Help the poor peasants

[Chris_P_Bacon]

Now, I may sound crazy, but I was thinking and I have an idea for making the game a little bit more new player friendly.

I think the lowest level in the game should be 15 or 20. Both when starting and when retiring (although making it only a first gen one time only thing could work as well), this could help ease along the grind. Starting a few levels ahead makes the game less frustrating for brand new players, who may feel completely overwhelmed by both our decently high skill level in cRPG and the very high level players who have been playing for years.

Starting at level 15 only takes 300k out of almost 8.7 million for 31, and starting at 20 takes out 600k. In the long run, this really isn't a lot of experience, but it's a really big character difference.

Also, and this is a long shot that I just thought of, but it would also be interesting if it was a degrading bonus, for instance, at gen 1 you start off at level 15, then every gen after that you start off one level lower, then from gen 15 on you'd retire to level 1.

I haven't thought this through much at all, so feel to bring any issues up. Discuss!

Edit: meant to put this in suggestions.

[Eugen]

This has been proposed in several other threads, regarding new players and THE GRIND.

As it does not take very long to go through level 1 to 20 it is not very much a problem either way.

If you keep the extreme low level, you just invest some hours more into the game with some funny and some frustrating moments.

If devs would decide to cut the extreme low level out of game not much would be lost also.

I see no big difference either way. Maybe I am slightly pro on your side to cut off the 1-20 low power grind. Still it goes by so fast, it nearly does not matter imho.

EDIT:
If I think about it a second time, maybe I would even miss the lucky level 5 peasant kill and the slapstick of no gear, no hitpoints and not strength...

[Werty]

Considering the up hill battle the peasants have as is, I can see this easing their pain, at least some what.  I don't know if it's a real fix, though.  People who are new and quit so soon after starting probably wouldn't stay around even if they had a 15 level starting bonus.

[BlindGuy]

No, its fine. Theres eu7 where they can lvl once or twice per wave, there eu2 where the constant dbbl xp will have them wielding death in notime.

What kills most newbs is learning timing and being outranged and that wont change without their practising, that's all it takes.

If it was just about gear.. LSC and Scythe, shortened spear, practise longsword are all useable with 3 strength and can kill a man with some effort.

Don't mollycoddle the peasants or they will grow up weak and unable to defend themselves properly.

[Eugen]

And if I think about it a thrid time - exteme low level is a good noob-troll protection - they just cant really hurt teammates so much 

[Chris_P_Bacon]

If you keep the extreme low level, you just invest some hours more into the game with some funny and some frustrating moments.
EDIT:
If I think about it a second time, maybe I would even miss the lucky level 5 peasant kill and the slapstick of no gear, no hitpoints and not strength...

I don't remember the early levels of my first gen being funny or enjoyable at all, granted it was years ago, but I just remember hiding behind tin cans hoping not to die because xp was based on proximity back then. I feel like for a brand new player after the first couple rounds a lot of them just give up fighting until they've made more money and hit level 20 or so. So they just give higher level players a K/D ratio buffer.
Also, the suggestion where it only applies to the first gen, and after each time you retire it brings you back to level 1 would be more up your alley.

Considering the up hill battle the peasants have as is, I can see this easing their pain, at least some what.  I don't know if it's a real fix, though.  People who are new and quit so soon after starting probably wouldn't stay around even if they had a 15 level starting bonus.

I can't disagree with this one, people who are gonna stay are most likely gonna stay, and those 15 levels do have a low chance to be the one thing that makes the difference between continuing or not.

No, its fine. Theres eu7 where they can lvl once or twice per wave, there eu2 where the constant dbbl xp will have them wielding death in notime.

What kills most newbs is learning timing and being outranged and that wont change without their practising, that's all it takes.

If it was just about gear.. LSC and Scythe, shortened spear, practise longsword are all useable with 3 strength and can kill a man with some effort.

Don't mollycoddle the peasants or they will grow up weak and unable to defend themselves properly.

