Calling Turbine on the carpet : Justify 275th level.

[Zero_Washu]

I want to see the justification other than it was the easy thing to do.

This does NOTHING for the game. What it does do is.

1. Means that everyone will essentially be superheros with all stats and skills maxed. Where is the variety in this? Where is the thought in character creation if everything eventually caps? There is no diversity. There is no decision to make. You will be the best at everything you can learn.

2. Balancing the game. How does this make your job easier? I can't see it. Unless you plan to have content for these upper level do everything people. Dispell traps become meaningless when everyone can be 3schooled and have sufficient scores to cast 7s nearly unbuffed.

3. Promote the wrong kind of play. AC used to be about lore and the stories. Now you emphasize levels and experience. How do you think this will affect the way players behave? I think it will make many feel justified in their selfish gameplay. You will now have even more people willing to macro/ACM/UCM as you gave them REAL goals to reach. No longer will they have to suffer the "indiginity" of being just 126.

4. Increase your support costs. Simple, more people will macro/ACM/UCM as you gave them reason to. You already waste a ton of time of Envoy's to police this play when they could be doing stuff beneficial to the players. So, is this how its to be? Waste money policing something you should never have encouraged? Are we forever trapped with Envoy's playing hall monitor that when we need help we get to wait till hell freezes over? We all know your punishement for getting caught is laughable.

5. Increased exploits and abuses to come. Your encouragement of the wrong type of play appeals to the same people who cause the most other problems. Are you prepared for all the work that will cause you? Having to hot patch each event is already a staple, what about weeklies? Or are we going to see month long exploits like the spiketails ruin the game for multiple month periods (the effect of spiketails was damaging for time beyond their use)



Most games set caps because they have already seen it does not drive away customers. Most of those reaching caps simply start another character on the account or use their time more effectively in game. You have removed either case. Now its all about gaining experience because y'all took the so called "easy way" out. It is far easier to cave in that to set rules.

If the past could predict the future then Biting The Hand columns told your story before you came about.

[God Slayer]

are you aware that this game is 5 years old

and people have been at 126 for over 4 years now?

AC is an old game it needs Elder content

It wont' make people UCM any more than they do, and when AC gets their suport in order that problem might go away quicker than you guys think

AC is still about stories and lore, how does somebody being lvl 275 hurt you?

if anything it'll make new dungeons they can go to far away from the rest of the worlds population.. which is a good thing.

The game has little balance which makes AC good, when it becomes too ballenced i won't play any more.

my highest level char is 74 i've been playing this game since 00' ,

not all their stats will be maxed out, nor will all there skills. you can only put so much into a skill which they are not raising nor are they raising how many skill points you can use to spec in.

so your logic is flawed.

[Dieter McBain]

As always, I must agree with God. ;)

This is called evolution... as we evolve the world around us changes. With change comes intrigue, excitement, and work...

So let's hunker down and win one for the gipper... :cool:

[ApolloAce]

As I stated on another thread.

It's only a level grind if you make it that way.

Some of us wish to continue forward, and as Dieter said, evolve.

For those that want an end, as stated there are plenty of games that cap.

Stagnation kills.

Evolution contines the growth.

[Lord-of-Light]

Zero, just exactly what were they going to do to keep the 126+ folks in the game, especially the powerleveler types?

We see various claimed estimates of what percentage these types of folks comprise of the subscriber base...ranging from, say, 80% on the high side to, say, 20% on the low side.

Let's take the low side...i.e., assume that it's 20%, and let's also assume that the AC subscriber base consists of 25,000 accounts (not taking into account for the moment the factor of some/many subscribers having multiple accounts...and the likelihood that many of those multiple accounts are more likely held by over-achiever types than non-achiever types)...and that we are thus talking about 5000 accounts +/-.

Are you maintaining that all of those types of players would have stuck with AC even if they weren't afforded the opportunity to further advance their chars? Or are you maintaining that most of them would? Ineed, would you even maintain -- fairly/reasonably -- that even 20% of them would? I think not.

So just exactly where/how would you maintain that Turbine would pick up the 5000 accounts +/- to make up for those who left because they were afforded no way to continue advancing their chars?

You too have read posts by others like Don attributing to his buddy in the business the assessment that Turbine will have a pretty tough time getting any shelf space for an XPack period at this juncture...that his company is already planning shelf space for the first quarter of 2005, and that the AC XPack has been allocated no/zippo space in their shelf space allotment plans. And, sure, those plans could change...and, sure, that's just one company...but you don't think that Turbine doesn't have to take, and hasn't taken thse kinds of factors/dynamics into account when formulating the target audience for the XPack?

