Please Overhaul Raids.

[Tyson.5160]

> @"maddoctor.2738" said:

> > @"Tyson.5160" said:

> > Wuuuuuuhhhhh! From someone who is almost finished the armor, you realize that when you win games you gain more pips yeah? Which makes gaining things like the precursor armor and 2400 ascended shards faster?

>

> I replied later on the subject of the pvp version:

>

> > I think the best system for Legendary Armor acquisition is in PVP. There are two versions with different skins available.

> > The https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Ardent_Glorious_armor skin is available to all, it's a long term goal, your skill allows you to get it faster.

> > And then there is the https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Glorious_Hero's_armor skin which is only available to the winners of monthly pvp tournaments.

> > In PVE we have a skill gated skin but not a time-gated skin. Of course we can all agree that the winners of the monthly tournaments are a fraction of the raiding population

 

Yeah they are currently working on a new pvp armour that is a reskin of the glorious armor with FX. No cost posted yet, but I suspect that it will follow the formula for the Mistforged Triumphant Armor and be double the Ascended shard cost and locked behind pvp rank.

 

That being said, I think if they had the Refined armor act as the time gated option of the Legendary armour it would follow the pattern set by WvW and pvp.

 

[nia.4725]

> @"vesica tempestas.1563" said:

> > @"nia.4725" said:

> > > @"vesica tempestas.1563" said:

> > > > @"nia.4725" said:

> > > > > @"vesica tempestas.1563" said:

> > > > > > @"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said:

> > > > > > > @"maddoctor.2738" said:

> > > > > > > > @"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said:

> > > > > > > > > @"maddoctor.2738" said:

> > > > > > > > > > @"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said:

> > > > > > > > > > Well clearly pve world bosses is a baseline difficulty of nobody getting kicked, so they could make raids that easy and then nobody would be removed from any group. That would actually solve all the problems. And what does a person misjudging their skill for content have to do with anything?

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Difficulty is not why there is no removal from groups in pve world bosses.

> > > > > > > > > You see no kicks because they are pointless, if let's say Tequatl was inside an instance (without changes in difficulty) you'd see loads of kicks from the squad there. For example every single dead person that refuses to use a waypoint.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Yah but there really is no reason to kick because it's so easy, and even if you do you're not excluded from finishing the content. That's my point, make it as easy as world bosses and scrutinization pretty much drops to zero, I'm not saying it should be that easy but some difficulty options and features to find people would help.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > This wouldn't work either, I gave the example of Tequatl, if it was in an instance you'd see kicks there too (the dead that don't waypoint for example).

> > > > > > > At Shadow Behemoth you might kick those standing waiting for his head and not moving to attack the portals.

> > > > > > > In an instance you can always find reasons to kick slackers, in the open world, you you said it, even if you kick them they can stay with the squad and leech the rewards anyway. That's not possible inside an instance as kicking will exclude you from the rewards.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Also, while world bosses in central tyria are really easy, bosses and events in the Heart of Thorns are not as much.

> > > > > > > Legendary Wyverns, the Chak Gerent, even some sides of the Octovine have a higher difficulty rating, and lots of ways to fail, which means lots of reasons to kick.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Further, as you can see in this thread: https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/37656/how-would-an-easy-mode-raid-work-vg/p1 even supporters of an easy mode do not want easy mode to be like a world boss at all. What happens then? We add two easy modes, one for the easy mode crowd, and one for the no-difficulty crowd?

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Yes but my only point was that lowering the difficulty of raid content lowers players scrutinization and lowers people's desire to kick players for any reason. This is the only issue im concerned with, not actually implementing an easy mode into raids, but lowering the amount of socializing, scrutinization of others as well as making it easier to setup a group.

> > > > >

> > > > > I agree with this, the issue is removing factors that make people feel they need to quit or worse kick others. That means fights that are challenging but don't require 'training' i.e doesn't have bullet storms, one shot attacks and tight enrage timers that trigger the meter monkeys. The goal is not tuned raids (we have existing raids for that) , the goal is pleasurable relaxed 10 man instances that gives an opportunity for all to play their favourite character and build in larger more complicated fights with all the dynamics that fighting with 10 people brings. From what we can see in this thread, there are no negatives for this, i.e here are the 'objections' raised:

> > > > >

> > > > > - Demand: evidently there is demand for easy and hard mode.

> > > > > - Cost to implement: It only took a small team to build the entire raid structure in GW", so taking a few extra developers from the existing 400 or so developer pot is not inconceivable. Whatsmore, tuning down is obviously cheaper since undertuning and overturning is less risky as you are not balancing to enrage timers.

> > > > > - Rewards: well we can see legendary rewards from casual play in WVW already so there's no issue with this. Make sure skins are different from existing raids (especially) and we are golden.

> > > > > - It will split the player base: No, it will only split the existing minority that plays raids - worse case scenario.

> > > > > - People who are arguing against this for selfish reasons will be unhappy. Yes they will.

> > > > >

> > > > > and the benefits?

