+/- 4 levels is too restrictive

[Sk00ba5t3v3]

I heard Sirken talking on his livestream about wanting to keep new players on the server and one of the solutions was to decrease the level range from 8 to 4 levels.

I would call me a "new player" and I can't say how ghey this is. +/- 4 levels is nothing. More often than not half of my group is ever able to engage in fights....this feels like a low pop blue server.

Coming from a "new player" I think your idea, although well intended, was not a solution to the problem.

[Hamburgalur]

That's why exp/leveling should be a lot quicker, only a handful of people playing and everyone is too spread out.

[Hamburgalur]

The journey isn't a static one, it should change with the times. Not enough players to sustain the old ways. Server must adapt.

[Hamburgalur]

<---------- Think it's that way but anyhow, leveling isn't difficult, just tedious.

[Potus]

The fact that a level 55 Cleric can't get hit by a bunch of 60s is pretty fucking ridiculous. I think it should go back to 8.

Dying at 52 to level 60s builds character.

[Sk00ba5t3v3]

I think there could be a hybrid solution. Keep it +/- 4 levels until lvl 30 or 40 then it goes back to +/- 8 lvls

[Bazia]

I think there could be a hybrid solution. Keep it +/- 4 levels until lvl 30 or 40 then it goes back to +/- 8 lvls

that was how it used to work, it scaled as you leveled

[Sk00ba5t3v3]

Then what exactly WAS the problem before?

[Potus]

Then what exactly WAS the problem before?

A couple of level 60s were going around zones and just destroying level 52s in Kunark. People hated it and claimed it ruined the game, but really it was more complicated than that, the server was on a downward trajectory due to broken resists and places like Perma and SolB were free-for-all zones.

[Hamburgalur]

A couple of level 60s were going around zones and just destroying level 52s in Kunark. People hated it and claimed it ruined the game, but really it was more complicated than that, the server was on a downward trajectory due to broken resists and places like Perma and SolB were free-for-all zones.
They still could do that with or without broken resists.

[Swyft]

Then what exactly WAS the problem before?

No clue I was actively hunting 60's at lvl 52

[Gaffin 7.0]

pvp is more stale for sure, i think it should be 8 lvls till 52 then use 4

[compulsion]

Then what exactly WAS the problem before?

For some people it was the xp loss on death. Nerfing that and the range at the same time was a bit much.

For a healthy PvP environment, 6 levels would probably be the most reasonable. A 52 does not have the Kunark spells or discs to do anything to a 60. By 54 casters have upgraded nukes and shield of the magi, priests have sheal or remedy/DL, and melees have discs. A 52 will get pointlessly victimized by a 60, while a 54 can put up a good fight, and our level range should reflect that. 4 levels is arbitrary and meaningless, and less than the level range for 3 of the 4 live PvP servers.

[xblade724]

NO it's not. It's from Rallos Zek rules, and WTF someone two tiers of spells higher than you going to kill you? It's SUPPOSED to be like this -- an unfair fight is not a fun fight.

Level 20 anything vs lvl 28 anything will DESTROY you, no contest, no fun. The same could be said about lower or higher levels, all the same.

[Bazia]

i care less about dying to a 60 at 52 1v1 then my group getting griefed by one guy killing my clr or enc and i cant help

[Swyft]

NO it's not. It's from Rallos Zek rules, and WTF someone two tiers of spells higher than you going to kill you? It's SUPPOSED to be like this -- an unfair fight is not a fun fight.

Level 20 anything vs lvl 28 anything will DESTROY you, no contest, no fun. The same could be said about lower or higher levels, all the same.

LOL nope I've killed so many 60's at lvl 52, but your right it was unfair...for them! Hell my wiz used the exact same nukes from 52-56 was absolutely no difference in those lvl's.

[Eslade]

I remember voting for a range of 6 at the top end when it was up for debate. We need a flagging system so that lower players can attack higher level players and higher players can kill those annoying oor healers/buffers.

[Clark]

I like +/- 4. Is what rallos zek and zek used!

[BigTB]

Been leveling steady this last week, SO MANY times some ding dong rolls in on group and i cant root because I'm too low, really makes shit feel blue as previously stated.

tired of not being able to clear people out of my camps as well

8 is great

[Eslade]

Been leveling steady this last week, SO MANY times some ding dong rolls in on group and i cant root because I'm too low, really makes shit feel blue as previously stated.

tired of not being able to clear people out of my camps as well

8 is great

You say this until you get to level 52 and a vp geared bard decimates your group with little to no recourse.

