Rank cap increase every 1-2 years discussion thread

[kukurumei]

I think SE could increase the level cap while keeping old content interesting by way of a limit break system akin to what FFXI uses, and as such I'll use FFXI terminology/data to demonstrate what I mean.



75-80 Requires Sky Access, as the NPC would be in Sky, and you'd be required to defeat all 5 major sky NMs: Byakko, Genbu, Suzaku, Seiryu, and finally, Kirin.
85-90 - Requires Limbus access, and you'd need to defeat both Proto-Omega and Proto-Ultima.
90-95 - Requires you to defeat the Dynamis Lord.
95-100 - Requires Dynamis-Tavnazia completion, Assault Rank Chief Sergeant, and 10 Nyzul Isle floors completed.

Those are just some examples, but as you can see it would still at least keep a lot of older content relevant by some degree or another. They could've done with Abyssea a lot of stuff they wanted to without making it necessarily any easier to level between 1-75 by simply requiring that you be X level to access a quest giving access to Abyssea.

Problem with that is the "opt-in" system. Expansions are not mandatory. The fact that access to the "end level" areas like sky, sea, etc, etc required the mission content clear goes a long way in making people experience content, they otherwise wouldn't have bother (and many times actually enjoyed it as a rite of passage type)

[Dragon]

Problem with that is the "opt-in" system. Expansions are not mandatory. The fact that access to the "end level" areas like sky, sea, etc, etc required the mission content clear goes a long way in making people experience content, they otherwise wouldn't have bother (and many times actually enjoyed it as a rite of passage type)

I don't see how you think expansions weren't mandatory in the long-run. To even get to 75, one had to have RoZ for the longest of time, then ToAU came which had better areas for getting to 75 once you hit 50+, which still had you go to RoZ-based areas prior...

The examples I gave would also require the mission completions just as well, so I don't see what your point is.

[kukurumei]

I don't see how you think expansions weren't mandatory in the long-run. To even get to 75, one had to have RoZ for the longest of time, then ToAU came which had better areas for getting to 75 once you hit 50+, which still had you go to RoZ-based areas prior...

The examples I gave would also require the mission completions just as well, so I don't see what your point is.

Because they weren't. It's a physical fact, trying to get psychological doesn't change that fact. There's no line blurring here.

You can suggest a change in business policy with regards to expansion prerequisites, but I think it's a logical foregone conclusion of just simply bad PR.

[Brotech]

I don't see how you think expansions weren't mandatory in the long-run. To even get to 75, one had to have RoZ for the longest of time, then ToAU came which had better areas for getting to 75 once you hit 50+, which still had you go to RoZ-based areas prior...

The examples I gave would also require the mission completions just as well, so I don't see what your point is.

Technically 50-75 was RoZ enabled. So Yes it was mandatory, however 1-50 it wasn't you could do it in all Original zones, no one did though, just because it was quicker not to.

[kukurumei]

Technically 50-75 was RoZ enabled. So Yes it was mandatory, however 1-50 it wasn't you could do it in all Original zones, no one did though, just because it was quicker not to.

Huh? do you mean leveling up camps or do you mean limit breaks? I assume you mean leveling up camps. Yes and no and sorta...

You could reach pretty high (they are possible to 75 but, by the PC/NA release it was a moot point) by going to Xarcabard and then to Zvahl the highest level for non RoZ.

It is still not mandatory. To this day you could potentially install and deinstall any of the expansions and never cared, and that's the way almost every expansion has been sold as.

It's just bad business, and bad PR.