Do levels suck?

[Nija]

As to people with no playtime coming into a game you've played for months and yet immediately being as powerful as you? Get over yourself buddy.

I take it you never have played sports? That type of stuff happens all the time. Yeah, you could argue that people play these games because they're not good at sports, but I'd just disagree again.

It works the same way in FPS games, and it pretty much works the same way in mmorpg games. Successful raid guilds from EQ are now successful raid guilds in WoW. Guys that were good at Q1DM are now great at CS.

Hypothetical -

World of Diablo is released. Some Diablo 2 players are hyped, start up characters, and level to 120 in about 6-8 weeks. (WoD = WoW x2) They join together to form an 80 player raid group to attempt the raid content. We'll call this Guild A.

3 months after release Guild B, a guild that has been raiding in WoW for the past 4 years stops playing WoW and creates new characters in WoD, never having played the game before. They level up to 120 in about 6-8 weeks as well. They can easily fill a single raid group of 80, and their 4 weekly groups are now divided into two weekly groups and they had to move up two pricing tiers on the Ventrilo server that they rent. They consider getting a leased line just to provide voice communication.

Which group of players will have more success? What does 'level 120' really mean in this example?

[Mandrel]

I HATED[/i] pre-CURB SWG (and I have yet to ever play it post CURB or NGE, not worthy of my time).  The game sucked.  Moisture farming, while accurate, is not fun.  The combat system was retarded, unbalanced, and silly.  Having 3 "damage bars" that each could kill you, but only having healers for 2 damage bars is the most retarded thing I've ever seen.  How the fuck did Raph think that THAT wasn't going to be unbalanced?

You could choose to be a moisture farmer if you wanted.  That was the beauty of it.  You didnt find it fun.  Others did.  Not everyone wants combat.  Others want a more sedate lifestyle. 

The combat system was unbalanced, and could have been balanced very easily.  And in fact is "was" with the ORIGINAL CU docs.  FWIW, there WERE stims that healed the mind in beta, and dropped in live.  However, they were never implemented as a schematic for *anyone* to craft (would have been an excellent money maker for entertainers).  The original CU docs included mind stims.  Combat was unbalanced *primarily* because of one thing:

The inability to heal the mind pool (by anyone not a Jedi or a Combat Medic) in combat without resting or not taking damage to that particular pool. 

Put in effective mind healing stims, and the game takes a radical turn towards being balanced.  And more strategic. 

Also, lack of foresight by the devs by not implementing cures to Combat Medic poisons and diseases fast enough (launch would have been a good time), as well as a way to cure being on fire (Commandos were the second profession to receive a solid hit with the nerf bat).  All put in WAY too late (1-1.5 years after launch, IIRC).   Another failure of the devs was the apparent lack of comprehension of their own crafting system and the heights and strengths to which it could produce armor, weapons, heals, etc.  I'm not entirely convinced they thought that the player base was smart enough to figure it out as quick as they did.

FWIW, the original CU docs had combat *on paper* very balanced.  There was a counter for everything. 

I think that the scrapping of the original CU design for whatever reason is where SOE really lost integrity of the game, along with the trust of the player base.  For a year and a half, players were fed the line "this will be solved with the Combat Upgrade" as the answer to balance issues, smuggler revamp, Galactic Civil War, etc, etc.
What was pushed live was seen by many as a betrayal of the original design, that had nothing to do with fixing the problems players had complained about since launch, added further imbalances and bugs, and three in a new interface.  What exatcly does adding cartoony icons have to do with a "combat upgrade" anyways?
Since the first try at attracting the WoW crowd failed with the "substitute" CU, SOE felt the need to try something even more drastic, which may have been on the back burner as a pet project for some time.  The problem with the NGE is that it has invalidated years of progression for players just 6 months after the CU partially invalidated time invested by most of the player base.
I was a pretty hardcore weaponsmith from launch, which to be successful I needed to know the combat system often better than my customers.  I did get out fairly often for group hunts, mostly to test things and have a little "shoot em up time", but most of my enjoyment from the game came from the challenge of tracking hundreds of resources, buying weapon upgrades from hunters, and tailoring custom weapons to what I knew would work best for my customers (most of which became friends, whom I could chat with even while they were out hunting).
I really would like to know what happened to cause the scrapping of the original CU vision, that could have fixed the majoity of the issues players had at the time.  A HAPPY, satisfied player base (word of mouth does matter), along with the commitment to advertising SOE has recently shown and a plan to attract former players could have been a much more successful venture than spending the manhours and money on 2 new game versions in a 6 month period.

