Need for a middle tier for rvr

[Manatikik]

I share Hargrim opinion, and well, there are some facts...

Fact 1 : We already tested it in the past, adding DEBOLSTER to increase this middle tier population, and yes it was ghost land, and when some debolstered were joining the game to articially increase pop, it was a river of tears (cause they were organised > OP).

Fact 2 : Actually the worst part when in T2+ is when you hit lvl 31, meaning officially T4 compatible. There is always a moment where you are the little for some time, and i think the bolster system lift a lot the issue. I guess including lvl 16-39 in the same tier would be funny for some. Less for lvl 16. And i assume they would ask for separating Tier 2 for 16-25 or someting like this at a moment or another.

Fact 3 : Actually, all player between lvl 16 and 30 are crying scenarios are not popping. Why would it be different in ORvR? Probably worse according you need even more ppl than a SC to make it alive. And even worse if multiple areas must be opened in the same time.

Fact 4 : (i tested it) Going from 16 to 30+ takes few hours mixing, ORvR (joining friendly WB), or my guidies, (rare) Scenarios, and (super fast and easy) visit quests. FEW HOURS. And it gives you the possibility to anticipate (in ORvR), your future set, collecting some currencies. Btw, you prefer to play alone when you could join your guildies to play?

Fact 5 : I understand you wanna test things. Keep in mind it may take lot of time to make such changes (and obviously not yours) and it would have lot of involvment you probably don't even think about (but some will obviously complain later).

Fact 6 : The OP suggestion is based on Prime Time pop. What about the NA pop, rolling around 150-300 players? Will it still be viable, according it is already a bit complicated in term of population at this moment. If you don't think about or don't care, we must keep this in mind and take it into consideration.

Fact 7 : Probably the more "disputable". Players asked in the past we open multiple areas to split pop, and well, let them play far from the zerg (lol?). When prime comes, there are atleast 2 opened areas. More often 3. Systematically, everyone in evolving in only 1 area. EVERYONE. Why according you ask for a separation, don't you organize it; inviting all lvl X to XX to move on empty area? Have you even tested it?

Are you guys (the team) still opposed to increasing XP gains from 16-30 (but keeping T1 and T4 gains the same) so that people can progress through these slower and more boring levels (T1 is unique where as T2/3 is just like a dumbed down T4 that is more frustrating than fun). And you say it only takes a few hours but I recently leveled 2 new toons to 40 and 16-31 took like 6 hours with double xp (only played while winning SCs while they were popping) so I think your estimate is a little off (though you are in a position to know exactly the fastest way to level unlike the rest of us I suppose).

I think having people spend less time in T2 levels is the best way to make new players feel less like fodder and older players to be willing to level up alts/new toons, get SC pops more frequent (cause in this model I predict there would be more flow of toons through T2), and it wouldn’t be affected by the population fluctuations.

[Yaliskah]

@Manatikik.

Mm, just a supposition (but a bit experienced), but if we increase XP gain, what will happen? Another factual experience is when we are starting x2 WE (around 6/year). XP progression is just fun and crazy, but in the end, some complain they are naked, and gear progression don't follow.

So the next step will be to ask to link gear progression to fit with XP progression. But in this case, renown not gonna follow, so ... and so on.

Pushing the logic to the extrem, ideally, we should give the possibility to give full XP/RR lvl + full gear (a gm shop in a word). And even, everyone would complain it becomes boring because there is no more progression...

If we give the possibility to a player to jump directly in T2+ through a scroll, and let him take his responsibility in term of "nakedness", the collateral efect will be to see T1 becoming a ghost land in the low pop hours, forcing ppl to jump directly in T2+, naked too, generating more and more complains...

Whatever we will do, there wont be any unanimous consensus. We choose the least harm.

As you see, it is not as simple as you could think.

Now, and it is my personnal opinion (and only mine as a player), there are some things to do in the 31-39 bracket in term of progression/Scenarios.

[Manatikik]

@Manatikik.

