Community answers - level requirements on nano programs

[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.

However, Community will work out a suggestion for more lenient requirements, which should still allow for character tweaking to use the programs earlier, and preserves the advantage of playing a nanomage breed character. We can't promise anything except that the suggestion will be looked at, and that we will do what we can to have it replace the current system.

We will also look into removing the requirements completely on programs such as the leet charms for Adventurers.

I don't want to make too much of a post here to start off with, as I want to get started on the suggestion. We will be back with more information later.

And please keep postings calm. I know this is a heated topic, much due to our lack of response earlier, but ranting and similar really isn't helping.

/me leaves ice cream for the masses and runs off to do some calculations

[____________Greystar]

Maybe two level requirements on Nanos, one lower for Nanomage and one higher for other breeds ?

[Cz]

Greystar, idea noted. I'll look into it.

Btw, I added "AO Stratics" as a title for you.

[______________Scorus]

A couple of questions/observations/suggestions:

1) The difference between what you are suggesting here and what was announced previously is that, before, the question of whether a nano would have level reqs or not was simply "Is it pre-14.2 or post-14.2?" Since you open up the distinct possibility that some post-14.2 nanos will not necessarily need level reqs, does that open the door that some pre-14.2 nanos will? Is it at all possible that level reqs could be added to older nanos? Many of us have wondered whether there is concern that things like Nano Shutdown, TMS Mk X, Izzy's Last Word, etc. will be castable at a 'trivial' level after the new skill bonuses which supposedly require level reqs are added.

2) I agree that some nanos don't need reqs, the leet charm line being the most obvious example. I would further suggest that nanos which are very similar to other, already existing lines (i.e. nanos with no level reqs) also fall into this category. By that, I most especially mean the buffing lines. The lower versions of the new pistol, 1HE and SMG buffs most especially.

3) Get input from your professionals and don't set any limit that can be reached by a self-buffed character.

4) It seems that all this would have been largely unnecessary if you had made oe rules apply to NCUs.

Scorus

[secondkenlon]

Cz, could you please try to explain again why the new nanos are all being level restricted but the old ones are not?

The stated reason (Allowing you to put ph4t l3wts into Shadowlands without rendering nanos trivial to cast) might make sense if you were restricting everything.

However, with a major part of the NFs in the game unrestricted, it seems to me that the Fixer, Advent, NT, and to a lesser degree the Agent, will be at a great disadvantage versus those classes that did not need fixing and thus will not have restricted nanos.


Can you please try to clarify this? It leaves me most puzzled.

[Tetra]

I wont copy the thread i started here that explains why the current defence for the level req's is completely illogical at best but anyone who has an idea of defending them should most definately check it out before they throw out a tired strawman argument.

[Darkbane]

Hmm, yes, a better explanation is needed before we can even begin to discuss this issue in a sensible fashion (ok, ok, fat chance of that on these boards... ).

We simply don't know enough to make any reasoned suggestions.

As it appears the level requirements were not put there just to prevent twinking (in which case the levels were way too high), but to aid in balancing a future product... ok, I'm still not getting this... Spell it out in plain simple language...

[Warlock]

I'm with Kenlon on this

I cannot see how you can _justify_ putting level reqs on new nanos (e****ially those designed to re-balance a class) yet completely ignore the main causes for OE in the first place (i.e. Wrangle, Mochams, Infuse, Masteries etc). You didnt need to put level reqs on equipment to address OE, why do you need it on nanos?

Now I'm an _not_ suggesting you go back and put level reqs on every nano in the game, this is just _more_ reason to remove the level restrictions on all the nanos and address _the cause_ of the upcoming problem i.e. the 'shadowlands uber buffs', these are the cause of the problem, they should be the object of the solution (added bonus - if you nerf them before they are even released, no one will ever know and you wont get any player backlash from it).

Failing that why arent you considering only applying the level restrictions to the new nanos in the shadowlands version of the database? (since you are obviously not going to let non-shadowlands players access the new items, I fail to see how you can avoid having 2 version of the database at the same time?).

