Raid difficulty and challenge motes

[Loken.7684]

> @Lakemine.3014 said:

> Because if gear is easier to get, then it becomes about peoples skill and knowledge about their class and the fights. This is why I LOVE pvp and ranked in GW2. Icame from SWTOR pvp, where you would get rofl stomped, even with a bolster on, by people who had better gear then you. Pvp here (I started just after the change in April of 2014) is NO FREKAING GEAR NEEDED. Its about skill, its about knowing your class, the other classes, trying to outsmart other people, know the maps, know rotations. Your not held back by stupid gear that costs upwards of 400+ gold. And you can switch to a different class on the fly, no hassle. Heck, I can go make a new character, and within 3 minutes of making them, be beating people in ranked. Can't do that in raids. (Also to help people if I need to switch to a different class because the comp needs to change. Can do that in ranked, can't in raids, unless you have metric ton of gold, which most people don't.)

 

Ascended gear isn't that expensive.

 

 

[Blaeys.3102]

> @Fatalyz.7168 said:

> @"Blaeys.3102"

>

> I am not attempting to say that people don't want or shouldn't want access to that story. It, just is flat out not related to the Commander (PC). That, by it's nature makes it a side story. Whether people want access to it or not, has no bearing on whether it is or is not a side story.

>

> The decision to lock the content behind a skill wall, that they intentionally made high, and whether it is bad or not, is highly subjective.

>

> I do not see it as a bad thing, simply because there is nothing wrong with some content that a majority will never experience. In this, raids are content that are all about the challenge for the group, the story is secondary. If it was all about the story, why doesn't it involve the Commander, why is most of the story told through notes, not dialogue and cut scenes?

>

> Yes, it has interesting story. But just because it has interesting story, does not mean that it has to be for everyone. Perhaps if it kills the game, then it can be said that it was needed. But if the game continues to go strong, then perhaps it never did need it, and people just wanted it.

 

You are right - it is highly subjective, which is why I say it is a semantic argument to begin with. It is why you and I disagree on the definition - but I do still believe that the developer's use of the phrase "side story" when first used in relation to raids (and I was an active part of that conversation) was misleading and used almost exclusively to convince people that they wouldn't be interested in the stories in the first place. That was just weeks before wing four came out and we saw that the story dealt with the fate of a GW1 character - a story/revelation that a lot of people (not just hardcore raiders) would have loved experiencing with their friends.

 

So, if the story is truly secondary, as you say, then a short term solution seems to be removing story from raids entirely - at least until a better solution can be developed. Not saying that would solve the underlying issue with raid design in this game, but it would keep it from getting worse for the time being.

 

To your other argument, it really doesn't matter what they originally intended raids to be. If we go with that line of reasoning, there is a lot in the game that would have never changed. Sometimes, the game has to adapt.

 

They have clearly proven themselves that multiple difficulties would work (by Crystal's own admission, whether she accepts it or not, with her comments about MO challenge mote earlier in this thread). Other games have shown that it eventually becomes necessary to sustain a raiding community. No matter what people think of how story modes were implemented in those games, they were implemented for a reason.

 

I believe it is just a matter of time before Anet has to accept that they will be needed in this game as well.

[Fatalyz.7168]

> @Blaeys.3102 said:

Sometimes, the game has to adapt.

 

Very true. Sometimes though, the player has to adapt (look no further than dungeons, no matter how much people want it, Anet is leaving it behind). They have put a lot of different things into the game, and unfortunately they can't fully develop everything. If the trade-off for single difficulty raids, was no raids, due to the limited resources that they wanted to put into it. I'll gladly take the single difficulty.

 

> They have clearly proven themselves that multiple difficulties would work (by Crystal's own admission, whether she accepts it or not, with her comments about MO challenge mote earlier in this thread). Other games have shown that it eventually becomes necessary to sustain a raiding community, not matter what people think of how they were implemented there. It is just a matter of time before Anet has to accept that.

 

It isn't about whether it would work or not. I'm pretty sure that they know that multiple modes would work. The problem lies with the trade-off being the frequency with which they can release content, and they prefer a higher frequency of content. (I understand that her comment about their preference to put out content faster was more in relation to making it more accessible from a grouping standpoint, but I feel that it can be easily applied to making different difficulty levels as well.)

 

They may accept that, but they do not have to. They may never accept that, and the game could continue on for a couple of decades, being successful. In that instance, it is just a matter of time before the player accepts that Anet isn't changing it.

 

I also get the feeling that Anet isn't trying to maintain a tight knit raiding community. If they were, why do the raid devs barely partake with the community, or even a raid CM? Raids feel more like, here you go, see what you can do with it. We created this challenge, we want to see how you solve it.

[Blaeys.3102]

@Fatalyz.7168

 

Except raiding in this game - for actual hardcore raiders - is a bit of a joke. First kills are within hours, if not minutes, of the raid wing release, compared to days, weeks (and even months in one case I can remember) for other raid focused games.

 

There are raiding games out there that push your knowledge, reflexes and general skill at the game - GW2 is not one of them. You memorize the "dance" of the raid and everything else is just numbers. Difficulty in GW2 raids is centered almost entirely around mathematical tweaks that only serve to make the content less accessible (or, at the very least, overly frustrating) to average players who enjoy off brand (way off meta) builds or playstyles. That frustration creates an illusion that relies on exclusionary design (fewer people do it so it must be hard) rather than actual difficult mechanics.

 

The problem is that, in order to maintain that illusion of difficulty, they have to maintain the exclusionary design, and that is potentially damaging to the feel of the game for people not interested in the arbitrary requirements of GW2 raiding in its current form.

 

And that stems from a fundamental design difference between GW2 and those other games - the very difference that brought people like me to the game in the first place. GW2 is more community focused than pretty much any other MMO out there. Guilds actually mean something here - people are encouraged to become part of the larger community. In contrast, raid focused MMOs are more about the small group (5, 10, 25, 40 person) experience. They build their content almost exclusively to cater to those groups. That is what Anet is trying to do with raids, but I do believe it goes against the underlying feel of the game and often works in direct contradiction to that community focused design that made the game so groundbreaking when it first came out.

[Exciton.8942]

> @Blaeys.3102 said:

> @Fatalyz.7168

>

> Except raiding in this game - for actual hardcore raiders - is a bit of a joke. First kills are within hours, if not minutes, of the raid wing release, compared to days, weeks (and even months in one case I can remember) for other raid focused games.

>

> There are raiding games out there that push your knowledge, reflexes and general skill at the game - GW2 is not one of them. You memorize the "dance" of the raid and everything else is just numbers. Difficulty in GW2 raids is centered almost entirely around mathematical tweaks that only serve to make the content less accessible (or, at the very least, overly frustrating) to average players who enjoy off brand (way off meta) builds or playstyles. That frustration creates an illusion that relies on exclusionary design (fewer people do it so it must be hard) rather than actual difficult mechanics.