> > > > >

> > > > > - New content for everyone including existing raiders.

> > > > > - A new stream of players for existing raids as they naturally migrate up from easy mode (plus they have learned a good part of the fights) This becomes your natural training ground.

> > > > > - Possible new investment in additional raids for all at all difficulty levels. Raid reuse is also higher so current investment has better bang for buck.

> > > >

> > > > I see some things here that wouldn't be like you think.

> > > >

> > > > Easy modes would be played by most raiders only once or twice, maybe more, just for the memes and the speedruns. Easy mode Cairn solo (0:50s). Things like that. Then we would go back to normal raids, because easy mode is too easy so it is boring af for us. But yeah, at least it would be a huge source of raiding memes.

> > > >

> > > > Raiders wouldn't accept easy mode players in normal mode unless they have the same requirements as everyone else: regular boss KP/LI/whatever. If easy mode gave LI, then LIs wouldn't be asked for in LFG or the number of LIs required to join would increase a lot. If KPs were the same in all modes, then KPs wouldn't be asked for and the new requirements would be any raid legendary collection skin, probably alongside a lot of LI. Normal raiders would scrutinize players even more, because they wouldn't like any easy mode raider in their group -an easy mode raider that has never done the regular boss will not know nor be used to the regular mechanics, so only low requirements or training squads will accept them in a normal boss.

> > >

> > > thats a whole lot of who shot john, If a raid is easy such that any pug can do it, then by definition it will be sympathetic to a wide range of build and profession combinations, just like existing world bosses. your categorisation of 'normal' raiders and 'easy mode' raiders and chat about li etc etc etc is your attempt to apply your own behaviour and generalisation of people that is the realm of existing raids. Think existing dungeons - you don't get this kind of attitude there.

> >

> > No vesica, I'm telling you what will happen. I know how the raiding community is, I'm part of it. If there's already high requirements in almost all groups, what makes you think that an easy mode will make things better in normal mode raids? Yeah, sure in easy mode it will be easy to fill the group, but what makes you think that easy mode raiders will be welcome into normal mode raids without experience in them?

> >

> > I tell you: they won't be welcomed. They will be accepted only if they have experience in normal mode, unless it's a training group or one of those no LI/no KP squads. If anet does not implement some sort of different KPs for easy mode bosses, players will ask for a lot of KP to be more sure of having normal mode raiders in the squad (following something like "only normal mode raiders will have a lot of KP, since easy mode raiders are more casual"). If anet implements different KPs from the normal mode, then players will have to link normal mode KPs. If they give LI for easy mode, then normal mode squads will require a lot of LI (because only normal mode raiders will have a high number of LI).

> >

> > When I said that I was referring to this "a new stream of players for existing raids as they naturally migrate up from easy mode", so I don't see why you're saying anything about builds and professions; but anyway, now that you mention it, in normal mode raids easy mode builds won't get accepted and probably they won't work, either. Normal mode will still expect meta or close to it.

> >

> > If you don't believe me, it's okay. But this is the reality.

> >

> > Also, when I see dungeons I see things like "only zerker lv80". You can't really say that dungeons are inclusive. Even with my full ascended druid I wouldn't be accepted into some dungeon groups. Do you remember those times when dungeon LFG asked for lv80 zerker and more than a certain amount of AP? Because I do.

> >

> > pd. you don't know my behaviour in raids, and neither you know my lfg requirements or the people I accept in my squads.

>

> the easy mode is not targeting the existing raid community, its targeting the same player demographic that plays easy mode raids in the millions on other mmorpg. As i said, the meta chat and the rest doesn't happen in dungeons because its just not needed and tends to be existing raiders because they struggle to adapt beyond rote patterns they are used to. Same for fractals with non raiders (in the main) its more time effective NOT to try and apply filters because the group doesn't wipe because its tuned to not require it. If someone cannot adapt and still tried to apply filters like AP etc then supply and demand applies, people will go to groups that don't do this, because they know the instance is not tuned to need it.

>

> works happily in other games, I for example regularly raid casually in eso and its a blast.

>

 

I like how you do not respond at all to what I was saying.

 

Anyway, nope. Your knowledge about raiders is quite bad. But I'm not willing to open a discussion on a completely unrelated topic.

[Ohoni.6057]

> @"maddoctor.2738" said:

>He was talking about putting something similar to shadow behemoth into an instance. No matter how easy it is, if it's an instance kicks can and will happen. Kicking in the open world is indeed a jerk move because it accomplishes nothing anyway. They can still leech.

 

But **again,** the less damage a "bad" player can cause, the less justifiable a "kick" becomes, and therefore the less often people will bother. You will always have some players that are just jerks and will kick people left and right for stupid reasons, that doesn't really mean much. What the goal of easy mode would be is to reduce the *need* to kick substandard players, giving groups more *opportunity* to *not* kick substandard players, which will inevitably result in *less* kicking, even if nothing can guarantee *no* kicking so long as it remains an option. Again, don't argue the perfect against the good.

