Pay to Train

I misunderstood your original question about if they were going to sell gold in the add-on store. I said, "I share argyle's concern, that if they sell gold in the store, then it sort of defeats the purpose to a real challenge to achieve master level in some skill. And then we'll have the have's and have not's."

I read it that you were concerned if they did this.

But one thing I want to point out - the tone in her post, towards me (not you), you picked up on quite clearly. It's what she always does in any post I ever write.

P2W is a concern for many gamers, and in the context I brought it up, I believe it's constructive feedback about the ramifications of what can happen if they make training P2W. I am not saying they have done this. Just that it could impact a lot of people.

 

I can't add much here in the way of game mechanics as I'm not a dev, but I think one of the most simple factors in the answer to "why are we paying to train" would be, gold sink. Expect it to cost a lot more by the time the game comes out too.

I did like the way UO did it, you had to train yourself beyond the initial NPC training shelf. If I would add anything to that system, perhaps it would be a player training shelf at a limit somewhere above the NPC shelf where players could train one another.

 

There is no straw man bait here. You took my posts from another thread, placed them here out of context and I pointed it out. That's just fact. If anyone else had done it, I would have pointed it out to them. You took a question posed by someone else and turned it into a *concern*. Another fact that I pointed out. The whole *selling gold in the addon store* concern is the straw man.

My constructive comments were on the *other thread* and I felt I had to post them in full on *this thread* so people would know the context of what I said. Context that is NOT the same as yours by a longshot. I won't ignore your posts because I have no personal ax to grind with you. There are plenty of times I agree with what you have to say or at least find your views interesting. In this case, you took my posts out of context which it not cool in my book. Perhaps that's the real problem and something you may want to reconsider doing in the future.

 

Ok since the Devs Caved and reduced Traiing costs can someone post what the new ones are so I can see IF I can go back to testing stuff?

Looking for

Tiere - $ and Each Level $ for each tier.

Used to be 5 times more for each level

TY

 

If I took it out of context, I apologize. I had agreed with that post and included it as an interesting take on things. But you took it as an insult.

If what you said is the opposite of what I thought, I don't know what to say about that.

Edit: I need to add, I didn't remain in the thread where you said it because I didn't want to be accused of being off topic and it deleted. So I started a new topic with some of those ideas, and my own in mind.

 

You should have no problem testing, you will have gold and low costs to test all you like. I don't know what those costs are because I haven't logged into the game except for a few minutes on day 1 of this release.

The devs caved, for now. Let's hope they don't institute high fees for training in the future.

 

I'm glad we cleared the air and I'm sending hugs your way. If I came across as accusatory, I do apologize for that. Not my intention, I am just a fairly blunt spoken woman and don't beat around the bush...lol. I've eaten my share of humble pie and I know I will again

 

I honestly hope that they don't institute high costs ever. If I spent days out in the wilderness training myself to get the level, I don't want to then have to pay a fortune to get someone to explain to me what I worked so hard to learn.

 

I pay to train in Pagan, the thing is, the trainer actually gives a time amount that you can hit him and, it's immersive. Handing over GP for skills is understandable, but I miss the old days, Ultima VII, Ultima VIII, where you watched your dude train. Maybe that's just over the top too complex.

 

I'm not advocating for high costs.. but I don't think that's what's going on. Imagine you're in a dojo and are a fighting master and you have a pupil; you tell your pupil that you'll teach him a new move when he proves he's ready to learn it. Or, you're a craftsman and you have an apprentice; you tell your pupil that you'll teach him new skills when he proves himself on the skills you already taught him. I don't think the idea is that you're paying for what you already learned.

 

Ok ill play the bad guy... wiping the skills from us and then changing the cost to them yes that was bad however the cost them selves were not to outrageous over all. by the time a player is a higher lvl going for the elite bottom end spells going from one lvl to the next lvl wont be matter of hours it will be days or weeks. plenty of time to grab 5k gold or whatever. so when it goes to game time i approve of the costs. the point i agree with now is that were testing and how are we going to play around with skills if it costs that much each time we want to try something new. granted game time i love the high cost

 

I liked that too. I don't think it is a factor of complexity, rather a factor of it taking too long for people to get their instant gratification skill increases off the backs of their level achievements. I suppose it is left to that very hard issue of the Devs trying to find the middle ground!

My dream system would look something like this:
Pay a trainer to gain initial training and access to a new skill that was "discovered" by the Player Character through numerous means. Books/reading, observation, direct combat.
That skill then becomes available to the PC and the PC can work on that skill naturally by simply using it.
Checkpoints could be used for further training between NPCs and other PCs on the same skill at multiple proficiencies within.

 

Maybe we can have a little mini-game with the trainer to get your skill? They COULD put nice things like this in the game, BUT it seems they're going for a much more generic and pre-fabricated MMO feel, even though there will (supposedly) be a single player mode also. Bah.

 

Oh don't get me wrong, I totally think it's a fair question to ask, consider, and debate. It can be contentious and I present only reasons why it might be helpful to someone in a position I am (little time to actually play).

You didn't actually misunderstand me, I was being intentionally vague so as to avoid starting an argument for or against either side.

