Welcome to the Wizard101 Message Boards


Player Guide
Fansites
News
Game Updates
Help

Follow important game updates on Twitter @Wizard101 and @KI_Alerts, and Facebook!

By posting on the Wizard101 Message Boards you agree to the Code of Conduct.

Level Requirement for Worlds

AuthorMessage
Defender
Aug 13, 2010
180
Should there be level requirements for worlds?

I say no, because level is not always the defining characteristic of someone's experience. A while ago, I used to be neutral on this issue, but realizing the excitement and uncertainty of being underpowered in a world full of monstrous monsters has swayed my opinion dramatically.

In fact, a ban on levels anywhere would hinder me and my gaming experience.

For example, I found it simply awesome that I was able to buy a home in Marleybone at level 15 thanks to a helpful friend. Rather than have to complete all of Krokotopia, I got my 'Marleybonian' Wizard a much desired head start on developing his rightful home

Even as a Magus Balance Wizard I've impressed Grandmasters with my knowledge of the game and selfless strategy, and have been invited to Celestia numerous times to help them fight. It was through this method that I helped someone reach level 60, and myself a satisfying 42.

You may say that I didn't earn the right to enter a later world, but I say that I did earn the temporary privilege to enter it, simply by showing the people who have the right that I can handle it in a responsible manner.

Although a ban on lower levels would get rid of the occasional noob ruining battles for some of us, there are much more valid solutions to this problem (Such as an alert for incoming teleports, as some very wise students have suggested) And, as the old saying goes, why let what one person does ruin it for all of us?

Squire
Aug 12, 2009
593
I voted No because I use my low level wizards on my opposite account as free minions / henchman.

Survivor
Aug 19, 2010
2
i think there shouldnt because i do that just for the i tems that way we can buy better stuff and that make me happier.

Kyle Starcaster
level 17 jouneyman diviner

Survivor
Apr 22, 2009
36
octagig wrote:
I think it would be a good idea to place level requirements on the worlds, reasonable levels that a person would be at when they reach a new world. Lately I am seeing more and more people taking lower level friends through high level worlds to get them to level up faster.

It just seems like it takes away from the game and isn't really fair to those of us who actually worked to get to where we are. It would also cut back on the number of noobs who teleport in, add an enemy, then leave because it is too overwhelming for them.


Well what about people who do the world but skip side quests and are low lvl after they finish the world?

Survivor
Jan 09, 2011
2
I say no but if low level. I'm level 23 but imagine me starting at the beginning and going to Celestia. I would have a small chance of winning. please reply :P

Survivor
Aug 10, 2010
6
Teleporting in to help friends is a good thing.

BUT

i don't think low lvl peeps should be able to access the entry door until ambrose allows them to access that area.
another words, you can't access it until you complete a certain chain of quests. i'm sure it is this way already, but i don't think a lvl 5 toon should be able to complete the chain alone to access kroktopia. this person should have all boss quests completed in wizard city first.


Defender
Sep 11, 2010
154
Voted no.

Artificially restricting game access based upon "level" is a technical solution to a management problem. It is the BEHAVIOR and PERFORMANCE of certain players that is being complained about, not their level. Nobody would care what level a wizard happened to be IF that wizard's actions did not compromise THEIR game play or yield unearned XP and loot rewards.

In my opinion, the best solution is to simply prevent porting into unearned areas. If you have not unlocked, or "earned", or for that matter, dare I say it, ... PAID ... for access to an area, ANYWHERE on The Spiral, then you may NOT go there. Period.

If you need help from friends that have not earned access to the area you are having trouble with, then YOU should port DOWN to them and contribute your time and expertise developing THEIR wizards so that they will actually be of use to you, and others, when they EARN access.

We will also find that this simple change ELIMINATES the ability of creating "free" accounts for the sole purpose of "misbehaving" with no penalty. Using windows, a single paid account can create unlimited "free accounts", befriend them, and thereafter use the porting feature to vandalize the game experience of everyone else ALL over the Spiral.

And the only ramification is "sanctioning" a "free" account ???

Big Deal. He or she just spends an evening creating 20-30 more and laughs at the absolutely unenforceable "Terms of Use Agreement" and ALL of the labor being expended to punish the malicious behavior.

I suspect the biggest performance improvement, showing IMMEDIATE results for EVERYONE using Wizard101 servers, would be the simple prevention of porting free accounts into UNPAID areas.

The BEHAVIOR we are incorrectly trying to address with all this "Let's keep the noobs out of 'you name it place' is NOT going to be corrected by level restrictions ... we have to hit them where it hurts ... the wallet.

