DLC level cap raise - Why it shouldn't be done

(madamonkey1990) #21

i allways think that there should be more stuff to unlock more choose what if when the raise the level cap they dont giv you points to spend and only giv you more outfits i also think you should be able to create ai bot and choose what there class body type and guns are but hay im only dreaming

(its al bout security) #22

i dont play a chatricter after lvl 20 its boring, but not much is “unfair” everyone get the same points if you think its unfair make the build that defeats you

its lvl 24 so it wont have rank 6

(tokamak) #23

There’s no abilities for rank 6 either…

(iezza) #24

i think the level cap was purely done to give rank 5 some breathing space, so in the future DLC’s there will be npo new levels but abilities.

(Rally) #25

People seem to forget that there is just no easy way to switch to a new class. Sure, it works in theory, that having to pick and choose just abilties for one class, with a few left over for a subclass, is balanced and a good idea. Then you remember, if you are on a team as a soldier/engy class, and you could really use a medic or op, you have to quit out of the game, switch chars, then rejoin and hope it didnt get filled, or that you can still get on the team you where on.

Seriously, you wont be maxing all 4 classes with 24 points. I think this is just more so you can just have a better focus on 2 classes on one char, yet still have the universal abilities that you might be missing out on, since you would rather make use of class abilities.

Honestly, thinking back, it seems like this was a bad idea to go with things, since you can never be fully useful to a team. Its cool to think that its like an RPG or something, where different people will have different builds that work for different things, but thats not the kind of game Brink is. It would have been much better if you just had a certain number of points for each class, rather than total. Brink is a class based game that requires people to play more than one class a match, and if you have to switch to Op because no one else will, but your on a char that has no points in Ops, all youll be good for is hacking the objective, which I guess isnt worthless, but will be making things harder, since you are just a gun that can hack, and nothing more.

(shadyadi) #26

It won’t be that bad, surely, the Napalm 'nade would replace molotov or grenade, the napes mine would replace standard mine. The UAV, well, I dunno what would happen there or with the medics buff banner thing.
I’m guessing they will be upgrades (sidegrades) for other skills you already have, probably they will have a disadvantage compared to what you are replacing, as well as an obvious advantage.

And they will be restricted to rank 5 level matches where everyone will have similar levels of savage kit, so it won’t break balance.

Napalm FTW basically, love the smell of it.

(Exedore) #27

Any idea where you saw this? I’m genuinely curious.

(zenstar) #28

AHAHAHAHAHA! That made my day :slight_smile:

(jfunk) #29

I’m not sure if you guys ever said this or not, but consider this at least one vote to PLEASE not do this anymore or more often.

I bought Brink because I was looking for a new team/objective based FPS since I lost the will to play TF2 when they started adding all the stupid MMO grinding style stuff. I was able to overlook the leveling and unlocking of stuff in Brink because it was fast and there wasn’t much of it.

PLEASE, don’t add more “grinding”. If I want to grind characters, I’ll go play an MMO. I don’t have 100 hours a week to play games. When I’m able to jump in for a couple hours here and there, in an FPS especially, I would like to just be able to play. Not have to worry about spending hours and hours unlocking garbage just so I can get to the point where I can be competitive.

The competition should be to see who plays better, not who spent more time unlocking stuff. Only in video games does this happen. In any other competitive game, there is an emphasis on a level playing field. Why are video games going the opposite direction, looking for more ways to UNbalance the competition? Is the next version of Chess Master going to allow players who win X matches to move their pieces differently?

Shouldn’t people who play more be better simply because of all the practice they get? Why do they also need to be given artificial advantages over people who don’t have the same amount of time to devote?

(Saint Stunna) #30

Well who want’s more than one character anyways? I’m totally opposite to OP. I want to have one character that can take any role depending on how much my team sucks. If by some magic my team don’t suck i can play my main role, but most of the times i have to jump between medic, engi and operative, so i want these 3 classes to the max on one character. That’s all.

(Glyph) #31

The point is that if you can have one character that can do everything then everyone can have a character that can do everything making your character exactly the same as the rest. Thanks for proving our point.

(Oschino1907) #32

[QUOTE=jfunk;329497]I’m not sure if you guys ever said this or not, but consider this at least one vote to PLEASE not do this anymore or more often.

I bought Brink because I was looking for a new team/objective based FPS since I lost the will to play TF2 when they started adding all the stupid MMO grinding style stuff. I was able to overlook the leveling and unlocking of stuff in Brink because it was fast and there wasn’t much of it.

PLEASE, don’t add more “grinding”. If I want to grind characters, I’ll go play an MMO. I don’t have 100 hours a week to play games. When I’m able to jump in for a couple hours here and there, in an FPS especially, I would like to just be able to play. Not have to worry about spending hours and hours unlocking garbage just so I can get to the point where I can be competitive.

The competition should be to see who plays better, not who spent more time unlocking stuff. Only in video games does this happen. In any other competitive game, there is an emphasis on a level playing field. Why are video games going the opposite direction, looking for more ways to UNbalance the competition? Is the next version of Chess Master going to allow players who win X matches to move their pieces differently?