 

>I guess AB ML and Palawadan were the most popular content in the game because everyone found them the most fun and engaging (proven by the majority playing them).

 

Hey, if that's what people want to do, let them. I've argued that ANet has it within their power to balance rewards better, they have chosen not to, and here's where we are. Unique rewards do nothing to help with that.

 

>The needs of a specific player are hardly relevant when talking about reward balance.

 

But *every* player is a specific player.

 

>Ever wondered why some mount skins are available as solo purchases while others are put in a package? That's because a designer chooses how much "weight" each different skin has and prices it accordingly.

 

If they were willing to do that then they would have priced EVERY mount skin at different levels, which they should have done. But they didn't.

 

The expensive skins are priced high because the developers put more work into them. That doesn't necessarily translate to higher demand, but when they do their job right, it does balance out. I would still pay more for a Shiba Jackal skin than for the Peacock Raptor skin.

 

>That's what balancing does. Ever wonder why Boots cost less tokens than chests?

 

Because chests offer more stats.

 

>Ever wonder why each dungeon has one unique set of armor and weapons? No dungeon has two of those, to keep them balanced with each other.

 

That's just because they didn't take the time to make two.

 

>Not really, it's impossible to do that because each item has a different value. But all the bosses got their own unique drops,

 

That goes against your idea that unique drops lead to balance. If unique drops lead to balance, then every boss would be farmed equally.

 

>Also, GW1 items had a market value which meant the hardest to get items (from the more difficult bosses) were also the more profitable.

 

That also goes against the idea that unique drops lead to balance. If your argument were true, then the market value of all those drops would be equal.

 

> @"nia.4725" said:

> Raiders wouldn't accept easy mode players in normal mode unless they have the same requirements as everyone else: regular boss KP/LI/whatever. If easy mode gave LI, then LIs wouldn't be asked for in LFG or the number of LIs required to join would increase a lot. If KPs were the same in all modes, then KPs wouldn't be asked for and the new requirements would be any raid legendary collection skin, probably alongside a lot of LI. Normal raiders would scrutinize players even more, because they wouldn't like any easy mode raider in their group -an easy mode raider that has never done the regular boss will not know nor be used to the regular mechanics, so only low requirements or training squads will accept them in a normal boss.

 

Forgive me for saying so, but those guys sound like real kittenhats. I'm glad I don't have to associate with them in game, that sounds like a horrible experience.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[maddoctor.2738]

> @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> But **again,** the less damage a "bad" player can cause, the less justifiable a "kick" becomes, and therefore the less often people will bother.

 

Are we really talking about making easy mode Raids like world bosses now?

 

> Unique rewards do nothing to help with that.

 

Actually they do. If they didn't add unique rewards to Sandswept Isles it would've been empty from the start. Same with most LS releases so far, (with the exception of those with the best farms) without their unique rewards they'd all be empty because better farms exist. Of course it's not a perfect solution because after a while players get all the unique rewards and we get back to square one. But it is a good start to keep maps healthy at least for a while. Aurora requiring players to go back to all LS3 zones also helped revitalized those zones. Need more "Auroras"

 

> The expensive skins are priced high because the developers put more work into them.

 

Which means what individual players want is hardly relevant and a designer **IS** the one that decides what weight each skin has.

 

> That's just because they didn't take the time to make two.

 

It was to balance them out across all dungeons.

 

> That goes against your idea that unique drops lead to balance. If unique drops lead to balance, then every boss would be farmed equally.

 

It leads to better balance, not to perfect balance, let's not make perfect the enemy of good. If each boss dropped all the unique rewards then the easiest ones would be the only ones being farmed and the hardest ones would be empty wastelands. You are really underestimating how fixated online communities get towards the path of least resistance. Fun isn't really the top qualification. It should've been but it's not.

[nia.4725]

> @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> Forgive me for saying so, but those guys sound like real kittenhats. I'm glad I don't have to associate with them in game, that sounds like a horrible experience.

 

I get your point, but I think it depends. I mean, there's nothing wrong in wanting people with a experience similar to yours in your squad. It's natural. You don't always have the will or the time to help newer players or to spend more time killing a boss. Sometimes you just want a smooth, fast kill, and high requirements reduce the chance of not enough experienced players joining. But as I say it depends on how you treat people -you can say "I'm sorry, I want more experienced people" and that's okay, or you can say "sorry no noobs here" and that's not okay at all.

 

 

 

 

[Vinceman.4572]

> @"nia.4725" said:

> > @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > Forgive me for saying so, but those guys sound like real kittenhats. I'm glad I don't have to associate with them in game, that sounds like a horrible experience.

>

> I get your point, but I think it depends. I mean, there's nothing wrong in wanting people with a experience similar to yours in your squad. It's natural. You don't always have the will or the time to help newer players or to spend more time killing a boss. Sometimes you just want a smooth, fast kill, and high requirements reduce the chance of not enough experienced players joining. But as I say it depends on how you treat people -you can say "I'm sorry, I want more experienced people" and that's okay, or you can say "sorry no noobs here" and that's not okay at all.

