Feanor.2358 Posted April 30, 2018 Share Posted April 30, 2018 > @"Tyson.5160" said: > > @"maddoctor.2738" said: > > > @"CptAurellian.9537" said: > > > We'd have a complete U-turn from the premises this game launched on. Current raids mostly complement the original goals, i.e. providing challenging instanced group content, what dungeons failed at. However, I'm very confident that even with infantile mode we would not see a majority in raids, since it's obvious that a large part of the game population doesn't care about instanced PvE. > > > > Well if T1 Fractals had rewards comparable to let's say Palawadan we'd see loads more running T1 Fractals since it seems to me that the game's population moves where the best rewards are. > > > > > @"Ohoni.6057" said: > > > I don't know that it would make a huge difference, since they added the multi-server maps, so as long as some people are running open world content, they would end up on the same maps. > > > > > > And even if the majority of players *do* raids, that doesn't mean the majority of the people laying would be *in* a raid at any given time, since most players would only spend a couple hours a week doing raids and then spend the rest of their time doing something else. > > > > In raiding mmorpgs (that have multiple different difficulties for raids) raids are the major part of the game while the open world is more of an after thought, in that situation having multiple difficulty tiers makes sense because that's the focus of the game. Guild Wars 2 is different though and adding more tiers of difficulty in Raids would certainly move this more closer to a full raiding mmorpg, instead of raiding being a relatively small part of it. What actual effect it would have on the open world population is uncertain but it certainly depends on what kind of rewards it gives compared to the difficulty. > > > > > I do think that as they continue to add more raids they need to give more thought to "total raid reward" caps to disincentivize players running *every* encounter every week. > > > > Even more important than that, what happens if someone runs both. Will they be able to get both normal and easy mode rewards on the same week? Challenge motes solve this "problem" by being one time only rewards, therefore there is little reason to repeat them on a schedule. > > Your thoughts on this are very interesting and I didn’t take that into much consideration, that putting more incentive into raids could damage the rest of the game. > > Do you guys think they will cap the Raids off at a certain amount of raids, like dungeons? Nah. I expect a system resembling the fractal one which gives you incentive to play a select, limited number of wings every week. Dungeons are "capped" because they're abandoned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maddoctor.2738 Posted April 30, 2018 Share Posted April 30, 2018 > @"Raizel.8175" said: > Just a random thought of mine: Don't we already have easy-mode-raids? Raids a very centered on support-roles (well, mostly chrono and druid). They basically handle all the mechanics and bear the responsibility of success or failure. Since you (mostly) don't have any kind of responsibility as dps-spec, can't that be considered raid-easy-mode? Playing some DPS roles IS easy mode in some Raids as you don't have to do much other than follow your rotation. This is mostly true in Wing 1, Vale Guardian, Gorseval and Sabetha are really easy bosses for DPS roles and only some very specific players need to actually pay attention in the Raid. The tank at Vale Guardian, the kiter and those going for cannons at Sabetha are the only players that must do something unique. The rest of the players require the same skill as your average open world boss or expansion story mode boss. It gets trickier in later wings though because they probably figured out that this kind of thing wasn't very good for raids and challenging content. They added the fixated mechanic, or similar mechanics, that selects players at random, which means all players need to pay attention to the mechanics in Wings 2, 3 and 4. It basically goes likes this: Easy mode is when a player failing doesn't lead to the entire squad failing (unless it's a very specific role), like except for the tank on VG failing, the squad can recover from most other "failures". Hard mode is when any player in the team can cause a wipe, like mishandling the poison at Slothasor or Matthias. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turin.6921 Posted April 30, 2018 Share Posted April 30, 2018 > @"maddoctor.2738" said: > In raiding mmorpgs (that have multiple different difficulties for raids) raids are the major part of the game while the open world is more of an after thought, in that situation having multiple difficulty tiers makes sense because that's the focus of the game. Guild Wars 2 is different though and adding more tiers of difficulty in Raids would certainly move this more closer to a full raiding mmorpg, instead of raiding being a relatively small part of it. What actual effect it would have on the open world population is uncertain but it certainly depends on what kind of rewards it gives compared to the difficulty. That is actually a good point that most of us here missed (pro or against). That might be one of the reasons why Anet dev team is happy that the raids are not designed for everyone and seems satisfied by the numbers the mode is bringing currently (at least until now based on their responses - They expressed how they are actually impressed they are both by the ppl playing and the ability of the community to handle the difficulty). They do not want a raid-focused game like wow and ff. They prefer for the majority of the population with play the game semi-casually on the open world and their development effort focused mostly there. And for that reason their projection on how popular the raids are supposed to be is smaller. Thus the smaller team compared to the rest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raizel.8175 Posted April 30, 2018 Share Posted April 30, 2018 > @"maddoctor.2738" said: > > @"Raizel.8175" said: > > Just a random thought of mine: Don't we already have easy-mode-raids? Raids a very centered on support-roles (well, mostly chrono and druid). They basically handle all the mechanics and bear the responsibility of success or failure. Since you (mostly) don't have any kind of responsibility as dps-spec, can't that be considered raid-easy-mode? > > Playing some DPS roles IS easy mode in some Raids as you don't have to do much other than follow your rotation. This is mostly true in Wing 1, Vale Guardian, Gorseval and Sabetha are really easy bosses for DPS roles and only some very specific players need to actually pay attention in the Raid. The tank at Vale Guardian, the kiter and those going for cannons at Sabetha are the only players that must do something unique. The rest of the players require the same skill as your average open world boss or expansion story mode boss. > > It gets trickier in later wings though because they probably figured out that this kind of thing wasn't very good for raids and challenging content. They added the fixated mechanic, or similar mechanics, that selects players at random, which means all players need to pay attention to the mechanics in Wings 2, 3 and 4. > > It basically goes likes this: > Easy mode is when a player failing doesn't lead to the entire squad failing (unless it's a very specific role), like except for the tank on VG failing, the squad can recover from most other "failures". > Hard mode is when any player in the team can cause a wipe, like mishandling the poison at Slothasor or Matthias. I don't know. Did every boss from w1 till w4 thus far and the only boss that I really hate is Sloth. The rest is fine, especially since raids are focused on mechanics rather than dps. Haven't seen a single real dps-check thus far like in more traditional mmorpgs. That's also why I don't get the ridiculous LI-reqs some people have for dps-classes (I get that for support-classes though). It's also not like stuff is overly complex. Would argue that SO is more complex than most encounters mechanic-wise. Could only be me though... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ohoni.6057 Posted April 30, 2018 Share Posted April 30, 2018 > @"maddoctor.2738" said: > A game doesn't become a "raiding game" if it just adds some Raids, it's extra content for those that like that sort of content. It becomes a "raiding game" when they become the actual focus of the game, meaning the entire game revolves around them. Nobody's talking about doing that though.The discussion is on making the raids a bit more accessible, like by having an easy mode to them. That doesn't mean that the game "becomes *about* raids," it just means that more people can add raids to the various things they spend their time on. I doubt there's any scenario in which the majority of players spend the *majority* of their time raiding, but I do think there is value in the majority of players dabbling in raiding as a portion of their playtime. >And what happens for those players that find the easy version too hard? They're out of luck. I'm sorry, but there's no other answer to that question. This game has a lot of content, if you can't do any of it then there's really no place for you in the entire game. Since the goal for an easy mode should be that it is in line with the content of the rest of the game, it *should* be accessible for any well-rounded player of GW2. There might be some players who are on the fringes and would find the content "pretty hard compared to their skills," but it would be easy enough that the rest of the team could carry them without them being *too* much of a burden that they would really mind. I just find the "what if it's not easy enough" argument to be a snide attack against people who don't already find the raids "easy enough," rather than a question expecting a serious response. > @"Raizel.8175" said: > Just a random thought of mine: Don't we already have easy-mode-raids? Raids a very centered on support-roles (well, mostly chrono and druid). They basically handle all the mechanics and bear the responsibility of success or failure. Since you (mostly) don't have any kind of responsibility as dps-spec, can't that be considered raid-easy-mode? No. > @"maddoctor.2738" said: >Easy mode is when a player failing doesn't lead to the entire squad failing (unless it's a very specific role), like except for the tank on VG failing, the squad can recover from most other "failures". >Hard mode is when any player in the team can cause a wipe, like mishandling the poison at Slothasor or Matthias. No, hard mode is when *each player* has a high chance of dying if they make simple mistakes. Entire team wipes due to small numbers of player mistakes make it even worse, but just "jump *all* the hoops without missing a single one or you're dead" is bad enough in and of itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nia.4725 Posted April 30, 2018 Share Posted April 30, 2018 > @"Raizel.8175" said: > > @"maddoctor.2738" said: > > > @"Raizel.8175" said: > > > Just a random thought of mine: Don't we already have easy-mode-raids? Raids a very centered on support-roles (well, mostly chrono and druid). They basically handle all the mechanics and bear the responsibility of success or failure. Since you (mostly) don't have any kind of responsibility as dps-spec, can't that be considered raid-easy-mode? > > > > Playing some DPS roles IS easy mode in some Raids as you don't have to do much other than follow your rotation. This is mostly true in Wing 1, Vale Guardian, Gorseval and Sabetha are really easy bosses for DPS roles and only some very specific players need to actually pay attention in the Raid. The tank at Vale Guardian, the kiter and those going for cannons at Sabetha are the only players that must do something unique. The rest of the players require the same skill as your average open world boss or expansion story mode boss. > > > > It gets trickier in later wings though because they probably figured out that this kind of thing wasn't very good for raids and challenging content. They added the fixated mechanic, or similar mechanics, that selects players at random, which means all players need to pay attention to the mechanics in Wings 2, 3 and 4. > > > > It basically goes likes this: > > Easy mode is when a player failing doesn't lead to the entire squad failing (unless it's a very specific role), like except for the tank on VG failing, the squad can recover from most other "failures". > > Hard mode is when any player in the team can cause a wipe, like mishandling the poison at Slothasor or Matthias. > > I don't know. Did every boss from w1 till w4 thus far and the only boss that I really hate is Sloth. The rest is fine, especially since raids are focused on mechanics rather than dps. Haven't seen a single real dps-check thus far like in more traditional mmorpgs. That's also why I don't get the ridiculous LI-reqs some people have for dps-classes (I get that for support-classes though). It's also not like stuff is overly complex. Would argue that SO is more complex than most encounters mechanic-wise. Could only be me though... You need decent DPS for certain bosses. Ex Gorseval, without decent DPS you won't phase Gorse before it kills you (not counting the gliding strat since no one does it nowadays and it's kind of annoying). In Sabetha, good DPS is very nice. Same with KC. Xera does need decent DPS if you plan on doing the first 50% in mid, you need decent cleave to deal with adds and you need good DPS players who will clear shards when it's time to do it. Then we go into W4: Cairn doesn't really matter, Mursaat gets kind of messy with bad DPS, Samarog meh and Deimos with bad DPS is a pain in the ass (at least for me as handkiter). As for W5, DPS should be good in Desmina or else us chronos and druids will suffer a looot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maddoctor.2738 Posted April 30, 2018 Share Posted April 30, 2018 > @"Ohoni.6057" said: > Nobody's talking about doing that though.The discussion is on making the raids a bit more accessible, like by having an easy mode to them. From what I understand that's not making them "a bit more accessible" but nerf them to the point of it being doable by someone that can't beat the story of either expansion. > This game has a lot of content, if you can't do any of it then there's really no place for you in the entire game. Since the goal for an easy mode should be that it is in line with the content of the rest of the game, it *should* be accessible for any well-rounded player of GW2. "Rest of the game" is also the Balthazar fight in Path of Fire, Caudecus fight in the Living Story and killing moa in Queensdale. It's not like the rest of the game has one difficulty that fits all content. > No, hard mode is when *each player* has a high chance of dying if they make simple mistakes. When fighting Tequatl a portion of the players fighting it always die, does it mean that Tequatl is "hard" as a whole? Same can be said for many other encounters, people die when fighting Heart of Thorns Legendary Wyverns, they die even at Golem Mk2 sometimes but that's irrelevant to the outcome of the entire fight. Also, there is a reason raid selling works in the first place, it works because you can low-man the raid encounters. Which means the survival of those "extra" players is irrelevant to the outcome of the fight (meaning they are "easy mode" positions). That's how I split the easy and the hard ones. The "essential" roles that without them you absolutely fail are the hard ones and those that are completely irrelevant to the outcome of the fight and only make it go a bit faster, are the easy ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vinceman.4572 Posted April 30, 2018 Share Posted April 30, 2018 > @"nia.4725" said: > > @"Raizel.8175" said: > > > @"maddoctor.2738" said: > > > > @"Raizel.8175" said: > > > > Just a random thought of mine: Don't we already have easy-mode-raids? Raids a very centered on support-roles (well, mostly chrono and druid). They basically handle all the mechanics and bear the responsibility of success or failure. Since you (mostly) don't have any kind of responsibility as dps-spec, can't that be considered raid-easy-mode? > > > > > > Playing some DPS roles IS easy mode in some Raids as you don't have to do much other than follow your rotation. This is mostly true in Wing 1, Vale Guardian, Gorseval and Sabetha are really easy bosses for DPS roles and only some very specific players need to actually pay attention in the Raid. The tank at Vale Guardian, the kiter