[Numtini]

As to people with no playtime coming into a game you've played for months and yet immediately being as powerful as you? Get over yourself buddy.

I take it you never have played sports? That type of stuff happens all the time. Yeah, you could argue that people play these games because they're not good at sports, but I'd just disagree again.

It works the same way in FPS games, and it pretty much works the same way in mmorpg games. Successful raid guilds from EQ are now successful raid guilds in WoW. Guys that were good at Q1DM are now great at CS.

Hypothetical -

World of Diablo is released. Some Diablo 2 players are hyped, start up characters, and level to 120 in about 6-8 weeks. (WoD = WoW x2) They join together to form an 80 player raid group to attempt the raid content. We'll call this Guild A.

3 months after release Guild B, a guild that has been raiding in WoW for the past 4 years stops playing WoW and creates new characters in WoD, never having played the game before. They level up to 120 in about 6-8 weeks as well. They can easily fill a single raid group of 80, and their 4 weekly groups are now divided into two weekly groups and they had to move up two pricing tiers on the Ventrilo server that they rent. They consider getting a leased line just to provide voice communication.

Which group of players will have more success? What does 'level 120' really mean in this example?

In sports, those guys wouldn't be playing in the same league as I would. That's the thing.

You don't see Chelsea dropping by the local pitch and getting some kind of twisted thrill by stomping the local co-ed over 30 team (my place in the football world) by 250 to nil. In gaming, that's exactly what happens.

The problem is how to segregate people because the online world is anonymous and gaming culture has produced a very anti-social culture.

[Strazos]

Which group of players will have more success? What does 'level 120' really mean in this example?

It means jack and shit as far as skill goes - they've just put in the requisite time to hit level 120.

Leveling takes zero skill in most MMOs - it's simply a matter of smacking enough mobs over the head to make a bar fill up.

[Jimbo]

Well, I know that some people have a hard time thinking that since they spent the time to wack-a-mole to the highest level, they should be able to beat up the low levels no matter what.  I disagre, especially if the low level uses some means to suprise the high level.

But I think a lot of it comes down to how the game is set up.  Some games have a terrible death penalties, some would favor certain classes over others, and some just totally ignored any use of the environment or positioning (what and where you were attacked from).  Plus, with having a leveling grind that takes forever to hit the top level, makes those who got to the top, unwilling to want to be killed in a fair fight by the low levels.

In Planetside, I don't mind if my Rank(level) 10 is killed by a 1-9, because I knew he got a better shot at me, got in a better position, or surprised me.  No biggie, I'll wait a few seconds and respawn and reequip.  Believe it or not, UO at one time was like that, well, if you weren't red that is... (oh I could bitch that it took a while to get the perfect 7 skill GM since skill gains were fucked up).  The private UO shard called Angle Island has somewhat brought that back.

I just think it would be a lot more fun if you had more people to play with, and right now the level requirements on many games means I won't play that game.
ex:
DAoC--takes too long to hit 50 so I can go out and defend my realm (plus other balance and fun stuff)
EQ--the original grind from hell (plus all the 'Zeke servers bullshit and game imbalances)
UO--takes forever to build a 7 skill GM (well, that was an old rant...have no clue now)

Now here is a twist though...I don't mind the grind in BF2!  Hell it has taken me  88+ hours and I'm only a Staff Sergeant ( http://bf2s.com/player/slipnslide1969/ ) and I'll be grinding away to get a few more weapons  :-D  If I spent that much time leveling in a MMOG wonder where I would be...and would I be able to skull fuck the highest level if I caught him from behind or dropped a boulder on him.

[Glazius]

Well, I know that some people have a hard time thinking that since they spent the time to wack-a-mole to the highest level, they should be able to beat up the low levels no matter what.  I disagre, especially if the low level uses some means to suprise the high level.

