The Problem with removing Exp Lock

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MitsuMarty

I think where your math falls short is the foundation of the low level WF's. Sure by tevik's post it said 7%. But that's a constant percentage. The other 93% will be rotating in and out of the brackets, so yesterday could be one person that wants to level via wfs, tomorrow could be people (within that level bracket) that just want to quest or dungeon past it. So sure yesterday it was 7% because of the available people for that level, but tomorrow it could be considered 50% (within that bracket of course).

And of course, tevik is right, as soon as IA hits for low levels. Pre-50 Wf's will be gone except for the occasional queue pop here and there. It's common sense, something this forums has a major lack in.

---

That's why the increase in bolstering (to R36?) come 1.9. It's the only way to keep new 50's playing PvP, they need the very false impression that not being 1 to 3 shot dead means they are doing enough damage to not end up dieing anyway because they can't get the needed gear via Favor fast enough anymore due to xp locking being removed. Twinks, per se in pre 50 brackets, are a completely separate issue from xp locking and could have been handled (if really needed) differently than by removing xp locking. And leveling by way of IA isn't going to reward with Favor needed for PvP gear at 50, only xp locking did that. It's not about twinking, it's about new players not quitting PvP once they do get force leveled to 50 and discover just how unprepared they really are and for how long they will remain that way.

@tevikolady
No, very few really read anymore. And as you noted, it's a done deal. I just can't hardly wait for the new force leveled 50's shortly after 1.9. The team matching really ought to work real fine for everyone then.

@the game killers
Congratulations to those who only play one Calling and it being R40 and only playing with custom groups when possible. Some of you have helped really make a mess of things with your arguments that have been listened to. I think that's exactly what your long term and well coordinated intend has been. That's fine, I think, because of it within the next year either PvP will be entirely eliminated in Rift or it will be forced into a complete and entire redesign. Good going, nice way to help ruin the PvP potentials of this game.

I predict lowbie warfronts will have faster queue times because players won't worry about twinks and IAs will keep their population high. WAR had PQs, which offered the same style of drop-in drop-out fun. Queue pops were always good when PQs were going on because people would get bored and queue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MannSeastone

I predict lowbie warfronts will have faster queue times because players won't worry about twinks and IAs will keep their population high. WAR had PQs, which offered the same style of drop-in drop-out fun. Queue pops were always good when PQs were going on because people would get bored and queue.

---

PQs aren't a great comparable to Instant Adventures. IAs are far more accessible, active, and reliable than PQs were, namely because PQs had fixed positions, could not be joined from anywhere, often required a much longer time requirement, and had a cooldown. The loot was a crapshoot, and that is a common trend. ;)

They also certainly weren't particularly XP-efficient (unless you were just using the first stage and its potentially-over-a-hundred mobs as a good solo/duo grinding spot), unlike the current end-game IAs (and, I'm assuming, new ones, which I haven't had a chance to check), nor was there the ability to drag people in from other locations (afforded by mentoring/teleport-to-IA systems in place). Perhaps most importantly, failure was a different ballgame -- failure in a Rift IA (the few that can arguably be failed) just costs you the reward for that one specific 'step', whereas failure in a WAR PQ meant you got nothing for your (arguably far more significant and time-consuming) efforts.

I'll give you the T1, C1-3 PQs as a good comparable, perhaps, but I'd say Rifts were far closer to PQs than IAs are, even if you feel that is splitting hairs. IAs are far more accessible, far more supportive of drop-in, drop-out play (which might reduce the potential PvP player loss), and likely far more efficient for people looking to progress.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MannSeastone

I predict lowbie warfronts will have faster queue times because players won't worry about twinks and IAs will keep their population high. WAR had PQs, which offered the same style of drop-in drop-out fun. Queue pops were always good when PQs were going on because people would get bored and queue.

---

Care to put a couple plat wager on that?

Sure, but we'd need someone to test it. Kyera, you interested?