and those going for cannons at Sabetha are the only players that must do something unique. The rest of the players require the same skill as your average open world boss or expansion story mode boss. > > > > > > It gets trickier in later wings though because they probably figured out that this kind of thing wasn't very good for raids and challenging content. They added the fixated mechanic, or similar mechanics, that selects players at random, which means all players need to pay attention to the mechanics in Wings 2, 3 and 4. > > > > > > It basically goes likes this: > > > Easy mode is when a player failing doesn't lead to the entire squad failing (unless it's a very specific role), like except for the tank on VG failing, the squad can recover from most other "failures". > > > Hard mode is when any player in the team can cause a wipe, like mishandling the poison at Slothasor or Matthias. > > > > I don't know. Did every boss from w1 till w4 thus far and the only boss that I really hate is Sloth. The rest is fine, especially since raids are focused on mechanics rather than dps. Haven't seen a single real dps-check thus far like in more traditional mmorpgs. That's also why I don't get the ridiculous LI-reqs some people have for dps-classes (I get that for support-classes though). It's also not like stuff is overly complex. Would argue that SO is more complex than most encounters mechanic-wise. Could only be me though... > > You need decent DPS for certain bosses. Ex Gorseval, without decent DPS you won't phase Gorse before it kills you (not counting the gliding strat since no one does it nowadays and it's kind of annoying). In Sabetha, good DPS is very nice. Same with KC. Xera does need decent DPS if you plan on doing the first 50% in mid, you need decent cleave to deal with adds and you need good DPS players who will clear shards when it's time to do it. Then we go into W4: Cairn doesn't really matter, Mursaat gets kind of messy with bad DPS, Samarog meh and Deimos with bad DPS is a pain in the kitten (at least for me as handkiter). As for W5, DPS should be good in Desmina or else us chronos and druids will suffer a looot. Additionally if you don't set up certain requirements you'll get those 4k dps players that also prefer to go downstate several times during a fight and have no clue about the encounter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sokeenoppa.5384 Posted April 30, 2018 Share Posted April 30, 2018 > @"maddoctor.2738" said: > > @"Ohoni.6057" said: > > Nobody's talking about doing that though.The discussion is on making the raids a bit more accessible, like by having an easy mode to them. > > From what I understand that's not making them "a bit more accessible" but nerf them to the point of it being doable by someone that can't beat the story of either expansion. > > > This game has a lot of content, if you can't do any of it then there's really no place for you in the entire game. Since the goal for an easy mode should be that it is in line with the content of the rest of the game, it *should* be accessible for any well-rounded player of GW2. > > "Rest of the game" is also the Balthazar fight in Path of Fire, Caudecus fight in the Living Story and killing moa in Queensdale. It's not like the rest of the game has one difficulty that fits all content. > > > No, hard mode is when *each player* has a high chance of dying if they make simple mistakes. > > When fighting Tequatl a portion of the players fighting it always die, does it mean that Tequatl is "hard" as a whole? Same can be said for many other encounters, people die when fighting Heart of Thorns Legendary Wyverns, they die even at Golem Mk2 sometimes but that's irrelevant to the outcome of the entire fight. > Also, there is a reason raid selling works in the first place, it works because you can low-man the raid encounters. Which means the survival of those "extra" players is irrelevant to the outcome of the fight (meaning they are "easy mode" positions). > > That's how I split the easy and the hard ones. The "essential" roles that without them you absolutely fail are the hard ones and those that are completely irrelevant to the outcome of the fight and only make it go a bit faster, are the easy ones. IMO 10 man raids are easy enough If you can lowman them ^^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raizel.8175 Posted April 30, 2018 Share Posted April 30, 2018 > @"nia.4725" said: > > @"Raizel.8175" said: > > > @"maddoctor.2738" said: > > > > @"Raizel.8175" said: > > > > Just a random thought of mine: Don't we already have easy-mode-raids? Raids a very centered on support-roles (well, mostly chrono and druid). They basically handle all the mechanics and bear the responsibility of success or failure. Since you (mostly) don't have any kind of responsibility as dps-spec, can't that be considered raid-easy-mode? > > > > > > Playing some DPS roles IS easy mode in some Raids as you don't have to do much other than follow your rotation. This is mostly true in Wing 1, Vale Guardian, Gorseval and Sabetha are really easy bosses for DPS roles and only some very specific players need to actually pay attention in the Raid. The tank at Vale Guardian, the kiter and those going for cannons at Sabetha are the only players that must do something unique. The rest of the players require the same skill as your average open world boss or expansion story mode boss. > > > > > > It gets trickier in later wings though because they probably figured out that this kind of thing wasn't very good for raids and challenging content. They added the fixated mechanic, or similar mechanics, that selects players at random, which means all players need to pay attention to the mechanics in Wings 2, 3 and 4. > > > > > > It basically goes likes this: > > > Easy mode is when a player failing doesn't lead to the entire squad failing (unless it's a very specific role), like except for the tank on VG failing, the squad can recover from most other "failures". > > > Hard mode is when any player in the team can cause a wipe, like mishandling the poison at Slothasor or Matthias. > > > > I don't know. Did every boss from w1 till w4 thus far and the only boss that I really hate is Sloth. The rest is fine, especially since raids are focused on mechanics rather than dps. Haven't seen a single real dps-check thus far like in more traditional mmorpgs. That's also why I don't get the ridiculous LI-reqs some people have for dps-classes (I get that for support-classes though). It's also not like stuff is overly complex. Would argue that SO is more complex than most encounters mechanic-wise. Could only be me though... > > You need decent DPS for certain bosses. Ex Gorseval, without decent DPS you won't phase Gorse before it kills you (not counting the gliding strat since no one does it nowadays and it's kind of annoying). In Sabetha, good DPS is very nice. Same with KC. Xera does need decent DPS if you plan on doing the first 50% in mid, you need decent cleave to deal with adds and you need good DPS players who will clear shards when it's time to do it. Then we go into W4: Cairn doesn't really matter, Mursaat gets kind of messy with bad DPS, Samarog meh and Deimos with bad DPS is a pain in the kitten (at least for me as handkiter). As for W5, DPS should be good in Desmina or else us chronos and druids will suffer a looot. "Decent" is still very low in GW2 compared to other MMORPGs. Mostly it's already sufficient in some players dps is around the 50th percentile. That's not your classical dps-check where people really have to be able to play their class and need to be at least in the 80th (better yet 90th) percentile like in more sophisticated instanced-PvE-based MMORPGs. It's not like you need anything above the 50th percentile for anything in w1 till w4 anyway. It's better that way anyway since dps-potentials in GW2 vary too much and are too unbalanced. We already have enough toxicity. > @"Vinceman.4572" said: > > @"nia.4725" said: > > > @"Raizel.8175" said: > > > > @"maddoctor.2738" said: > > > > > @"Raizel.8175" said: > > > > > Just a random thought of mine: Don't we already have easy-mode-raids? Raids a very centered on support-roles (well, mostly chrono and druid). They basically handle all the mechanics and bear the responsibility of success or failure. Since you (mostly) don't have any kind of responsibility