- Proposal
- In summary, we propose vendors -- like token vendors and the Mustafar vendor -- that would enable players to trade in items, tokens, currency, or other items, in exchange for certain items with low drop rates. Rather than merely increasing the drop rates, our goal is to allow players to trade effort or time in order to negate randomness. Ridth is a good model for this.
Make all items in scope available to trade in exchange for things other than credits, so that this exchange does not impact the player credit economy beyond increasing the potential item supply. More items will be in general circulation, but will still require certain pre-requisites to obtain from the vendor, and can still be sold for credits between players for those who are unable to obtain them from the vendors.
This also gives us another way to acquire and spend tokens that are otherwise not being spent, which in turn encourages player to participate in other game modes such as PvP.
Junk Exchange Vendor
- Make literally ALL Junk items in the game available to trade for.
- Allow players to trade X stacks of any Y junk item in exchange for any Z Junk item. Generally this should be a somewhat consistent but uneven exchange for all non-combat related junk, something like 5 stacks of Item Y in exchange for 1 stack of Item Z, and vice versa (i.e., all junk items not used for crafting or slicing any combat-related item, can be exchanged for each other at a 5:1 ratio).
- For junk required in crafting or slicing combat-related items (such as interframes, simple tookits, etc.), then perhaps the ratio should be significantly higher, such as 10:1 or even 20:1 (Y:Z), where Y is a non-combat related junk item and Z is a combat-related junk item.
"Rare" Item Exchange Vendor
- Make literally ALL "Rare" items (items with the Rare label) in the game available to trade for.
- Make literally ALL decorative items in the game that have very low drop chance but are not labelled "Rare" -- such as holograms -- available to trade for, at a lower cost.
- Include area-specific items as well (such as Dathomir items needed to craft decorations), at a higher cost.
- Allow players to trade X tokens of type Y in exchange for any Z Rare item. Generally the ratio should be commensurate to how difficult it is to acquire that type of token. For example, sample base ratios below based on Rare item label (which should be increased for area-specific items, and lowered for non area-specific and not Rare label):
- 1 Galactic Fortitude token for any 1 Rare item
- 5 Base Tokens for any 1 Rare item
- 5 Battlefield tokens for any 1 Rare item
- 10 GCW tokens for any 1 Rare item
- 20 Restuss Commendations for any 1 Rare item
- 50 space duty tokens for any 1 Rare item
Collection Item Exchange Vendor
- Similar to the above ideas, we propose making most collection items available for exchange as well, using both token exchange as well as a collection item exchange ratio within the same collection, very much like how Ridth works. For example, trade 100 each of Weed I through Weed VIII in exchange for 1 Weed IX.
- We agree that certain collections like Ridth should be left as is. No strong argument for changing how Jedi/Sith collections work at this time, given balance implications.
Combat-Related Item Exchange Vendor
There is discussion about making combat-related and area-specific rare drops (like interwovens, speed stims, cybernetics, weapons, ship chassis, etc.) similarly available for exchange from a vendor. Frankly, this is a much bigger discussion as it has game balance implications, and is not in scope for this initial proposal. I recommend starting with the above as a Proof of Concept first, and then we can open it up to combat-related items, prioritizing limited time-gated availability first (such as Acklay drops).
- Justification
- The proposed solution would free up average play time by at least hundreds of hours per player, allowing players to trade time and effort in place of random chance, in order to acquire items that do not significantly affect game balance. This would allow players to experience and enjoy content that is otherwise cut off from them -- either because they have exceedingly low drop rates or they simply have never dropped -- while still requiring players to put in effort (of a different kind) to obtain them.
In other words, this proposal would help maximize the value this game holds for most players, which is the sandbox creative element, so that even players with limited time can enjoy the game rather than give up and go elsewhere. This design rewards players rather than punishes them for their time and effort investment.
This would increase items in player circulation allowing for more consumption, crafting, and sales. It would also give players other ways to spend tokens that they might not otherwise be spending. And it also give players more incentive to participate in other game modes to acquire those tokens, such as PvP.
By utilizing existing game mechanics, there should be low dev effort required to implement this proposal, so this should be a win/win for both the devs and the players.
- Motivation
- Some items in the game (detailed in proposal) require much more repetitive and time consuming grinding than is fun for many players (as discussed and agreed on Discord between many Senators and players), with little benefit or balance implications to such grinding, and in some cases these items might never even drop due to the random nature of those drops.
Said another way, some parts of the game actively punish rather than reward the player for their time and effort investment, and currently the only workaround (as stated by the devs) is to encourage AFK macros or grinding while dual boxing. For players who already have limited time to play, this distracts them from enjoying the real content and value of the game -- sandbox creativity -- or otherwise discourages them from playing at all. (refer to Discord senate-public channel for player testimonials, including folks who stopped playing this server)
------------------------
Detailed Explanation (as discussed on Discord)
A good game doesn't require someone to play it AFK at all. (That's not really playing at that point.) Generally a good game design to me is one that accomplishes the following:
Randomness is the enemy of player agency and creativity, which defeats the purpose in a sandbox game like this which attracts players because of the freedom to choose. For example, I could build all kinds of ways of killing NPCs together with a group of players, but none of it matters if the rewards are random and never drop. Meaning, the game in that case is actively punishing me for trying to be creative, rather than rewarding me for my effort.