Shouldn’t people who play more be better simply because of all the practice they get? Why do they also need to be given artificial advantages over people who don’t have the same amount of time to devote?[/QUOTE]

I get your grief here but no one makes you play with higher leveled people, you can choose to play your rank and below only, or your rank and above. Also the things being added arent that over the top and for anyone 20 or higher and besides i have joined many of matched lower ranked then others and I never had a huge problem cause of others being ranked to high.

For the most part this is the most well balanced and well thought out game i have played, everything has a rhyme and a reason with all things having an action and equal reaction to keeps things fair and balanced. There is literally almost nothing you can do or set up without having somekind of positive and negative response. I trust SD knows what they are doing and how to do it fair and level for all, if they have plans to go further i trust them but also hope they have the right mind to not go to far and keep things fairly simple since there is already alot of depth.

But before they would even think of or consider that I want to see some weapon skins, more weapons as its obvious there is more considering pre orders got locked weapons. Dont know how much further attachments can go after first DLC but more variety of current attachments would be nice and more characters archtypes and clothing/tatoos/scars/hair types are always welcome also. I love the open customization of characters/weapons over leveling up and unlocking things.

(Saint Stunna) #33

Well not everything. There is so many more or less useless abilities that you can create 3 superb classes already. 2 classes you can max out already with one character.

Also it can be argued that having to create more than one character is actually a fundamental flaw. Simply because most of the time people just refuse to play some classes and even if i liked to save the team/game i might only have a mediocre class needed for the mission at that time.

IMHO the game should have even more levels and once you hit the top you get all abilities unlocked.

I think different characters should be for hats and ****, really, lol.

(Glyph) #34

[QUOTE=Saint Stunna;329515]Well not everything. There is so many more or less useless abilities that you can create 3 superb classes already. 2 classes you can max out already with one character.

Also it can be argued that having to create more than one character is actually a fundamental flaw. Simply because most of the time people just refuse to play some classes and even if i liked to save the team/game i might only have a mediocre class needed for the mission at that time.

IMHO the game should have even more levels and once you hit the top you get all abilities unlocked.

I think different characters should be for hats and ****, really, lol.[/QUOTE]

By your own logic, why have any levels at all then? Just unlock everything from the start. You have to love it when your own logic contradicts your own statements. I didn’t even need to counter your point, you did it entirely on your own.

(Achtung) #35

Im cool with it, they’ve always done a helluva good job with balance in characters and weapons ect. I just hope those maps are better with less choke points.

(tokamak) #36

The level cap increase was purely done to make the players chase more meaningless marbles at the cost of configuration diversity.

The system is toxic, they’ll have to keep increasing the cap each content patch to give the illusion there’s actually more to do in this game.

Instead of constantly having to add there needs to be a way to combine the abillities in a more meaningful way. Giving players more choice but decreasing their ability to buy them all.

Currently I’m playing with spare coins because I already have everything I want. That’s just flawed. You need to leave players with the feeling of ‘oh if I only had a few more coins to spent then I would be PERFECT’. That way you tickle players to keep creating new characters and trying out new builds with them. Before the dual-specialisation in WoW (a mistake on Blizzard’s behalf I think) people gladly raised new characters to level 70 just so they could play the SAME CLASS with a different talent build.

That would be considered an achievement, that would be a meaningful customisation system. Right now it’s nothing but a hidden training mode, steadily introducing new things to players so they don’t get overwhelmed. It’s condescending.

It would be okay if you raised characters in singleplayer mode separately. Then you could have something like in Starcraft, where you could easily grow new builds to experiment with while you kept the more difficult to raise multiplayer characters with a smaller amount of abilities.

(JaxDad08) #37

I think they need to add more leveling and abilities with each DLC. Hopefully one day we can have level 50 characters with 10 ability levels per class.

However, I also think they need to change how you use your points for abilities so everyone doesn’t have the same one character with all around abilities. I think you should be forced into taking a certain number of each level ability per class in order to use the next level. This would be similar to the way the turrets work for the Engineer Class. This would make a character real good at universal and one class with enough left over for basic support abilities in the other classes.

Also, in the last DLC with leveling increase, please add the ability to continue to level way beyond earning points for ability. This is the one feature I feel would keep a lot of people playing after they max out all 10 characters. You could brag that you had a level 151 Soldier because you put the time in to earn the XP. Nothing is more frustrating than playing a game after maxing out with nothing to show for the XP earned.

(Glyph) #38

And this is exactly why it shouldn’t be done. Why should you brag about playing more than another player?

(Saint Stunna) #39

No i didn’t. Levels are there for keeping MMO people like you interested in the FPS game.

Levels are there for noobs to team oriented class based games to promote them to start with just one class and learn the overall game while at it, not getting confused with too many things. Hope that made sence to you since my English sucks.

You have to love it when you think someones logic is flawed when your own logic just failed, what now, you hostile little punk kid? Why do you feel you need to counter me in the first place?

(JaxDad08) #40

It is a personal preference. Most people play multiplayer online games because they are competitive in nature. When you cap out in a game, it tends to get stale. I love how in this game you can start over with another character, but eventually we will begin building the same characters over and over. Why not let someone earn more levels with the XP they are earning for team play? If it is an incentive to keep people playing without the cost of them being super powerful, then why not?