as dps-spec, can't that be considered raid-easy-mode? > > > > > > > > Playing some DPS roles IS easy mode in some Raids as you don't have to do much other than follow your rotation. This is mostly true in Wing 1, Vale Guardian, Gorseval and Sabetha are really easy bosses for DPS roles and only some very specific players need to actually pay attention in the Raid. The tank at Vale Guardian, the kiter and those going for cannons at Sabetha are the only players that must do something unique. The rest of the players require the same skill as your average open world boss or expansion story mode boss. > > > > > > > > It gets trickier in later wings though because they probably figured out that this kind of thing wasn't very good for raids and challenging content. They added the fixated mechanic, or similar mechanics, that selects players at random, which means all players need to pay attention to the mechanics in Wings 2, 3 and 4. > > > > > > > > It basically goes likes this: > > > > Easy mode is when a player failing doesn't lead to the entire squad failing (unless it's a very specific role), like except for the tank on VG failing, the squad can recover from most other "failures". > > > > Hard mode is when any player in the team can cause a wipe, like mishandling the poison at Slothasor or Matthias. > > > > > > I don't know. Did every boss from w1 till w4 thus far and the only boss that I really hate is Sloth. The rest is fine, especially since raids are focused on mechanics rather than dps. Haven't seen a single real dps-check thus far like in more traditional mmorpgs. That's also why I don't get the ridiculous LI-reqs some people have for dps-classes (I get that for support-classes though). It's also not like stuff is overly complex. Would argue that SO is more complex than most encounters mechanic-wise. Could only be me though... > > > > You need decent DPS for certain bosses. Ex Gorseval, without decent DPS you won't phase Gorse before it kills you (not counting the gliding strat since no one does it nowadays and it's kind of annoying). In Sabetha, good DPS is very nice. Same with KC. Xera does need decent DPS if you plan on doing the first 50% in mid, you need decent cleave to deal with adds and you need good DPS players who will clear shards when it's time to do it. Then we go into W4: Cairn doesn't really matter, Mursaat gets kind of messy with bad DPS, Samarog meh and Deimos with bad DPS is a pain in the kitten (at least for me as handkiter). As for W5, DPS should be good in Desmina or else us chronos and druids will suffer a looot. > > Additionally if you don't set up certain requirements you'll get those 4k dps players that also prefer to go downstate several times during a fight and have no clue about the encounter. Is that even possible? I mean, SC is the absolute standard when it comes to raid-builds. If people are really interested in raiding, they will at least look up some of these builds and basic rotations. That way, it should already be impossible to only reach 4k. It's not like GW2-combat is that sophisticated anyway. It favors skill-spam off CD a lot. There isn't really any kind of CD-management like in most other MMORPGs or (at least in most cases) the need to use certain skills situational as dps-class. ...or am I just too optimistic? Sure, I had some really horrific failures in my 10, 15 years of playing MMORPGs, but most people at least tried... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ohoni.6057 Posted April 30, 2018 Share Posted April 30, 2018 > @"maddoctor.2738" said: >From what I understand that's not making them "a bit more accessible" but nerf them to the point of it being doable by someone that can't beat the story of either expansion. Yes and no? The fact is that this is 10-man grouped content, story mode is intended to be soloed. Do I feel that easy mode raids should fail if there are a few players in there who can't complete the toughest missions of HoT or PoF solo? No. Do I feel that the easy mode raid should fail if the majority of the players fall into that category? Maybe. And if all of them are that bad at the game? Yeah, it should probably still fail, but the odds of that happening are fairly slim. Again, I feel that they should be balanced against the rest of the game, so that players who can complete the rest of the game can complete the easy mode raids relatively cleanly. That shouldn't be a radical concept. >"Rest of the game" is also the Balthazar fight in Path of Fire, Caudecus fight in the Living Story and killing moa in Queensdale. Yes, that's an *excellent* example of how to distract from a rational topic by using hyperbole. Now, if we could talk about raids instead. . . >When fighting Tequatl a portion of the players fighting it always die, does it mean that Tequatl is "hard" as a whole? In a sense, although in those situations, players can rez other players, or WP and rush back, which isn't really an option in raids, so the "cost" of death is different. Broadly speaking, I think it's best to avoid situations where any single mistake should result in death. It should take a combination of errors to kill a character. Single-cause deaths tend to feel very "cheap" and aren't particularly interesting gameplay. Every player should have the tools to survive and contribute. It shouldn't just be about whether a few players can drag the team across the finishline even if most are dead, it should be able creating conditions in which *every* player feels that they have meaningfully contributed to the outcome of the encounter. Why even have a 10-man raid if it can effectively be soloed and most of the participants are just treading water? > @"sokeenoppa.5384" said: > IMO 10 man raids are easy enough If you can lowman them ^^ But the point is to have a random pug of average capability players be able to complete it as easily as a pack of experts low-manning it. We are not there yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astralporing.1957 Posted April 30, 2018 Share Posted April 30, 2018 > @"ReaverKane.7598" said: > In GW2 people would rather spend time in the forums complaining or suggesting "easy mode" than actually playing the content. That's because the content is that unappealing to them. > @"ReaverKane.7598" said: > That makes the raiding community small, and dividing it by creating difficulty tiers is only going to make it worse. _Or_ it would make the community bigger because the content would become more appealing to players. > @"ReaverKane.7598" said: > Raids in GW2 are fun, and some of them are actually great, people just don't engage in them Maybe because most people just _don't_ find them fun at all. > @"ReaverKane.7598" said: > People don't even try, that's the problem. Yes. A problem that won't be solved if you think everything is okay and thus won't even start to consider why people find raids so much unappealing they won't engage in them. (mind you, a lot of players _do_ try them. It's just most won't continue trying) > @"Linken.6345" said: > No Im saying that its human nature to take the easiest way to get stuff. > I mean I could go out hunt my own food and cook it over a fire or go to the store and cook it on my stove, guess witch one I do? That's because you're not interested in hunting but in getting food. There are actual hunters, people that are interested in things like that, and being able to get their food in store doesn't impact their behaviour at all. Basically, the people that would switch are those that _aren't_ interested in current difficulty raids. If you're saying that this would seriously damage raids, you're saying that the real interest in raids is too low to keep that content afloat. > @"Turin.6921" said: > I think thats were the call of the mists comes in. For now it gives extra gold and xp. Later than could be extended in with Li or currency i suppose. > With more raid wings there will be a per week shifting priority based on the reward. And later when there are enough wings in the game you can have mutliple of them having the call. So a squad that can only raid a single night a week can choose to prioritize those wings for that specific week that have the call. Or go with the fractal solution and move some rewards towards the raid dailies (weeklies?) > @"Raizel.8175" said: > "Decent" is still very low in GW2 compared to other MMORPGs. Mostly