Maintenance for the week of June 23:
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – June 23
• PC/Mac: NA and EU megaservers for maintenance – June 25, 12:00AM EDT (4:00 UTC) - 6:00PM EDT (22:00 UTC)
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – June 23
• PC/Mac: NA and EU megaservers for maintenance – June 25, 12:00AM EDT (4:00 UTC) - 6:00PM EDT (22:00 UTC)
The issues on the European console megaservers have been resolved at this time. If you continue to experience difficulties at login, please restart your client. Thank you for your patience!
Stop exponential leveling NOW!
As a vr5 nightblade I killed 8 people (sub 50) at once. There should be no benefit to being higher level other than you can equip better gear as much as I liked doing that it was not right, they should have had my number. Levels should NEVER EVER NEVER EVER equal win! Put it together, implement it, figure it out, etc.
8
-
Dudis✭✭✭If he killed 8 of you, you have much bigger problems than him being higher level tbh.Edited by Dudis on May 11, 2014 10:04AM4 -
Dudis✭✭✭My bad for misreading then, but my point still stands.
What do you propose as an alternative progression then? This is not Quake...Edited by Dudis on May 11, 2014 10:10AM1 -
Phoenix99✭✭✭My suggestion is to make a VR leveled campaigns and non-VR leveled ones. Simple fix to all that jazz7
-
Gaudrath✭✭✭My suggestion is to make a VR leveled campaigns and non-VR leveled ones. Simple fix to all that jazz
My solution is for low level players to finally realize that they're cannon fodder. Something to distract the enemy with. That's not a bad thing. You have to be a zergling before you can advance to being a juggernaut of destruction.
And of course, 8 players are absolutely able to kill a VR ranked player, provided said player is not abusing anything. I've been in plenty of situations where 2-3 lowbies took down a VR ranked player. Sure, alone you wouldn't stand a chance, but together it is perfectly doable. Keep in mind low level players a re usually learning their class ropes, what they can and can't do.. many are new to Cyrodiil as well. So it is no wonder they get wiped by a VR player which knows what he is doing.4 -
Nox_Aeterna✭✭✭✭✭
✭OP , do you see 10 threads about this here? Nope?
You know why?
Because they should have been able to kill you if they were not really low lvl like 15 and if they actually knew what they were doing.
It was not your level and after a point not even your own skill that made you win , mostly it was their lack of it."Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."
-Hanlon's razor4 -
Censorious✭✭✭✭My opinion: there's no reason to change anything. The scaling for low levels is fine as it is.
Sure, low levels are not as outright powerful as a VR player but it's not a big difference - certainly not the suggested 8 times as much.
I played from lvl 10 in Cyrodill and never once felt I was at a serious disadvantage. True - you can't go face-to-face with any random guy you meet. You have to play it a bit carefully but that's to be expected.
I wouldn't say low-levels are cannon fodder - in fact, they are the infantry, the ground troops. where strength in numbers counts for everything.
'Clever' sigs get old real fast - just like this one.1 -
Alestair✭✭My suggestion is to make a VR leveled campaigns and non-VR leveled ones. Simple fix to all that jazz
You know, I agree with this.. I remember my first Post about How Veteran levels would ruin pvp, and people Laughed at me harshly, but seeing as you have a better Idea than I did.. I like this idea..
2 -
Dudis✭✭✭Sad truth is that you'd get your ass kicked as much by the better players in the 10-49 campaign as you did in the normal one. This is because they will still put in the time to get the best gear, best spec and all the passives to support it.
I never got why people want to play low level BGs in any game since your chars WILL be underdeveloped and balance issues WILL be worse.
They should change the scaling to better represent your build, but that's it.
Really, just suck it up and level. I hit 50 on my first alt the other day with less than 40 hours /played and that includes all the harborage mainquests, the coldharbour ones and the 1-50 skyshards.Edited by Dudis on May 11, 2014 11:24AM0 -
Phoenix99✭✭✭My suggestion is to make a VR leveled campaigns and non-VR leveled ones. Simple fix to all that jazz
You know, I agree with this.. I remember my first Post about How Veteran levels would ruin pvp, and people Laughed at me harshly, but seeing as you have a better Idea than I did.. I like this idea..
