Clarification: how is CP getting translated over?

furiouslog · March 2021

NoSoup wrote: »

You've hit the nail on the head, its pointless continuing to argu about the XP distribution because ZOS is not going to make adjustments this late in the PTS cycle.

Your champion points on the 8th will be your CP in 2.0, period.

I agree that is the most likely outcome, but I'd prefer to at least say something and state my case so that they are confronted with my discontent at their black box decision process and still hope that they might listen. It's the only remedy I have, other than quitting the game.

Grimm_Cortex · March 2021

First last time they modify the CAP we talked about 30 CP more each time, a drop in the ocean.. .Here we talk about removing the CAP and allow all player to go to 3600 CP.... Not the same things IMO.

So when some explain, that's because new players will feel bad because of the low CP they have ... Ok I heard, but hey, they're new to the game.... So What ?

Actually we talk about the feeling about ancient player who spent hour in game to do quest, donjon, trial and so on ... And the position of ZOS is we remove some of the time you passed on in order to what ? .... Punished player for playing their game ?

I'm not happy, I will continue to play for sure, but still I'm not happy at all !

remosito · March 2021

NoSoup wrote: »

You've hit the nail on the head, its pointless continuing to argu about the XP distribution because ZOS is not going to make adjustments this late in the PTS cycle.

Your champion points on the 8th will be your CP in 2.0, period.

Has Live Patch exactly been 1:1 identical to the last PTS patch for ever Update in the last years?

In the end CP adjustment would be rather trivial and does not need extensive testing at all.

stefj68 · March 2021

Someone was able to make up a nice spreadsheet... it is real easy to calculate... they could create an sql table for cp1.0 1 to 3600 and a new cp2.0 value corresponding to that, and voila... a simple sql replace and everything is set...

but if that is too hard for ZOS to code...
then an alternative like CP2.0 = CP1.0 * 1.20 (flat 20% increase) is still a compensation

right now we just have to soak it up... and say nothing... wow... vMA 2.0 and Worst

ApoAlaia · March 2021

relentless_turnip wrote: »

They are just moving us with our cp level as it is. I don't agree with the argument that we are entitled to anything though... Time is not relative to the new scale imo. You haven't lost any of the time you spent. Yes spending the same time again would put you at a higher cp level, but that that doesn't entitle you to anything. As this is a new standard.

Doesn't anyone want something to work towards?

furiouslog wrote: »

NoSoup wrote: »

You've hit the nail on the head, its pointless continuing to argu about the XP distribution because ZOS is not going to make adjustments this late in the PTS cycle.

Your champion points on the 8th will be your CP in 2.0, period.

I agree that is the most likely outcome, but I'd prefer to at least say something and state my case so that they are confronted with my discontent at their black box decision process and still hope that they might listen. It's the only remedy I have, other than quitting the game.

Indeed.

Chances of this move being reconsidered may look slim to none however in reality we don't know.

It could be something they had already discussed at length well in advance, made up their minds over and they are simply not receptive to user feedback.

Or it could be something that is still up for debate and the outcome could be influenced by user feedback.

Just in case is the latter is worth providing such feedback.

hafgood · March 2021

Does it matter? You lose nothing. You still have the CP you had, the fact it took longer to get there than it will is irrelevant. You are losing nothing.

You have still played the game, you have still gained the CP, you are CPwhatever (I'm CP1260), you are still CPwhatever.

Does it matter that new player takes longer to get to CPwhatever? No, nor did it matter when the curves got adjusted before.

You still have your CP, you have lost nothing. Were you grinding to get to CP3600 before? No.

Were you actively trying to increase your CP? No.

Be glad that the game didn't stop at 810 and allowed you to carry on getting CP allowing you to be CPwhatever. Many games would have stopped progression at 810. And would not have kept score of anything about that. You would be may XP and would be starting from 810 along with everyone else.

Becauae we carried on getting CP we are above 810, we have a headstart on getting to 3600. Will I be grinding CP to get there as fast as I can? No.

Why? Because I enjoy the game and will continue to enjoy the game, watching CP go up and amending my build as needed will just become a part of it.

