Please balance bs lvl ranges again

[acidburn]

am I the only one who wants bs lvl ranges to be balanced again? even if they made bs lvl ranges different to make bs run again this is really stupid at least bring the 150-174 bs back

[Spead]

151-200 is the one with the real problem in my opinion. Make it 150-174 please


Inb4gorolla200

[Wyoming]

50-74 is needed too. I mean, 60s bashing 40s is wrong.

[Gatester]

150's being smashed by 174's again? No thanks, that was terrible enough and caused BS to practically stop running. People don't really make 174's anymore for PVE or towers, and I would prefer not having a BS range that focuses on a PVP level meant to farm 150's. It also gives agents far too much strength again, where in 200 BS practically every profession is actually viable, this does not occur in the 150-174 range. The only problem with 200 BS is how hard it is for 200's to acquire top levels of gear and that people think a 151, 152, 153 etc should compete against the top levels when there is no content that actually supports those levels and therefore there is no reason to even maintain those levels.

A 74 bashing a 50 or 60 player is still bad as well, more so since 60s would actually be showing up to BS while the 74's made only for BS would be there to farm them. We do not want this.

Top levels of BS ranges should be:

25 (subway)
60 (totw and steppes of madness)
100 (foremans, CoH)
150 (s10)
200 (s7)
220 (endgame)

No other levels of players are important, there will always be a "bottom level" which means there will always be players who feel entitled to having the biggest advantage, like "my 164 twinks should not have to fight 200's, BS should have a 130 to 164 level range".

You do not put your PVE content levels below PVPer levels, you only cause PVMers to quit participating because the PVPers are creating toons just to farm them. Boosting content for 25, 60, and 100's could also increase BS participation, and improving available loot would help as well. The other problem people have to realize is that our population is limited, so making 6 viable BS ranges that support participation also means that players are choosing between those 6. They often will not run in this case because only so many players can sign up at each range.

There is nothing to fix things other than more players playing the game.

[acidburn]

could also make the bs 150-164 then u wont have the problem with 170 agents

[Awikun]

Agree 100% with Gatester

[Manaas]

BS ranges should follow PVE encounter level locks +1

[Pomidor]

+1 for Gatester

[Variable]

Yea, gatester nailed it

+1

[Ciex]

Top levels of BS ranges should be:

25 (subway)
60 (totw and steppes of madness)
100 (foremans, CoH)
150 (s10)
200 (s7)
220 (endgame)

No, no, no, there is to much logic in this and its way to obvious to be ever implemented. It should be more like:
1-38
39-72
73-102
102-166
167-203
204-219
220
for example. Ive no idea where my numbers came from so they must be good. People would spend more time trying to get into not working battlestations and they more time they spend online the hogher FCs profit, isnt it? AO players really enjoy paying their monthly fee to afk in fron of something thats not working. There is also this issue with account slots - having a character thats able to have fun in both pvp and pvm at same level is an economic disaster to game operator. Having a character working for pvm should make it useless in pvp and vice versa, so people would need to pay for 2x more account slots.

[Pomidor]

Actually, there is hole in current BS ranges. Or two.

At this moment we have:
31-60 (good for Temple of Three Winds twinks)
61-100 (good for Foreman Twinks)
101-150 (CoH Twinks and S10 twinks, but we know there is not much twinks for CoH except engis to warp 220toons)
151-200 (s7 twinks, TL5 twinks at 170ish, which some are damn good vs everyone at 200)
201-214 (now, this range is blindside - every char 214 twinked for that BS will totaly destroy leveling toon there, so whats the point? 214 twink can stand a chance vs all mid/low geared 220 char).
215-220 - top BS

First hole in FC logic is, that seems all ranges are based on PVM encounters (list above). Yet, at 100 there is little to none interest to make twinks. Also, there are none lvl locked items or big game changing items then Token Board (1k one). It would be reasonable to move that range from 61 to 110, so twinks lvl 100 would be usable in CoH and in Foremans and in BS.

More reasonable, but of course it would require lot of work, would be implement new AI PF for lvl 61-110 (for which playerbase is asking since years), and range would boost life in both PVM and PVP by big ammount.