There are ways to put players of widely dissimilar levels on an even (okay, perhaps a slightly tilted) grounding with each other. In cases where they're implemented levels become much more of a way of measuring your character against the world.

The worst possible implementation of levels are where a higher-leveled player can always destroy a lower-leveled player but must run for his life from a dozen giant rats.

--GF

[Righ]

The worst possible implementation of levels are where a higher-leveled player can always destroy a lower-leveled player but must run for his life from a dozen giant rats.

You're not even trying. For an extra fee, you too can play a giant rat!

[Arnold]

Look at it this way....

The more you do something, the better at it you will be - unless of course, you have a natural talent for it. 

Look at Tiger Woods for example. 

Probably the best athlete that has EVER played golf.  If he were to play any other sport, he would probably do well at it.  Why?  He's a phenominal athlete.  But golf being his game of choice, he's dedicated himself to that.  He practices more than ANY other golfer out there save Vijay Singh who is widely regarded as the hardest working golfer out there.

To be the best, you have to put in the time - whether its grinding, or questing for that sword that gives 2 percent more to hit.

Nope.  Tiger would get his ass kicked by professional football, baskeball, soccer players, etc.  Look to Jordan when he tried to play baseball, and he was serious about baseball before his basketball career.

I had a couple of friends who played a golf tournament where you had to take a shot of booze at every hole, and were pounding beers in the meantime.  One of them had a good quote, "Tiger Woods could kick my ass in a regular golf tournament, but I KNOW I could take him in one like this."

Tiger is a good golfer, but I doubt he's a good drinker, and I bet my friends could take him in a tournament that combines golf and drinking. 

For me, becoming the best wasnt about being leet.  It as a personal accomplishment that I had the best template, the best equipment, the best enhancers.  The best strategy for 1 v 1 combat, or even 1 v 5, or 1 v 10.  In SWG, I took great pride that as a Master Gunfighter (Pistoleer), I had the best tools at my disposal to be the best.  I had the best guns.  I had the best CAs and AAs.  I had the best armor.  I knew my strategy.  As a Jedi, I took alot of pride in being an honest to goodness alpha player - thru a perfect saber, capped attachments, and a unique template that suited my playstyle - and understanding my templates strengths and weaknesses.  I put in the time and "effort" to get the perfect pearls for a perfect saber.  I put in the time and "effort" to get +25 CA's.  I practiced dividing up groups, of being solo and wiping out 10 other players against friends, guildies, etc or even just saying fook it, and loading into Theed overt and solo and seeing what worked and what didnt. 

Bah, talk about getting sidetracked....

You put WAY too much emphasis on equipment and skills gained from grinding.  You ARE about being leet.  I don't want a game where the highest level guy, with the best loot, is at a great advantage; I want a game where I can go head to head with players of relatively equal character levels and come out on top through better playing.

Kicking the ass of a group 2-5 times the size of yours, in numbers, but equal character skill, RULES.  I've experienced that plenty of times in oldschool UO.  Even when your character dies, but your group wins, it's awesome.  Even if your whole group dies, but you've got more of them than they got of you, it RULES.

We didn't need some super edge through items or levels (they didn't exist then), we just need better timing, tactics, and combat skill.  You didn't even need to be maxed out to be the best(this was true in early AC too).  There are plenty examples of sub 7xGMs who could destroy maxed out characters.

Face it, as much as you deny, you are just a fan of mud wimping, who wants every advantage the game can give you to have superiority over other players, through catassing.

Anyway, what I am getting at, is that once you "master" or cap out a profession, it doesnt stop there.  All PGA players are exceptional golfers.  The difference in the pro's are the small percentages that makes one better than the other.

It's still about SKILL at that level, not equipment and endorsements.  Do you really think these guys are going to do worse with "cheap" equipment?  Eddie Van Halen is considered to be about the best rock guitarist who ever lived, and he did his best work on a cheap-ass, beater guitar, that he assembled out of pieces.  I bet that Tiger could go buy a $200 set of clubs and still kick ass on the PGA.

[Soukyan]

Which group of players will have more success? What does 'level 120' really mean in this example?