[BigTB]

You say this until you get to level 52 and a vp geared bard decimates your group with little to no recourse.

at least its pvp

[Eslade]

at least its pvp

True, but so is killing afks. Flagging system would fix the problem with having to watch your group members getting ganked and you can hunt higher levels if you wanted.

[Swyft]

I like +/- 4. Is what rallos zek and zek used!

Sure and if they add item loot I'll agree with +/-4 but 6 at the very least would be better for 50+ when you suffer nothing from death.

[compulsion]

LOL nope I've killed so many 60's at lvl 52, but your right it was unfair...for them! Hell my wiz used the exact same nukes from 52-56 was absolutely no difference in those lvl's.

1 out of 14 classes getting significantly better at 51 with an obsolete and ridiculous resist code is not exactly justification for shifting the entire level range. Every other class lacks key tools that only become available 53-55. 6 level range would increase the amount of overall and competitive PvP while discouraging some camping of specific level breaks.

[Swyft]

1 out of 14 classes getting significantly better at 51 with an obsolete and ridiculous resist code is not exactly justification for shifting the entire level range. Every other class lacks key tools that only become available 53-55. 6 level range would increase the amount of overall and competitive PvP while discouraging some camping of specific level breaks.

My point was if I can do it with the same damned spells and kill VP geared 60's in rags then quite your whining, that means your gonna get upgrades each lvl. My class didn't and I did just fine.

http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h266/syft13/EQ000131_zps42dea484.png (http://s66.photobucket.com/user/syft13/media/EQ000131_zps42dea484.png.html)

In a freaking Advisor robe fer christ sakes, basically the people crying about 8 lvls are gonna die anyways it's more a learn2play issue.

[Bazia]

as a wizard or druid u could be naked and get a kill

doesnt apply to most classes

[Swyft]

as a wizard or druid u could be naked and get a kill

doesnt apply to most classes

Sure prove it show me your screenshot of you killing VP geared toons in rags twinky?

Love how people always say it's something anyone can do, when they are someone who has never done it!

[Bazia]

i have a nude druid portbot just Blizzard + Scoraie = gg

doesnt require gear, but keep bein dumb

[Swyft]

i have a nude druid portbot just Blizzard + Scoraie = gg

doesnt require gear, but keep bein dumb

Where is this place that people sit under rains for 3 ticks lol could you point me to this wonder land!

I don't want theory-crafting I want proof, its so easy to say blah blah blah but 95% of the Wizards on this server never got a kill till they hit 60 and got epic'd.

[Bazia]

wizard hard pvp class ur right

[Swyft]

wizard hard pvp class ur right

I can name more Wizards that never got a single kill till epic'd then ones who slayed pre 60. Truth is most of the players here blue as fawk and couldn't pvp worth a damn regardless of the class they play. Lvl range won't change that.

Sullon had exp death and NO LVL LIMIT!

Rallos had 4 lvls and item loss.

Ya gotta be bluer than a smurf penis to cry about 8 lvls when you lose nothing on death.

[Hamburgalur]

Sullon had exp death and NO LVL LIMIT
Well that's just stupid, hanging at high levels slaying lowbies like you're hot shit. Lol what a joke.

[Rheon]

Dumb Idea..played when server was -8 +8, pop was low and new players who were trying to lvl were just being griefed off the box by super twinks more so then they are now. +4 -4 and exp group bonus is the best thing to happen to this server IMHO.

[Swyft]

Well that's just stupid, hanging at high levels slaying lowbies like you're hot shit. Lol what a joke.

LOL wtf you talking about unless you went to Sullon day one and neckbearded it ya had to survive in a world where 60's could murder lvl 12's and no safezones!

Or Rallos where every death meant ya lost an item.

And ya'll crying about death when you lose nothing because it's 8 lvls, you smurfs wont be happy till the only pvp on red is /duel lol WoW kids go emocide on pvp-death.

[xblade724]

as a wizard or druid u could be naked and get a kill

doesnt apply to most classes

^ This. This. All of the one's QQing about levels are OP solo classes that are probably the griefers of our server causing people to leave anyway..

Arguing that they want to kill higher levels instead of lower levels lol...

Ok then, how about +8/-4? The lower levels can engage on the higher levels, but the higher levels can't engage on the lower levels. There's your argument~ If someone is stupid enough to mess with someone 8 lvls higher, they can try. Like accepting a /duel. What about this proposal?
"Glares at you threateningly -- Are you sure you want to do that? Your body is probably not ready (power level over 9000)."
"Glares at you threateningly -- He is too fluffy for you to engage; your body is too OP."

