POLL: Level Progression Cap for T99?

[Lowlife]

Fawqueue submitted the idea of a cap on level progression within Teams 99. While the specifics have yet to be outlined, for the sake of this poll one could assume a level progression cap could be something along the lines of ...

WEEK 1: Level 10
WEEK 2: Level 20
etc

While I was initially against this idea, Alecta and some other members of the community gave their perspective on the idea

Originally Posted by Alecta [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

People who hit the cap will have nothing to do other than kill those more casual than they are (repeatedly).

I think it will increase the total amount of pvp which is a good thing, but it's worth thinking about when proposing the level cap as being good for the casuals.

and I thought why not create a poll for it.

[Vexenu]

Fawqueue was advocating for an idea I proposed in my modified SZ rules thread. Details and rationale:

Cap the speed of leveling shortly after server launch. Something like:

Week 1: Max level 20
Week 2: Max level 30
Week 4: Max level 40
Week 6: Max level 50
Week 8: Earliest consideration of Kunark launch depending on community demand


This means neckbeards can't race ahead of everyone else and dominate the server from the get-go by simply massively outleveling them, as happened with <Ruin> on SZ. This shifts the focus from PvE to PvP, where it belongs on a PvP server. With the 4x XP bonus in place from 1-20, almost everyone should be able to reach level 20 within a week with even modest effort. From there things will open up a little more, but the caps in place should help keep most players in the same general level range, which keeps things fun, and results in battles for PvE zone control rather than just random griefing. Also, imagining a raid-sized force of level 20s descending into Lower Guk during the first week is just hilariously awesome.

[Lowlife]

Thank you for the quote Vexenu, I cited Fawqueue as the originator of the idea in the OP but didn't know where to find his specifics.

[big mouth chew]

not sure if we have enough polls

[Lowlife]

social and communications science are built on surveys bru

[Vexenu]

Also, I disagree with Alecta's contention that people would have nothing to do but grief if they were level locked. Smart players would be farming up lower level PvP gear for their guild/team during that time, so you'd probably see a lot of battles around Upper Guk (Runed Bone Fork), Crushbone (Dwarven Ringmail Tunic) and Unrest (Bloodstained Mantle) to secure those nice resist items early on.

And honestly, keep in mind that these proposed level locks are really only restrictive to the most hardcore players. Having to wait til the second week of the server to hit level 30 shouldn't exactly be onerous. The purpose is just to keep the biggest poopsockers from playing 20 hours a day for the first month and avoiding all PvP due to their headstart.

[Tavrin]

I like the teams concept, but this training wheels crap is getting out of hand.

What's next, GM enforced loot share if one team Nihilum's up the server?

[big mouth chew]

i thought the goal was finding a ruleset where everybody wins?

[Lowlife]

Originally Posted by big mouth chew [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

i thought the goal was finding a ruleset where everybody wins?

So, you'd rather grind in seclusion than engage in pvp in crush bone and shit with more people? I really do understand both the yes crowd and no crowd, i get it, but isn't the primary goal here large scale pvp, a larger population, and most importantly fun?

[Pudge]

If we limit to one IP&mac address = you get 1 toon to play, then a level cap may in fact work. Otherwise, the poopsocks will not be "forced to PvP" but will instead create alts on the opposing teams, or alts on their own team, and level multiple chars at once. I have no doubt that ppl like tune and nizzar would create as many characters as possible, and just never play the game the way its creators intended.