it's already sufficient in some players dps is around the 50th percentile. That's not 50th percentile of all players, but of all raid players (of whom, by the way, most only post their _succesful_ logs on raidar) Thus, in reality it's significantly higher when compared to the whole community. > @"Raizel.8175" said: > Is that even possible? I mean, SC is the absolute standard when it comes to raid-builds. If people are really interested in raiding, they will at least look up some of these builds and basic rotations. Casual players mostly don't read such guides. I'd say that many players don't even know those exist. > @"Raizel.8175" said: > That way, it should already be impossible to only reach 4k. It's not like GW2-combat is that sophisticated anyway. It favors skill-spam off CD a lot. There isn't really any kind of CD-management like in most other MMORPGs or (at least in most cases) the need to use certain skills situational as dps-class. ...or am I just too optimistic? You are. Just go do tequatl or some of bounty runs in a squad, doing only the most basic lazy rotations. I'd be surprised if you won't be in top 3 dps per whole squad, and if there won't be a significant dropoff in dps levels between top few dps-ers and the rest of the squad. And yes, some of the people below you _will be_ trying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sokeenoppa.5384 Posted April 30, 2018 Share Posted April 30, 2018 > @"Ohoni.6057" said: > > @"maddoctor.2738" said: > >From what I understand that's not making them "a bit more accessible" but nerf them to the point of it being doable by someone that can't beat the story of either expansion. > > Yes and no? The fact is that this is 10-man grouped content, story mode is intended to be soloed. Do I feel that easy mode raids should fail if there are a few players in there who can't complete the toughest missions of HoT or PoF solo? No. Do I feel that the easy mode raid should fail if the majority of the players fall into that category? Maybe. And if all of them are that bad at the game? Yeah, it should probably still fail, but the odds of that happening are fairly slim. > > Again, I feel that they should be balanced against the rest of the game, so that players who can complete the rest of the game can complete the easy mode raids relatively cleanly. That shouldn't be a radical concept. > > >"Rest of the game" is also the Balthazar fight in Path of Fire, Caudecus fight in the Living Story and killing moa in Queensdale. > > Yes, that's an *excellent* example of how to distract from a rational topic by using hyperbole. Now, if we could talk about raids instead. . . > > >When fighting Tequatl a portion of the players fighting it always die, does it mean that Tequatl is "hard" as a whole? > > In a sense, although in those situations, players can rez other players, or WP and rush back, which isn't really an option in raids, so the "cost" of death is different. Broadly speaking, I think it's best to avoid situations where any single mistake should result in death. It should take a combination of errors to kill a character. Single-cause deaths tend to feel very "cheap" and aren't particularly interesting gameplay. > > Every player should have the tools to survive and contribute. It shouldn't just be about whether a few players can drag the team across the finishline even if most are dead, it should be able creating conditions in which *every* player feels that they have meaningfully contributed to the outcome of the encounter. Why even have a 10-man raid if it can effectively be soloed and most of the participants are just treading water? > > > @"sokeenoppa.5384" said: > > IMO 10 man raids are easy enough If you can lowman them ^^ > > But the point is to have a random pug of average capability players be able to complete it as easily as a pack of experts low-manning it. We are not there yet. > > Im not expert :D i have 22 Li and ill do lowman pug VG:s Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ohoni.6057 Posted April 30, 2018 Share Posted April 30, 2018 > @"sokeenoppa.5384" said: > > @"Ohoni.6057" said: > > > @"maddoctor.2738" said: > > >From what I understand that's not making them "a bit more accessible" but nerf them to the point of it being doable by someone that can't beat the story of either expansion. > > > > Yes and no? The fact is that this is 10-man grouped content, story mode is intended to be soloed. Do I feel that easy mode raids should fail if there are a few players in there who can't complete the toughest missions of HoT or PoF solo? No. Do I feel that the easy mode raid should fail if the majority of the players fall into that category? Maybe. And if all of them are that bad at the game? Yeah, it should probably still fail, but the odds of that happening are fairly slim. > > > > Again, I feel that they should be balanced against the rest of the game, so that players who can complete the rest of the game can complete the easy mode raids relatively cleanly. That shouldn't be a radical concept. > > > > >"Rest of the game" is also the Balthazar fight in Path of Fire, Caudecus fight in the Living Story and killing moa in Queensdale. > > > > Yes, that's an *excellent* example of how to distract from a rational topic by using hyperbole. Now, if we could talk about raids instead. . . > > > > >When fighting Tequatl a portion of the players fighting it always die, does it mean that Tequatl is "hard" as a whole? > > > > In a sense, although in those situations, players can rez other players, or WP and rush back, which isn't really an option in raids, so the "cost" of death is different. Broadly speaking, I think it's best to avoid situations where any single mistake should result in death. It should take a combination of errors to kill a character. Single-cause deaths tend to feel very "cheap" and aren't particularly interesting gameplay. > > > > Every player should have the tools to survive and contribute. It shouldn't just be about whether a few players can drag the team across the finishline even if most are dead, it should be able creating conditions in which *every* player feels that they have meaningfully contributed to the outcome of the encounter. Why even have a 10-man raid if it can effectively be soloed and most of the participants are just treading water? > > > > > @"sokeenoppa.5384" said: > > > IMO 10 man raids are easy enough If you can lowman them ^^ > > > > But the point is to have a random pug of average capability players be able to complete it as easily as a pack of experts low-manning it. We are not there yet. > > > > > > Im not expert :D i have 22 Li and ill do lowman pug VG:s Good for you, we still have room to go though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReaverKane.7598 Posted May 1, 2018 Share Posted May 1, 2018 > @"Astralporing.1957" said: > > @"ReaverKane.7598" said: > > In GW2 people would rather spend time in the forums complaining or suggesting "easy mode" than actually playing the content. > That's because the content is that unappealing to them. > And it will be unappealing because they don't want to play 10 man instanced content regardless of difficulty. > > @"ReaverKane.7598" said: > > That makes the raiding community small, and dividing it by creating difficulty tiers is only going to make it worse. > _Or_ it would make the community bigger because the content would become more appealing to players. > Or not... Seriously there's already a raid encounter (Escort) that's easier than many dungeons, or fractals, and yet still only ~25% of people have Li on their accounts, people aren't interested regardless of dificulty. > > @"ReaverKane.7598" said: > > Raids in GW2 are fun, and some of them are actually great, people just don't engage in them > Maybe because most people just _don't_ find them fun at all. > Then don't play it, it's not like anything about GW2 is mandatory, it's a hobby! Seriously there's people out there in this game, in this day complaining that the **PERSONAL STORY** is too hard... Seriously... > > > @"ReaverKane.7598" said: > > People don't even try, that's the problem. > Yes. A problem that won't be solved if you think everything is okay and thus won't even start to consider why people find raids so much unappealing they won't engage in them. > (mind you, a lot of players _do_ try them. It's just most won't continue trying) Mind