The 120 means nothing. The 6-8 weeks worth of uberloot obtained by mindlessly smacking raid mobs every night mean everything. While the Ventrilo server may make things easier to coordinate and facilitate ease of communications, it also costs more money (although I will admit that the guild could host their own for free if they so choose) and doesn't do anything to change the mechanics of mindless repetitive strategies to farm uberloot to have the biggest epeen. I'm sure that'll piss some people off so yes, the first time through an encounter (and maybe even some subsequent times) requires skill... in organizing people, not at playing the game. Once a strategy is set, it's a matter of posting it and having your underlings read and understand it. Cake. Farm at your leisure. Okay, okay. I'm being a shit just to antagonize. Those with better reflexes and faster reading speeds will play the game better. Those with Ventrilo will be able to react even faster because the voice communication will beat the text communication almost every time. But the thing that will be that new uberguild (at least for a short time) would be the 6-8 week headstart on farming uber gear because at that level of these games, it's all about farming the uberloot dry until the devs release the next expansion with even more uberloot that requires previous copious amounts of uberloot to obtain because you'll never mitigate damage at this level of play without a whole hell of a lot of item assistance.

It always made me laugh that no matter how powerful or experienced your hero became in EQ, if you only wore plain, no stat adding armor, you were not much better than a newbie FOB. Ah well, I guess even in virtual worlds we're only human. Or orc. ;)

[Strazos]

You put WAY too much emphasis on equipment and skills gained from grinding.  You ARE about being leet.  I don't want a game where the highest level guy, with the best loot, is at a great advantage; I want a game where I can go head to head with players of relatively equal character levels and come out on top through better playing.

Kicking the ass of a group 2-5 times the size of yours, in numbers, but equal character skill, RULES.  I've experienced that plenty of times in oldschool UO.  Even when your character dies, but your group wins, it's awesome.  Even if your whole group dies, but you've got more of them than they got of you, it RULES.

Guild Wars, partiocularly pre-order Beta.

[dEOS]

It works the same way in FPS games, and it pretty much works the same way in mmorpg games. Successful raid guilds from EQ are now successful raid guilds in WoW. Guys that were good at Q1DM are now great at CS.

Take me, powergamer with the constraints of a casual gamer & old qw/q2/q3 player with pretty good skills (your comment is right, I was naturally good at CS). When I played AC1/AC2 and now play CoH, I am always meet with compliments on how well I play my tank/healer/controller... I know the numbers, I know what is effective, I know how to place myself. I pull from the extremity of my range, I strafe, use corners for protection... All my twitch skills are very good.

Except that I have to endure the whole grind no matter what. I constantly see people playing like total morons and being higher level than me because they have more time on their hands.

Levels and their influence on ability to hit/defend/do damage are completetly unrealistic. If I am going to hit you in the back with a sword, no matter how more experienced you are, if you get hit, you die or are severely hurt. In a MMORPG, it will be MISS, MISS, MISS...

Levels are more of a bad system made in order to be able to categorize content and be able to signify character progression through content than any representation of reality. There is absolutely no reason I shouldn't be able to wield a sword. I may not be able to use it to its full potential but certainly not unable to use it at all.

AC1 despite its flaws had some good things. One of them was the ability for a level 1 to wield high-level equipment. Wearing it in combat was exhausting (you were over-burdened as you didn't have enough strength)...

[Tebonas]

You got it the wrong way around. Equipment levels were introduced after Level 1 were twinked with high level gear. Zone key quests were introduced when high levels complained about level 1 running around in high level zones and interrupting gameplay. Both in EQ.

If people wouldn't have ruined the gameplay of other paying customers by invading areas they had no business being in, or by taking away resources of other players who played the game as intended by killing in newbiezones with their twinked alts faster than the spawnrate could handle (and if the spawnrate would be adjusted untwinked characters would just have been slaughtered) those changes would never been introduced. We players just have to sleep in the beds we made for ourselves.

We are all egoistical bastards who don't care for anything but our own entertainment. And for some of us, this entertainment is the exact opposite of what other people want. If you wouldn't be annoyed that some other gamers were better because they have more time playing the game, those other people would be annoyed that you can beat them just because they don't have the same reflexes as you.

Different games for different strokes. Thats the only way there is.

