Celtic Heroes

The Official Forum for Celtic Heroes, the 3D MMORPG for iOS and Android Devices

Re: Letting weaker players win endgame bosses

#251
Plus3 wrote:Just thought I'd point out again a lvl200 suffers no lock penality compared to a lvl180 on a lvl180 boss like necro mord hrung and snorri.

People who stay at lvl180 die easier, have 20 less ability points and 100 less stat points. There is much better gear you can equip at 200 over 189. The optimal level to lock is actually 20 level above the boss in question.

From 200-205 you go from approx 15% to 17.5% needed to lock a 180 which is actually a fairly large difference. By 220 it's 25%. It's close to 0.5% per level penality past 20, a formula that holds well for small level differences.


It's just amusing to see 90% of the complaints about how target lock works actually have no idea how it actually works.

I agree it needs help but if people want to have their opinions heard it helps to tune them to coincide with reality first.

Im aware of 20 lvls difference, thus why I made it 205. The use of lvl 180's was to show how large the difference is between locking as a 180 and as a 205 or above. Im myself a warrior, when I was 190 I could here and there lock some 4*s with my horrible locking-abilities, but as 206 against 182 rogue with ss hrung helm? No chance for me. Gladly Im no bothered by 4*s, but this is an advantage that they have in 5*s and mains, now Im above 205 so I'll start losing the 20 lvls range lock on hrung as well.
#NerfMages #AvoidBalance #WhyPlayARogue #MeatShieldOnly #HealingSlavesOnly

OP dps warrior on Belenus, hot af melee druid on Nuada. #Elementals #Apex

Re: Letting weaker players win endgame bosses

#252
Criminal wrote:
Plus3 wrote:Just thought I'd point out again a lvl200 suffers no lock penality compared to a lvl180 on a lvl180 boss like necro mord hrung and snorri.

People who stay at lvl180 die easier, have 20 less ability points and 100 less stat points. There is much better gear you can equip at 200 over 189. The optimal level to lock is actually 20 level above the boss in question.

From 200-205 you go from approx 15% to 17.5% needed to lock a 180 which is actually a fairly large difference. By 220 it's 25%. It's close to 0.5% per level penality past 20, a formula that holds well for small level differences.


It's just amusing to see 90% of the complaints about how target lock works actually have no idea how it actually works.

I agree it needs help but if people want to have their opinions heard it helps to tune them to coincide with reality first.

Im aware of 20 lvls difference, thus why I made it 205. The use of lvl 180's was to show how large the difference is between locking as a 180 and as a 205 or above. Im myself a warrior, when I was 190 I could here and there lock some 4*s with my horrible locking-abilities, but as 206 against 182 rogue with ss hrung helm? No chance for me. Gladly Im no bothered by 4*s, but this is an advantage that they have in 5*s and mains, now Im above 205 so I'll start losing the 20 lvls range lock on hrung as well.


Well I wasn't outing you as someone who didn't know how it works, there are 20+ pages where I keep seeing 180 over and over again. Didn't mean to be specific to a single person.

As far as the 4* goes the level issue with target lock is nonexistent. It's because the first rogue to actually tap on it and hit shaodow, quick, ammy damage skill, and likely an auto goes off will lock it regardless of being 220 or 180 because it's so wimpy. It's bosses like snorri that take many hits to get below that 15% per team where you lock that makes it hard for a group of 205 to lock over a group of 200. 220s don't have much chance at all compared to 200s.
Member of Aeon - Taranis - 24 boxer
220+ toons
Ravenleaf druid - Silverstring ranger
Stormsong warrior - Nwerb Mage - Eventide Rogue

Toon histogram:
Level_____|200+|150-199|100-149|50-99|20-49|1-19|
# of toons|_5__|___16___|____3___|__11__|__21_|407|

Re: Letting weaker players win endgame bosses

#253
Criminal wrote:^And u have both of them u lucky *******. Off-topic on that part.

@Vraelen, "These analogies make the same mistake....." , "Level is more like age, except you can control how fast you level/age."

