Maintenance for the week of November 25:
• [COMPLETE] Xbox: NA and EU megaservers for maintenance – November 27, 6:00AM EST (11:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EST (14:00 UTC)
• [COMPLETE] PlayStation®: NA and EU megaservers for maintenance – November 27, 6:00AM EST (11:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EST (14:00 UTC)
• [COMPLETE] Xbox: NA and EU megaservers for maintenance – November 27, 6:00AM EST (11:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EST (14:00 UTC)
• [COMPLETE] PlayStation®: NA and EU megaservers for maintenance – November 27, 6:00AM EST (11:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EST (14:00 UTC)
CP system is like DAOC realm rank system, but with a major flaw
Xsorus
✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
no Scaling XP requirement.
What I mean is this, in DAOC ranks 1-5 required very little realm points in comparison from going from RR10 to RR10l1 for example.
So while a Realm Rank 1 would get wrecked by an RR10 player, the RR5 player was able to hold his on against an RR10 player. RR5 required usually around 1 to 3 days to get depending on much ya played...RR10 required longer of course.
the CP system should work like that, The first couple hundred CP points should require far less then 400k XP for each one, after that it should start scaling up till 400k xp becomes standard.
This would allow players just starting to quickly catch up....While making sure those that have been playing for a while are rewarded with continued progression.
Edited by Xsorus on 11 February 2015 04:06 What I mean is this, in DAOC ranks 1-5 required very little realm points in comparison from going from RR10 to RR10l1 for example.
So while a Realm Rank 1 would get wrecked by an RR10 player, the RR5 player was able to hold his on against an RR10 player. RR5 required usually around 1 to 3 days to get depending on much ya played...RR10 required longer of course.
the CP system should work like that, The first couple hundred CP points should require far less then 400k XP for each one, after that it should start scaling up till 400k xp becomes standard.
This would allow players just starting to quickly catch up....While making sure those that have been playing for a while are rewarded with continued progression.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXpX7JMwRXtczc5GTrIYRIw
ESO and GW2 PvP videos
ESO and GW2 PvP videos
7
-
Tankqull✭✭✭✭✭
✭and another point is that the gap between a rr13 and a RR1 char was never that big as the gap between a CP1 and cp3600 char ...spelling and grammar errors are free to be abused
Sallington wrote: »Anything useful that players are wanting added into the game all fall under the category of "Yer ruinin my 'mersion!"0 -
Shuichi✭✭✭I've always thought CPs should cost more points to earn the further you get into the tree. Very good pointHand of Sithis - Daggerfall Covenant1 -
sagitter✭✭✭✭✭and another point is that the gap between a rr13 and a RR1 char was never that big as the gap between a CP1 and cp3600 char ...
You forgot that in Eso you can pve cp but In Daoc you can get realm ranks only in pvp/rvr activity and to get realm ranks 13 you need 66181501 realm points.
Killing 1 player in daoc , i don't know now, but when i played it was like 1000-1800 rp, depending on enemy rank and bonuses. And these numbers were divided by all group members. I would like to level cp points only in pvp like in Daoc but the majority ppl that are playing this game wouldn't.0 -
Kragorn✭✭✭✭✭An alternative way to look at CPs is that they're copied from Rift's Planar Attunements (PAs), the CP system of Constellations is very similar to Rift's use of Elemental Planes.
CPs are obtained on a linear XP progression, just like PAs. Sadly this whole debate is bogged down in PVP and little though it given by ZOS to the PVE side of the game which likely as not is what the majority of players are interested in: it's impossible to believe PVPers are a majority here, hey they've being pandered to incessantly while the PVE side of the game is slowly being destroyed.1 -
kkampaseb17_ESO✭✭✭Darkintellect wrote: »It's more like Everquest's Alternate Advancement than anything.
This is exactly what I have been thinking of. And I can't say I don't like it. It is good news to the ears of an old MMOer. It is a long time progression that depends on skills. In EQ a character that just started game (aka few months old) could never be as strong as a character 4-5 years old. It is the nature of things. I think with EVE it is exactly the same (I haven't played the game due to SciFi setting).Edited by kkampaseb17_ESO on 11 February 2015 09:280 -
Rodario✭✭✭✭✭Don't diminishing returns per CP spent have kinda the same effect as scaled xp requirements per CP gained?Victoria Lux - Templar Tank
{EU/DC}3 -
Derra✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Well I´m personally under the impression that the champion system has two major flaws:
The first one is the one mentioned in the topic. Scaling Experience would make it easier for new players to catch up to a reasonable level and would make high levels a major achievement (win - win situation imo).
The second one is that you don´t have to make choices but are able to max every champion skill on your character. I think the system would be much better with only say 1200 champion points to spend (passives adjusted acordingly) because this would lead to meaningful choices even in the late progression of the champ system.Edited by Derra on 11 February 2015 10:51<Noricum>
I live. I die. I live again.
