EQ2 Forum Archive @ EQ2Wire

 

Go Back   EQ2 Forum Archive @ EQ2Wire > EverQuest II > General EverQuest II Discussion > Battlegrounds
Members List Search Mark Forums Read

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 07-25-2012, 12:35 AM   #1
Winter12345

Loremaster
Winter12345's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Nagafan Qeynos only
Posts: 486
Default

Coming from a t9 player, I think there needs to be more done to balance out the playing field in the agnostic BG tier. As of right now, the 80s who are in raid gear are completely superior to anyone below t9, let alone t9 players. It's also having a serious toll on the amount of lower tier players participating in BGs. When I played my first match in the morning, there were plenty of 30s, 7-8 per raid. However, I only see 1 or 2 per match now.

Hopefully this will get worked on asap, if anything, maybe the hard-hitting profession spells some classes get at higher levels (plaguebringer, rays of dis, elemental blast, etc), should have their recast/cast/recovery timers severely decreased or maybe have them consume a LOT of power.

Winter12345 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2012, 12:41 AM   #2
Makembleed
Server: Nagafen
Guild: D O O M
Rank: Member

Loremaster
Makembleed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 18
Default

[email protected] wrote:

Coming from a t9 player, I think there needs to be more done to balance out the playing field in the agnostic BG tier. As of right now, the 80s who are in raid gear are completely superior to anyone below t9, let alone t9 players. It's also having a serious toll on the amount of lower tier players participating in BGs. When I played my first match in the morning, there were plenty of 30s, 7-8 per raid. However, I only see 1 or 2 per match now.

Hopefully this will get worked on asap, if anything, maybe the hard-hitting profession spells some classes get at higher levels (plaguebringer, rays of dis, elemental blast, etc), should have their recast/cast/recovery timers severely decreased or maybe have them consume a LOT of power.

I have no doubt that the response we'll get is that the new BGs are working as intended.  Sony, for some reason, has beeen hostile to T4 for quite some time.  time to make a decision....

Makembleed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2012, 02:55 AM   #3
Applo

Loremaster
Applo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 69
Default

Yeah, T4 warlock here.  I have over 5k health or 750ability mod, depending on gear set.  I can count on my hand the number of times I've lost a 1 v 1.  I did three matches today before I quit.  The last match I had my AA spec on full defense, so they were still busting through maxed out magi's shielding ward, ward of sages, pvp ward, max toughness in 1 or 2 shots by every single person I encountered.

I don't think the answer is increasing power cost for spells or recast timers, you are still dead instantly either way.  Even if I had access to shadows tree, I would stand no chance and probably still not get my first or second spell off before ONE level 80+ killed me. 

They definitely need to tweak the formulas for outgoing dmg on higher levels.  But arbitrarily penalizing higher levels and/or boosting lower levels seems a bit unfair and counterintuitive to the idea of character progression. It doesn't help that a large number of people were obviously locked 80-89 in full raid gear to take advantage of this update.  Should they be punished?  I don't think that's right either.

Maybe they need to separate the bgs to a third queue.  There are 3 warfields, maybe there should be 3bg queues.  I just don't think they can balance this out otherwise - the extra skills, aas and access to vastly superior gear is just too much of a difference in a 59 level span.

Applo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2012, 03:06 AM   #4
Daisey
Server: Oasis
Guild: Compulsive Harvesters
Rank: Chief Collector (Leader)

Loremaster
Daisey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 95
Default

What bothers me is how the pets can come onto my teams base.  In every game (mostly tag) I've ever played "base" meant a safe spot.  Those darn pets make it really hard to find a hidey hole to shoot arrows and such.  They find you no matter where you are.

Daisey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2012, 03:24 AM   #5
Rahatmattata

Loremaster
Rahatmattata's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 3,232
Default

I don't really think it's supposed to be balanced so that a level 30 stands a chance against a level 89. The goal was to narrow the gap enough so that all lower level players could play together without it being completely ridiculous and pointless. So maybe 2-3 level 30s in full pvp gear can take out a level 89 warden or inquisitor or whatever. I'd call that fair.