We don't have an under 20 server in NA, so that doesn't really help out over here. And the peasants are gonna grow up the same way whether or not they start at 1 or 20. The difference is whether or not they choose to continue, which will be more likely if they don't start unable to hurt anybody in the slightest, even when they're lucky enough to get a hit in. Also it's a lot easier to be outranged when you have only 1 athletics and the person you are fighting has 6 or 7 or more. Footwork is pretty important in cRPG for most players, and it's impossible to use when you have no equipment and are the slowest player on the field.

[Eugen]

Mostly its only fun if one can lough about him/herself - true. And gold is the thing. Level 1 newbies need gold. Until selling first loompoint life is a bitch. I think this is what I thought. Its hard to get to gold until gen 31 and selling your first loom or after three gens selling some +3 loom. Its a tough time without gold for beginners.
I see mostly gold problem for newbies.

[Bryggan]

I thought being low level was kinda fun, especially since it was proximity based.  I would also hide behind a tin can and do everything I could just to stay alive.  What i hated most and made me quit a few times was when I hit level 30 and still couldn't kill anyone.

The part that I hate is the levels 20-30.  Everything slows down; takes forever to level and you still aren't that effective.  I'd say lower the exp needed to get through these levels.

[Werty]

I thought being low level was kinda fun, especially since it was proximity based.  I would also hide behind a tin can and do everything I could just to stay alive.  What i hated most and made me quit a few times was when I hit level 30 and still couldn't kill anyone.

The part that I hate is the levels 20-30.  Everything slows down; takes forever to level and you still aren't that effective.  I'd say lower the exp needed to get through these levels.

After a few gens of lvl 31+ being a peasant loses it's luster.

[San]

I think some people are underestimating the 5 hours of not doing anything. I know I would prefer a level 15 start point with quick levels to 20, or a level 20 start point.

I would prefer a curve that looks more like this. Levels 1-15 can also just be 0 and make level 16 require 10000 experience.

Something like the far right? You'll be a true peasant for 1 map, instead of 2-3 hours. 30->31 would also be less psychologically grueling.

Code: [Select]

Level     XP Requiree
1 0   0
2 3000 1000
3 18375 2000
4 34173 3000
5 50502 4000
6 67503 5000
7 85349 6000
8 104259 7000
9 124512 8000
10 146455 9000
11 170528 10000
12 197286 12000
13 227425 14000
14 261825 16000
15 301595 18000
16 348129 20000
17 403188 30000
18 468987 60000
19 548319 100000
20 644701 160000
21 762569 220000
22 907507 300000
23 1086553 400000
24 1308577 550000
25 1584752 750000
26 1929158 1000000
27 2359534 1300000
28 2898233 1700000
29 3573418 2500000
30 4420577 4000000
31 8735843 6000000
32 17784806   13000000
33 37332277   28000000
34 80873140   60000000
35 180977644   150000000
36 418780850   400000000
37 1003125954   1000000000

[LordLargos]

I kinda like the grueling grind being there because it makes being high level seem much more rewarding when you finally get to it.
If you were to change the xp to 31 it would also have various market complications.

[Admerius]

I think that this is the wrong way to go about it... I would prefer a smoother xp increase to level.

This is my personal preference, but I believe it would make the grind less frustrating if you're gradually being eased in to higher xp requirements... this can easily be tweaked for lvl 31 as max... on second thought I'll add that right away


The table below is based on:
Each level is multiplies by a 9886 to get final xp needed

The number 9886 is not arbitrary it is 4,3 million divided by the sum of all whole numbers 1-29 then rounded down and after that +1.
This way it will take 9886 more xp to reach the next level compared to current level, this sums up to 4 300 016 total.

