Scenarios idea.

[zgolec]

Hi.

Since scenarios in bracket 16-31 are pain in the arse to grind [very low sc pop] would it be possible to change brackets there?

Lvl 16 got its bolster which even with low number of abilities makes some characters go head to head with others or even get stronger rhen other lowbies. 40 lvls on the other hand almost instantly on 40 lvl got access to conq items which put them waaaay ahead of any 32 lvl that they face.

So.

Is it possible [and in place] to set sc bracket for 16-39 and the other one for 40s exclusively? Guess this would help being competetive for low lvls not just being farmed and also would help being compettive to pug scenarios - when atm you can be only 40 lvl with low lvls in grp against for example enemy which are only 40s with 1 player below 40.

Waiting for opinnion on this.

[Brutinho]

Hi.

Since scenarios in bracket 16-31 are pain in the arse to grind [very low sc pop] would it be possible to change brackets there?

Lvl 16 got its bolster which even with low number of abilities makes some characters go head to head with others or even get stronger rhen other lowbies. 40 lvls on the other hand almost instantly on 40 lvl got access to conq items which put them waaaay ahead of any 32 lvl that they face.

So.

Is it possible [and in place] to set sc bracket for 16-39 and the other one for 40s exclusively? Guess this would help being competetive for low lvls not just being farmed and also would help being compettive to pug scenarios - when atm you can be only 40 lvl with low lvls in grp against for example enemy which are only 40s with 1 player below 40.

Waiting for opinnion on this.

Really good idea imo.
Would bring two positive changes; stimulate SCs for t2 players (16-30) and with proper bolster adjustment the difference between a [16 and 39] vs [31 and a BiS 40] should be less noticeable.

Edit: I believe I saw another topic requesting T2 rvr back. These two things could go hand in hand, making all t2 rvr maps for 16-39 bracket would also server as a training ground for t3-t4 which would be 40s only. I know most people were against it back in the day cause rewards were not match to a player's rank like it is now. But it doesn't make any sense to have all these rvr zones together as players won't get endgame rewards untiI they are 40/41. Also, if 16-39 feels too broad t1 could be adjusted to 1-19 and t2 set to 20-39.

[zgolec]

Hi.

Since scenarios in bracket 16-31 are pain in the arse to grind [very low sc pop] would it be possible to change brackets there?

Lvl 16 got its bolster which even with low number of abilities makes some characters go head to head with others or even get stronger rhen other lowbies. 40 lvls on the other hand almost instantly on 40 lvl got access to conq items which put them waaaay ahead of any 32 lvl that they face.

So.

Is it possible [and in place] to set sc bracket for 16-39 and the other one for 40s exclusively? Guess this would help being competetive for low lvls not just being farmed and also would help being compettive to pug scenarios - when atm you can be only 40 lvl with low lvls in grp against for example enemy which are only 40s with 1 player below 40.

Waiting for opinnion on this.

Really good idea imo.
Would bring two positive changes; stimulate SCs for t2 players (16-30) and with proper bolster adjustment the difference between a [16 and 39] vs [31 and a BiS 40] should be less noticeable.

Edit: I believe I saw another topic requesting T2 rvr back. These two things could go hand in hand, making all t2 rvr maps for 16-39 bracket would also server as a training ground for t3-t4 which would be 40s only. I know most people were against it back in the day cause rewards were not match to a player's rank like it is now. But it doesn't make any sense to have all these rvr zones together as players won't get endgame rewards untiI they are 40/41. Also, if 16-39 feels too broad t1 could be adjusted to 1-19 and t2 set to 20-39.

T2 RVR is bad idea. I think rvr is fine. Cause pug wbs mix on both sides lowbies and bis geared ppl and this is not so bad to swallow as on confined space that sc is. It would make t2 rvr ghosttown like it was in the past... Lets just stick to scenarios here

[dalen]

I would like this change, but would also like to extend T1 to lvl 1-19. There is a massive power change at lvl 20 when healers get group heal.

[adamthelc]

I spend a decent amount of time in lower tiers and am often frustrated by the lack of scenario population, but I dont agree with this.

having slower mid tier scenarios is better than having slower end game scenarios.

This proposal would also pit players in annihilator against players in obliterator.

And if you extended T1 you would pit players in obliterator against players in me ole shirt or whatever it is.

[Kitsumy]

This change would be great for any non elitist 40 player.

Of course geared 40s player like some of the comentary allready said. Wont like this since they will get slower queues and wont be able to faceroll on any non 40 with 0 skill.