I dont see (and maybe I need the numbers in front of me) how a lower level restriction will help nanomages? Since any other breed who is able to get hold of 'the right buffs/items' will also be able to use said nano at the 'new' level. Yes you give the nanomage an slight 'edge' but since those 'unbalancing buffs' (for want of a better phrase) are still in the game and unrestricted its not going to be very difficult for other breeds to achieve this. It certainly doesnt offset the huge penalty a nanomage pays compared to the other breeds (hitpoints spring to mind)

I tremble in fear at what you are going to do when you finally get around to 'fixing' the Engineer class

[Cz]

Imposing the current level requirement system on all the old nano programs will simply be too much of a nerf. I think we can all agree on that, right?

Now, if we get a system with more lenient level requirements - requirements which have little or no effect with the current buffs and skill budgets, but still adds enough restrictions when taking future (Expansion Pack) budget into account - I don't see anything wrong with adding those level requirements to the old nano programs too.

But remember, this is a suggestion from Community, not something the designers are working on. While we (Community) have slightly more information than you players, designers have even more they have to take into account. They might discard our suggestion altogether, as they have to consider other issues for the future and base their judgements on that.

Of course, we hope to make something they can accept. And discussing it with the professionals is already in the plans.

[Tetra]

Originally posted by Cz
Imposing the current level requirement system on all the old nano programs will simply be too much of a nerf. I think we can all agree on that, right?

In my earlier linked to thread one of the aspects I talked about was how funcom stated players would be able to cast ql200 nano's around level 100 which works out to +250 or so points of nanoskills around level 100 (taken by comparing level 195 restricted nano with an old ql113 nano of same class). With such a large bonus how is it that funcom considers things like using an inferior morph+mochams to get a nuke that barely brings you back to the damage output of the much much lower cf sabertooth, the damage shield additions, smg buffs for fixers, pistol buffs for advents, or basically any of the new nano's could be more unbalancing than things like UVC, TMS MK X, igz's, etc at such trivial levels. You [funcom] have stated time and again that it's done as a balancing issue yet every single arguement that has been thrown out to try to defend such a position is a strawman that's demolished when you simply take a step back and look at it with an ounce of reason. I most certainly would like to see a responce to the points raised in that thread which are also points raised by many others in the various threads about level req's already.

Now, if we get a system with more lenient level requirements - requirements which have little or no effect with the current buffs and skill budgets, but still adds enough restrictions when taking future (Expansion Pack) budget into account - I don't see anything wrong with adding those level requirements to the old nano programs too.

It's hard to avoid noticing that the level req's currently placed on nano's roughly work out to allowing heavy MP or trader buffs to cast it at the level req but not both. Could it be that funcom never immagined people would stack MP+Trader nanoskill buffs to cast things. Up until now most classes wound up casting their nano's roughly when they were the same level as the QL, yet with the new nano's they hit the QL and level req and are still required to get heavy external buffs to cast... It seems much more plausible that funcom decided they didn't like people casting much higher level buffs with external help because of ho much more effective they were but didn't want to remove the usefulness of the nanoskill buffers so placed artificial restrictions on the nano's so now instead of using the next best thing that was much higher level when you were with a trader/meta you cast the next best thing which is your level... I cant help but laugh when I point out that the community would likely have said fine if you told us before the fact and used an ounce of logic when you created the requirements both for level restrictions and nanoskill's needed to cast.

But remember, this is a suggestion from Community, not something the designers are working on. While we (Community) have slightly more information than you players, designers have even more they have to take into account. They might discard our suggestion altogether, as they have to consider other issues for the future and base their judgements on that.

We've heard this argument several times in the past, especially when dealing with level req's, yet each time it was given to us we were also presented an argument that had no chance of even standing against even the most clueless of the newbies who looked at a few facts. It's all well and good to say we are listening but listening doesnt mean we will do as you say, but if you expect us to allow you to say such a thing you must present an argument that can withstand a shred of logic, period end of discussion.

Of course, we hope to make something they can accept. And discussing it with the professionals is already in the plans.