__________________


A Cure For Cancer
Rahatmattata is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2012, 03:34 AM   #6
Applo

Loremaster
Applo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 69
Default

[email protected] wrote:

I don't really think it's supposed to be balanced so that a level 30 stands a chance against a level 89. The goal was to narrow the gap enough so that all lower level players could play together without it being completely ridiculous and pointless. So maybe 2-3 level 30s in full pvp gear can take out a level 89 warden or inquisitor or whatever. I'd call that fair.

It's called 'level agnostic' for a reason.  Neither the patch notes nor the reality on the ground live up to that expectation.  The imbalance is so bad at this point I'd rather be logging into as an avatar where gear and level means nothing than this.

If it isn't fixed, I'm finally done.

Applo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2012, 07:25 PM   #7
Rahatmattata

Loremaster
Rahatmattata's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 3,232
Default

Applo wrote:

It's called 'level agnostic' for a reason.

Call it whatever, but "Damage, healing, and survivability in the 30-89 bracket are equalized.  Having additional AAs or better gear will still give minor advantages."

All you can do is argue the definition of "minor."

__________________


A Cure For Cancer
Rahatmattata is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2012, 08:10 PM   #8
Omougi

Developer
Omougi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 137
Default

There was a bug that was giving 80-89 players more power than intended.  This has been adjusted in the patch earlier today.  Let us know if it's working a bit better now. SMILEY

__________________
Omougi | Associate Mechanics Designer | Everquest II
Omougi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2012, 12:57 AM   #9
Makembleed
Server: Nagafen
Guild: D O O M
Rank: Member

Loremaster
Makembleed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 18
Default

Omougi wrote:

There was a bug that was giving 80-89 players more power than intended.  This has been adjusted in the patch earlier today.  Let us know if it's working a bit better now.

Ok, I appreciate the effort; i really do...  but seriously?  Does Sony really contend there's balance in this new "level agnostic" tier?  Well geared 80s are consistenly doing 5-10x the damage of well gearded T4.  Sigh.... 

Makembleed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2012, 11:18 PM   #10
Splatterpunk28

Loremaster
Splatterpunk28's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 447
Default

Omougi wrote:

There was a bug that was giving 80-89 players more power than intended.  This has been adjusted in the patch earlier today.  Let us know if it's working a bit better now.

I accepted a queue for a bg today on my server with 4.8khp/4.5kpower (39mage btw).  I zoned into Smuggler's and I then had 23khp/4.5kpower max pools.  My power pool did not change.  The closest mage next to me, level 80, had 22khps/18.5kpower.  So...why did he have 14k more power than me?

My health was quintupled, my power pool made NO change whatsoever.

Did you push the hotfix to the live server?  Because that's in your face messed up, still.  Or are you meaning just overpowered in general?  Because they are that still as well.

Splatterpunk28 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2012, 10:27 AM   #11
convict

Loremaster
convict's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 375
Default

So, let me see if I understand this correctly, you lock at 39 and expect to be on even ground with an 89? It takes a bit more time and effort to get the aa and levels than it does to get to 30, so expect to not be 1 shotting 89's. I knew what was coming that's why I unlocked, but then I didnt expect to be handed everything and on even ground with someone who spent more time on their toon.

__________________
convict is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2012, 02:06 PM   #12
Oobo
Server: Nagafen
Guild: Extinction Agenda
Rank: Hand of the Executioner

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 217
Default

Ya the BG DMG needs to be tweaked even more, i have been running BGs for 3 days now and it seems as a lvl 80 the DMG to and from people in my Tier seems to be petty close.. But the DMG coming from the lvl 30-40s is insane, including my lvl 39 BL, im eating through high lvl people and hardly taking any DMG from the high lvls..