>

> The problem is that, in order to maintain that illusion of difficulty, they have to maintain the exclusionary design, and that is potentially damaging to the feel of the game for people not interested in the arbitrary requirements of GW2 raiding in its current form.

>

> And that stems from a fundamental design difference between GW2 and those other games - the very difference that brought people like me to the game in the first place. GW2 is more community focused than pretty much any other MMO out there. Guilds actually mean something here - people are encouraged to become part of the larger community. In contrast, raid focused MMOs are more about the small group (5, 10, 25, 40 person) experience. They build their content almost exclusively to cater to those groups. That is what Anet is trying to do with raids, but I do believe it goes against the underlying feel of the game and often works in direct contradiction to that community focused design that made the game so groundbreaking when it first came out.

 

I have to disagree.

 

Encounter mechanics is precisely the No.1 reason that raid is challenging for most players. It is not because that they can't run off-meta builds.

There is no strict dps requirement to beat most encounters and most meta builds are not that much worse than meta ones. You can easily get away by doing 20%-30% less dps than optimal builds.

 

So you think content should either be so difficult that it has to be like a second job for players to beat or so easy that every one can beat with ease. I feel you are ignoring many players falling into a middle ground in content difficulty(just like me). For me, gw2 raid difficulty is very well-tuned. It provides just enough challenge for casual gamers.

[Blaeys.3102]

@Exciton.8942 said:

 

Never said that people can't beat raids with off meta builds. What I said is that raids are much more frustrating for people who choose to do so - which in turn discourages a lot of people from the content.

 

I made my comments about difficulty versus other raiding games because of Crystal's point about remembering the first time you kill a particular boss. I dont recall my first Vale Guardian kill fondly with pride. I remember it as the point at which the group finally caved and went all meta. On the contrary, after a decade, I still remember my first KT kill in WoW, or first Lich King or Yogg Saron Alone in the Dark - and the effort that went into learning and beating those encounters. I remember them, in part, because they fit well with how that game was designed and who it was designed for.

 

The math in GW2 raids is not a hard wall restriction, but it is punishing enough to make the experience exponentially more frustrating for players, creating that illusionary difficulty that I talk about above. It isn't a black and white difference; it is a matter of degrees. And, with the way Anet markets raids, they rely on that frustration and the people who succumb to it (which is bad for the community, imo), rather than any real difficulty, to create the illusion of challenging content.

 

And, to make things worse, they really can't fix it without changing their entire design philosophy around raids. Lonami said it best on reddit and again here in this thread, but I will attempt to summarize -

 

Without separating into multiple difficulties, they have to make too many concessions related to difficulty in order to keep from pushing that frustration spot to the point where the number of raiders no longer justifies development time. If they make it too hard, they lose too many people. If they make it too easy, they lose a different group of people. They are paying Peter to rob Paul either way. Ergo, if we want continued (actual) difficult content in raids, in a sustainable model, we need the story or easier motes alongside the challenging content.

[ugrakarma.9416]

> @Cyrus.2607 said:

> I agree that Raids should always be difficult! With regards to having an "easy" version of the raid, why not just have an Easy Mote that basically grants invul (like Determined) to the entire squad. That way any number of people can just run through the raids as-is and see the story in the raids. There should be **NO **rewards for running it this way and **NO **achievements possible from this. **That way, the only reward of doing this is for those interested in what the raid stories are, but gain nothing else outside of that.** Additionally, the devs need not figure out how to create "cheaper" mechanics for the bosses at all and continue creating content at the rate they already are.

 

this. just a cheap mode for the curious ppl.

 

But although from what I observed in the raids, there is not much of lore in there, just few dialogues and cinematics at end. .

 

In fact, anyone who has ever done raids, maybe because people talk about complex mechanics, imagine it to be a business full of cinematics and dialogues and lore lol.

 

 

[Fatalyz.7168]

> @Blaeys.3102 said:

> @Fatalyz.7168

>

> Except raiding in this game - for actual hardcore raiders - is a bit of a joke. First kills are within hours, if not minutes, of the raid wing release, compared to days, weeks (and even months in one case I can remember) for other raid focused games.

 

I understand that it is. The thing about that is, it was never marketed towards hardcore raiders. It was only ever marketed as challenging group content, and within the context of the rest of the game, it fits.

 

> There are raiding games out there that push your knowledge, reflexes and general skill at the game - GW2 is not one of them. You memorize the "dance" of the raid and everything else is just numbers. Difficulty in GW2 raids is centered almost entirely around mathematical tweaks that only serve to make the content less accessible (or, at the very least, overly frustrating) to average players who enjoy off brand (way off meta) builds or playstyles. That frustration creates an illusion that relies on exclusionary design (fewer people do it so it must be hard) rather than actual difficult mechanics.

 

Except, that if people are able to perform the mechanics, a lot of fights could be done with 10/10 off-meta builds. The difference is, running off-meta builds requires a much deeper understanding of your class/playstyle, as well as the ability to continue performing mechanics. I would say that this pushes your knowledge, reflexes, and general skill at the game.

 

If anything running meta builds makes it easier for people to get into raids, not harder. All of the work has already been done for the player.

 

> The problem is that, in order to maintain that illusion of difficulty, they have to maintain the exclusionary design, and that is potentially damaging to the feel of the game for people not interested in the arbitrary requirements of GW2 raiding in its current form.

>

> And that stems from a fundamental design difference between GW2 and those other games - the very difference that brought people like me to the game in the first place. GW2 is more community focused than pretty much any other MMO out there. Guilds actually mean something here - people are encouraged to become part of the larger community. In contrast, raid focused MMOs are more about the small group (5, 10, 25, 40 person) experience. They build their content almost exclusively to cater to those groups. That is what Anet is trying to do with raids, but I do believe it goes against the underlying feel of the game and often works in direct contradiction to that community focused design that made the game so groundbreaking when it first came out.

 

The difference is, those games wanted raids to cater to multiple communities within the game, and that isn't a bad thing. GW2 wants raids to cater to those who want a challenge, not those who don't, and that isn't a bad thing either. Saying that they should just remove the story then because someone might find it interesting and can't do the challenge, is not.

 

I will admit that Crystal said that raids SHOULD stay challenging and exclusive based on skill level, that doesn't mean that it will. I did take it to mean that it will stay that way unless it becomes a failure or detracts from the main game.

[zealex.9410]

> @Blaeys.3102 said:

> @Exciton.8942 said:

>

> Never said that people can't beat raids with off meta builds. What I said is that raids are much more frustrating for people who choose to do so - which in turn discourages a lot of people from the content.