Will others get to 3600 before me, yes. Will I beat others to 3600, yes. Does it matter? No.

remosito · March 2021

hafgood wrote: »

Does it matter? You lose nothing. You still have the CP you had, the fact it took longer to get there than it will is irrelevant. You are losing nothing.

You have still played the game, you have still gained the CP, you are CPwhatever (I'm CP1260), you are still CPwhatever.

Does it matter that new player takes longer to get to CPwhatever? No, nor did it matter when the curves got adjusted before.

You still have your CP, you have lost nothing. Were you grinding to get to CP3600 before? No.

Were you actively trying to increase your CP? No.

Be glad that the game didn't stop at 810 and allowed you to carry on getting CP allowing you to be CPwhatever. Many games would have stopped progression at 810. And would not have kept score of anything about that. You would be may XP and would be starting from 810 along with everyone else.

Becauae we carried on getting CP we are above 810, we have a headstart on getting to 3600. Will I be grinding CP to get there as fast as I can? No.

Why? Because I enjoy the game and will continue to enjoy the game, watching CP go up and amending my build as needed will just become a part of it.

Will others get to 3600 before me, yes. Will I beat others to 3600, yes. Does it matter? No.

happy to hear you are glad about it all. But please don't tell others how to feel about things.

Different people see things differently and have different playstyles and priorities.

As for me all my chars are healer or tank. who like to do solo stuff and pvp. Before I could spec dual purpose at least marginally. After I won't much at all with cp1200. So my playstyle is actually getting nerfed pretty hard. That aint loosing nothing.

If zos didnt throw away 300M Xp (=2500hours playtime) of my 500M Xp gained. I'd be like CP 1900. And I could would be well into horizontal progression and back to multipurpose speccing..

At least a 50/50 split of xp difference counted/thrown out. Or the Xp difference given as enlightenment. So it doesnt take 2500 hours to get it back. Is kinda what will be needed to not make me at least quit eso+, buying standard chapters once they hit 50% or more off instead of pre ordering collectors edition chapters...

Olupajmibanan · March 2021

CP stays the same. It's definite.

furiouslog · March 2021

hafgood wrote: »

Does it matter? You lose nothing. You still have the CP you had, the fact it took longer to get there than it will is irrelevant. You are losing nothing.

You have still played the game, you have still gained the CP, you are CPwhatever (I'm CP1260), you are still CPwhatever.

Does it matter that new player takes longer to get to CPwhatever? No, nor did it matter when the curves got adjusted before.

You still have your CP, you have lost nothing. Were you grinding to get to CP3600 before? No.

Were you actively trying to increase your CP? No.

Be glad that the game didn't stop at 810 and allowed you to carry on getting CP allowing you to be CPwhatever. Many games would have stopped progression at 810. And would not have kept score of anything about that. You would be may XP and would be starting from 810 along with everyone else.

Becauae we carried on getting CP we are above 810, we have a headstart on getting to 3600. Will I be grinding CP to get there as fast as I can? No.

Why? Because I enjoy the game and will continue to enjoy the game, watching CP go up and amending my build as needed will just become a part of it.

Will others get to 3600 before me, yes. Will I beat others to 3600, yes. Does it matter? No.

I already explained why it matters.

Sju · March 2021

If they hand out extra cp I didn't earn, I'll feel worthless, and entitled, it'll probably make me quit the game.

Septimus_Magna · March 2021

The problem with giving XP retroactively is that you only widen the gap, everything points to the direction of ZOS closing the gap to decrease the impact of BiS gear and CP level.

When the conversion from veteran levels to the champion system was introduced everyone started from a level corresponding to the vet level if I remember correctly.

furiouslog · March 2021

Olupajmibanan wrote: »

CP stays the same. It's definite.

Source?

Also, can we please get clarification from ZOS on why this is their approach?

@ZOS_GinaBruno

Xuhora · March 2021

As source i would state PTS as for why this is the approach (oh and i know im not gina): its common pracitce?

