Ghosting spawns - so...?

[archaicsubrosa77]

Here is the link that shows Reds cannot insta log from houses...

http://wiki.uosecondage.com/index.php?t ... 08/26/1999

It's listed under other changes

[poogoblin]

To address some of the claims here:

"It's not era accurate" doesn't hold a ton of water because the majority of the player base, during this era, had 1 account, and they didn't want to use that one account to sit around and ghost.

So you are suggesting creating a game mechanic that didn't exist in the era to combat a perception of gameplay style that you had for the era? Doesn't hold a ton of water either in my humble opinion.

Again the issue is only a very minute % of people had multiple accounts pre-tram, it wasn't just my play style it wasn't anyone's.

I guess for a true T2A experience we'd all have to be limited to one account, I'm not sure I'm for that, but it is probably necessary if we are trying to duplicate the experience.

[Kraarug]

EDITED to be more clear

I think most of us agree that:

Condition 0: Having multiple accounts is not the problem EDITED

Condition 1: Having a ghost in a dungeon is not the problem.

Condition 2: Having a ghost planted for the specific purpose to conduct risk-free reconnaissance is wrong and an abuse of the multiple account policy of UOSA

It is this practice of condition 2, and only this practice, that people would like controlled.

Easy solution?

Simply move parked ghosts (those not moving in over two mins) to just inside of the given dungeon's entrance.

That way condition 0 and 1 are still viable but it eliminates condition 2 which is the problem because it is out of control here.

[Odin]

Yet again your basically advocating adding era inaccurate mechanics to solve a balance problem. This is something the shard clearly states is not in its remit.

I would also ask what evidence you have that ghosting is "out of control". Which guilds are ghosting, where are they ghosting and what real adverse effects does it have on peoples gameplay. Remember that many red ghosts in dungeons are simply there because someone died in stat and just left the ghost there to wait it out. Just because there is a ghost doesn't mean it is a spy...

[Kraarug]

Yet again your basically advocating adding era inaccurate mechanics to solve a balance problem. This is something the shard clearly states is not in its remit.

I would also ask what evidence you have that ghosting is "out of control". Which guilds are ghosting, where are they ghosting and what real adverse effects does it have on peoples gameplay. Remember that many red ghosts in dungeons are simply there because someone died in stat and just left the ghost there to wait it out. Just because there is a ghost doesn't mean it is a spy...

It'll take some time but I'll gather some screen shots to illustrate the point.

I hear what you are saying and I certainly do not take asking for a 'nerf' very lightly. To be honest, this situation doesn't bother my personal play style, however I think the current situation does hurt non-powerplayer shard growth and it is definite an issue with many as evidenced by the number of posts this thread contains.

[archaicsubrosa77]

Yet again your basically advocating adding era inaccurate mechanics to solve a balance problem. This is something the shard clearly states is not in its remit.

I would also ask what evidence you have that ghosting is "out of control". Which guilds are ghosting, where are they ghosting and what real adverse effects does it have on peoples gameplay. Remember that many red ghosts in dungeons are simply there because someone died in stat and just left the ghost there to wait it out. Just because there is a ghost doesn't mean it is a spy...

You dont believe that do you? Come on.
If it wasnt a ghost cam there would be no problem with it being moved to the entrance, if it was a ghost cam there would be no problem moving it to the entrance. Comprendo?

[Caranthir]

Yet again your basically advocating adding era inaccurate mechanics to solve a balance problem. This is something the shard clearly states is not in its remit.

I would also ask what evidence you have that ghosting is "out of control". Which guilds are ghosting, where are they ghosting and what real adverse effects does it have on peoples gameplay. Remember that many red ghosts in dungeons are simply there because someone died in stat and just left the ghost there to wait it out. Just because there is a ghost doesn't mean it is a spy...

You dont believe that do you? Come on.
If it wasnt a ghost cam there would be no problem with it being moved to the entrance, if it was a ghost cam there would be no problem moving it to the entrance. Comprendo?

Yes there is a problem, it didn't happen in this era and so it shouldn't happen here. There are plenty of things that are completely out of balance, tamers to just name one, and the staff are surely not going to nerf them to balance playing styles. So why should they do it in this case? There are plenty of ways to counter this kind of gameplay but people are simply too complacent to use them and would rather go the easy route and complain about it.

[Kraarug]

You know, I do think that having a ghost parked for risk-free recon is a blantant expliot of multiple accounts and is something not intended to be part of normal game play.

There's no skill for it, it is not something that was intended as part of the game, there is no risk involved, it negatively impacts others without cost to the perpetrator and provides a general negative effect on the shards non-powerplayer growth.

Simply put, there is no risk/benefit relationship in parking a ghost.

All of these points should justify some kind of action.

If moving ghosts, when inactive for a period of time, to the entrances of a dungeon is not feasable, then the ERA ACCURATE response of disconnecting players from the server due to inactivity should be implemented.

