Ancient Rite of Passage Requirements

[Eleena]

Ok, here is my problem with the 300+ days since creation... I have over 120 days since creation butALMOST 50 days ingame. I spend over 12 hours a day busting my tail and LOVE it!! If that isnt dedication, I dont know what is!! I am always out hunting, helping others, crafting etc. I have yet to spend an hour afk during my time here and refuse to help others powerlevel just so they can go thru RoP!! I have taken bipeds out to hunt that are tagging along for xp but will NOT do so for a dragon. I have too much pride in the race. Why should I have to sit for one year roughly to be able to complete ARoP when I have put in as much game time as those who have been here for a year and playing only a few hours a day/night??? I too have lived thru the merge, the mass exodus of members and alot of discord. I have just paid for a year one subscription so its not like I'm going anywhere but what I would like to see is an and/or option since I have been playing this game with the same dedication as those who have been here over a year in real life.

I also think we should have a hoard requirement. That is our pride just like a bipeds armor and school class. According to dragon lore, the higher the hoard of a dragon, the higher his standing in the dragon community. Don't get me wrong, I HATE hoarding!! At lvl 86 my hoard is at a mear 560k so I have alot of work to do with it and yes, I dread it. I dont go out begging for hoard drops during group hunts, I dont go asking other bipeds for help with hoard, I simply gather the things needed and turn to my pali pet and have him make me jewelry or make scales to hoard. That way both my craft lvl and my hoard benefit. I am fortunate enough to have a pet to help but I still gather the materials.

I know of dragons on Chaos that go around begging for hoardables, those that have been power leveled and are out hunting things way abovetheir knowledge baseand who dont have the game experience to tell newbs where to even start other than to come hunt and level with others much higher than the newb is. These same dragons dont want to ask or take advice from older dragons and think they know just how to get things done and are cocky about how they do things although they are not as knowledgable as needed for their level. IMO these are the dragons that I would HATE to see as an Ancient and I know that is what the 300+ day idea is to eliminate. I would just like to see it an ingame timer to make it fair for those of us who are spending an equal amount of time as those who have been here that long but have the time on a more massive daily hours input.

Ok, enough of my two cents for now....

Eleena
Chaos

[Spellbound]

Really when you think about it, there will always be some players that like the new content and some that don't like the new content. That is the problem developers face in these games now.

I just want the new content, whatever it is, is better thenNO new content.

We still have players leaving this game, it shows on a weekly basis.

Adding the ARoP is content badly needed for dragons. I just look forward to the day it is patched to the game, and we can group up and set out on a new adventure.

As far as how many will be ancients, who is legite, who isn't legite, who is dedicated and who isn't dedicated. I don't give a rats ****** about that. All I care about is that I enjoy the game I pay to play. So give me the new content and let's have some fun. :)

[rooth]

Absolutely! [<:o)] Please, AE, whatever you do, don't delay the ARoP any longer than you have to. Certainly don't delay it on account of our discussions here. I doubt the introduction of new content will be reason for anyone to leave the game, but lack of it sure will.[8-|]

[Pharcellus]

[img]/Web/Themes/default/images/icon-quote.gif[/img]Pharcellus wrote:No, I am not ASSUMING it, I am HOPING for it. BIG difference.

True, reading your post again, I see you said "It gives AE a reason [to make us buff]." Not exactly the same thing as assuming. I didn't mean to offend you with the word 'assuming', but seems I hit a sensitive spot by accident. Sorry.

Not at all. Many people infer capitalization as yelling. I use it simply for emphasis, as I come from a time before formatted messages, and I usually don't like to break my flow of typing out my thoughts gyrating with buttons, marks, clicks, etc to change font size and decoration.

Is it safe to say that if they don't scale the benefits to the difficulty, everyone will be upset?

I can't speak for everyone, but my response would be no. However, a quantifiably significant portion of the playerbase will, if that is sufficient as an answer.

Like I said in a previous post that is apparently no longer available on this forum (could have been on Tazoon), no single requirement is going to serve as an effective barrier for entry, and no low barrier will be suitable, even in combination with others.
"low" is relative, and qualitative. It must somehow be quantified to fit the majority understanding (which means of course that the minority will be upset with it [img]/Web/emoticons/emotion-5.gif[/img]).

That is true, but I think that through all the discussions made over the last year, "low" is easily quantifiable by anyone informed of the subject. It is also qualified via my support of specific numbers that I have quoted and those of others I currently support.

Perhaps the best thing to do is to take some statistics from the current database, and look at what requirements need to be to allow some percentage of the Dragon population to be eligible upon release.

This is precisely what I outlined in my post above, which you cited as being "completely irrelevant." Apparently not?

Apologies, I accidentally omitted an important piece of information in my post. What I was intending to say was that your premise for doing so was irrelevant to me, the reason why I explained right afterwards.

assage the numbers and add extra requirements as needed to accomplish making it so that there will be a steady flow of Ancients for a while. Make it so that someone cannot just start playing a Dragon the moment it comes out and be Ancient after a few months.
One of the suggested ways of doing this was to establish an age requirement for an adult to start the ARoP. That was shot down by Kumu as having "absolutely ZERO bearing on the requirements". Do you have an alternate suggestion?

If I understand you correctly, Kumu didn't shoot such down; he endorses the requirement in his list. I think he was shooting down the notion that exploiters and powerlevellers getting around it is relevant to its existance.

The requirements suggestions that Kumu, Vesuvius, myself, and others have made come the closest in my mind for doing that. They weave a web of efforts that serve as a filter, to sort out the real dedicated players from those who are, yes, casual, for whatever reason, be it they play a Dragon alt for giggles to they only have 10 hours a week to play tops. Not a single requirement we have posted prevents anyone from meeting the requirements; all it takes is time.I don't think anyone said it was impossible. However, I protest the notion that only being able to spend 10 hours a week in the game automatically makes one "casual". Some of us have to work to pay for the game, and the electricity that feeds the computer, and the heat that warms the house, and the mortgage on that house, and the taxes levvied against that property, and the required insurance to protect the bank's investment. These cost money, which in turn costs time. Some players don't have to do these things--they are provided for them. That's all fine and good--most of us were there at some point in our lives, and we took advantage of it then just the same. But the fact that I have to work for it, and others don't, doesn't automatically mean I'm any less dedicated. If I devote half my available time to the game, that should account for something more than "casual."

No, but people who are against stringent requirements seem to make them out to be impossible. No one is expecting you or anyone else to devote your life to an online game. Some can, some can't. One thing you can consider, however, is that people who play a minor role in your life shouldn't dictate its shape and course over those that play a major role. I think the same can be said of games. While I don't agree that those who spend a great deal more time in a game should be the absolute authority on what happens in the game, I would tend to consider what they have to say with a little more weight than those that spend a significantly smaller amount in the game. It is only a game, however, and such is not expected, but it would be nice. Further, your distaste at being labelled is understandable. No one likes to be labelled or otherwise pigeonholed into a group. In retrospect, I do not consider someone a "casual" gamer solely because of the amount of time they have to play the game; I also consider it based on the amount of effort they put into it during that time. Thus, I expect that anyone who only has a few hours a week to play can be as dedicated as those who have 16-20 hours a day to play; the difference is that achieving their goals will most likely take them longer. It is not a reason to lower requirements, as anyone who only has a small amount of game time to play can still show their dedication and commitment to completing their goals, whether it takes them 3 months, or 3 years.

