Training lessons for 1 loom point: Official petition

[FleetFox]

Don't worry guys, we have been in contact with Harald, this is on the list for the devs, so the 300 votes have not been in vain this thread was only about building awareness to the devs, which has worker ^^

[Rico]

bump

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

[Kalp]

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

[Admerius]

I wanna bump too!

My old suggestion is hidden here, Heskey made me change my mind, this was a bit too harsh, check new version on next page for updated version

(click to show/hide)

To be honest I think that 1LP is far too cheap for a respec, at least add a gentler xp penalty instead of removing it all. I wouldn't mind between 10 to 20% xp penalty.

Or to add some math to the post:
respec without paying LP cost=-40% xp
respec+1LP=-20% xp
respec+2lp=-10% xp
respec +3lp=-5% xp.

For 175 million xp char the 5% difference between 2lp and 3lp option is 8,75 million xp that's a good that's roughly lvl 1->31 in xp

NEVER 0% that's too kind for a full respec.

Oh and I never respec(maybe ten times or so tops, and never after lvl 31) so I speak from the omnnipotent perspective of a wiseguy.

[UnholyRolyPoly]

It would also help stabilize the loom market.  It's been out of whack since double xp.  If it cost a loom to respec.... and you only have gold.... you're going to use the gold to buy the loom.  Therefore more looms will go off the market.  Thus driving prices back up and keeping the +1 market on track. 

Overall I completely agree.  1 loom is the equivelant of one gen.  I would have no problem spending it to get a free respec on my high level characters.

[Admerius]

When it's an achievable form of ingame currency you get to pretend you arent paying for respec directly with wasted time, paying with exp removes that illusion - you are directly paying in hours you will never get back.

I know looms are arguably the same thing, but paying with one makes you want to give up and the other doesnt.

I stand corrected, LPs aren't that easy to get your hands on, I would still prefer a 5% penalty if you pay 1LP, and 0% if you pay 2LP, that way the you have to pay up to not lose those mere 5%.

Previous post edited to reflect this change of heart...

Respecing without paying any LP might actually give -((current level^2)/30)% in xp,
repsecing at lvl... removes this amount of xp
10...-3.3%
20...-13.3%
30...-30%
33...-36.3%
36...-43.2%

[Canary]

As someone who has retired three times this month alone after a relative slowdown in playing habits from previous months, I disagree with this proposal. The only time a free respec is actually a significant benefit versus the xp-cost respec is in the case of a character who is level 32 or higher. I do not think a single heirloom point comes close to the impact respeccing a high-level character has. This perspective is coming from a player who also has a character that is level 36, gen 1.

This isn't a proper way to address heirloom point inflation. This isn't the way the economy could be "fixed", if that ever becomes a goal the devs have. This isn't a reasonable way to deal with lower level respecs (the xp cost is not significant enough at lower levels to call for this). This is lobbying for an easy solution to try and min/max builds on characters at high levels. Maybe that should be a thing, and maybe it should be cheaper than what the going-rate for training lessons auctions currently are, but one heirloom point is not giving up nearly enough. How much do those even go for on the market, these days? The proposal here is to effectively lower the cost of xp-free respeccing by, what,  ten times? There are too many high level characters already, allowing the optimization of each and every one of them is a bad idea. Play on your alts!

[Thryn]

If there is some sort of XP gaining system change coming sooner or later, that's when we should worry about respecs. For now, though, it's either persevere and get the loompoint on the build you're playing and start the grind over (but hey, you got a LP out of it), or you lose half of your experience and get to pick up from there. Generally, games that offer no penalty regarding things like this usually die out because, well, people get bored. I like my penalties for respeccing, but I'm not a fan of the current xp system.

[Kalp]

bump

[Tzar]

derp..

[Aprikose]

As someone who has retired three times this month alone after a relative slowdown in playing habits from previous months, I disagree with this proposal. The only time a free respec is actually a significant benefit versus the xp-cost respec is in the case of a character who is level 32 or higher. I do not think a single heirloom point comes close to the impact respeccing a high-level character has. This perspective is coming from a player who also has a character that is level 36, gen 1.

This isn't a proper way to address heirloom point inflation. This isn't the way the economy could be "fixed", if that ever becomes a goal the devs have. This isn't a reasonable way to deal with lower level respecs (the xp cost is not significant enough at lower levels to call for this). This is lobbying for an easy solution to try and min/max builds on characters at high levels. Maybe that should be a thing, and maybe it should be cheaper than what the going-rate for training lessons auctions currently are, but one heirloom point is not giving up nearly enough. How much do those even go for on the market, these days? The proposal here is to effectively lower the cost of xp-free respeccing by, what,  ten times? There are too many high level characters already, allowing the optimization of each and every one of them is a bad idea. Play on your alts!

truth

[STR_aD_Sargon_eqv]

the point is we whouldn't needed dose training lessons if that mod wanst been under modding.

for example heavycav nerf patch.
i was lvl 34, 24\15 and when they changed my horse difficultly from 5 to 7.
and they backed up only 3 str points.... so they crashed my build just to play more comfortble. this community wants funny game, nobody don't fckin care of realizm. they don't gave me a choice, (but still, some badmins helped their friends with free respec, even since it isn't allowed) sure i need that T.L. but i have no tons of gold for it.

i want to say, if an devs gonna still make some bullshit changes awhile we are playin, then yes, T.L. should costs 1LP.

BUT T.L. shouldn't costs 1LP just becouse of some QQX bored to play 2h, for example (totaly joke, coz he won't, childs want go easy )

[Tzar]

but still, some badmins helped their friends with free respec, even since it isn't allowed) sure i need that T.L. but i have no tons of gold for it.

Who   :

[Mendro]

but still, some badmins helped their friends with free respec, even since it isn't allowed)

Time to give some names

[STR_aD_Sargon_eqv]

Time to give some names

gimmi 10 L.P. 

(click to show/hide)

how's the difference? nobody here don't fckin care of admin's outrage