Rework ilvl?

[Bracken]

I only recognize it when done well.

and yet 1st to bite

[Ibi]

what does the "i" stand for in ilevel anyway? is it SE trying to jump on the apple train or does it stand for irrelevant?

I don't think SE actually use the term ilevel anywhere; they always refer to it by the full term.

[Zantitrach]

Right, I was agreeing with you and elaborating.

Apologies, couldn't quite tell.

[Shurrikhan]

As long as there aren't any massive jumps, I'm fine with it. We're still only increasing by 20 ilvls per currency set generations, 10 ilvls between each of those, etc.

I simply would have preferred that there was less level descaling on the secondary stats from 51-60 in the first place, and less stat growth per ilvl thereafter, such that levels 51-52 weren't for many a (max geared) dps loss through large crit deductions, etc. (rather strange), and there wouldn't be quite so much of a ramp up over the course of the expansion, likely forcing the next expansion to need some 200 crit on a given gear piece to supply the same critical chance bonus at level 70 as a 60 crit piece did at level 60.

tldr; Rather than trying to use heavy ilvl->stat growth to soft-gate content, I wish they would taper off the stat gains a bit to focus more on the long-term shape of the game, before people we have to start measuring dps in the k (no decimals needed), m(an), or m(illion)s by the third expansion.

[Nutz]

As long as there aren't any massive jumps, I'm fine with it. We're still only increasing by 20 ilvls per currency set generations, 10 ilvls between each of those, etc.

We're actually jumping 30 ilvls each generation, assuming you're looking at base item -> base item or upgraded item -> upgraded item, but i guess you were saying +20 for evens, +10 for odds (for the majority of people not participating in Savage content).

I'm fine with it currently, but the rate at which certain numbers are increasing does make me feel like it could quickly spiral out of control and get annoying/ difficult to keep balanced.

Currently as a moderately geared BLM (something like 215) I have more than double the hp I had at 50 in i130 gear. By i245 it seems to be about 2.5x (or more if you meld VIT). All the main stats are keeping pace, while at least SE did scale secondary stats based on level (so that a 25% crit rate at 50 plus all the new gear with higher stats didn't end up granting a 50% crit rate at 60).

Still, the ilvl jump increased by 50% per patch in Heavensward (from jumping 20 to jumping 30 on even patches) and the stat gains per jump are now much higher. Throughout much of 2.x we gained 5-6 main stat per 10 ilvl jump on weapons, but now it's more like +10-11.

Like I said, it's still fine and will continue to be in principle, but in practice this trend could easily lead us to Fire VI dealing 150k damage and tanks with 400k hp a couple expansions from now.

[Shurrikhan]

We're actually jumping 30 ilvls each generation, assuming you're looking at base item -> base item or upgraded item -> upgraded item, but i guess you were saying +20 for evens, +10 for odds (for the majority of people not participating in Savage content).

I'm fine with it currently, but the rate at which certain numbers are increasing does make me feel like it could quickly spiral out of control and get annoying/ difficult to keep balanced.

Like I said, it's still fine and will continue to be in principle, but in practice this trend could easily lead us to Fire VI dealing 150k damage and tanks with 400k hp a couple expansions from now.

Ah, yeah, I didn't think about pre-improved items (even though, by that scale, Myth to Soldiery would have been a jump of 10). Dang, they really are picking up the pace, which may mean another increase to this jump next Xpac... Thanks for the reminder.

For the rest though, as beyond what you quoted explains, I too am fine with it in principle, but worry about what's down the line given its continuation. It seems like it's going to get clunky faster than intended just due to short-sightedness and reliance on the carrot-on-a-stick model of vertical-gearing. Though, one could argue that the necessary short-term incentives are more important that something that will inevitably happen a certain amount of expansions down the line anyways.