As a result, I am a supported of stringent requirements not for the purposes of excluding anyone but those who don't wish to put forth what I think should be the requisite efforts, be they people with very little time to play or a great deal of time to play. Thus, even though I may consider you a "casual player" based on your available play time, I never intend to imply that you cannot be dedicated enough to put in the time and effort to achieve the goal of becoming Ancient. The only consideration is *when* you achieve the goal.

Yes, whatever the requirements are, anyone can meet them, in time. But, our accounts are not charged per month of play, they're charged per month of activity. If it takes me 4 times longer than someone who can put in 8 hours a day, I will have to pay 4 times as much money to accomplish the same goal. That's a major deterrent. Unless, of course, the benefits are higher for me than for others, since I will have paid more money. [img]/Web/emoticons/emotion-5.gif[/img] That's a joke, btw, if you can't tell from the smiley -- I'm not suggesting that Ancient status should be something you can buy. (Though I wouldn't be surprised if AE considered that--they're here to make money, after all [img]/Web/emoticons/emotion-2.gif[/img]).

That's part of life, my friend. You have to choose where you place your time. Not everyone can be 100% efficient at everything they want do as if they spend 100% of their time on everything. I think you should be aware of that going into this. I also don't think it is a fair consideration to force the lowest common denominator onto everyone else because your life choices place you there. The real issue is where to draw the line, and if we want to consider everyone's limitations, we will end up with *no* requirements, because there will be some players can't spend more than ONE hour a week in-game.

Now, that's mostly just me whining. Maybe I'm an exception in the game, and there are more players who put in more time than I have than those who have put in less time. It all harkons back to those statistics that both Pharcellus and I have talked about -- if the aim is to make Ancient an elite status in the game, then the game's statistics should be used to define that threshhold (although this would not be true if the game were significantly younger... or older?). And if I'm far below that threshhold and it'll cost me another $400 to get there, that's perfectly fine, as long as it was determined with some degree of reason and logic, and not just arbitrarily.

I don't think anyone here is just pulling numbers out of his/her rectum with wild abandon. I think everyone has justifications for the numbers they give, as I have read plenty of them. I have my reasons as well. I am a fairly hard-core player, with almost 170 days in-game. I think I understand what it takes to play a Dragon, and I think I have fairly reasonable considerations for what requirements I have posted and support. However, what has been proposed by AE is completely pathetic and useless in my eyes, and I feel they are a complete insult to the efforts I have put forth thus far.

This may anger/confuse some of the armchair psychologists out there, but for those who spend 95% of their lives in the real world and 5% in Horizons, you will reap the benefits of interacting with the real world. For those who spend more than half of their lives in Horizons, they should reap the benefits of doing so, and be able to enjoy them without the "real worlders" telling them they can't and doing what they can to take it away from them.

I recognize that everyone, no matter how much time they spend in the game, pays the same amount every month, and technically should have no more or less say in how the game should be done. However, for some things, I would tend to appreciate a little consideration in the context of the world I have put a lot of my short time on this earth into. After all, I don't begrudge anyone their success and happiness and control of their destiny in their real life, why would anyone begrudge me mine in my fantasy life?

[rooth]

Not at all. Many people infer capitalization as yelling. I use it simply for emphasis, as I come from a time before formatted messages, and I usually don't like to break my flow of typing out my thoughts gyrating with buttons, marks, clicks, etc to change font size and decoration.

Oh, okay. I saw you use italics in an earlier post, so I construed the all-caps thing as being even more emphatic, approaching yelling. My bad.

"low" is relative, and qualitative. It must somehow be quantified to fit the majority understanding (which means of course that the minority will be upset with it [img]/Web/emoticons/emotion-5.gif[/img]).

That is true, but I think that through all the discussions made over the last year, "low" is easily quantifiable by anyone informed of the subject. It is also qualified via my support of specific numbers that I have quoted and those of others I currently support.

Since you've read them all and probably authored more than a few of those discussions, and are clearly one who is well informed, could you please reiterate, since this is a new thread and a relatively new site? I assume the requirements you currently support are not the same as what you would consider to be "low", but rather are something else, like "sufficient" or better. So, what's the threshhold for "low", in your eyes?

This is precisely what I outlined in my post above, which you cited as being "completely irrelevant." Apparently not?Apologies, I accidentally omitted an important piece of information in my post. What I was intending to say was that your premise for doing so was irrelevant to me, the reason why I explained right afterwards.

Ah, sorry. I thought you were saying the analysis and/or the proposed mechanism (which has strong parallels with the one you suggested) was the irrelevant part. Did not occur to me that you were speaking only of the premise for such. Thanks for the clarification (assuming I'm at all accurate in my understanding).

One of the suggested ways of doing this was to establish an age requirement for an adult to start the ARoP. That was shot down by Kumu as having "absolutely ZERO bearing on the requirements". Do you have an alternate suggestion?
If I understand you correctly, Kumu didn't shoot such down; he endorses the requirement in his list. I think he was shooting down the notion that exploiters and powerlevellers getting around it is relevant to its existance.

You're right, the 'absolutely zero' was with regards to exploits. I misremembered. As regards the aging requirements, he was slightly less negative about them, but only in regards to their powerlevel inhibiting factor, with "This requirement is the least effective powerlevel inhibitor. This one is there more for "Realism" than as an obstacle."

I wonder if the same can be said of any 'age requirement', or just that one in particular, since it is relatively low (3 months).

I don't think anyone said it was impossible. However, I protest the notion that only being able to spend 10 hours a week in the game automatically makes one "casual". Some of us have to work to pay for the game, and the electricity that feeds the computer, and the heat that warms the house, and the mortgage on that house, and the taxes levvied against that property, and the required insurance to protect the bank's investment. These cost money, which in turn costs time. Some players don't have to do these things--they are provided for them. That's all fine and good--most of us were there at some point in our lives, and we took advantage of it then just the same. But the fact that I have to work for it, and others don't, doesn't automatically mean I'm any less dedicated. If I devote half my available time to the game, that should account for something more than "casual."


No, but people who are against stringent requirements seem to make them out to be impossible. No one is expecting you or anyone else to devote your life to an online game. Some can, some can't. One thing you can consider, however, is that people who play a minor role in your life shouldn't dictate its shape and course over those that play a major role.

As regards how I run my life, you are correct. However, in my community, every person has equal say for many of the things which shape that life, regardless of how much they interact with me or with life itself. It's called a vote, and it happens at least once a year, usually more often.

I think the same can be said of games. While I don't agree that those who spend a great deal more time in a game should be the absolute authority on what happens in the game, I would tend to consider what they have to say with a little more weight than those that spend a significantly smaller amount in the game. It is only a game, however, and such is not expected, but it would be nice. Further, your distaste at being labelled is understandable. No one likes to be labelled or otherwise pigeonholed into a group. In retrospect, I do not consider someone a "casual" gamer solely because of the amount of time they have to play the game; I also consider it based on the amount of effort they put into it during that time. Thus, I expect that anyone who only has a few hours a week to play can be as dedicated as those who have 16-20 hours a day to play; the difference is that achieving their goals will most likely take them longer. It is not a reason to lower requirements, as anyone who only has a small amount of game time to play can still show their dedication and commitment to completing their goals, whether it takes them 3 months, or 3 years.

To get 60 hours of play-time in during 3 months would require every waking moment. ;) Or lots and lots of 'cheating'.