If you have some kind of brilliant idea that would suddenly convert AC into the game that almost everyone else out there would want to play instead of what they are playing...or are otherwise planning to play...and that wouldn't cost an arm and a leg (and other vital body parts) to produce...please share it with Turbine and the rest of us.

[BillBraskey]

would you like some cheese with that whine?

[JJC]

> 1. Means that everyone will essentially be superheros with all stats and skills maxed. Where is the variety in this? Where is the thought in character creation if everything eventually caps? There is no diversity. There is no decision to make. You will be the best at everything you can learn.

How does that differ from now? The only thing is now they will be displaying the actual number of earned experience rather than making people ask or guess. The inability to display a level after 126 didn't stop anyone from maxing a skill.

> 2. Balancing the game. How does this make your job easier? I can't see it.

Same question, how does displaying the proper amount of experience earned change how they balance things?

> AC used to be about lore and the stories

Again, how does displaying actual levels of experience change how the player interacts with the game? People who care about the exp already figured out their fake levels. People who care about lore and stories never paid attention to any of that anyways. Displaying it changes nothing.

> Simple, more people will macro/ACM/UCM as you gave them reason to

Same as above. People who care about exp enough to bend and break the rules will do so even if they have to 3rd party the stats. Nobody stopped their macro because they hit the top level displayed.

> Your encouragement of the wrong type of play appeals to the same people who cause the most other problems.

It also appeals to those who follow the rules and miss watching their character grow as the game goes on. Level 126 cap was a function of bad design and fixing it is a good thing for everyone.

JJC

[God Slayer]

everybody should agree with me :-p

[MaddyFF]

everybody should agree with me :-p

I do :p

And I tend to be anti-powergamer/macroer. AC is 5 years old, increasing the level cap won't effect much.

[DadgaSilverhand]

hm, that is other part of question, we get ToD in early 2005, and play somewhat until 2007 or 2008? more complaints that they hit 275 lvl.

again, raising new level caps? so what will going on? 2009? new expansion? title as "Children of the Empyreans"?

i think it should have some new game dynamic, just like Ac2's "Transfiguration Temple" that allows new elder style. for example, you played mages, and do the transfiguration quest to become a new and better mages as Archmage or get "Lords" or "Sir" if you are melee or archer.
after the transfiguration, you are reverted back to level 1 as Archmage with all the spells learned, and skills intact, but no longer get any credit points or any pre-transfiguration, but do get new way to get other elder skills by finding the shards of the knowledges.
new epic skills.
new concepts.

when this AC:ToD come out, it will give the Devs to find out how many are already "post 126" in game, and they need time to gauge to make 200th lvl quest, etc, and so on.
but also need time to make a new developing concept for future expansion to allow epic classes. right now they have no clue and need alot of data inputs and to make balanced game. otherwise it will forced the Devs to have a reworked classes and skills similair to Ac2's 2003 class adjustments issue.
No one want that to happen with adjustments of their characters.

[Arphaxad Magus]

"This does NOTHING for the game."

You'll have to do more than make unqualified statements to back up this claim.

"1. Means that everyone will essentially be superheros with all stats and skills maxed. Where is the variety in this? Where is the thought in character creation if everything eventually caps? There is no diversity. There is no decision to make. You will be the best at everything you can learn."

Actually, this will mean that those who are currently at or near the max now have further room for improvement. Further, when fighting content designed for those 100 levels below you, yes, you will always be a "superhero." If you think we're getting this "carrot" without a "stick" (i.e., REALLY hard content), I think you are mistaken. :)

"2. Balancing the game. How does this make your job easier? I can't see it. Unless you plan to have content for these upper level do everything people. Dispell traps become meaningless when everyone can be 3schooled and have sufficient scores to cast 7s nearly unbuffed."

They're not raising the cap on skills--it has been confirmed that this will remain at about 4.3 billion xp. Raising the cap has no impact on the scenario you cited.

"3. Promote the wrong kind of play. AC used to be about lore and the stories. Now you emphasize levels and experience. How do you think this will affect the way players behave? I think it will make many feel justified in their selfish gameplay. You will now have even more people willing to macro/ACM/UCM as you gave them REAL goals to reach. No longer will they have to suffer the "indiginity" of being just 126."

I started playing AC during sudden season--come january, I will have played the game for 5 years. I don't ACM/UCM, nor have I ever, nor do I plan to. According to the scale Treestats uses, I'm probably around level 135 or so. I've played the "right" way.

Further, if someone is paying you so he can do nothing but hunt in one spot for 8 hours a day, who cares? So long as he isn't cheating by macroing, I see little reason for turbine to discourage that style of gameplay.