You got a certrain Item (the Championpoint) for a certain currency (Experience). If the Value of the item changes, it does not mean that there is compensation needed. Works in the real world, works in the game world.

and as i stated a number of times allready: this bringt the playerpool closer together which benefits all of us, rather than tearing it further apart which benefits no one.

tmbrinks · March 2021

1100 is where you reach full DPS/heals plus most mitigation in the blue tree.

0-1100 in the new system will cost less XP than 0-810 in the old system.

So, new players reach "parity" quicker. Imagine being a new player and thinking you need 2500-5000 hours of play to get to 'end game' because everybody else is at 1700+ CP. How many of them would never even get to the beginnings of 'end game' which is arguably when the best parts of the game happen. Thousands of players see a "BDO-level" grind ahead of them and never get invested (and yes, the purpose of any retail product is to make money, I'm not naive) in the game.

Yes, a few players in the 810-1100 range (which is a fairly small population, as ZoS has said most long term players are in the 1200-1300 range) will lose some power (which is also part of the CP nerfs)

CP and their importance have been reduced. There is an approximately 50% increase to DPS for no-CP characters (50k->75k) and a 10% loss at the top (110k->100k) (obviously class dependent). CP will no longer be the most important thing in your success in this game. Player skill is now #1, then gear, then CP as a tertiary effect.

The cost of each CP in the 810-1800 range has been reduced by an average of 67%!!! You have 2 double XP events soon after the shift (Jester's and Anniversary), ZoS gives plentiful XP scrolls in login rewards. If you're in the 810-1100 range and you feel the need to "grind" some more CP, they're going to come so quickly! Random normal with your enlightenment = 1+ CP, put on an XP scroll and it's 2+ CP! For a 15 minute dungeon!!!!

Do your other activities (that give XP) and you're looking at 5+ CP a day with those XP scrolls for your few hours of playtime. 20-40 days later and you're back at the new "soft-cap" of 1100 CP if you're in that average range.

(Again, to reiterate, you've already gotten the 50/50 split that's been proposed.. .that's what the 50% penalty does

Just be thankful you could continue to earn CP over the cap this whole time )

furiouslog · March 2021

Xuhora wrote: »

As source i would state PTS as for why this is the approach (oh and i know im not gina): its common pracitce?

You got a certrain Item (the Championpoint) for a certain currency (Experience). If the Value of the item changes, it does not mean that there is compensation needed. Works in the real world, works in the game world.

and as i stated a number of times allready: this bringt the playerpool closer together which benefits all of us, rather than tearing it further apart which benefits no one.

As already mentioned, the historical precedent of a bad thing does not justify a new bad thing.

As to your value statement, I disagree. An analogy: you are hired to do work for a certain amount of salary. You do work and earn money. After a year has passed, the company for which you work decides to reduce salaries, and retroactively applies their reductions to prior pay, removing the equivalent of 60% of your salary from your bank account.

I agree that bringing the player pool closer together is a good thing. I'm not sure how giving my character a reduced amount of CP relative to the effort I spent to earn such that I can not continue playing at the same level I had achieved prior to the changes achieves that objective. It only forces to to grind more to get what I already had. Note: I'm not talking about nerfs resultant from changing the CP allocation mechanics, I'm talking about having to put points I have in crafting passives today into DPS in order to stay at parity, at the cost of my crafting benefits - the loss of which provides no gap closing benefit to new players.

tmbrinks · March 2021

furiouslog wrote: »

Xuhora wrote: »

As source i would state PTS as for why this is the approach (oh and i know im not gina): its common pracitce?

You got a certrain Item (the Championpoint) for a certain currency (Experience). If the Value of the item changes, it does not mean that there is compensation needed. Works in the real world, works in the game world.

and as i stated a number of times allready: this bringt the playerpool closer together which benefits all of us, rather than tearing it further apart which benefits no one.

As already mentioned, the historical precedent of a bad thing does not justify a new bad thing.

As to your value statement, I disagree. An analogy: you are hired to do work for a certain amount of salary. You do work and earn money. After a year has passed, the company for which you work decides to reduce salaries, and retroactively applies their reductions to prior pay, removing the equivalent of 60% of your salary from your bank account.