I keep hearing "Ancient should be something only the truly dedicated can achieve" (paraphrased) from multiple sources. But that's counter to "anyone who only has a few hours a week to play can be as dedicated as those who have 16-20 hours a day to play".

But the requirement that reflects dedication usually ends up being some incredibly huge amount of time. Yes, I can eventually achieve that amount of time, but until I do, I won't be considered "dedicated". From my perspective, I have been, and still am, and will continue to be 'dedicated', and I don't think another 3 years of play should be required of me to have that dedication acknowledged.

Yes, whatever the requirements are, anyone can meet them, in time. But, our accounts are not charged per month of play, they're charged per month of activity. If it takes me 4 times longer than someone who can put in 8 hours a day, I will have to pay 4 times as much money to accomplish the same goal. That's a major deterrent. Unless, of course, the benefits are higher for me than for others, since I will have paid more money. [img]/Web/emoticons/emotion-5.gif[/img] That's a joke, btw, if you can't tell from the smiley -- I'm not suggesting that Ancient status should be something you can buy. (Though I wouldn't be surprised if AE considered that--they're here to make money, after all [img]/Web/emoticons/emotion-2.gif[/img]).That's part of life, my friend. You have to choose where you place your time. Not everyone can be 100% efficient at everything they want do as if they spend 100% of their time on everything.

So, if I want to achieve Ancient, my choices are: (a) keep my lifestyle, pay $600 and play for 3 years at 10 hours a week, (b) completely change my lifestyle to match yours and play for another couple of months, or (c) something inbetween?

I think you should be aware of that going into this.

But that's just it -- I wasn't aware of the ARoP requirements going into this. I never would have invested a red cent into this game if I knew up-front that it would take 3 years to accomplish something of significance at what I consider to be a modest pace. I dare say there are other players out there who would feel similarly, and the last thing I want to see is another exodus of players from this game--we're bleeding well enough as it is. Extravagent requirements for ARoP that all but the top dozen or so players in the game can hope to accomplish in a full year of play could quite possibly turn out to be yet-another death knell.

I want to avoid that. I think we all do. I think we just have different concepts of what constitutes 'extravagent', for whatever reasons we have.

I also don't think it is a fair consideration to force the lowest common denominator onto everyone else because your life choices place you there.

Okay, first of all, I'm not forcing anything. I'm not in a position to. I'm discussing. There's a big difference.

That said, I wholeheartedly agree with this statement. But I'm not asking for the "lowest common denominator" to set the requirements. I'm not sure why you think that's what I'm after. In my example post earlier, I was talking about the "top 10%" - how is that even remotely the "lowest common denominator"?

I'm requesting that, whatever they are set to, they be made with a vision, with a plan, with a process that's agreeable and understandable and meaningful. If it ends up making the best sense to have them set to 100/100 level, 365/60 days, 90 days adult, and 12.5 mil hoard, then we'll all just have to live with that. That's why I proposed the process above. 100/100 365/60/90, 12.5mil translates to some percentage of the dragon population -- my guess would be 0.1%, but who knows for sure. The devs might. :) If there's something to connect the two, and most folks (or the Focus Group, if it comes to that) agree with that something, then great, I'm happy. A process was developed, selected, followed, and most importantly, it's repeatable. And for those who don't care about repeatability -- come back to this thread after you've been a non-evolving Ancient for a year or two, and see what you think then. It'll probably feel real similar to being a non-evolving Adult, which is what some of us are already suffering through.

The real issue is where to draw the line, and if we want to consider everyone's limitations, we will end up with *no* requirements, because there will be some players can't spend more than ONE hour a week in-game.

Naturally. And I'm not asking for that. But by the same token, we should not consider only the limitations (or lack thereof) of the elite few, such as yourself and Kumu.

There are a lot of factors that will impact these requirements, and a lot of game facets that these requirements will impact.

For instance, if very high requirements translate into very powerful dragons (as some of us are hoping for), that will require Lots More Content (TM) to keep those Ancients happy, since there won't be anything left in the game remotely challenging. If AE doesn't have budget for creating such content, Ancients are going to be as grumbly as they were as adults about such, and it'll be even less enticing to be an Ancient.

There's a balance to be achieved. And that's what all these posts are looking to find.

I don't think anyone here is just pulling numbers out of his/her rectum with wild abandon. I think everyone has justifications for the numbers they give, as I have read plenty of them.

Perhaps I missed the bulk of the discussions, then. Because when I hear things like "I used that number because it's half of what I have", or "because I think that's a good number", I don't really consider that to be a justification. If someone were to say "because that represents the amount of hoard one could legitimately generate in the requisite number of game-days based on the average rate of hoard growth over time sampled from the top 10% of the dragon population", then that is a good justification.

I justify stuff at work all the time. "I chose X days because I think it's a good number" is a lot like saying "I need this new server, because then things will be better." My bosses need a lot more than that to spend money. They want to know they're going to get a return on their investment out of it. Among other things, but that's the bulk of it. AE is going to need more than that to make a decision, too--they're going to want to feel confident that they have a net gain of players, not a net loss. Among other things.

I have my reasons as well. I am a fairly hard-core player, with almost 170 days in-game.

11+ hours a day isn't "fairly" it's "verily". ;) Well, unless most of that time was unattended, but I doubt that's the case.

I think I understand what it takes to play a Dragon, and I think I have fairly reasonable considerations for what requirements I have posted and support. However, what has been proposed by AE is completely pathetic and useless in my eyes, and I feel they are a complete insult to the efforts I have put forth thus far.

For the requirements to be respectful of your overwhelming dedication and commitment, you would possibly be the only Ancient in the game, because I haven't heard of anyone else coming close to that kinda game-time. I don't think that's what you're really after, but it does sound that way -- the lower the requirements get compared to what work you've already done, the less respectful they will be.

11+ hours a day, on average. Wow. Only way I could even remotely compete with that would be to leave myself connected all day and night, using macros to keep my character busy and productive enough to reach the other requirements. That would be cheating, that would be exploitave, but that would be the only way I could hope to achieve Ancient status in any reasonable amount of real time.

Hmm, but we're trying to discourage power-leveling, exploiting, and other forms of cheating. If the requirements are so high that cheating's the only way for 99% of the population to get there without spending a fortune, won't we be encouraging that behavior?

This may anger/confuse some of the armchair psychologists out there, but for those who spend 95% of their lives in the real world and 5% in Horizons, you will reap the benefits of interacting with the real world. For those who spend more than half of their lives in Horizons, they should reap the benefits of doing so, and be able to enjoy them without the "real worlders" telling them they can't and doing what they can to take it away from them.

The difference is that the developers of this game are looking for feedback on these requirements, from everyone. If God opened up a thread on how the Real Life should work, I wouldn't begrudge your inputs, regardless of your proportion of involvement. ;)

Since you're obviously one of the top players in the game, and have nearly 12 hours a day to devote to it, you could "reap the benefits" of Ancient no matter what they set the requirements to. And even if they make it higher than what you currently have, it would no doubt take you very little in the way of Real Time to meet them.

Unless you're saying you can't enjoy Ancient if the requirements are anything but close to or equal to what you've already accomplished. But that's counter to "I don't really care if there is a 25-30% Dragon population flood the day the ARoP is released ... the requirements [should be] stringent enough to be meaningful."

Let's put it another way -- suppose they implemented ARoP when they implemented Adulthood. Would you be championing the same requirements you're doing now?

