Community answers - level requirements on nano programs

[cold]

Originally posted by Cz
Tetra (and a bunch of others), argument about current top level nanos apparently becoming trivial - while new nanos are level restricted - noted. Its the foundation argument for imposing same restrictions on the old nanos as the new ones.

No.... it's the foundation argument for removing the level restrictions on every nano.

The problem is not the nano's being used on a too low level. The problem is the skill buffs you are going to introduce. If something new requires such a big change, don't implement it.

And even if you do, the nanomage will have a bigger problem than the rest. No matter how low the level requirement is, the nanomage is going to hit it first. Different level requirements for each breed might help, but I personally think it will not.

Finally, please answer this question : Why do you introduce large skill buffs if you make them useless again with level requirements ?

Will we no longer have to spend a single IP in nanoskills since we'll have items that buff them high enough to use our nano's ?

[cold]

Re-think The Shadowlands. If it brings changes like this, we do not look forward to it.

The current skill system isn't broken. So don't fix it.

[Cz]

Warlock and reality, point on buffs noted, and will be brought up in the discussion.

[______________Kajpin]

This might be slightly off topic, but...

I was quite pleased to get a pair of kick of the spirit boots from boss mob a couple of weeks ago. This was a very challenging, for us, ql129 mission. The boots have a L124 restriction on them.

Now I'm a mere L80 MA atm, but have invested tons of ip in my abilities and keep agi/str/sta at least partly implanted. My point is, by the time I reach L124, these boots will be little more than an underpowered status symbol. Even without getting ability buffs I could pop these babies on in the next couple of levels. Sure deflates the excitement of finding a unique item when you realize it's completely useless.

Why do you bother putting items in that will be obsolete before you can use them?

[Marlark]

Hello Funcom and Everyone else!!!!

I think alot of use totaly hate the lvl req's because of what it stand for ... But i think i get it why you have put it there ... But wouldnt it be better to put in a lower skil req instead on the nanos that was based on the base skil instead. That way you get the nano-mage breed and other advantages right dont you?

The base skil of the chars is based without imps and other buffs and they are changed based on breed, ip cost and IP bank aint it ... ?

So to make it none lvl based why not make it base skil req that way u kill the OE on the nanos?

A example on a nano crystal, just to show what i mean.
(this is one of the nanos from adv nano list and its current req list)

Name NanoCrystal (Kin of Tarasque)
QL 182

Requirements
biological meta >= 865
matter meta >= 779
level >= 195
profession adventurer

(This is how it could look in my sugested idea.)

Name NanoCrystal (Kin of Tarasque)
QL 182

Requirements
biological meta >= 865
matter meta >= 779
basebiological meta >= 583
basematter meta >= 568
profession adventurer

Well this is just a idea so dont take to hard on the numbers .. more then a sugestion based on some factors that i thinked on when setting them 2 figures.

My personal feeling is that this is a better way of limiting or OE limiting the nanos. But then i could be totaly wrong on this to.

// Marlark

[Maximilian]

->Kajpin: No it is not off topic. Level restriction on what ever is the topic.

My main issue: High level Pistol buffs.

Summary: An utter joke.

Besides the ubiquitous Wrangles there are three nanos to be regarded:

Nano formula		Prof	line	ql	lvl	Buff	PM  SI   NCU
B. Plains Wanderer	Adv	199	169	195	100/25	784 784  44
B. of the Pistolero	Adv	199	142	145	87/17	661 664  37
Extreme Prejudice	Eng	207	139	 - 	120	648 648  43

Without any further explanation, this is a slap in the face. Not that our new buffs are clearly weaker than the highest available one, no, they are self only and level limited. Already the weaker one needs more skill than the Engineer buff and is restricted.

Why has a buff, that is suppossed to be the top of the line (Plains Wanderer) almost 140 skill points more than a superior non self buff?
I play an Engi as well (homo nano), and it is unreasonable to assume that an Engineer will be able to cast this buff by himself at level 139 (both skills are dark blue - 12 point skills), but we all know by now, that at level 150 it is not that hard to get a nano skill buffed by 300+ points. And by then, I think I will have 350 base value anyway. [Side note, the first ones to be able to cast this nano are the Agents, btw.]

