Curse

SotiCoto · Feb 15, 2007, 04:58 PM // 16:58

Now... I note something important before continuing...
Increasing Xunlai Storage Capacity would be effectively essential for this to work as intended......

But here is... in a rather Devil's Advocate kind of way... a potential nerf for farmers, and something they wouldn't take too kindly to.
But what I'm thinking is along these lines:

That based on the number of items a character is carrying, they get a small percentile Movement Speed penalty.
For instance... every five items over 20 could net them a 5% penalty... so if they were at full capacity, they would be moving 25% slower.

I mean it could still be done... people could still go out and collect things... but quite rightly if they're carrying a ton of loot about with them, they wouldn't be so effective at running away from the monsters if they needed to. It would definitely stop people farming until their inventories were totally full up in particularly dangerous areas.
It could make rare items rarer, but could also lower the overall gap between the rich and the poor in Guild Wars, which is something seriously needed.

[Of course I'm expecting lots of people to seriously dislike this notion, unless of course they're against UW-farming and the like too.]

moriz · Feb 15, 2007, 05:13 PM // 17:13

it's not a bad idea, but i don't think it will really do a whole lot to farmers.

the initial 20 items limit is quite large. people can get around that by simply emptying out their inventory, and just go in with the ID kit and the two salvage kits. that's still 17 items they can load up before they get hit with the penalty. smarter farmers can also salvage/toss what they don't need, so they can get huge stacks of materials instead of useless loot (which are often more valuable anyways).

lowering the 20 item limit is not an option either, since that will cut into the item capacity of nonfarmers as well. imagine having to juggle your inventory just because you picked up a few items after killing a mob, for example.

maybe putting this restriction only in certain areas would be a better idea. i've never done UW farming (hell, i've never BEEN to the underworld), so i'm not sure how much potential loot you can get out from there. it's just that it doesn't make since to have this penalty in presearing, for example.

Tiny Killer · Feb 15, 2007, 05:28 PM // 17:28

No thank you. If I want encumberance rules, I will grab my dice and graph paper to play D&D.

TheRaven · Feb 15, 2007, 05:29 PM // 17:29

I don't like the idea personally and I'm not a farmer. I simply play the game going from quest to quest and mission to mission. I do however pick up EVERYTHING that drops for me and sometimes it can be quite a while before I head back into town.

I don't understand the folks that won't pick up their drops. Yeah, I know that most of them aren't worth much, but they add up. It doesn't take that long to merch them.

tenshi_strife · Feb 15, 2007, 06:03 PM // 18:03

/notsigned....

i am not a farmer but i am a pack rat.... my main charecvter has like 6 minipets on him and tones of otehr crap i prolly dont need. normally i will have my invetory basicly full and this would really really tick me off. if you want to stop farmers then stick with the new farming codes... they work well enough i dont really think you need to try and hinder them more, i mean for gods sakes if you keep trying to stop farmers or what not then it will be almost impossible to make money and you will have a hell of a hard time to get green items and and if you dont have the money to buy a green wep then you will not be able to get it yourself, makeing the gap between rich and poor LARGER not smaller, cause farming will only be possible with tons of time, and casual player like myself will get boned..... so really before you guys who are poor because of lack of effort start screamign about farming nerfs think about what your saying... it will only make it worse.

DarkGanni · Feb 15, 2007, 08:49 PM // 20:49

Very bad idea.

/notsigned

Stormlord Alex · Feb 15, 2007, 09:03 PM // 21:03

/notsigned - it wouldn't really close the gap between rich and poor, the poor would lug less merch fodder around and make less.
It would screw over monks who carry around shedloads of +10 vs. X shields tho (not a good thing - useful to have for PvP arenas, alas Soti doesn't acknowledge their existence)... Or people like me who fill their inventories with weapon swaps for different foes/situations.

LuckyGiant · Feb 15, 2007, 10:40 PM // 22:40

/not signed

imagine doing a mission with someone who is full of weapons etc, wouldn't affect farmer, just slow them down

Antheus · Feb 15, 2007, 10:46 PM // 22:46

Mule characters never leave outposts in the first place. So what if they have movement penalty.

Give me 500 inventory slots and 95% movement penalty. I'm fine with that.

lazy1 · Feb 15, 2007, 10:48 PM // 22:48

/notsigned

what about ppl wiht 2 sets of armour and more than 1 weapon... that would drive me insane i mean just about all of my chars have 2 sets of armour and they all have more than 1 weapon set then u get alot of loot from just general activities on quests that is my main suorce of income.

draxynnic · Feb 16, 2007, 12:41 AM // 00:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Antheus

Mule characters never leave outposts in the first place. So what if they have movement penalty.