Remember, for most of us, there's still work to be done to meet ARoP requirements, even as posted, so we'll feel accomplished once we get there. Just because you're already done with that work, and then some, didn't make that work any less difficult for you than it will be for us, so it doesn't make the accomplishment any less significant.

I recognize that everyone, no matter how much time they spend in the game, pays the same amount every month, and technically should have no more or less say in how the game should be done. However, for some things, I would tend to appreciate a little consideration in the context of the world I have put a lot of my short time on this earth into. After all, I don't begrudge anyone their success and happiness and control of their destiny in their real life, why would anyone begrudge me mine in my fantasy life?

Because how I define my successes and happinesses in my real life doesn't affect how you define yours. In RL, the only one I have to please is me. The game is different. The definition of ARoP will affect everyone who plays a dragon, and thus, we all should have a say, and a realistic chance of achieving such success and happiness in the short time we have on this earth (which, in game terms, means "a few years", because at some point, Horizons will become extinct ;) or else reinvent itself into a sequel that we all have to start over in .. frankly, I'm looking forward to that).

So, I'm posting ridiculous quantities of discussion to counter the points that are being made in favor of uber-high requirements, or at least offer alternate perspectives on them. For the most part, it seems like many players have already made up their minds, and don't see any reason to change them. Understandably, especially for those who have been playing a long while, and doubly so for those who have been playing games in general for quite a while. For my part, it's enough that I have the opportunity to voice my opinions, offer alternatives, and let the powers-that-be decide. No one has to agree with me--but if they look, and read, and say, "Interesting, but no," then I guess that's all I can ask.

[padishar]

I think the requirments should be left just as David posted first.
However, at least some of the quests should be solo only and very hard to do.

[Pharcellus]

[img]/Web/Themes/default/images/icon-quote.gif[/img]Pharcellus wrote:
Not at all. Many people infer capitalization as yelling. I use it simply for emphasis, as I come from a time before formatted messages, and I usually don't like to break my flow of typing out my thoughts gyrating with buttons, marks, clicks, etc to change font size and decoration.

Oh, okay. I saw you use italics in an earlier post, so I construed the all-caps thing as being even more emphatic, approaching yelling. My bad.

Sometimes I do. Most of the time I don't. Old habits and all that.....

Since you've read them all and probably authored more than a few of those discussions, and are clearly one who is well informed, could you please reiterate, since this is a new thread and a relatively new site? I assume the requirements you currently support are not the same as what you would consider to be "low", but rather are something else, like "sufficient" or better. So, what's the threshhold for "low", in your eyes?

*sigh* like I said, I support Kumu's and/or Vesuvius' numbers. My preference would be: 365 days since creation, 60 days in-game time, 180 days since adult, 30-40 in-game days since adult, L100 in adv OR craft, and at least L60 in the off class, and 25m hoard. I don't even meet the hoard requirement, so no, I don't meet my own requirements yet. However, I know my standards are quite high, and most everyone will probably completely disagree with them. I want it to be a challenge, even for me.

"Low" would be anything less than what Kumu has posted. I could live with those as bare minimums. Anything less, and I don't see it as a real challenge for anyone, incluing the "casual gamer", however you want to define it.

You're right, the 'absolutely zero' was with regards to exploits. I misremembered. As regards the aging requirements, he was slightly less negative about them, but only in regards to their powerlevel inhibiting factor, with "This requirement is the least effective powerlevel inhibitor. This one is there more for "Realism" than as an obstacle."

I wonder if the same can be said of any 'age requirement', or just that one in particular, since it is relatively low (3 months).

It serves as a "patience" obstacle. Just keeps the feel and flavor by saying "you need patience as a Dragon". After all, why be considered "Ancient" in less than a tenth of the time it takes for a human child to get out of diapers in the "Real World"? Doesn't make much sense to me.

No, but people who are against stringent requirements seem to make them out to be impossible. No one is expecting you or anyone else to devote your life to an online game. Some can, some can't. One thing you can consider, however, is that people who play a minor role in your life shouldn't dictate its shape and course over those that play a major role.As regards how I run my life, you are correct. However, in my community, every person has equal say for many of the things which shape that life, regardless of how much they interact with me or with life itself. It's called a vote, and it happens at least once a year, usually more often.

OK, so let's turn this into a vote. Where's my ballot? [8-)]

To get 60 hours of play-time in during 3 months would require every waking moment. [img]/Web/emoticons/emotion-5.gif[/img] Or lots and lots of 'cheating'.

Huh? I don't understand. I think you are mixing points or something. I said nothing about cramming 60 hours in 3 months.

I keep hearing "Ancient should be something only the truly dedicated can achieve" (paraphrased) from multiple sources. But that's counter to "anyone who only has a few hours a week to play can be as dedicated as those who have 16-20 hours a day to play".

But the requirement that reflects dedication usually ends up being some incredibly huge amount of time. Yes, I can eventually achieve that amount of time, but until I do, I won't be considered "dedicated". From my perspective, I have been, and still am, and will continue to be 'dedicated', and I don't think another 3 years of play should be required of me to have that dedication acknowledged.

Maybe the problem is in your definition of dedication. Perhaps you are confusing "fervor" with "dedication". Dedicated is doing something towards a goal until you achieve it, no matter how long it takes you or how hard it is. You can be as dedicated as I am, even with MY requirements. Just gonna take a while longer than it took me. *shrug* Some people breeze through college in 3 years and get their Bachelor's Degree. Others take 6-8 years. Do you think that someone should have to wait out the extra 3-5 years to have their "dedication" acknowledged? One gets one's degree when one completes the requirements to get said degree. If one person's life allows them to do it in 3 years because they can be 110% dedicated to it and another takes their time because they can't devote more than 10-20% of their time to the effort, should we just lower the requirements for latter's sake?

That's part of life, my friend. You have to choose where you place your time. Not everyone can be 100% efficient at everything they want do as if they spend 100% of their time on everything.
So, if I want to achieve Ancient, my choices are: (a) keep my lifestyle, pay $600 and play for 3 years at 10 hours a week, (b) completely change my lifestyle to match yours and play for another couple of months, or (c) something inbetween?

You do whatever you want. If becoming Ancient is your sole reason for chosing what you do in life, then go route (b). If your current life is important to you as is, then go route (a). If you want to do something in-between, go route (c). I am curious how all of a sudden, becoming ancient has a price tag on it; is that the sole reason you play this game?

I think you should be aware of that going into this.But that's just it -- I wasn't aware of the ARoP requirements going into this. I never would have invested a red cent into this game if I knew up-front that it would take 3 years to accomplish something of significance at what I consider to be a modest pace. I dare say there are other players out there who would feel similarly, and the last thing I want to see is another exodus of players from this game--we're bleeding well enough as it is. Extravagent requirements for ARoP that all but the top dozen or so players in the game can hope to accomplish in a full year of play could quite possibly turn out to be yet-another death knell.

Umm. No. "that" refers to the premise that you choose where your time from your life goes. I did not say anything about ARoP specifically. So, you play this game SOLELY to become an Ancient Dragon. Not interested in long-term commitments in a game world? Some players aren't. Considering that when this game was still in the concept phase, I expected that, even with my level of time commitment that I could put into it, that it could be 1-2 years before I would ever see Ancient. Thus, I fully expected a long-term commitment.

Also, we're faced with the opposite problem with too low requirements. The players which have been CARRYING the game for the last year will join the exodus if the requirements are too low.