"4. Increase your support costs. Simple, more people will macro/ACM/UCM as you gave them reason to. You already waste a ton of time of Envoy's to police this play when they could be doing stuff beneficial to the players. So, is this how its to be? Waste money policing something you should never have encouraged? Are we forever trapped with Envoy's playing hall monitor that when we need help we get to wait till hell freezes over? We all know your punishement for getting caught is laughable."

Those losers macro no matter what. Fellowships get an exp bonus to encourage group hunting and make leveling less of a chore? Macroers UCM in fellowships. They raise the exp of all monsters across the board to even out the leveling scale? Macroers UCM and get exp faster. They add in extreme level hunting to give higher levels some challenging content? Macroers sit in the middle of it in packs of nine, UCMing away. There's nothing they can do to change the UCM situation beyond banning macroers--these people seem to just do it for the sake of doing it.

"5. Increased exploits and abuses to come. Your encouragement of the wrong type of play appeals to the same people who cause the most other problems. Are you prepared for all the work that will cause you? Having to hot patch each event is already a staple, what about weeklies? Or are we going to see month long exploits like the spiketails ruin the game for multiple month periods (the effect of spiketails was damaging for time beyond their use)"

This is a facetious argument, and does not warrant a response.

"Most games set caps because they have already seen it does not drive away customers. Most of those reaching caps simply start another character on the account or use their time more effectively in game. You have removed either case. Now its all about gaining experience because y'all took the so called "easy way" out. It is far easier to cave in that to set rules."

No, most games set caps because they only have content to support characters up to a certain level. Most games also raise their level caps once they've generated content for those higher level characters. The level cap in FFXI has been raised several times (I think 3 times, though it might be more), and the level cap in EQ has been raised like 20 times. If you want to cite precedent, please cite "all" of the evidence. :)

[Yinchi]

"The only thing is now they will be displaying the actual number of earned experience rather than making people ask or guess."

Actually no. The developers time will be spent making content/quests/dungeons for 1-275 rather than 1-126. They will need to divide the land mass further to encompass the new 1-275 cap. Who do you think will be the losers, certainly not the highest levels.

And how much did EQ raise their cap in all of those 20 times? Does anyone know the difference between a 126 and our present highest character, a 260? It is approximately 35.75 times higher, about 4 bil vs 143 bil. If it took you 4 years to make that 126... well....... you can do the math.

[God Slayer]

so what if the developers time goes for higher level monstesr,

have you honestly done every single quest for the 1-60 part of AC?

i hardly doubt it.

honestly somebody beening a higher level than you shouldn't hurt you at all.

In fact i'd dare say it'll make your gaming experiance better, because turbine could just make a far of land they can all goto and leave us alone :-p

[Cash_we]

the best thing I see about raising the level cap:it will encourage the patron vassal relationship; being a freelance who try to sell exp will be hard unless you reroll many times, and the same for peeps who may look to buy exp the same way.

[Ariella]

Totally agree with ya cash.

And it will also put a stop to those new 126+ chains, as long as swearing allegiance (with the level check in place) remains the same. :)

[Bluntmn04]

I just dont see how increasing the level cap helps the game. Even now too much content is geared toward the highest levels. With an expansion pack coming out one of Turbines goals has to be to attract a larger player base. However when a player joins the game and finds a world full of level 200+'s and most new content being geared toward them then the game looses a certain attraction. Essentially all the cap raising does is cause more of a reason to add high level content instead of the lower level (40-70) content that tends to be lacking. God made a point by asking if anyone had done all the level 1-60 quests but thats not the point the point is how many NEW level 1-60 quests have been introduced? Even this last patch had several items introduced with a 85+ level req. it jus doesnt stand to reason to raise the level cap unless low level content is going to get some serious love as well.

[morrigan]

Atm, based on what Ibn said on the "experience points" post, I am going to wait until I hear more. So, reserving any other personal thoughts and opinions till then:

Ibn
AC1 Online Community Relations


Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 2,722

Re: AC Expansion: Not about the experience, just the experience points
I can't answer a lot of the questions on here yet, but one thing that I can say (because it was said in the Q&A) is this:

We are NOT NOT NOT abandoning content for any level of character. We are committed to continuing to introduce content for all levels, whether that's 20, 40, 80, 110, 150, 200, or what have you.

So the folks who have the opinion, "I have to powerlevel to 275 or else there will be no content for me"... I am happy to say that this is NOT the case.
__________________
Alex "Ibn" Beckers
AC1 Online Community Relations