New Massively Article

[GregJL]

Oh boy, I can't wait to kill 360 enedwaith spiders and run 24 man helegrad 20 times to get some great cosmetic gear. I sure will look good when I run around enedwaith bored from lack of endgame.

Maybe, just maybe they'll put in a new horse that you have to grind and grind and grind to get (that's exactly the same as the one you already have except it has pink ribbons on its tail this time).

And maybe they can revamp the old forest again. I still think its needs to be the priority with the next update.

[tomcat211]

LOL at the previous post. For those who cry for new content, yes I hear you, however, we burn through that new content with the exception of the new raid in about 1-2 months. The entire time we have been asking about housing changes, and more recently LI changes, and me specifically opening up the SoA raids to end game players at level. WB/Turbine is doing that, and adding enedwaith while they put sme real polish on Isenguard and Rohan (that's a guess).
I'm happy.
I'm glad they realize a balrog and undead dragon shouldn't be level capped and put on farm mode so that when we finally wakl up to the gates of Mordor we can't tell Gandalf he's a pansy for taking so long to solo a Balrog. They should always be end-game fights, and now they will be.

[douglasburns]

I'm glad they realize a balrog and undead dragon shouldn't be level capped and put on farm mode so that when we finally wakl up to the gates of Mordor we can't tell Gandalf he's a pansy for taking so long to solo a Balrog. They should always be end-game fights, and now they will be.

Eh, the Balrog we fought (Thaurlach) was extremely weakened by his captivity and the mystical shackles he was in before breaking free. Not really any comprison to Durin's Bane.

The storyline even says that if we "don't beat him now" he will regain his true might and wreak havic.

[Jadzi]

Eh, the Balrog we fought (Thaurlach) was extremely weakened by his captivity and the mystical shackles he was in before breaking free. Not really any comprison to Durin's Bane.

The storyline even says that if we "don't beat him now" he will regain his true might and wreak havic.

This. And Thorog isn't necessarily a dragon at full might, he's a giant wight inhabited by fell spirits. One that still takes twenty-four people (less if they're somewhat skilled or sufficiently above level). And even then, it's not as if Men haven't taken down dragons before.

Great heroes though we may be, we do have our limits.

[Digital_Utopia]

Very fascinating, although I'm trying to see what parts of that should be taken "worth a grain of salt". Most of it if not reasonably possible - has already been mentioned by the mods and/or devs. Enedwaith, V3B2, Wardrobe, DX11, LI revamp, the store and Isengard have all been mentioned "officially", leaving only: New hobbies, housing improvement, mounted combat and Ranger session play as "maybes"

However, the last two are 100% viable as you can already be a Ranger in the Moors, and since "mounts 2.0" it's technically possible to use all skills from a mount, with only combat skills being flagged to not be allowed. Granted, animations would have to be added - otherwise you get left with what happens now when we go into warspeech or fervour while mounted - absolutely nothing.

[Beleg]

How do you do solo Barad Gularan when you need 3 people on the sigils and one tanking Undunion?
You can't.

Actually, you can. A burg can use FMs to interrupt the boss, preventing him from doing any of his special attacks. It's not easy, and it takes some luck, but it can be done. I don't have the fraps to prove it though (yet).

[Magian]

Actually, you can. A burg can use FMs to interrupt the boss, preventing him from doing any of his special attacks. It's not easy, and it takes some luck, but it can be done. I don't have the fraps to prove it though (yet).

I know he was soloed by Burgs in SoA. I'd like to see you solo him, as a Burg, on level in post-SoM. Our BPE isn't near good enough anymore to get the job done.

[douglasburns]

I know he was soloed by Burgs in SoA. I'd like to see you solo him, as a Burg, on level in post-SoM. Our BPE isn't near good enough anymore to get the job done.

Yah, and you can solo him fighting him in the back corner, all you got to do is break line of sight by ducking around the corner when he shouts out one of his mega attacks.

[Magian]

Yah, and you can solo him fighting him in the back corner, all you got to do is break line of sight by ducking around the corner when he shouts out one of his mega attacks.