I also don't think it is a fair consideration to force the lowest common denominator onto everyone else because your life choices place you there.Okay, first of all, I'm not forcing anything. I'm not in a position to. I'm discussing. There's a big difference.

Semantics. Wasn't intended to imply that "you" personally were doing the forcing, but that the developers forcing for "your" (not intending to indicate you alone, but people who don't have as much time to put into the game) sake.

That said, I wholeheartedly agree with this statement. But I'm not asking for the "lowest common denominator" to set the requirements. I'm not sure why you think that's what I'm after. In my example post earlier, I was talking about the "top 10%" - how is that even remotely the "lowest common denominator"?

I am including rebuttals to some of the others here in my replies to you. Perhaps I shouldn't do that, but that is why I said it. It is a blanket rebuttal, as it is part of the resistance I keep getting from people who don't like the higher requirements. Sorry if I transposed it onto you.

I'm requesting that, whatever they are set to, they be made with a vision, with a plan, with a process that's agreeable and understandable and meaningful. If it ends up making the best sense to have them set to 100/100 level, 365/60 days, 90 days adult, and 12.5 mil hoard, then we'll all just have to live with that. That's why I proposed the process above. 100/100 365/60/90, 12.5mil translates to some percentage of the dragon population -- my guess would be 0.1%, but who knows for sure. The devs might. [img]/Web/emoticons/emotion-1.gif[/img] If there's something to connect the two, and most folks (or the Focus Group, if it comes to that) agree with that something, then great, I'm happy. A process was developed, selected, followed, and most importantly, it's repeatable. And for those who don't care about repeatability -- come back to this thread after you've been a non-evolving Ancient for a year or two, and see what you think then. It'll probably feel real similar to being a non-evolving Adult, which is what some of us are already suffering through.

I agree and support that notion. If I had access to the data, I would have already run the queries and tabulated the results myself. However, I don't have that, I only have what I know about myself and other Dragon players I know on my shard and in the forums. With Kumu's numbers, I know of at least 10 Dragons on Order who already qualify, or can qualify within a very short time (only due to hoard requirement, as it is neglected by most people).

There's a balance to be achieved. And that's what all these posts are looking to find.

Agreed. The problem is that the developers are not going through due dilligence to achieve that balance. The now-locked thread without any further response is a testament to that.

Perhaps I missed the bulk of the discussions, then. Because when I hear things like "I used that number because it's half of what I have", or "because I think that's a good number", I don't really consider that to be a justification. If someone were to say "because that represents the amount of hoard one could legitimately generate in the requisite number of game-days based on the average rate of hoard growth over time sampled from the top 10% of the dragon population", then that is a good justification.

Kumu justified his numbers. I justified my numbers in my old post on Tazoon, which are pretty much based on the same considerations he posted.

I think I understand what it takes to play a Dragon, and I think I have fairly reasonable considerations for what requirements I have posted and support. However, what has been proposed by AE is completely pathetic and useless in my eyes, and I feel they are a complete insult to the efforts I have put forth thus far.For the requirements to be respectful of your overwhelming dedication and commitment, you would possibly be the only Ancient in the game, because I haven't heard of anyone else coming close to that kinda game-time. I don't think that's what you're really after, but it does sound that way -- the lower the requirements get compared to what work you've already done, the less respectful they will be.

No, since that is not what I said. I don't know how else to say it so that it sticks, so I will just keep reiterating: I SUPPORT KUMU'S, VESUVIUS', AND OTHERS SUGGESTIONS AS TO THE REQUIREMENTS.

Since you're obviously one of the top players in the game, and have nearly 12 hours a day to devote to it, you could "reap the benefits" of Ancient no matter what they set the requirements to. And even if they make it higher than what you currently have, it would no doubt take you very little in the way of Real Time to meet them.

No, I can't even meet Kumu's requirements right now. ..and hoard will take quite a bit of time to raise because it is a stupid pathetic grind. However, the concept of hoard is vitally important to a Dragon.

Unless you're saying you can't enjoy Ancient if the requirements are anything but close to or equal to what you've already accomplished. But that's counter to "I don't really care if there is a 25-30% Dragon population flood the day the ARoP is released ... the requirements [should be] stringent enough to be meaningful."

Yeah, that's because you are reading something into what I am saying that isn't there.

Let's put it another way -- suppose they implemented ARoP when they implemented Adulthood. Would you be championing the same requirements you're doing now?

Absolutely. Like I said, again, I fully expected that Ancient would take 1-2 years of dedicated gameplay to achieve since before the game was launched.

Remember, for most of us, there's still work to be done to meet ARoP requirements, even as posted, so we'll feel accomplished once we get there. Just because you're already done with that work, and then some, didn't make that work any less difficult for you than it will be for us, so it doesn't make the accomplishment any less significant.

I am NOT done with that work, as I DON'T meet the requirements. *sigh*

Anyway, just ignore my psychological discussion crap. Like someone recently told me, I am tired, depressed, and feel like yesterday's trash left out on the curb too long in the summer sun right now.

[Vlisson]

So, if I want to achieve Ancient, my choices are: (a) keep my lifestyle, pay $600 and play for 3 years at 10 hours a week, (b) completely change my lifestyle to match yours and play for another couple of months, or (c) something inbetween?

please stop complaining about paying money for this game!!! We all pay too [;)]
pay for 1 year if you want to save money or quitt!!!

if you dont have enough time to play HZ then quitt too

there will be always people who can invest more time, can be better... thats life

And AE stated since the first day that Dragons will be special with powers casual players maybe will never reach

if you want to roleplay a dragon then roleplay an adult, or is an adult less worth for an roleplayer?

My personal view: i dont want that the requirements are to low because it should be a rare thing that an adult will become ancient. Its the final stage of the dragonkin so its acceptable that this will be a difficult and time eating way.

A biped can multiclass like hell (with no endgame), if you seek power than play an biped

@peaches: don´t close this threat again only because you think the threat is insulting ;-) if my post is read to be insulting then please delete it

[Jazmyn]

Perhaps the requirements should be different, depending on if you are on the RP shard or the regular gaming shard. I can understand the roleplayers point of view in not wanting a bunch of ancients running around, especially if they are dictating that how they RP their dragon is the only correct way. Perhaps for the RP shard the permission to become ancient should be based on a vote from their fellow dragon RPers.Then you'd be sure that the resulting ancients were indeed rare, and properly played.

However, I don't play on the RP shard, therefore all the RP points on this are negated by this simple fact. Now, what does it matter how "old" the dragon is, or how much time anyone has spent playing the dragon if no one is RPing anyways?

Dedication is a word people keep throwing about. Dedication to what? Roleplay? The game? Dragon character? Any character? What is a "Dedicated" player? Is someone whohas been playing an Elf for the past year and just rolled a Dragon a month ago less dedicated that someone who has been playing a Dragon all year?Less dedicated to roleplaying a dragonprobably, yes, but.. he's on Choas.. there is no RP there anyways.. so.. what does it matter there?

Bottom line for me is that there should not be any required time for having played a dragon character. In my view, acheiving ARoP would be like getting a biped to it's 2nd 100.. there's no time requirement for that.. there shouldn't be for ARoP either. Just the level requirements, just like for any other quest.