you, there's a cool site with thousands of registered users (184 thousand accounts, pretty good sample, there's a lot of scientific studies done with a thousandth of that) that tracks a lot of stuff, one of them is Legendary Insights, and only ~25% of people have at least one, which means that only ~25% of people attempted a Raid encounter to completion. Given that Escort is pretty much impossible to fail (unless you quit really early), this kinda disproves the "many tried, but didn't stick" theory. Or at least, didn't try anywhere hard enough, which just means, regardless of difficulty settings or training wheels, Raids aren't the right kind of content for people that would rather complain and demand something to be lowered to their standards, than raise their own performance. > > > @"Linken.6345" said: > > No Im saying that its human nature to take the easiest way to get stuff. > > I mean I could go out hunt my own food and cook it over a fire or go to the store and cook it on my stove, guess witch one I do? > That's because you're not interested in hunting but in getting food. There are actual hunters, people that are interested in things like that, and being able to get their food in store doesn't impact their behaviour at all. > > Basically, the people that would switch are those that _aren't_ interested in current difficulty raids. If you're saying that this would seriously damage raids, you're saying that the real interest in raids is too low to keep that content afloat. No, they are interested, but, like i explained before, and you carefully managed to ignore, crafting a single set of Legendary Armor (nevermind the 3 sets) requires players to complete hundreds of raid encounters, and regardless of how much you enjoy doing something, when you have to repeat it hundreds of times, if you have a easier way to do that you will. Doesn't mean that they dislike hard content, it means it gets repetitive. > > > @"Turin.6921" said: > > I think thats were the call of the mists comes in. For now it gives extra gold and xp. Later than could be extended in with Li or currency i suppose. > > With more raid wings there will be a per week shifting priority based on the reward. And later when there are enough wings in the game you can have mutliple of them having the call. So a squad that can only raid a single night a week can choose to prioritize those wings for that specific week that have the call. > > Or go with the fractal solution and move some rewards towards the raid dailies (weeklies?) Raid rewards are already capped weekly? And you don't want a single reward, the more encounters players can complete in a week, the faster they get the Li for the legendary armour. I'm not sure that you didn't know that fact or just forgot about it. > > > @"Raizel.8175" said: > > "Decent" is still very low in GW2 compared to other MMORPGs. Mostly it's already sufficient in some players dps is around the 50th percentile. > That's not 50th percentile of all players, but of all raid players (of whom, by the way, most only post their _succesful_ logs on raidar) > Thus, in reality it's significantly higher when compared to the whole community. Actually raidar only takes into account successful raids, which is a good thing, otherwise the statistics would be easily skewed. It's not that peeople only post successes, but that it only takes those into account. I mean you want an indicator of what's viable, not of what could be viable, but it's damage is skewed by thousands of fails. You're not wrong. You just need to run ArcDPS in a open world raid and you can easily tell the people that raid apart from the rest. Usually there's like 1-5 people on the top 10 damage with 2-10 times the damage of the rest. And honestly if people even in the easiest end-game(ish) content in the game (world bosses) are slacking to the point where a handful of people are doing most of the DPS, then regardless of having an easy mode or not, people will still not be able to complete Raids, because unless it's like press 1 to finish, people won't do it. > > @"Raizel.8175" said: > > Is that even possible? I mean, SC is the absolute standard when it comes to raid-builds. If people are really interested in raiding, they will at least look up some of these builds and basic rotations. > Casual players mostly don't read such guides. I'd say that many players don't even know those exist. > Because those casual players aren't interested in Raids... > > @"Raizel.8175" said: > > That way, it should already be impossible to only reach 4k. It's not like GW2-combat is that sophisticated anyway. It favors skill-spam off CD a lot. There isn't really any kind of CD-management like in most other MMORPGs or (at least in most cases) the need to use certain skills situational as dps-class. ...or am I just too optimistic? > You are. Just go do tequatl or some of bounty runs in a squad, doing only the most basic lazy rotations. I'd be surprised if you won't be in top 3 dps per whole squad, and if there won't be a significant dropoff in dps levels between top few dps-ers and the rest of the squad. > > And yes, some of the people below you _will be_ trying. > No they're not... They're pretending to try, or simply didn't evolve in the game to the point where they know what they should be doing. I mean yeah, a guy that plays the game for a couple months doing 5k DPS isn't abnormal, a guy that plays it for 5 years and still thinks Celestial gear is the god of all stats, and refuses to change anything to fit in a group. That guy isn't trying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ohoni.6057 Posted May 1, 2018 Share Posted May 1, 2018 > @"ReaverKane.7598" said: > And it will be unappealing because they don't want to play 10 man instanced content regardless of difficulty. That's not entirely true. There are some people for whom that would apply, certainly, but I do believe that there's plenty of market space for players that *would* enjoy "10-man instanced content," IF it met certain accessibility conditions. It needs to be simple enough that it can be "pick up and play," NO training, NO gearchecks, NO meta-builds, NO hassling around beforehand to prune just the right team comp or credential everyone, just open an LFG, first ten people show up, go in, and stand a decent chance of winning on the first try or at least knowing what went wrong so that they can win the second try. Present them that sort of casual experience, and I'm sure plenty would do it. Not as the *only* thing they do in the game, but certainly as *one* of the things they do in the game. >Mind you, there's a cool site with thousands of registered users (184 thousand accounts, pretty good sample, there's a lot of scientific studies done with a thousandth of that) that tracks a lot of stuff, one of them is Legendary Insights, and only ~25% of people have at least one, which means that only ~25% of people attempted a Raid encounter to completion. Given that Escort is pretty much impossible to fail (unless you quit really early), this kinda disproves the "many tried, but didn't stick" theory. >Or at least, didn't try anywhere hard enough, which just means, regardless of difficulty settings or training wheels, Raids aren't the right kind of content for people that would rather complain and demand something to be lowered to their standards, than raise their own performance. You do understand that a lot of players wouldn't jump into chapter seven of a story without first reading the first six, right? >No, they are interested, but, like i explained before, and you carefully managed to ignore, crafting a single set of Legendary Armor (nevermind the 3 sets) requires players to complete hundreds of raid encounters, and regardless of how much you enjoy doing something, when you have to repeat it hundreds of times, if you have a easier way to do that you will. Doesn't mean that they dislike hard content, it means it gets repetitive. The instant they stop doing something because they are enjoying it, they *should* start doing something else, and the game design should *encourage* this, not punish it. >Because those casual players aren't interested in Raids... They aren't interested in raids *as they currently exist,* sure. That doesn't mean that they couldn't be interested in a raid that removes the elements they do not like. It's like, I don't like a lot