[*presses his be nice button and deletes his comment*]

[Turin]

Originally posted by Cz



However, Community will work out a suggestion for more lenient requirements, which should still allow for character tweaking to use the programs earlier, and preserves the advantage of playing a nanomage breed character. We can't promise anything except that the suggestion will be looked at, and that we will do what we can to have it replace the current system.

/me leaves ice cream for the masses and runs off to do some calculations

Cz, Thank you for finally responding somehow about the nanomage situation. I was starting to get a tad upset. ( as im sure you could tell from my posts ) but I get mad when I feel ignored by someone I pay to provide a service.

This really doesnt answer the question though, it only shows to me, that this wasnt thought of what so ever when this design was thought up by the Dev team. That to me signals poor planning, wich makes me even more afraid of Shadow Lands. ( which I intend to buy ) I will eagerly await a final answer on this, and leave you alone on it for a couple weeks.


Secondly. with the new buffs being introduced, your going to have problems vrs the old nanos. Unless you say "not only do you have to be this lvl to cast it, you can only cast it on lvl ### or above people"

By your own words, it will make casting a lvl 200 nano at lvl 100 trivial. well.. so will MP's now cast mochams at lvl 50 if theyt get the right buffs? or NT's hitting me with nano shutdown at lvl 20 or something insane like that? There are some HUGELY insane buffs in this game that you must be high lvl to cast right now. With the upcoming buffs in Shadow Lands, will it not just make this even more "trivial" when you have lvl 50 docs casting complete heal or something like that?


IT would be a HUGE nerf to lvl req all the old nano's. I think we would all agree with you on that. ITs also unfortuneatly not balancing to leave them alone. There has to be some kind of even medium in there, or the current high lvl buffs will be "trivialized" by your own statements.

Thank you for the ice cream. its hot here today. ( 115 degrees with heat index!!! ouch! )

[___________Firedrake]

originally posted by Cz
But remember, this is a suggestion from Community, not something the designers are working on. While we (Community) have slightly more information than you players, designers have even more they have to take into account.

The designers should also remember that they aren't the ones PLAYING or PAYING for the game. If makes little difference what their "vision" is if the vast majority rejects the rules they imposed to make it work and leave the game. Sure, they certainly can cram their will upon the player base, this has been done in other MMORPG's, but almost always at a large cost in players and ill-will if the change is not liked, wanted, or needed.

EQ got away for a long time with shoving nerfs and unpopular changes down players throats. Then they started to get competition in the market. Not long after that, they sack a large part of those who previously zealously defended Verant's "vision" and start actually giving players what they wanted. Don't repeat VI's mistakes. I'd recommend you cut the camping, keep soloing viable, and lose the idiotic level restrictions. But then, what do I know, I actually expect the game to be FUN.

I am, however, gratified that at least you are trying to communicate with your players and hopefully you will listen to them and their desires and so will your developers.

[Bionitrous]

Cz,

You hit the nail on the head. 'Level' should not be the determining factor. Ever.

If a player can use his resources and 'skill' to execute a nano, then he should be able to execute the nano. If he has not cheated, he should not be punished for not having made enough revolutions of the mousewheel.

Since you seem pressed into more communication with the players, I suggest the following:

Put out a call to the players who have these nanos that they can execute right now but are only prevented from doing so by the 'level' requirement. Ask them to meet up with you, or Cosmik, or Dai in-game. Perhaps the designers are really that out-of-touch with what a 'real' character looks like. Ask them to show you their items and implants. It's called a case study.

Nobody is really going to go into the fine dissections done on these boards with respect to how poorly chosen some of the 'level' limits were. If you give them a character name and an example of a specific nano that is rotting away in their backpack for no other reason than the despised and detested 'level' requirements, then maybe their eyes will be opened to reality.

The 'Shadowlands' argument could hold some water if players were not being 'level' restricted right now six months before the release of a product that many of us will not probably buy based on our desire to switch to a different skill-based game at around the same time. The fact is, people are being 'level' locked even without any of the (IMHO) ill-advised 'uber-buffs' expected to come in the December-January timeframe.

