Just a (crazy) Idea, No more levels for new expansions .

[Deleted]

This COULD work like shaman becoming farseers and we basically become more specialized.

Essentially we become hero classes.

Yeah that was my idea, hero classes basically.

I understand some people might not be fans of it and I realize that a lv110 is totally plausible and non-issue (heck, I played a game where levels go all the way to 9999) but for some reason lv100, while being a mere number, always meant something in my book. Perhaps that's because I came from Final Fantasy (single player), don't know.

[Serissa]

I just can't understand and not a single "nay-sayer" can explain it - why is level 100 so "magic" for you? Why should leveling stop @ 100? Why not 73? Or 91? Or 206?

For me it's just a number. Please explain why is it so "magic" for you!

[-Superman-]

I just can't understand and not a single "nay-sayer" can explain it - why is level 100 so "magic" for you? Why should leveling stop @ 100? Why not 73? Or 91? Or 206?

For me it's just a number. Please explain why is it so "magic" for you!

Apparently they are under the misconception that you need numbers to reflect progression. Yet Mario has progressed through 20+ games and has never changed clothes or leveled up. The game should have just progressed zone by zone with an auto-pop telling you what was next.

[SirBeef]

I personally don't see us going past 100. It just seems...odd. Level 105? Really?


Who knows, only time will tell. But going past 100? Nah.
I don't think so at least.

Why is it so odd? Blizzard has stated many time throughout the years that 100 is just a number. I never understood the hang up people have with going past 100 as a player/character level in a game.

- - - Updated - - -

I just can't understand and not a single "nay-sayer" can explain it - why is level 100 so "magic" for you? Why should leveling stop @ 100? Why not 73? Or 91? Or 206?

For me it's just a number. Please explain why is it so "magic" for you!

The more I think about it, the more I believe it has to do with tradition and unwillingness to change.

- - - Updated - - -

Apparently they are under the misconception that you need numbers to reflect progression. Yet Mario has progressed through 20+ games and has never changed clothes or leveled up. The game should have just progressed zone by zone with an auto-pop telling you what was next.

Good old Walter not even answering the question he quoted again. Also, you really cannot compare Super Mario games to RPGs, except for Super Mario RPG, in which case has character levels.

[TKTank]

They should brake the level cap and allow infinite leveling.

[Felkor]

Having a gap in level between 2 extentions is the best way to "reset" all progress, and take a fresh start. And that is why extentions are funs.

This is imo the major issue against a "non leveling" progression. There is so much mechanics based on this idea of level progression that it would take a lot of work to make it right. But why not, I like the idea btw

[-Superman-]

Good old Walter not even answering the question he quoted again. Also, you really cannot compare Super Mario games to RPGs, except for Super Mario RPG, in which case has character levels.

Good old SirBeef, just looking to start shit by saying random shit. I gave an honest answer to an honest question. You don't have to like it, or agree with it, but it might be nice for once if you weren't such a jerk about it.

[Sweetpeaz]

I have always liked leveling, but there can be no doubt that they are running out of space in the game. Even with phasing the game has become more and more disjointed.

[Sanguiris]

Just stop leveling and add paragon levels like in diablo....i didnt it failed there.

Edit: btw i like the idea of hero classes for all, maybe even add the 4th spec and allow tri-spec.

[tehdef]

I must say that my first language is not English. So I apologize in advance.

The idea I propose is because I'm just bored senseless leveling up and forget the content that often have not even reach each expansion.

My proposal is based on a new dynamic where we stay at lvl 100. Instead of performing missions to gain levels, change to clean all the quest of a map for that we got a new skill or improve it (like WoD level perks).

Thus, in addition to new areas and history, I will have new skills to test in the old content remains the same difficulty.

What I mean is that they should stop thinking vertically and start thinking horizontally.

Broaden our possibilities of adventure, that is the purpose of an RPG. Not only level up to fulfill a requirement.

I know this idea will have its pros and cons, but we do not say lies, no longer makes sense to force us to climb 5, 10, 20 or even 50 levels where adventures are reduced to a new lore.

It's just a crazy idea. Maybe you have some better . ( Expose them ) . But the point is that since leveling up is pointless.

I wish Blizzard would squish the levels. 100 is soooooooooo daunting. I wish they would cut max level before the next expansion to 50, and then make new expansion 50-60. They can do it pretty easily, just squish the XP and make things last a bit longer and widen the zones.

[SodiumChloride]

Blizz has been very innovative in the past

HA!

Blizzard is well known for well polished games, but creative? I don't think so.

Blizzard's formula has always been, clone some popular game and polish it to a showroom shine.

RTS? Started with C&C. (Edit: Dune II)

MMOs? WoW is pretty much based of the Everquest template.

Heroes of the Storm? LoL duh.

Hearthstone? Magic the Gathering is the granddaddy of the genre.

[Serissa]

RTS? Started with C&C.

rofl C&C was realesed 1 year after 1st warcraft. 1st RTS game for PC was released 11 years prior C&C (and even earlier for other computers)

[sykoex]

I would love for them to do something to freshen up the leveling process.

[Rhine101]

That isn't a crazy idea at all. It is actually quite normal to see this in RPG type games.

There are more ways to throttle people and keep certain areas off limits than just level use. You can literally add any other metric to do it. Kinda like gear level.

Okay you are level 110 bro, but your gear level is still only 730. Go actually play the game and come back when you are at 800

[SodiumChloride]

rofl C&C was realesed 1 year after 1st warcraft. 1st RTS game for PC was released 11 years prior C&C (and even earlier for other computers)

Fine. Dune II.

[kilj]

I personally don't see us going past 100. It just seems...odd. Level 105? Really?

It seems more likely to me that they will go down some sort of EverQuest style "Alternate Advancement" system, whereby we are still "Leveling" in the traditional sense, but the exp is going towards accumulating points that we are able to distribute among different sets of ability and character improvements. The story can still be told the same way it always has been, XP for these points can still force players into questing if it's the only way / easiest way to achieve the reasonable "max" amount of whatever these points may be.

Who knows, only time will tell. But going past 100? Nah.
I don't think so at least.

Paragon levels brah!

[Traveler Voltin]

"Its just a number" -blizzard

[Gourmandise]

The leveling system is there to engage players and make them feel progression without having to put any effort into their gameplay. Questing/leveling has become so ridiculously easy I don't see it as part of the game anymore. The only thing questing is for now is telling a story. If they removed levels they'd have to replace the with something that gives a reward of progression, which they don't want to be generally hard anymore. The alternate progression systems are dungeons, raiding and so on, each with their varying degrees of difficulty. We view leveling as useless because it is, for the general player, faceroll easy. We can say these things about any aspect of the game that we don't take a part in.
I don't like leveling because it's easy. I do like quests because they tell a story. I wish they would shove a general difficulty into the game instead of give me my own corner of it. That would essentially force me to "try", for lack of a better word, and end up getting better. Being more accessible is what blizzard wants in their game, so I don't see leveling being removed, although it's what I would like.

[Serissa]

Fine. Dune II.

Yes Dune 2 was released 1 year before WC and WC was just clone of D2 but it's not founder still. First one was released around 1982-84 for uhmm Atari I guess. And no, Atari was not "just console" like (S)NES or SEGA MD/Saturn.

[fixx]

Just stop leveling and add paragon levels like in diablo....i didnt it failed there.

Paragon levels brah!

So add levels instead of levels? What's the point? Why not just stick to levels instead?

Blizzard is well known for well polished games, but creative? I don't think so.

Blizzard can innovate too. GW2 and Wildstar tried to launch without LFD/LFR by design and look what happened.