of salad on my hamburger, I just like a bun and a beef patty, that's it. Now if you insist that a burger *must* contain lettuce and onions and tomato and ketchup, or else you can't call it a burger, then no, I do not like burgers at all. But if you strip out those elements, leave the bun and patty, then I like burgers very much. There are definitely parts of the current raid system, parts that raiders hold very dear, that casuals will NEVER enjoy, and that's fine. And raiders should always have the current version available to play, if they enjoy that sort of thing. But there should also be a version that contains the elements that casuals *would* enjoy, with none of the parts that they do not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maddoctor.2738 Posted May 1, 2018 Share Posted May 1, 2018 > @"Ohoni.6057" said: > >"Rest of the game" is also the Balthazar fight in Path of Fire, Caudecus fight in the Living Story and killing moa in Queensdale. > > Yes, that's an *excellent* example of how to distract from a rational topic by using hyperbole. Now, if we could talk about raids instead. . . > Funny. You said: > Since the goal for an easy mode should be that it is in line with the content of the rest of the game, it should be accessible for any well-rounded player of GW2. And I pointed out that the "rest of the game" has different difficulty ratings and even gave some, intentionally extreme, examples. The difference in the difficulty spectrum of this game is insane, and yet you say to make the Raids like the "rest of the game", without defining what that rest of the game is in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feanor.2358 Posted May 1, 2018 Share Posted May 1, 2018 > @"Ohoni.6057" said: > Since the goal for an easy mode should be that it is in line with the content of the rest of the game, it *should* be accessible for any well-rounded player of GW2. Funny. I'd say raids *are* accessible to any well-rounded player of GW2. But I would bet my definition of "well-rounded" will be quite different from yours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ohoni.6057 Posted May 1, 2018 Share Posted May 1, 2018 > @"maddoctor.2738" said: > > @"Ohoni.6057" said: > > >"Rest of the game" is also the Balthazar fight in Path of Fire, Caudecus fight in the Living Story and killing moa in Queensdale. > > > > Yes, that's an *excellent* example of how to distract from a rational topic by using hyperbole. Now, if we could talk about raids instead. . . > > > > Funny. You said: > > Since the goal for an easy mode should be that it is in line with the content of the rest of the game, it should be accessible for any well-rounded player of GW2. > > And I pointed out that the "rest of the game" has different difficulty ratings and even gave some, intentionally extreme, examples. Which is why, in the portion you quoted right there, I said "well rounded player," rather than "anyone with an account." A player who can complete *most* of the game's available content could still not enjoy the struggle of the current raid encounters. Again, we are not talking about being unreasonable here. >The difference in the difficulty spectrum of this game is insane, and yet you say to make the Raids like the "rest of the game", without defining what that rest of the game is in the first place. I shouldn't have to. I *really* shouldn't have to. > @"Feanor.2358" said: > > @"Ohoni.6057" said: > > Since the goal for an easy mode should be that it is in line with the content of the rest of the game, it *should* be accessible for any well-rounded player of GW2. > > Funny. I'd say raids *are* accessible to any well-rounded player of GW2. Yes, but your perspective on this is skewed. Again, the existing raids work fine for *your* definition of "well-rounded," so you're already covered and require no further action. It's clearly *not* fine by most players' definitions of "well rounded" or more players would spend some of their time in raids. This is like a door that's only 5ft high. You walk right through it and go "wow, that was easy," a bunch of people behind you bump their heads, and grumble about the low doorframe, and a bunch of other people didn't even bother because they could see that they'd bump their heads, and you shout back at them "come on through, it's easy!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CptAurellian.9537 Posted May 1, 2018 Share Posted May 1, 2018 > @"Raizel.8175" said: > > Additionally if you don't set up certain requirements you'll get those 4k dps players that also prefer to go downstate several times during a fight and have no clue about the encounter. > > Is that even possible? I mean, SC is the absolute standard when it comes to raid-builds. _If people are really interested in raiding, they will at least look up some of these builds and basic rotations._ That way, it should already be impossible to only reach 4k. It's not like GW2-combat is that sophisticated anyway. It favors skill-spam off CD a lot. There isn't really any kind of CD-management like in most other MMORPGs or (at least in most cases) the need to use certain skills situational as dps-class. ...or am I just too optimistic? Sure, I had some really horrific failures in my 10, 15 years of playing MMORPGs, but most people at least tried... It is very possible to find the people Vinceman describes, because you make one wrong assumption I've set in italics. There's a crapload of players who suffer from the Dunning-Kruger effect, who think they're entitled to get a free carry, who stick to their special snowflake build at any cost, or who do whatever else. Stuff like the toughness non-healer ele who does about as much damage as the magi druid (when magi still was healer meta) does happen. And even if people look up SC, I still have the impression that some manage, for whatever reason, to fuck up the rotation so much that they still end up with abysmal damage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vinceman.4572 Posted May 1, 2018 Share Posted May 1, 2018 > @"Raizel.8175" said: > > @"Vinceman.4572" said: > > > > Additionally if you don't set up certain requirements you'll get those 4k dps players that also prefer to go downstate several times during a fight and have no clue about the encounter. > > Is that even possible? I mean, SC is the absolute standard when it comes to raid-builds. If people are really interested in raiding, they will at least look up some of these builds and basic rotations. That way, it should already be impossible to only reach 4k. It's not like GW2-combat is that sophisticated anyway. It favors skill-spam off CD a lot. There isn't really any kind of CD-management like in most other MMORPGs or (at least in most cases) the need to use certain skills situational as dps-class. ...or am I just too optimistic? Sure, I had some really horrific failures in my 10, 15 years of playing MMORPGs, but most people at least tried... > Yes, it is possible. I've met a lot of those people when pugging and even yesterday in our full clear static squad we needed 2 additional pugs for w1-4 and had one player competing in dps with our chrono although our chrono didn't wear dps gear. Think ahead: If you have more than just this single player - maybe 3-4 - you wouldn't kill bosses in the slightest. Let me tell you, as druid I joined a pug escort run that struggled with spawning enemies because the dmg was so low that they overran us. Funny but also horribly to watch - and it wasn't a training. Also, we need to take some of our static members to the golem test area otherwise they wouldn't practice new stuff. On Sunday I took the initiative and brought a guildie to Dhuum so we could practice greens while stealthing the reapers otherwise she wouldn't have practiced at all. And god, how often I was reminding people to at least read a guide or watch a yt video about some of the mechanics because it's annyoing when people fail the same mechanics again and again over several weeks and still not having understood them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nia.4725 Posted May 1, 2018 Share Posted May 1, 2018 > @"CptAurellian.9537" said: > > @"Raizel.8175" said: > > > Additionally if you don't set up certain requirements you'll get those 4k dps players that also prefer to go downstate several times during a fight and have no clue about the