If we were allowed to return to what worked and what kept us striving to improve our characters in ways other than inching towards that damned 'ding!' perhaps more of us would be open to continuing our lives on Rubi'Ka as we evaluated other Galaxies.

Do your jobs as Community reps ask the community to come to you with each example of a Nano they can execute right now, today, with modest buffs that the designers have locked them out of.

Example: 'Jojack the level 60 Nanomage Fixer is able to execute this particular Supressor nano with only his implants and Masteries. Yet the 'level' limit prevents him from doing so for 8 levels.' If he has not exploited his implants, then this situation must be fixed. It is a design flaw. End of story.

Fix it and I and others might reconsider leaving the 'level treadmill' and evaluate the impact of the Shadowlands. Leave it so that Jojack has no other option than to 'level' and we're gone.

The current problems with the new nanos present problems _now_. People can't execute them using the _current_ ruleset even if they have the skills. That is why people are leaving in anticipation of a real skill-based game.

This is another shining example of why people should be allowed to play their 'mains' on the test server at least between the period from when a preliminary patch goes onto Test unti the time it's moved to 'Live'.

Likewise, there are nanos that have zero effect on PvP that should never have been considered for level limits. Assuming the Agent nano Advanced Face Graft came out after this silly idea of 'level' limits came out, you'd probably put a 'level' 150 requirement on it. For what purpose?

Getting into the Fixer Grid 7 levels before another player is unbalancing how? Seems to be a fun goal to strive for. Having an MP around or implanting like a crazed scientist to achieve this goal is a hell of a lot more Fun than dredging through 7 more 'levels'. The game _is_ supposed to be Fun, isn't it?

To put it simply, there is nothing more detestable than having a 'level' requirement on _anything_. That simply isn't why we play. We level to get IP's. That is the end of the story. IP's make us stronger in ways that we _choose_ to get stronger. The fact that we mostly choose the same Skills to get stronger in is simply because there's only about 30% of the Skills that have any value.

When was the last time anybody put more than 90 in Vehicle air or a single point into Sharp Objects? Perhaps your designers are not aware that this simple fact is one of the reasons they are having so much difficulty with people pumping and implanting NanoSkills to the extreme. Not much else matters. Please relay the fact that if the Skills were more equally important, players would have to thin out their IP spread or risk ineffectiveness in a potentially important area. MapNav above 130 is useless in comparison to NanoSkills. Parry? Riposte? Vehicle Skills? NanoResist? Adventuring?

No. People pump NanoSkills and Weapon Skills. Then Treatment, CompLit, BodyDev. And the designers wonder why people are able to execute nanos so much higher than their 'intended' level.

Has anyone checked out the Basic Profession Implant shops? That's a telling example of how clueless the designers are when it comes to how people actually play.

And I still haven't gotten an explanation of why I have armor in my pack that is _not_ imbalancing, that I got from a boss that I killed _by myself_, that I have had the skills to use _unbuffed_, that I can't wear for 20 'levels'. Explain to me why that piece of crap 'level-locked' item rotting in my bank is 'fun' and makes me want to 'level.

[__________LostBoyJim]

Originally posted by Turin

Secondly. with the new buffs being introduced, your going to have problems vrs the old nanos. Unless you say "not only do you have to be this lvl to cast it, you can only cast it on lvl ### or above people"

By your own words, it will make casting a lvl 200 nano at lvl 100 trivial. well.. so will MP's now cast mochams at lvl 50 if theyt get the right buffs? or NT's hitting me with nano shutdown at lvl 20 or something insane like that? There are some HUGELY insane buffs in this game that you must be high lvl to cast right now. With the upcoming buffs in Shadow Lands, will it not just make this even more "trivial" when you have lvl 50 docs casting complete heal or something like that?


IT would be a HUGE nerf to lvl req all the old nano's. I think we would all agree with you on that. ITs also unfortuneatly not balancing to leave them alone. There has to be some kind of even medium in there, or the current high lvl buffs will be "trivialized" by your own statements.

