Twenty Questions with the LOTRO Dev Team - July 2013

[timmyloo22546]

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

That is very unfortunate to hear. The old loot system was 10x better. The RNG hurts Kins and Friends who like to group. The previous loot system allowed players to help each other out and get items for friends relatively quick with a sense of reward for helping players out. Currently we can "help" friends and kinnies but it might require us to do 100 runs and often still fail to see the player get what they want. The old system allowed us to pass and essentially guarantee a person an item in a small number of runs. The new system doesn't incorporate that aspect which is a true fundamental flaw in the system. As much as players like to group for fun they also like being rewarded whether that be for themselves or a friend/kinmate they are running content for. It's a slap in the face when a Mini who has the gold Erebor helm wins a 2nd while a mini who doesn't have a gold Erebor helm doesn't get it when they're on the same run.

Turbine should address common sense issues. Some aspects of the RNG are better, some aspects are not. The aspects that are worse should get changed to make them on par or better than the previous system. But this is Turbine so I guess I'm asking too much for common sense changes.

[Thruili]

[COLOR=#ff8c00]
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

The part about

1 signature, 2 normals, 3 swarms

makes me concerned.
I am right now levelling my sixth character through Rohan and I am already skipping content to stay a few levels below the my enemies in order to increase difficulty. But still every character of mine was able to e.g. kill this elite wight in the lowest chamber of the Ancient Tomb or those three signature uruks in the tent of Maustazg. My Burglar and my Lore-master were both FOUR levels below those uruks (78 compared to 82) and managed to kill them. For the LM it was a piece of cake due to Water-Lore but at least my Burglar needed three or more tries traited for Mischief-Maker to succeed.
The Captain did this on level traited LoM and using the Shield-Brother on the Herold and in my opionion he had the hardest time beating them up.
All the above mentioned classes and the Guardian were using lvl 75 SA weapons (Symbol can be gotten from the epic in the Great River but without looking for proper legacies or relics) and mostly quest rewards or barter stuff from Dunland and Great River, in some cases from Rohan.
As far as I am aware every player should be able to acquire and use quest or bartered equipment.
My Champion and Minstrel had raid equipment (though still SA weapons) and therefore it was as expected easier.
I now wonder how shall I increase the difficulty even more? I am already fighting more mobs than are considered 'normal' with a higher challenge rating several levels above me with yellow (or is it green?) and purple equipment from content up to ten levels below. And neither my Burglar nor my LM or my Guardian had (or still have) much instance experience.

But I assume there is not much hope for landscape content to be challenging for me as long as I do not make it artificially harder. And I am okay with that as long as I can enjoy challenging group content. But this is the next point:

A15: For instance or skirmish content:
Lots and lots of playtests and iterations.
Difficulty is intended to increase as both tier and group size increase.

We attempt to tune tier 1 to be beatable by our Palantir players, tier 2 by bullroarer, and then challenge for live. The reason for this isn’t because players on live are better than Palantir or Bullroarer players, it comes down to the groups being better because they’ve been playing together as the same group for years. There’s a familiarity with each other and a gelling over time as kinships that allow for different levels of coordination and collectively overcoming presented problems and situations, that more randomly put together groups of players simply do not have. If we beat tier 2 in house, then it’s not hard enough and gets balanced as such. Many challenges haven’t been beaten by anyone when they launch. We know they’re functioning and the numbers are where we project is doable, but we don’t have the coordination to pull it off ourselves.

Well, I do not know enough about testing on Bullroarer and especially Palantír but I do know that when there is no benevolent game master around one does not have access to FA weapons, raid (or Hytbolt) armour and the like when creating a new character while those characters on live are already geared up to the teeth when new content hits.

Small Fellowship we tune to need a tank or a healer, but try to avoid requiring a trinity, even within challenge level difficulty.

Fellowships we aim for a trinity plus 3 others. We avoid trying to build 6-man content that requires multiple tanks.

Raids we attempt to design and tune to encourage 2 tanks, 2 main healers, 2 captains, and at least one of each class.