I agree that bringing the player pool closer together is a good thing. I'm not sure how giving my character a reduced amount of CP relative to the effort I spent to earn such that I can not continue playing at the same level I had achieved prior to the changes achieves that objective. It only forces to to grind more to get what I already had. Note: I'm not talking about nerfs resultant from changing the CP allocation mechanics, I'm talking about having to put points I have in crafting passives today into DPS in order to stay at parity, at the cost of my crafting benefits - the loss of which provides no gap closing benefit to new players.

Nobody is taking anything away from you. So your analogy is flawed.

It's more this. You work for a company and make 40k a year. You get a 2k a year raise, and they have a "soft-cap" which kicks in at 60k a year, after which you'll only get a 1k a year raise, which you'll get as soon as they raise the "soft-cap" (the 50% penalty for being over cap). So, after 15 years, you're at 60k. But the second they change the cap, you bump up to the 65k

Now, they change the "soft-cap" to 100k a year. Change the raises to 4k a year, but keep the starting salary at 40k a year.

You don't retroactively get the 4k a year raises (which is what you're asking for by having the XP shift to the new CP scale) and are suddenly making the 100k a year (since you'd be at the new "soft-cap"), you're making the 65k a year and getting 4k raises for the next 10 or so years.

But somebody who is new is making the 40k a year plus the 4k raises. Yes, they will get to the 65k you're now making much quicker than you did, but you will still be ahead of them.

I know it doesn't work this way in the real world. But you aren't losing anything as your analogy would suggest.

furiouslog · March 2021

tmbrinks wrote: »

Nobody is taking anything away from you. So your analogy is flawed.

It's more this. You work for a company and make 40k a year. You get a 2k a year raise, and they have a "soft-cap" which kicks in at 60k a year, after which you'll only get a 1k a year raise, which you'll get as soon as they raise the "soft-cap" (the 50% penalty for being over cap). So, after 15 years, you're at 60k. But the second they change the cap, you bump up to the 65k

Now, they change the "soft-cap" to 100k a year. Change the raises to 4k a year, but keep the starting salary at 40k a year.

You don't retroactively get the 4k a year raises (which is what you're asking for by having the XP shift to the new CP scale) and are suddenly making the 100k a year (since you'd be at the new "soft-cap"), you're making the 65k a year and getting 4k raises for the next 10 or so years.

But somebody who is new is making the 40k a year plus the 4k raises. Yes, they will get to the 65k you're now making much quicker than you did, but you will still be ahead of them.

I know it doesn't work this way in the real world. But you aren't losing anything as your analogy would suggest.

I knew that if I attempted to provide an analogy that the discussion would become about the analogy. Rookie mistake.

I don't agree with your analogy, because we just don't see the issue the same way. I invested time for value. The value is being removed. It's that simple. I could use currency devaluation or some other contrivance to communicate the core idea in the name of communicating why I think this is unfair, but the conversation will just continue to get sidetracked as we mutually nitpick the analogy instead of the core issue. So I'll say this: I agree that my analogy is flawed. Your analogy is also flawed and is not at all representative of my perspective of the situation I am in.

At the core of it is that you don't feel that it's unfair that I have to mindlessly regrind to get to the same level of ability that I currently possess. I do think it's unfair. If we can't agree on that, there is little point in trying to convince each other of that, and we just part ways on the issue.

tmbrinks · March 2021

furiouslog wrote: »

tmbrinks wrote: »

Nobody is taking anything away from you. So your analogy is flawed.

It's more this. You work for a company and make 40k a year. You get a 2k a year raise, and they have a "soft-cap" which kicks in at 60k a year, after which you'll only get a 1k a year raise, which you'll get as soon as they raise the "soft-cap" (the 50% penalty for being over cap). So, after 15 years, you're at 60k. But the second they change the cap, you bump up to the 65k

Now, they change the "soft-cap" to 100k a year. Change the raises to 4k a year, but keep the starting salary at 40k a year.