I strongly support KI's insistence upon providing a safe, free, place for anyone to play Wizard101. It is good for business. But, I resent sharing overworked resources that I PAY to use, with people who choose NOT to pay, simply because they can artificially "friend" their way around it.

If an individual cannot afford $10.00 a month to play a game as great as this one is, perhaps they should find a better way to spend their time ... I certainly would not expect to be able to play areas I had not paid to use, but most people these days consider stealing a valued KSA, knowledge-skill-and ability, rather than a character flaw.

There are no technical solutions to management problems.

THIS is a management problem.


Survivor
Jan 16, 2010
5
octagig wrote:
I think it would be a good idea to place level requirements on the worlds, reasonable levels that a person would be at when they reach a new world. Lately I am seeing more and more people taking lower level friends through high level worlds to get them to level up faster.

It just seems like it takes away from the game and isn't really fair to those of us who actually worked to get to where we are. It would also cut back on the number of noobs who teleport in, add an enemy, then leave because it is too overwhelming for them.

Not exactly a good idea true sometimes i miself and annoyed when say my lvl 10 friend ports to me in DS but i also port to a lot of friends in CL i never left even when i was an adept looking for a taste of what was to come
true i did a dungeon in CL but i was only there to see what was to come and i was amazed that KI could do something so amazing as this I'm not saying that this isn't useful but it would be unfare to not let me into CL just beacause I wasn't high enough lvl.

Mastermind
Oct 11, 2009
327
Yes. And here's how it should go:

Wizard City: Level 0

Krokotopia: Level 10

Marleybone: Level 20

MooShu: Level 30

Dragonspyre: Level 40

Celestia: Level 50

And Grizzlehiem should be moved to level 25.

Explorer
Aug 18, 2010
56
yes yes yes yes!!!!! everyone vote YES........i hate noobs in higher areas they annoy me

Explorer
Mar 24, 2009
58
gmpax wrote:
I voted "no", and here are my reasons:


  • [*] We should try not to unduly discourage friends from playing together, even if one friend's character is significantly lower in level than the other's;
    [*] I'd rather see a cap put on XP earned, so that beyond X difference between your actual level, and the expected level, you don't get any additional XP. That way, the abov epoint is preserved, while the exploit of "power-levelling" is somewhat curtailed;
    [*] I would also rather see each world pop up a "Hey, you sure about this" warning for people who are under-levelled for that area, than simply lock them out;
    [*] Quests can still be level-limited, without locking people out of the areas entirely. I would still suggest letting people up to 5 levels below the "expected" time of entry get thsoe quests, though - so a World that expects you to be level 30 ... you can get the quests from there, as soon as level 25.


Let me go ahead and explain solutions to your problems or why they're just flat out wrong.

[*] We should try not to unduly discourage friends from playing together, even if one friend's character is significantly lower in level than the other's;

Instead of the lower level going to help the higher level, why doesn't anyone ever ask the higher level to go back and help the lower level? This is like asking a 6 year old to help your high school student with his calculus homework. This way friends are still playing together and characters aren't in an area where they're not supposed to be.

[*] I'd rather see a cap put on XP earned, so that beyond X difference between your actual level, and the expected level, you don't get any additional XP. That way, the abov epoint is preserved, while the exploit of "power-levelling" is somewhat curtailed;


You obviously have no experience in computer programming. Adding a level cap to each world would be a lot easier than writing different XP earned for each level for each quest. That one just isn't logical from a programming perspective. WAY too much code to be added. Using simple if/then statements, it'd be something like:

If char =/= Level 48, then =/= Celestia. (or something similar for each world). That's 7 instances of coding, instead of about 15-20 different codes per quest of which there's more than 300. See my point?

[*] I would also rather see each world pop up a "Hey, you sure about this" warning for people who are under-levelled for that area, than simply lock them out;

Now come on...do you really think this would stop anything? It's like a 15 year old viewing things he should be on the internet. "Are you above 18? Yes? No?" What do you think he's going to click?

[*] Quests can still be level-limited, without locking people out of the areas entirely. I would still suggest letting people up to 5 levels below the "expected" time of entry get thsoe quests, though - so a World that expects you to be level 30 ... you can get the quests from there, as soon as level 25.