You know, the only thing that is going to happen is, that Extreme Prejudice is either removed, downgraded or a level restriction is put on - sigh.

I can only repeat what others have said.

- If you can't control OE by your actual means, expand the rules to other/all items, don't put level restrictions in game. Nothing more frustrating than having an item, fulfilling the skill requirements and then have to wait for x levels until I can use it.

- This is a skill based game. Don't drive it to level based one.

- If we wanted level caps - we would have played DAoC.

- If you think level restrictions are necessary, rework them and make them reasonable. Specialization should be rewarded, not punished.

I plan(ned) to post something about the new damage shields as well, but I don't know, if I am going to invest the work.

So long,

Max(imlian)

P.S. Ehh, always open for discussion.

[Kuro]

Originally posted by Maximilian
->Kajpin: No it is not off topic. Level restriction on what ever is the topic.

My main issue: High level Pistol buffs.

Summary: An utter joke.

Besides the ubiquitous Wrangles there are three nanos to be regarded:

Nano formula		Prof	line	ql	lvl	Buff	PM  SI   NCU
B. Plains Wanderer	Adv	199	169	195	100/25	784 784  44
B. of the Pistolero	Adv	199	142	145	87/17	661 664  37
Extreme Prejudice	Eng	207	139	 - 	120	648 648  43

Without any further explanation, this is a slap in the face. Not that our new buffs are clearly weaker than the highest available one, no, they are self only and level limited. Already the weaker one needs more skill than the Engineer buff and is restricted.

Why has a buff, that is suppossed to be the top of the line (Plains Wanderer) almost 140 skill points more than a superior non self buff?
I play an Engi as well (homo nano), and it is unreasonable to assume that an Engineer will be able to cast this buff by himself at level 139 (both skills are dark blue - 12 point skills), but we all know by now, that at level 150 it is not that hard to get a nano skill buffed by 300+ points. And by then, I think I will have 350 base value anyway. [Side note, the first ones to be able to cast this nano are the Agents, btw.]

You know, the only thing that is going to happen is, that Extreme Prejudice is either removed, downgraded or a level restriction is put on - sigh.

I can only repeat what others have said.

- If you can't control OE by your actual means, expand the rules to other/all items, don't put level restrictions in game. Nothing more frustrating than having an item, fulfilling the skill requirements and then have to wait for x levels until I can use it.

- This is a skill based game. Don't drive it to level based one.

- If we wanted level caps - we would have played DAoC.

- If you think level restrictions are necessary, rework them and make them reasonable. Specialization should be rewarded, not punished.

I plan(ned) to post something about the new damage shields as well, but I don't know, if I am going to invest the work.

So long,

Max(imlian)

P.S. Ehh, always open for discussion.

That's not entirely fair to compare the Engineer pistol buff to the Adventurer pistol buff. The engineer buff only does +120 to grenade and pistol. The Adventurer buff does modify more skills. This is not an arguement for putting a level lock on it in any way. Don't misinterpret that, please. But the Adv buff is better than the Engineer buff. And I'd have to further wonder if the 2 stack. If so, then that means an Adventurer can have his pistol skill buffed higher than anyone else + bonuses which would be another arguement for making it harder to execute.

Again, I say making all nanoformulas require base skill amounts and having buffs to nanoskills modify the nanoformula's effects is the only way out of this while preserving both meaning for breeds and for buffing professions. And I think it's worth the pain and effort to implement a system like that, both for the long term balance of AO and to ensure meaning for breed differences/buffing professions.

Why no response Cz?

[Tyndel]

Originally posted by Cz


Starting a new thread here, and closing the others to get the issue covered in one place. A complete report, based on your feedback on the issue, has been given to the development team (last week), and we've had a few chats with them since then.

First of all, to make that clear, we will not remove the level requirements on the new nano programs.

Originally posted by Cz

Warlock and reality, point on buffs noted, and will be brought up in the discussion.

