequitur. The relationship with MEE isn't relevant, is it? Turbine holds the option, so the deciding factor in continuing the game would be whether or not WB wants to continue to develop it, not MEE, right?.

I agree. The non-answer followed by what seemed like a cheeky, "my answer to 16 was completely clear" followed by another vague, non-answer made me more concerned than I had when we only had silence.

Silence vs. vague, non-answers. Discuss amongst yourselves, class, while I take a bio break.

[Elrantiri]

But they also can not confirm with absolute certainty that the economy will completely collapse before then either which would also put them out of business... It would be odd if they said sorry but they can't confirm that the game will exist in 2014 because of extremely unlikely events. The license not getting renewed is also an unlikely event, but I'm pretty sure they're going ahead with business as usual anyway instead of putting all plans on hold.

Of course it would be too much to ask for such certainty - and that's not what Turbine was asked.

Look at the question again:

Can we have a straight yes or know answer, has Turbine extended the licence to 2017?

Cossieuk was not asking about the likelyhood that LotrO will exist post 2014 or the likelyhood that the license will be renewed/extended, (s)he asked whether or not the license is renewed.
It was Turbine themselves who chose to go beyond the simple answer and instead confirm well beyond what cossieuk was asking, yet without actually answering the question.

[Pheonix99]

BTW I just wanted to say thank you to all the Devs taking the time and answering our questions, this is one of my favorite Threads to read.

Beo

[Lohi]

Cossieuk was not asking about the likelyhood that LotrO will exist post 2014 or the likelyhood that the license will be renewed/extended, (s)he asked whether or not the license is renewed.

But everyone knows this was a loaded question, not to be read on the surface literally. Sapience couldn't just pretend that there wasn't a huge controversy brewing over this.

[Lohi]

BTW I just wanted to say thank you to all the Devs taking the time and answering our questions, this is one of my favorite Threads to read.

I agree here. I want to see more of this. It's interesting sometimes to see just what other players want to ask (chicken play!).

[Camto]

I've noticed that some areas on the map are dimmed signifying that they are not on. Do yall have future plans for putting them online in the next couple of years?

[Fangdang]

Are there any plans to update the shared banking so we can put gold, silver, copper in to share between all characters on account?

[Leixy]

I'd love it if they added scaleable war-bands to the lower level areas,

like Angmarim in evendim that leave an angmarim city and match toward Ost Galadh.

or Brigands who sneak in packs around the shire looking for hobbitses to thug.

each giving scaleable Marks or boxes as rewards.

I know in other MMOs, if a high level helps someone in those encounters, their toon is scaled down to say, lvl 10 or something in order to contribute a little more evenly against the public encounter.

I don't know if lotro's gear system would do this effectively, but it would make the game a lot more interesting, and enable high levels to help new players without making it easy mode for them.