[dEOS]

Tebonas,

I didn't say that AC1 was without flaws :)
Magic system design was completly broken and that is what you talk about.

If it wasn't for lvl VII buffs being applied to level 1 toons, twinkage wouldn't have existed so much.
Fighting Shadows in the Obsidian Plain as a level 1 (with the help of friends) and gaining 15 levels from one kill was quite a rush though :)

[cevik]

You got it the wrong way around. Equipment levels were introduced after Level 1 were twinked with high level gear. Zone key quests were introduced when high levels complained about level 1 running around in high level zones and interrupting gameplay. Both in EQ.

To be annoyingly pendantic, my MUD had both level based equipment and zone keys.  We stole them from a different MUD I played (so don't think I'm trying to claim the idea), and I'm pretty sure that MUD had stolen the concept from other MUDs.  I think level requirements and zone keys have been around for much longer than EQ. 

[Krakrok]

Yeah, since the invention of the LOCKED DOOR.

[Tebonas]

I just wanted to point out it has been tried without both in one game and the makers of that game reconsidered for the abovementioned reasons. Not that it was invented by them, there is not much Verant invented.

[Arnold]

Tebonas,

I didn't say that AC1 was without flaws :)
Magic system design was completly broken and that is what you talk about. g with

If it wasn't for lvl VII buffs being applied to level 1 toons, twinkage wouldn't have existed so much.
Fighting Shadows in the Obsidian Plain as a level 1 (with the help of friends) and gaining 15 levels from one kill was quite a rush though :)

The broken thing about the magic system in AC1 is that it was too easily deciphered, and Split Pea really ruined it.  Besides, if you were twinking with level VII spells, that was LONG after the damage had been done; when people were abusing the monarchy system.

I didn' have a problem with someone being twinked up in AC1.  Eventually they'd have to stand on their own feet.  I hated the XP whoring and the macroing.  That shit ruined Darktide.

[Sky]

You put WAY too much emphasis on equipment and skills gained from grinding.  You ARE about being leet.  I don't want a game where the highest level guy, with the best loot, is at a great advantage; I want a game where I can go head to head with players of relatively equal character levels and come out on top through better playing.

Kicking the ass of a group 2-5 times the size of yours, in numbers, but equal character skill, RULES.  I've experienced that plenty of times in oldschool UO.  Even when your character dies, but your group wins, it's awesome.  Even if your whole group dies, but you've got more of them than they got of you, it RULES.

I agree with what you said. I don't mind losing, if it's fun. Even if my group loses, but had a chance to win and the fight was interesting, it's a win in my book.

Being fucked because someone has the time to collect all the shiny power differential gear and levelup++ is not fun. Well, maybe for that person, but not anyone else. That's one part of why pvp in most mmo sucks balls.

[dEOS]

The broken thing about the magic system in AC1 is that it was too easily deciphered, and Split Pea really ruined it.  Besides, if you were twinking with level VII spells, that was LONG after the damage had been done; when people were abusing the monarchy system.

Even a dev recognized it, buffs were broken in their design. Fixed numbers where it should have been percentage and the opposite.
Fixed number buff :
- 200 AL (Impenatribility 6) being applied to an armor piece regardless of the type of cloth/armor it was -> instant uber armor
- +60 skill to any skill at any skill initial level by using Creature VI spells -> level 1 as an uber untouchable killling machine
Percentage buffs:
- Accuracy & defense buffs on items (improved by fixed number buffs):
  +20% defense from an item on top of your already +60 boosted defense was really overkill and unbalanceable with toons that didn't have magic

In AC1, 3schools >> all.

The spell system you had to search spell formula was excellent, as was the concept of spell economy (the more a spell was used the less powerful it was). Sadly they didn't leverage on them to overcome their shortcomings.

I didn' have a problem with someone being twinked up in AC1.  Eventually they'd have to stand on their own feet.  I hated the XP whoring and the macroing.  That shit ruined Darktide.

AC1 macroing and XP chains ruined the game totally. We agree on that ;)
I played the game from early 2000 to end of 2003 (and then I *played* AC2... eek!). I have seen a lot happen in AC1 :) but this is for another day.