Well in PvE you have the division between the VR content and non-VR content. Why not to make the same logical step and put in non-VR campaigns in PvP and VR campaigns. Obviously the VR ones would return higher rewards.1 -
Samadhi✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭...
And of course, 8 players are absolutely able to kill a VR ranked player, provided said player is not abusing anything. I've been in plenty of situations where 2-3 lowbies took down a VR ranked player. ...
When 2 coordinated pre-50s drop a VR10 player it equates to absolute hilarity to witness.
"Veterans are unkillable." lolright."If you want others to be happy, practice compassion. If you want to be happy, practice compassion." -- the 14th Dalai Lama
Wisdom is doing Now that which benefits you later.
3 -
Cydone✭✭✭✭
So much this. They SHOULD have been able to take the OP out, but it's pretty evident that the 8 ppl didn't know anything about pvp.Nox_Aeterna wrote: »OP , do you see 10 threads about this here? Nope?
You know why?
Because they should have been able to kill you if they were not really low lvl like 15 and if they actually knew what they were doing.
It was not your level and after a point not even your own skill that made you win , mostly it was their lack of it.
1 -
Cydone✭✭✭✭My suggestion is to make a VR leveled campaigns and non-VR leveled ones. Simple fix to all that jazz
You know, I agree with this.. I remember my first Post about How Veteran levels would ruin pvp, and people Laughed at me harshly, but seeing as you have a better Idea than I did.. I like this idea..
Well in PvE you have the division between the VR content and non-VR content. Why not to make the same logical step and put in non-VR campaigns in PvP and VR campaigns. Obviously the VR ones would return higher rewards.
That's because VR content is for VR's only. This is not true for pvp. And with the MAJOR imbalances in alliance population and the overall dwindling population of the pvp servers, further segregation would probably kill pvp all together.
Edited by Cydone on May 11, 2014 7:17PM3 -
Phoenix99✭✭✭My suggestion is to make a VR leveled campaigns and non-VR leveled ones. Simple fix to all that jazz
You know, I agree with this.. I remember my first Post about How Veteran levels would ruin pvp, and people Laughed at me harshly, but seeing as you have a better Idea than I did.. I like this idea..
Well in PvE you have the division between the VR content and non-VR content. Why not to make the same logical step and put in non-VR campaigns in PvP and VR campaigns. Obviously the VR ones would return higher rewards.
That's because VR content is for VR's only. This is not true for pvp. And with the MAJOR imbalances in alliance population and the overall dwindling population of the pvp servers, further segregation would probably kill pvp all together.
I dare to say that it's actually is making people abandon campaigns, because they feel useless. no one wants to be a cannon fodder, because it's UNFUN.
I am inclined to say that actually this would help PvP together with limiting the total number of campaigns (for example for 3 VR ones and 4 non VR and then check on population factor)
2 -
Blackwolfe5✭✭✭Yes, splitting pvp campaigns between VR and non-VR. Most guilds would love that, not. :P "Sorry, you can't play with us, you haven't reached veteran rank yet"Edited by Blackwolfe5 on May 11, 2014 8:24PM2 -
Cydone✭✭✭✭My suggestion is to make a VR leveled campaigns and non-VR leveled ones. Simple fix to all that jazz
You know, I agree with this.. I remember my first Post about How Veteran levels would ruin pvp, and people Laughed at me harshly, but seeing as you have a better Idea than I did.. I like this idea..
Well in PvE you have the division between the VR content and non-VR content. Why not to make the same logical step and put in non-VR campaigns in PvP and VR campaigns. Obviously the VR ones would return higher rewards.
That's because VR content is for VR's only. This is not true for pvp. And with the MAJOR imbalances in alliance population and the overall dwindling population of the pvp servers, further segregation would probably kill pvp all together.
I dare to say that it's actually is making people abandon campaigns, because they feel useless. no one wants to be a cannon fodder, because it's UNFUN.
