Massively Multi-Player games and the RPG crowd

Applebrown · Post by **Applebrown** » Thu Mar 01, 2001 10:20 pm

After talking games with AB the last few days, I'm getting the feeling his decidely non-powergamer. I being a powergamer, have to disagree with him.

I don't think hell levels are a good thing and they actually affect the casual gamer a lot more than a powergamer.

Oh, I apologize, I didn't mean to imply that I thought hell levels in general were in any way good. Especially in EQ, those hell levels every 5 levels beginning with 30 through 45 were terrible. What I actually meant was that I think it's a great design they have to keep people playing for months and still not be able to reach the highest plateau and I think they did a great job at designing something that was both quick to implement and a bonus to players with what they did in Ruins of Kunark.

They raised the level cap to 60 for the gamers. If they raised it any higher the Ruins of Kunark wouldn't have come out for much longer as it would have taken a long time to balance and create everything. And due to the higher cap, they wanted to prolong the gaming experience to reach the new one... it all makes sense and I totally agree with what they did. Yes, each level was a "hell level" after 50... but that's only relative to what you were used to. At level 50 you were already 83% at maximum power.

They gave new abilities and spells every level after 50 and raised the cap more for the expansion pack. And yes, they wanted to extend the time it took to get to 60. I see nothing at all wrong with that. When the casual gamer reaches 50 they really are not much of a casual gamer you know. Perhaps not a powerleveler but not a casual gamer either. Just a consistent and probably smarter gamer.

And you are partly correct Equis, but partly incorrect. I'm a total powergamer sometimes. But often I'm not... I don't believe that anyone has to be one or the other exclusively. There were times when I went through levels as fast as the best of them... such as level 24 through 29 in Highkeep as a wizard. Before that I was into exploring lots and hanging out, and it was like that afterwards as well for a long while, and again in the mid 40's. It just goes in spurts and I think it's that way with a lot of people.

In summary, I think they did an excellent job with leveling from 50 to 60, but I think they should never have put "Hell levels" in from 30 through 50... and I am both a powergamer and not... depends on my friends, my time, my mood, my goals and a lot of factors.

I am though, a power-trader-! I LOVE to trade... buy things for cheap, sell them for more, pay attention to the player market, know what everything is worth and take advantage of it. I do love that and spend hours doing it. Had the SMR at level 40 back when you only saw level 47+'s with it and Ruins wasn't out, and I didn't even camp it.... thank goodness, because I spent hours with others who were down there and it was letdown after letdown more often than not.

By the way, the exp loss from 50 to 60 should have been less to compensate for the time to level... but the time to gain exp was perfect. And I agree with pretty much everything else they did during those levels... save specific arguments about certain abilities, spells, etc.

------------------
Applebrown @
www.GameBanshee.com
Make YOUR Gaming Scream!

Maurice · Post by **Maurice** » Fri Mar 02, 2001 3:39 am

Mmm ... I think indeed the death penalty is too much. As it is, I am a casual gamer - in as much that I can only play during the evenings, about 3 hours or so, and not 24/7 like some people seem to be able to. I do play longer during the weekends, of course

In that light, however, I really hate it when I die once or twice, and see a week's worth of experience go down the drain. Especially when I die in a post-hell level.

Sure, Cleric get resurrection spells that restore lost experience, but there's not nearly always a Cleric around to provide one ... and I get the first one only at lvl 39, which is still 8 levels away (including one Hell level). By the way, as a side note, did you guys notice that Hell levels are ALL preceded by Spell levels (I mean levels in which new spells were gained)??

Also, I would like to get my Cleric Epic weapon ... it's one of the ultimate goals in the game, right? To get your Epic? However, that DOES mean fighting MOBs of lvl 55+, if not 60+. I've read into my Cleric Epic, and it appears to be relatively easy, in that I don't have to spend bucketloads of time to camp a certain spawn. Only one, maybe.

I will yet have to see this high-level play, though. My only encounter with an Epic Boss Mob was in Kunark so far, and that was for the Monk Epic ... he came trashing our party while we were camping the Sarnak Fortress, and the guys going for him had lost him out of sight ... they were at least kind enough to provide free, 96% resurrections.

As it is, ever since Scars of Velious came out, the late game has been heavily driven to melee classes. Most Velious Mobs have 50k+ HPs, and 80%-100% MR. Casters have become virtually useless, only as backup of the melee classes. I believe Verant has finally seen this point, and have begun to do something about this.

Equis · Post by **Equis** » Fri Mar 02, 2001 2:20 pm

Epic weapons were not in when I quit, other than the Fiery Avenger, which we managed to obtain 3 in one day.

As for getting the Epic, I would be rather surprised if anyone sub lvl 45 could do it. I don't know for a fact, it just seems that they targeted the level 50s+ for the Epics.

Uber mobs have always been about fat (Ogre and Troll tanks). You need those hit points to absorb the damage dealt, and conserve cleric mana. (Full heal is better used on a tank with 3000hps than one with 2000) I have heard that Scars swung even more melee. What I take from this is that they didn't want to spend a lot of time balancing spells, which are a lot harder to tune than melee damage.

------------------
Equis - Editor
Gamebanshee
www.gamebanshee.com
Make your Gaming Scream!

fable · Post by **fable** » Sat Mar 17, 2001 10:08 am

I played Gemstone 3 for about 7 years, and Dm'd in DragonRealms for 4. Great games, both. I admit to a bias in favor of text-based games, because the reader's mind can conjure up better visual effects than anything that can be created in a graphics-based MRPG.

Equis · Post by **Equis** » Sat Mar 17, 2001 12:55 pm

Text based games - It seems these games also foster a better roleplaying atomosphere. If I were to label myself, I would be a powergamer/roleplayer with emphasis on powergaming.

I played Gemstone III a bit and found it much easier to roleplay than UO or EQ. I think it is because with only the test discriptions, you have to roleplay to bring it alive.

Equis

fable · Post by **fable** » Thu Mar 22, 2001 12:51 pm

The complexity of DragonRealms was exciting. It had learning systems between players, forging, tons of spells, armor devices and weapons, poison creation and use on weapons, houses players could buy, sea travel, leather tanning, and five continents. As opposed to UO, where many activities more or less led up dead ends, all the wealth of detail in DragonRealms was involved in developing greater mastery within a given profession or series of skills. Damn fine game.