Here's the problem with that. The people will be getting higher experience for the later quests, allowing them to level up faster than they should. Doing this, I could be doing Mooshu quests, and still be in Krokotopia. Maybe even Dragonspyre quests. Also, level-limiting the actual quests is just as pointless code-wise as handicapping the XP levels. It's much easier to just limit the world access for 7 worlds than to individally limit 300+ different quests.

Mastermind
Jun 23, 2010
345
alex321694 wrote:

We will also find that this simple change ELIMINATES the ability of creating "free" accounts for the sole purpose of "misbehaving" with no penalty. Using windows, a single paid account can create unlimited "free accounts", befriend them, and thereafter use the porting feature to vandalize the game experience of everyone else ALL over the Spiral.

And the only ramification is "sanctioning" a "free" account ???

Big Deal. He or she just spends an evening creating 20-30 more and laughs at the absolutely unenforceable "Terms of Use Agreement" and ALL of the labor being expended to punish the malicious behavior.

I suspect the biggest performance improvement, showing IMMEDIATE results for EVERYONE using Wizard101 servers, would be the simple prevention of porting free accounts into UNPAID areas.

The BEHAVIOR we are incorrectly trying to address with all this "Let's keep the noobs out of 'you name it place' is NOT going to be corrected by level restrictions ... we have to hit them where it hurts ... the wallet.

I strongly support KI's insistence upon providing a safe, free, place for anyone to play Wizard101. It is good for business. But, I resent sharing overworked resources that I PAY to use, with people who choose NOT to pay, simply because they can artificially "friend" their way around it.

If an individual cannot afford $10.00 a month to play a game as great as this one is, perhaps they should find a better way to spend their time ... I certainly would not expect to be able to play areas I had not paid to use, but most people these days consider stealing a valued KSA, knowledge-skill-and ability, rather than a character flaw.

There are no technical solutions to management problems.

THIS is a management problem.



True free to play accounts can only access The following places; The Commons. Pet Pavilion, Ravenwood, Shopping District, Fairgrounds, Golem Court, Unicorn Way, Triton Avenue, Haunted Cave and Nightside. You CANNOT port to any other areas until you buy them with crowns or have a subscription.

I do agree that nobody should be able to port to a world they do not hold the Spiral Key to. KI has a clear game structure as to how you get from one world to another. I sincerely hope they starting enforcing it through world locks.

I think it is much better for my characters to go back and help others.

Megan-formerly Firefan02
Firefan02 is now my son.


Survivor
May 31, 2009
3
i think there should be one. its not that fair for the people who went through all the main quest and put time into the game see a player who got there without having to do anything. theres no point in playing this game if you can just go were ever you want without having to do anything. even if they have to do hard quest for there level, what did they do to diserve that quest? another thing is thet ruin battles. lets say your in DS and a level 30 joins and then flees or dies without doing anything. that makes the battle longer and makes people mad. if your not the proper level for the world then dont got there. its as simple as that.

Mastermind
Jun 13, 2009
332
I do not see why anyone would have a problem with how people level up their wizards. Frankly speaking, it's not your business.

I have five legendary wizards and currently working on my ICE and it's quite a challenge to focus on leveling him up becuase I have already do this 5 times!!

Doesn't matter if you power level or not (we all do it), you will still HAVE to do all the main quests in order to access the worlds on your own. So what's the problem here?

When you are leveling up your other wizards, you just want to get it over with so that you can focus on other things such as crafting, pet leveling and PVP. No one has the time ot be struggling in trition avenue with field guards because of low health and weak spells.

The worlds do not belong to anyone, they are free for all toi roam about once they pay for the area or subscribe.

if you want to restrict the low levels in other worlds, then why don't we just abondon the friend thing and porting? Not gonna happen. So let's move on. it's not a big deal. Go on about your business, change realms, do whatever you want but let other people enjoy the gome too.

Mastermind
Jun 13, 2009
332
littlebelle wrote:
I find this so frustrating especially with the kids with no chat. You can not tell them they should not be here. I had a few I made friends that follow me into battle in mooshu. Would 900 points be good enough no way.

In big ben fight we had to carry a kid who had 800 points. I would not like the levels to be too hard to get too. But no wizard that has not even finish Kroktopia should be able to get into Mooshu.

This never bothered me before. With chat people I can express my displeasure. With No chat all I can do is delete them. Which I think is much more cruel than telling them to stop following me and you should not even be here.

But if we have a chat button that said you should not be here go back home then I would see no need for minimal requirements.

Or maybe you could go to Mooshu but you would only get experience points for the level you are at. There is no way you could beat any of those monsters with 800 points. So If the prize is a robe the robe that player gets is the same value as they would get in Colossus.

