I needed a bit of a cool off period before responding to this topic, so I apologize for the delay. I decided to work on DL2-Client updates for a while to try to get my mind off this topic and re-motivate myself.

I found several of the previous comments disheartening, but also largely logical fallacies (at least from my perspective -- I have to admit it seems like everyone has their own truth these days). I also found several of them to be almost completely off topic. That said, I appreciate everyone's willingness to contribute their thoughts and ideas. I believe that is how we will make Distant Lands a better place and continue to attract more players.

We've had 10 new accounts created in the last 11 days. I think that is largely because we've done so well in the voting polls lately (THANK YOU, COVETOUS), but also because some previous players have been checking in to see if it is a good time to come back (IT IS!). Regardless of your perspective, I'd like to think we can all agree that we'd like to see more players because it generally makes the game more fun. IT IS THE PLAYERS THAT REALLY MAKE THE GAME FUN, NOT THE GAME ITSELF. It isn't like I don't think of myself as a player (even though I typically feel guilty for playing because there are many other ways I can contribute -- some ways in which others cannot). When I say we need to grow the player base to help solve the problem, that is on my shoulders too. I am a player too (if you combine my characters excluding Staff I'd be about level 100).

I wasn't trying to be dismissive of the issue of item limits, I was trying to let you know that I consider it serious enough that I believe we've already significantly addressed it. And I consider the idea still worthy of a response. Further, if you read back what I said, we can (and will continue to) make adjustments on an item by item basis. I don't think completely getting rid of item limits is the right answer, but I'm open to thinking about it and discussing it. In fact, that is why the topic was brought up to begin with -- because we have interest in continuing to refine our approach to item scarcity.

With that as a baseline, I'd like to re-open the conversation about players hoarding large numbers of items. If it isn't a problem, that is fine, I'm good with that. So far at least, we have enough memory and CPU to handle it. But I tend to think we could still do a better job of addressing it. We've made some recent changes that will help (no extra dimensional pockets inside other extra dimensional pockets, for example) but I believe we should still consider more changes (though not as drastic a change as removing items limits completely).

I think we need to reduce the number of items that can be held within extra dimensional pockets (maybe make it so they hold 25 less items, or something). I think we should consider limiting players (and houses/rooms) to 2 extra dimensional pockets. I think a house and player inventory purge could help to re-balance out the existing world (while helping to avoid players dying and being unable to pick up some of their gear), but I'm open to that discussion and that brings us full circle.

So please help, give us your thoughts related to this topic and how we can fix it -- without drastic changes to the game. If you don't think we can, that's fine, but you should know that I respectively disagree with you.

Kindest regards,

--Nezmar

I agree with almost everything Nezmar has said. No reason for me to reiterate that.

I do have a suggestion about houses, though, for anyone willing to entertain the idea.

I believe that if we were to place more limitations on houses, it might further dissuade "hoarding". Limiting extra-dimensional containers forces us to not carry tons of stuff. That said, the alternate solution is storing it in your house. I propose that any items left on the floor will be purged on reboot. Furthermore, house containers (cabinets, etc) would have strict limitations so we don't have holes, bags, etc, filled to the brim shoved into them. I think we used to have weight limits on them. Something like that might work (and maybe bar the extra-dimensions items from even going into them).

That being said, we're kind of taking the fun out of extra-dimensional containers. On the other hand, they're unbalancing the game. I'm not sure that we need to limit the space that they will hold any further. I believe they're sized appropriately for the moment. Ensuring we don't have multitudes sitting in houses with gear that no one gets to use is a good next step in my opinion.

Thank you.
-Mike

Man, I don't really know where to start most days on this topic. And I've definitely been off topic on this subject that seems to matter to you. I feel like in a combined effort we've been through player purges together, item purges, and a whole lot of other funky ideas. But I believe you're on to something with the container issue. . . .