>

> I made my comments about difficulty versus other raiding games because of Crystal's point about remembering the first time you kill a particular boss. I dont recall my first Vale Guardian kill fondly with pride. I remember it as the point at which the group finally caved and went all meta. On the contrary, after a decade, I still remember my first KT kill in WoW, or first Lich King or Yogg Saron Alone in the Dark - and the effort that went into learning and beating those encounters. I remember them, in part, because they fit well with how that game was designed and who it was designed for.

>

> The math in GW2 raids is not a hard wall restriction, but it is punishing enough to make the experience exponentially more frustrating for players, creating that illusionary difficulty that I talk about above. It isn't a black and white difference; it is a matter of degrees. And, with the way Anet markets raids, they rely on that frustration and the people who succumb to it (which is bad for the community, imo), rather than any real difficulty, to create the illusion of challenging content.

>

> And, to make things worse, they really can't fix it without changing their entire design philosophy around raids. Lonami said it best on reddit and again here in this thread, but I will attempt to summarize -

>

> Without separating into multiple difficulties, they have to make too many concessions related to difficulty in order to keep from pushing that frustration spot to the point where the number of raiders no longer justifies development time. If they make it too hard, they lose too many people. If they make it too easy, they lose a different group of people. They are paying Peter to rob Paul either way. Ergo, if we want continued (actual) difficult content in raids, in a sustainable model, we need the story or easier motes alongside the challenging content.

 

Gw2 doesnt need to do too many diff mode the most would be base mode and cm. The game hasnt or wont become raid centric raiding as alot of ppl have said is a niche and if you want to get into it you should change your aproach. Much like i had to change my entire paladin build in wow when i dicided to get into raids. Wow tries to make raids relavant to alot more ppl because raids are what wow is played for.

 

"I remember it as the point at which the group finally caved and went all meta" is there something wrong with that? should content require you to have a specific playstyle and something that makes sense to compensate for the lack of skill required? U remember your first raids in wow because that was prob your first real interaction with the content meanwhile gw2's isnt something new so it wont stick to you. I for example my first raid experience was lfr in wod then i took a break and went to gw2 and raided. I hold my first vg kill with alot more pride than i do my first wow kill. Same when i went back to legion and tried heroic nightmare. it wasnt so much impactful to me as a player because i had already experienced the struggle and excitement of raiding elsewere.

[zealex.9410]

> @Blaeys.3102 said:

> @Exciton.8942 said:

>

> Never said that people can't beat raids with off meta builds. What I said is that raids are much more frustrating for people who choose to do so - which in turn discourages a lot of people from the content.

>

> I made my comments about difficulty versus other raiding games because of Crystal's point about remembering the first time you kill a particular boss. I dont recall my first Vale Guardian kill fondly with pride. I remember it as the point at which the group finally caved and went all meta. On the contrary, after a decade, I still remember my first KT kill in WoW, or first Lich King or Yogg Saron Alone in the Dark - and the effort that went into learning and beating those encounters. I remember them, in part, because they fit well with how that game was designed and who it was designed for.

 

> The math in GW2 raids is not a hard wall restriction, but it is punishing enough to make the experience exponentially more frustrating for players, creating that illusionary difficulty that I talk about above. It isn't a black and white difference; it is a matter of degrees. And, with the way Anet markets raids, they rely on that frustration and the people who succumb to it (which is bad for the community, imo), rather than any real difficulty, to create the illusion of challenging content.

>

> And, to make things worse, they really can't fix it without changing their entire design philosophy around raids. Lonami said it best on reddit and again here in this thread, but I will attempt to summarize -

>

> Without separating into multiple difficulties, they have to make too many concessions related to difficulty in order to keep from pushing that frustration spot to the point where the number of raiders no longer justifies development time. If they make it too hard, they lose too many people. If they make it too easy, they lose a different group of people. They are paying Peter to rob Paul either way. Ergo, if we want continued (actual) difficult content in raids, in a sustainable model, we need the story or easier motes alongside the challenging content.

 

Gw2 doesnt need to do too many diff mode the most would be base mode and cm. The game hasnt or wont become raid centric raiding as alot of ppl have said is a niche and if you want to get into it you should change your aproach. Much like i had to change my entire paladin build in wow when i dicided to get into raids. Wow tries to make raids relavant to alot more ppl because raids are what wow is played for.

 

"I remember it as the point at which the group finally caved and went all meta" is there something wrong with that? should content require you to have a specific playstyle and something that makes sense to compensate for the lack of skill required? U remember your first raids in wow because that was prob your first real interaction with the content meanwhile gw2's isnt something new so it wont stick to you. I for example my first raid experience was lfr in wod then i took a break and went to gw2 and raided. I hold my first vg kill with alot more pride than i do my first wow kill. Same when i went back to legion and tried heroic nightmare. it wasnt so much impactful to me as a player because i had already experienced the struggle and excitement of raiding elsewere.

 

Raids take 8 or so months to come out how longer to do you thing that would be if raids lets say had 3 modes? And already the cm isnt a brand new take on the fight its basically the same encounter with buffed hp and a changed mechanic.

[Fatalyz.7168]

> @Blaeys.3102 said:

> @Exciton.8942 said:

>

> Never said that people can't beat raids with off meta builds. What I said is that raids are much more frustrating for people who choose to do so - which in turn discourages a lot of people from the content.

>

> I made my comments about difficulty versus other raiding games because of Crystal's point about remembering the first time you kill a particular boss. I dont recall my first Vale Guardian kill fondly with pride. I remember it as the point at which the group finally caved and went all meta. On the contrary, after a decade, I still remember my first KT kill in WoW, or first Lich King or Yogg Saron Alone in the Dark - and the effort that went into learning and beating those encounters. I remember them, in part, because they fit well with how that game was designed and who it was designed for.

>

> The math in GW2 raids is not a hard wall restriction, but it is punishing enough to make the experience exponentially more frustrating for players, creating that illusionary difficulty that I talk about above. It isn't a black and white difference; it is a matter of degrees. And, with the way Anet markets raids, they rely on that frustration and the people who succumb to it (which is bad for the community, imo), rather than any real difficulty, to create the illusion of challenging content.

>

> And, to make things worse, they really can't fix it without changing their entire design philosophy around raids. Lonami said it best on reddit and again here in this thread, but I will attempt to summarize -

>

> Without separating into multiple difficulties, they have to make too many concessions related to difficulty in order to keep from pushing that frustration spot to the point where the number of raiders no longer justifies development time. If they make it too hard, they lose too many people. If they make it too easy, they lose a different group of people. They are paying Peter to rob Paul either way. Ergo, if we want continued (actual) difficult content in raids, in a sustainable model, we need the story or easier motes alongside the challenging content.

