Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Hell Levels

Dezark35Dezark35 LondonMember Posts: 2

Wondered what the consensus on hell levels are? Seems that these have been identified as one of the aspects of EQ that were rightfully 'retired' in future games as they were not player friendly and they made people ragequit. Within the following paragraphs I hope to explain why I thought they were a good idea.

Firstly, each game has a set amount of time to achieve maximum level. In my experience every game since EQ has had a levelling curve that was simply too quick or easy (for example, I hit 80th level in GW2 6 days after release). Hell levels added a road bump in the levelling process and provided a window were the levelling speeds slowed and brought the community together as slower levellers caught up with the quick levellers. I know on VZ, possibly due to the team ruleset, when I hit max level I went to certain camps and buffed people to help them along.

Hell levels were a pain in the arse but they were there for all and they forced people to explore the world or exchange information in order to hit 'sweet spots' to minimise the impact of such levels. Camps within the game became known for each hell level and, on Vallon Zek (my server), intense pvp would happen over these spots. I presume on the PVE servers there were lengthy queues for these camp spots. I know that I sat at zone in Lower Guk waiting for spots to open and chatted to people and built groups at the zone in to xp whilst we waited. In no game since have I felt the need to group whilst I level to max and my involvement with the community has been limited to my RL friends in game and to a certain extent my guild (if I could be bothered to join one).

I know I am likely to be flamed (as I was in SWTOR forums previously) but I really feel that whilst I  hated them in game (at the time) they were actually a positive thing for building the community and encouraging group play due to the better xp gain per hour provided by group play.

 

So, what do others think?

«1

Comments

  • DMKanoDMKano Gamercentral, AKMember Posts: 13,470 Legendary

    No.

    Again we are talking about old concepts that belong in old games, if EQN is so radically different it will have none of this.

    I hope that even the basic concept of leveling is so different in EQN that this simply does not even apply.

  • IadienIadien Charleston, WVMember Posts: 638 Common
    Considering hell levels were a bug and not a design choice. I would say we will most likely never see them again.
  • RamanadjinnRamanadjinn Huntsville, ALMember Posts: 1,365 Uncommon
    personally hoping EQNext maybe doesn't have traditional level based character progression.
  • WaterlilyWaterlily parisMember Posts: 3,105 Uncommon
    Wouldn't mind hell levels at all. They were some of the best times I had in EQ. Around lvl 50 is when I made most of my best friends in EQ, and lvl 50 was when the hell levels started.
  • SavageHorizonSavageHorizon ParisMember Posts: 2,716 Rare
    Originally posted by DMKano
    No. Again we are talking about old concepts that belong in old games, if EQN is so radically different it will have none of this. I hope that even the basic concept of leveling is so different in EQN that this simply does not even apply.

    Doesn't matter really because Smed has hinted at harsher rule servers more akin to EQ, don't like them then people don't have to play on those types of servers.




  • DMKanoDMKano Gamercentral, AKMember Posts: 13,470 Legendary
    Originally posted by Waterlily
    Wouldn't mind hell levels at all. They were some of the best times I had in EQ. Around lvl 50 is when I made most of my best friends in EQ, and lvl 50 was when the hell levels started.

    Not that it matters anymore hell levels are now gone, but they started before 50, it was 5 level increments starting at lvl 30.

    Hell levels were 30, 35,40,45,50

    Look at the XP below in EQ1 Classic:

    "33 - 39,531
    34 - 43,234
    35 - 51,450
    36 - 55,987

    So, in terms of what has to be earned from one level to the next:

    34 - 3,703
    35 - 8,216
    36 - 4,537"

  • TribeofOneTribeofOne Wellford, SCMember Posts: 1,006 Uncommon
    leveling should take MONTHS even for the most hard core.. if we must have levels at all
  • rusrecrusrec Fort Belvoir, VAMember Posts: 52
    Originally posted by Ramanadjinn
    personally hoping EQNext maybe doesn't have traditional level based character progression.

    This...I think Id prefer to have no levels just open world and fear and consequences

  • BadSpockBadSpock Somewhere, MIMember Posts: 7,974
    Originally posted by Ramanadjinn
    personally hoping EQNext maybe doesn't have traditional level based character progression.

    Even UO had "traditional level based character progression" - they just called them "skills."

    EQNext will only be truly innovative and unique if they remove linear statistical progression... which they won't.