Derra - DC - Sorc - AvA 50
Derrah - EP - Sorc - AvA 502 -
kkampaseb17_ESO✭✭✭The second one is that you don´t have to make choices but are able to max every champion skill on your character. I think the system would be much better with only say 1200 champion points to spend (passives adjusted acordingly) because this would lead to meaningful choices even in the late progression of the champ system.
To that I agree. To your first part I think it has been answered by the fellow poster above you. Diminishing returns on gains take care of that. I know it is not the same since there are also milestone skills. Still not that big a deal. Or is it?
Edited by kkampaseb17_ESO on 11 February 2015 11:070 -
Sharee✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Don't diminishing returns per CP spent have kinda the same effect as scaled xp requirements per CP gained?
Exactly. DAoC you had to gain more and more points to get the next ability. In ESO, the points come in at a constant pace, but you need more and more of them to get another 1% increase. Net effect is the same.
1 -
Berinima✭✭✭
Not exactly true. Diminishing returns do help but since there are so many stars to chose from the net effect is not the same. If the whole system would be setup as some sort of a skill line that you would traverse deeper and deeper it would have the same effect then. But if the DR kicks in and you are not satisfied with the gain per point anymore you can easily switch to another star and have the same benefit from one point as anybody else, hundreds of points in front of or behind you.Don't diminishing returns per CP spent have kinda the same effect as scaled xp requirements per CP gained?
Exactly. DAoC you had to gain more and more points to get the next ability. In ESO, the points come in at a constant pace, but you need more and more of them to get another 1% increase. Net effect is the same.
1 -
kkampaseb17_ESO✭✭✭
Not exactly true. Diminishing returns do help but since there are so many stars to chose from the net effect is not the same. If the whole system would be setup as some sort of a skill line that you would traverse deeper and deeper it would have the same effect then. But if the DR kicks in and you are not satisfied with the gain per point anymore you can easily switch to another star and have the same benefit from one point as anybody else, hundreds of points in front of or behind you.Don't diminishing returns per CP spent have kinda the same effect as scaled xp requirements per CP gained?
Exactly. DAoC you had to gain more and more points to get the next ability. In ESO, the points come in at a constant pace, but you need more and more of them to get another 1% increase. Net effect is the same.
Yea but if you do that you are missing on some important "milestone" passives. On the other hand anyone can do that. And to make things even simpler...there will always be some difference between old and new players and the major being game experience. New players will be old at some point and things will even out without gutting a long term progression or the feel of dedicated players.Edited by kkampaseb17_ESO on 11 February 2015 11:480 -
Berinima✭✭✭
You don't need to. There are several useful stars in one constellation you can switch to.kkampaseb17_ESO wrote: »Yea but if you do that you are missing on some important "milestone" passives.
0 -
NewBlacksmurf✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Hmmm. It sounds like both do not fit into PvE but if VR levels and CP because separate your idea works better.-PC (PTS)/Xbox One: NewBlacksmurf
~<{[50]}>~ looks better than *5010 -
Sharee✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
Not exactly true. Diminishing returns do help but since there are so many stars to chose from the net effect is not the same. If the whole system would be setup as some sort of a skill line that you would traverse deeper and deeper it would have the same effect then.Don't diminishing returns per CP spent have kinda the same effect as scaled xp requirements per CP gained?
Exactly. DAoC you had to gain more and more points to get the next ability. In ESO, the points come in at a constant pace, but you need more and more of them to get another 1% increase. Net effect is the same.
It has been a while since i played DAoC, but from what i remember, realm ability system was not 'some sort of skill line you traverse deeper and deeper'. You had many abilities and you could spend the points in various ways, same as the champion system.Edited by Sharee on 11 February 2015 12:090 -
Berinima✭✭✭
I have no idea about DAoC. I was just reacting to your claim that the diminishing returns have the same net effect as a scaled XP requirement. And that is simply not true.It has been a while since i played DAoC, but from what i remember, realm ability system was not 'some sort of skill line you traverse deeper and deeper'. You had many abilities and you could spend the points in various ways, same as the champion system.0 -
Sharee✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
I have no idea about DAoC. I was just reacting to your claim that the diminishing returns have the same net effect as a scaled XP requirement. And that is simply not true.It has been a while since i played DAoC, but from what i remember, realm ability system was not 'some sort of skill line you traverse deeper and deeper'. You had many abilities and you could spend the points in various ways, same as the champion system.
Why not?
System1(diminishing returns): you earn points at a constant rate, but each item you buy gets more and more expensive. That means you are getting less and less 'per point spent'. If each point takes one hour to get, it also means you are getting less and less 'per hour spent gaining points'.