Second hole is 214 range. It was introduced to drag those 201 from 220 characters, but if FC would play AO at this range, they would know that there are build ultra twinks for this lvl range, which - in my opinnion - destroys casual daily players, so it turns out to be the same as they would fight 220 characters, but in fact they feel even worse to lose so much vs even lower then 220 enemy. So this BS should be emnrged into 1: 201-220.

[RedWatr]

I wouldn't mind seeing the 150 BS upped to 160 max.

other than that, I still think my overlapping idea would work gracefully. if you have a toon that is 150 for example, it could join either of 2 BS's, the 100-150 or the 150-200, minor changes to the requirements, and it gives everyone an opportunity to test their strengths or push the max, keeping BS's populated and active.

[Burgly]

I wouldn't mind seeing the 150 BS upped to 160 max.

other than that, I still think my overlapping idea would work gracefully. if you have a toon that is 150 for example, it could join either of 2 BS's, the 100-150 or the 150-200, minor changes to the requirements, and it gives everyone an opportunity to test their strengths or push the max, keeping BS's populated and active.

Except that people don't want to test their strength, they want to roll fotm profs and own other's with minimal effort

[acidburn]

150's got more chance vs 174's than 170's got vs 200's I've seen 150 enfs beat 164 enfs but a 164 will never be near killing a 200 enf. and 200's also got IP for whatever they want something tl5's do not have and twink gets limited if they made bs 150-164 or 150-165 it would be better instead of thoose 200 gimps farming all the tl5's

[Gatester]

150's got more chance vs 174's than 170's got vs 200's I've seen 150 enfs beat 164 enfs but a 164 will never be near killing a 200 enf. and 200's also got IP for whatever they want something tl5's do not have and twink gets limited if they made bs 150-164 or 150-165 it would be better instead of thoose 200 gimps farming all the tl5's

I like how you use the example of a 150 enforcer to somehow insinuate that 150's of any profession actually have a chance against 170-174 twinks built for the sole purpose of killing them in BS. Even the worst profession at 170 can handle and kill several 150's when played correctly.

No one makes a 174 to farm 150s in BS now because they can't, instead you have people who make 200's to PVP, people who have 200's to do PVE who are also PVPing, and people who are leveling. Why do people insist on making dedicated PVE content levels the bottom of PVP brackets is beyond me, it's like you all subconsciously want weaker players you can farm and you look for excuses to make it a good idea.

[Le-Quack]

151-200 is the one with the real problem in my opinion. Make it 150-174 please


inb4gorolla200

YES PLEASE, There is enough 200 twink now so they can have their own bs agein from 175-200

also reduce the map on lev 1-150 bs becose people arent much intrested to join there mostly becose it takes a freaking year to run.
or have a diffrent map type for the lower lev battle station

[Wyoming]

Well, to be fair, 150-164, 165-174 and 175-200.
Split it into 3. Remove the whole "Highest to fight -you- but avoid 220s" thing; there's nothing new at 165-174 and there's very little difference between 150 and 164; except a levelling 160 can fight a 150.

[Vispa]

Bump, 150-174 back please. If such a big deal, 151-174. Give 200s a bs of their own also if people want that, the difference in gains as a tl5 twink to a 200 bs twink is quite large.

[Gatester]

150 to 174 BS already died once with an S10 that was far more active than it is today all because 150's were sick of being farmed by higher levels. I also seriously doubt developers are dumb enough to think creating more BS ranges would cause them to run more often, you know, by spontaneously creating a player base to occupy those BS's.

Power gains occur every time you introduce better gear, which means anything above 150 is a power gain. Symbiants also cause a large imbalance in power due to accessibility. You guys may not think it is significant to go from 150 to 174 or to 164 but I KNOW it is significant because I have made these twinks for years.


That said, I cannot convince players to stop wanting what is best for them, to stop wanting what gives them an advantage over others, but I can at least help make it clear what people are really asking for.

[Xootch]

Top levels of BS ranges should be:

25 (subway)
60 (totw and steppes of madness)
100 (foremans, CoH)
150 (s10)
200 (s7)
220 (endgame)

bump. i'm with gates here. also, i'd do the same for tower fields. no more scaling up twinks until its tl7.