I'll have to disagree with u on the analogy here, especially as I see that ur lvl 190+? I wont say so just yet, because Im not from Arawn, but just like I said I believe in my first post on this topic, like u expect me as a higher lvl from a dominant clan that has existed for most of the time the game exists to try and be in ur shoes, I expect u to do the same (and Im aware BadaBing exists for a while, but I believe its not the same BadaBing).
Having fun and having an advantage are two totally different things, u can have fun at lvl 180, that doesnt mean ur supposed to get an advantage for 'pausing' ur 'age' just because u wanna have fun. Dont we all wanna have fun? Since when lvl 180 boss is limited to lvl 180? By that same logic, if ur lvl 181, dont go to snorri, dont go to money bosses, dont farm on hawkhursts, dont kill aggy and so on.
I wont turn it into analogies showdown, but I'll disagree with the 'level = age' and 'having fun = having an advantage', in a game level decides the most for u as a player (maybe class decides more), and as a player u shouldnt pass on contact that u have passed it's lvl just because its forced on u, if it would have been that way, none of us would go past lvl 180.
Let me take an example of a clanless person, that clanless person has lvled to 180 and got familiar with the lvl 180's clan, he didnt like the ppl there and continued to lvl, he reached lvl 205 and decided he wanna join some clan, perhaps the dominant one will accept him. The dominant clan voted and accepted him in, after a while he was supposed to get his dl mainhand, but alas, he couldnt, he passed lvl 180 and could no longer kill snorri, he shall forever be stuck without dl mainhand which will never let him progress to edl that is available only on higher LEVEL (205 for just full armour) because hes no longer 180 and didnt want to join a clan of ppl that stay at lvl 180, perhaps he didnt get along with them perhaps he wanted to lvl with his clannies. What a sad situation this lvl 205 is stuck at, to never enjoy a dl mainhand, he camped and camped and camped, he couldnt win the lock and so he tried to improve himself with different gear, he camped and continued to call his 200+ strong clannies to help but they just couldnt get the lock often enough to just kill snorri and enjoy the aspect of the game that these 180's enjoy too...

Well, this was a rather long and slightly exaggerated example, but I believe it passes my point. Ppl who want to ENJOY dl as much as u, the low lvl, wanna enjoy it, shouldnt be limited on lvling and clan's average lvl, just because there are ppl abusing the flawed system, he wanna enjoy just like u, why wont u let him?


EDIT: just for the record, the example doesnt resemble myself, Im in my clan since Im lvl 122 and before Ive been in the rival clan, I dont have dl sword or shield as I passed them down so others could get it because there isnt enough to gear us all + ppl who join, and my warrior is a main, not an alt.

Sorry, was out for a bit. That situation above kinda seems like a "too bad, so sad" for one person out of a hundred who could have stayed at 180 to help out his new clanmates who are in a similar situation or stayed at 180 to help him/herself. I could also make a sob story for say a level 180 who doesn't want to join the one dominant clan. The 180 camps and camps, but these super high 220s keep coming back and locking because all that matters is damage. Even if the 180 and his/her friends of 180s start early, a 220 can chance upon it and call his/her group of 220 friends to do more damage. *Quick note, I am using 180/220 because this seems to generally be a 180 vs 220 argument...*

I just want to point out again, there should not be a reason for the higher levels to come back. Rather than complain about the fence that separates the generations of levels, you should focus on the reason why people want to go over the fence...
Image

Re: Letting weaker players win endgame bosses

#254
Too many people have lost site of this game and it's set of progression and replaced progression with greed. No drop from any boss is required. All boss drops are toys and make the game interesting and give goals to aim for. Soon as one drop comes out it is eventually obsoleted by the next. The level lock is to keep the sense of progression in check and prevent the higher levels from hoarding the treasures. If you still view HRUNG as an end game boss, then maybe you need to relook at the game. Anything that is a kill on spawn is no longer end game to those that can kill on spawn.

Drak
Gwidion
215 rogue
186 ranger
151 Mage
I am old and Cranky, Don’t mess with me

Mr Drak
Draknocht 223 rogue
Drakolas 223 ranger
Halefire 222 mage
Bombshell Betty 223 warrior
Lelelia 173 druid
And many many more

Re: Letting weaker players win endgame bosses

#255
Draknocht wrote:Too many people have lost site of this game and it's set of progression and replaced progression with greed. No drop from any boss is required. All boss drops are toys and make the game interesting and give goals to aim for. Soon as one drop comes out it is eventually obsoleted by the next. The level lock is to keep the sense of progression in check and prevent the higher levels from hoarding the treasures. If you still view HRUNG as an end game boss, then maybe you need to relook at the game. Anything that is a kill on spawn is no longer end game to those that can kill on spawn.