AC1 was always to me the only MMORPG where levels didn't matter so much. Sure there was difference between lvl 10 and level 130+... but a 5 level difference was never the overwhelming-difference it can be in other games. The progression was much smoother in a sense.

[Nija]

AC2 was also pretty lax on level vs level. I still have screenshots of me taking out a 28 FI and a 42 FI with my level 28 mage/defender.

Then I was taking out level 50 guys at 44, but that's pretty normal.

It was all about the vigor heal.

[schild]

AC2 was also pretty lax on level vs level. I still have screenshots of me taking out a 28 FI and a 42 FI with my level 28 mage/defender.

Then I was taking out level 50 guys at 44, but that's pretty normal.

It was all about the vigor heal.

You got to level 44 in AC2? Catassing for charity?

[Rasix]

Heh, he played at launch.  Most of that 44 was probably obtained through exploits.  I think I had a level 48 and level 42 in AC2 through completing quests I should have been able to, sitting on a ledge shooting things that couldn't fight back, or getting something stuck on a pixel and shooting it.  It wasn't exactly exciting, but it didn't really take that long either.

AC2 wasn't that bad until you realized you were funding the worst MMO development team ever.
 

[Piperfan]

Heh, he played at launch.  Most of that 44 was probably obtained through exploits.  I think I had a level 48 and level 42 in AC2 through completing quests I should have been able to, sitting on a ledge shooting things that couldn't fight back, or getting something stuck on a pixel and shooting it.  It wasn't exactly exciting, but it didn't really take that long either.

AC2 wasn't that bad until you realized you were funding the worst MMO development team ever.

After AC2 Turbine made every effort to become as independent as possible. They threw off the evil overlord and sought VC to fund expansion. I think there is a reason for that. I saw Microsoft hands all over the failings of AC2. I loved AC original but I started losing the fanboi shine as the MS manager (what the hell was his name?) took more and more lead.

Summation: Turbine did not, does not, have the worst MMO development team ever.

[dEOS]

MS Manager: Ken Karl ?

I probably should make a CoV toon with that name (unless it's already taken). It would be a Dominator Mind/Fire.
- Sleep the fanboi
- Mezz devteam
- Fireball the players!!!

d

[Nija]

You got to level 44 in AC2? Catassing for charity?

haha, dude I had a 50, 48, 45.. hmm 42 maybe.

Pretty pathetic but you have to realize the only leveling i did from 30 onward was watching movies/tv/playing other games and running a macro to target monsters that got stuck on 3 pixel high rocks.

Plus, you could run newbies through the Mage Academy quest and go from level 1 to level 38, then you could do another quest and go from 38 to 42.

Anyways, yeah. AC2, another well made Turbine product.

[WayAbvPar]

Haven't paid much attention to this thread, since the original premise (Do levels suck?) is pretty much a foregone conclusion in my mind. However, I just wanted to chirp up with the following-

After playing Eve (which has an incredibly broad and deep skill system), I am going to be hardpressed to ever play something with levels/classes again. It is all about customization and casual-friendly advancement schemes for me.

[Cyrrex]

I don't think levels suck inherently, but all games leave something to be desired as to how they are implemented.  Seems to me that there is a holy grail somewhere out there that hasn't been invented yet, the ultimate level system to please "everyone" (note: you cannot please everyone).  Somebody in this thread mentioned something that got me thinking...

Right, so take any prototypical MMO.  Usually you can have just one main class, or in same cases you may be allowed to multi-class in two, possibly three different professions.  In the end, things become pretty predictable as people tend to flock towards the cookie-cutter templates.  In any event, you can usually tell what somebody is and what they are capable of just by knowing their class(es) and by looking at the little level indicator next to their name.  You can further judge the extent of these capabilities by the equipment they are wielding.

Why not add further dimensions to such a level system?  I am not talking about a "talent" or "skill" dimension, but a whole new system of sub-levels underneath the main level.