 

The thing is, I don't see raids as being intended towards the hardcore crowd, nothing in this game is, at least to me. I see this is as a casual game. Raids are challenging content, within that scope. Ergo, raids are intended to be "casual challenging content". Not meant to cater to either extreme. This is OK because they want raids in this game, to remain niche content. Niche content in games is good. There is just a disconnect with raids, where some people do not think it is acceptable for raids to be the niche content, and can't seem to get around that.

[setdog.1592]

> @"Crystal Reid.2481" said:

> New forum, so I'll jump in with a new post on this.

>

> We won't be adding a different difficulty tier at this time. Raids need to continue to remain the most challenging content in the game, and they aren't designed to be accessible by everyone from a skill perspective. Could they be more accessible from a "finding 9 other players to play with" side? Sure. That isn't always an easy problem to solve, and any solution would detract away from the team making more raid content. We'd love to get more content out to you guys faster really.

>

> I see a lot of comments about W4 difficulty, so I'll add some notes on that as well. Balance came in later than expected since we had far more bosses and content to test than usual. Are we totally happy with how balance turned out? Yes and no. The Mursaat Overseer base difficulty is too easy, but we were very happy with the CM difficulty. For the next release we'd like to get difficulty tuned more back in line with Spirit Vale. However, some of that original difficulty and magic is hard to re-capture. You never forget your first raid boss kill.

 

i enjoy this game alot and lately ive been getting more and more interesting in doing fractals, then i learned about Challenge Mote fractals I was thinking, "gee i really need to finish my ascended gear so I can do these "Challenge Mode" level 100 Fractals

 

I went online to check out a guide and found a video of a Guardian soloing a F100 challenge mote

 

Cant tell you how much i feel that just screams "Broken Game",

 

whats the challenge if "group content" can be soloed?

[Fatalyz.7168]

> @setdog.1592 said:

> > @"Crystal Reid.2481" said:

> > New forum, so I'll jump in with a new post on this.

> >

> > We won't be adding a different difficulty tier at this time. Raids need to continue to remain the most challenging content in the game, and they aren't designed to be accessible by everyone from a skill perspective. Could they be more accessible from a "finding 9 other players to play with" side? Sure. That isn't always an easy problem to solve, and any solution would detract away from the team making more raid content. We'd love to get more content out to you guys faster really.

> >

> > I see a lot of comments about W4 difficulty, so I'll add some notes on that as well. Balance came in later than expected since we had far more bosses and content to test than usual. Are we totally happy with how balance turned out? Yes and no. The Mursaat Overseer base difficulty is too easy, but we were very happy with the CM difficulty. For the next release we'd like to get difficulty tuned more back in line with Spirit Vale. However, some of that original difficulty and magic is hard to re-capture. You never forget your first raid boss kill.

>

> i enjoy this game alot and lately ive been getting more and more interesting in doing fractals, then i learned about Challenge Mote fractals I was thinking, "gee i really need to finish my ascended gear so I can do these "Challenge Mode" level 100 Fractals

>

> I went online to check out a guide and found a video of a Guardian soloing a F100 challenge mote

>

> Cant tell you how much i feel that just screams "Broken Game",

>

> whats the challenge if "group content" can be soloed?

 

The challenge was in being able to solo, that is no easy feat, and a really skilled player who knew the encounter and their class. There have been at least one raid boss soloed (Cairn), and most hardcore guilds run low-man raids (5-6 instead of 10). Most players in this game are no where near that skill level.

[FOX.3582]

> @Fatalyz.7168 said:

> > @SirMoogie.9263 said:

> > > @"Crystal Reid.2481" said:

> > >

> > > We won't be adding a different difficulty tier at this time. Raids need to continue to remain the most challenging content in the game, and they aren't designed to be accessible by everyone from a skill perspective.

> >

> > The big question is why are they aren't designed to be more accessible to different skill levels given that they are telling stories that many players would like to experience (in character), my small guild included? They can still remain the most challenging content, while offering different skill levels, as you yourselves have proven with the challenge motes.

> >

> >

>

> They aren't designed to be more accessible because it would detract from being able to push out content at an acceptable rate. She even mentioned it in her reply, "... any solution would detract away from the team making more raid content." The only solution to being able to continue to release raids at the clip that they are, while providing more difficulty levels, would be to hire more people. For a game that isn't considered raid-centric, that would seem to be a poor use of resources. In the current set-up, it's a small team or two that are working on them, not a lot of resources.

>

> At the end of the day, they had/have a very specific vision for Raids in GW2. They've told us their vision, and stood by it. At some point, you have to start accepting it, otherwise you just end up bitter (not you specifically, just people in general seem to get bitter when fighting to understand or change something, and it never comes to fruition).

 

 

This game has been a very easy "press 1111 only and still get the best gear etc" game since release. You can't just tell people to "accept the change" when this game is changing into something they didn't ask and pay for. Thanks to this raid drama we now have a game were elitists leave because raids are too easy (let's be honest, they are not hard at all), and casual (newbies) leave because this isn't the game anymore as it was when they've bought it. If someone should accept something, it should've been the people who cried for hardcore content all the time, because they are the ones who wanted to change the game! To bad Anet listened to much. The playerbase has dropped like flies after HoT...

[Fatalyz.7168]

> @FOX.3582 said:

> > @Fatalyz.7168 said:

> > > @SirMoogie.9263 said:

> > > > @"Crystal Reid.2481" said:

> > > >

> > > > We won't be adding a different difficulty tier at this time. Raids need to continue to remain the most challenging content in the game, and they aren't designed to be accessible by everyone from a skill perspective.

> > >

> > > The big question is why are they aren't designed to be more accessible to different skill levels given that they are telling stories that many players would like to experience (in character), my small guild included? They can still remain the most challenging content, while offering different skill levels, as you yourselves have proven with the challenge motes.

> > >

> > >

> >

> > They aren't designed to be more accessible because it would detract from being able to push out content at an acceptable rate. She even mentioned it in her reply, "... any solution would detract away from the team making more raid content." The only solution to being able to continue to release raids at the clip that they are, while providing more difficulty levels, would be to hire more people. For a game that isn't considered raid-centric, that would seem to be a poor use of resources. In the current set-up, it's a small team or two that are working on them, not a lot of resources.

> >

> > At the end of the day, they had/have a very specific vision for Raids in GW2. They've told us their vision, and stood by it. At some point, you have to start accepting it, otherwise you just end up bitter (not you specifically, just people in general seem to get bitter when fighting to understand or change something, and it never comes to fruition).

