Blue wrote:Ok you are right on this one. 1.53 introduced a wider level range you can group with.

http://support.darkageofcamelot.com/kb/ ... php?id=242

GROUPING AND EXPERIENCE CHANGE

- We've relaxed the rules that govern the experience clamp that occurs when lower level characters group with higher level characters and the group fights monsters deemed unchallenging to the group's total strength. You should now be able to group with a wider range of players in the group without suffering an experience point penalty.

This is not on Uthgard yet. Obviously you refer to that 1.53 change. Will reevaluate that.

Blue wrote:I hope you know that group bonus depends on BAF (group bonus works on Uth, wonder how you can say "no group bonus"). You only get group bonus for BAF mobs.

Ok, lets end offtopic now. For XP bugs better open a new thread or bump an old one.

Sethor wrote:Taking a closer look on MMORPG development within the last decade, one thing becomes very clear. The development direction was more and more focusing on simplification and solo-playability, climaxing in World of Warcraft, Warhammer Online or for example Aion. The genres development drifted into some sort of "Solo Online Role Playing Game with optional multiplayer content" and everything had to be fast paced and easy to achieve. Fortunately, the first MMO Development Studios understood this issue and are finally heading towards a MMORPG-Rennaissance, yet keeping modern MMO features such as for example PublicQuests.

Zarkor wrote:

Hoppip wrote:This is not realistic. You should very well know that the game does not work this way. A level 45 player will not find respectable action in the frontiers. No, no, no, no. They're food for the Level 50s. Players will be out there trying to EXP, and most RvR encounters will be against Level 50s who are looking for some easy RPs. Did we have good action in Agramon while trying to level? No, we did not. Agramon has very popular leveling spots, but clashes between lower level characters were rare and usually only occurred once. Not even close to being a substitute for a full BG setting. And this includes times where the BG in question was dead.

I think your theory has a crucial flaw. You are assuming that the frontier potential population will remain exactly the same, while ONLY removing the latest BG. This makes it SEEM as if there would simply be a huge gap where players don't have a chance but XP because end RvR is a big nono before level 50 (4L2).

The big difference however is that players who want to XP will do so a lot more in the frontier zones when the xp spots and boni get fixed. This will lead to a serious increase in frontier PvE activity, which consists not only of those 45+ players, but also of basicly players all the way down to lvl 20, when they can start xping in the frontiers. What this means is that the entire concept of endgame RvR will differ enormously.

Smallman and more casual RvR grps/solos will start roaming around looking for a fight or an unlucky xper/xp grp, making the overall smaller action skyrocket (also because caster smallman/solo RvR becomes very viable with OldRAs). This newly revived form of action is based upon a solid PvE activity by players that go as low as lvl 20 which creates a steady RvR incentive for zones that currently are only inhabited by the insuffuciently attractive amount of actual RvR players. To some, xpers are the primary target, to others, they are part of their ambush. What this means is that this new action will not require the player to be fully maximised in temp/skill/coordination/... no, they will be able to perform and have a satisfying RvR experience in a way more casual setting than we see today in Emain because there actually are players out there they can kill, even at level 45 without a template.

Surely, players that DO maximise their setup as we're seeing now will have the upperhand, but that's where you need that x15 or even better x20 XP per RvR kill combined with the lvl 44 BG end for. They provide the less optimised players with the incentive to team up and actually RvR. However the incentive alone is not enough, you NEED an active and reliable playerbase to support such an incentive, otherwise there just wouldn't be enough players to make it all happen. That is the actual reason why removing that last BG is in fact so important, it provides the crucial amount of new potential endRvR players needed to both provide easy access to casual/smallman RvR groups and thus of course inherently easy access to enemy targets. My whole theory is based upon the concept of creating the will to do something (make RvR in frontiers attractive to non 50s) while at the same time supporting that will by providing a solid and reliable active playerbase (last BG ends at 44).

Because the entire scope of frontierzone population will get broader, RvR groups won't consist of purely lvl 45-49 players vs only lvl 50s. Specificly smallman groups will be a lot more open to non50s since there the necessity to fully maximise your potential is gone due to the fact that your enemies will not by far be maximised either. This is far from the case in the current state, and also the reason why RvR with anything below lvl 50 4L2 seems complete suicide.

Hoppip wrote:Nonsense. Forcing players to EXP after reaching 44 (YES, this is what you are suggesting, please don't try to suggest otherwise),will never help them get into Level 50 any better.