You don't retroactively get the 4k a year raises (which is what you're asking for by having the XP shift to the new CP scale) and are suddenly making the 100k a year (since you'd be at the new "soft-cap"), you're making the 65k a year and getting 4k raises for the next 10 or so years.

But somebody who is new is making the 40k a year plus the 4k raises. Yes, they will get to the 65k you're now making much quicker than you did, but you will still be ahead of them.

I know it doesn't work this way in the real world. But you aren't losing anything as your analogy would suggest.

I knew that if I attempted to provide an analogy that the discussion would become about the analogy. Rookie mistake.

I don't agree with your analogy, because we just don't see the issue the same way. I invested time for value. The value is being removed. It's that simple. I could use currency devaluation or some other contrivance to communicate the core idea in the name of communicating why I think this is unfair, but the conversation will just continue to get sidetracked as we mutually nitpick the analogy instead of the core issue. So I'll say this: I agree that my analogy is flawed. Your analogy is also flawed and is not at all representative of my perspective of the situation I am in.

At the core of it is that you don't feel that it's unfair that I have to mindlessly regrind to get to the same level of ability that I currently possess. I do think it's unfair. If we can't agree on that, there is little point in trying to convince each other of that, and we just part ways on the issue.

So, to hell with any new players, they should be forced to put the same time investment in the game that you did to reach "parity" with you. Got it!

It's the same as my elderly neighbors complaining about having to pay taxes to the local schools... "well, I don't have any kids going there anymore so why do they get my money?"

Or my parents complaining when anybody brings up making community college free/reducing the cost. "I had to pay for mine, so you should too!!!"

furiouslog · March 2021

tmbrinks wrote: »

So, to hell with any new players, they should be forced to put the same time investment in the game that you did to reach "parity" with you. Got it!

It's the same as my elderly neighbors complaining about having to pay taxes to the local schools... "well, I don't have any kids going there anymore so why do they get my money?"

Or my parents complaining when anybody brings up making community college free/reducing the cost. "I had to pay for mine, so you should too!!!"

This straw man is a mischaracterization of my perspective. I've already explained the concrete effects of the changes in my playability in a prior post, and how retaining what is lost to me does not really affect the viability of new players and their participation in end game content. If you want to converse on those specifics, I'm happy to do so.

If in these metaphors you are saying that my view that my gameplay and abilities being reduced in scope should be an obvious and acceptable cost of making the game more accessible to new players, I don't agree. Using socially charged metaphors designed to characterize me as spoiled, dimwitted, stubborn, or unjustifiably entitled will not change that view, and I don't appreciate it. I respect your perspective, and honestly thank you for sharing it. I just completely disagree. If your intent is to convincingly argue your point, I assure you that you're not going to convince me using the tactics you are currently employing.

tmbrinks · March 2021

furiouslog wrote: »

tmbrinks wrote: »

So, to hell with any new players, they should be forced to put the same time investment in the game that you did to reach "parity" with you. Got it!

It's the same as my elderly neighbors complaining about having to pay taxes to the local schools... "well, I don't have any kids going there anymore so why do they get my money?"

Or my parents complaining when anybody brings up making community college free/reducing the cost. "I had to pay for mine, so you should too!!!"

This straw man is a mischaracterization of my perspective. I've already explained the concrete effects of the changes in my playability in a prior post, and how retaining what is lost to me does not really affect the viability of new players and their participation in end game content. If you want to converse on those specifics, I'm happy to do so.

If in these metaphors you are saying that my view that my gameplay and abilities being reduced in scope should be an obvious and acceptable cost of making the game more accessible to new players, I don't agree. Using socially charged metaphors designed to characterize me as spoiled, dimwitted, stubborn, or unjustifiably entitled will not change that view, and I don't appreciate it. I respect your perspective, and honestly thank you for sharing it. I just completely disagree. If your intent is to convincingly argue your point, I assure you that you're not going to convince me using the tactics you are currently employing.