Drak
Gwidion
215 rogue
186 ranger
151 Mage


We see hrung as an endgame boss :( were looking at hagvar the hairy next though, so i guess we will leave hrung alone while we make a strategy for him.

208 ranger
105 rogue (op)
106 druid (under p)
16 warrior lol

Re: Letting weaker players win endgame bosses

#256
Draknocht wrote:Too many people have lost site of this game and it's set of progression and replaced progression with greed. No drop from any boss is required. All boss drops are toys and make the game interesting and give goals to aim for. Soon as one drop comes out it is eventually obsoleted by the next. The level lock is to keep the sense of progression in check and prevent the higher levels from hoarding the treasures. If you still view HRUNG as an end game boss, then maybe you need to relook at the game. Anything that is a kill on spawn is no longer end game to those that can kill on spawn.

Drak
Gwidion
215 rogue
186 ranger
151 Mage

I suppose ur clan has lots of godly hrung bracelets, skulls and dmg rings.
#NerfMages #AvoidBalance #WhyPlayARogue #MeatShieldOnly #HealingSlavesOnly

OP dps warrior on Belenus, hot af melee druid on Nuada. #Elementals #Apex

Re: Letting weaker players win endgame bosses

#257
Whether hrung is endgame or not is irrelevant. He has drops that endgame players are still using and want because theyre the best you can get. 2+ years of killing should have geared a clan with the drops their players want but because of terrible drop rates we have to continue killing him. Im Actually pro target lock, i would prefer they adjusted the drop rates and maybe added more permanent bosses so players aren't forced into killing bosses much lower than them then situations like this wouldnt be a problem.
#NerfIdolsCutBossHP #DecreaseRaidWindows

Image

Re: Letting weaker players win endgame bosses

#258
I think the overlooked result here is that if Res gets its way and level lock is removed. There will no longer be competition, because Res will kill all bosses (just as any leading clan in any world would be able to do). Essentially its not competitive.

So solutions?

1. Res, go get a balanced clan. You only allow 190+? That's flawed if you want bosses under 190. Obviously, the game mechanics dictate that lock is level dependent, so your strategy should include some element of that.
2. If you lower level requirement, encourage these new recruits to stay there until they get the gear. Why encourage fast Lux leveling, knowing full well the end result will be lack of MH and OH weapons, and no locks at lower bosses. Or adjust requirement that to join, you have to have that gear
3. OTM can modify lock code to more accurately reflect that 20% lock for 180 is equivalent to 40% lock of 220 (or whatever numbers you get), based on class and expected equipment levels. In other words, a 180 rogues damage to Hrung should be proportional to 220 rogues damage at Hrung so that a fight to lock would be close. This would encourage clans to adjust their DPS teams to get the appropriate lock down.

REmoving locks wouldn't help game, just help end game clans. You may be discouraged that your clannies can't get end game quest gear, but at least its created a challenge in a game with very few challenges. removing the lock would just make it so new players would have zero chance for gear unless you recruited them into the clan.
Forum Guide. If you need help please message me -- Click Here

Roguish Warrior, or Warrish Rogue
Rogue 194, Warrior 176, Druid 112, Ranger 111, Mage 100, Bank 71

Re: Letting weaker players win endgame bosses

#259
I remember 2 years ago, the dominant clan cannot lose a single snorri spawn over the same smaller clan because of any rogues armed with dl weapons and eg items at 190s. The same small clan waited patiently for two years for this great opportunity where the dominant clan leveled to 220, and now the situation is exactly opposite. This dominant clan invited new people who needs dl weapons but cant win lock to get it, even armed with edl gears and weapons all hasted some uses attack lixes doing huge damages but still lose lock. Im not blaming the smaller clan. Im just frustrated that we cant do anything to help our new members.
World: Epona
Clan: Enigma
Gabee/war
Fpj/druid

World:ARAWN
Gabee/Rogue
BeastKing/Ranger
FPJ/Druid

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Romeo and 23 guests