One of the biggest tricks is to be aware of the numbers when it comes to equipment and gear but to not be overly bound by it. Introducing chaos, and requiring communication and coordination by increasing the number of dynamic elements involved creates a far more challenging and satisfying fight than simply raising the health and damage. - JWB

But I enjoy 6-man content so much more than raiding (I guess this is an old habit from my old kin where it was easier to form a fellowship compared to a raid when raiders had locks and stuck to themselves) that I really hurts me to see six man content trivialized so much as it is now. I just fail to see how e.g. Sambrog or Ost Elendil are aimed

for a trinity plus 3 others

compared to the Fornost cluster which seems to be the only one I really enjoy doing regularly.
I would so much love to see interesting, challenging and rewarding (even though I do challenging stuff for fun that does not mean that others do and finding a group of players to beat challenges 'just for fun' is really hard nowadays when most players are only driven by their greed for better gear which interestingly is so overpowered to trivialize some of the content to begin with) content again to spend my time (and money!!) on; six-man content that requires a tank, a healer, at least one support class (be it debuffer, crowd-controller or buffer) and then some dps instead of the now common 'looking for 5 dps and captain'.

[Elrantiri]

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.

And yet that was what he did. Ignoring the question makes it go away just as much as the probable answer would have.

[Thurrock]

bonjour mon nom est thurrock je suis un chevalier qui cherche un qu'on frère pour jouer

[JTollers]

The part about makes me concerned.
I am right now levelling my sixth character through Rohan and I am already skipping content to stay a few levels below the my enemies in order to increase difficulty. But still every character of mine was able to e.g. kill this elite wight in the lowest chamber of the Ancient Tomb or those three signature uruks in the tent of Maustazg. My Burglar and my Lore-master were both FOUR levels below those uruks (78 compared to 82) and managed to kill them. For the LM it was a piece of cake due to Water-Lore but at least my Burglar needed three or more tries traited for Mischief-Maker to succeed.
The Captain did this on level traited LoM and using the Shield-Brother on the Herold and in my opionion he had the hardest time beating them up.
All the above mentioned classes and the Guardian were using lvl 75 SA weapons (Symbol can be gotten from the epic in the Great River but without looking for proper legacies or relics) and mostly quest rewards or barter stuff from Dunland and Great River, in some cases from Rohan.
As far as I am aware every player should be able to acquire and use quest or bartered equipment.
My Champion and Minstrel had raid equipment (though still SA weapons) and therefore it was as expected easier.
I now wonder how shall I increase the difficulty even more? I am already fighting more mobs than are considered 'normal' with a higher challenge rating several levels above me with yellow (or is it green?) and purple equipment from content up to ten levels below. And neither my Burglar nor my LM or my Guardian had (or still have) much instance experience.

But I assume there is not much hope for landscape content to be challenging for me as long as I do not make it artificially harder. And I am okay with that as long as I can enjoy challenging group content. But this is the next point:



Well, I do not know enough about testing on Bullroarer and especially Palantír but I do know that when there is no benevolent game master around one does not have access to FA weapons, raid (or Hytbolt) armour and the like when creating a new character while those characters on live are already geared up to the teeth when new content hits.



But I enjoy 6-man content so much more than raiding (I guess this is an old habit from my old kin where it was easier to form a fellowship compared to a raid when raiders had locks and stuck to themselves) that I really hurts me to see six man content trivialized so much as it is now. I just fail to see how e.g. Sambrog or Ost Elendil are aimed compared to the Fornost cluster which seems to be the only one I really enjoy doing regularly.
I would so much love to see interesting, challenging and rewarding (even though I do challenging stuff for fun that does not mean that others do and finding a group of players to beat challenges 'just for fun' is really hard nowadays when most players are only driven by their greed for better gear which interestingly is so overpowered to trivialize some of the content to begin with) content again to spend my time (and money!!) on; six-man content that requires a tank, a healer, at least one support class (be it debuffer, crowd-controller or buffer) and then some dps instead of the now common 'looking for 5 dps and captain'.

I think these examples are not rare and what most of us mean/feel. I understand that one T2C E raid has not been beaten worldwide yet, but that is not great evidence for the mark. Even if we agree that JWB's aim is a good one (which it may be), I think the mark is off.

I would venture to see (apart from the interest and loot issues as well) that the low counts in t2 takedowns or runs and T2c for Erebror or even OD/BG is that (unlike it used to be in Angmar, Moria, OD and even mirkwood a bit) that landscape set you up for some instance play, instance set you up for the raids with 3 player setting up the 6 player. The game taught you to be a better player and therefore made it all accessible if desired.

Our kin had to rebuild in Moria (during dun dun dun...radiance). This meant that we had to attract people to the kin, but most of what we could do at that point pugs were doing (GS and FG). Since raids were gated (already good players just filled the ranks of established raiding kins). We taught willing good natured people. We could not have done that in the current cluster and scaled instance approaches. It would have fallen short of key mechanics and team work - which group play should be. Moria helped us get to watcher as our kin first on level raid. Mirkwood SG and sword halls really pushed us and got our kin to take down Lt the last night before Radiance went away. All those OD instances (including hobbit slapping) prepared us for OD wings and we took those down faster.