Bringing it up on the discussion is a great idea.. but it does crash a bit with earlier statements. A discussion without any plans of implementing changes isnt all too constructive.
That being said, i agree on that making the unbalancing buffs levelbased, instead of the nanos they unbalance, sounds like a much better idea to me.
I really dont know why this is being still discussed though. It seems clear to me that Funcoms official stance is that they will go through with level requirements on new eq and nanos no matter what we(the players) say, and keeping on discussing it seems a lot like beating a dead horse with a stick.
I think biotronius summed up my own position very well with the sentence
"You hit the nail on the head. 'Level' should not be the determining factor. Ever. "


It seems to me that Funcom are having the opposite position, and argueing about how it can be made more "bearable" for the players, isnt really the way to go.. Instead, give us an explanation we can accept/understand as to why they have that position.
Ill be waiting eagerly for that explanation, and if i feel it makes sense, i guess ill stick around here a bit longer, otherwise, i wish you all well and hope ill see some of you in SWG.

[Jayde]

Originally posted by Kuroshio
[B]
That's not entirely fair to compare the Engineer pistol buff to the Adventurer pistol buff. The engineer buff only does +120 to grenade and pistol. The Adventurer buff does modify more skills. This is not an arguement for putting a level lock on it in any way. Don't misinterpret that, please. But the Adv buff is better than the Engineer buff. And I'd have to further wonder if the 2 stack. If so, then that means an Adventurer can have his pistol skill buffed higher than anyone else + bonuses which would be another arguement for making it harder to execute.

Huh?

Since when, at level 195, is anyone gonna need +25 fling? O.o

I've *never* had to buff fling. Fling for Advents is green, and always significatly lower than the primary (Pistol) req. Meeting the Fling req is never a problem.

-Jayde

[Cambist]

Could restrict buffs to people you can get XP with and avoid the extreme levels of twinking without destroying group mechanics.

Originally posted by Cz
Cambist, such restriction would probably stop the extreme twinking, but would still allow for people getting huge buffs and then using their top nanos at level 100.

That's what I saw as the positive.. People would be able to use their best buffs when in groups with Metas and Traders, but couldn't twink beyond reasonable ammounts without them. I thought that's what you tried to do with the Overequipping fixes in the first place.

That keeps buffing professions as viable team members and allows everyone to be much more efficient when teamed. Keeps group dynamics and keeps new nanos in line with old ones, but fixes extreme twinking.

If Funcom was trying to make Traders and Metas giving buffs useless, I can see how this would be a bad thing. I don't think that's the case, though.

[Kuro]

Originally posted by JaydeStargunner


Huh?

Since when, at level 195, is anyone gonna need +25 fling? O.o

I've *never* had to buff fling. Fling for Advents is green, and always significatly lower than the primary (Pistol) req. Meeting the Fling req is never a problem.

-Jayde

Plus damage modifiers to almost all damage types and a perception buff. Doesn't matter if you don't have a use for those bonuses. They do have to consider that someone else may

[_______________Elria]

On nano programs:
Like the majority of posters here, I believe that level requirements are bad. Granted, there may be a need for some form of control on the skill any character can reach, so please consider the alternative solution proposed by many here and in other threads: do skill-based restrictions (see Kuroshio's first post).
In my opinion, there are only two types of NFs that could be subject to that kind of restriction:
* the fixer NCU buffs: if they worked as stated in their description (i.e. memory compression), they would reduce the NCU usage of the NFs by a certain %. That, or add an amount of NCU memory based on either the recipient's CompLit skill or the total NCUs available pre-buff. Thus removing the need for level reqs. (sorry if I am only repeating someone else's idea, I have been bad and have not read the threads about the new fixer NFs )
* the skill buffs: those are the potentially unbalancing NFs if used too early. As proposed above, you could do some base skill checks on the caster to determine wether one can cast the buff: that is, IMO, close enough to a level req on the caster. And you could do something similar on the receiving end: instead of checking the recipient's level (as is the case for the fixer NCU buffs), check their to-be-buffed skill -- eg. someone with a Pistol (base) skill of 12 cannot receive a +200 Pistol buff, but one with a (base) skill of 400+ can. There may be a problem with the trader's wrangles that can boost so many skills simultaneously, but I am sure some satisfying solution can be found.

I think all of the other nano programs, and even some of the self-only skill buffs, should be left unrestricted.