    So you'll have some form of "levels" be they skills or actual levels or box's and skill points or xp etc. etc.

     

  • RictisRictis UnknownMember Posts: 1,298 Uncommon

    I never want to see these brought back in any game. Hell levels drove me nuts, you do not need hell levels to feel like you have reached a goal. Going from 1 - 100 is quite enough for me, now I wouldn't mind seeing hell levels when it comes to AA's as a form of end game as long as they make it worth while.

  • Zen_BladeZen_Blade Folsom, CAMember Posts: 106 Uncommon
    Originally posted by Iadien
    Considering hell levels were a bug and not a design choice. I would say we will most likely never see them again.

    This...

  • NanfoodleNanfoodle Member Posts: 6,686 Epic
    I never liked hell levels. I agree I dont want a fast leveling process but I think a curing progression EQ changed to is much better. They dropped hell levels and I see no reason they should make a return. 

    =-D Only on a forum can optimism be called bad and pessimism the good thing =-D Welcome to the internet and forums. 


  • CoreChamberCoreChamber Pikeville, KYMember Posts: 139 Uncommon

      Why do people not want to level?  I want the old EQ treadmill because it gives me time to enjoy and explore all of the content.  It lets me use my gear for more then an hour before I become under geared. Why do you want to be the best at the very start, why must every ones damage be balanced?

     

      I again want to play an EQ where there are roles that must be filled, and groups to find.  I want those camps that last why into the night resulting in a level, skills sometimes gear but more importantly the forging of friendships.  I had a huge friends list in EQ, people I talked to every day, some I still do, but that has not happened it a single other game and I believe its because we do not depend on each other. Games move way to fast.

  • kjempffkjempff AarhusMember Posts: 1,102 Uncommon
    Originally posted by Iadien
    Considering hell levels were a bug and not a design choice. I would say we will most likely never see them again.

    Yup. Kind of funny how bugs and other kind of flaws and unexpected uses turned out to be great features. I am sure if devs have had better control, EQ would never have shined so much haha. That could be a good lesson for todays devs, not that they should make strange mechanics, but to acknowledge that overly designed and controlled games easily become dull.

    Anyways, all these things people take from EQ and want/hope will be in EqNext.. I think You should stop trying to fool Yourself, EqNext will not have any of those EQ features, EqNext will not be anywhere close to EQ, its a completely new game. All You can hope for is that some of the spirit remains and shows in the new systems EqNext will present, but specific features no. There will be instant travel, there will not be harsh death penalties, it will not be group centric, there will be instances and/or phasing, and so on.

  • Storm_CloudStorm_Cloud MalmoMember Posts: 388 Uncommon

    Yes please, do bring hell levels back. It's going to be tough obstacles to climb, but once over it, I want the yay feeling knowing that things will get slightly easier again.

    If only on "EQ1 Hardcore" servers, then fine. That's where I intend to play anyway. :)

     

  • IadienIadien Charleston, WVMember Posts: 638 Common
    Originally posted by kjempff
    Originally posted by Iadien
    Considering hell levels were a bug and not a design choice. I would say we will most likely never see them again.

    Yup. Kind of funny how bugs and other kind of flaws and unexpected uses turned out to be great features. I am sure if devs have had better control, EQ would never have shined so much haha. That could be a good lesson for todays devs, not that they should make strange mechanics, but to acknowledge that overly designed and controlled games easily become dull.

    Anyways, all these things people take from EQ and want/hope will be in EqNext.. I think You should stop trying to fool Yourself, EqNext will not have any of those EQ features, EqNext will not be anywhere close to EQ, its a completely new game. All You can hope for is that some of the spirit remains and shows in the new systems EqNext will present, but specific features no. There will be instant travel, there will not be harsh death penalties, it will not be group centric, there will be instances and/or phasing, and so on.

    Yeah. A lot of game mechanics were bugs or unintentional (ie FD pulling) by the designers.

  • CoreChamberCoreChamber Pikeville, KYMember Posts: 139 Uncommon
    Originally posted by kjempff
    Originally posted by Iadien
    Considering hell levels were a bug and not a design choice. I would say we will most likely never see them again.

    Yup. Kind of funny how bugs and other kind of flaws and unexpected uses turned out to be great features. I am sure if devs have had better control, EQ would never have shined so much haha. That could be a good lesson for todays devs, not that they should make strange mechanics, but to acknowledge that overly designed and controlled games easily become dull.