So long as the game has meaningful progression it will increase player base. If it doesn't everything will feel hard to new folks.

Hoping for a solid Kinship revamp and improved player progression, but really hoping the content gets a look at alongside all the class trait tree changes.


Here is one suggestion on how loot progression could be - I welcome others

http://forums.lotro.com/showthread.p...rds&highlight=

[timmyloo22546]

When is Flights T2c going be fixed? I don't care if the raid is "working as intended." It's impossible to do as-is and that classifies the raid as broken in my book.

[Aerothir]

Q6: How do you get the "horse and rider" to sync (or not)? Why do some horses sync better than others?

A6: The horse and rider animate independently. The horse gets directions from the rider of course, but it’s still possible for the animations to get out of sync. The player characters use their own set of animations too, so it may be possible that one race may sync better than another. - Elliot

Why therefore is it that I never have sync problems with dwarfs and hobbits, only with elfs and humans?

Could it be due to the type of movement each exhibits? Remarkably the problem is easy to rectify, toggle walk off then on.
Could this be the basis for a fix?

Unfortunately the problem will invariably recur if I remount, pass through a portal or use any form of quick travel.

Can't say for war mounts.

[Artemis023]

On Facebook someone suggested the wording for Q16 should be 'developing' not 'supporting'. So, ok. Developing, supporting, making, cavorting in the shire, whichever works better for you.

Thank you for the clarification so Facebook is the best way to get replies?

[Sapience]

Thank you for the clarification so Facebook is the best way to get replies?

Considering you got your reply here You'll have to decide that for yourself. A more accurate statement would be that we answer questions where they are asked and if it's something significant or seems appropriate to do so, we share it out in other places.

[Frisco]

That is very unfortunate to hear. The old loot system was 10x better. The RNG hurts Kins and Friends who like to group. The previous loot system allowed players to help each other out and get items for friends relatively quick with a sense of reward for helping players out. Currently we can "help" friends and kinnies but it might require us to do 100 runs and often still fail to see the player get what they want. The old system allowed us to pass and essentially guarantee a person an item in a small number of runs. The new system doesn't incorporate that aspect which is a true fundamental flaw in the system. As much as players like to group for fun they also like being rewarded whether that be for themselves or a friend/kinmate they are running content for. It's a slap in the face when a Mini who has the gold Erebor helm wins a 2nd while a mini who doesn't have a gold Erebor helm doesn't get it when they're on the same run.

Turbine should address common sense issues. Some aspects of the RNG are better, some aspects are not. The aspects that are worse should get changed to make them on par or better than the previous system. But this is Turbine so I guess I'm asking too much for common sense changes.

I think you're misunderstanding the statement. The RNG is the same RNG that we've been using since launch. It controls everything from how often we crit in crafting, to number of parries in a battle, to what we get for loot. "RNG" does not refer to the entire reward system that we currently have, just the rolling mechanism, which may or may not be borked (which is why the question was asked--some people, from the beginning of the game, have shown consistently better results, while others can't get a win/crit/drop to save their lives).

The RNG isn't the biggest problem with LOTRO rewards.

Drop rates *are* a problem. But those can and will be adjusted. Some things that are random may get less so. They may change some drops to 100% again.

Being satisfied with the actual RNG code doesn't necessarily mean that they're not going to change the way rewards are distributed. They still may not, but I don't think we should read too much into a dev question that merely states that despite some people seeming (or actually *being*) slightly luckier than others, the RNG itself is in a good place.

If Helm's Deep beta players report the same miniscule drop rates for class golds (assuming those stick around) and horrible drop rates for raid rewards (I haven't seen a single 1st Age drop for anyone in 2 months, in which I've done 10 T2C and at least 14 T2 raids) then that'll be a good time to panic.

[Dornatha]

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

What this means, is that the all loot drops with the intended frequency, but it is not distributed evenly among the players, as has been talked about. Runs of luck don't matter if you happen to be in the shallow end of the loot pool and the length of run has a possibility of being very long.

If there is nothing to guarantee a drop after certain number of runs, and the chances are sufficiently low, there will be people who will NOT get the piece they are looking for. On the other hand there will also be people who will get ALL the loot they want. This is basic statistics, look up 'Bell curve'. Given the number of players and the drop rates, some people may be at the left or right side of the curve.