Mm, just a supposition (but a bit experienced), but if we increase XP gain, what will happen? Another factual experience is when we are starting x2 WE (around 6/year). XP progression is just fun and crazy, but in the end, some complain they are naked, and gear progression don't follow.

So the next step will be to ask to link gear progression to fit with XP progression. But in this case, renown not gonna follow, so ... and so on.

Pushing the logic to the extrem, ideally, we should give the possibility to give full XP/RR lvl + full gear (a gm shop in a word). And even, everyone would complain it becomes boring because there is no more progression...

If we give the possibility to a player to jump directly in T2+ through a scroll, and let him take his responsibility in term of "nakedness", the collateral efect will be to see T1 becoming a ghost land in the low pop hours, forcing ppl to jump directly in T2+, naked too, generating more and more complains...

Whatever we will do, there wont be any unanimous consensus. We choose the least harm.

As you see, it is not as simple as you could think.

Now, and it is my personnal opinion (and only mine as a player), there are some things to do in the 31-39 bracket in term of progression/Scenarios.

Well that's why i suggested only affecting XP in T2/T3 brackets. People get to 31 quickly and have enough time to get anni/merc/ruin/BL/Redeye (now) without being naked.

On my AM i only got one gold bag before 50, a belt even. And I can keep up with most players I find just fine; sure high level premades can roll me but that hasn't happened yet (granted i usually run with a decently geared/leveled group). I just feel like if you can streamline mid-tier there may be better new player retention.

[dalen]

If anything I would extend tier 1 to lvl 1-19 instead of lvl 1-15. So all that are in tier 2-4 have group heals etc. Currently when you join T2-4 you really are too weak until you hit at least lvl 20, as almost all classes get pretty vital abilities at lvl 20.

[Ototo]

If anything I would extend tier 1 to lvl 1-19 instead of lvl 1-15. So all that are in tier 2-4 have group heals etc. Currently when you join T2-4 you really are too weak until you hit at least lvl 20, as almost all classes get pretty vital abilities at lvl 20.

Well, I think that is more linked with the Obliterator set being very OP in T1. You can't equip 2 pieces till level 16, so there's the cap setted. At least that's what I think.

[Kylashandra]

Back on live, there has never been such thing as a middle tier, except for a few weeks after release when everyone was still in the middle of the leveling process. The action was in T1 and T4, you would just grind through T2/3, and it was a breeeze thanks to fast xp spot like RvR rats, mentoring system, no limitations on power leveling by your friends/guild.

I still don't get the point of restricting people to a painful lvling process and forcing them into facing lvl 40 high RR players with only 2 tactic slots and half their spells/morales unlocked. Bolster doesnt make up for this at all, and we can see it daily when facing lvl 40 organized people with PU warbands, half full of lvl 16-30 people... Especially with the unnecessary nerf (in my opinion) on buff stacking. They just get roasted, and it has nothing to do with better tactics/game knowledge, just plain lack of stats/utilities not unlocked.

So if you want to keep your no-fast XP policy for lower levels, yes a middle tier might be needed for RvR and SC's... And it would be much more enjoyable (again in my opinion) to restrict T4 PvP (Rvr and Sc's) to lvl 40 players who can at least compete on a fairly same level skill-wise and stat-wise.

[BeautfulToad]

My only issue is the levelling at levels 32-39. I find it takes too long, and you are not useful enough to do scenarios. What to do about that is anyone's guess, but I'd like to see some boosts to XP/RR for these levels.

[Martok]

My only issue is the levelling at levels 32-39. I find it takes too long, and you are not useful enough to do scenarios.

I disagree. As stated prior in leveling my Witch Elf from level 29 to 40 I did nothing but scenarios and open RvR. I took my lumps at times, but that is part of the game. Leveling, to include acquiring better gear sets, didn't take that long at all and more often than not I proved quite useful in SC's.

[TenTonHammer]

Don’t know why leveling should be so slow it’s an artificial gatekeeper of reaching 40 that exists to slow you down from the “real game” of grinding renown, currency and dungeons

[Asherdoom]

the main issue is that from 16 to 40 youre totally useless as dps for example making you leech in siege battles or just quit the game entirely