Lvl 1-30 tweaked xp

Code: [Select]

From lvl To lvl "weight" Added xp Total xp reuirements
1 2 1 9886
2 3 2 19771 29657
3 4 3 29656 59313
4 5 4 39541 98854
5 6 5 49426 148280
6 7 6 59311 207591
7 8 7 69196 276787
8 9 8 79081 355868
9 10 9 88966 444834
10 11 10 98851 543685
11 12 11 108736 652421
12 13 12 118621 771042
13 14 13 128506 899548
14 15 14 138391 1037939
15 16 15 148276 1186215
16 17 16 158161 1344376
17 18 17 168046 1512422
18 19 18 177932 1690354
19 20 19 187817 1878171
20 21 20 197702 2075873
21 22 21 207587 2283460
22 23 22 217472 2500932
23 24 23 227357 2728289
24 25 24 237242 2965531
25 26 25 247127 3212658
26 27 26 257012 3469670
27 28 27 266897 3736567
28 29 28 276782 4013349
29 30 29 286667 4300016

Lvl 1-31 tweaked xp. Base xp becomes 18787 when lvl 31 is added, otherwise it is the same fomrula as above.

Code: [Select]

From lvl To lvl "weight" Added xp Total xp reuirements
1 2 1 18787
2 3 2 37574 56361
3 4 3 56361 112722
4 5 4 75148 187870
5 6 5 93934 281804
6 7 6 112721 394525
7 8 7 131508 526033
8 9 8 150295 676328
9 10 9 169081 845409
10 11 10 187868 1033277
11 12 11 206655 1239932
12 13 12 225442 1465374
13 14 13 244228 1709602
14 15 14 263015 1972617
15 16 15 281802 2254419
16 17 16 300589 2555008
17 18 17 319375 2874383
18 19 18 338162 3212545
19 20 19 356949 3569494
20 21 20 375736 3945230
21 22 21 394522 4339752
22 23 22 413309 4753061
23 24 23 432096 5185157
24 25 24 450883 5636040
25 26 25 469669 6105709
26 27 26 488456 6594165
27 28 27 507243 7101408
28 29 28 526030 7627438
29 30 29 544817 8172255
30 31 30 563603 8735858(Current is=8,735,843)

(click to show/hide)

Current lvl*Top level xp requirements/sum of lvls from 1 to (Top level - 1)

"Top level" that has been used here is 30 or 31.

Sum of all lvls means adding up all lvls until top lvl - 1, for example: Using top level 30 is(1+2+3...+27+28+29)=435

My firm, almost religious conviction is that lvl 32+ should have the same xp as now(double that of previous lvl, right?)

[Admerius]

The point of the game is to have fun,
That means enjoying your progression from farmer to Veteran Elite Mercenary/Professional soldier,

We have "Skip the fun" option,
You just have to enjoy(endure?) the grind to be able to go lvl 31+ and/or retire.

As seen in my earlier post I dislike the sudden xp increase in xp required to level after lvl 25, it should be smooth to lvl 30, maybe even to lvl 31! Make the grind consistent!

I speak from experience believe me, Main=gen 17 and 21(Twenty one) gen 2 alts, and 5 gen 1 alts all at lvl 20+

[Aprikose]

Why dont u stop making those threads?

[Eugen]

I personally did not say it was easy to be peasant. But I enjoy it from time to time and I would miss it, if there was not the period of peasantry after retirement. I know that as peasant one dies a lot. I personally dont care - I play siege at low level stage and also battle from level 15 upwards.

I think that we should have a kind of sneakpreview mode for newbies to get into game with premade and fully equipped toons, just that they can see how it could look later on. But thats a decision our devs have to make, if they want to spend theire time on some easy-entry mode for new starters.

And yes the xp boost makes it faster - still compared to the 30 to 31 grind its relative "fast" even for generation zero folks.

XP-Boost is one nice thing that makes it worth to retire. And people should have reasons to retire. I think c-rpg is meant to have a battlefield with a variety of different levels around - else we could go play vanilla, with everyone on equal base. The G in c-rpg stands for grind or not?

I totally would not like some level-protection matchmaking or levelcapping like in your standard mmorpg. I am here becouse I like the c-rpg style grind and I think wow-like grind is boring.

@Uruk: lets close the forum. It consumes to much time, and distracts from fighting battles... right, right.