I am inclined to say that actually this would help PvP together with limiting the total number of campaigns (for example for 3 VR ones and 4 non VR and then check on population factor)
I was killing VR players at lvl 30. Sorry, but if they are accepting that they are cannon fodder, then they don't belong in pvp in the first place. Learn to play your class and build to it's strengths, and you will be fine. Or, change your build to something that favors your style of gameplay. Sorry but some ppl will ALWAYS be cannon fodder for others, no matter what level they are, because they simply don't want to put in the time or thought into their build or how to effectively play their class.Edited by Cydone on May 11, 2014 8:34PM1 -
Phoenix99✭✭✭My suggestion is to make a VR leveled campaigns and non-VR leveled ones. Simple fix to all that jazz
You know, I agree with this.. I remember my first Post about How Veteran levels would ruin pvp, and people Laughed at me harshly, but seeing as you have a better Idea than I did.. I like this idea..
Well in PvE you have the division between the VR content and non-VR content. Why not to make the same logical step and put in non-VR campaigns in PvP and VR campaigns. Obviously the VR ones would return higher rewards.
That's because VR content is for VR's only. This is not true for pvp. And with the MAJOR imbalances in alliance population and the overall dwindling population of the pvp servers, further segregation would probably kill pvp all together.
I dare to say that it's actually is making people abandon campaigns, because they feel useless. no one wants to be a cannon fodder, because it's UNFUN.
I am inclined to say that actually this would help PvP together with limiting the total number of campaigns (for example for 3 VR ones and 4 non VR and then check on population factor)
I was killing VR players at lvl 30. Sorry, but if they are accepting that they are cannon fodder, then they don't belong in pvp in the first place. Learn to play your class and build to it's strengths, and you will be fine. Or, change your build to something that favors your style of gameplay. Sorry but some ppl will ALWAYS be cannon fodder for others, no matter what level they are, because they simply don't want to put in the time or thought into their build or how to effectively play their class.
then make it an educated choice, make VR campaigns allow non-VR palyers if the choose to, but make non-VR campaigns for non-VR players only0 -
Cydone✭✭✭✭My suggestion is to make a VR leveled campaigns and non-VR leveled ones. Simple fix to all that jazz
You know, I agree with this.. I remember my first Post about How Veteran levels would ruin pvp, and people Laughed at me harshly, but seeing as you have a better Idea than I did.. I like this idea..
Well in PvE you have the division between the VR content and non-VR content. Why not to make the same logical step and put in non-VR campaigns in PvP and VR campaigns. Obviously the VR ones would return higher rewards.
That's because VR content is for VR's only. This is not true for pvp. And with the MAJOR imbalances in alliance population and the overall dwindling population of the pvp servers, further segregation would probably kill pvp all together.
I dare to say that it's actually is making people abandon campaigns, because they feel useless. no one wants to be a cannon fodder, because it's UNFUN.
I am inclined to say that actually this would help PvP together with limiting the total number of campaigns (for example for 3 VR ones and 4 non VR and then check on population factor)
I was killing VR players at lvl 30. Sorry, but if they are accepting that they are cannon fodder, then they don't belong in pvp in the first place. Learn to play your class and build to it's strengths, and you will be fine. Or, change your build to something that favors your style of gameplay. Sorry but some ppl will ALWAYS be cannon fodder for others, no matter what level they are, because they simply don't want to put in the time or thought into their build or how to effectively play their class.
then make it an educated choice, make VR campaigns allow non-VR palyers if the choose to, but make non-VR campaigns for non-VR players only
Stop being such a roleplayer man! No segregation at all! If ppl learn to play their professions and stop asking for an "I win" button, things will be fine. And by an "I win" button I mean being able to take out a VR10 at lvl 10.0 -
Jeremy✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭hodgson.dylanub17_ESO wrote: »As a vr5 nightblade I killed 8 people (sub 50) at once. There should be no benefit to being higher level other than you can equip better gear as much as I liked doing that it was not right, they should have had my number. Levels should NEVER EVER NEVER EVER equal win! Put it together, implement it, figure it out, etc.
I don't think lower level characters are meant to be on a equal footing with veterans Hodgson. There needs to be some benefit for players who have trained longer and put in more effort - else what would be the point?
Also (and as someone who has had their clock cleaned by veterans before) I feel there is enough in Cyrodiil to do at lower levels to be sufficient. I have always found productive ways to spend my time there and never felt like mere cannon fodder. And I like that there is an encouragement to achieve veteran ranks so you can stand out on the battlefield. Nothing wrong with that. Least not to me.