At least this action is something that OSI did and would require the ghost parker to at least run some sort of macro. Even this action though isn't sufficent because I can easily craft a macro that would not only circumvent this but even worsen the problem.

[Ronk]

Just a random thought...doesn't' really solve or disprove anything...

But...if a PK can park two ghosts in a dungeon to watch for people. Could not a farmer make a 'clone' of his character on one or two extra accounts? Then when you are farming they'll never know which character has the loot. The clones don't need anything but 100 str and the ability to recall...and then to dress/look the same.

Alternatively, you could hide a character in the area to act as a pack mule. This way if a pk comes you can recall out. If they get lucky and kill you, they'd have to think to look for the hidden character. Not to mention that recalling from hidden, while it unhides you, makes it very unlikely you'd disrupt you in time unless they knew you were there and had a target up.

[Kraarug]

...
Alternatively, you could hide a character in the area to act as a pack mule. This way if a pk comes you can recall out. If they get lucky and kill you, they'd have to think to look for the hidden character. Not to mention that recalling from hidden, while it unhides you, makes it very unlikely you'd disrupt you in time unless they knew you were there and had a target up.

That's what I do actually. I park a hidden character, who's able to gate, in an area near my farmer but not in the farming location. This character has his scavenger on so I can just drop the loot near them and they pick it up.

I make frequent 'loot runs' to this character and if my farmer gets get PK'ed or killed, I run my farmer's ghost over for a res or gate.

I do this regardless of weather there is a ghost parked in the area, it's just good game play

[Ronk]

That's what I do actually. I park a hidden character, who's able to gate, in an area near my farmer but not in the farming location. This character has his scavenger on so I can just drop the loot near them and they pick it up.

I make frequent 'loot runs' to this character and if my farmer gets get PK'ed or killed, I run my farmer's ghost over for a res or gate.

I do this regardless of weather there is a ghost parked in the area, it's just good game play

Uh huh, and now by saying that you are gonna get hammered with people calling you a hypocryte

But I think it does show the fundamental problem is the whole multi-accounts at the same time thing.

[Kraarug]

That's what I do actually. I park a hidden character, who's able to gate, in an area near my farmer but not in the farming location. This character has his scavenger on so I can just drop the loot near them and they pick it up.

I make frequent 'loot runs' to this character and if my farmer gets get PK'ed or killed, I run my farmer's ghost over for a res or gate.

I do this regardless of weather there is a ghost parked in the area, it's just good game play

Uh huh, and now by saying that you are gonna get hammered with people calling you a hypocryte

The difference? My 'gate player' has risk by being in the area because he or she can be killed.

A risk free recon ghost can not be killed or hampered in anyway through player actions and so, my major issue with ghost parking in the lack of a risk to benefit relationship, is not an issue with parking a live player in a dungeon.

I would highly suggest that once ghost parking is corrected, those that need recon should park their own hidden character. I'd be delighted to reveal them and use the actual game mechanics as intended to rid their nuisance.

That's how the game was designed to play.

[Caranthir]

That's what I do actually. I park a hidden character, who's able to gate, in an area near my farmer but not in the farming location. This character has his scavenger on so I can just drop the loot near them and they pick it up.

I make frequent 'loot runs' to this character and if my farmer gets get PK'ed or killed, I run my farmer's ghost over for a res or gate.

I do this regardless of weather there is a ghost parked in the area, it's just good game play

Uh huh, and now by saying that you are gonna get hammered with people calling you a hypocryte

The difference? My 'gate player' has risk by being in the area because he or she can be killed.

And the PK who is supposedly attacking you doesn't have a much greater risk with suffering statsloss? Sorry but you're a hypocrite of the first order.

[Kraarug]

And the PK who is supposedly attacking you doesn't have a much greater risk with suffering statsloss? Sorry but you're a hypocrite of the first order.

That's a cheap and illogical shot.

Go back to the argument's construction and then challenge me. Otherwise you are just whining.

Let me lay it out for you to make it easier for you.

My argument:

Point A: There is no problem with multiclienting.

Point B: Using Ghosts to Recon is an abuse of multiclienting in that there is No Risk to Ghost Recon and there are No In Game Mechanics available to players to reduce the impact of Ghosting by another.

Using a hidden LIVE alt character to store loot and gate does use the benefit of multiclienting, however, there is still the very real direct risk from other players. Anyone is free to to locate and kill live players as they wish using normal game mechanics.

With ghosts though, one player can not banish or diminish the impact of another's ghost performing recon in a dungeon through any skill or mechanic available to them.

That is the root of the issue.

Live Player In Dungeon = Risk and Reward
Ghost Recon in Dungeon = Abuse of Game Mechanics

Now, speak to that if you can.

[zzyzx]

And the PK who is supposedly attacking you doesn't have a much greater risk with suffering statsloss? Sorry but you're a hypocrite of the first order.

The PK doesn't HAVE to risk anything. They have the upper hand here. They have the ghost scout to know what they're dealing with, they have the element of surprise, and they can always bring 2 or 3 buds with them to quickly eradicate their target.