I mentioned the LOS exploit. I said try to solo him WITHOUT the LOS exploit. Ie., on-level solo without LOSing.

I guarantee you won't win without the LOS exploit.

[yurick75]

I like the idea of a wardrobe but would be very disappointed if it can only hold cosmetic items. I think of cloaks as an item in point. There are numerous cloaks out there that I would have loved to keep for cosmetic reasons but have had to dispose of to make room for numerous other items we must keep.

I hope that we end up being able to put all armour and cosmetics into this storage.

[douglasburns]

I mentioned the LOS exploit. I said try to solo him WITHOUT the LOS exploit. Ie., on-level solo without LOSing.

I guarantee you won't win without the LOS exploit.

Oh, I'm sorry I'm afraid I didnt see that.

Personally I don't see it as an exploit, but rather as a tactical strategy. Ducking around the corner as he charges up his attack, could even be viewed as good role playing. I'd certainly try to avoid a bazooka if one was aimed at me.

As an example, the "throne trick" on igash was an exploit, because he should have been able to target you up there since you were in clear sight.

Just my personal opinion, but believe whatever you want.

[Magian]

Oh, I'm sorry I'm afraid I didnt see that.

Personally I don't see it as an exploit, but rather as a tactical strategy. Ducking around the corner as he charges up his attack, could even be viewed as good role playing. I'd certainly try to avoid a bazooka if one was aimed at me.

As an example, the "throne trick" on igash was an exploit, because he should have been able to target you up there since you were in clear sight.

Just my personal opinion, but believe whatever you want.

Any deliberate attempt to circumvent gameplay mechanics in an unintended manner (in this case boss attacks) is a clear exploit.

There really is no opinion about it. We may use or not use it; advocate it or argue against it. But it's still an exploit.

[carpleloctrapus]

As the new article from Massively has, maybe a vault space bank I would buy for the house but nothing else is of use. Nine character slots is more than I can deal with since the quests are the same for each as they level up I am totally burnt out on playing pve - freeps. As for the raid stuff, theres nothing they can put in it to even get me to join a pve raid as its all just the same thing my characters can make with a different look and a stat moved from top of list to bottom of list. Not one reason to raid but as a creep in the moors. WHatever...

[Angadan]

"Any deliberate attempt to circumvent gameplay mechanics in an unintended manner (in this case boss attacks) is a clear exploit."

There really is no opinion about it. We may use or not use it; advocate it or argue against it. But it's still an exploit.

Hmm, not sure about that. The dev could certainly have made the aoe attack run through walls...they didn't. They seem to have intentionally made the attack LoS-able. The room design also raises the question: many rooms do not have corners you can hide behind _within_ the room...this room does. Intentional?

Perhaps LoSing the attack is not circumventing mechanics at all, but using one particular mechanic to your advantage, just as using the 3 items on the sigils isn't "circumventing the mechanic" of his attack and self-heal, but taking advantage of those items to avoid them. There's nothing that says a dev had to create _just_one_ way of beating him....

p.s. Having said all this, my money would be on the Dev wanting everyone to do the fight with the 3 items and the sigil...but it _is_ curious that the Dev made it so convenient to LoS the guy for those big attacks....maybe he DID mean to provide a partial alternative....

[Swiftstrike]

Actually, you can. A burg can use FMs to interrupt the boss, preventing him from doing any of his special attacks. It's not easy, and it takes some luck, but it can be done. I don't have the fraps to prove it though (yet).

Yes, until they go back and implement everyone's favorite FM-immunity-for-everything system from BG

[Kraggy]

I mentioned the LOS exploit. I said try to solo him WITHOUT the LOS exploit. Ie., on-level solo without LOSing.

I guarantee you won't win without the LOS exploit.

And using a perfectly valid in-game mechanic is an exploit .. why?

[0rdinary0wl]

Oh, I'm sorry I'm afraid I didnt see that.

Personally I don't see it as an exploit, but rather as a tactical strategy. Ducking around the corner as he charges up his attack, could even be viewed as good role playing. I'd certainly try to avoid a bazooka if one was aimed at me.