>

 

That's the point. And on top of it I wouldn't compare the situation with the dungeon history. Just look at 100 CM. There was a time window of around 2-3 weeks when this CM was easier because Arkk (the final boss) was bugged. Some more players than before and after got easy kill proofs during this time span and after the fix you had to increase the number of kps to a certain amount to have a smooth run because a lot of people couldn't handle Arkk any longer. Nowadays the threshold is at 100 kp. You find some groups with less but also with more. While I agree it really doesn't make sense to ask for more because if you haven't learned to run it after ~30 times you won't learn it with more runs I personally avoid groups below 80 kps due to having made bad experiences.

 

The exact thing will happen if you allow LIs or normal mode kps in easy mode raids.

It has absolutely nothing to do with people being "real kittenhats" and no, to meet those players is not having a "horrible experience". It's the other way round. As an experienced player you join certain groups with certain requirements (of course not the totally absurd ones - you just have to use common sense) because you want to get things done. You don't want to find yourself in a training run every week if you already have mastered all bosses. People that aren't experienced can wipe the whole squad in the actual raids so you make sure to avoid them when trying to get your weekly first kill. People with easy mode experience will wipe normal groups due to not having practiced the original encounter long enough. That is not a bad thing per se but never expect that they'll have an easier access to normal mode with it. It's not going to happen.

 

 

[Feanor.2358]

> @"Vinceman.4572" said:

> > @"nia.4725" said:

> > > @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > > Forgive me for saying so, but those guys sound like real kittenhats. I'm glad I don't have to associate with them in game, that sounds like a horrible experience.

> >

> > I get your point, but I think it depends. I mean, there's nothing wrong in wanting people with a experience similar to yours in your squad. It's natural. You don't always have the will or the time to help newer players or to spend more time killing a boss. Sometimes you just want a smooth, fast kill, and high requirements reduce the chance of not enough experienced players joining. But as I say it depends on how you treat people -you can say "I'm sorry, I want more experienced people" and that's okay, or you can say "sorry no noobs here" and that's not okay at all.

> >

>

> That's the point. And on top of it I wouldn't compare the situation with the dungeon history. Just look at 100 CM. There was a time window of around 2-3 weeks when this CM was easier because Arkk (the final boss) was bugged. Some more players than before and after got easy kill proofs during this time span and after the fix you had to increase the number of kps to a certain amount to have a smooth run because a lot of people couldn't handle Arkk any longer. Nowadays the threshold is at 100 kp. You find some groups with less but also with more. While I agree it really doesn't make sense to ask for more because if you haven't learned to run it after ~30 times you won't learn it with more runs I personally avoid groups below 80 kps due to having made bad experiences.

>

> The exact thing will happen if you allow LIs or normal mode kps in easy mode raids.

> It has absolutely nothing to do with people being "real kittenhats" and no, to meet those players is not having a "horrible experience". It's the other way round. As an experienced player you join certain groups with certain requirements (of course not the totally absurd ones - you just have to use common sense) because you want to get things done. You don't want to find yourself in a training run every week if you already have mastered all bosses. People that aren't experienced can wipe the whole squad in the actual raids so you make sure to avoid them when trying to get your weekly first kill. People with easy mode experience will wipe normal groups due to not having practiced the original encounter long enough. That is not a bad thing per se but never expect that they'll have an easier access to normal mode with it. It's not going to happen.

>

>

 

It's not a bad thing per se, but it's actually pretty bad thing when you've already walked the path. I mean, I enjoy learning a new boss. There's a lot of wiping involved and that's fine. Even fun in a way. But once you've done it, there's no more fun in it. You know how it works, you know what you're supposed to do. You're doing your part routinely but you still wipe because somebody is clueless and does the same mistakes over and over despite you've explained them. It's just annoying.

[Ohoni.6057]

> @"maddoctor.2738" said:

>Are we really talking about making easy mode Raids like world bosses now?

 

Yeah, I don't get it either, but it's a comparison people keep insisting on bringing up.

 

>Actually they do. If they didn't add unique rewards to Sandswept Isles it would've been empty from the start.

 

Well again, it's a good thing to add unique rewards in a *limited* case, to draw in people. It just needs to be *limited.* It can be time limited, as in the item is exclusive to that map for a few months, or it can be "depth limited," in that a few items are truly exclusive to a given area, but something any player can earn there in a few hours work, so that they have to show up, engage the content, but if they aren't enjoying themselves after a bit, they can move on. The thing is, having unique rewards in a map doen't even guarantee anything, not all rewards are worth chasing for someone who isn't a completionist.

 

It's good to give people a reason to show up, a reason to engage the content, we 100% agree on this much, but once they *have* engaged with it, you need to respect their interests, and not hold rewards hostage from them unless they keep playing in that area. Players should stay because they *enjoy* it.

 

>Which means what individual players want is hardly relevant and a designer IS the one that decides what weight each skin has.