[Swyft]

^ This. This. All of the one's QQing about levels are OP solo classes that are probably the griefers of our server causing people to leave anyway..

Arguing that they want to kill higher levels instead of lower levels lol...

Ok then, how about +8/-4? The lower levels can engage on the higher levels, but the higher levels can't engage on the lower levels. There's your argument~ If someone is stupid enough to mess with someone 8 lvls higher, they can try. Like accepting a /duel. What about this proposal?
"Glares at you threateningly -- Are you sure you want to do that? Your body is probably not ready (power level over 9000)."
"Glares at you threateningly -- He is too fluffy for you to engage; your body is too OP."

or we could just keep it classic ya know like it's suppose to be since this is PROJECT 1999!

And either choose no lvl limit and exp death in 8 lvls, item loot, or accept 8 lvls as a happy medium...since this is supposed to be a classic server...

or play wow!

BTW Bazia is a fully decked out warrior who griefs lvl 40's in rags lmfao! Blue's are the griefers cuz they can't pvp people there own lvl without a massive gear advantage, reds just want more targets they don't care if they are higher or lower.

The 4 lvl limit protects griefers more so than the ones they are killing, 8 lvl's would mean that even the best geared griefer is in trouble when someone skilled and 8 lvls higher finds them. 4 lvls is the perfect buffer for a lvl 26 MM twink, would take an equal twink to run him out when meanwhile a 34 in descent gear could cleanse him from the zone quite easily.

[xblade724]

or we could just keep it classic ya know like it's suppose to be since this is PROJECT 1999!

And either choose no lvl limit and exp death in 8 lvls, item loot, or accept 8 lvls as a happy medium...since this is supposed to be a classic server...

or play wow!

BTW Bazia is a fully decked out warrior who griefs lvl 40's in rags lmfao! Blue's are the griefers cuz they can't pvp people there own lvl without a massive gear advantage, reds just want more targets they don't care if they are higher or lower.

The 4 lvl limit protects griefers more so than the ones they are killing, 8 lvl's would mean that even the best geared griefer is in trouble when someone skilled and 8 lvls higher finds them. 4 lvls is the perfect buffer for a lvl 26 MM twink, would take an equal twink to run him out when meanwhile a 34 in descent gear could cleanse him from the zone quite easily.

Oh , okay, yea let's make it +8 levels so that the twinks can kill super twinks, and the first-char leveling guys get beat unfairly -- right? Sorry you guys are already max level, but find your own content, some of us are still trying to level and don't have twink gear to barely sustain someone 4 levels higher...

You guys wanted the population to return, right? Well if it changes away from +4/-4, you will see the population drop fast from rage quitters (genuine ones, not QQ ones, where some twink 8 lvls higher, that would ALREADY be tough if only 4 levels higher, 2 shots you repeatedly, and the griefers will be higher than the actual players~

[Swyft]

Oh , okay, yea let's make it +8 levels so that the twinks can kill super twinks, and the first-char leveling guys get beat unfairly -- right? Sorry you guys are already max level, but find your own content, some of us are still trying to level and don't have twink gear to barely sustain someone 4 levels higher...

I am not max lvl I stay lower so I don't only have 4 lvl's of people to kill. Your freaking crying to someone who grew up with 8 lvls and had 5 empty slots, rocking an adviser robe.

I'm asking for the same thing I had to go through WTF should you get it easy when I got it hard? If you can't handle it than you don't belong on red, we shouldn't have to change the rules to make red more comforting to blue player's lol

Pop increased the minute Nihilum folded 4 lvl limit had zero. LET ME SAY IT AGAIN ZERO AS IN YOU CAN GIVE ZERO EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT LVL LIMIT INCREASING POP NONE, ZIP, ZILCH, NIX, NODDA!

We already have enough blue's here that just want to raid dragons all day, they are worthless to the pop and increase pvp not at all. They as much of a real pop as a dual boxed clone. If you don't embrace pvp, and that means not always having the advantage, then for real you don't belong here and no matter how much we change the rules ya never will!

[Rec]

+/-1

you want real pvp get to 60.

[phacemeltar]

i think it would be cool if purple, and no lvl restrictions for tk

[Doors]

+/- 4 has nothing to do with population being low.