On the increased skill budget:
People have already asked for more info on that, saying that we do not know enough on what is to come to have a clear opinion on the topic at hand. I want to add my voice to theirs. I hope increased skill budget does not mean increased IPs budget.

[__________JohnMclain]

I'm amazed that you guys wont remove level requirements despite the near unilateral distaste the community in general has.

More than that, the reasons you have given seem extremely weak to most of us. To "prevent oe" is lame. No one over 120 is subject to those rules anyways - so why have a level 195 req for god sakes.

I agree with some of the others - if something in Shadowlands is going to cause all these issues about using nanos at trivial levels - then change Shadowlands. Come up with more inventive ways of making our profession specialties useful.

If you feel like you need to prevent hardcore early tweaking thats fine. Use ABILITY or SKILL requirements on SOME lines. But don't make them retarded requirements like Fixer "love" armor (570 stamina? wtf? hello?).

For instance - you don't want a level 10 getting a 30m Fixer hot thats ql195, thats fine. But a level 150 fixer can SELF CAST this nano with the right implant setup and general buffs (not that it would be his best strat to do so - he'd be severely gimping himself in other areas). The requirements for this could be 300 stamina. Any level 100 player should be able to easily meet this requirement (its not overpowering at this level really...) but theres almost no way the level 10 could meet it.

Failing any inventive way to use the skill system - simply downgrade each level "requirement" by two notches.

Level 195 nanos should require 150
Level 175 nanos should require 135
Level 150 nanos should require 100
Level 135 nanos should require 75

etc etc.

This will at least give us a reason to use MP and Traders in groups - esp with the neutered Trader team healing, their wrangling is now more important than ever.

Whoever has been assigning skill requirements to items lately has been eating some special brownies (forget cookies).

John

[__________Munchausen]

Originally posted by Maximilian
->Kajpin: No it is not off topic. Level restriction on what ever is the topic.

My main issue: High level Pistol buffs.

Summary: An utter joke.

Besides the ubiquitous Wrangles there are three nanos to be regarded:

Nano formula		Prof	line	ql	lvl	Buff	PM  SI   NCU
B. Plains Wanderer	Adv	199	169	195	100/25	784 784  44
B. of the Pistolero	Adv	199	142	145	87/17	661 664  37
Extreme Prejudice	Eng	207	139	 - 	120	648 648  43

Without any further explanation, this is a slap in the face. Not that our new buffs are clearly weaker than the highest available one, no, they are self only and level limited. Already the weaker one needs more skill than the Engineer buff and is restricted.

648 SI/PM - there is no reason to get 272 points of buffs to cast Extreme Prejudice. It's just not that good. Lets say just mochams... 480ish SI/PM is nothing you will want to do as an engie till you are well over 150, and selfcasting is very brutal. Be careful about assuming that nanos in the database are being used in practical instances. There are two engies that I know of that self-cast Extreme Prejudice on the entirety of RK2. Level reqs are odious, but sometimes nanoskill reqs are odious too.

[Routeen]

Originally posted by reality


Finally, please answer this question : Why do you introduce large skill buffs if you make them useless again with level requirements ?

Will we no longer have to spend a single IP in nanoskills since we'll have items that buff them high enough to use our nano's ?

Yes, this strikes me as the heart of the matter!

Want to elaborate on this a bit. I assume that FC plans not only to introduce nanoskill buffs, but also buffs to various weapon skills.

The problem (and this is THE central problem with NTs, atm] is that every pt. of weapon skill increase has an effect -- on both dmg and hit chance. It is a smooth scale. [this is in addition to equipping, of course]

For all intents and purposes, the ONLY effect of nano skill is allowing you access to nanos. It is not a smooth scale, but discrete. My counter and dmg rates with nukes is nearly identical when I have 1100 MC, or 874. Mob lvl relative to yours is always the most decisive variable for dmg, although this is a completely "Hidden variable."

So, what exactly is the pt of nano skill buffs? The only way they could be meaninful is if you introduced nanos at the top end that can ONLY be cast using these buffs. But this can only effect the top end of the curve, and seems a rather silly addition.

Additionally, if you introduce weapon buffs at the same time, it seemingly trivializes the pure casters.

More responses and suggestions to follow

[Varfleet]

First thanks for at least putting it on the table as something that needs to be looked at.