So they would gain nothing for jumping up so high, but if they truly wanted to help a friend they could too.


Not sure if you are aware that you can actually turn off friend teleport. yes that's right KI gave us that option so problem solved right there.

If they are so annoying then delte them or turn off teleports. No need ot be creating a storm when you have the tools to solve the problem.

Mastermind
Jun 23, 2010
345
NicoUzumaki wrote:
I do not see why anyone would have a problem with how people level up their wizards. Frankly speaking, it's not your business.

I have five legendary wizards and currently working on my ICE and it's quite a challenge to focus on leveling him up becuase I have already do this 5 times!!

Doesn't matter if you power level or not (we all do it), you will still HAVE to do all the main quests in order to access the worlds on your own. So what's the problem here?

When you are leveling up your other wizards, you just want to get it over with so that you can focus on other things such as crafting, pet leveling and PVP. No one has the time ot be struggling in trition avenue with field guards because of low health and weak spells.

The worlds do not belong to anyone, they are free for all toi roam about once they pay for the area or subscribe.

if you want to restrict the low levels in other worlds, then why don't we just abondon the friend thing and porting? Not gonna happen. So let's move on. it's not a big deal. Go on about your business, change realms, do whatever you want but let other people enjoy the gome too.


I am on my fifth wizard. I have not power leveled any of them. I have followed the quest line. So no, not everyone power levels. My friends actually won't help in areas they have not opened yet.

The amount of conflict and ill will be caused by this issue makes it a problem that needs to be looked at and solved. It is harming the community. I hope KI will address it.

Not sure if you are aware that you can actually turn off friend teleport. yes that's right KI gave us that option so problem solved right there.

If they are so annoying then delte them or turn off teleports. No need ot be creating a storm when you have the tools to solve the problem.


This only works if everybody does it and that is PRECISELY the problem. Most people just don't care. Then their friend runs off and causes problems. I keep my ports off and have deleted people for all the above behaviors. In some areas I have to fight to find a free realm to do my quest because so many lower level players are farming.

You say to let people enjoy the game. Well that is a two way street. I have had lower level players infringe upon my enjoyment of the game. World locks would settle this nicely. I would happily go back and help lower friends. I am doing it right now.

Megan--formerly Firefan02

Survivor
May 06, 2009
21
I voted no because there are the occasions when you were saving up for a house in the next level up when you worked REALLY hard to save up all that gold and you can't even acess the world because your "too low a level".

And for changing the badge requirement...
I have a relitavely low level character... and I helped my friend with Jade Oni, just to have fun! We would buff up our spells and get 1000+ damage on a rank 2-3 spell. I worked REALLY hard to get the "Oni Slayer" badge and I wear it with pride!

Yes, I understand that porting and bringing in yet another monster can be uber-annoying- and I have a low level friend with closed chat who bothers me CONSTANTLY, but just recently she unknowingky helped me through an entire dungeon(yes i got noobs to do my bidding)- but you people have to understand they mean well, they just dont have the health or level to prove it, I started a new character because I was bored with my school of focus, and I am constantly called "noob" and "low level". So, you have to look at things from their perspective, too.
______________________________________________________________________

Lindsey Shadowcaller
Magus Sorceress(lvl 38)
Oni Slayer
Shiratkai Temple, Mooshu

Morgan Drake
Journeyman Myth(lvl 14)
Undead Hunter
Various side quests of my own

Survivor
Aug 11, 2009
35
Luvas wrote:
Should there be level requirements for worlds?

I say no, because level is not always the defining characteristic of someone's experience. A while ago, I used to be neutral on this issue, but realizing the excitement and uncertainty of being underpowered in a world full of monstrous monsters has swayed my opinion dramatically.

In fact, a ban on levels anywhere would hinder me and my gaming experience.

For example, I found it simply awesome that I was able to buy a home in Marleybone at level 15 thanks to a helpful friend. Rather than have to complete all of Krokotopia, I got my 'Marleybonian' Wizard a much desired head start on developing his rightful home

Even as a Magus Balance Wizard I've impressed Grandmasters with my knowledge of the game and selfless strategy, and have been invited to Celestia numerous times to help them fight. It was through this method that I helped someone reach level 60, and myself a satisfying 42.

You may say that I didn't earn the right to enter a later world, but I say that I did earn the temporary privilege to enter it, simply by showing the people who have the right that I can handle it in a responsible manner.