Oobo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2012, 03:18 PM   #13
Hammieee
Server: Everfrost

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 158
Default

I had a 39 beastlord two shot my level 80 fury with all of my HoT's and hibernation up.

Hammieee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2012, 08:39 PM   #14
Piccolo
Server: Everfrost
Guild: Campaign of Light
Rank: Senior Member

Loremaster
Piccolo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 287
Default

I had my level 39 warden in the BG's today. 22k hp and 4k power. raid buffed obviously. My heals, Crit at 1200 per tick for my main group HoT. It ticks 5 times. My main single target HoT hits for 650ish and ticks 6 times. Needless to

say, my heals don't do jack squat. I have all my heals as buffed as i can get them with AA's. I'm only level 39 = 100 AA's is all i can use. I think heals need a bit more, for the level 30-40's. healers in the 80's seem to have no problem at all.. It's bad enough i don't have all the good spells like Group Cure and what not. I have to rely on my AA cure and my single target cure, both have way to long of a reuse timer imo..

Piccolo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2012, 05:00 AM   #15
Winter12345

Loremaster
Winter12345's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Nagafan Qeynos only
Posts: 486
Default

convict wrote:

So, let me see if I understand this correctly, you lock at 39 and expect to be on even ground with an 89? It takes a bit more time and effort to get the aa and levels than it does to get to 30, so expect to not be 1 shotting 89's. I knew what was coming that's why I unlocked, but then I didnt expect to be handed everything and on even ground with someone who spent more time on their toon.

No one is advocating for 39s to be able to one shot 80s. However, no one wants 80s to be able to one shot 39s. You may say it's unfair for those who are higher to be scaled down to the same ability as a 39, but is it the level 39's fault that he now has to play in a BG with people 40 to 50 levels higher than him? In my opinion, if you're forcing people who are in lower tiers to fight with those who have MORE spells and upgrades, they need to have an incentive to BG rather than level up.

I'm saying make it where the 80s spells are either scaled down DRASTICALLY or have their casting/recast/etc increased. As of right now, 80 geared warlocks are almost unstoppable in BGs. Put 2 or 3 raid geared ones in the same group (stupid matchmaking system) and you need 3 or 4 geared 80 healers just to barely survive.

That's a problem you have to admit to.

Winter12345 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2012, 07:50 PM   #16
Maevianiu

Developer
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 86
Default

[email protected] wrote:

I don't really think it's supposed to be balanced so that a level 30 stands a chance against a level 89. The goal was to narrow the gap enough so that all lower level players could play together without it being completely ridiculous and pointless. So maybe 2-3 level 30s in full pvp gear can take out a level 89 warden or inquisitor or whatever. I'd call that fair.

Yes. The idea wasn't to make level locking at 39 to be the ideal way to be "powerful" in battlegrounds. It was just put in place to give lower level and lesser geared players a fighting change. However, with today's update level 39s should get a slightly better deal and bolster up better. While they will not likely be able to go toe to toe with an equally skilled high geared level 80+, they should be able to put up a better fight now.

The battlegrounds should be a reasonable good way to level up and earn AA and get some gear along the way.

And we have not forgotten the T4 crew. We are still working on more improvements!

__________________
Maevianiu

Coder EQ2
Maevianiu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-01-2012, 01:43 AM   #17
Proud_Silence

Loremaster
Proud_Silence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 342
Default

Sorceror and summoner dmg is so ridiculously out of hand, it's worse then the 92 BG's. Apocalpyse ticking for 10-15% of total HP on lvl 80 raid geared tank, direct target nukes dealing a solid 30-50% of HP. There is absolutely no way anyone below lvl 80 has the slightest chance of even getting close to a mage lvl 80-89 in a face to face situation.

I mean i got a lvl 80 SK myself and feel sorry for pretty much anyone lvl 30-79 already, but if you face a 80-89 sorceror or summoner that's not wearing lvl 62 quest gear, you're in for a world of hurt, and its not like they shatter like glass when you actually managed to get into mellee range with 20% hp left...

