Personal time-locked progression limits

[Lowlife]

I would greatly appreciate some perspective from the Blue player base on a possible mechanic to be implemented on the upcoming Teams 99 server.

The idea is that personal time-locked progression limits would be imposed on the server from launch. While the specifics have yet to be outlined, for the sake of this poll one could assume a level progression cap could be something along the lines of ...

WEEK 1: Level 10
WEEK 2: Level 20
etc

If you would please visit the following link and voice your opinion on the poll, and add your commentary to the thread, hopefully we can create a server that will be enjoyable for a myriad of players and play types.

http://www.project1999.org/forums/showthread.php?t=127939

Thanks

[fadetree]

I think any attempt to make sure 'neckbeards don't race ahead' is doomed to fail in one way or another. Since there is a progression, someone will dominate it. If you get rid of the progression, its not the same game. In this proposal, you are just replacing the ultimate cap with a series of smaller caps.

Since you say the intent is to foster pvp and not pve, why don't you just reduce exp gain from pve and increase it from pvp?

[Weekapaug]

If you artificially cap advancement people will get bored and go find something else to do. Everytime someone does that there is a chance that they will just do the other thing entirely and not return to the first thing.

bad idea jeans

[Lowlife]

If you artificially cap advancement people will get bored and go find something else to do. Everytime someone does that there is a chance that they will just do the other thing entirely and not return to the first thing.

bad idea jeans

pvp, farm low level resist gear, etc

[Lowlife]

I think any attempt to make sure 'neckbeards don't race ahead' is doomed to fail in one way or another. Since there is a progression, someone will dominate it. If you get rid of the progression, its not the same game. In this proposal, you are just replacing the ultimate cap with a series of smaller caps.

Since you say the intent is to foster pvp and not pve, why don't you just reduce exp gain from pve and increase it from pvp?

do you think exp gain from pvp *might* be exploitable?

[Andervin]

do you think exp gain from pvp *might* be exploitable?

Sure, but less likely with teams I'd think. I'd love a server where I could level solely thru PvP.

[fadetree]

do you think exp gain from pvp *might* be exploitable?

I don't understand...why would it be more exploitable than any other kind of exp...if you mean bind camping and griefing, isn't that part of the deal? and isn't there other mechanisms in place to prevent that kind of stuff..really not sure what you mean here. You either get exp from pvp or you don't.

or are you suggesting a pvp server where you DON'T get exp from pvp? I haven't been following the discussions and I'm not familiar with eq pvp but i've played a lot of pvp on other games and pvp without exp seems kind of silly.

[Weekapaug]

pvp, farm low level resist gear, etc

It will never work the way you think it will.

[Lowlife]

I don't understand...why would it be more exploitable than any other kind of exp...if you mean bind camping and griefing, isn't that part of the deal? and isn't there other mechanisms in place to prevent that kind of stuff..really not sure what you mean here. You either get exp from pvp or you don't.

or are you suggesting a pvp server where you DON'T get exp from pvp? I haven't been following the discussions and I'm not familiar with eq pvp but i've played a lot of pvp on other games and pvp without exp seems kind of silly.

there has never been a server where one gains XP from pvp.

[justin2090]

LVL 10 Rogue Rogue LF Mistmoore raid

[Swish]

If nothing else it'll just bottleneck the XP grind zones the day after the cap goes up.

[fadetree]

there has never been a server where one gains XP from pvp.

Ah, ok, didn't know that. Still, I would think that if you get exp for kills, but

a) only if they are relatively close to you in level, and
b) only if they are a legit enemy team member, and
c) only if you haven't killed them like x times before in the last y minutes

it might promote pvp over pve to some extent without being hugely exploitable.

[Atmas]

I don't think impacting xp positive or negative is a good idea for promoting PvP. PvP in itself slows down xping.

Level capping is somewhat interesting. It was annoying as hell to read all the PvE crazed exploiters bragging as if leveling the fastest was something PvPers cared about. It might force these people to actually /gasp PvP. While there would be some consequences I don't think it would be detrimental long term, unless items that get removed form the game were taken out before people got to those levels.