The most heart-warming player I know has been Laqmar with his efforts to help me be a better player. Even he stated that he would stop keeping gear to hand out to others. I feel like you're item number is particularly off due to the fact we need to look at it from a regenerative stand point, how many items one keeps to wield, and the number of items necessary to facilitate individual player growth. So with the new containers I've noticed the lack of being able to keep said amount of items in the bags of holding. I'd like to point out that I, as a player, utilize a number of scrolls and casting items to benefit my play-ratio. I also like to keep on hand a generic 10 items to hand out to new player when they log on, as well I also like to have a few keep-sake items like "an egg of a hawk" for my role play status. Regardless, I feel like finding the minimal number of items in inventory a smart way to move forward. . .

Laqmar said it in a way that I understood it. "I'll stop keeping items to hand out," which basically means even the kindest of people don't need the ability to keep a limitless number of items. As far as houses go, I should have honestly looted and tithed this incredible wealth that most players keep on their availability list. This isn't just a house problem, but an inventory issue. We need to stop keeping incredible amounts of gameplay for others, just because we feel like we're doing something good.

For examples, I could list players all day long that I feel like have stopped logging in and playing the game. And I really don't know their genuine reasons for keeping said items. . .

So as soon as possible, we need to do this item purge. I don't contribute a lot to this game, but once in a while I make my opinions soundly. This obsessive compulsive desire to own everything has gotten out of hand. The sooner we limit it, the better.

While I'd like to retain some of my gear, I'm also willing to give up for the enhanced gameplay of others.
SO, without a doubt. Let's move forward with this idea. Considering I've been more active than any other player over the past decade, then I don't really foresee a need to discuss whether or not we do this. I mean I've been responsible for agreeing to countless player purges in hopes that it would advance the game.

And as Myrrima taught me, it's all electronic fluff. What really matters it what you've nailed already here, the new accounts, the new players, and the friendships that ensue.

But don't mind me, I'm just some bumbling idiot that doesn't know jack about left to right.

Thank you for addressing your concerns. And thank you for being willing to bring them into the fold. It matters a lot that the game you've spent time on moves in a direction you can agree with.

So unless anyone wants to object. Let's purge the hell out of our accounts and get back to our basics. Because that's when we start to care about one another more than we care about things.

Sincerely,
Michael.

[quote="Nezmar"]With that as a baseline, I'd like to re-open the conversation about players hoarding large numbers of items. If it isn't a problem, that is fine, I'm good with that. So far at least, we have enough memory and CPU to handle it. But I tend to think we could still do a better job of addressing it. We've made some recent changes that will help (no extra dimensional pockets inside other extra dimensional pockets, for example) but I believe we should still consider more changes (though not as drastic a change as removing items limits completely).

I think we need to reduce the number of items that can be held within extra dimensional pockets (maybe make it so they hold 25 less items, or something). I think we should consider limiting players (and houses/rooms) to 2 extra dimensional pockets. I think a house and player inventory purge could help to re-balance out the existing world (while helping to avoid players dying and being unable to pick up some of their gear), but I'm open to that discussion and that brings us full circle.

So please help, give us your thoughts related to this topic and how we can fix it -- without drastic changes to the game. If you don't think we can, that's fine, but you should know that I respectively disagree with you.

Kindest regards,

--Nezmar[/quote]

I think others might have a better understanding of how much is being hoarded. I haven't been in anyone's house except Guiseppe's guild and I don't know how much everyone carries on them. My perception is based solely on what others have stated in-game and that is many people store items they never intend to use and in times past (maybe even presently), people hoarded items if only so others couldn't have access to them. It seems like that goes against the spirit of the game, but if I'm wrong please tell me. With that said, if an inventory and house wipe is going to occur let's implement changes so we don't have to undergo an inventory wipe again. One way is of course reducing the amount of items that can be put in bags/tubes and limiting the number of containers in homes, but maybe also limit how many of a certain item an [b]account[/b] can have across the various characters listed under that account. This way you have to decide as a player which of your characters has that really awesome two-hander or which of your characters has that fantastic head item. And if a person is caught multi-accounting with the intention of circumventing the rules then you delete both accounts.

My two copper.

Thank you for the reply. I like the idea, but from a code perspective (for now at least) it is more work than it would be worth. I think that could also be confusing (and annoying) to players, especially since you can't move gear between characters on your account. I appreciate the input. Please feel free to keep it coming.

Kindest regards,

--Nezmar