[Laugher]

I think someone put it best in a thread from a while ago in regards to pop: there were simply far more people and servers that were blue than red. the percentage of players remaining/coming back on these servers and playing reflects that, it would seem that for the idk how many blue servers more there were that the pop on blue looks like a blue server somewhere near its prime because so many other blue servers produced players of that version of EQ, whereas PvP and more specifically ffa PvP was a far less widespread idea.

tl;dr in classic more blue pop/servers=more 99 blue players, in classic less PvP pop/servers=less r99 pop

I guess one could also argue the same point about the quantity of blue emu v red

http://i.imgur.com/ZU2Gp6V.png

[Hamburgalur]

Going from .25x to .5x swayed a lot a people to play on red. myself and some RLers included. That small exp increase is why we have a population more than 40 but just think what 2x, 3x, 4x, or even 5x would do. Starting a new character wouldn't feel like a job leveling him up. You could get to where everyone else is in a matter of days, instead of weeks. Could have time starting a new char without putting your chips(time) into one char.

Changing the pvp lvl range isn't going to bring in the numbers like an exp boost would. That shit is minor. People who play on other servers would definitely give it a try, knowing they wouldn't have to commit to such a time consuming grind.

This server should be about pvp, not leveling.

[Gaffin 7.0]

the lvl change for pvp was just too late, if it was implemented way earlier before people quit it might would have done some change but the mindset of the server is past it

[Swyft]

I think someone put it best in a thread from a while ago in regards to pop: there were simply far more people and servers that were blue than red. the percentage of players remaining/coming back on these servers and playing reflects that, it would seem that for the idk how many blue servers more there were that the pop on blue looks like a blue server somewhere near its prime because so many other blue servers produced players of that version of EQ, whereas PvP and more specifically ffa PvP was a far less widespread idea.

tl;dr in classic more blue pop/servers=more 99 blue players, in classic less PvP pop/servers=less r99 pop

I guess one could also argue the same point about the quantity of blue emu v red

http://i.imgur.com/ZU2Gp6V.png

If you have to turn a red server into a blue one to increase pop then you defeated the purpose of creating the red server in the first place.

Rallos Zek was at one time the only pvp server and it had a higher pop than all blue servers. Sony never tried to create allot of pvp server's. If your logic was correct than games like Shadowbane(which were all pvp) wouldn't have been the number 1 game on launch.

You can make red totally blue, you will lose all pvp and watch the server be nothing but people raiding dragons, wait we tried that for 3 years, logic dictates that's not the answer.

http://tiarrabianca.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/insanity.gif

[Potus]

Loving the "keep it classic" people. You realize there were 4 (arguably 5) PVP servers right? This shit isn't classic, you left that station when you nerfed recharges and Loops.

[Swyft]

Loving the "keep it classic" people. You realize there were 4 (arguably 5) PVP servers right? This shit isn't classic, you left that station when you nerfed recharges and Loops.

lol well it is called project 1999, sticking to clasic pve but not pvp is some pretty smurfy shit if ya ask me.

[Not_Kazowi]

bump it back to +-8 for pvp

[Bazia]

bump it back to +-8 for pvp

[Laugher]

I think you missed the point of my post Swyft

think about it this way: 1/50 players of 25 PvE servers at 2k pop a night (~50k people, probably more according to wikipedia) play blue (1k people)

1/50 of the PvP server players @ 4-5 servers, 2-3k pop (10-12k total since you say the PvP servers were more populated) play red (this adds up to ~150-250 people)

pt being that the numbers on both servers are proportionate (to some degree) in reference to the live server quantity from which they came (even if the numbers aren't the same assuming the quantity of servers for PvP and PvE was about 5:1 this seems accurate)

(of course you could argue these numbers were made up (cz they were), or that variables such as getting a job/family/griefed off the server/began post-velious etc etc. weren't accounted for)

Its not a criticism to red but more to show that it is operating at about the same level as blue, on its own terms/within its own community

also, back on topic: I don't think the level range is the straw that's breaking the camel's back here when we talk population

[Swyft]

The fact being that only 10% of the population actually cares about pvp at all..the rest are blues who only came here to easy-mode raid pixels. They are always pixel whore's who pretend to care about pvp but don't engage in it until they are 60 and epic'd.

These are always the players who make up your griefers. We have catered to these players from day 1 under this misguided ideal that carebearing the server will bring more pop from the blue community.

It's never worked, it's actually had more of detrimental effect on pop as it turns off this servers true demographic of players...reds from live!