Is pretty logical to do that. Since why arent lvls 1 on same bracket as 40s? Same reason why a lvl 39 shouldnt be with a lvl 40. They are giant steps difference and make it unplayable on lowside. Per example my blackguard 36 with full ruin( my lvl yellow gear) is deleted in less than 3 seconds against any 40 even healers like dok.
And i think a decent geared shield tank shouldt die in 3 seconds against even a healer lol

Thats the reason why my brother and me stoped doing scs at 31. Because it isnt any fun and are absurd.

[zgolec]

I spend a decent amount of time in lower tiers and am often frustrated by the lack of scenario population, but I dont agree with this.

having slower mid tier scenarios is better than having slower end game scenarios.

This proposal would also pit players in annihilator against players in obliterator.

And if you extended T1 you would pit players in obliterator against players in me ole shirt or whatever it is.

There is shitton 40 players playing scs, so dont think it will be deserted.
I pick my chances in Obliterator with bolster vs Annihilator anytime.
Now get on annihilator and vs me in vanq/inv ^^ gl

[adamthelc]

I spend a decent amount of time in lower tiers and am often frustrated by the lack of scenario population, but I dont agree with this.

having slower mid tier scenarios is better than having slower end game scenarios.

This proposal would also pit players in annihilator against players in obliterator.

And if you extended T1 you would pit players in obliterator against players in me ole shirt or whatever it is.

There is shitton 40 players playing scs, so dont think it will be deserted.
I pick my chances in Obliterator with bolster vs Annihilator anytime.
Now get on annihilator and vs me in vanq/inv ^^ gl

You are greatly understating the difference between annihilator and obliterator. The difference between decimator and obliterator is already big. Decimator usually has better bonuses than annihilator though, so I am not sure that would be a huge difference.

But having said all of that, you wouldnt be getting rid of a annihilator vs endgame gear matchup. I dont think everyone hits 40 and has a full set of conq ready to put on.

If there were more people I would support a 31-39 Tier. There isnt though. And I stand by my opinion that putting 39s with 16s is a bad idea. Same with 20s, but a marginally smaller extent.

[adamthelc]

This change would be great for any non elitist 40 player.

Of course geared 40s player like some of the comentary allready said. Wont like this since they will get slower queues and wont be able to faceroll on any non 40 with 0 skill.

Is pretty logical to do that. Since why arent lvls 1 on same bracket as 40s? Same reason why a lvl 39 shouldnt be with a lvl 40. They are giant steps difference and make it unplayable on lowside. Per example my blackguard 36 with full ruin( my lvl yellow gear) is deleted in less than 3 seconds against any 40 even healers like dok.
And i think a decent geared shield tank shouldt die in 3 seconds against even a healer lol

Thats the reason why my brother and me stoped doing scs at 31. Because it isnt any fun and are absurd.

Why would an "elitist" argue for less competition?

Anyway it's not about the max level vs lower levels. Its healthier for the game to have endgame be more active. If you cant see why that is the case I am not going to waste words on you.

Ideally the tiers would be set up differently, but you need to look at things pragmatically. We are playing a game with a limited population.

[zgolec]

I spend a decent amount of time in lower tiers and am often frustrated by the lack of scenario population, but I dont agree with this.

having slower mid tier scenarios is better than having slower end game scenarios.

This proposal would also pit players in annihilator against players in obliterator.

And if you extended T1 you would pit players in obliterator against players in me ole shirt or whatever it is.

There is shitton 40 players playing scs, so dont think it will be deserted.
I pick my chances in Obliterator with bolster vs Annihilator anytime.
Now get on annihilator and vs me in vanq/inv ^^ gl

You are greatly understating the difference between annihilator and obliterator. The difference between decimator and obliterator is already big. Decimator usually has better bonuses than annihilator though, so I am not sure that would be a huge difference.

But having said all of that, you wouldnt be getting rid of a annihilator vs endgame gear matchup. I dont think everyone hits 40 and has a full set of conq ready to put on.

If there were more people I would support a 31-39 Tier. There isnt though. And I stand by my opinion that putting 39s with 16s is a bad idea. Same with 20s, but a marginally smaller extent.

You are greatly understate bolster.
My kotbs was tougher on 20 lvl then on 35 cause of simple difference that bolster to 48 lvl does. If you know how bolster work and how to stack stats you can get realy tanky/or make great dps. |

p.s. I recently lvled my chosen, was 25 lvl after x2 event. I had full conq in bank since 34 or 35.... its not hard these days.