Edited by Jeremy on May 11, 2014 9:27PM1 -
Phoenix99✭✭✭My suggestion is to make a VR leveled campaigns and non-VR leveled ones. Simple fix to all that jazz
You know, I agree with this.. I remember my first Post about How Veteran levels would ruin pvp, and people Laughed at me harshly, but seeing as you have a better Idea than I did.. I like this idea..
Well in PvE you have the division between the VR content and non-VR content. Why not to make the same logical step and put in non-VR campaigns in PvP and VR campaigns. Obviously the VR ones would return higher rewards.
That's because VR content is for VR's only. This is not true for pvp. And with the MAJOR imbalances in alliance population and the overall dwindling population of the pvp servers, further segregation would probably kill pvp all together.
I dare to say that it's actually is making people abandon campaigns, because they feel useless. no one wants to be a cannon fodder, because it's UNFUN.
I am inclined to say that actually this would help PvP together with limiting the total number of campaigns (for example for 3 VR ones and 4 non VR and then check on population factor)
I was killing VR players at lvl 30. Sorry, but if they are accepting that they are cannon fodder, then they don't belong in pvp in the first place. Learn to play your class and build to it's strengths, and you will be fine. Or, change your build to something that favors your style of gameplay. Sorry but some ppl will ALWAYS be cannon fodder for others, no matter what level they are, because they simply don't want to put in the time or thought into their build or how to effectively play their class.
then make it an educated choice, make VR campaigns allow non-VR palyers if the choose to, but make non-VR campaigns for non-VR players only
Stop being such a roleplayer man! No segregation at all! If ppl learn to play their professions and stop asking for an "I win" button, things will be fine. And by an "I win" button I mean being able to take out a VR10 at lvl 10.
Like that's gonna happen... only if the VR will be having lag spikes and be out of stamina and magicka.. the maybe...0 -
Cydone✭✭✭✭My suggestion is to make a VR leveled campaigns and non-VR leveled ones. Simple fix to all that jazz
You know, I agree with this.. I remember my first Post about How Veteran levels would ruin pvp, and people Laughed at me harshly, but seeing as you have a better Idea than I did.. I like this idea..
Well in PvE you have the division between the VR content and non-VR content. Why not to make the same logical step and put in non-VR campaigns in PvP and VR campaigns. Obviously the VR ones would return higher rewards.
That's because VR content is for VR's only. This is not true for pvp. And with the MAJOR imbalances in alliance population and the overall dwindling population of the pvp servers, further segregation would probably kill pvp all together.
I dare to say that it's actually is making people abandon campaigns, because they feel useless. no one wants to be a cannon fodder, because it's UNFUN.
I am inclined to say that actually this would help PvP together with limiting the total number of campaigns (for example for 3 VR ones and 4 non VR and then check on population factor)
I was killing VR players at lvl 30. Sorry, but if they are accepting that they are cannon fodder, then they don't belong in pvp in the first place. Learn to play your class and build to it's strengths, and you will be fine. Or, change your build to something that favors your style of gameplay. Sorry but some ppl will ALWAYS be cannon fodder for others, no matter what level they are, because they simply don't want to put in the time or thought into their build or how to effectively play their class.
then make it an educated choice, make VR campaigns allow non-VR palyers if the choose to, but make non-VR campaigns for non-VR players only
Stop being such a roleplayer man! No segregation at all! If ppl learn to play their professions and stop asking for an "I win" button, things will be fine. And by an "I win" button I mean being able to take out a VR10 at lvl 10.
Like that's gonna happen... only if the VR will be having lag spikes and be out of stamina and magicka.. the maybe...
SMH! Reading comprehension ftw?? I was saying that ppl are ASKING to be able to take out a VR10 as a level 10. It's all over these boards. If someone has the max number of attribute points and possibly 100's of skill points, why should someone that doesn't have those be equal in power?
Oh and still no to segregating the servers based on level. You want that?? Go to TOR. I hear their PvP is awesome! *snickers*Edited by Cydone on May 11, 2014 9:58PM1 -
Attorneyatlawl✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭My suggestion is to make a VR leveled campaigns and non-VR leveled ones. Simple fix to all that jazz
Considering VR2+ vs. VR1 basically gives just this side of nothing but slightly increased stat caps and a very small number of sets that require VR6 but aren't generally used anyway, and some weapon damage stat... yeah, I'd say their problem of getting killed wasn't caused by the game. Please learn what you're talking about before making radical demands like this which would do nothing but hurt the game by lessening the population of the campaigns.Edited by Attorneyatlawl on May 11, 2014 10:22PM-First-Wave Closed Beta Tester of the Psijic Order, aka the 0.016 percent.