Let's say we have a Rogue class in an MMO game.  For the sake of argument, the level max will be 100.  Now, underneath the Rogue class, let's say you have 5 sub levels.  Each of these sub levels is potentially very important and powerful in and of itself within the class (not necessarily compared to other classes).  These could look as follows in my wildly ficticious example:

-Stealth & Defense - Classical stealth abilities and defensive modifiers (parry, dodge, counters, etc.)
-Melee Skills - Specific weapons certifications and offensive modifiers for melee weapons and general combat
-Ranged Skills - Specific weapons certifications and offensive modifiers for ranged weapons and general combat
-Healing, Buffs and Debuffs - Minor self healing and buffing relevant to a Rogue class.  Perhaps Regen rates.
-Items and Loot - Looting probability percentages and access to high level loot tables.  Restrictions on equipping certain special "elite" level equipment (enchanted weapons?)

Imagine now that you implement some sort of "talent" or "skill" system that ensures that the better abilities are achieved the nearer you get to the level 50 limit of the sub-set.  These enhance existing abilities, but do not determine what you can access in terms of abilities or certifications.  Further inherent racial and class bonuses and the usual STR, DEX, etc. will also apply.  Nothing new here.

So far so good.   Now, assume that the max level of each of these five sub-sets is 50.  With only 100 possible levels to allocate, this makes it necessary to pick and choose to the extent that you can be relatively powerful in the one area, while seriously gimping yourself in others.  Some areas may be entirely neglected.  The inlcusion of an "Item and Loot" section was intentional on my part.  In my ficticious system, a true loot whore might be a gimped fighter.

Right, so I go ahead an max out my character at 100 levels.  From the same order from above, he turns out as a 30/50/0/0/20 Rogue.  The idea here is that within one single class, I have a toon with 2 mediocre skill sets (Stealth/Defense & Item/Looting), 1 powerful set (melee fighting with every Rogue certed melee weapon), and two completely gimped areas...no ranged abilities whatsoever (and I lose some general combat advantages too), no healing, buff/debuff abilities.  Note that these strengths and weaknesses are relative to the class...its not to say that a level 50 melee Rogue can stand toe-to-toe with a Warrior at the same level 50.

The guy you are looking at wearing rags and carrying a stubby, rusty looking dagger might be a maxed out combat-oriented character that will tear you apart in 4 seconds.  The guy next to him wearing Gold Plate Mail +10 armor wielding some flaming 2-handed axe might not be able to fight his way out of a wet sack.

The point of all this, even if the example is ridiculous, is that I think it can be done such that a) characters really are different, even within the same class, b) you can not judge a person by a number or by their appearance, and c) to some degree you can make it such that the lower level stands a chance against the max level depending on where their levels are invested.   It should be possible to develop a level system such that you can line up 5 different Rogues each at a different level, and have no idea what they are or what they are capable of.  Each may be viable in one or two areas, but seriously lacking somewhere else.  That is the kind of level system I want to play in.

[Alkiera]

Stuff

So... Like DAoC(Or WoW, for that matter), only more than three things to spec in...  Sure.  Not really revolutionary, and you run into the same problem those games have, that certain specs are seen as far superior to others.  You have to balance the abilities in all the trees, and the balance is more sensative the higher up you get in a given 'skill'.  31 Fire is a pretty rare choice for mages in WoW, because the high level ability is not seen as being on the same level as the 31 point abilities in the other two skills, especially Arcane Power.  Other classes have similar problems.  Only a few really have nicely balanced trees.  In WoW, for Mages at least, it does tend to mean that there are casters who are specialized into mostly fire, or mostly ice spells, because it makes sense to pick one or the other and power it up, and only use the other spells for utility or backups in case an enemy is highly resistant to the one you chose.

In the same way, there are rogues that use maces, those that use swords, those that use daggers.  Once they choose a route, it limits their talent choices in such a way that they would only every really use the weapon type they chose, switching from daggers to maces means a major shift in talents that are useful.

I agree that this kind of this is useful...  but I'd argue that if you get rid of classes and levels, and just lump all those things together to be chosen from, with a max number of points for a character...  You have Ultima Online.

Alkiera

[Krakrok]

More complex level systems only obfuscate the problem. I'm still going to see through the facade at some point (probably sooner rather than later) and bail.

See with skill based systems my character is 100% unique because no one else will have the same exact set of skills that my character has (unless I want to be cookie cutter of the month). Level based systems, not so much.

Skills are dynamic content, levels are static content.