[cdq1958]

What this means, is that the all loot drops with the intended frequency, but it is not distributed evenly among the players, as has been talked about. Runs of luck don't matter if you happen to be in the shallow end of the loot pool and the length of run has a possibility of being very long.

If there is nothing to guarantee a drop after certain number of runs, and the chances are sufficiently low, there will be people who will NOT get the piece they are looking for. On the other hand there will also be people who will get ALL the loot they want. This is basic statistics, look up 'Bell curve'. Given the number of players and the drop rates, some people may be at the left or right side of the curve.

It is supposed to be rare, for golds, so the loot isn't going to be evenly distributed among the players anyway. That's why the pRNG system is fair. Guaranteed drops from raids is also fair; but the have-nots will be different subsets of players. The best system, to me, within the limits of golds are supposed to be rare, is to have both methods, so that as many subsets of players have the same opportunities and have the same expectations. That means that players who want them badly enough can get them and everyone else can hit the jackpot every now and then, upping the demand .

[Frisco]

It is supposed to be rare, for golds, so the loot isn't going to be evenly distributed among the players anyway. That's why the pRNG system is fair. Guaranteed drops from raids is also fair; but the have-nots will be different subsets of players. The best system, to me, within the limits of golds are supposed to be rare, is to have both methods, so that as many subsets of players have the same opportunities and have the same expectations. That means that players who want them badly enough can get them and everyone else can hit the jackpot every now and then, upping the demand .

Gold drops are supposed to be rare because Turbine says so. But there doesn't seem to be any good reason to make them as rare as they are in RoR.

If the only way they can get people to play the game is to make it so they want gold items so bad they'll run an instance 100+ times, it's a sad state of affairs.

It's an unfortunate side effect of turning group content into 6-20 minute encounters with no locks. There's no way, without some sort of lock, that they can both keep people who play 20 hours a day from getting what they want in a matter of a week *and* give the other 99% of players a reasonable chance at obtaining it. The loot distribution system needs to be looked at, fundamentally.

[Thiranigor]

There's no way, without some sort of lock, that they can both keep people who play 20 hours a day from getting what they want in a matter of a week *and* give the other 99% of players a reasonable chance at obtaining it. The loot distribution system needs to be looked at, fundamentally.

I think there's one simple thing they could do to improve the situation dramatically, and also justify an increase in drop rates: MAKE THE INSTANCES HARDER. A 5 minute Sambrog run that requires no skill or coordination SHOULD have a miniscule drop rate for valuable stuff. Make that instance as hard as it's supposed to be (i.e., so you can't just chain-pull it, and there's actually a chance of failure), and an increase in drop chance for high-quality loot would be justified.

Making the instances harder would also make them a lot less boring. So please, Devs, make 'em harder, and make the reward worth the effort.

[cdq1958]

Gold drops are supposed to be rare because Turbine says so. But there doesn't seem to be any good reason to make them as rare as they are in RoR.

If the only way they can get people to play the game is to make it so they want gold items so bad they'll run an instance 100+ times, it's a sad state of affairs.

It's an unfortunate side effect of turning group content into 6-20 minute encounters with no locks. There's no way, without some sort of lock, that they can both keep people who play 20 hours a day from getting what they want in a matter of a week *and* give the other 99% of players a reasonable chance at obtaining it. The loot distribution system needs to be looked at, fundamentally.

Given that, there is no reason to look at loot distribution at all. Leave it as it is, for the most part. Add a barter/deed gate for those who love team play. And I don't think having those who love team play so much that running instances/raids 100+ times is such a bad thing, provided that is spread over all of the instances/raids. From what I can see, an effort has been made to encourage players to run more instances than Sammy 1000 times. That players so often are willing to run Sammy 100+ times says something to me about the players. It also seems to me that the dynamic nature of risk/reward will mean that most of the time things won't feel right, particularly since you can't really hit the sweet spot most of the time. Most of the time you're going to be ranging the target.

As someone who skips team play unless it can be fit into 20 min max a run, locks have always been something that discourages me from team play (remember I came late to the party ... another set of players that some seem to want to lock out), especially so for long, failure filled runs. That gets old for me very quickly. For teams of people who know each other well and play together most of the time, yeah I can see where you are coming from; but it also seems to me that some want to lock the rest of us out altogether.

[Frisco]

Given that, there is no reason to look at loot distribution at all. Leave it as it is, for the most part. Add a barter/deed gate for those who love team play. And I don't think having those who love team play so much that running instances/raids 100+ times is such a bad thing, provided that is spread over all of the instances/raids. From what I can see, an effort has been made to encourage players to run more instances than Sammy 1000 times. That players so often are willing to run Sammy 100+ times says something to me about the players. It also seems to me that the dynamic nature of risk/reward will mean that most of the time things won't feel right, particularly since you can't really hit the sweet spot most of the time. Most of the time you're going to be ranging the target.