Cz,
Has this been discussed with the dev team? For each profession, take their "best" nanos...when will they be able to cast them with Shadowland artifacts? Who cares about the "new" nanos, if I can cast Pit Lizard at level 90 then there's going to be a lot of problems.

If you have plans to retroactively change reqs on current crystals, you need to start aclimating the community to that now. I can tell you now that balloon is going to fly like lead. If you do nothing to the nanos, then you are going to have huge problems in terms of damage done by mid-level players. What will NTs be like if they can cast QL 120 nanos at level 50?

I think a previous poster hit the nail on the head. We as a community have very few things to implant TOWARD except nanoskills. Of course we are damn good at it by now!

LostBoy
jim

[Jayde]

A few comments here from the eyes of an Advent...

It's already a fact that most of the new nanos being added are self-only..however, I think it's really silly to consider that we have to *self-cast* everything.

The nano requirements the devs game up with don't seem to take into account:
1) Resonably high nano implants
2) Resonable buffs for that level

Obviously, they shouldn't plan for a level 12 char to have access to Mochams, but once you hit 100, it's silly to think that we shouldn't be able to get Mochams. I play side-by-side with an MP. I have access to Infuses and Masteries with my level 88 Advent rather easily. Many of the level 100 req nanos I have stockpiled I could easily cast now with a few buffs from my friend, and with my level 110 nano-oriented implants.

Imposing the current level requirement system on all the old nano programs will simply be too much of a nerf. I think we can all agree on that, right?

Cz...I know you're trying, but just stop to think about it for a moment.

Yes. I agree. Why? Because I *don't* agree with the current way things are with the Advent/Fixer nanos!

HOWEVER, if the Advent and Fixer nanos stay as-is, I wholeheartedly think that all nanos should get the reqs. Sorry, but it's all about balance, as you said.

Yes, yes...better keep us from casting our +100 pistol buff until level 195 when we couldn't possibly need +100 pistol, but an Engineer with buffs could cast it in the early 100s. Oh, dear... those uber 1337 charm nanos may unbalance the game, but we'll go ahead and let NT's get Mochams and go to town with Izgimmer's Enveloping Flame whenever they feel like it. (And, no, I didn't mean Last Fumble. *L*) Oh man, our super uber (read: worthless) charms need to be level locked, but that's ok...let a crat cast Total Mental Domination whenever they can get the appropriate Mochams and QL 200 implants stepped in.

Sorry...but if these changes were instituted in the name of balance, how come they don't seem to balance anything at all? NCU buffs are the only possible nano I see that should get these limits on them. Period. All or nothing.

Also, it was stated that there was some special forumla for determining the level requirements? Umm...you gotta be kidding me, right?

Since when do forumlas yield level requirements of:
25, 50, 75, 100, 155, and the almighty 195?

There are WAY too many nanos with level 75, 100, 155, and 195 reqs for it to be anything more than an abitrary number that "sounded good" to the developers. There is NOT A CHANCE these were scientifically calulated to be fair in any way, shape, or form. 488, 594, 479, 578. What are those numbers? The major nano skill reqs on various "level 100" nanos. They aren't even remotely similar. Yet the numbers: 422 and 444? Level 75 req. Yep.

Compare:
NanoCrystal (Zephyr from the Grove)
Requirements:
biological meta >= 444
sensory imp >= 403
level >= 75

NanoCrystal (Anger of the Porcupine)
Requirements
matter meta >= 488
matter creation >= 488
level >= 100

NanoCrystal (Ballad of the Desperado)
Requirements
sensory imp >= 479
psycho mod >= 479
level >= 100

Now...I was able to self-cast Zephyr from the Grove without any buffs at around level 80. (I hadn't raised my SI in a while, so I had to pour some levels into it...so I can't give you an exact number there.)

As mentioned, I play with a Meta. Get Masteries, cast Expertises on myself...I could easily cast Anger of the Porcupine or Ballad of the Desperado at level 90. Easily. No question about it. Probably sooner, but I'm being liberal here to make a point.

Maybe it dev-land where they can type "/level 100" when they want to test something, 10 levels is "no big deal." For me, it's over a week of pretty extensive play, unless I get lucky with some great missions and can avoid lag deaths.