>

>

> This game has been a very easy "press 1111 only and still get the best gear etc" game since release. You can't just tell people to "accept the change" when this game is changing into something they didn't ask and pay for. Thanks to this raid drama we now have a game were elitists leave because raids are too easy (let's be honest, they are not hard at all), and casual (newbies) leave because this isn't the game anymore as it was when they've bought it. If someone should accept something, it should've been the people who cried for hardcore content all the time, because they are the ones who wanted to change the game! To bad Anet listened to much. The playerbase has dropped like flies after HoT...

 

Accept that the game isn't changing into a raid-centric game. This game is still very focused on it's open world and living world, and that hasn't changed. Raids are an attempt to fill the hole that Explorable mode dungeons were supposed to fill, challenging content. There was always intended to be exclusive and challenging content in this game. Too bad those dungeons weren't able to fulfill that role.

[Lakemine.3014]

> @Fatalyz.7168 said:

> > @Lakemine.3014 said:

> > > @Fatalyz.7168 said:

> > > > @Lakemine.3014 said:

> > > > > @Feanor.2358 said:

> > > > > > @Zefiris.8297 said:

> > > > > > > @Feanor.2358 said:

> > > > > > > The simple answer is: it's not cost-effective. An "easy/story mode" raid would have no replayability whatsoever. Let alone multiple difficulty tiers. They will serve to only be "accessed" once by some curious players who will never go back to them. It is simply not worth the effort.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Actually, other MMOs have proven this to be wrong: This approach is most cost effective, because it achieves multiple things at once.

> > > > > > 1. It gets people into raiding, letting them actually try the content and see if they like it (which many do)

> > > > > > 2. It gets people to practice the mechanics, leading to the average person trying a raid to be better at it

> > > > > > 3. It keeps people engaged, because there is more content to do with friends, which is *the* reason for a MMO to have retention

> > > > > >

> > > > > > This is why the most successful MMOs do use such easier modes. It's not because these games have nicer designers, it's just because it's a more effective use of development time.

> > > > >

> > > > > 1. No it doesn't. I've seen many people show interest in raiding and lose it quickly. It was never a difficulty problem, it was commitment. Having to make arrangements ahead of time and having to stick with them for the sake of a game - that's what makes people not become raiders, most of everything. You might argue PUGs exist, but pugging wastes a lot more time in setting up a group, both at the start and when somebody leaves. It's your free time and you're trying to have some fun. Waiting is nobody's idea of fun, so people give up on that, too.

> > > > >

> > > > > 2. No it doesn't. Tuned-down mechanics can only teach you bad habits.

> > > > >

> > > > > 3. No it doesn't, see (1).

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > > For point 2.....imo, they should not tune down mechanics, just the dps checks and enrage timers. Does that mean having to dodge 15+ of Slothasor's Spore Release, yeah maybe, but people are not under a time constraint, plus it means practicing that mechanic more. Also, removing LIs and lessening rewards for this mode, so people don't just go the path of least resistance to get LIs, but can still learn the mechanics and see the storyline

> > >

> > > Tbf, most of the DPS checks are really low, VG I think is around 4k, per person in a 10 person squad. Gorseval, on the other hand, is a dps check. But on most other fights, like sloth, if people are dodging the mechanics anyway, enrage won't usually matter, it isn't insta-wipe, and you can still keep on plugging away. Enrage mode, however, does severely lower the possibility for recovery, if a mechanic is missed.

> > >

> > > I remember my guilds first Matt kill. We ended up going 5 min past the enrage timer.

> >

> > Hmm.......then I guess the guild runs I tried people couldn't even get to 4k? Because we couldn't even get to phase 2 more then 3 times of VG. And I know the necro was at 29k and me on my thief was around there too, but lower because I don't have min/max stats, just stuff in the general range, running mostly full zerk with some assassin. And when the raid leader posted the dps meter (which to my understanding, NO ONE is aloud to test your dps unless you do it yourself.) most everyone seemed to be around 14k, which I'm guessing not being higher was because of only being in the first phase? Now true, the reason why was because people kept failing the green circle. But the few times we did make it to the 3rd phase, it was after 4 minutes, so 4 minutes into the fight. Dps to low I'm guessing?

>

> First, you give consent to having your dps monitored, anytime you join a group or squad. The only way to never have it read, is not join a group, or go with groups/people that don't use them. I believe that this was how Anet phrased giving consent.

>

> To the point you raised, it seems your dps was at an OK level. So it seems that the issue is failed mechanics. For VG, the most common mechanic fails are, not managing greens (either through distort or having people go to the circle), people getting ported by blues (personal mechanic check, although can be distorted), lack of seeker control, slow CC (his CC channel ability really hurts), dps getting in front of VG and getting hit by his absurdly hard auto, and if kiting the boss for phase 2 and 3, not moving the boss fast enough causing greens to spawn in a danger zone.

>

> Something that I suggest to people, if you are having difficulty overcoming a boss, you or someone else, record a couple of runs. See what you can see, and focus on improving those areas.

 

To the rest of the info about the fight, I knew most of they info already, guess just putting in the context you did made it seem clearer. Thanks, and hopefully I can try it again with the guild, or get into another one that can do it.

 

About the DPS meters. Before I thought they were against the EULA (heck my brother got banned for 2 weeks for running in circles and then got banned for buying PoF (complicated story, but I learned some good info out of it, still sucks I wasted 90 bucks on a voided code.) and using them put you at risk to get banned. Then I think it was in April or May they said that personal DPS meters were ok, but not ones that recorded other peoples information. If it was just your numbers, then DPS meters were fine, but if it was recording another player(s) information then it was against the EULA. And I seem to remember the people on reddit who made those DPS meters, having to redesign them so it was within EULA parameters. I will try to find the info that Anet released on it, but its in the old forums. Hopefully a dev can help me out? :D

 

[Fatalyz.7168]

> @Lakemine.3014 said:

> > @Fatalyz.7168 said:

> > > @Lakemine.3014 said:

> > > > @Fatalyz.7168 said:

> > > > > @Lakemine.3014 said:

> > > > > > @Feanor.2358 said:

> > > > > > > @Zefiris.8297 said:

> > > > > > > > @Feanor.2358 said:

> > > > > > > > The simple answer is: it's not cost-effective. An "easy/story mode" raid would have no replayability whatsoever. Let alone multiple difficulty tiers. They will serve to only be "accessed" once by some curious players who will never go back to them. It is simply not worth the effort.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Actually, other MMOs have proven this to be wrong: This approach is most cost effective, because it achieves multiple things at once.