Exploits suck. Don't blame just the game, blame the players abusing them!
-Playing since July 2013, back when we had a killspam channel in Cyrodiil and the lands of Tamriel were roamed by dinosaurs.
________________
-In-game mains abound with "Nerf" in their name. As I am asked occasionally, I do not play on anything but the PC NA Megaserver at this time.2 -
Firellight✭✭✭The quest for linear leveling is definitely something for designers to strive for. I come from Maplestory, and anybody who knows a thing or two about mmos, Maplestory is a great example of the problem with exponential leveling.
But here is what I think is the root of the problem:
You can have a level cap as short as Lv.50, and have Veteran ranks, and a game can have stats grow linearly each time the player levels. But your equipment is also leveling your stats, and your buffs, passives, and party buffs improve your stats.
Now you have a character who is fast, defensive, regenerative and with strong/swift hits, racking a massive dps, and you have no worry to run through a zerg.
This is where the exponential issue becomes a problem, and for games that already improve stats exponentially (like Maplestory), all these ways to grow your character will come crashing down on the players who don't bother spending their entire gaming career merching and enchanting their way to victory. Oh and, enchantments are another way to improve stats.
My mmo ideas start with a cap, and all ways to improve stats are simply a way to reach that cap. For example, I design a cap of 700 damage in my game. So the highest damage I would place on any sword would be 100, the highest damage improvement on my sword skill line would be +300% (400 dmg), the highest damage boost on a buff would be +50%, up to 3 buffs at a time (+150% = +150 from base), the highest increase from passives would be +150% (+150 dmg from base), rendering the average player's damage anywhere around 450 damage. I would then proceed to calculate the critical, which would be up to 1050 damage, because I would make the highest critical possible would be 50% increase.
A player who starts PvPing at level 10 would then be developed to be able to withstand 500 damage from a linear leveled player at max, and survive 1050 from somebody who uses every possible way to improve dps.
BUT, see what I did with the buff count? You could only have 3 in that example. This is the stuff that I like in an mmo. Imo, a player who specializes in a hulking warrior build should not have everything that comes with a thief build, and vice versa. I do believe in the freedom to mix and match, but I believe that we should be limited to how much can be put into a player, before this exponential growth starts to kick in.
Even the example above can be heavy to low level players, and if they are made to survive a blow from 1050, where's the competition to reach higher damage?
Think about it this way: If you were only allowed to use five passives (including the attack bonus on weapon's skill line), which would you choose? I term this "effort", and imagine leveling your character and gaining an "effort point" (EP), in which would max at 300, so you can mix and match your weapon's passives for that 300% all-in-one. Want +300% attack and +0% range on your bow? Go ahead! Want +100% attack and +200% range? Go ahead! Or do you want both at 300%? It will cost you another passive, which could be passives from your armour skill lines, character passives, etc.
So you got 5 active skills, 5 passives, 1 buff, and infinite receiving buffs from allies. This is my idea.Edited by Firellight on May 12, 2014 12:17AM1 -
Cydone✭✭✭✭Firellight wrote: »The quest for linear leveling is definitely something for designers to strive for. I come from Maplestory, and anybody who knows a thing or two about mmos, Maplestory is a great example of the problem with exponential leveling.
But here is what I think is the root of the problem:
You can have a level cap as short as Lv.50, and have Veteran ranks, and a game can have stats grow linearly each time the player levels. But your equipment is also leveling your stats, and your buffs, passives, and party buffs improve your stats.
Now you have a character who is fast, defensive, regenerative and with strong/swift hits, racking a massive dps, and you have no worry to run through a zerg.
This is where the exponential issue becomes a problem, and for games that already improve stats exponentially (like Maplestory), all these ways to grow your character will come crashing down on the players who don't bother spending their entire gaming career merching and enchanting their way to victory. Oh and, enchantments are another way to improve stats.