There's no joy in the 30-89 BG's for me at all, if you think it's bad at 92, i dare anyone to check out the lowbie BG's and witness how releasing broken pvp mechanics/resist/whatever this is...to live can destroy the entire BG/pvp fun

Proud_Silence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2012, 11:48 PM   #18
Makembleed
Server: Nagafen
Guild: D O O M
Rank: Member

Loremaster
Makembleed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 18
Default

Maevianiu wrote:

[email protected] wrote:

I don't really think it's supposed to be balanced so that a level 30 stands a chance against a level 89. The goal was to narrow the gap enough so that all lower level players could play together without it being completely ridiculous and pointless. So maybe 2-3 level 30s in full pvp gear can take out a level 89 warden or inquisitor or whatever. I'd call that fair.

Yes. The idea wasn't to make level locking at 39 to be the ideal way to be "powerful" in battlegrounds. It was just put in place to give lower level and lesser geared players a fighting change. However, with today's update level 39s should get a slightly better deal and bolster up better. While they will not likely be able to go toe to toe with an equally skilled high geared level 80+, they should be able to put up a better fight now.

The battlegrounds should be a reasonable good way to level up and earn AA and get some gear along the way.

And we have not forgotten the T4 crew. We are still working on more improvements!

Ok, so, although no T4 would voluntarily tangle with a T9 we're being forced to do so and we're told we can't expect to go toe-to-toe with them.  We're forcing you to fight them, they'll kick your butt, and that's the way it's designed to work.  Sigh.... 

Makembleed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2012, 12:05 PM   #19
Twyxx

Guardian
Twyxx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: CA
Posts: 244
Default

Maevianiu wrote:

[email protected] wrote:

I don't really think it's supposed to be balanced so that a level 30 stands a chance against a level 89. The goal was to narrow the gap enough so that all lower level players could play together without it being completely ridiculous and pointless. So maybe 2-3 level 30s in full pvp gear can take out a level 89 warden or inquisitor or whatever. I'd call that fair.

And we have not forgotten the T4 crew. We are still working on more improvements!

Just put the t4 bg tier back.  Pretty simple.  It was the most popular tier and provided something very different than the cap tier.  There is a reason it was popular and the community was good. 

While a lot of the changes brought over from SWTOR were fine this one was not well thought out, especially since you allow locking at 89.

The reason it works in SWTOR is because you have a ton of people still leveling toons and you aren't allowed to lock at 49...eventually the bg xp will take you to 50.  And even then it barely works.  EQ2 is so old and had so many easy buttons put in that most people just power-level now and don't bother actually playing their toons til cap.  Leveling is so easy that re-gearing at each tier isn't worth it.  Easier to just get a friend to power-level you.  So, end result really is you have two tiers...89 and 92. 

Why not just give 30-39 back?  It was fine, you just needed to fix the matching system, add new gear and fix tundra.

__________________
Twyxx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2012, 11:48 PM   #20
apwyork

Loremaster
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 186
Default

[email protected] wrote:

I don't really think it's supposed to be balanced so that a level 30 stands a chance against a level 89. The goal was to narrow the gap enough so that all lower level players could play together without it being completely ridiculous and pointless. So maybe 2-3 level 30s in full pvp gear can take out a level 89 warden or inquisitor or whatever. I'd call that fair.

Why not just call it the "Where 89's come to farm tokens" battleground?  That's pretty much what you describe which makes this battleground ridiculous and pointless.  Just toss the 89's in with the 92's and let us farm tokens off of them since they have the same prayer of winning against my 92's than a 30 has against an 89.

For that matter just do away with the division at all. No reason why my 92's shouldn't be able to farm tokens off the lower levels too.

apwyork is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:16 PM.

vBulletin skin by: CompleteGFX.com
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
All threads and posts originally from the EQ2 and Station forums operated by Sony Online Entertainment. Their use is by express written permission.