EC Accounts Need XP Restrictions Gone

Leveling with a guy who just came into the game...we're both 36 to start with, now I'm 39 and he's still 37. That's unacceptable.

Comments

  • Totally agree. EC accounts should be encouraged to get to NF (or the appropriate battleground) as soon as possible--as that's the end game. The majority of restrictions should be removed on EC accounts.

  • Eh, idk, some perspective:

    the PVE requirements are temporary - they might add a few more hours to your road to 50 - the massive reduction in RPs, BPs, no CL abilities, no Supremacy (excluding the ones you buy with mith) are permanent and far more game impacting.
  • What are exactly the nerfs on a EC account considering XP ?

    I was in a RvR donjon with friends. A paying account got exactly 2 times more XP than me.
    It seems to be the rule for mob, but is it the same rule for quest rewards ?
    I noticed I got for less "free level" at my trainer than my paying account. Is there also a rule to know about free level ?
  • Idk. The problem with RPs is that it’s just not the RP nerf but also the inability to use buggane (which is 75% at lower ranks).
  • You get no bonus xp or RPs on an EC account. That's why you get half the xp, because he's getting all those bonuses and you aren't.

    Personally I think the only restrictions on EC should be a RR cap where it's at, class race restrictions, and housing restriction. Everything else needs to go. You're trying to encourage people to play, not let them log on. Get the population up and you'll see more accounts paid for even if the percentage of EC accounts converting to paid goes down.
  • EC Accounts can’t use the SI helm. Nor bind/guild stones. That bothers me more than the XP thing.
    Da ant familyDa fly familyDa spider family
    https://www.daocutils.com/chimp/daredant
  • 800 rps for a solo kill! :(
  • Amurdora wrote: »
    Personally I think the only restrictions on EC should be a RR cap where it's at, class race restrictions, and housing restriction. Everything else needs to go. You're trying to encourage people to play, not let them log on. Get the population up and you'll see more accounts paid for even if the percentage of EC accounts converting to paid goes down.

    This exactly. If players could quickly hit RR 5, they would probably think "Holy cow that was fun, I sure would like to keep going. Some of those other classes sound neat. I wonder what housing is all about?" However if they spend that entire journey advancing at a crawl and at an unfair disadvantage in most fights due to to inferior buffs, I doubt many will want to stick around.

    However, for me the really critical thing is the six month lockout if I decide to sub for a month. Subbing for a month to get one or two new classes on my account (by getting in 24 hours played with them) would be a good value. Sub once and lose access to everything I have for free right now (for six solid months after the sub lapses) is a terrible value. It would feel like paying $15 to potentially jack up my account. "Don't sub at all unless you plan to sub forever" is a bit daunting.
  • edited March 3 PM
    Yeebo wrote: »
    However, for me the really critical thing is the six month lockout if I decide to sub for a month. Subbing for a month to get one or two new classes on my account (by getting in 24 hours played with them) would be a good value. Sub once and lose access to everything I have for free right now (for six solid months after the sub lapses) is a terrible value. It would feel like paying $15 to potentially jack up my account. "Don't sub at all unless you plan to sub forever" is a bit daunting.

    This needs to be removed entirely if the F2P model is to make any meaningful impact. All this does is prevent people from playing the game.
    Amurdora wrote: »
    Personally I think the only restrictions on EC should be a RR cap where it's at, class race restrictions, and housing restriction. Everything else needs to go. You're trying to encourage people to play, not let them log on. Get the population up and you'll see more accounts paid for even if the percentage of EC accounts converting to paid goes down.

    I disagree with some of this. There should not be a RR cap and all classic classes / races should be available (maybe include SI). RR increases character potential and therefore should not be limited on EC accounts as that puts them at a disadvantage. Additionally, buff potions should be available to EC accounts but classic buffing restrictions should still apply. Between the slow RR progression and classic buffing restrictions, there's still incentive to sub over playing EC even though character potential is identical. The current housing restriction makes sense in regard to vault space. However, I would like them to implement an account wide vault for both EC and subbed accounts so players can trade between characters without needing another player.

    XP could be increased for EC accounts that are grouped with subbed accounts. Include an XP bonus for EC players if the grouped players are within the same level range (i.e. 5-10 levels). This would promote grouping, which is non-existent on Ywain for XP, but still give subbed accounts the benefit to XP faster solo than EC players. Additionally, you could allow subbed accounts to gain a XP bonus modifier that applies to the whole group and accumulates after successful completion of an instance or the current OW / Cursed campaigns. Such a modifier would be great for CLXP and Artifact XP too.
    Post edited by Tyrantanic on
    "The grab bag isn't for explaining every single class change decision or reasoning or that's all we would ever do." - John_Broadsword
    "The type of of dev communication of 30 mins a day updates mentioned here just isn't feasible." - Carol_Broadsword
    "Our Studio. Our Rules." - http://www.mythicentertainment.com/
  • Enkertons wrote: »
    800 rps for a solo kill! :(


    <Throws up in mouth>

    Da ant familyDa fly familyDa spider family
    https://www.daocutils.com/chimp/daredant
  • EC should have a limit on inventory/vault space, and limited respecs. Of course there would have to be some reliable source for in-game spells/specs. The official source is still completely out of date. Expecting people to pay for a product where the official source is missing all recent changes is the biggest money grab.
    "...the best thing to do if you disagree (or agree) isn't to ask us why (which is rhetorical)...." -John_Broadsword
    "the patch [1.127] is later this year" -Carol_Broadsword, aka "constable paddy biehbien of the **** local community Enforcement force "
    send a message with your wallet
  • I think the group ideas are nice @Tyrantanic but there need to be restrictions in place to motivate people to buy. The game needs to generate money after all. I think restricting classes and RR is the most effective way to do that as many people will want to sub.
  • Amurdora wrote: »
    I think the group ideas are nice @Tyrantanic but there need to be restrictions in place to motivate people to buy. The game needs to generate money after all. I think restricting classes and RR is the most effective way to do that as many people will want to sub.