As explained above, my theory is based upon creating an attractive RvR environment for non-optimised players, be it in terms of levels, gear, RR, skill, whatever. This, combined with the further increased XP per RvR kill in the frontier zones (x20 perferably) creates a setting where endgameRvR actually can replace BG RvR in terms of "leveling through RvR" for the last 5 levels. This is also why there is no such thing as "Forcing players to EXP/PvE after reaching lvl 45", because they actually have a very viable choice between PvE and RvR.

Hoppip wrote:And no, Zarkor, I don't care if more players "stay" in the BGs, the number of players actively in them will not double. Players will still PvE, action will die down, you're not being realistic. Even on live with a bigger population, there were battlegrounds that were inactive. It's just how it happens.

I will agree that you have a point here. Allthough, I find live to be a bad reference since PLing and BB leveling is more or less the rule there, which makes solo/enclosed PvE the way to go. That's also why there barely are any real XP grps etc. In any case, I guess it might be good if my 5 BGs were toned down to 4. Allthough the end level should definately be around 44 and the level where BG RvR first becomes viable around lvl 20.

Hoppip wrote:Your so-called solution for getting people into Level 50 RvR is... to force them to go before they can even compete? To go out and try and build groups that incorporate level 45-49 characters and go compete? That's completely ludicrous .

It's not because as explained above it's completely different from that. I create an environment where they CAN compete, while at the same time make RvRing in the frontiers really attractive in terms of characterprogression (even higher xp rewards for RvR kills) to reward the risks that go with it.

Hoppip wrote:My solution is very simple, make the BGs start earlier and work better, and let players leave with a higher Realm Rank cap so they can compete better in 50 RvR with potentially more PvP experience under their belt. Why you feel a system that not only relies on improvements in another area (da frontiers) and forcing players to RvR in a zone where they can't fully compete is better continues to elude me.

My solution is superior because not only does it focus on improving the BG experience, like yours, on top of that it allows players to flow naturally into end RvR by actually making it attractive without forcing them to fully optimise their temp/level/... It creates the middle ground between fullsized bigboy end RvR (Emain zerg/8v8, what we have now) and BGs. Instead of dumping players at level 49, forcing them to compete with higher RealmRank players without any possibility whatsoever to improve their character than by trying to compete against those improved characters.
On top of this, by engaging themselves in end RvR before actually maximising at least their level and gear, they will get used to both fighting in OF, as well as fighting enemies that are naturally stronger than them (in a 1v1 view). These 2 aspects are ideal to prepare them for a lasting and rewarding endgame RvR experience, which in turn will make the end RvR population increase significantly and reliably over time.

Ironically, as you might have noticed, the setting we have now is actually the setting that dumps players that capped Thid into endgame RvR without really giving them a chance. There is a lack of open groupforming in End RvR because there is no real smallman action, while at the same time locking fresh-out-of-Thid players out of established RvR groups because those groups will not want to take the risk of being under-optimised compared to their enemies, who also do not want to afford losing due to under-optimisation of the teamsetup, creating an inpenetrable spiral which basicly locks out newer players from end RvR.

That's also why it doesn't matter at what RR the BGs end, and why there is no such thing as "get more RvR experience to prepare for end RvR" because BG RvR is nothing like end RvR, at all. Groups will still be unlikely to invited newcomers and newcomers will still be unable to solo/smallman viably enough to really enjoy themselves. The whole setting is simply flawed and needs a complete revamp, which my theory is an example of.

Blue wrote:I'm still open for experiments like the mentioned 5 level BG ranges up to 44 or even 35, to see more low ranked players in endgame which can lead to a greater mass in that low rank range.

jeZe wrote:http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&word1=thatfor&word2=lemonjelly

Sethor wrote:As I told you, only because you can't find it with google/dict.cc/dictionary.reference does not mean that the term 'thatfor' does not exist.

Sethor wrote:A 'riddle me this batman' is also inappropriate. Last but not least, I did not ´claim that Anarchy Online was a massive PvP game, I stated that the game mechanics were much more focused on teamplay.

lampardinos wrote:Just give some 'special' rewards for bounty points. I wouldnt even care for the price. Would prefer reskins obviously tho this is somethings many players are wishing for. Even for 50k or 100k it would be a goal. At some point a nice reward for bps would lure some people out of the bg but not the whole crowd.

lampardinos wrote:Most times its zergy enough in Emain so the current situation is ok as it is.

If all the BG players would move to Emain we would get a real classic feeling... camping the milegates for hours or run with 3 sticked groups.

Just give some 'special' rewards for bounty points. I wouldnt even care for the price. Would prefer reskins obviously tho this is somethings many players are wishing for. Even for 50k or 100k it would be a goal. At some point a nice reward for bps would lure some people out of the bg but not the whole crowd.