[Somekid123]

Yes put it back to 8 level range where garbage players such as tune can wreck anyone who dings 52. It'll also go great for people like knights templar who destroy any new player in cloth that they can find.

Keep it 4 range.

[Swyft]

Yes put it back to 8 level range where garbage players such as tune can wreck anyone who dings 52. It'll also go great for people like knights templar who destroy any new player in cloth that they can find.

Keep it 4 range.

You don't pvp so why do you believe you should have some say in the matter when your one of the blues I'm talking about. Whether you hit 60 or stay 52 you'll avoid pvp all together. LOL you can talk about Tune, Tune would stop what he was doing and go after me with full groups everytime I was online. Failed to kill me everytime until he finally went so far as to have Eldermoran edit the boards to show a kill on me, he never got lmfao. If I could survive Tune at 52 when it was his number 1 goal to kill me, then ya'll need to dry your eyes.

Your part of the problem here not the solution! There's a whole big blue server for you to /d on and cosplay yourself into a badass.

[Sear]

Didn't read whole thread. Agree with original post.

Box is way way better now with group exp thing, although I still think hotzones offer better tradeoffs (no penalty on solo players, more pvp, more like live was).

The +/- 4 levels thing is a bummer. It is pretty rare to find anyone you can actually attack.

This barely flew on RZ which had 800+ players concurrent. Don't think it'd be a stretch to say that most players preferred the ranges on the other three pvp servers (VZ, TZ, SZ). I'd rather get my ass kicked by someone 8 levels higher than me than not get any pvp action till 60.

Someone mentioned that the high level dungeon zones used to have no pvp level cap and that sounded like a great feature to me. Did it not work out for some reason?

[Swyft]

Pvp is immoral
the next step is to disable it completely

http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/14/146053/3026884-i-see-what-you-did-there-and-i-like-it-thumb.jpg

[Hamburgalur]

Just increase exp rate and everyone can be in the same pvp range a lot sooner and help contest raid bosses.

[Mac Drettj]

I miss 8 lvl range but it was a little griefy for non hardcores.

Servers healthier with 4.

[Stasis01]

I think I agree that 4 is too small, maybe with the PNP it won't be as bad and without serious hardcore losers like Tune that don't play anymore but there's probably a bunch more than I am unaware of.

Plus with EXP bonus it's not as bad to level so the inconvenience of PVP becomes less of an inconvenience when it isn't fucking pulling teeth to progress towards the good shit.

+ add boxing, then no one would give a fuck about the level range and would embrace PVP as the PVE grind would essentially be trivial and a by product of the server WHICH IS HOW IT SHOULD BE, and people could port/res/pvp all day long.

[Aenor]

If they had just made it 5 levels instead of four like I pleaded with them to do, it wouldn't be so painfully carebear.

[xblade724]

8 lvl range but it was a little griefy for non hardcores.

Servers healthier with 4.

[georgie]

http://makeameme.org/media/created/we-are-virgins.jpg

[Swyft]

Yes put it back to 8 level range where garbage players such as tune can wreck anyone who dings 52. It'll also go great for people like knights templar who destroy any new player in cloth that they can find.

Keep it 4 range.

No 4 lvl's is better so that the garbage blues can keep a healer at 54-55 and no 60's have a chance at dying in PvP due to OOR healer.

Which they have been doing! <cough>Samsung

[LulzSect]

I miss 8 lvl range but it was a little griefy for non hardcores.

Servers healthier with 4.

[Rec]

if oor healing is the problem it sounds like something else needs to be fixed and not the level range

[Swyft]

if oor healing is the problem it sounds like something else needs to be fixed and not the level range

well 8 lvls seemed to take care of it just fine, or they can do some elaborate patch and work-around in a attempt to make blues feel more comfortable on red, so they can avoid pvp all day and raid dragons with less lines.

Nothing better than rolling around in groups of people only a few lvl's apart and not being able to help your friend because he's 1 lvl oor vs who's fighting him.

Invisible walls make carebears smile...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/21/Meet_the_care_bears.jpg

[Swish]

if oor healing is the problem it sounds like something else needs to be fixed and not the level range

[Swyft]

Sounds like some people don't belong on red and wont be happy till PvP is removed altogether

http://img10.glitterfy.com/graphics/106/hey_girl_care_bear.gif

Almost everyone in this thread for 4 lvl range has next to zero kills/deaths lifetime value, next to zero pvp participation. Talk about a blue army agenda for non pvp.