Zaraki wrote:Why would people want another bg? Every bg is a Shroomville.

That's right, but just ask local stealthers to kill the shroomers.

As a stealther I love animists, because I can kill them and jump of the wall before shrooms attacking me

1 - 20 = ok

20 - 25 = boring

25 - 30 = tireing Wink

Well, partly right.
From 20 on it's getting a bit harder, but with a good grp you can lvl fast enough.
Chainpull and nearly no downtimes can be easily achieved.
And you can say it's the work before fun

Happuch wrote:
And you can say it's the work before fun

Well yea, but I'd rather call lvls 36-40 or 44-47 work before fun than a whole 1-30.

It's just too much. 30 levels to be able to compete in the first BG, theres a reason live had Thidranki at 20-24 instead of 30-34.

Zarkor wrote:Hmm I don't understand how some people think a lower lvl bg would Decrease the agramon population.

Imo it would only help the server and thus agramon population. Currently going to a bg from lvls 20+ where u'll only find urself wacked by lvl 30+ isn't really appealing for new people, even demoralising.

By creating a Bg for lvls 15 - 24 for instance, you can join the bg at lvl 20; pick up some fun fights, get some decent xp and actiually close the gap between lvl 20 and 35 while adding a ton of fun instead of a boring grind.

More ppl will enjoy it, more people will stay and stick around to hit 50 and see what Agramon brings.


More BGs and most of all a lower lvl BG will not negatively affect the Agramon population! (maybe apart from the first few days where ppl wanna check out the map etc etc)

Anyway I hope the staff still has this on it's to-do list..

/agree

Theres hardly enough population to consistently fill the Bgs as is, the action in braemar would be worse if the lower levels didn't have the option to join it. You can reasonably go to braemar at 26+.

Salbei is right though, if more of the people who played in the Bgs went to agra instead it would have better action.

Yes make BG for level 1 too for fight without armor, weapons, stiles. Yes nigtmare rvr.

Stop play in bgs and play in agramon.

vangonaj wrote:Yes make BG for level 1 too for fight without armor, weapons, stiles. Yes nigtmare rvr.

Stop play in bgs and play in agramon.

Yes because lvl 20s can chose between going to a BG or going to Agramon at the same time.

Also, people are putting a hold on Agramon RvR because it's getting too crowded, not because BG action is so awesome.


Saying that people should play in Agramon instead is completely ridiculous and in no way contributing to this thread.

It's about lvls 1-20 or ~25, NOT ABOUT LVL 50!

you can get level 25 in 2 days and go braemar. why other bg?

vangonaj wrote:you can get level 25 in 2 days and go braemar. why other bg?

If you have A) a group friendly char, B) the right group for 2 days and C) enough play time on your hands.


If not, u're gonna be stuck somwhere at ur lvl 20s. And lvl 25 is still way too low to do anything decent in brae.

in 2 days playing solo or with random group and not necessaty fg. But i agree you will need time. Without time 4-5 days.

vangonaj wrote:in 2 days playing solo or with random group and not necessaty fg. But i agree you will need time. Without time 4-5 days.

A newer player will not zoom through the levels. Especially not solo. Especially not if they play a class that is not adept at PvE.

And NO, you cannot compete at level 25 in Braemar. It just won't work. Maybe if you're a healer or a mezzer, or an Animist or something very useful for a group, you'll be killed in three hits by a level 35 character.

Theres hardly enough population to consistently fill the Bgs as is, the action in braemar would be worse if the lower levels didn't have the option to join it. You can reasonably go to braemar at 26+.

Salbei is right though, if more of the people who played in the Bgs went to agra instead it would have better action.

This is asinine. For one thing, I cannot take my 26 character to AGRAMON and expect to do more than 10 damage before being 1-shotted by a 50. And at 26, you cannot be on even grounds with a 35 character. Even at 30 you'll have a hard time. Sure, you can help out, but it's not an even match in any way.

Now, if you're talking about players who have 50s and low characters, this is also ridiculous. If a player wants to make a BG character, let them. If they choose to stay in the BGs, they will do it regardless of if it starts at 35 or 24,

I'm talking about the player who is just trying to get a character to 50. I see no reason to force every character below 30 to go PvE all the time, especially a new player who was told that DAoC was about RvR, if they have to wait days and days just to go fight on somewhat even grounds in Braemar at 30.

Honestly, how in the world will adding another BG hurt other BG's? If I logged a 20 char and went to Braemar and tried to get a group, people would tell me to go level. If I went and solo'd... well, you know how that would end. If I went to Agramon? Well, you know how that will end.

So honestly, stop trying to freak out over a little thing like a BG being added. There are already a very small amount of BGs compared to live (at least during the Classic era), likely to accommodate a smaller population, but there is NO POINT in making braemar 1-35. The level margin is TOO LARGE and players in their lower 20's will not be able to compete there, and newer players will definitely be put off by spending days leveling a character to go try out RvR to get rejected from groups or massacred solo by a Purple+++ character.

And despite what you may think, there are people who don't enjoy PvEing and exploring. You may have, I may have, but not everyone does. Let players actually try what the game is really about within a reasonable time.

i never play in any bg but i think krinton has the right view on the situation so i support his idea

change thidranki to a lower lvl bg and change the actual thidranki map to Vale of Cathal

Krinton3 wrote: -what he wrote above-

Exactly, DAoC's (lowlvl) PvE isn't really why people are playing DAoC, in fact it's why people AREN'T playing DAoC.
So at least give new people that don't intend to play as intensive as some of us a break by creating a BG that doesnt take a lvl 30 requirement to be able to compete.

Bloodwyne wrote:i never play in any bg but i think krinton has the right view on the situation so i support his idea

change thidranki to a lower lvl bg and change the actual thidranki map to Vale of Cathal

While it's not a bad idea, i'd be happy with a lower lvl BG to start with. Further changes are not as important .

My point in this topic still stands and hasn't been addressed.

Bumping.

I completely agree with this. As a returning player, I've become burnt out trying to get other classes then my main (whos only 43) to BGs to try them out. BGs are also a decent way to xp without the grind.

A 20 - 28 BG would be awesome. Can't rush the people who run this though, what they have even now is nothing but amazing.

As I have been playing Dark Age of Camelot since the closed beta phase I would like to share my thoughts about battlegrounds with the community:

On one hand battlegrounds are a wonderful way to refresh yourself from PvE. It's not about wtf-pwnage but about having some action quite different from killing tons of mobs. It is like holiday from grinding and I am very sure that the majority of all DAoC players is feeling the same. On live server I never would have made any character to level 50 if I didn't have the chance to relax in the battlegrounds: without battlegrounds I couldn't have chilled out from time to time the raise the energy for the next steps of leveling and continue my way to lvl 50.

On the other hand the staff here on Uthgard is concerned about people playing in battlegrounds because they fear that this keeps the people from leveling further to lvl 50 to join big rvr. This might very well apply to a certain percentage of the players and therefore should now carefully be discussed:

My experience is that you wont keep those players from playing in and only in battlegrounds regardless from any restriction you chose to apply on the battlegrounds. Those players simply don't want to play in big RvR and therefore never will. I also experienced that those players only form a minor part of the DAoC players. As I stated above for the major part of the DAoC players the battlegrounds work as a holiday from grinding to lvl 50.

My conclusion is: Restricting the battlegrounds too strict will not get more people into big RvR. Instead less people will join big RvR because they are lacking the possibility of regularly doing something different than killing tons of mobs, and so they are becoming bored before they reach lvl 50 and join big rvr. The "holiday thought" should therefore play a major role in battleground policy.