> > > > > > > 1. It gets people into raiding, letting them actually try the content and see if they like it (which many do)

> > > > > > > 2. It gets people to practice the mechanics, leading to the average person trying a raid to be better at it

> > > > > > > 3. It keeps people engaged, because there is more content to do with friends, which is *the* reason for a MMO to have retention

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > This is why the most successful MMOs do use such easier modes. It's not because these games have nicer designers, it's just because it's a more effective use of development time.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > 1. No it doesn't. I've seen many people show interest in raiding and lose it quickly. It was never a difficulty problem, it was commitment. Having to make arrangements ahead of time and having to stick with them for the sake of a game - that's what makes people not become raiders, most of everything. You might argue PUGs exist, but pugging wastes a lot more time in setting up a group, both at the start and when somebody leaves. It's your free time and you're trying to have some fun. Waiting is nobody's idea of fun, so people give up on that, too.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > 2. No it doesn't. Tuned-down mechanics can only teach you bad habits.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > 3. No it doesn't, see (1).

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > For point 2.....imo, they should not tune down mechanics, just the dps checks and enrage timers. Does that mean having to dodge 15+ of Slothasor's Spore Release, yeah maybe, but people are not under a time constraint, plus it means practicing that mechanic more. Also, removing LIs and lessening rewards for this mode, so people don't just go the path of least resistance to get LIs, but can still learn the mechanics and see the storyline

> > > >

> > > > Tbf, most of the DPS checks are really low, VG I think is around 4k, per person in a 10 person squad. Gorseval, on the other hand, is a dps check. But on most other fights, like sloth, if people are dodging the mechanics anyway, enrage won't usually matter, it isn't insta-wipe, and you can still keep on plugging away. Enrage mode, however, does severely lower the possibility for recovery, if a mechanic is missed.

> > > >

> > > > I remember my guilds first Matt kill. We ended up going 5 min past the enrage timer.

> > >

> > > Hmm.......then I guess the guild runs I tried people couldn't even get to 4k? Because we couldn't even get to phase 2 more then 3 times of VG. And I know the necro was at 29k and me on my thief was around there too, but lower because I don't have min/max stats, just stuff in the general range, running mostly full zerk with some assassin. And when the raid leader posted the dps meter (which to my understanding, NO ONE is aloud to test your dps unless you do it yourself.) most everyone seemed to be around 14k, which I'm guessing not being higher was because of only being in the first phase? Now true, the reason why was because people kept failing the green circle. But the few times we did make it to the 3rd phase, it was after 4 minutes, so 4 minutes into the fight. Dps to low I'm guessing?

> >

> > First, you give consent to having your dps monitored, anytime you join a group or squad. The only way to never have it read, is not join a group, or go with groups/people that don't use them. I believe that this was how Anet phrased giving consent.

> >

> > To the point you raised, it seems your dps was at an OK level. So it seems that the issue is failed mechanics. For VG, the most common mechanic fails are, not managing greens (either through distort or having people go to the circle), people getting ported by blues (personal mechanic check, although can be distorted), lack of seeker control, slow CC (his CC channel ability really hurts), dps getting in front of VG and getting hit by his absurdly hard auto, and if kiting the boss for phase 2 and 3, not moving the boss fast enough causing greens to spawn in a danger zone.

> >

> > Something that I suggest to people, if you are having difficulty overcoming a boss, you or someone else, record a couple of runs. See what you can see, and focus on improving those areas.

>

> To the rest of the info about the fight, I knew most of they info already, guess just putting in the context you did made it seem clearer. Thanks, and hopefully I can try it again with the guild, or get into another one that can do it.

>

> About the DPS meters. Before I thought they were against the EULA (heck my brother got banned for 2 weeks for running in circles and then got banned for buying PoF (complicated story, but I learned some good info out of it, still kitten I wasted 90 bucks on a voided code.) and using them put you at risk to get banned. Then I think it was in April or May they said that personal DPS meters were ok, but not ones that recorded other peoples information. If it was just your numbers, then DPS meters were fine, but if it was recording another player(s) information then it was against the EULA. And I seem to remember the people on reddit who made those DPS meters, having to redesign them so it was within EULA parameters. I will try to find the info that Anet released on it, but its in the old forums. Hopefully a dev can help me out? :D

>

 

Chris Cleary has been clarifying on Reddit, I am not sure where his posts are right now.

 

In essence, Anet didn't allow for DPS meters in the beginning. Eventually they relaxed their stance on it. Chris Cleary is typically in constant contact with the meter creators, and making sure that they are inline with what is allowed.

 

What is allowed? iirc, only the reading of party/squad member dps, I believe that there may be more to it. Currently there is only one DPS meter that is allowed, that I am aware of. The other one, the dev was banned and is no longer developing it. He did pass along the source code, but I am unaware if it has been picked up by anyone else.

 

Edit: As for VG, good luck, I know you'll get it in time :).

[Zoltar MacRoth.7146]

> @Nafets.1238 said:

> I reported this and ask a moderator to close it. It has been specified that no "EZ MODE" raids will come, but they are focusing on problems such as "how can I gather more people to do this content".

 

You reported this...on what grounds exactly?

[TexZero.7910]

> @setdog.1592 said:

> i enjoy this game alot and lately ive been getting more and more interesting in doing fractals, then i learned about Challenge Mote fractals I was thinking, "gee i really need to finish my ascended gear so I can do these "Challenge Mode" level 100 Fractals

> I went online to check out a guide and found a video of a Guardian soloing a F100 challenge mote

> Cant tell you how much i feel that just screams "Broken Game",

> whats the challenge if "group content" can be soloed?

 

For every 1 person that can "solo" a boss in fractals there's quite literally thousands more that have a hard time effectively using their dodge key.

So just because you see a handful of talented individuals doesn't mean the content isn't any less challenging. To put it in real world perspective they're Tom Brady and the rest of the crowd is still playing JV Ball.

[Lakemine.3014]

> @Fatalyz.7168 said:

> > @Lakemine.3014 said:

> > > @Fatalyz.7168 said:

> > > > @Lakemine.3014 said:

> > > > > @Fatalyz.7168 said:

> > > > > > @Lakemine.3014 said:

> > > > > > > @Feanor.2358 said:

> > > > > > > > @Zefiris.8297 said:

> > > > > > > > > @Feanor.2358 said:

> > > > > > > > > The simple answer is: it's not cost-effective. An "easy/story mode" raid would have no replayability whatsoever. Let alone multiple difficulty tiers. They will serve to only be "accessed" once by some curious players who will never go back to them. It is simply not worth the effort.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Actually, other MMOs have proven this to be wrong: This approach is most cost effective, because it achieves multiple things at once.