As someone who skips team play unless it can be fit into 20 min max a run, locks have always been something that discourages me from team play (remember I came late to the party ... another set of players that some seem to want to lock out), especially so for long, failure filled runs. That gets old for me very quickly. For teams of people who know each other well and play together most of the time, yeah I can see where you are coming from; but it also seems to me that some want to lock the rest of us out altogether.

English is my first language, but none of this computes. :/

[Bethup]

Q1: Are there ever going to be plans to do single server dev fun nights, for instance like the end of beta's where you guys release Balrogs in bree or Thorog in Rivendell? How about Sauraman in the Shire?

A1: We’ve recently (just yesterday) discussed the possibility of creating some live events with developer participation. We’re continuing to investigate what it would take to make this happen, but for now we’re focusing on the expansion pack.- Derek
[COLOR=#ff8c00][B]

Holy cow! Please do this! Pleeeeeeeeeease. Yeah, yeah, finish the expansion and all that stuff. Geez, why do you have to prioritize things so logically? lol

[Bethup]

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!).

I second this.

[Radbug]

Interesting stuff.

Who asked these questions, where do I go to submit a question, and what is the likelihood of getting a question answered?

[MarkoftheRealm]

Interesting stuff.

Who asked these questions, where do I go to submit a question, and what is the likelihood of getting a question answered?

I believe, though I could be incorrect, that the members of the players' council are the ones who come up with these questions. You could submit your question(s) to one of the players' council members.

[Steihl]

There has been a kinship overhaul thread on these forums for years now, that I still get posts in my e-mail about people supporting the idea, yet the Dev team has apparently summarily dismissed it, why? The individual who made the thread did a lot of the groundwork for you, even to the point of creating the interface windows, suggesting mechanics and rewards, etc.

One of the biggest "I'm done playing this game" points for a lot of my old lotro buddies has been that the Kinship system is nothing more than a social club. If you gave rewards for organized kinship play, and made the system more integral, like guilds and clans in other games, I think you might see a bit of a turn around and old players that left spending a bit more time looking at the game again.

[Annariel]

There has been a kinship overhaul thread on these forums for years now, that I still get posts in my e-mail about people supporting the idea, yet the Dev team has apparently summarily dismissed it, why? The individual who made the thread did a lot of the groundwork for you, even to the point of creating the interface windows, suggesting mechanics and rewards, etc.

One of the biggest "I'm done playing this game" points for a lot of my old lotro buddies has been that the Kinship system is nothing more than a social club. If you gave rewards for organized kinship play, and made the system more integral, like guilds and clans in other games, I think you might see a bit of a turn around and old players that left spending a bit more time looking at the game again.

I don't know what your definition of 'summarily dismissed' is, but Sapience has acknowledged the thread and indicated that Turbine does want to do something with it, though we may need to wait for a while.

For example, this post specifically mentions that housing will come first.

A later post in that same thread mentions a time frame of end of next year.

[Steihl]

I don't know what your definition of 'summarily dismissed' is, but Sapience has acknowledged the thread and indicated that Turbine does want to do something with it, though we may need to wait for a while.

For example, this post specifically mentions that housing will come first.

A later post in that same thread mentions a time frame of end of next year.

I'm not whinging, I've been playing the game off and on for over 2 years, and it is fun, but that suggestion was made over 2 years ago, and there is next to no social aspect in this game as of now, nor has there been for as long as I've played. Yes, Kinships are social circles, but nothing more. The fact that we're talking end of next year for a major feature that was suggested in 2011 is, in my PERSONAL opinion, more than unsatisfactory.

Had kinships had a system to grow, more than simply be meeting the prerequisite 7-8 members, and waiting x amount of months for lifespan ranks, then it'd make joining one have some depth of meaning. That's what I'm saying.

And as to them acknowledging the lack of depth in Kinships, it would have perhaps been courteous for them to have posted on that suggestion it's self. I may be wrong, as it has 25 pages of replies, but I don't ever remember seeing any Turbine staff post on that suggestion.

[Xaxinian]

I hate Session Play... what were you thinking! It's the worst thing that was ever added to Lotro!

[SjsharksBoy]

Don't know if this has been suggested or not, but can you please list a few more instances where Erebrandir's Horseshoe actually does something specific?

Thank you Sapience!