Using both time and randomness as a gate is what I consider frustrating and bad design, and is not specific to SWG, as games like WoW suffered from the same design. Given the typical game player (not specific to SWG) doesn't want to spend the time anymore, especially if there is a strong chance of simply never getting the reward due to how randomness works, they will either automate or just not play at all. Thus it becomes a meaningless measure of difficulty.
So most games nowadays define difficulty based on challenging the player to use their skills and abilities (both real and game-based) to overcome obstacles. Whether that's bosses that use player abilities and AI like what a player would do, or puzzles that require solving (not simple fetch quests). And those games also reward players for their level of participation, meaning the more you do the more you get, the less you do the less you get. For example, games like Guild Wars 1 and 2, when you take a group of people to kill a boss that has special loot, there is a 100% chance for it to drop one piece of relevant loot for each player who hit the boss or healed someone hitting the boss or took damage from the boss (and greater quality depending on how much that player hit the boss or healed someone hitting the boss or took damage from the boss).
Not saying that's possible to implement in an old game like SWG, just suggesting that I would rather re-define what are the things that should be gated by time vs things where time shouldn't matter, and how those time gates work. And ideally, try to eliminate randomness altogether where possible, so we are rewarding rather than punishing effort.
In terms of the "things" we are talking about, I mean rare loot drops that don't affect game balance. I'm not suggesting that "Rare" shouldn't mean rare, I'm suggesting redefining how rare works, using Ridth as a perfect model, which allows players to eliminate randomness by trading in things they accumulate over time and effort.
I think the easiest to implement compromise is a vendor that works in very much the same way, but also accepts tokens that already exist in game. Maybe add a new token to the game that drops with maps, so you still have to do the foraging but you're not stuck with RNG drops, you can trade in the tokens you get for that particular helmet or hologram you're looking for.
Detailed Explanation (as discussed on Discord)
A good game doesn't require someone to play it AFK at all. (That's not really playing at that point.) Generally a good game design to me is one that accomplishes the following:
- Progress requires effort, effort should require and enforce (more than diminish) player agency / choice, and effort is rewarded commensurately (in a way that encourages further progress)
- There is a competitive element (whether it's players vs. the game AI or players vs. other players) that encourages (more than discourages) further gameplay (or encourages you to progress so you can be better than the AI or other players)
- It is very replayable (gameplay is not boring or stale, there is always something new to do or new variations to try out that make it seem like you are doing new things to get new experiences you didn't have before)
Randomness is the enemy of player agency and creativity, which defeats the purpose in a sandbox game like this which attracts players because of the freedom to choose. For example, I could build all kinds of ways of killing NPCs together with a group of players, but none of it matters if the rewards are random and never drop. Meaning, the game in that case is actively punishing me for trying to be creative, rather than rewarding me for my effort.
Using both time and randomness as a gate is what I consider frustrating and bad design, and is not specific to SWG, as games like WoW suffered from the same design. Given the typical game player (not specific to SWG) doesn't want to spend the time anymore, especially if there is a strong chance of simply never getting the reward due to how randomness works, they will either automate or just not play at all. Thus it becomes a meaningless measure of difficulty.
So most games nowadays define difficulty based on challenging the player to use their skills and abilities (both real and game-based) to overcome obstacles. Whether that's bosses that use player abilities and AI like what a player would do, or puzzles that require solving (not simple fetch quests). And those games also reward players for their level of participation, meaning the more you do the more you get, the less you do the less you get. For example, games like Guild Wars 1 and 2, when you take a group of people to kill a boss that has special loot, there is a 100% chance for it to drop one piece of relevant loot for each player who hit the boss or healed someone hitting the boss or took damage from the boss (and greater quality depending on how much that player hit the boss or healed someone hitting the boss or took damage from the boss).
Not saying that's possible to implement in an old game like SWG, just suggesting that I would rather re-define what are the things that should be gated by time vs things where time shouldn't matter, and how those time gates work. And ideally, try to eliminate randomness altogether where possible, so we are rewarding rather than punishing effort.
In terms of the "things" we are talking about, I mean rare loot drops that don't affect game balance. I'm not suggesting that "Rare" shouldn't mean rare, I'm suggesting redefining how rare works, using Ridth as a perfect model, which allows players to eliminate randomness by trading in things they accumulate over time and effort.
I think the easiest to implement compromise is a vendor that works in very much the same way, but also accepts tokens that already exist in game. Maybe add a new token to the game that drops with maps, so you still have to do the foraging but you're not stuck with RNG drops, you can trade in the tokens you get for that particular helmet or hologram you're looking for.