 

Only so far as it applies to "pay to play" content. If the developers are charging cash for an item, then it needs to be at least worth the money they paid in salaries to produce it. When it comes to items delivered through gameplay, there is no such relationship, there is no reason to "charge" anything that would prohibit players who want the item from having a fun way to earn it. The goal should always be to encourage players to enjoy themselves in the game, so that they are more willing to spend money on it.

 

>It was to balance them out across all dungeons.

 

So you're saying that they has two full sets of CoF skins just lying around, and one of them said "we can't offer both, that would be unfair to the other dungeons!" so they binned one of them? That seems unlikely to me. I think the far simpler explanation is that they just didn't want to do the work for more than one skin per dungeon.

 

>It leads to better balance, not to perfect balance, let's not make perfect the enemy of good.

 

Again, it doesn't lead to *better* balance either. The balance will be whatever it will be. Yes, some players will farm a boss just for the unique loot, but is that a boss that *needed* that boost, or one that would have been fine without it? Players might farm a boss less that has a less desirable reward. Is that because they don't like that boss, or because there's nothing worth earning from it? It's a system equally likely to tip the scales out of balance as it is to tip them towards balance, *unless* exceptional care is taken to place the best rewards next to the content that is most in need of them, which is much harder than any other sort of balancing since the unique rewards are likely themed to the specific content, and thus harder to shift around if they get it wrong.

 

Unique rewards can *potentially* lead to a balanced system, it's just a very *unlikely* outcome, and much more difficult than balancing through other methods, a bit like trying to balance a set of scales not using measured decimal weights, but instead a random assortment of fruits. Instead of putting three 5g weights and one 10g on one side, and one 20g and one 5g on the other, you end up having to put two apples, a banana, and a grape on one end to balance out the orange, kiwi, and five strawberries on the other. It's possible, just a confusing mess.

 

> @"nia.4725" said:

> I get your point, but I think it depends. I mean, there's nothing wrong in wanting people with a experience similar to yours in your squad. It's natural.

 

My feeling is, I get not wanting people along that will hold you back, but what I can't get is *defending* a system in which other players are likely enough to hold you back that they must be rooted out with extreme prejudice. With easy mode, that would not be necessary, there would be no point. Anyone who showed up would be good enough to contribute at least most of their load, enough that the other players shouldn't notice the slack.

 

> @"Vinceman.4572" said:

> > @"nia.4725" said:

> > > @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > > Forgive me for saying so, but those guys sound like real kittenhats. I'm glad I don't have to associate with them in game, that sounds like a horrible experience.

> >

> > I get your point, but I think it depends. I mean, there's nothing wrong in wanting people with a experience similar to yours in your squad. It's natural. You don't always have the will or the time to help newer players or to spend more time killing a boss. Sometimes you just want a smooth, fast kill, and high requirements reduce the chance of not enough experienced players joining. But as I say it depends on how you treat people -you can say "I'm sorry, I want more experienced people" and that's okay, or you can say "sorry no noobs here" and that's not okay at all.

> >

>

> That's the point. And on top of it I wouldn't compare the situation with the dungeon history. Just look at 100 CM. There was a time window of around 2-3 weeks when this CM was easier because Arkk (the final boss) was bugged. Some more players than before and after got easy kill proofs during this time span and after the fix you had to increase the number of kps to a certain amount to have a smooth run because a lot of people couldn't handle Arkk any longer. Nowadays the threshold is at 100 kp. You find some groups with less but also with more. While I agree it really doesn't make sense to ask for more because if you haven't learned to run it after ~30 times you won't learn it with more runs I personally avoid groups below 80 kps due to having made bad experiences.

>

> The exact thing will happen if you allow LIs or normal mode kps in easy mode raids.

 

Well, I would hate to make it difficult for players to discriminate against their fellow players. Maybe they could do a thing like World Completion, and put a little star on player's nametags if they haven't completed each of the bosses enough times on hard mode yet. That way you could segregate them off to themselves, and wouldn't have to interact with them.

 

 

> @"Feanor.2358" said:

> It's not a bad thing per se, but it's actually pretty bad thing when you've already walked the path. I mean, I enjoy learning a new boss. There's a lot of wiping involved and that's fine. Even fun in a way. But once you've done it, there's no more fun in it. You know how it works, you know what you're supposed to do. You're doing your part routinely but you still wipe because somebody is clueless and does the same mistakes over and over despite you've explained them. It's just annoying.

 

Yeah, it really sucks when the raid is actually challenging, it's supposed to be a cakewalk.

 

[Feanor.2358]

> @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > It's not a bad thing per se, but it's actually pretty bad thing when you've already walked the path. I mean, I enjoy learning a new boss. There's a lot of wiping involved and that's fine. Even fun in a way. But once you've done it, there's no more fun in it. You know how it works, you know what you're supposed to do. You're doing your part routinely but you still wipe because somebody is clueless and does the same mistakes over and over despite you've explained them. It's just annoying.

>

> Yeah, it really sucks when the raid is actually challenging, it's supposed to be a cakewalk.