[Jaraiden]

Perhaps the requirements should be different, depending on if you are on the RP shard or the regular gaming shard. I can understand the roleplayers point of view in not wanting a bunch of ancients running around, especially if they are dictating that how they RP their dragon is the only correct way. Perhaps for the RP shard the permission to become ancient should be based on a vote from their fellow dragon RPers.Then you'd be sure that the resulting ancients were indeed rare, and properly played.

However, I don't play on the RP shard, therefore all the RP points on this are negated by this simple fact. Now, what does it matter how "old" the dragon is, or how much time anyone has spent playing the dragon if no one is RPing anyways?

Dedication is a word people keep throwing about. Dedication to what? Roleplay? The game? Dragon character? Any character? What is a "Dedicated" player? Is someone whohas been playing an Elf for the past year and just rolled a Dragon a month ago less dedicated that someone who has been playing a Dragon all year?Less dedicated to roleplaying a dragonprobably, yes, but.. he's on Choas.. there is no RP there anyways.. so.. what does it matter there?

Bottom line for me is that there should not be any required time for having played a dragon character. In my view, acheiving ARoP would be like getting a biped to it's 2nd 100.. there's no time requirement for that.. there shouldn't be for ARoP either. Just the level requirements, just like for any other quest.

It is in Tulga/AE's best interest to better control the game mechanics that allow such speedy leveling. After all, some players like to learn their characters at low and mid levels and do quests and not be essentially ignored as more and more speed to the top and whine about content (even though they ignored much of the low and mid level content).

And don't forget, dragons are distinctly different. Just because game mechanics allow players to grind out adventure levels fast does not mean it should apply to dragons leveling and becoming Ancient (it is too bad AE removed the age requirement for hatchlings to become adult).

As for roleplaying, did you not read the Player Rules of Conduct?

a. "Role-playing" does not grant license to violate policy. We strongly encourage the use of role-playing while using and enjoying the Game. In fact, certain shards within the System will be specifically designated as "role-playing shards" where players are encouraged to immerse the ir characters even further into the fantasy world of Istaria.

Read it - "encourage" and "even further" - at https://horizons.istaria.com/horizon...sOfConduct.pdf

Thus AE has the option and should exercise some RP aspect into all shards - I would hope Chaos has some RP life and is not full of toons grinding levels. Oh, quests and lore are RP related, so I hope the two major dragon rites are more than just "Do this, kill that, make something" tasks those on Chaos.

Perhaps, on Chaos, the Adult dragon meeting DB's stated requirements can just go to the Helian or Lunus Ancient dragon and click on "Make me Ancient, kthxbye"

[rooth]

please stop complaining about paying money for this game!!! We all pay too [img]/Web//emoticons/emotion-5.gif[/img]

Yep, we all pay basically the same rate. I think AE sees us all basically as customers, no matter how much we play in that month. In fact, they might even favor those who don't play as much, as we're less of a drain on their servers and bandwidth and stuff, but they get the same profit from us. ;)

Thing is -- if I'm paying the same as you (generic you), why should my voice be any less important?

pay for 1 year if you want to save money or quitt!!!

Actually, I've been trying to redefine my subscription policy, but there doesn't seem to be a way to do it from the website. :/

if you dont have enough time to play HZ then quitt too

Half my waking, non-working hours should be 'enough'. But it won't be, if certain requirements are put into place.

there will be always people who can invest more time, can be better... thats life

Again, not asking to be automatically made as cool as they are. I'm not even asking for the requirements to be as low as I am. Yes, there will always be people better than me. I never suggested otherwise. If I'm an Ancient and they're an Ancient, they'll still be better, because they have more levels, more hoard, more power, more money. Me being Ancient won't change that. A year from now, when the bulk of the dragon population is Ancient, they'll still be more powerful than me! I don't expect that to change, and I dunno why people keep thinking I somehow expect it to.

And AE stated since the first day that Dragons will be special with powers casual players maybe will never reach

Really? Never saw that anywhere. Is it on the box? In the manual? Can you cite a reference?

if you want to roleplay a dragon then roleplay an adult, or is an adult less worth for an roleplayer?

Well, if you ask some of the folks on these boards, they'll tell you that Adult is (a) worthless, and (b) far to easy to achieve. But none of the hatchlings I've been helping recently have agreed with either of those two statements. ;)

My personal view: i dont want that the requirements are to low because it should be a rare thing that an adult will become ancient. Its the final stage of the dragonkin so its acceptable that this will be a difficult and time eating way.

If the requirements Kumu and Pharcellus and others have suggested are put into place, then 1 year from now, Ancients will be "a dime a dozen". It's only a matter of time before Ancient becomes "non-special". The only way to avoid that destiny is to make the requirements actually vary over time. For example: "Character age must be 90% of Horizons age". With something like that, there would always be very few Ancients.

A biped can multiclass like hell (with no endgame), if you seek power than play an biped

Many dragons of 100/100 also play bipeds, because they ran out of content. And bipeds will eventually get an "endgame", much like we have. And when that happens, we'll go back to being second class characters, like we are now. It's really just a matter of how much fun we can get out of the game 'til that happens, and we're back in the same mess we started in.

Besides, according to some, dragons can powerlevel just as easily as bipeds, so I don't see how that has any bearing on the discussion at hand.

[rooth]

[img]/Web/Themes/Generic/images/icon-quote.gif[/img]rooth wrote:

One of the suggested ways of doing this was to establish an age requirement for an adult to start the ARoP. That was shot down by Kumu as having "absolutely ZERO bearing on the requirements". Do you have an alternate suggestion?

Excuse me, but you have misread me multiple times.

Then we're even now, because I corrected that misstatement [as well as a few others] in later posts, which you appaerently also misread, or else didn't read. ;)

[Vlisson]

my problem is that my favourite website stopped because the Admin stopped playing HZ

there have been all interviews and infos about HZ since 1999

And DB stated 2002 some infos about dragons and their difficult way to play and that you have to invest much more time than a biped

so i cant show you a link or any other proof but maybe another one can remember this info?

my problem is not denying all dragons to become ancients, my problem is that i dont like to see no adults anymore because all got ancient.

I spent till now very much time in HZ but i think i will get a casual player too.

RL is more important and my job will take in the future more time.

So sorry if i get rude to you, but i dont likehearing baa

[Jazmyn]

Jaraiden wrote:

"It is in Tulga/AE's best interest to better control the game mechanics that allow such speedy leveling. After all, some players like to learn their characters at low and mid levels and do quests and not be essentially ignored as more and more speed to the top and whine about content (even though they ignored much of the low and mid level content).

And don't forget, dragons are distinctly different. Just because game mechanics allow players to grind out adventure levels fast does not mean it should apply to dragons leveling and becoming Ancient (it is too bad AE removed the age requirement for hatchlings to become adult)."

Are you now dictating what people should or should not find enjoyable about the game? You know, my daughter once came to me and cried that no one wanted to play with her. The reason? She made all the rules, and insisted that they play the games her way. They left instead. You remind me of that when you try to tell me how Ishould be playing this game. How about you let the rest of us get on with the quest and you can wait out your time requirements yourself?

a. "Role-playing" does not grant license to violate policy. We strongly encourage the use of role-playing while using and enjoying the Game. In fact, certain shards within the System will be specifically designated as "role-playing shards" where players are encouraged to immerse the ir characters even further into the fantasy world of Istaria.
As in, it's not required on Choas, because Chaos isn't the role-play shard. If *you* want to RP *you* certainly can.. but *I* don't have to if *I* don't want to.

