Zone scaling almost completely negates the need for level progression

[Steampunkette]

Why, don't feel like having me explain why it makes perfect sense to you again?

The only reason it will start an argument is if YOU start it.

Dude, you're literally baiting right there. Go to the other thread if you wanna see the final nail in the coffin of your "Perfect Argument"

[derpkitteh]

i wish that ALL the old vanilla zones were 1 - 60. cause i'm still gonna overlevel the cap of each zone before i end the zone's story.

i wish i could just turn off the experience gain of my heirlooms. i want the power without the boosted experience.

[lukoil]

No, the fact that level scaling counters leveling is not "my opinion", that's not only fact but the very concept of level scaling. That's precisely the point. Duh.

And there is no sense of growth if the foes progress just like you, unless you're a complete idiot who just look at his numbers without looking at the rest of the world.

Leveling gives you new abilities. Thats the point of leveling. Not the raw stats. Mobs still threats but new abilities provide you new ways to kill them. There is sense of growth but in a different sense. Bear in tirisafal galdes is basicaly the same bear as in western plaguelands. Why should it be harder/eaisier to kill I don't know. You tell me. Mister "not "my opinion""

[lukoil]

Do you have proof of this? My understanding is that there won't be minimums other than the already stated breaks between expansions. Or are you just talking out your ass?

I've played ESO in the last year, and it is a completely-scaled world, and you can do zones in any order. It doesn't hurt anything at all.

Blizzcon. All zones in vanilla will have level starts and caps. Starting zone 1-10. What other zones ranges we will know soon on PTR.

[Teri]

Do you have proof of this? My understanding is that there won't be minimums other than the already stated breaks between expansions. Or are you just talking out your ass?

I've played ESO in the last year, and it is a completely-scaled world, and you can do zones in any order. It doesn't hurt anything at all.

Did you see blizzcon presentation? They said you can't go to Plaguelands or Burning Steppes at low level and it'll be like level 40-60, but Westfall was 10-60.

As for expansions, they got their own seperate brackets, and they are 60-80, not 1-80. etc.

BUT, as I understand it you can still go to any Northrend zone at 60-80 or any Pandaria zone at 80-90, and that's great freedom.

I just hope they adjust cold weather flying to 60, and pandaria flying to 80.

[Darktbs]

No, the fact that level scaling counters leveling is not "my opinion", that's not only fact but the very concept of level scaling. That's precisely the point. Duh.

And there is no sense of growth if the foes progress just like you, unless you're a complete idiot who just look at his numbers without looking at the rest of the world.

Yeah, lets ignore the fact that the player receive gear with stats that increase his/her power and npcs don't

Or that Players learn new spells/ talents while Npcs stay the same pool of skill or lack of them.

[Teri]

I knew about the 60-80, and on up from there, but I only heard 1-10 for starting zones and 10-60 for Azeroth. OTOH, 40-60 is still pretty flexible. I guess we'll find out what's what in 7.3.5.

I don't think they'd go insanely tight tuning, and probably all later level zones are likely 40-60, 50-60 at most.

I don't expect 55-60 Blasted Lands/Silithus even while that's their current levels, 40-60/50-60 seems a better bracket, including Winterspring/Swamp of Sorrows/Un'goro.

[Accendor]

Levels still act as a device to unlock skills and features like talents/mounts/battlegrounds.

Level scaling will also make use of gear/kill xp/quest xp and dungeons much more efficient.

If you do 1 dungeon or battleground win now, you gain like at least half level, and you outlevel a zone super fast.

Now of course it shouldn't be 1-110 and it isn't.

I don't see the problem with 7.3.5 scaling at all, you have MORE choice, and it's MORE efficient, not less.

Levels still matter, it's not like you will see level 120 Kobolds in Elwynn.

But he is right: You could do all that with ~10 levels instead of 110 or even remove it completely and connect everything to Itemlevel. Makes more sense that Zone Scaling...

[Teri]

But he is right: You could do all that with ~10 levels instead of 110 or even remove it completely and connect everything to Itemlevel. Makes more sense that Zone Scaling...

Sure you can compress levels like crazy, but you'd kill progression even more then it is already.

Yay level 5 ragnaros. Level 9 Archimonde, level 10 Kil'jaeden, that doesn't really sound good at all.

Level 1, you start, level 2 would be like level 20, grats you can mount and have 8 new abilities. Great gameplay spending 2 hours with 1 spell?

Bad idea.

[Deleted]

because level 6 feel powerful...atleast when my people suggest this waste of an idea they still aim to make bfa like lvl 60 not 7....