>

 

How is that a challenge? I do everything perfectly, but we still fail because of some clueless newbie. So in order to succeed it is not my skill that matters, it's the pure luck of the newbie not getting any mechanic. That's not a challenge, that's lottery.

[maddoctor.2738]

> @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> Well again, it's a good thing to add unique rewards in a *limited* case, to draw in people. It just needs to be *limited.*

I'm not sure how *limited* rewards can be enough to keep interest on every zone. We already have that issue with not-limited rewards, wouldn't limited rewards make it even worse? I mean so many zones are already deserted because players got their unique rewards from there and then moved on to the better liquid farms.

 

> So you're saying that they has two full sets of CoF skins just lying around, and one of them said "we can't offer both, that would be unfair to the other dungeons!" so they binned one of them? That seems unlikely to me. I think the far simpler explanation is that they just didn't want to do the work for more than one skin per dungeon.

No I'm saying that they didn't want to create a second set for one dungeon only, in order to have an equal number of sets on all of them. No need to make one dungeon more preferable than the others.

 

> Is that because they don't like that boss, or because there's nothing worth earning from it?

That's why adding things worth earning on all bosses is important, to eliminate the chance of a boss not being run because it doesn't have anything "worth earning". I know that's not possible in the long run because eventually players will get all those rewards and then find less and less incentive to go back, but it's a good way to keep interest for a while (at least the next LS episode is released)

 

> since the unique rewards are likely themed to the specific content, and thus harder to shift around if they get it wrong.

Here is a big question: if all rewards are available in multiple content types, what happens with themed rewards? Do we ignore them completely and add a flaming armor as a reward from running an underwater dungeon?

 

> Unique rewards can *potentially* lead to a balanced system, it's just a very *unlikely* outcome, and much more difficult than balancing through other methods

How is adding unique rewards on each content much more difficult than having every content compete with each other (and future content) for access to all rewards?

[Ohoni.6057]

> @"Feanor.2358" said:

> How is that a challenge? I do everything perfectly, but we still fail because of some clueless newbie.

 

That is literally the *entire* challenge factor of raiding that get so often lionized by raiders.

 

> @"maddoctor.2738" said:

>I'm not sure how limited rewards can be enough to keep interest on every zone.

 

It's not and it shouldn't be.

 

Rewards should not be used to keep interest in a zone, they should, at most, be used to attract *initial* interest to the zone. Beyond that, the *fun* of the content should be what keeps players there, and if it can't achieve that, then players *should* move on. Besides "non-limited" rewards are no better in the long term, once players have them they will move on, it just takes longer to reach that point, making it more likely they will be burnt out on the content well before they're "done."

 

>I mean so many zones are already deserted because players got their unique rewards from there and then moved on to the better liquid farms.

 

Like I've said, that's only because ANet seems to *like and support* their liquid farms. They could cut off the spigot any minute if they didn't want people to be doing exactly what they're doing, but they haven't so clearly they don't want to. That's a fault of intent, not a fault of the mechanics themselves. If they turned off the liquid farms, so that all content areas were *closer* in liquid payouts, then players would spread out more. Really though, there are only so many players, so you really don't *want* them spreading out too thinly. You want to draw them to the new content for a while, and then when the next thing comes out, draw them to that.

 

>No I'm saying that they didn't want to create a second set for one dungeon only, in order to have an equal number of sets on all of them.

 

But I don't understand where you get the idea that they ever *would have* created two sets for one dungeon, if not for the "unbalancing" effect it might have. It's like you're arguing that the only reason you don't fly around like Superman is because you don't want to wrinkle your clothes, rather than the more likely reason, "because you're incapable of flying."

 

I will however point out one exception to your "rule," the Twilight Arbor. It rewards a unique set of weapons that can only be earned there, and which has no balancing factor in any other dungeon. So, if they are interested in making new loot for one dungeon, it seems like nothing prevents them doing so.

 

>That's why adding things worth earning on all bosses is important, to eliminate the chance of a boss not being run because it doesn't have anything "worth earning".

 

But again, rewards are entirely subjective. If you have a thing like the old Scythe that dropped from Shadow Behemoth, then a lot of people might want that, so they chase it. If you have another thing, like I don't know, most maces? Then few people want that, so it would attract few people. If you gave one of those to each of two different bosses, then *you* seem to consider that "balance achieved," but the result would be that almost no players would be playing mace guy, and tons of players would be playing scythe guy (until enough people have the things that neither are worth caring about, of course). The only way that would *actually* balance anything is that if the quality of the loot offset player perception of the encounter itself, to the point that players would play the one with lame loot because they enjoyed it so much, and the unfun one because the loot was so good, but since all of this is purely subjective, that's really hard to do right. Again, there is NO benefit to even bothering with that sort of thing *unless* you do it right. Slapping rewards on things haphazardly has no better chance of improving balance than it does making it worse. That is not a "don't make perfect the enemy of the good" situation, it's a "don't make good the enemy of utter chaos" situation.