    Anyways, all these things people take from EQ and want/hope will be in EqNext.. I think You should stop trying to fool Yourself, EqNext will not have any of those EQ features, EqNext will not be anywhere close to EQ, its a completely new game. All You can hope for is that some of the spirit remains and shows in the new systems EqNext will present, but specific features no. There will be instant travel, there will not be harsh death penalties, it will not be group centric, there will be instances and/or phasing, and so on.

      Ive told my this a million time, and will till I see details Aug 2nd.  But from the tweets to the stories they have posted on the eq next webpage why would it not be.  Why post videos on the everquest next site that talks about corpse runs and camping for 2 days to get something if you have no intentions of making it  a part of you game. 

  • kjempffkjempff AarhusMember Posts: 1,102 Uncommon
    Originally posted by CoreChamber
    Originally posted by kjempff.....

      Ive told my this a million time, and will till I see details Aug 2nd.  But from the tweets to the stories they have posted on the eq next webpage why would it not be.  Why post videos on the everquest next site that talks about corpse runs and camping for 2 days to get something if you have no intentions of making it  a part of you game. 

    Hmm well if that is the case I guess You could be right. The few things I have read didn't indicate that they will re-implement any of those old EQ features, only that they "recognize and remember them", but I will gladly stand corrected, no I would be ecstatic if it was so.

  • waynejr2waynejr2 West Toluca Lake, CAMember Posts: 6,589 Rare
    Originally posted by CoreChamber
      Why do people not want to level?  I want the old EQ treadmill because it gives me time to enjoy and explore all of the content.  It lets me use my gear for more then an hour before I become under geared. Why do you want to be the best at the very start, why must every ones damage be balanced?     I again want to play an EQ where there are roles that must be filled, and groups to find.  I want those camps that last why into the night resulting in a level, skills sometimes gear but more importantly the forging of friendships.  I had a huge friends list in EQ, people I talked to every day, some I still do, but that has not happened it a single other game and I believe its because we do not depend on each other. Games move way to fast.

     I would like it too.  There are plenty of fast leveling games for those who want them.  Then again, I don't need everything NOW.

    http://www.youhaventlived.com/qblog/2010/QBlog190810A.html  

    https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1

    https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1

    Kyleran:  "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."

    John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."

    FreddyNoNose:  "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."

    LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"



  • dandurindandurin Santa Clara, CAMember Posts: 497 Uncommon

    Every level should be a hell level.

     

    The 5 level cycle in EQ was a well-documented bug.  Good riddance.

  • OzivoisOzivois Phoenix, AZMember Posts: 598
    Originally posted by dandurin
    Every level should be a hell level.   The 5 level cycle in EQ was a well-documented bug.  Good riddance.

    Agree to all levels should be hell

  • ice-vortexice-vortex Member Posts: 953 Uncommon
    Originally posted by SavageHorizon
    Originally posted by DMKano
    No. Again we are talking about old concepts that belong in old games, if EQN is so radically different it will have none of this. I hope that even the basic concept of leveling is so different in EQN that this simply does not even apply.

    Doesn't matter really because Smed has hinted at harsher rule servers more akin to EQ, don't like them then people don't have to play on those types of servers.

    He hinted at harsher rule servers before the EQ/EQ2 evolution of EQNext got outright scrapped. That EQNext no longer exists.

  • quseioquseio stevens, PAMember Posts: 226 Uncommon
    Originally posted by rusrec
    Originally posted by Ramanadjinn
    personally hoping EQNext maybe doesn't have traditional level based character progression.

    This...I think Id prefer to have no levels just open world and fear and consequences

    if its not lvls then its skills and id rather not i havent seen a skill based game ever done right for a mmorpg

  • PpiperPpiper Member Posts: 747 Uncommon
    Originally posted by TribeofOne
    leveling should take MONTHS even for the most hard core.. if we must have levels at all

    agreed. It essentially takes leveling out of the prime component and returns game play to its focus.

  • ice-vortexice-vortex Member Posts: 953 Uncommon
    Originally posted by Ppiper
    Originally posted by TribeofOne
    leveling should take MONTHS even for the most hard core.. if we must have levels at all

    agreed. It essentially takes leveling out of the prime component and returns game play to its focus.

    Why should leveling be the focus?

«1
Sign In or Register to comment.