> > > > > > > > 1. It gets people into raiding, letting them actually try the content and see if they like it (which many do)

> > > > > > > > 2. It gets people to practice the mechanics, leading to the average person trying a raid to be better at it

> > > > > > > > 3. It keeps people engaged, because there is more content to do with friends, which is *the* reason for a MMO to have retention

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > This is why the most successful MMOs do use such easier modes. It's not because these games have nicer designers, it's just because it's a more effective use of development time.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > 1. No it doesn't. I've seen many people show interest in raiding and lose it quickly. It was never a difficulty problem, it was commitment. Having to make arrangements ahead of time and having to stick with them for the sake of a game - that's what makes people not become raiders, most of everything. You might argue PUGs exist, but pugging wastes a lot more time in setting up a group, both at the start and when somebody leaves. It's your free time and you're trying to have some fun. Waiting is nobody's idea of fun, so people give up on that, too.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > 2. No it doesn't. Tuned-down mechanics can only teach you bad habits.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > 3. No it doesn't, see (1).

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > For point 2.....imo, they should not tune down mechanics, just the dps checks and enrage timers. Does that mean having to dodge 15+ of Slothasor's Spore Release, yeah maybe, but people are not under a time constraint, plus it means practicing that mechanic more. Also, removing LIs and lessening rewards for this mode, so people don't just go the path of least resistance to get LIs, but can still learn the mechanics and see the storyline

> > > > >

> > > > > Tbf, most of the DPS checks are really low, VG I think is around 4k, per person in a 10 person squad. Gorseval, on the other hand, is a dps check. But on most other fights, like sloth, if people are dodging the mechanics anyway, enrage won't usually matter, it isn't insta-wipe, and you can still keep on plugging away. Enrage mode, however, does severely lower the possibility for recovery, if a mechanic is missed.

> > > > >

> > > > > I remember my guilds first Matt kill. We ended up going 5 min past the enrage timer.

> > > >

> > > > Hmm.......then I guess the guild runs I tried people couldn't even get to 4k? Because we couldn't even get to phase 2 more then 3 times of VG. And I know the necro was at 29k and me on my thief was around there too, but lower because I don't have min/max stats, just stuff in the general range, running mostly full zerk with some assassin. And when the raid leader posted the dps meter (which to my understanding, NO ONE is aloud to test your dps unless you do it yourself.) most everyone seemed to be around 14k, which I'm guessing not being higher was because of only being in the first phase? Now true, the reason why was because people kept failing the green circle. But the few times we did make it to the 3rd phase, it was after 4 minutes, so 4 minutes into the fight. Dps to low I'm guessing?

> > >

> > > First, you give consent to having your dps monitored, anytime you join a group or squad. The only way to never have it read, is not join a group, or go with groups/people that don't use them. I believe that this was how Anet phrased giving consent.

> > >

> > > To the point you raised, it seems your dps was at an OK level. So it seems that the issue is failed mechanics. For VG, the most common mechanic fails are, not managing greens (either through distort or having people go to the circle), people getting ported by blues (personal mechanic check, although can be distorted), lack of seeker control, slow CC (his CC channel ability really hurts), dps getting in front of VG and getting hit by his absurdly hard auto, and if kiting the boss for phase 2 and 3, not moving the boss fast enough causing greens to spawn in a danger zone.

> > >

> > > Something that I suggest to people, if you are having difficulty overcoming a boss, you or someone else, record a couple of runs. See what you can see, and focus on improving those areas.

> >

> > To the rest of the info about the fight, I knew most of they info already, guess just putting in the context you did made it seem clearer. Thanks, and hopefully I can try it again with the guild, or get into another one that can do it.

> >

> > About the DPS meters. Before I thought they were against the EULA (heck my brother got banned for 2 weeks for running in circles and then got banned for buying PoF (complicated story, but I learned some good info out of it, still kitten I wasted 90 bucks on a voided code.) and using them put you at risk to get banned. Then I think it was in April or May they said that personal DPS meters were ok, but not ones that recorded other peoples information. If it was just your numbers, then DPS meters were fine, but if it was recording another player(s) information then it was against the EULA. And I seem to remember the people on reddit who made those DPS meters, having to redesign them so it was within EULA parameters. I will try to find the info that Anet released on it, but its in the old forums. Hopefully a dev can help me out? :D

> >

>

> Chris Cleary has been clarifying on Reddit, I am not sure where his posts are right now.

>

> In essence, Anet didn't allow for DPS meters in the beginning. Eventually they relaxed their stance on it. Chris Cleary is typically in constant contact with the meter creators, and making sure that they are inline with what is allowed.

>

> What is allowed? iirc, only the reading of party/squad member dps, I believe that there may be more to it. Currently there is only one DPS meter that is allowed, that I am aware of. The other one, the dev was banned and is no longer developing it. He did pass along the source code, but I am unaware if it has been picked up by anyone else.

>

> Edit: As for VG, good luck, I know you'll get it in time :).

 

Ok, i'll check reddit a bit more, maybe I just read it a different way and misunderstood it. And I have killed VG multiple times, I have 15 LI atm, just the person I started to raid with, left the game and she hasn't come back in 8 months, so I have to start from the ground up. But i'll get there, just takes time......to long for me, but.....im a stubborn idiot B)

[Zaxares.5419]

Thanks for the reply, Crystal. While I personally am disappointed to hear there won't be a "Story Mode" version of raids, I'll grant that the ultimate decision rests with you and ANet's vision of the experience you are trying to provide. Nonetheless, I hope you guys are aware that there's a lot of players out there who would love to be able to see the story and lore content of raids, because in LS3, it actually bled over in a negative way. For example, you run into Squad Leader Benett in Bloodstone Fen, who talks to you as if you've met him before. (And you have, but only if you've done raids.) For the non-raider, their experience was "Who the hell are you?", akin to the story dissonance that many players experienced going through the Personal Story after large chapters of it got cut out.

 

Likewise, in later chapters the Eye of Janthir plays a notable role in the LS3 story, yet for players who have not raided (or never played GW1), you again have no idea what the Eye of Janthir is or why your character is talking like they know about it. This is extremely jarring and, frankly, a sign of poor storytelling. This is not something that any decent RPG should have, let alone a game the quality of Guild Wars 2 is.

 

So again, I acknowledge that the decision is in your hands, but please just be aware that there are a lot of players out there who were confused as hell about aspects of the LS3 story, and that if you stand by your decision, this is something that must not be repeated in the future.

 

For the record (for those who might think me a player who hasn't done raids and am just wanting stuff to be "easier"), I've cleared about half of the total bosses and am slowly working towards the others, so I do understand the perspectives of both sides. (I DO think that raids have separate issues about build/team comp diversity, but that's a discussion for another thread.)

[maddoctor.2738]

> @Zaxares.5419 said:

> Nonetheless, I hope you guys are aware that there's a lot of players out there who would love to be able to see the story and lore content of raids, because in LS3, it actually bled over in a negative way. For example, you run into Squad Leader Benett in Bloodstone Fen, who talks to you as if you've met him before. (And you have, but only if you've done raids.) For the non-raider, their experience was "Who the kitten are you?", akin to the story dissonance that many players experienced going through the Personal Story after large chapters of it got cut out.