[dracinfir]

the ancient rop is here???
and hello![:)]

[rooth]

None of the requirements put forth are arbitrary. I can explain every one of them.

365 days since creation - David is quoted in an interview to say that "No dragon currently qualifies for Ancient RoP". Since when he said this, creation date would have been 230+, players have decided that 365 would be a good figure since back at beta, this was the number he gave us. (Though he gave us 90 days for Adult too and we all know that didn't happen.)

Another way of saying this would be to say "365 was chosen because it's greater than 230, and some number of players have thought of it as a good number since beta." Why isn't it 300? Why isn't it 700? Those are also both above 230. What makes 365 any more or less sensible than other numbers? Is it because it's "a year", and thus easy to remember and understand? How does that have any bearing at all on the concepts of dedication and commitment and elite and respect, terms that have been used to try and define the meaning behind Ancient status? That's why I say it's arbitrary -- no one has made any sort of meaningful justification for that value over any other value as it pertains to the game itself or even the very concept of Ancient. If they have, in an older thread or board, please repost.

60 days in game - This number means that you have played 28 hours a week. 2 hours a weekday and 8 on the weekends. This is a bit more than average. Average would be about 24 hours a week. I suppose we could say it's 52 days and cut it down to the 24, but round numbers are easier to explain.

I see "a bit more than average", but how do we know what "average" is in this game? We guess. We 'feel'. But we don't know. Given that, wouldn't it be more descriptive and justifyable to say "X days in game, where X is 'a bit above average', whatever average actually is"? That would be less arbitrary, and more easily calculable (by the devs anyway, or even by polling/sampling). Maybe even define 'a bit above' to be "50% above" or something. What if average is 2 days? 60 is a lot more than a bit above 2. If you'd still want to stick with 60 at that point, your justification would need to be something like "60, because it's a lot more than average." If your justification has to change if the in-game actuals are other than what you think, then it's not a justification based on actuals (like 'average'), it's a justification based on something else (like 'half of my time investment', or '2 hours a day for 2 years').

I believe Ancient requirements should be more reflective in-game accomplishments, since it is an RPG fantasy after all, and less out-of-game, real-life elements. If 60 days somehow corresponded (equal, 20% longer, whatever) to the expected time to complete the level and hoard requirements, then the justification for the number would be less arbitrary and more substantive.

In an earlier post, you said: "I personally have over 120 days. I chose 60 days because it's 4 hours a day which is a number halfway between casual and manic." This is also an arbitrary selection. Why half, instead of 1/4 or 3/4? Because it's a round number, and easy to understand? Or does it translate to something directly related to what Ancient status should represent? Maybe only players who are at least "halfway between casual and manic" should be Ancient, and that's why you chose half. But, then Ancient is being defined by the nature of the player, and not what the character or player accomplishes. In addition, it does nothing to differentiate the powerleveler who leaves themselves connected when afk from the 'dedicated' player who fully participates in the content and truly earned every aspect of their progress.

90 days since adulthood - This number is how long you would have had to wait to be able to complete the adult RoP were David Bowman to ever be able to say anything without it turning into a lie. It also serves nicely as a deterrant to sleeper dragons who powerlevel their way through adulthood.

(starting to border on insults to DB - we're supposed to be avoiding that). It sounds like the justification for the 90 day age requirement is that it's a number DB came up with for adulthood, and we might as well reuse it. But how is it a valid number? Here's our chance to change it, if it should be. What is it representing? Is 90 days about how long it would take for a dedicated non-cheating player to get from adult to ancient, maybe? That would be a justification. But saying 90 days because it sounds good, or because someone else said it first, isn't really substantive. It's arbitrary.

100/100 Level - Current Maximum level obtainable. David mentions that no bipeds will be able to assist on parts of the quest. So lets be realistic and simply go all the way. You will need all the help you can get. We all know that if the requirements are 90, there will be ancients at 90 simply because they will obtain people to power them through it. We have already seen it with the adult RoP.

Aha! 100/100 isn't nearly as arbitrary. Yay! It represents the (current) pinnacle of achievement. You can't get any higher than that. It has meaning in the game. Especially if it is the case that the ARoP process has solo elements in it that would simply be too difficult, or even impossible, for someone of lower level to overcome. In addition, anyone achieving 100/100 has, theoretically, experienced all the content the game has to offer, and worked hard to do so (powerleveling aside -- while it's "easy" to power-level adventurer levels without even being at the keyboard, like by hanging out at some particularly nasty area for a few days [you get XP even if you're dead, so there isn't even a danger involved, though you might have to rejoin a group from time to time], it's really hard to do for crafting without actually interacting with the game).

If we're saying 100/100 because of the above reasons, because it's max/max, because it's the pinnacle of achievement, why don't we just say "max/max"--that way, if the level cap changes later on, it doesn't lose its meaning. Suppose max is 200/200 later on -- 100/100 becomes pitiful. Ah, but those of us who had already achieved Ancient "back when it was 100/100" could continue to be ancient .. and every 130/130 dragon we come across who looks up at us will know we were grandfathered, that we've been around a damned long time, and will have some respect for us (or at least jealousy). Otherwise, a year from now, lots and lots of dragons will be at least 100/100, and if that's all that's needed to become Ancient, the requirements will have gone from 'awesome' back to 'pitiful' in that short amount of time.

12.5million hoard - Half of the maximum hoard/level. Why not 25.5? Because 99.9% of the dragon population agree that hoard is way out of line in reguards to effort/reward. If I had my way I would make it 25.5million, but then I'd have all but 4 or so dragons coming for my throat.

Hmm, maybe Order is different. On Chaos, I've heard of at least a few folks who have well beyond that (60-100mil are the numbers I'm hearing). Mostly thanks to exploits, I guess. I just broke my fist 1mil the other day--it was quite a thrill, I must say. I'm hoping that as I gain levels in crafting, hoarding will speed up, and I can hit that 12.5mil in another month or two. And that'll feel like an accomplishment. I can't fathom ever reaching nine digits without cheating. ;) At least, I can't imagine getting there before Horizons 2 comes out. :D

Anyway, 12.5mil is mostly non-arbitrary, as it's based on game mechanics. The 'half' still sounds like it was chosen because of its roundness and ease. As it happens, 12.5 corresponds to about level 85 .. which is awfully close to the 90 number DB first put out. If we're going to use previously stated values as valid, justifyable numbers to work from (though I personally think that's not the best thing), then perhaps "16 million" would be good, as it's above what you need for 90th level. 15 and a third million is more clumsy to say -- it would probably be even smoother to just say "optimal hoard for 90th level". That way, if the hoard mechanism changes later on, you don't have to redefine the ARoP hoard requirements, since the definition is flexible enough to allow for such changes.

With the number of hoard exploits out there, it shouldn't be hard to reach even the optimum for 100th level, so maybe tieing together level and hoard requirements is actually the way to go.

So there, the numbers are no longer arbitrary and have reasoning behind them.

In about half the cases, I found the reasoning to be insubstantial, as I described above.

Please feel free to give the reasons for 100 days, 90 levels and completion of adult RoP, or whatever you feel the requirements should be.