[jiih]

this is a change i really like and couldnt wait for. now you sre way more flexible what zones you want to level and dont habe to change every 5lvl in vanilla. finally an alternative to boring dungeon grind and doong zones you dont like but rather finish the zones you like

[Steampunkette]

Honestly, they could do away with character progression, entirely, have all characters just exist in the world and let their item level determine how strong they are. It wouldn't be awful, but it would give up the doubled up Skinner Box in favor of only one.

This way, they can maintain both Skinner Boxes while also giving use the ability to level through earlier content in a more flexible manner.

The Skinner Box was an experiment in which a mouse was put into a box with a lever and two lights. When the light was red, if the mouse pulled the lever the mouse got shocked. But if the light was green and the mouse pulled the lever the mouse would get food. Once the mouse had gone through this cycle for a while, the mouse would -always- pull the lever when the green light was one, and -never- pull the lever when the red light was on. Eventually the experiment changes slightly, and the mouse has to start pulling the lever twice to avoid the shock or get the food. Or three times. Or ten times. Eventually the green light stayed on until the mouse stopped pulling the lever over an hour later, and then food was given to the mouse. The next time they left the light on, the mouse did not give up on the lever for even longer.

It's called Operative Conditioning. And it's the basis of leveling in RPGs. You get levels fast, early on, and get used to the idea of doing things for XP that eventually grant levels,, but the longer you play, the further out the levels get. Making you crave them even more. But so long as the reward is there, there's someone so conditioned that they'll keep pulling that lever 'til it breaks off to get their reward...

[PragmaticGamer]

It will cap out at 60 but you can't run to the Western Plaguelands as a lv1 UD warrior. I mean tou can, but there will be some zombie bears lv?? waiting for you. Zones will still have a minimum level requirement to start questing there.

It will help a lot in smoothing out the zone progression. Nowadays you can't even do half a zone before you outlevel it. That's without heirlooms. God forbid of you do a dungeon. Leveling is really weird and disjointed now.

I've wanted something like this for awhile... I hated, when leveling, having to skip to the next zone when halfway through the storyline, because it stopped being rewarding.

I hope it maxes out by zone, as well (e.g., starting zone is level 1-15, so I can go back at level 20 and stomp the mobs that gave me any difficulty...)

[Teri]

I hope it maxes out by zone, as well (e.g., starting zone is level 1-15, so I can go back at level 20 and stomp the mobs that gave me any difficulty...)

As far as we know it only maxes out by expansion, except the 1-10 zones. Otherwise it's gonna negates the whole staying in zones longer.

Of course this means you can't roflstomp Ring of Blood style areas in Outland/Northrend/Twilight Highlands, but when you do them at-level with other ppl they will give a ton of xp (unless they make them non-elite trivial)

[InfiniteCharger]

The only thing level scaling solves is having to play hopscotch around various zones in the world as you leveled. And face facts this isn't like it was in vanilla when you had to walk everywhere prior to level 40 and getting a mount. With this change you can level from one zone to the next zone regardless of level (in theory). Probably the only downside to this is many folks will be leveling alts in as few zones as possible (which makes sense). So many zones will be dead.

[Steampunkette]

The only thing level scaling solves is having play hopscotch around various zones in the world as you leveled. And face facts this isn't like it was in vanilla when you had to walk everywhere prior to level 40 and getting a mount. With this change you can level from one zone to the next zone regardless of level (in theory). Probably the only downside to this is many folks will be leveling alts in as few zones as possible (which makes sense). So many zones will be dead.

Most zones are, already, dead. It just means people will be able to hang out in their favorite zones, longer, which means more chances to run into them -there-, instead of maybe catching them somewhere in the mad dash between zones to try and keep up with the XP train.

[InfiniteCharger]

Most zones are, already, dead. It just means people will be able to hang out in their favorite zones, longer, which means more chances to run into them -there-, instead of maybe catching them somewhere in the mad dash between zones to try and keep up with the XP train.

It will be interesting to see how what the new quest tables look like along with the XP reward as a big factor in that regard.

[Powerogue]

It fixes the issue of outleveling zones before you finish their questlines though, which is really nice. That was always a big problem with things like heirlooms and rested xp.

[Steampunkette]

It fixes the issue of outleveling zones before you finish their questlines though, which is really nice. That was always a big problem with things like heirlooms and rested xp.

Mm.. It was like "Should I gain extra XP so I don't have to spend weeks of real world time to level this character but get to enjoy the story, or take 'em off and say goodbye to my dinner plans for the next month?"

[Accendor]

Sure you can compress levels like crazy, but you'd kill progression even more then it is already.

Yay level 5 ragnaros. Level 9 Archimonde, level 10 Kil'jaeden, that doesn't really sound good at all.

Level 1, you start, level 2 would be like level 20, grats you can mount and have 8 new abilities. Great gameplay spending 2 hours with 1 spell?

Bad idea.

Make it 20 levels then or couple spells at quest progress. Everything else does not make sense with scaling.