Obviously, these level limits are not to protect the game from Shadowlands, no. They are to hold back people from casting them before that level PERIOD. The level limits were NOT set in a "fair" manner, they were set when the developers "think they should get them" without regard to the current method of play. Maybe one of your new nanos designers game over from DAoC, and doesn't understand the concept of operating without hand-holding the players through the entire game.

Level limits destory team-work. Level limits destory having fun tweaking your character to be "the best they can be." Level limits destroy any advantage a "good" player has over a "novice" player at all.

This is the reason I canceled my account, and I feel quite strongly about the issue. I have a backpack flush with new advent nanos that I should be able to use by now, but I can't. It's annoying, it's frustrating, and it certainly isn't fun.

-Jayde

[____________Greystar]

Originally posted by Cz
Greystar, idea noted. I'll look into it.

Btw, I added "AO Stratics" as a title for you.

Thanks, on both counts

[______________Scorus]

Some of your questions are not as easy as they appear. Once you decide to go down the slippery slope of level reqs, you face a decision between two very bad choices:
1) If you apply the decision to all the old nanos retroactively, then you have a major nerf. And you are forced to add level reqs as use reqs for the nano in addition to the nano crystal so that everyone is on the same playing field. Otherwise you set off a wave of Mocham-selling so people can load their nanos before they are nerfed.
OR
2) You don't do this and you have created two different playing fields. You have some classes who have to deal with this major stumbling block and some that don't and can cast nanos WAY above their level with what you guys have said will be common buffs. In other words, some classes will have to wait until level 110 to cast level 100 nanos while other classes are casting level 200s at the same level. Ick! (Though you already have it this way since your weapon oe reqs allow overequipping while your nano reqs force underequipping).

On the subject of old nanos, we would REALLY like something authoritative. Even if that is "Our official position is it MAY or MAY NOT happen." The reason I say this is that past messages said it definitely wouldn't and now you say that it might. We just need to know which is accurate. You don't want to be in a position where the spokesman says one thing and the company ends up doing another.

Lastly, these are all questions that the developers should have had answers to before they made such a sweeping change to the system. Funcom has thusfar been perceived as brushing aside criticisms with statements that infer that this is really not a big deal, but the repercussions are tremendous. This change greatly affects major aspects of the game that touch every character: breed choice, profession choice, profession balance, the importance of the leveling treadmill versus the skill buffs and implants, etc.

This is a lot like a pre-beta or beta change. The developers seem to be approaching Shadowbane like it is a new game and the old rules can be tossed out the window without serious repercussion. It is common for programmers to get a revolutionary idea in their head and just run with it. But if this is just the first of a serious of huge mechanics changes, then it will be problematic. You have already lost the part of your playerbase that didn't like AOs mechanics, so all that are left are the players that like them. If you change those mechanics and lose them, there ain't nothing left.

Scorus

[____________Psiraven]

"However, Community will work out a suggestion for more lenient requirements, which should still allow for character tweaking to use the programs earlier, and preserves the advantage of playing a nanomage breed character."
-------------------------------------------------

Heya, Cz, this is off-topic a bit, and just a player's comment. I'd rather not have a "breed advantage" that disappears in the long run of the game. If this is intended as the whole of a nanomage's breed advantage, Id rather not have it.

I don't find that being able to execute nanos a 1or 2 levels early is any true advantage when all breeds can exectute the same nanos eventually.

I'd rather have reduced chance to fumble a nano program, being able to defeat nano resistance a little better, being able to execute programs faster. More nanopool. Maybe even a little % extra damage on nukes.

Losing 800+ hit points in the high end game is a pretty hard hit and its permanent. Please don't balance it out by giving an advantage that disappears in the long run.

191 mp

[Kuro]

I won't take credit for Nietya's idea (I think it was her) but I like it. It was suggested in a comments thread over at Bashers.