My mmo ideas start with a cap, and all ways to improve stats are simply a way to reach that cap. For example, I design a cap of 700 damage in my game. So the highest damage I would place on any sword would be 100, the highest damage improvement on my sword skill line would be +300% (400 dmg), the highest damage boost on a buff would be +50%, up to 3 buffs at a time (+150% = +150 from base), the highest increase from passives would be +150% (+150 dmg from base), rendering the average player's damage anywhere around 450 damage. I would then proceed to calculate the critical, which would be up to 1050 damage, because I would make the highest critical possible would be 50% increase.
A player who starts PvPing at level 10 would then be developed to be able to withstand 500 damage from a linear leveled player at max, and survive 1050 from somebody who uses every possible way to improve dps.
BUT, see what I did with the buff count? You could only have 3 in that example. This is the stuff that I like in an mmo. Imo, a player who specializes in a hulking warrior build should not have everything that comes with a thief build, and vice versa. I do believe in the freedom to mix and match, but I believe that we should be limited to how much can be put into a player, before this exponential growth starts to kick in.
Even the example above can be heavy to low level players, and if they are made to survive a blow from 1050, where's the competition to reach higher damage?
Think about it this way: If you were only allowed to use five passives (including the attack bonus on weapon's skill line), which would you choose? I term this "effort", and imagine leveling your character and gaining an "effort point" (EP), in which would max at 300, so you can mix and match your weapon's passives for that 300% all-in-one. Want +300% attack and +0% on your bow? Go ahead! Want +100% attack and +200% range? Go ahead! Or do you want both at 300%? It will cost you another passive, which could be passives from your armour skill lines, character passives.
So you got 5 active skills, 5 passives, 1 buff, and infinite receiving buffs from allies. This is my idea.
I'm only a student and not in the gaming industry, so coming up with this stuff is the best I can do. Do you think it's a good idea?
No.3 -
Mange✭✭Topics like this all have one thing in common, no evidence. If it's that simple for you to kill 8 people I am sure you can make a quick videos proving it.
In before we see Bat Swarm stacking from two weeks ago.1 -
SourceError✭✭I'm sure he killed 8 people looking for skyshards because they don't actually PvP.
Anyways, once the crybabies get their way and veterans are no longer in the same campaigns, the new flood of bad players will complain about the level 45-49 lifers. Welcome to the old republic.0 -
Kewljag_66_ESO✭✭✭✭✭My suggestion is to make a VR leveled campaigns and non-VR leveled ones. Simple fix to all that jazz
You know, I agree with this.. I remember my first Post about How Veteran levels would ruin pvp, and people Laughed at me harshly, but seeing as you have a better Idea than I did.. I like this idea..
Well in PvE you have the division between the VR content and non-VR content. Why not to make the same logical step and put in non-VR campaigns in PvP and VR campaigns. Obviously the VR ones would return higher rewards.
Because your thinking of a campaign as a battle ground or a pvp match. A campaign is so much more than that and its the PVP endgame, Its almost like its your home, your lands, you started here and now your building a character to protect it. Its what pushes you to level up and become stronger, so you can protect what is yours and make a name for yourself. now if you have to go to a new VR campaign once your 50.... its almost like your starting over, everything you accomplished their pre 50 does not matter. You have to start all over making a name fo ryour self and getting to know your enemies.
Aside from that how would you play with your guild and protect your guild keep if VR and sub VR players are split up?
Cyrodiiel is ment to be the PVP endgame. Pre 50 with the buff lets you survive there and help your realm but, your not suppose to be on even playing field as VRs. but it lets you help when your alliance needs help and it gives you a taste of PVP and pushes to level to 50 so you can join in the endgame theirEdited by Kewljag_66_ESO on May 12, 2014 8:10PM0 -
Theron75✭✭This debate rages in every MMO. In my opinion: PvP should never be about gear or level. The game should level the playing field so that no player has a statistical advantage over another.
That said:
I've seen this plenty of times. A veteran steamrolls through a pile of sub-50's and nary bats an eyelash. 8v1 sounds plausible to me. On the flip side, I've been in many 2v1, 3v1, etc where a veteran was outnumbered, and we got him.1 -
NordJitsu✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Is this a joke?
I mean, I prefer MMOs where gear = / = win, but I've never heard of levels not mattering at all.
If you want to compete, put the time into your character.2