Give me 500 inventory slots and 95% movement penalty. I'm fine with that.

Some people don't have mules, however. After all, extra character slots cost money...

Since I'm a bit of a packrat and I don't like getting rid of anything that I can't buy from a merchant, I have a distinct tendency to fill up my inventory. Regularly, I go out on expeditions where I only have ten or so slots open for new stuff... this is often around the point where I start looking to cull some items, but that doesn't mean it doesn't happen regularly. And this is with all my other characters full - I store my free inventory spots in storage when I'm not playing.

And I don't farm, except on rare occasions when I'm looking for something very specific (a particular green or collector's items to get a particular weapon).

So, definitely, defiantly not signed.

Arkantos · Feb 16, 2007, 12:52 AM // 00:52

Farming is one of the only ways to make money. Even with farming, the money you make is all based on luck. My warriors bags are half full of armor/weapons, all the time. Why should he be punished? This is an awful idea.

Meat Axe · Feb 16, 2007, 01:52 AM // 01:52

I don't understand why you'd want everyone punished simply because some people don't know how to farm, or don't want to farm. I don't farm, but like others have stated, I pick up everything I can, because every little bit counts. I don't want to be forced to stop playing the storyline or exploring because I have 20 items. I mean, when I'm exploring a map, I don't want to have to go back to town just to sell some items. I want to explore the whole thing, maybe find another town.

Farming is just a type of work to earn money. It earns a lot more money, but everyone has the option to do it. It's like in real life, everyone has the option to become a successful cars salesman or whatever, but you don't see the people who don't want to become one complain about how much they earn.

I don't think this would affect the game in any positive way. It'd mean that the farmers would be more careful in how they manage their inventories, whereas the rest of PvE would take this penalty just for going through an area.

*Alexiel* · Feb 16, 2007, 01:59 AM // 01:59

I can maybe see how this would be more realistic- but yeah, I doubt it would really affect the game positively overall..

Mainly due to the fact as someone mentioned-alot of people may/may not be farmers however they are constantly carrying a second set of armour and more than one weapon set... So I don't think it'd be that fair really.

Alfrond · Feb 16, 2007, 02:08 AM // 02:08

I've filled up my storage box already, so I often store the remainder on my characters. It wouldn't take me very long at all to hit 20 items. While encumberance is an interesting idea in other games, I find it usually just makes things less fun, which I believe would be really true in Guild Wars.

/not signed

malignant-heretic · Feb 16, 2007, 02:22 AM // 02:22

my warrior has 3 sets of armour and 2 swords, an axe, a shield, and a hammer sets, so thats my 20 slots right there. My necromancer is the same, 3 armours, 3 staffs, a wand and an offhand. And since my storage is full of materials/runes/event weapons ect.... ive got no space for em else where.

no offence but i think this idea is probably one of the worst ive heard.

/Notsigned

Legandary Spartan · Feb 16, 2007, 02:28 AM // 02:28

I'm a packrat and i don't make money or get halfway decent loot. My characters bags almost always have 5 or 6 slots left to pick up stuff. If it would weigh me down it would only stop me from going out and farming. Limited and/or being weighed down in core area's would stop me because this is where i make my money. The warriors are ussualy the first into battle and if they are weighted down there going to slow down the whole party. Monks also need to move and the last thing i want is a monk who can't run to heal or run away.

LifeInfusion · Feb 16, 2007, 05:14 AM // 05:14

/notsigned
I carry random crap like collectable drops.

Master Ketsu · Feb 16, 2007, 08:17 AM // 08:17

/Notsigned,

Your forgetting about People who like to bring their PvE chars all the way to be PvP worthy. A PvP worthy PvE char needs to have multiple armor sets with differant runes for differant builds, and all the differant weapons with mods that are also needed for PvP. This alone can take up over 20 items.

Not everyone who has a full backback is a farmer.

SotiCoto · Feb 16, 2007, 11:47 AM // 11:47

Heh... ^_^

I enjoy being right, even if its being right about everyone disagreeing with me.

I mean I like to fill up my inventory as well.... but then I have to ask myself: "How could one little assassin carry all that crap on him at the same time and STILL fight effectively?!" ... Without little inconveniences like this, it becomes less of a Role-Playing Game and more a game of trumps...

Regardless... I was only half-serious. I know nobody would back it up here because as far as I'm aware I'm practically the only roleplayer here.