[tkinnun0]

Given a sufficiently popular game there's going to be at least one other player with exactly the same skill choices as you and lot's of players with characters that are practically indistinguishable from yours. Without the structure afforded by classes, talent trees and levels it just isn't so readily apparent. You just like to pretend you're a unique snowflake.

[Cyrrex]

Stuff

Not really revolutionary, and you run into the same problem those games have, that certain specs are seen as far superior to others.  You have to balance the abilities in all the trees, and the balance is more sensative the higher up you get in a given 'skill'. 

In the same way, there are rogues that use maces, those that use swords, those that use daggers.  Once they choose a route, it limits their talent choices in such a way that they would only every really use the weapon type they chose, switching from daggers to maces means a major shift in talents that are useful.

Alkiera

Balance is overrated, but that is another argument.  The reason that certain specs end up being superior is in large part due to the fact that they can ultimately "do everything".  Too many strengths, and no significant weaknesses.  Naturally, people are going to flock to these choices.   My point, though it may have been lost in the silly example, is that every choice should ultimately come at a HUGE cost somewhere else.

Yes, your Rogue can focus on any of those weapons and perform predictably with it.  That's the problem.  Chances are, when you see this character, holding some kind of flaming Dagger of Destruction +8, you know what he is capable of.  His best attack is probably to go into Stealth mode, sneak up and stab you in the back.  He is going to hit you a lot, for relatively small amounts of damage.  When you finally manage to engage him, he is going to be a quick SOB that dodges a third of your attacks.  When you do manage to hit him, you know it is going to hurt him because his armor rating stinks.   He has little or no healing ability.  Perhaps you are a level 60 to his 50, so you have a general idea of your HP advantage, and you also know that he is lacking specific skills that come in those last 10 levels of the Rogue class.

What I am thinking of is a way to buck these predictable trends.  You seem him holding the same flaming dagger, but have no clue as to what this means of his proficiencies with this or any weapon.  His Stealth abilities might be gimped to the degree that a backstab attack would  be counterproductive (or completely impossible).  His actual attack speed may be quite low, but hitting for higher damage numbers.  He might not be agile, an unable to dodge most attacks.  His armor rating might be much higher than you expect (levels invested in natural mods?), so you hit him for lessor numbers.  He may  have a relatively effective self-heal.  If you can even see his level indicator, the fact that he is ten levels below you might not give you a clue as to what he can actually do, and you have no idea what he is lacking either.  He may be fully invested in offensive melee combat, or he may be split between ranged combat and defense.  His 50 levels of melee might well trump your combination of 30 defense and 30 ranged.

Polarize the options.   Any great advantage in one area should come with a corresponding deficiency in another.  The level should only indicate potential, not absolutes.

[tkinnun0]

Rock-paper-scissors, the greatest game ever!

[Cyrrex]

Rock-paper-scissors, the greatest game ever!

Aye.  Problem is, most games allow you to be Paper and Rock at the same time.   And the scissors are not sharp enough.  And everyone knows that you are scissors.

[WayAbvPar]

Given a sufficiently popular game there's going to be at least one other player with exactly the same skill choices as you and lot's of players with characters that are practically indistinguishable from yours. Without the structure afforded by classes, talent trees and levels it just isn't so readily apparent. You just like to pretend you're a unique snowflake.

It is not so much the chance to be a unique snowflake; it is more that a broad skill system allows me to focus on whatever aspect of character progression interests me most without level restrictions. There are far fewer cockblocks.

[Merusk]

Given a sufficiently popular game there's going to be at least one other player with exactly the same skill choices as you and lot's of players with characters that are practically indistinguishable from yours. Without the structure afforded by classes, talent trees and levels it just isn't so readily apparent. You just like to pretend you're a unique snowflake.

It is not so much the chance to be a unique snowflake; it is more that a broad skill system allows me to focus on whatever aspect of character progression interests me most without level restrictions. There are far fewer cockblocks.

Agreed, which is why I'm liking EVE so much again. (Even though I still love my Level-based loot-aquisition simulators).   I don't HAVE to be a miner, or a corp leader, or a crafter to get shit done.  I'm also not hosed if I decide to be one of them but completly hate combat, and don't lose my combat skills just because I decided to take-up trading for a while.