 

>Here is a big question: if all rewards are available in multiple content types, what happens with themed rewards? Do we ignore them completely and add a flaming armor as a reward from running an underwater dungeon?

 

Yes. As I say, you *weight* the rewards, you make it so that they can **first, fastest, and easiest** be acquired via the themed method, but also you can get them other places if you really prefer. And don't look at me with such feigned horror on your face, because you know full well that the game launched with hundreds of "themed" clothing and weapon skins that could be found in any random loot bag or chest, and also that they gave the ability to earn dungeon and map loots through PvP, which has no such thematic connections.

 

So if you have flaming armor, sure, make it so that for the first few months you can only get it from the flaming boss in the volcano, he'd maybe drop it, or give tokens that would allow you or buy it from an NPC. And then after a few months, you could *maybe* find it in other locations, but at a much much lower drop rate (like precursors), and you could buy them from other NPC for other currencies, but at a much more expensive rate. So if you want it NOW, your best bet is to farm that specific mob. If you're patient or come later to the game, you can earn it elsewhere, but it would still be much easier for you if you came and did his event for a while. It would give you genuine options, it wouldn't lock you into one thing whether you liked it or not, it would just strongly encourage a certain path, while giving you the freedom to wander off it.

 

>How is adding unique rewards on each content much more difficult than having every content compete with each other (and future content) for access to all rewards?

 

It's not, but we were talking about a *balanced* system. Adding unique rewards on each content is easy, making it *improve balance* is hard, because to do it, you'd need to accurately weigh the subjective value of each item verses the subjective interest in each type of content, and distribute them accordingly. Doing any less is as likely to cause more harm as it is to cause more balance.

[Feanor.2358]

> @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > How is that a challenge? I do everything perfectly, but we still fail because of some clueless newbie.

>

> That is literally the *entire* challenge factor of raiding that get so often lionized by raiders.

 

No, it isn't. Allow me to know better, as I clear everything weekly and you don't.

 

> @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> >How is adding unique rewards on each content much more difficult than having every content compete with each other (and future content) for access to all rewards?

>

> It's not, but we were talking about a *balanced* system. Adding unique rewards on each content is easy, making it *improve balance* is hard, because to do it, you'd need to accurately weigh the subjective value of each item verses the subjective interest in each type of content, and distribute them accordingly. Doing any less is as likely to cause more harm as it is to cause more balance.

 

"Accurately weighing subjective value" is impossible. Quite literally. As it is subjective. So adding exclusive rewards isn't only the easy way, it is the *proper* way to balance rewards. No wonder it is so widely used across so many different games.

[Ohoni.6057]

> @"Feanor.2358" said:

>No, it isn't. Allow me to know better, as I clear everything weekly and you don't.

 

I'm just going by what they tell me in these threads. "The raids are meant to be challenging," "It's meant to be hard because there are other people and they might mess up" "You can't compare raids to single player content because other players have to be accounted for." and so on.

 

>"Accurately weighing subjective value" is impossible.

 

*Thank you.*

[maddoctor.2738]

> @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> Rewards should not be used to keep interest in a zone, they should, at most, be used to attract *initial* interest to the zone.

In a way they already do that. The unique rewards attract interest to a zone/content, then it's up to the liquid rewards to keep interest up.

 

> I will however point out one exception to your "rule," the Twilight Arbor. It rewards a unique set of weapons that can only be earned there, and which has no balancing factor in any other dungeon. So, if they are interested in making new loot for one dungeon, it seems like nothing prevents them doing so.

I think you are talking about the rewards added to the Aetherpath, right? So a **new** unique set added as a reward for **new** content.

 

> It's not, but we were talking about a *balanced* system. Adding unique rewards on each content is easy, making it *improve balance* is hard, because to do it, you'd need to accurately weigh the subjective value of each item verses the subjective interest in each type of content, and distribute them accordingly. Doing any less is as likely to cause more harm as it is to cause more balance.

That's why when you add unique rewards to new content you don't care about the interest, because since it's new content, you don't know the interest to begin with.

[Feanor.2358]

> @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> >No, it isn't. Allow me to know better, as I clear everything weekly and you don't.

>

> I'm just going by what they tell me in these threads. "The raids are meant to be challenging," "It's meant to be hard because there are other people and they might mess up" "You can't compare raids to single player content because other players have to be accounted for." and so on.

 

I encourage you to actually play before forming strong opinions based on someone else's reflection on the content in a variety of different contexts.

[Ohoni.6057]

> @"maddoctor.2738" said:

>In a way they already do that. The unique rewards attract interest to a zone/content, then it's up to the liquid rewards to keep interest up.

 

Yes, we agree that they do that, and that part is fine. The problem is that the situation persists long past where it's served that function, and starts to become a problem, by incentivizing players to *stay* when they'd be better off *leaving.* It's like a parachute, a parachute is a great thing to have in the minutes immediately after you fall out of a plane, I think we can all agree that we'd rather have that parachute right then than not have it. But a half hour, an hour, a day, a month after you've fallen out of that plane, maybe you'd be better off without that chute, maybe cut it loose rather than dragging it behind you everywhere you go.