Warning!!! Heavy sedatives will prolly be needed for everyone that reads this

1. Make all nanoformula requirements work from the base skill instead of buffed skill.
   
   If the problem is controlling when nanoformulas are availible because of buffs remove the buffs as a variable to calculate. This would also make the different breeds actually mean something. Nanobreeds would be able to execute nanoformulas earlier because of their breed modifier to base attributes. Implant bonuses could be kept or tossed when determining when a player could execute a nanoformula. I'd suggest keeping them though. Implant allow for customization.
   
2. Make buffs/implant bonuses to nanoskills mean something different.
   
   I know it's been said that the ability to crit on a nukes wouldn't be implemented. But the options of what skill means in AO are being reduced with implementing level caps. With level requirements, buffed/implanted skill starts to become worthless. So you might as well make it worthless across the board for when someone can use a nanoformula and make it valuable across the board for how it enhances the use of a nanoformula. Higher skill reduces nanocost. Or takes up less ncu space. Or adds bonus damage/healing/debuff/buff (not necessarily crit style bonus damage). Or reduces recharge time. Or even combinations of those types of beneficial effects as the players have more and more skill above the requirements.

Now here's where the sedatives would be necessary. Obviously that would mean rewriting the entire nanoformula system, rebalancing all the nanoformulas, and updating their entries. I'd suggest bypassing any normal chemical sedatives and just hitting Blackmane over the head with a blunt object if you take this idea to him. But the upside is that you'd forever be able to control exactly when you wanted a nanoformula to be used. Also you make breed begin to mean something again thanks to base attribute caps/ip costs and trickle down into nanoskills. That would forever remove the nano balance/OE nightmares the devs apparently are having (cause they came up with level requirements, which ranks right up there with night terrors). And it would satisfy a prominent demand from the playerbase: make my breed mean something.

We players would need sedatives as well. If this was implemented, it would mean a change to AO's gameplay larger than the OE changes. And this bunch is skittish. But at least you wouldn't need heavy sedatives. To relieve the panic doing something like this would cause, all that would be required is communication, IPR, and making the benefits of getting buffs worth actually having.

By publicizing the new requirements before implementing them, you'd be giving the playerbase a chance to see any changes to their character they might have to make and plan accordingly. But since the devs already have an idea when specific nanoformulas should be executable for xxx level player, it wouldn't be difficult to keep people capable of executing most their nanos after the change. And a full IPR would definately help to mollify most people. There would still be concerns over what buffs to nanoskills mean, especially in the grey areas like Pet Summoning. But I think yall underestimate just how devaluing this is to a person like myself, that plays a character that's supposed to be good at buffing. Wrangles aren't very popular already. With level requirements, what's the point of being able to buff nanoskills at all? It's even worse for MPs, cause at least as a trader I can wrangle a weapon on ya.

Before anyone dismisses this out of hand saying "It'll be too much work" or "He's nuts", consider what's at stake here and compare the possible benefits of implementing it. Speaking as a player capable of buffing nanoskills, I have to question the feasibility of aquiring those nanos over their actual value. If I can't help other players by buffing their skills, I won't bother getting the wrangle crystals. That removes me as someone capable of buffing. And if the level limits spread to more and more additions, which FC has basically stated already, people capable of buffing will ask the same question. No buffers = No buffs = Everyone loses

[MrWaddles]

Originally posted by Cz
Of course, we hope to make something they (the developers -- ed.) can accept.

This statement is quite telling. No, Cz, the developers should be making something the playerbase can accept. Not the other way around. It's the playerbase who's paying the developers' salaries.

Keep putting the developers' desires ahead of the playerbase, and see how long "Funcom receiving subscription revenue" is something a majority of the playerbase "can accept".

You folk are just repeating yet another well-publicized mistake committed in the past by another MMORPG company. Verant started with that same mentality of "vision first". Then, when the revenue stream showed the players' feelings about that mentality, the entire "vision" development team got canned. It wasn't until Verant took a mandate to be "players first", that they greatly improved their player relations (and ongoing subscription numbers).

Are you sure you and your developers wish to maintain your current approach? It won't end well, I assure you.

Yeesh..."something they can accept". Ugh.