About time and didn't a bunch of you pro exp lock people tell us to be quiet it would not be taken out and that was FINAL? LOL, like I said long ago, it is NOT FINAL, so now you twinks will not exist anymore. You should have supported seperate WFs if you really wanted "competition" from other twinks, now you won't even have that option.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Starsong

About time and didn't a bunch of you pro exp lock people tell us to be quiet it would not be taken out and that was FINAL? LOL, like I said long ago, it is NOT FINAL, so now you twinks will not exist anymore. You should have supported seperate WFs if you really wanted "competition" from other twinks, now you won't even have that option.

---

The only reason we gave against a 'seperate exp locked' warfront was queue impacts.

It's so nice to see you haven't lost your vitriol. At least somethings in life are consistent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Starsong

About time and didn't a bunch of you pro exp lock people tell us to be quiet it would not be taken out and that was FINAL? LOL, like I said long ago, it is NOT FINAL, so now you twinks will not exist anymore. You should have supported seperate WFs if you really wanted "competition" from other twinks, now you won't even have that option.

---

The reason people were saying that XP lock was here to stay, at least for the short term, was because that was the definite impression Trion gave us. Between Elrar popping into threads saying "We're keeping an eye on things" and "We'll make changes as they are needed" (and doing just that in several cases) and Hartsman's "It's not as big a problem as you say it is / we've designed things to minimize the impact of twinking" statement made it very obvious to us that Trion didn't consider XP locking a problem.

I'm still not convinced Trion thought XP locking in WF's is a problem. I honestly think that they're just replacing it with what they feel is a better system.

And, as Tevikolady said, we would have been all for separated queues, if they would pop more than once every 2 hours. We're already seeing increases in queue times and they haven't even shut XP locking off yet.


Oh, and LOL! at "twinks will not exist anymore".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Meina

-
I'm still not convinced Trion thought XP locking in WF's is a problem. I honestly think that they're just replacing it with what they feel is a better system.

---

Then why is mentoring unallowed in Warfronts?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zaros

Then why is mentoring unallowed in Warfronts?

---

*snorts* do I really need to point out the obvious?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Meina

The reason people were saying that XP lock was here to stay, at least for the short term, was because that was the definite impression Trion gave us. Between Elrar popping into threads saying "We're keeping an eye on things" and "We'll make changes as they are needed" (and doing just that in several cases) and Hartsman's "It's not as big a problem as you say it is / we've designed things to minimize the impact of twinking" statement made it very obvious to us that Trion didn't consider XP locking a problem.

I'm still not convinced Trion thought XP locking in WF's is a problem. I honestly think that they're just replacing it with what they feel is a better system.

And, as Tevikolady said, we would have been all for separated queues, if they would pop more than once every 2 hours. We're already seeing increases in queue times and they haven't even shut XP locking off yet.


Oh, and LOL! at "twinks will not exist anymore".

---

lol I make it my mission to prove this false. I will 'twink' in every level bracke.....muwahahahaha.

Perhaps I can get my 'I just wanna kill n00bs' award.

Seriously. Bad enough I kill level 19's, and 18's, the real challenge is killing those level 10's. Them things is squirrely.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tevikolady

*snorts* do I really need to point out the obvious?

---

I can't take my full relic 50 warrior in the 10-19 bracket? :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zaiana

I can't take my full relic 50 warrior in the 10-19 bracket? :(

---

If you could, twinks would still defend it.

Edit: "THE GEAR IS ATTAINABLE BY THEM TOO OMG"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zaros

If you could, twinks would still defend it.

Edit: "THE GEAR IS ATTAINABLE BY THEM TOO OMG"

---

Hahahaha.

Uhm, sure, if this helps you sleep better at night

The difference between a lvl 10 and a level 19 is not gear, but spec and the amount of points you can put into your spec. do you really think 10 intelligence will give a mage the upper hand when base stats allow AoE fire to kill anyone in a phew ticks? It's fun while it lasts but was not designed to allow you to lock your EXP to stay in low level brackets, trion clearly saw the problem in this and now it is being removed. I don't think there is much anyone can do about it people are just going to have to pvp where it matters and that's at lvl 50. Plus they are going to want people to play conquest not lock their exp at 19 to pwn noobs in warfronts.