 

This is actually false. This is the dialogue of Squad Leader Bennett:

https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Squad_Leader_Bennett

 

He never once treats you as if you've met him before unless you actually did rescue him.

If you rescued him he says:

After you rescued me, I notified the queen about Salvation Pass. Then I regrouped with my squad and chased some White Mantle here.

I've been thanking Dwayna you busted me out of that infernal place. If not for you, I'd be rotting in a ditch.

 

However if you never rescued him, his lines are:

After I was rescued, I notified the queen about Salvation Pass. Then I regrouped with my squad and chased some White Mantle here.

I've been thanking Dwayna that the rescue team found me in time. If not for them, I'd be rotting in a ditch.

 

A player speaking with him in Bloodstone Fen, that has never finished that part of the Raid, doesn't miss any of the story. It's just a Pact Squad Leader that got rescued by some "team" inside a place called Salvation Pass. There is no "who the kitten are you" feeling.

[FrizzFreston.5290]

> @maddoctor.2738 said:

> > @Zaxares.5419 said:

> > Nonetheless, I hope you guys are aware that there's a lot of players out there who would love to be able to see the story and lore content of raids, because in LS3, it actually bled over in a negative way. For example, you run into Squad Leader Benett in Bloodstone Fen, who talks to you as if you've met him before. (And you have, but only if you've done raids.) For the non-raider, their experience was "Who the kitten are you?", akin to the story dissonance that many players experienced going through the Personal Story after large chapters of it got cut out.

>

> This is actually false. This is the dialogue of Squad Leader Bennett:

> https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Squad_Leader_Bennett

>

> He never once treats you as if you've met him before unless you actually did rescue him.

> If you rescued him he says:

> After you rescued me, I notified the queen about Salvation Pass. Then I regrouped with my squad and chased some White Mantle here.

> I've been thanking Dwayna you busted me out of that infernal place. If not for you, I'd be rotting in a ditch.

>

> However if you never rescued him, his lines are:

> After I was rescued, I notified the queen about Salvation Pass. Then I regrouped with my squad and chased some White Mantle here.

> I've been thanking Dwayna that the rescue team found me in time. If not for them, I'd be rotting in a ditch.

>

> A player speaking with him in Bloodstone Fen, that has never finished that part of the Raid, doesn't miss any of the story. It's just a Pact Squad Leader that got rescued by some "team" inside a place called Salvation Pass. There is no "who the kitten are you" feeling.

 

Is it essential to take part in the story of the raids? Nah. But youre definitely missing out on some side story. And that is what most people criticize.

[maddoctor.2738]

> @FrizzFreston.5290 said:

> > @maddoctor.2738 said:

> > > @Zaxares.5419 said:

> > > Nonetheless, I hope you guys are aware that there's a lot of players out there who would love to be able to see the story and lore content of raids, because in LS3, it actually bled over in a negative way. For example, you run into Squad Leader Benett in Bloodstone Fen, who talks to you as if you've met him before. (And you have, but only if you've done raids.) For the non-raider, their experience was "Who the kitten are you?", akin to the story dissonance that many players experienced going through the Personal Story after large chapters of it got cut out.

> >

> > This is actually false. This is the dialogue of Squad Leader Bennett:

> > https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Squad_Leader_Bennett

> >

> > He never once treats you as if you've met him before unless you actually did rescue him.

> > If you rescued him he says:

> > After you rescued me, I notified the queen about Salvation Pass. Then I regrouped with my squad and chased some White Mantle here.

> > I've been thanking Dwayna you busted me out of that infernal place. If not for you, I'd be rotting in a ditch.

> >

> > However if you never rescued him, his lines are:

> > After I was rescued, I notified the queen about Salvation Pass. Then I regrouped with my squad and chased some White Mantle here.

> > I've been thanking Dwayna that the rescue team found me in time. If not for them, I'd be rotting in a ditch.

> >

> > A player speaking with him in Bloodstone Fen, that has never finished that part of the Raid, doesn't miss any of the story. It's just a Pact Squad Leader that got rescued by some "team" inside a place called Salvation Pass. There is no "who the kitten are you" feeling.

>

> Is it essential to take part in the story of the raids? Nah. But youre definitely missing out on some side story. And that is what most people criticize.

 

I was responding to the argument that Squad Leader Bennett was treating us as if he knew us, but that's false because he has different dialogue based on your completion of Salvation Pass or not. You are missing a side story yes, nobody ever argued against that.

[FrizzFreston.5290]

> @maddoctor.2738 said:

> > @FrizzFreston.5290 said:

> > > @maddoctor.2738 said:

> > > > @Zaxares.5419 said:

> > > > Nonetheless, I hope you guys are aware that there's a lot of players out there who would love to be able to see the story and lore content of raids, because in LS3, it actually bled over in a negative way. For example, you run into Squad Leader Benett in Bloodstone Fen, who talks to you as if you've met him before. (And you have, but only if you've done raids.) For the non-raider, their experience was "Who the kitten are you?", akin to the story dissonance that many players experienced going through the Personal Story after large chapters of it got cut out.

> > >

> > > This is actually false. This is the dialogue of Squad Leader Bennett:

> > > https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Squad_Leader_Bennett

> > >

> > > He never once treats you as if you've met him before unless you actually did rescue him.

> > > If you rescued him he says:

> > > After you rescued me, I notified the queen about Salvation Pass. Then I regrouped with my squad and chased some White Mantle here.

> > > I've been thanking Dwayna you busted me out of that infernal place. If not for you, I'd be rotting in a ditch.

> > >

> > > However if you never rescued him, his lines are:

> > > After I was rescued, I notified the queen about Salvation Pass. Then I regrouped with my squad and chased some White Mantle here.

> > > I've been thanking Dwayna that the rescue team found me in time. If not for them, I'd be rotting in a ditch.

> > >

> > > A player speaking with him in Bloodstone Fen, that has never finished that part of the Raid, doesn't miss any of the story. It's just a Pact Squad Leader that got rescued by some "team" inside a place called Salvation Pass. There is no "who the kitten are you" feeling.

> >

> > Is it essential to take part in the story of the raids? Nah. But youre definitely missing out on some side story. And that is what most people criticize.

>

> I was responding to the argument that Squad Leader Bennett was treating us as if he knew us, but that's false because he has different dialogue based on your completion of Salvation Pass or not. You are missing a side story yes, nobody ever argued against that.

 

Well, you did say that a Player that didn't finish that part of the raid doesn't miss any of the story. Which is what I was responding to. Ofcourse, I should've read that as regarding his dialogue only, rather than in general, though. My mistake.