As an example, the "throne trick" on igash was an exploit, because he should have been able to target you up there since you were in clear sight.

Just my personal opinion, but believe whatever you want.

Bazooka is lore breaking.

[findorin-gilrain]

Oh, I'm sorry I'm afraid I didnt see that.

Personally I don't see it as an exploit, but rather as a tactical strategy. Ducking around the corner as he charges up his attack, could even be viewed as good role playing. I'd certainly try to avoid a bazooka if one was aimed at me.

As an example, the "throne trick" on igash was an exploit, because he should have been able to target you up there since you were in clear sight.

Just my personal opinion, but believe whatever you want.

I agree with you

Any deliberate attempt to circumvent gameplay mechanics in an unintended manner (in this case boss attacks) is a clear exploit.

There really is no opinion about it. We may use or not use it; advocate it or argue against it. But it's still an exploit.

You are a sad bunny today it seems...so the next time a skirmisher orc winds up to disarm you in Mirkwood it's an exploit to LOS him behind a nearby tree?

[ararax2]

You are a sad bunny today it seems...so the next time a skirmisher orc winds up to disarm you in Mirkwood it's an exploit to LOS him behind a nearby tree?

I still think of it as emergent game play.

[findorin-gilrain]

I still think of it as emergent game play.

Not really on thread topic, but I know and I can still recall Orion's illuminating thoughts on the issue...however in regards to these issues. Line of Sight has to be a case-by-case judgement surely?

Line of sight to duck from a ranged attack, or AOE attack, is "realistic". If you really were telling the story of a character then ducking or avoiding is very likely part of the story! At least as realistic as the actual attack is in the first place.

Using LOS to bug out groups of mobs, as currently seems to be normal practice in SG for example, or Hunters using Desperate Flight to do the same, is where we have real emergent gameplay IMHO.

EDIT: I seem to have contradicted myself! As in "the majority of people, I judge, are sensible" and "as currently seems to be normal practice". Oh dear. Maybe these balancing issues should be gameplay designers' number 1 priority?

[Magian]

LOS by itself is not an exploit but in BG's case it is. Think about it. The devs did not intend for you to LOS Undunions attacks. Why else would they give you the items to use on the sigils that prevent the attacks? If and only if those items did not exist could the argument be made that LOSing Undunion would not be an exploit.

This is why LOSing attacks in skirmishes are not exploits. That is intended behaviour. But when you're bypassing mechanics that the devs clearly intended you to use, well, you're exploiting then.

[Kraggy]

LOS by itself is not an exploit but in BG's case it is. Think about it. The devs did not intend for you to LOS Undunions attacks.

If the devs aren't capable of foreseeing such a tactic then maybe they should think more before designing something.

There have been a large number of 'exploits' that in fact were simply perfectly legitimate game skills applied by players when faced with a situation that the devs presented with them, who then screamed EXPLOIT to cover up the inadequacy of these own designs.

The 'door' issue in Forges was an example of a terrain exploit that may not have been totally obvious, however this LOS issue is a perfect example of their lack of comprehension of the game they supposedly designed, bears with the Turtle being another perfect example.

[ararax2]

If the devs aren't capable of foreseeing such a tactic then maybe they should think more before designing something.

There have been a large number of 'exploits' that in fact were simply perfectly legitimate game skills applied by players when faced with a situation that the devs presented with them, who then screamed EXPLOIT to cover up the inadequacy of these own designs.

The 'door' issue in Forges was an example of a terrain exploit that may not have been totally obvious, however this LOS issue is a perfect example of their lack of comprehension of the game they supposedly designed, bears with the Turtle being another perfect example.

Agreed, Kiting is also not an exploit, just because the devs did not see something does not mean it is an exploit.

Rez Turtle Reset also emergent.

If the devs intent for something to stand there and the player acts logically and the mob does not become helpless/is unable to act. Then it is emergent.

Lets face it, the devs botching a mobs behavior does not mean it is an exploit. Like kiting barz.

