Items Rent

[Chisul]

This is a bit out there, but may be worth considering when talking about item decay.

1. Lower coin rate loads across the mud.

2. Lower rank prices an equal amount so the net effect on rank purchase is 0.

3. Significantly raise the rent on limit and elite items.

4. Rent prices increase over time. Meaning an item that rents for 100c it's first 24 hours will increase by 10% for every 24 hour period that player fails to log.

This will create a scarcity of coins coupled with a big hit on rent prices. Now players will need to be more selective about what they take to the rent. Especially early in the wipe before players have amassed insane "war chests"

The hope being a clan will need to choose which zones to spam vs the cost of rent. It does no good to spam all the frosted eq if by hoarding it you will deadbeat.

[reed23]

I think your idea is interesting Chisel, but if I were the big man, I would go in a different direction.  With the recent posts about people scripting coin-run bots/scripts, your plan may be punked by these masterminds!

All items are evaluated, and items that are better than basic mid-level eq (primes > 4d4, Non-body +stat, all dams, all heals, etc.) are on a different timer system.  The basic eq of the game can stay on normal timers however they are.  When i proposed this idea on a different forum, some people bawked and said that this doesn't favor the weekend player.  Therefore, some of the mid to lower end eq could be left.  The people who play 1-2 hours a week could find these type of items and not have to worry about them decaying in rent.

Idea:
For example, +dam boots' decay timer from Irda would work as follows.  From the instance the boots are popped, the boots get 3 weeks in peace/rent.  Every tick the boots are rented, inned, or in a peace room, the 3 week decay timer is ticking.  Every tick the boots are in non-peace/non-rent rooms, the timer is not ticking.

This prevents the long-hated deeprenting problem.  This prevents people who know that items are rent decay from logging their char on and inn-sitting to prevent the decay timer from ticking.  It also rewards players for "playing" the game and not sitting in the inn or leaving your char on overnight spamming skills with a lucky bone charm on (no one does this do they?  Only Tiger gets deleted for doing this!).

[RaVaN]

Why not just a random variable timer?  Load x item, timer starts between x to y days.  When timer wears inside or outside of rent it decays.  If rent money is not met it decays in rent.  Make all gear be in that random x to y day timer.


  This way you can't hoard gear longer than the timer period.  People can have as many coins as they want.  If the timer is suitably long enough the weekend players don't need to worry so much.  The timers are random so the chance of people clocking the timer on something to be able to reload the item decreases.  Thus more gear cycling through the mud and there is no deep renting. 

  I mean all items having this applied.  Having the decay timers be random between 21 and 28 days would be long enough.  I think you could even drop rent prices across the board as well in this system.

 

  The problem with Chisul's plan is that you still have the people who will just log all those characters they are playing paperdoll with to bypass his plan.

  The issue with reed23 plan is that it is too selective gearwise in my opinion.


  I am curious what of the three ideas here would be the quickest fix to implement.

[Chisul]

I guess the reason I like the "too expensive to store" option better than the "decay if rented" option is it doesn't foom the item, it forces the player to sell/trade the items (or dump them on a mob) thus keeping the item in circulation rather than popping up in zone.

The decay option favors locating mages, while the rent option could favor newer players who can trade or purchase cool stuff that others can't afford to rent. I remember getting my first "spec" weapon, the javelin of lighting, this way many years ago.

[RaVaN]

  I personally prefer items to load in zone.  It makes the player "play the game" and gives incentive to actually zone.  Who likes rolling through naked zones?  With a random timer decay, the chances increase for this or that item to be loading.  They can still sell the item as well.  Unless something like a rent cap of x coins you can rent anything you have coins for and I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with that.  If the end goal is to get rid of deep renters, it needs to be simple and across the board.  I don't think punishing players for playing the game is the best way to go about it, and I see making a draconian rent system to be punishing effective zoning.  I would feel the same way about a draconian decay cycle as well.


  As an aside, in a random timer decay cycle that applies to gear and you know that it is going to decay between x and y period....maybe just maybe we will see some real interesting pk that is NOT mage wars. 


Anyhow this is all interesting stuff and I think the more concise ideas outlined, the closer something usable and effective will crop up.

[Gnua]

If the end goal is to get rid of deep renters, it needs to be simple and across the board.