System 2(scaled XP requirements): each item has the same cost, but it takes longer and longer to gain another point with which you buy the item. This also translates into getting less and less 'per hour spent gaining points'
Both have in the end the same effect - the rate at which you gain additional items progressively slows down.
It is true that you can 'cheat' the diminishing returns system for a while by putting each new point into an ability you haven't increased yet, but that only delays the inevitable until you run out of new abilities to put points into(while arguably also gimping you since you are spreading the points thin)Edited by Sharee on 11 February 2015 13:360 -
Berinima✭✭✭
Because of that:Why not?Not exactly true. Diminishing returns do help but since there are so many stars to chose from the net effect is not the same. If the whole system would be setup as some sort of a skill line that you would traverse deeper and deeper it would have the same effect then. But if the DR kicks in and you are not satisfied with the gain per point anymore you can easily switch to another star and have the same benefit from one point as anybody else, hundreds of points in front of or behind you.0 -
Sharee✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
Because of that:Why not?Not exactly true. Diminishing returns do help but since there are so many stars to chose from the net effect is not the same. If the whole system would be setup as some sort of a skill line that you would traverse deeper and deeper it would have the same effect then. But if the DR kicks in and you are not satisfied with the gain per point anymore you can easily switch to another star and have the same benefit from one point as anybody else, hundreds of points in front of or behind you.
No matter how many stars you spread the points in, you will run into diminishing returns eventually. All you can achieve is slowing(lessening the effect of) the DR, at the cost of losing focus.Edited by Sharee on 11 February 2015 13:400 -
Berinima✭✭✭
That is not cheating, it's using the system. Also, you are not gimping yourself by spreading out your points. You would gimp yourself if you sticked to only one star, exactly BECAUSE of the diminishing returns some people just love to come up with for some reason. Your points would be valid if there was only one useful star for each build but there are at least two in every constellation that are very valid choices. The system is anti-cyclic at best and therefore, it's not the same as a scaled XP requirement. It's just not.It is true that you can 'cheat' the diminishing returns system for a while by putting each new point into an ability you haven't increased yet, but that only delays the inevitable until you run out of new abilities to put points into(while arguably also gimping you since you are spreading the points thin)0 -
Berinima✭✭✭
Yes, eventually. But that makes your statement false. Because only "eventually" it's the same result. Not per se. But if you like, you can keep on denying the fact that your initial claim is wrong. I will stop arguing now because it's pointless.No matter how many stars you spread the points in, you will run into diminishing returns eventually. All you can achieve is slowing(lessening the effect of) the DR, at the cost of losing focus.
Edited by Berinima on 11 February 2015 13:520 -
Sharee✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
That is not cheating, it's using the system. Also, you are not gimping yourself by spreading out your points. You would gimp yourself if you sticked to only one star, exactly BECAUSE of the diminishing returns some people just love to come up with for some reason. Your points would be valid if there was only one useful star for each build but there are at least two in every constellation that are very valid choices. The system is anti-cyclic at best and therefore, it's not the same as a scaled XP requirement. It's just not.It is true that you can 'cheat' the diminishing returns system for a while by putting each new point into an ability you haven't increased yet, but that only delays the inevitable until you run out of new abilities to put points into(while arguably also gimping you since you are spreading the points thin)
If by "it's not the same" you mean "the DR does not have the same impact" (as opposed to "it does not have a DR") then i agree with you.
However i believe the ZOS way is better. If every point would progressively cost more no matter where you put the previous one, there would be no point in spreading the points instead of putting them all into one attribute.
Someone would theorycraft which attribute gives the best 'bang for the buck', and it would become the 'boring right choice' to put every point into, exactly what ZOS wanted to avoid with the CP system.
The ZOS system allows people the spread the points out, while still allowing focus for those who want increased effectiveness of one attribute (at the cost of lowering overall effectiveness)0 -
manny254✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭A good portion of the perks in the cs will not actually increase your damage, but the stat gain will. My real concern comes from the stats you get just for placing any champion point.- Mojican0 -
Berinima✭✭✭
That I can agree on. However, the problem is that some people who like to defend this system with all they have seem to ignore the obvious power gap that will occur over time. A scaled XP requirement as the OP wanted to discuss is an attempt to handle that issue. Diminishing returns are a useful but not the silver bullet to the problem.However i believe the ZOS way is better. If every point would progressively cost more no matter where you put the previous one, there would be no point in spreading the points instead of putting them all into one attribute.
Someone would theorycraft which attribute gives the best 'bang for the buck', and it would become the 'boring right choice' to put every point into, exactly what ZOS wanted to avoid with the CP system.
The ZOS system allows people the spread the points out, while still allowing focus for those who want increased effectiveness of one attribute (at the cost of lowering overall effectiveness)0