I genuinely understand and agree with some of the points you made in your post. I'm not even sold on gold in the store anyway, as it can lead to issues. I just know that if its there, I'd probably use it at some point

 

i am neither for nor against gold in the store.... however if their is gold in the store one could regulate black market gold sales if they were kept below the value of what it would take them in time to make... again that could lead to pay to win but honestly if you have enough money no matter what game you play u can pay to win one way or another. so the decision is how to best mitigate the risks

 

Good point. That's what I was asking too, why the concept of a double hit to gain a skill.

 

The training cost is a problem for me in how it is currently implemented. I can be clicking away looking through the trees, trying to decide how to spend my points, and wind up with less skill than i started with and zero gold left after accomplishing nothing! that doesn't make any sense at all.

So to me, the biggest change needed is to allow us to play with our skills with a running tally of the cost (based on our original skill structure), and not spend any gold until concluding the overall transaction with the trainer.

I've said all that before in another thread though.

For the general topic of 'pay to train', I like the idea of seeing the trainer as a teacher, and attending a class. I'd love to see some more involved methods to the training aspect of the game. Rather than trees with icons to click on, how about a different quest line for each school, pay for a class for a specific skill within that school. Attending class allows you to spend your skill point in that skill, and how well you do in the class determines how much your training advances the skill.. you should also be able to 'test out' of certain classes based on the fact you've had experience with the skill and are so good the class would be super easy to complete for you.

I'm not sure if you're getting my meaning with this idea, but the basis is on making the whole system fun, and easier to understand what the skills are you are thinking of learning since it takes hands-on training to learn them.

 

Its very simple, no free respec, that's why we have to pay........and that's why it will be expensive........
This is for me one of this skill system flaws, once you get your level you can allocate XP points wherever you want.
So the only way to control free respec is adding a gold cost to it. (apart from having to find the right Trainer in the future)
So if they place Gold in the store yes then we are a bit closer to a P2W game.
Anyway gold sales will occur privately so I can understand its quite annoying for developers when someone is earning money with your very own product.
So why don't sell money directly in addon store?

 

Most of the people posting here want realism in this game.

Maybe a review of how people have been trained, from an historical perspective, is important (I know this might be preaching to the choir for some of you who are history buffs).

I have to go back to UO, because they had it right - not an opinion about the game, but only about the historical model they used quite nicely.

When a person became of age to train, around 12 or more years old, their parents found a guild of the profession desired. They paid the guild master to train their child (room, board and a fee). So in UO, you could pay a certain amount to the trainer, and it would give you a maximum number of points - this was only apprentice level. You could not pay "tuition" to become a journeyman.

From this article, Medieval Guilds:

"Apprentices to a guild could be as young as twelve years old. They were taught a trade by a guild member. He would expect to be paid for this by the parents of the boy. An apprentice could live with his master for anything up to 14 years. Once an apprenticeship was over, the young person now became a journeyman. He would be paid a wage and once he had saved enough money, he could start up a business of his own. Only members of a guild could sell within a town. This was meant to keep up quality. However, on market days anybody could sell their goods in the market whether they were skilled or not."

In UO, you were listed as an apprentice (it was in your title for that skill). Once you became better, you were a journeyman (in your title), and so on.

In the real world, once you became a journeyman, you were actually paid for your work, and could earn your own way. You didn't continue paying the guild master to train you. But to stay in the guild, you not only had to earn it, but had to produce quality goods, otherwise you were kicked from the guild.

The way UO handled the "inferior goods" was simply that you used the resources but failed to make them. No other way to accomplish that in a game. Or perhaps you had to make a certain quantity of quality goods and turn that in, in the form of a deed for X amount of goods, that you could sell.

But here is only food for thought, about design, rather than just paying a trainer:

It might be too complicated of a mechanism, but maybe you should have to earn a certain dollar amount, by selling your goods (either to an NPC or through your own public or private vendor), to remain in a guild and earn skill incrementally. The cost of making these goods is where people will need gold and resources to complete. Your character may have to be a certain "age" to reach higher levels also.

Maybe private or public vendors could only be for the particular skill you're training. So you could only sell weapons on a blacksmith vendor, for example. This would be one way to track sales. Same for selling items to an NPC. It would need to be a particular NPC, and they would only buy X amount over X amount of time (that also happened in UO).

Once you earned a certain amount, it would give you more XP for that skill. Now, that mechanism could be abused, by someone charging too much and their friend buying the overpriced items. So the vendors would have to set caps on prices for inferior quality (anything less than master, for example). These would have to be specialized vendors, because we know there will be rares and specialty items, that will be worth a lot.

As for combat training, that would have to be a different mechanism - like how many of each level of creature or person that you won a battle. They are already tracking how many things we've killed as a Steam achievement, so at least that mechanism is already created.

 

How about this when it comes to skills. the first round you train a skill its basically cheap. its your first try at a skill set but as soon as you try to reallocate skill points they become expensive and continue costing more as you change your skills over and over again. example take cost of first train lets say its was 250 gold to train that item then next time you change those skill points its 500 gold. the problem now is that we are in testing phase we need people to change skills as new ones come out to test to see and balance them in the game but once that's settled and we know its working right then their should be a huge penalty on changing skills all the time. remember we are looking long term not beta