What's the difference (from a game mechanics point of view) between a deep renter and a casual player? We seem to have the goal of discouraging deep renting without making the game onerous for casual players. But whatever mechanic we use would need to distinguish between the two.

[corey]

If the end goal is to get rid of deep renters, it needs to be simple and across the board.

What's the difference (from a game mechanics point of view) between a deep renter and a casual player? We seem to have the goal of discouraging deep renting without making the game onerous for casual players. But whatever mechanic we use would need to distinguish between the two.

I don't think it's right that you're able to hold on to coveted items in a game that limits them heavily as someone who logs on rarely, do you?

[Super Tacoman]

the best items in the game should be in the game!  either being used by a player or waiting in the zone for someone to win.  ive always hated the limit items system, and the way some extremely limited items are unavailable and unused by anyone for 99% of the wipe is beyond stupid.

[Gnua]

What's the difference (from a game mechanics point of view) between a deep renter and a casual player? We seem to have the goal of discouraging deep renting without making the game onerous for casual players. But whatever mechanic we use would need to distinguish between the two.

I don't think it's right that you're able to hold on to coveted items in a game that limits them heavily as someone who logs on rarely, do you?

Most of the mud, myself included, tends to agree with your view when it comes to deep renting, Corey. But when people propose mechanics to change things for the better, they always get shot down with "what about the casual player?" and that status quo remains because people want to protect the casual player while preventing deep renting. All I'm trying to say is we have only three options:

1. allow deep renting and casual players to keep their elite gear (status quo)
2. auto remove elite gear from deep renters and casual players (that seems to be the way you are leaning and I think I might like that because although I would lose a lot of gear, I might get to see a lot more cool stuff in zones)
3. find a mechanic to distinguish between casual players and deep renters (sometimes I think it's impossible, sometimes I think I just need more imagination to think of one)

And so I'm just pointing that if we want some mechanic to stop deep renting of elite gear (which many do), we either need to hit the casual players too or find a mechanic to distinguish between the two.

[Alecto]

Doesn't a casual player normally log at least one a week, while a deeprenter typically plays hard for a few days then disappears for months on end?  Is there a way to set up the rent decay to be modified by every week not logged?

For example:  If a player has logged in the last 7 days decay rate remains the same (status quo)
                      If a player has not logged in 8-14 days decay rate doubles
                      If a player has not logged in 14+ days decay rate quadruples

This would let the player who logs once a week, probably on the weekend, keep things just the way they are, while people who disappear for more than 2 weeks without logging would quickly find their gear gone.  Obviously there are ways around this (log for at least one tic every week being the most obvious), but that would at least put the onus of logging back on the deeprenter.

Yes, that means when you know you won't be able to mud for a few weeks you need to donate/liquidate gear, but that just keeps it in the hands of the people playing the game anyway.  Hopefully, when you can log, you can get it back.

[Dagda]

Hitting players on decay makes much more sense than hitting them with rent.  I would prefer for rent to go away completely and just have decay on items.  Increase the rank purchase costs if you need a money sink, and increase decay exponentially per week rented.  The least casual friendly part of this game is the rent prices, as someone who loves to the play the game and doesn't have any interest in renting elite items I'm turned off by feeling I have to play at least once a week to gather coins to rent gear that I've mostly purchased from the world merchant. 

[Super Tacoman]

Doesn't a casual player normally log at least one a week, while a deeprenter typically plays hard for a few days then disappears for months on end?  Is there a way to set up the rent decay to be modified by every week not logged?

For example:  If a player has logged in the last 7 days decay rate remains the same (status quo)
                      If a player has not logged in 8-14 days decay rate doubles
                      If a player has not logged in 14+ days decay rate quadruples

this would help a little.  ive quit the mud for 3-4 months before and come back surprised to find not only did my character not dead-beat he also still had limited items.

many cases of deep renting are players keeping a backup set for their primary characters though, and its no trouble at all for them to log on their deep renter every few days.

id like to see both a greatly increased coin cost and a faster decay while rented.  im not sure what dagda had to have trouble renting, but before i quit this wipe i was renting pretty decent stuff on multiple chars with no trouble and without making any effort to farm coins.  if you are wearing the items, rent is a joke.

[Aristox]

We are punting on the rent system for the most part until Lube.  Some good ideas in here though.

Shelved.