encounter. > > > > Is that even possible? I mean, SC is the absolute standard when it comes to raid-builds. _If people are really interested in raiding, they will at least look up some of these builds and basic rotations._ That way, it should already be impossible to only reach 4k. It's not like GW2-combat is that sophisticated anyway. It favors skill-spam off CD a lot. There isn't really any kind of CD-management like in most other MMORPGs or (at least in most cases) the need to use certain skills situational as dps-class. ...or am I just too optimistic? Sure, I had some really horrific failures in my 10, 15 years of playing MMORPGs, but most people at least tried... > > It is very possible to find the people Vinceman describes, because you make one wrong assumption I've set in italics. There's a crapload of players who suffer from the Dunning-Kruger effect, who think they're entitled to get a free carry, who stick to their special snowflake build at any cost, or who do whatever else. Stuff like the toughness non-healer ele who does about as much damage as the magi druid (when magi still was healer meta) does happen. And even if people look up SC, I still have the impression that some manage, for whatever reason, to kitten up the rotation so much that they still end up with abysmal damage. But also it depends on the boss. It we look at boss DPS, we'll see things like 6k boss DPS sometimes and while it's low, and it doesn't mean the player is running something weird or doesn't know a thing about their rotation. In Samarog the DPS is pretty low- My Dhuum kills have been with DPS players ranging from 6k to 10k. There are a lot of things that can go wrong when you try to learn a DPS rotation. Thinking about my personal experience (I'm a kinda bad DPS player, because I'm just bad at DPS and because I play support 90% of the time), these are my struggles: canceling skills by mistake, interrupting the auto attack in the wrong time, being slow in using the skills or changing between attunements when I try to play weaver, slow transitions between skills so some autoattacks end up being between them... Learning a DPS rotation isn't just learning a skill chain and pressing the buttons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CptAurellian.9537 Posted May 1, 2018 Share Posted May 1, 2018 > @"nia.4725" said: > > @"CptAurellian.9537" said: > > > @"Raizel.8175" said: > > > > Additionally if you don't set up certain requirements you'll get those 4k dps players that also prefer to go downstate several times during a fight and have no clue about the encounter. > > > > > > Is that even possible? I mean, SC is the absolute standard when it comes to raid-builds. _If people are really interested in raiding, they will at least look up some of these builds and basic rotations._ That way, it should already be impossible to only reach 4k. It's not like GW2-combat is that sophisticated anyway. It favors skill-spam off CD a lot. There isn't really any kind of CD-management like in most other MMORPGs or (at least in most cases) the need to use certain skills situational as dps-class. ...or am I just too optimistic? Sure, I had some really horrific failures in my 10, 15 years of playing MMORPGs, but most people at least tried... > > > > It is very possible to find the people Vinceman describes, because you make one wrong assumption I've set in italics. There's a crapload of players who suffer from the Dunning-Kruger effect, who think they're entitled to get a free carry, who stick to their special snowflake build at any cost, or who do whatever else. Stuff like the toughness non-healer ele who does about as much damage as the magi druid (when magi still was healer meta) does happen. And even if people look up SC, I still have the impression that some manage, for whatever reason, to kitten up the rotation so much that they still end up with abysmal damage. > > But also it depends on the boss. It we look at boss DPS, we'll see things like 6k boss DPS sometimes and while it's low, and it doesn't mean the player is running something weird or doesn't know a thing about their rotation. In Samarog the DPS is pretty low- My Dhuum kills have been with DPS players ranging from 6k to 10k. Of course it depends on the boss. It should be obvious to anyone that you can't compare the absolute numbers of something like Dhuum and MO. I'm talking about those people who play "dps", have no special mechanics duty and yet compete with support chronos or druids. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ohoni.6057 Posted May 1, 2018 Share Posted May 1, 2018 > @"CptAurellian.9537" said: > > @"Raizel.8175" said: > > > Additionally if you don't set up certain requirements you'll get those 4k dps players that also prefer to go downstate several times during a fight and have no clue about the encounter. > > > > Is that even possible? I mean, SC is the absolute standard when it comes to raid-builds. _If people are really interested in raiding, they will at least look up some of these builds and basic rotations._ That way, it should already be impossible to only reach 4k. It's not like GW2-combat is that sophisticated anyway. It favors skill-spam off CD a lot. There isn't really any kind of CD-management like in most other MMORPGs or (at least in most cases) the need to use certain skills situational as dps-class. ...or am I just too optimistic? Sure, I had some really horrific failures in my 10, 15 years of playing MMORPGs, but most people at least tried... > > It is very possible to find the people Vinceman describes, because you make one wrong assumption I've set in italics. There's a crapload of players who suffer from the Dunning-Kruger effect, who think they're entitled to get a free carry, who stick to their special snowflake build at any cost, or who do whatever else. Stuff like the toughness non-healer ele who does about as much damage as the magi druid (when magi still was healer meta) does happen. And even if people look up SC, I still have the impression that some manage, for whatever reason, to kitten up the rotation so much that they still end up with abysmal damage. Huh, if only there were a version of the raid in which meta builds weren't as necessary, and they could go into the raid and do their thing and it would be considered "plenty of damage" for the encounter. . . >Of course it depends on the boss. It should be obvious to anyone that you can't compare the absolute numbers of something like Dhuum and MO. I'm talking about those people who play "dps", have no special mechanics duty and yet compete with support chronos or druids. It's funny, because a lot of raiders around here seem to think that DPS role is *already* plenty "easy mode," to the point that it negates any need for easy mode because "anyone can do it," but here you're saying that plenty of people are still terrible at it relative to the demands of the encounter, hmm. . . if only there were some version of the raids where the demands were a bit more flexible. . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FrizzFreston.5290 Posted May 1, 2018 Share Posted May 1, 2018 > @"Ohoni.6057" said: > > @"Feanor.2358" said: > > > @"Ohoni.6057" said: > > > Since the goal for an easy mode should be that it is in line with the content of the rest of the game, it *should* be accessible for any well-rounded player of GW2. > > > > Funny. I'd say raids *are* accessible to any well-rounded player of GW2. > > Yes, but your perspective on this is skewed. > > Again, the existing raids work fine for *your* definition of "well-rounded," so you're already covered and require no further action. It's clearly *not* fine by most players' definitions of "well rounded" or more players would spend some of their time in raids. This is like a door that's only 5ft high. You walk right through it and go "wow, that was easy," a bunch of people behind you bump their heads, and grumble about the low doorframe, and a bunch of other people didn't even bother because they could see that they'd bump their heads, and you shout back at them "come on through, it's easy!" If it was a game to get to the other side, I would just adjust my height and not bump my head rather than complaining that the door isnt high enough. If it was a regular door there wouldnt be many people calling it a game in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now