    I agree that they need to make money. But if the end goal is to get players to subscribe, then why spend over a year developing a F2P model when the previous trial model was sufficient for that purpose? F2P models make money through microtransactions from a large player base. Ywain won't get a large player base with the current EC model.

    Sad to say, but the current version was not worth the development time. Even with the changes coming in March, I have my doubts that it will make a noticeable impact. Steam may help but only if the game is playable as EC. If that opportunity is squandered, there will be no recovery without a new server which is a tall order in itself.

    Going back the OP's topic, I think XP adjustments should be made but only for players that are grouped together.
    "The grab bag isn't for explaining every single class change decision or reasoning or that's all we would ever do." - John_Broadsword
    "The type of of dev communication of 30 mins a day updates mentioned here just isn't feasible." - Carol_Broadsword
    "Our Studio. Our Rules." - http://www.mythicentertainment.com/
  • Let EC accounts use the only free expansion (housing)
  • Let EC accounts use the only free expansion (housing)

    There are practical limitations to that. Nothing would stop a player from having loads of houses. I know nothing stops them today, but that process is far more difficult than a free account would be and it's limited in the number of players who do it.
  • Enkertons wrote: »
    Eh, idk, some perspective:

    the PVE requirements are temporary - they might add a few more hours to your road to 50 - the massive reduction in RPs, BPs, no CL abilities, no Supremacy (excluding the ones you buy with mith) are permanent and far more game impacting.

    I agree with this out of all the posts.

    As a potential EC guy or at least sympathizing with them. I'd much more likely be willing to pucker up for a month and grind the xp (and thereby get the traditional "I earned this" feeling which helps to keep people entertained), than to get easy xp and get crap for rps. I can stomach an xp death to a mob pretty easy. Dying to the same guy 10x in a row because there's nothing I can do, well, that might cause me to quit. So I'd agree, rps still need to be worth something on EC (I mean, there's still a cap, right? I'd be fine if EC accounts got instant R4-5 once they got 50).
  • Tyrantanic wrote: »
    (6 mo restriction)
    This needs to be removed entirely if the F2P model is to make any meaningful impact. All this does is prevent people from playing the game.

    What are we at, 5 months since EC went live?
  • edited March 7 PM
    Koe wrote: »
    What are we at, 5 months since EC went live?

    [edited]
    Post edited by Driralin on
  • Amurdora wrote: »
    You get no bonus xp or RPs on an EC account. That's why you get half the xp, because he's getting all those bonuses and you aren't.

    Personally I think the only restrictions on EC should be a RR cap where it's at, class race restrictions, and housing restriction. Everything else needs to go. You're trying to encourage people to play, not let them log on. Get the population up and you'll see more accounts paid for even if the percentage of EC accounts converting to paid goes down.

    I can not agree more

    Vicomtessa Muylasav, wildly swinging arms around. Vicomte Muylock, calling curses on enemies. Lord Muylaetrix, calling upon winter storms. some other chars with names starting with Muyl.
  • Let EC accounts use the only free expansion (housing)

    no

    i think that's actually a good restriction.

    not having a house and a CM is a BIG restriction. its a quality of life restriction and an economic restriction. it's also a restriction that doesn't handicap people in combat.

    there needs to be a difference between free to play and payed accounts. people who pay need to have something more than people who don't pay. this, to me, seems a fair difference.
    Vicomtessa Muylasav, wildly swinging arms around. Vicomte Muylock, calling curses on enemies. Lord Muylaetrix, calling upon winter storms. some other chars with names starting with Muyl.
  • Dale_Perf wrote: »
    EC should have a limit on inventory/vault space, and limited respecs. Of course there would have to be some reliable source for in-game spells/specs. The official source is still completely out of date. Expecting people to pay for a product where the official source is missing all recent changes is the biggest money grab.

    i think the limit on inventory/vault space is already bad on paying customers.

    worsening it on EC players .... no
    Vicomtessa Muylasav, wildly swinging arms around. Vicomte Muylock, calling curses on enemies. Lord Muylaetrix, calling upon winter storms. some other chars with names starting with Muyl.
  • Muylae wrote: »
    Dale_Perf wrote: »
    EC should have a limit on inventory/vault space, and limited respecs. Of course there would have to be some reliable source for in-game spells/specs. The official source is still completely out of date. Expecting people to pay for a product where the official source is missing all recent changes is the biggest money grab.

    i think the limit on inventory/vault space is already bad on paying customers.

    worsening it on EC players .... no

    Who said worsening? I don't think you read before you multi-post.
    "...the best thing to do if you disagree (or agree) isn't to ask us why (which is rhetorical)...." -John_Broadsword
    "the patch [1.127] is later this year" -Carol_Broadsword, aka "constable paddy biehbien of the **** local community Enforcement force "
    send a message with your wallet
  • Simple. EC server only No restrictions.
  • I truly believe that ec accounts should be allowed to play with zero restrictions for 60 days. After that they can choose a subscription account with full access and discount for mithril shops. EC accounts can not get houses, mounts and are only allowed 2 characters which cap at rr10.
Sign In or Register to comment.