From a mathematical standpoint; If ZoS were to retroactively give you all your previously earned XP and move you along on the new CP scale. It would unequivocally set new players back because they would need the same time investment as you previously had. The entire 'catch-up' mechanic then becomes useless as it no longer performs its function as a 'catch-up' mechanic, as it's meant to allow new players to reach the new, higher-leveled, "parity" in less time than it would have taken on the old system. But if the goal for parity (catching up to other players) has also been moved, that negates the change in XP needed, resulting in the same time to reach "parity"

The value of your time spent in the game was/is your ability to continue to earn CP above and beyond the cap for the entire time that the amount of CP that we could spend was capped. You were able to (at a 50% reduction) continue to bank future levels on the old system whereas upon the introduction of a new system you were able to immediately redeem.

Thus, your time has already been valued and included in the new system. Especially when, to get to the equivalent level (in terms of total damage increase/mitigation/healing, of which you have NEVER been able to get "all" of on the old system), you only need to be a little bit above the cap (~1100 CP). And with them making the curve and "soft-cap" be so far beyond this new level of "parity" will make it much easier to get to for ALL players. Not to mention that CP is at best a tertiary effect on your ability as a player now for what you'll be able to do. Players will be much more survivable with no-CP and the extra health and reduced monster damage than they ever were on the old system with a full 810CP.

(I apologize for the snarky responses as well, didn't sleep well, and the coffee isn't working today)

Ringod123 · March 2021

furiouslog wrote: »

At the core of it is that you don't feel that it's unfair that I have to mindlessly regrind to get to the same level of ability that I currently possess. I do think it's unfair. If we can't agree on that, there is little point in trying to convince each other of that, and we just part ways on the issue.

Once you realise he doesn't feel it's unfair because he is already at/above 1800CP you will see why he is defending his PoV so hard, he simply doesn't want to lose the thousands of hours (hundred of millions of XP) gap that ZOS has created between him and players at/around 810 who used to be on par with him.

And anyone who has been on the PTS in the last 2 weeks can easily see for PvP the cap is clearly between 1800-2100, keep saying its as low as 1100 doesn't make it true.

bayushi2005 · March 2021

A successful "catch up mechanics" would be buffing the new players (super duper xp buff until, say, 1200 cp is reached) instead of taking something away (time invested) from the old playerbase. Buff the new buggers to high heaven, leave my xp and use it with the new cp scaling, please.

tmbrinks · March 2021

Ringod123 wrote: »

furiouslog wrote: »

At the core of it is that you don't feel that it's unfair that I have to mindlessly regrind to get to the same level of ability that I currently possess. I do think it's unfair. If we can't agree on that, there is little point in trying to convince each other of that, and we just part ways on the issue.

Once you realise he doesn't feel it's unfair because he is already at/above 1800CP you will see why he is defending his PoV so hard, he simply doesn't want to lose the thousands of hours (hundred of millions of XP) gap that ZOS has created between him and players at/around 810 who used to be on par with him.

And anyone who has been on the PTS in the last 2 weeks can easily see for PvP the cap is clearly between 1800-2100, keep saying its as low as 1100 doesn't make it true.

Thus, I'm losing more "time" than you

(to take your argument)

But, please change your argument to suit as you see fit

I trust the end-game content creators who have released their analysis of the CP system.

tmbrinks · March 2021

bayushi2005 wrote: »

A successful "catch up mechanics" would be buffing the new players (super duper xp buff until, say, 1200 cp is reached) instead of taking something away (time invested) from the old playerbase. Buff the new buggers to high heaven, leave my xp and use it with the new cp scaling, please.

But, these accomplish the same thing...

The argument just changes from "give me all my time invested" to "they didn't have to spend as much time"

bayushi2005 · March 2021

tmbrinks wrote: »

bayushi2005 wrote: »

A successful "catch up mechanics" would be buffing the new players (super duper xp buff until, say, 1200 cp is reached) instead of taking something away (time invested) from the old playerbase. Buff the new buggers to high heaven, leave my xp and use it with the new cp scaling, please.

But, these accomplish the same thing...

