Currently level 42 on the inf. Will pay 1.5p per level of PL. /Send teets in game if interested.

sad that this server has come to this, game will be a mess within another month.

Stridah wrote:sad that this server has come to this, game will be a mess within another month.

No one will PL someone lvl40+ with 1,5p/level amount XD

Then people will have to make more necros and farm more plat to afford pl beyond 40, problem solved.

Still open for PL if anyone is interested. Paying the same 1.5P

And this is why it's so damned important in today's gaming age, even with a classic game, to offer XP bonuses for groups that fill up - regardless of class/level. Let everyone come out to play, let everyone be included, instead of the common:

LFM, levels 42-45....etc., etc.,


This really points to the inherent flaw in Dark Age of Camelot's "classic" period. Xp is god awful, over all, but nice for developers who want to keep the server smaller and more manageable.

Grouping in an RPG where half the classes aren't considering viable in an 8 man, means half the server is solo.

In the end, rpgs were meant to be about fun. While folks with tons of free time aren't going to worry about the grind, many of us who can't relive our daoc glory days are going to find something else.

And that's just unfortunate and it's not the dev's fault, of course, it's what the playground they personally enjoy. Take it or leave it.

Komaf wrote:Grouping in an RPG where half the classes aren't considering viable in an 8 man, means half the server is solo.

This part of your post gets even funnier if you read carefully. About 80-90% of the people asking for PL are infiltrators/mincers/scouts.

Which are SOLO classes.

Dingiva wrote:

Komaf wrote:GroupinRPG where half the classes aren't considering viable in an 8 man, means half the server is solo.

This part of your post gets even funnier if you read carefully. About 80-90% of the people asking for PL are infiltrators/mincers/scouts.

Which are SOLO classes.

This kind of assumption is exactly what I was referring to.

A non quest title like daoc was meant to inspire grouping. It's why only one class per realm has endurance regen (or two, if you count the Midgard savage).

It's why mana regen is offered by a limit of two classes.per realm, or one, if you count Midgard.

When we think about our greatest days in Daoc, I would argue that a vast majority remember grouping, and the fun that resulted. And, unlike Wow's, solo inspired community, it was grouping that inspired community - though, in our case here, I am arguing on behalf of "more" grouping and a removal of the illogic of assuming alleged "solo" classes don't bring dps or general group support and yet, are considered built for solo play.

Since you alluded to being humored, I must add it was humorous that you assume that classes should be designated as solo. The "funny" part being that if a given toon is so effective that it doesn't need group support, then imagine what it can bring to a group?

Not being self sufficient inspires.grouping. Daoc is built on this concept. Hence, toxically assuming anyone should solo because of some arbitrary concept, only degrades the community, pressures people to only play the "big six" toons of eight man groups, etc.

Anyway, my two cents.

Komaf wrote:This kind of assumption is exactly what I was referring to.

A non quest title like daoc was meant to inspire grouping.

The problem isn't the arbitrary assumption that some class is a solo class, and I seriously have to question how anyone could possibly think that it is. The problem is that DAoC doesn't have any balancing at this patch level. This is a game where some classes are strictly worse for groups than some other classes. The game gives players zero reason to ever group a scout or an infiltrator, and that's including the abstract benefit of that character eventually being available for RvR. It's pure charity, and that's why it doesn't happen that often.

On genesis there was a big xp bonus for each member in grp, so it was always better to xp in fg than pushing/small men/solo.
Was a genious system, so there XP grps were always crowded and ppl didnt care much whom to invite.

edit: has been settled

Afirejar wrote:

Komaf wrote:This kind of assumption is exactly what I was referring to.

A non quest title like daoc was meant to inspire grouping.

The problem isn't the arbitrary assumption that some class is a solo class, and I seriously have to question how anyone could possibly think that it is. The problem is that DAoC doesn't have any balancing at this patch level. This is a game where some classes are strictly worse for groups than some other classes. The game gives players zero reason to ever group a scout or an infiltrator, and that's including the abstract benefit of that character eventually being available for RvR. It's pure charity, and that's why it doesn't happen that often.

You ever been in melee with an infiltrator or sb/ns? Fun times? Feel like a ****** ton of dps coming your way and that's with merc/zerk/blade shade mode..no perf needed?

You do get that assassins will hit like a mack truck? Why shouldnt they be allowed to join? Archers, with self DA or a scout will do reasonable damage as well - and can pull for your group from quite a long range...as an add.

This conversation is as biased as White America vs the Chinese at the turn of the century. My last post on this - just ridiculous.

In the early days of DAoC groups were more diverse and I admit it was great and interesting. But the cause was not a better community, but just a less educated community in terms of in depth class knowledge and a lack of other titles, that had more player friendly (dumbed down if you will) approaches in comparison. Heck my first live character wasn't level 20 after its first month, because groups were that bad (and me too tbh).
15 years after 1.65 went live people just know what classes work and what dont and quite honestly I cant blame anyone for wanting the ideal (read fastest) group setup just to be done with the grind.

Thats bad for classes that cant support a fast killing group setup, but then again, if you want certain classes, you know what you sign up for. I always tell people to start with a strong PvE char and begin others as a second L50.

If you want to XP fast you want a group that can kill multiple purple mobs in one pull. Whether your class is desired for that depends on you being able to either provide necessary utility, tanking or strong area damage. If another class can fill that role better, its more desired for group xp. Its about efficiency, not general viability.

@ Tree,

You can also have fun levelling up with people from everywhere, take your time and all.
Obviously people see DAoC's RVR as the aim of the game, and yet, levelling takes time. Why not try to use this time to actually have fun and not see it as a burden ?

I'm levelling a valewalker atm and even if it's not the strongest, I manage to take some levels each day. I do so by forming group with each people who's willing to, no matter the class and with a wide range of levels.

Hopefully, all players aren't like "quickquickquick, RVR, template, RPs RPs RPs".

Paying for power level seems lonely to me.

Paying for the PL b/c I made enough to afford it with my first 50. I'm leveling an inf also. This is not generally well thought of as a grouping character. The reason being is because my play time is sporadic and not on a typical workday. My schedule at work varies greatly in hours and times of shifts as I am a nurse. One of the biggest draws to playing the inf is that I can play him by myself if I want to and be at no great disadvantage. What's wrong with paying for the PL? If I want to meet people in game I'll find them in guild and on raids.

I understand it's an mmorpg and it's made to bring people together. I don't really play it for the social aspect though. I just like the feel of the rvr engine that DAOC provides. I'm by no means an eliteist either. Hell im not even all that good. I just enjoy the stealth game b/c I can do well in it with the schedule that I keep.

You play it your way, and I'll play it my way.