Curse

Skult · May 03, 2005, 06:15 PM // 18:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zai

And 1 or 2 exp is going to make it worth it? You need like 10-15k exp to level at 15+.

At least they drop loot, it's not great, but with some AoE skills you can kill them all quick and pick up like 30 gold in loot, maybe even a salvage item with a rune or something on it.

No it won't really do anything at all, I guess what I ment was that there should be an aggro fade in place as the level gap increases.

etowiosee · May 03, 2005, 08:26 PM // 20:26

The problem I see with non aggro when you are a certain level above them is that for some of the missions you could get someone who is really high (say a level 16) and get them to group up with a newbie doing say the Great Northern Wall mission. The Newbie would stay back where it was safe at the gates and could even go AFK while waiting for his friend to return after easily just walking through the primary and secondary mission w/o aggro.

Lank · May 03, 2005, 08:28 PM // 20:28

I suggest you stop trying to level on lowbies and do the quests.

DarkAynjil · May 04, 2005, 10:49 AM // 10:49

Zai: (post #18)

way to not read my previous post, #14. I DON'T WANT min xp.
I want aggro to fade as your level increases over a monster's.

DarkAynjil · May 04, 2005, 10:54 AM // 10:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by etowiosee

The problem I see with non aggro when you are a certain level above them is that for some of the missions you could get someone who is really high (say a level 16) and get them to group up with a newbie doing say the Great Northern Wall mission. The Newbie would stay back where it was safe at the gates and could even go AFK while waiting for his friend to return after easily just walking through the primary and secondary mission w/o aggro.

Other RPG's with aggro fade (EQ2 as well, IIRC) determine whether a mosnster is aggro'd by using the lowest party member's lvl. So, if a lvl 13 and a lvl 6 party, then all the monsters that would have been non-aggro to the 13 will aggro because a lvl 6 is with him.

Skult · May 04, 2005, 04:09 PM // 16:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lank

I suggest you stop trying to level on lowbies and do the quests.

I suggest you understand what you read before you post: this thread is not about leveling -

etowiosee · May 04, 2005, 04:39 PM // 16:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarkAynjil

Other RPG's with aggro fade (EQ2 as well, IIRC) determine whether a mosnster is aggro'd by using the lowest party member's lvl. So, if a lvl 13 and a lvl 6 party, then all the monsters that would have been non-aggro to the 13 will aggro because a lvl 6 is with him.

Ah, never played EQ* so I wasn't aware that they did that. Last online game I played EVERYTHING aggro's on you, even if you are level 80 and it's level 2

Epinephrine · May 04, 2005, 04:43 PM // 16:43

Makes sense to have them fear you. I agree, aggro should diminish when you are significantly above the creature's level, or the minimum level in the party. The gap should be fairly large ~5+ levels and it shouldn't affect missions. (Yes, I just did the "Northern Wall" last night with a friend who didn't do any missions till then, just quests - he was lvl 12 doing it, and since I was in Borlis Pass I was about that level too. Imagine walking the missions with no resistance - spoils the plot.)

Zai · May 04, 2005, 07:22 PM // 19:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarkAynjil

Zai: (post #18)

way to not read my previous post, #14. I DON'T WANT min xp.
I want aggro to fade as your level increases over a monster's.

I read your post. I ignored it. This is not your thread, it was Skult's, and as such I was replying to him, not you. I couldn't care less what you want, Skult was asking for min exp at the time.

I also do not feel that low levels should not be hostile. Mobs are placed in a region to provide a challenge, just because you are level 20 does not mean you should just be able to waltz around as you please. That's called trivializing content.

Moskel · May 04, 2005, 07:27 PM // 19:27

The reason they need to agro is so you can't just have a L20 run a L7 straight through to the end cities of the map. If you really have that hard of a time dispatching the L3/4s while sight seeing with a build where they can actually kill you then you have some issues. Having to stop every couple of minutes and lay waste to the train chasing you isn't too hard.

StormWater · May 04, 2005, 07:58 PM // 19:58

Course, it's a bit disconcerting when a lag kicks in as you're surrounded by that 'train'

Belwas · May 04, 2005, 08:12 PM // 20:12

I like the idea of monsters many levels below you running away. Trivializing content? The fact of the matter is, at higher level, these mobs ARE trivial. They are a complete waste of time, and the gain is nothing. The enjoyment of the player is comprimised. How to deal with this, well.. There's many ways, and most of them will do the trick just fine. I just personally enjoy the idea of mobs being scared of me.

Zai · May 05, 2005, 04:01 AM // 04:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Belwas

I like the idea of monsters many levels below you running away. Trivializing content? The fact of the matter is, at higher level, these mobs ARE trivial. They are a complete waste of time, and the gain is nothing. The enjoyment of the player is comprimised. How to deal with this, well.. There's many ways, and most of them will do the trick just fine. I just personally enjoy the idea of mobs being scared of me.

If they are trivial to you, why are you complaining about slaughtering them? If they actually put up a decent fight in groups, then they are not trivial.

I have an idea about dealing with them, don't run around the noob zones making giant trains that kill you. Explore the area at the level it's meant to be explored.