Contested... Skill Vs Playtimes - Page 13

Illuminator · 05-09-2008, 10:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cracatoa

Easy fix, as previously stated: Stop raising the level cap. Voila!

EQ1 rocked because you'd be 60 for 2 years and tons more content would come out during that time. EQ2 has duplicated that only once (EoF) and it worked really well. Sad they got away from it already.

For a damn long time, people were still fighting over Hurricanus, MO and 3 Princes in EoF.

Hear hear!

Slippery · 05-09-2008, 12:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Widem

Linear Progression systems are the best. Diminishing returns aparently takes too much responsibility for forward thinking for a dev. after gear is made too powerful the only course of action is increasing the level cap.

Don't have to raise the level cap if you get rid of diminishing returns!

Illuminator · 05-09-2008, 01:11 PM

Don't have to get rid of diminishing returns if you stretch the curve.

Gaige · 05-09-2008, 01:35 PM

In EQ1 they always refused to raise the level cap because they didn't design the game with raising it in mind so everytime they did so it broke shit, especially in the beginning.

In EQ2 the game was designed to keep increasing the level cap.

So I don't think you can draw very many similiarities there. Also EQ1 had no TLC and the gear dropped from older, lower level shit stayed good throughout expansions.

Neither of which are the case here. EoF sucked imo, and the majority of raiders were NOT still chasing KoS content just because it was "current" tier.

Illuminator · 05-09-2008, 01:39 PM

Forget what they designed for EQ2 because the con system is a nightmare on all fronts and they clearly didn't think through the long-term ramifications.

Gaige · 05-09-2008, 01:52 PM

I'm totally sure they'll just start over after this long!

Phrogg · 05-09-2008, 07:48 PM

The playing field will never be even at this point on Avatars. Guilds that killed avatars in T7 will have the advantage right away. Yes many rosters are different than they were 12 months ago...even 6 months ago, but usually the strong survive. Instancing then = stupid. Having more than 1 up at a time just means the strong get stronger faster, the non avatar guilds will likely stay just that. A few servers do offer competition between guilds but it seems the guilds that want to kill avatars and/or do really don't want competition.....ie Confirmed moving to unrest..they chose that server because of the fact they wouldn't have competition.

The only way to try to lvl the playing field in the future is to have set spawn times and server wide announcements that "xxxx" contested, and have the spawn time make sense for the server.....ie a US server spawn time would be 9pm est.....etc.

A cool idea would be a contested "arena" that would span all the servers. Guild 1 signs up.....guild 2 signs up and bam they enter the Arena and start trying to kill said mob. Make it so you can only enter and win 1 time every 3-5 days and make it progressive. So after 5-10 wins your guild enters a second tier....then 3rd..then 4th...each lvl the competition gets stiffer but the loot gets better.

Guilds then could be apart of a ranking system...
just some thoughts....

Elvbryn · 05-09-2008, 10:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phrogg

A cool idea would be a contested "arena" that would span all the servers. Guild 1 signs up.....guild 2 signs up and bam they enter the Arena and start trying to kill said mob. Make it so you can only enter and win 1 time every 3-5 days and make it progressive. So after 5-10 wins your guild enters a second tier....then 3rd..then 4th...each lvl the competition gets stiffer but the loot gets better.

Guilds then could be apart of a ranking system...
just some thoughts....

i was thinking the same thing or if it was alwas up and the number of times you could go in during a 7day period of time

Phrogg · 05-09-2008, 11:39 PM

getting more specific i would make it a 3-5 day lockout with a win.

48 hour lockout for a loss.

If neither guild can kill the mob in xxx amount of time...(2-3 hours) they locked for 48 hours.

Arena sign ups would be based on a 24 hour clock and match ups would be randomly assigned....for example sign ups woulld be from 8:15 eastern to 8 eastern the following evening. Match ups would be randomly between 8:15-8:30 then guilds would have 30 minutes to get to the "arena"assigned and the battle would start at a specific time..say 9pm -11:30pm est

There would be a tier system set up. Mobs would be gradually more and more difficult based on the tiers. The number of wins a guild has would graduate them from Tier to Tier.

Mobs will be difficult to start......not quite avatar difficulty but hard....the mob killed will be random and unknown til you get in the "arena".....I would have 5-10 mobs per tier with 10+ at the top tier

Guilds advance with WINS to next tier.....7-10 wins would be a fair amount....making it so a guild can advance after about a month if taking advantage of all timers and winning.

Loot of course would be tier based as well.

Guild rankings/ toon titles would be attainable based on victories gained and advancement thru tiers. Have special status items/mounts available attainable as well thru rank advancement

not like this will ever happen but it would be a cool system

Phrogg

kakashi feigna · 05-10-2008, 12:33 AM

Am i mistaken in that "contested" means the guild that wants it more (that means get on early and put in the effort) should get it? If the non hardcore raiders want Avatars then they have to do the same shit the rest of the people who actually kill them do.