Although a ban on lower levels would get rid of the occasional noob ruining battles for some of us, there are much more valid solutions to this problem (Such as an alert for incoming teleports, as some very wise students have suggested) And, as the old saying goes, why let what one person does ruin it for all of us?


You are right. Iam alevel 33 storm who sometimes explores. I have gone into a battle in DS helped my friend defeat the monster and fend for myself. Did I get called a name in the higher worlds?No. I have come up with a conclusion: If I fend for myself,help do other things, and fend for myself,I will not be called a rude name.(I did vote no for my friends and I explore sometimes :-o)Can someone please reply to tell me if I am right.Thank You. :D

Autumn Emeraldleaf Lvl 33 Storm

Survivor
Mar 03, 2009
14
Yea, I do dislike the fact that low levels port in and flee but I suck it up and deal with it. Just don't allow friend port on or just don't add low levels. I don't add anyone that's not level 48 or above cause what would be the point of me friending anyone lower that I know for a fact that can't help me at all. If I see a struggling low level, then of course I would help them but friend NO. I have an upcoming death and I when some dungeons which is rare :D that I might need help I would like for my higher level friends port and help me out. So there should not be a level requirement..low level porting seems like a problems that the players need to fix not KI

Explorer
Mar 24, 2009
58
yukeelemental wrote:
Yea, I do dislike the fact that low levels port in and flee but I suck it up and deal with it. Just don't allow friend port on or just don't add low levels. I don't add anyone that's not level 48 or above cause what would be the point of me friending anyone lower that I know for a fact that can't help me at all. If I see a struggling low level, then of course I would help them but friend NO. I have an upcoming death and I when some dungeons which is rare :D that I might need help I would like for my higher level friends port and help me out. So there should not be a level requirement..low level porting seems like a problems that the players need to fix not KI


You're missing the point. I don't have anyone under Level 50 on my buddy list, yet I still see a HUGE problem. I do my part, you do your part, but the problem is we're in the minority. Sad to say this is the internet and that means that a majority of the people on here like to make others lives as difficult as possible.

Delver
Sep 26, 2009
227
I dont think there should be a lvl cap. I have some friends who play on their lvl 20-30 wizards and they are a great help in battle. Its not really the lvl, though a lvl 1 wouldn't be too helpful but its if they really know what their doing. Say your fighting ice things, they tower and you have all of your school traps on it but now it wont die. The other wizard can just use another schools spell. They are helpful only when they know what their doing. I would always prefer a lvl 34 life wizard and another monster than dying.

Autumn -- Lvl 36?
(other wizards)

Explorer
Jun 20, 2009
68
no. just no. i didn't do any sidequests on my main, and when i got up to mooshu, someone told me to go back to hyde park because i was a lying noob that had teleported to a friend and would ruin everybody's battle. it would really annoy me if i got up to a new world and then a little message showed up that said, "i'm sorry, but you must level up three levels before continuing your wizard101 adventure in this area. please return once you have done a good deal of sidequests". also, i like to teleport my lower level characters to get good houses in marleybone and mooshu because i just couldnt find enough space for all of my furniture in the dorm. also, you might want a lower lvl to help you in a world. for example sometimes i asked level 35's to come and help me with a dragonspyre boss or even street battle. it would be plan unfair if you made a level requirement to each world because 1. some people would be up to the world but unable to enter 2. we payed for subscription/crowns to enter the area, we should be able to, shouldnt we? 3. i like to ask lower levels to help me sometimes and 4. i like to buy houses in worlds i haven't reached.
Grandmaster thaumaturge,
julia rainbowgem

Survivor
Apr 23, 2010
6
I think a level requirement wouldn't be really good. I've been to Celestia only being level 31 . They didn't care at all, one of my friends really needed my help. I think that there should be a button that can port any player back to any area they have they have unlocked. This should stop noobs and other low leveled people from getting into places like Mooshu. Also, after that happens, they can't port to the friend for a day.

Survivor
Dec 11, 2010
19
It kind of would be safer to have requirements for a world.Cause the enemies would be a lot tougher.Imagine if you had access to Marleybone at Level 5 the enemies would be realy hard to beat.Plus it would be easier to beat enemies with a tougher spell.

Survivor
Aug 20, 2009
46
I for one, think that there shouldn't be a level cap. However I do think that if you have not yet gained entrance to a world, you should not be able to go in. I do find it very annoying when i turn on my port for a split second in a very intense fight in celestia, so a life can port to me and help, and then a bunch of noobs port during that second or two. I usually remove these people, but I dont want to have to remove them based on their rank.