The argument just changes from "give me all my time invested" to "they didn't have to spend as much time"

But less people will get bitter about something being taken away from them. There is a reason why this usually is the go-to solution in older MMOs. And yes, the outcome is the same, but less butts are hurt in the process.

remosito · March 2021

Ringod123 wrote: »

furiouslog wrote: »

At the core of it is that you don't feel that it's unfair that I have to mindlessly regrind to get to the same level of ability that I currently possess. I do think it's unfair. If we can't agree on that, there is little point in trying to convince each other of that, and we just part ways on the issue.

Once you realise he doesn't feel it's unfair because he is already at/above 1800CP you will see why he is defending his PoV so hard, he simply doesn't want to lose the thousands of hours (hundred of millions of XP) gap that ZOS has created between him and players at/around 810 who used to be on par with him.

And anyone who has been on the PTS in the last 2 weeks can easily see for PvP the cap is clearly between 1800-2100, keep saying its as low as 1100 doesn't make it true.

if there werent no cp campaigns this might be more of a point. with nocp campaign there simply is no cap between new and vet player.

remosito · March 2021

tmbrinks wrote: »

bayushi2005 wrote: »

A successful "catch up mechanics" would be buffing the new players (super duper xp buff until, say, 1200 cp is reached) instead of taking something away (time invested) from the old playerbase. Buff the new buggers to high heaven, leave my xp and use it with the new cp scaling, please.

But, these accomplish the same thing...

The argument just changes from "give me all my time invested" to "they didn't have to spend as much time"

what?

this is so utterly wrong.

counting all my xp would get me to cp 1900. not counting 60% of it only gives me my current cp 1200. one allows horizontal progression and multipurpose build. the other does not.

so they certainly do NOT achieve the same thing..

Oreyn_Bearclaw · March 2021

This is obviously a very real issue that has made a lot of players upset. I was actually surprised when I looked at the new curve to see where I would be had the new curve always been there. I would go from like 1350>2100 pts.

I was admittedly pretty upset (but not surprised) when I heard they were not going to give people the benefit of the new curve. That said, I am not sure U want to wake up with an extra 600-700 CP.

I wouldnt be opposed to some sort of flat bonus given to people in different brackets above 810 and below 1800. Say 810-900 got an additional 150, 901-1000 got 125, 1001-1100 got 100, etc. Some more thought would probably need to go into that proposal on specific amounts, but I am not sure we should go from 1300-2k overnight.

remosito · March 2021

Oreyn_Bearclaw wrote: »

This is obviously a very real issue that has made a lot of players upset. I was actually surprised when I looked at the new curve to see where I would be had the new curve always been there. I would go from like 1350>2100 pts.

I was admittedly pretty upset (but not surprised) when I heard they were not going to give people the benefit of the new curve. That said, I am not sure U want to wake up with an extra 600-700 CP.

I wouldnt be opposed to some sort of flat bonus given to people in different brackets above 810 and below 1800. Say 810-900 got an additional 150, 901-1000 got 125, 1001-1100 got 100, etc. Some more thought would probably need to go into that proposal on specific amounts, but I am not sure we should go from 1300-2k overnight.

Not against a partial, say 50/50 scale up. Or xp difference as enlightenment. so it only takes 600 hours to get my lost 2500 hours worth of cp back.

But personally dont see why I wouldnt want that 700cp gain you claim i shouldnt want....

Mix · March 2021

Lots of good arguments here.

Yes, I like working towards things but with the complete change in the system I feel that taking the XP gained should be applied to the new CP curve. The system changed, not how much time spent and XP gained.

Once hitting 810CP there was no reason for the majority of players to even care about further CP, especially after there was no cap increase for such a long time and we knew when/if the next increase came it would only be for 30 more CP.

I know if we were told a year ago that we would be able to spend 3600 CP I would have started making sure I was gaining CP to reach that cap and not merely making sure I had 30CP more than the current cap (which for me happened between the cap increases just through natural playing).

The new system will be a shock to all of us and we will have to adjust. That shock could be mitigated by taking our current raw XP and putting that on to the new CP XP curve imho.