[applesauce25r624]

they would just level up alts at the same time

[Lowlife]

they would just level up alts at the same time

possible.

[Vexenu]

they would just level up alts at the same time

So?

The point is to keep basement dwellers from outleveling everyone else by playing 20 hours a day for the first month of the server.

If you remove the possibility of massively outleveling the rest of the server, there's no incentive to poopsock during those first few weeks. That keeps people competitive without making them feel like they have to dedicate their lives to the game right out of the gate.

I think you'd get a lot more participation from Blue if people knew they wouldn't be blown out of the water if they didn't switch over to Teams immediately and grind XP nonstop for weeks.

[Swish]

I think you'd get a lot more participation from Blue if people knew they wouldn't be blown out of the water if they didn't switch over to Teams immediately and grind XP nonstop for weeks.

I'm not sure I see where this is coming from... since when did a typical blue player not thrive on wanting to get ahead of other players on the server in some capacity? Take the EC trader as an example...everyone is climbing over everyone else to try and amass more plat, to keep their "wealth" on an upward curve ahead of inflation.

There's also no reason to think that a typical PvP player is going to be well ahead of a blue player in terms of an XP grind.

[indiscriminate_hater]

So?

The point is to keep basement dwellers from outleveling everyone else by playing 20 hours a day for the first month of the server.

If you remove the possibility of massively outleveling the rest of the server, there's no incentive to poopsock during those first few weeks. That keeps people competitive without making them feel like they have to dedicate their lives to the game right out of the gate.

I think you'd get a lot more participation from Blue if people knew they wouldn't be blown out of the water if they didn't switch over to Teams immediately and grind XP nonstop for weeks.

even with a level cap progression you're still only benefitting some class of players whose playtime lies between the super casual and the super neckbeard.

and there absolutely is incentive to poopsock: keeping the more casual players out of the great leveling zones and preventing them from getting the good gear. keeping somebody at level 20 doesn't prevent them from being an asshole PVP griefer for 18 hours a day.

besides, this would only put a band-aid on the problem and provide a minor setback to people that have a ton of time to play. who do you think will get all the great gear when the level cap is gone? and who do you think will be prevented from getting all of that great gear? how will this affect the PVP scene at higher levels?

this idea will change very little at the server launch and nothing in the long-term

[Lagaidh]

If you artificially cap advancement people will get bored and go find something else to do. Everytime someone does that there is a chance that they will just do the other thing entirely and not return to the first thing.

bad idea jeans

I've begun referring to such things as "no child left behind" moments.

(Says a person who takes 3 years plus to get to L54. "Go on... leave me... I'll *cough* I'll only slow you down!")

[SamwiseRed]

Terrible idea

[Sadre Spinegnawer]

fish gotta swim, birds gotta fly, neckbeards gotta pwn

[Yumyums Inmahtumtums]

fish gotta swim, birds gotta fly, neckbeards gotta pwn

This and will also add that taters gonna tate.

I'm not seeing any real benefit to anyone with this. The difference between someone getting 50 within 3 days and someone who takes 3 months or longer is astonishing. Progression allows stratification and stratification allows people to reach their potential. That and from a pvp perspective someone who would have previously spent 18 hours pve grinding now has that much more time to camp your corpse.

Throwing things at the wall is good; this one isn't sticking.

[Andervin]

I don't really see the point considering there will be pvp engagement level limits +/- 8 levels right? So what if that guy is 50 to my 20, he can't touch me anyways. Or am I missing something?

[Castigate]

What you're missing is that if one side gets too strong too fast we could see something similar to Sullon Zek on live where the other teams are abandoned and the server falls apart. Since there's precedent for that happening on live, regardless of the conditions that led to it, people are justifiably concerned.
Also people want the launch to be successful, and sustain population past 2 months, and in theory the path to that is through healthy PvP where all sides have at least some success in all stages.

[myriverse]

The cream is gonna rise to the top, regardless. If it's ever going to be lopsided, then it's going to be lopsided, and there's nothing to prevent it... certainly not temporary caps.

[Castigate]

Just to be clear I wasn't arguing for temporary caps, but with the "for science" nature of the server, it might be nice to try out some method of power control.