I already have, but since you kindly reposted, I will as well, and take the opportunity to clarify and expound in the process. Since I don't have actuals from the database, I'll use placeholders and define them:

1. X days character age -- Where X represents the "Old" portion of the Dragon population. I will define "Old" as "the oldest 12% of all active dragons." Why 12%? Because according to the latest census, that's the portion of the population that is considered "elderly", over the age of 65 (actually, 12.4%, but I'll round to the nearest integer). I figure "Ancient" will have some degree of parallel with the real-world's "elderly" term, though Ancient will involve more than just age. 10% might be a better number, especially since the threshhold 'elderly' age of 65 might be raised to scale with the improving average life expectancy of 77.2 years. BTW, though Horizons is international, I used US census numbers, as I had them handy. International numbers probably won't be too far different to be a big deal.
2. Y days in-game play time -- where Y represents the amount of time a dedicated dragon will require to accomplish the level and hoard requirements below without cheating. This could be determined empiraclly by some cursory analysis of actual database information, or it could be an "educated guess" based on extrapolations or the like.
3. Z level adventurer / Z level crafter -- where Z is at least the average level of all "Old" dragons. Since "Old" dragons are piling up on 100 (max), and their extra weight is not being accounted for by their level numbers, perhaps calculating Z from the average experience of all "Old" dragons would be more appropriate. This might put Z over the current max level, in which case, make it the max level.
4. H hoard -- where H is the 100% optimum hoard at level Z.

In order to avoid "Ancient creep", these requirements could be redetermined periodically (whatever is practical), based on active game data. It might be a lot of overhead, but if such a mechanism were implemented, the requirements would be dynamic. It might look something like this: a given dragon character must meet whatever the current requirements were at the time of character creation (with ARoP implementation being a minimum timestamp), or whatever the requirements are at the current time (ditto), whichever is easiest. This way, a player knows from the moment of character creation what the maximum requirement is that will be required to achieve it, even if the requirements change over time. It also avoids the problem of a newer character being subject to looser requirements than an older one, and feasibly achieving Ancient much more quickly, despite best efforts. But this is probably too unwieldy, so perhaps it's best left as academic.

Your requirements of 365 / 60 / 100/100 and 12.5 would fit the above model just fine, if

1. "Old" were defined based on who's 365 days old (probably <10%), and
2. "60" was derived from either empirical or au priori knowledge of how long it takes in-game to reach Z and H, and
3. Z was set to max, and
4. H was set to 50% instead of 100% optimum.

Most, if not all debates over requirements settings can equate to values in this model, and in so doing, different justifications can be compared equally.

BTW, an intriguing side effect of a rolling, evolving, recalculated requirement would be that the longer Ancient characters stayed around, the more 'special' Ancient would be, thus giving some slight incentive for such a character to remain active, even if content dwindles.

People say that I only suggest these because I already qualify (I'm still short on the hoard actually). However, since I play "As much as most people SLEEP in a year"...I'll qualify for nearly everything you throw out there.

Sure, why wouldn't you? I don't think anyone's trying to come up with requirements specifically to prevent you from getting Ancient, but somehow allow them to. Least of all me. More power to you, I say -- you've put in more effort than most, after all (though Pharcellus has you beat, claws down, in terms of time ;)).

For the record, the amount of sleep a person requires is, on average, 7.2 hours, though Thomas Edison only needed about 4-6, and Albert Einstein fell into the 8-10 range (ref: http://webhome.idirect.com/~readon/sleep.html and http://www.ninds.nih.gov/disorders/b...rain_basic.htm). So that would make 109.5 days of play-time "as much time as most people sleep". Well, technically, "as much sleep-time as the average person needs." Odds are good people generally get less sleep than they need, at least in this country, but that only makes the statement "[played in a year] as much as most people SLEEP in a year" more valid. ;)

[Eleena]

This is exactly my point Kuma... I have logged almost as many hours in my days as a dragon of 365 days would have so by the time ancient arrives I WILL have the same amount of TIMEINGAME as those who have been here for that 365 and playing only 4 hours a day!!!! It needs to be an either/or option for those of us who have put in the same amount of play in a shorter creation time.

Yes, it may have come from DB's comments in BETA but guess what........ there were ALOT of things said in BETA that have gone by the wayside!!! And I do mean alot!!! This game is NOT what was planned in BETA and everyone that was therehas/needsto deal with that fact. I keep hearing about BETA this and BETA that... its out, its in stores, its no longer in a testing phase but LIVE and the requirements ARE going to change from what was planned!! As far as maturing, I am currently the one who goes on almost ALL RoP's on chaos, that ALOT of the hatchlings know is there if they need help or a ? answered, that has given away many gold just to help them with what they need or taken the time to help them with no xp to me... its my pleasure as I am a dragon and PROUD to be one!! I dont have a huge hoard because I'm helping others and I dont have alot of gold stored up because I give it away instead. I created this toon and took her to the level without massive powerleveling to where she is now so I could HELP others... dont see alot doing that if the hatchling isnt in the same guild. Our guild is 4 active members due to EQ2 and I have gained ALL but twelve of my 84 lvls ON MY OWN solo'ing...So when you start preaching about needing to mature,dont judge til you have played with me and gotten to know me or how much I KNOW about being a dragon...

And since you so graciously said that I wasnt mature enough to do ARoP, this became a personal judgement on your part. Maybe you should take it upon yourself to go back and read my original post in a different light than your clouded judgement evidently allowed the first time.. I sure did NOT see you posting that to any of the OTHER dragons here that you might know or who post more often than I happen to. I try to stick with something constructive, not destructive when I post here. I am VERY disappointed in the way these boards can take constructive chritism and turn it to a personal attack. There is definitely some "maturing" that needs to occur by many here. Learn to state your opinion in a manner that relates to the game NOT to the person!! Now I understand even more the mass exodus of people from this game. Its not just the bored/short time/ non dedicated as you may state but those that are looking for something beyond the constant bickering, fighting, disgruntled KIDS that seem to be taking over. I have lost over 60 friends that are older more mature people who wanted to have fun and play a game that seems to have become alot more like a high school hallway after classes.
Eleena
84/53

[Amerelium]

...365 days is way too long, and for too many obvious reasons to even bother to mentioned here. If the really old players want to feel special, I would be better to have some special ability quests that only can be finished if a) one is ancient and b) some more harsh requirements are met...

[Vahrokh]

I still think that Ancient should be something ancient.

Not some powered up newbie that feels excluded because he cannot get the Ancient Tag like he got level 100 in a week. I.e. doing nothing but afk "in the right places".

I'd be more than happy to have an half year only requirement.

Plus a proof that the dragon in question is not a scam like i.e. in our shard are being produced (a guild is producing an adult a day on purpose).

Said proof would be i.e. 70 craft and 5M or 10M (I don't care the exact numbers) of hoard.

Because be hoard right or wrong, 100% of the playerbase had to play by its rules and I don't see why now there are to be "exceptions".

We might one day have hoard turned to something more useful.
But still hoard is a thing to build up. Even if it gave +100 armor a level, a dragon would still suck without hoard.
Sure, the lazy ar.ses of nowadays would achieve a decent armor working 3 days instead of 10 months. But still some effort, at least a token of it, would be required.

Givinggems to pigs is a strategy that never worked.

[Eleena]

Kuna, I refuse to continue after this to respond to ANY post made here by you. I did reread your post many times before I responded and I too was talking about GAME maturity!! Maturity is knowledge and how you handle yourself in your race!! I DO have the TIME in game as those others with 365 days paying for the game and that is EXACTLY what I was trying to say to begin with in the original post. THAT is why I asked that YOU reread MY original post!! Now YOU can stop with the personal attacks!!


Eleena
84/53