[douglasburns]

If the devs aren't capable of foreseeing such a tactic then maybe they should think more before designing something.

There have been a large number of 'exploits' that in fact were simply perfectly legitimate game skills applied by players when faced with a situation that the devs presented with them, who then screamed EXPLOIT to cover up the inadequacy of these own designs.

The 'door' issue in Forges was an example of a terrain exploit that may not have been totally obvious, however this LOS issue is a perfect example of their lack of comprehension of the game they supposedly designed, bears with the Turtle being another perfect example.

^^This. I find it laughable that there has to be only "one way" to do anything. Do you really want your game to be so linear and boring? Shouldn't clever tactics be rewarded? As long as you are not outright bugging out a boss (throne trick), its a perfectly viable strategy. One of the most FUN things about this game is finding out clever tactics. Without that, you are stuck with the boring prospect of doing a,b,c,x,y,z a million times.

[Magian]

If the devs aren't capable of foreseeing such a tactic then maybe they should think more before designing something.

There have been a large number of 'exploits' that in fact were simply perfectly legitimate game skills applied by players when faced with a situation that the devs presented with them, who then screamed EXPLOIT to cover up the inadequacy of these own designs.

The 'door' issue in Forges was an example of a terrain exploit that may not have been totally obvious, however this LOS issue is a perfect example of their lack of comprehension of the game they supposedly designed, bears with the Turtle being another perfect example.

Good points.

I have always maintained there is a serious flaw in LOTRO's development, particualrly as it concerns instances. These never should have been brought to Live. But they were and labelled exploits.

To me, exploits is not something that should be debated. They are mandated by the developers. It's their game, and if they think it is an exploit, then that's what it is. It is up to us players to maintain integrity - both in the spaces and ourselves intrinsically.

I find it laughable that there has to be only "one way" to do anything. Do you really want your game to be so linear and boring? Shouldn't clever tactics be rewarded? As long as you are not outright bugging out a boss (throne trick), its a perfectly viable strategy. One of the most FUN things about this game is finding out clever tactics. Without that, you are stuck with the boring prospect of doing a,b,c,x,y,z a million times.

The problem is there is a fine line between clever tactics and cheating. In my mind, circumventing boss skills (such as Undunion) is not clever tactics, but cheating. Why is it cheating and not clever tactics? I think it is because you have found a way to take something complex and making it absolutely trivial. If, for example, LOSing attacks and activating the appropiate item had the same level of sophsication and execution, then it is clever tactics.

But this is not the case. You sit at the door, run to the side, and the attack is negated. It is a much simpler mental process. 'See words, move to the side.' As opposed to 'tell X to activate Y then remove debuff Z'.

The latter has so much more going on; and the former arguably trivializes the difficulty Turbine put in. Thus an exploit.

This issue has never been about forcing linear boss strats on anyone - a very common misconception of the side I argue on. It is about ensuring that exploits do not make something complex trivial. When people can effectively exploit - the tactics of which is infinitely simpler than the proper execution - then it lessens the value of the accomplishment (the kill and loot).

If you want clever tactics - which you seem to want - there are other ways to go about it. In other words, come up with strats that maintain the sophiscation and complexity of the intended way. Let's take a look at the Mistress fight, when the swarms of Orcs come out. I'm aware of two strategies: ball up then spread or spread from the start. In each situation the Orcs remain the same in number and they all must be killed. But the way in which they are accomplished are different; spread out or ball up and run. Which strategy is 'easier' is entirely dependent on your groups preference. Are you better at being balled up for AOE or situationally aware to spread out? How you answer this dictates the strategy. The intended complexity and sophication remains the same in both circumstances because a) healers must keep everyone alive and b) the orcs must die. In other words, you must deal with all the elements of the fight. Compared to exploits - like Undunion - that do not require you to deal with some mechanics. That's trivializing, not clever tactics.

Exploits are bad. They put us into bad habits, produce worse players, and devalue everything gained from where they occur. They should not occur in the first place, but they do, and, as players, we must deal with them.

Personally, I prefer to maintain the integrity of the players and game rather than gut it completely.