1st thought: Should you decide to keep level requirements, at least factor in that there are some who not play often to reach levels high enough to use these buffs. And if they do, the point is moot as you have enough skill by say 180 to self equip a 200 weapon. If the thought of the buffs being too powerful, and OE is the real concern, make them all self only.

2nd thought: If level requirements are going to stay, then you should up the benifits of the armor, weapon, etc. My 51 Enforcer wears 84 Omni-Elite legite and not OE. Now, as an example, that armor was level req'd to be at 84, I would have more than the reqs needed as at 51, I can legit equip 84 Armors. The upping of benefits of say a level req'd Elite should be at least 1.5 more powerful than the normal armor.

3rd and last thought. If level reqs are going to be a requirement, make it an alternative req. For example, Take the Shot needs 700 in PM and SI (I believe). If that nano was level req'd at 140, but I only had 550 in PM and SI I would still be able to use it and vice versa, if at level 120 I have 700 in PM and SI, I could use the nano.

Good, bad?

[____________Customer]

simple solution:

whatever the Devs were going to put into Shadowlands
that totally screws up the skill-based game we love,
DONT DO IT. DELETE THOSE ITEMS. DELETE THOSE BUFFS.
I care about a fun game, with smart rules, not phat l00t.

the cause of the problem is Shadowlands.
Shadowlands should not play by different rules.
Shadowlands should be an expansion of Anarchy Online,
not the Anti-Anarchy Online.

If the only thing your new Devs can dream up is bigger numbers,
then fire those <flame withheld> and hire people with some creativity.
(or better yet, get the old designers back)

[cold]

And another thingy, traders keeping a wrangle up in a team won't be even remotely useful if the team can't use higher level nano's

[Xtremtech]

I must apologise for having speed read this thread to an extent and yet contributing nevertheless. All my spare time is taken up with reading every thread on the MP and Professionals boards right now. There's been hearty discussion of this issue in both of those fora too, which I'm not going to reproduce here.

I just dropped in to offer the thought that a lot of the discussion (and occasionally argument) around these issues is based in a lack of overview that has been given to the players. We know that the shadowlands 'package' will include:

1) Breed Specialisations

2) Profession Specialisations

3) Increases to overall skills budgets

4) Level requirements to new nanos

5) Lots of new nanos

6) Many new items

We're seeing a foretaste of some of these elements already but have no overview of how the whole system will work with all of these elements together, so all of our discussions and analysis of impact may well be completely out of whack when we see the complete picture.

I'm wondering whether it would be possible to work out some way of giving us all a high level overview of what 'breed specialisation' and 'profession specialisation' will actually look like in Shadowlands and how those changes are seen as working together with level requirements, new nanos and new items. Within a framework like that we could perhaps discuss more solidly the overall effect.

Just a thought.

X

[Nepenthea]

Greetings,

What exactly is off-balance and "uneven" in the game, that requires CASTER level restrictions on a nano to be uploaded/cast? Understanding the base "cause" which has resulted in the "effect" (level restriction on casters uploading/casting a nano) would help tremendously in understanding Funcom's logic and reasoning.

I'm going to take a stab in the dark here and guess at what might be Funcom's reasoning:
Funcom wants to prevent (lower-level) over-equipping/"twinking".

If this IS the case, wouldn't a restriction--not on the CASTER of the nano--but on the RECIPIENT of that nano (buff) make far more sense?

In this scenario, it wouldn't prevent someone from being able to upload/cast a nano, if they meet the skill requirements, but, it does ensure that someone lower than the *appropriate level range* of that particular nano can't receive that buff. Logically, the nanos with recipient-level-restrictions would pertain specifically to skill/stat/ability buffs--the nanos which are the "cause" of the OE/twinking "effect". In this scenario, it would still allow for flexibility in which breed one chooses to play, and how one chooses to allocate their IP. The skill system currently in place would not be compromised. This scenario would be much less contradictory and much less defeating to the current skill system already in existance.


To reiterate:

- Level restriction is RECIPIENT only, NOT caster.
- A character of level lower than the appropriate level range of that nano can not receive that buff.
- The nanos with recipient-level-restrictions would pertain specifically to skill/stat/ability buffs.