 

>I think you are talking about the rewards added to the Aetherpath, right? So a new unique set added as a reward for new content.

 

It's still part of the Twilight Arbor, it was replacing one of the existing exploration paths. Other than those unique rewards, the Aetherpath still reward the standard TA currencies and other benefits.

 

>That's why when you add unique rewards to new content you don't care about the interest, because since it's new content, you don't know the interest to begin with.

 

But again, that's good for attracting people to new content, but becomes negative once that reasoning wears thing. It's best to have an exit strategy in place.

[Ohoni.6057]

> @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > >No, it isn't. Allow me to know better, as I clear everything weekly and you don't.

> >

> > I'm just going by what they tell me in these threads. "The raids are meant to be challenging," "It's meant to be hard because there are other people and they might mess up" "You can't compare raids to single player content because other players have to be accounted for." and so on.

>

> I encourage you to actually play before forming strong opinions based on someone else's reflection on the content in a variety of different contexts.

 

I have played it, and the "some player kittening it up for everyone else" part is the reason I don't like raids as they currently stand. It's the entire reason why I'm advocating for a mode in which players are less capable of kittening it up for other players. Have you been on my side this entire time?

[Feanor.2358]

> @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > > @"Ohoni.6057" said:

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

> > > >No, it isn't. Allow me to know better, as I clear everything weekly and you don't.

> > >

> > > I'm just going by what they tell me in these threads. "The raids are meant to be challenging," "It's meant to be hard because there are other people and they might mess up" "You can't compare raids to single player content because other players have to be accounted for." and so on.

> >

> > I encourage you to actually play before forming strong opinions based on someone else's reflection on the content in a variety of different contexts.

>

> I have played it, and the "some player kittening it up for everyone else" part is the reason I don't like raids as they currently stand. It's the entire reason why I'm advocating for a mode in which players are less capable of kittening it up for other players. Have you been on my side this entire time?

 

No, because if that's what you want you should be playing world bosses. As I've suggested numerous times. Expecting the top-tier rewards in the game for something that can't be possibly fucked up is just absurd.

[Tyson.5160]

I honestly like maddoctors suggestion about following the same pattern as Wvw and Pvp for Legendary armor, reserve the Perfect Envoy set like the Mistforged Triumphant set and Glorious Hero set and have the stat swap attached to another set. I think attaching it to the refined would’ve fine too.

[Astralporing.1957]

> @"Feanor.2358" said:

> "Accurately weighing subjective value" is impossible. Quite literally.

You do realize, that you've just made his point for him, right?

 

> @"Feanor.2358" said:

> As it is subjective. So adding exclusive rewards isn't only the easy way, it is the *proper* way to balance rewards.

You can't properly balance exclusive rewards if you can't weight their subjective values against (also subjective) content difficulty and fun factor. And you've just admitted it's impossible.

 

> @"Feanor.2358" said:

> How is that a challenge? I do everything perfectly, but we still fail because of some clueless newbie. So in order to succeed it is not my skill that matters, it's the pure luck of the newbie not getting any mechanic. That's not a challenge, that's lottery.

Ironically, that lottery _is_ the main challenge factor of raids.

 

> @"Feanor.2358" said:

> I encourage you to actually play before forming strong opinions based on someone else's reflection on the content in a variety of different contexts.

I happen to raid, and i still mostly agree with Ohoni on that one. The main difficulty of raid encounters _is_ other people.

 

 

 

[Feanor.2358]

> @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > "Accurately weighing subjective value" is impossible. Quite literally.

> You do realize, that you've just made his point for him, right?

>

> > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > As it is subjective. So adding exclusive rewards isn't only the easy way, it is the *proper* way to balance rewards.

> You can't properly balance exclusive rewards if you can't weight their subjective values against (also subjective) content difficulty and fun factor. And you've just admitted it's impossible.

 

And why can't I? Exclusivity works very well. You want that reward? You play by the rules of getting it. Simple. Balancing the exact reward to the feat requested then becomes just marketing. Or is marketing impossible, too?

 

> @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > How is that a challenge? I do everything perfectly, but we still fail because of some clueless newbie. So in order to succeed it is not my skill that matters, it's the pure luck of the newbie not getting any mechanic. That's not a challenge, that's lottery.

> Ironically, that lottery _is_ the main challenge factor of raids.

>

> > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > I encourage you to actually play before forming strong opinions based on someone else's reflection on the content in a variety of different contexts.

> I happen to raid, and i still mostly agree with Ohoni on that one. The main difficulty of raid encounters _is_ other people.

>

>

>

 

And I do not. We seem to have reached an impasse.

 

If we assumed you were right, then we'd have to conclude raids are played by the worst players and world bosses are where the top players are. Because raids then to fail much more often than world bosses. Right?

[Astralporing.1957]

> @"Feanor.2358" said:

> And why can't I? Exclusivity works very well. You want that reward? You play by the rules of getting it. Simple. Balancing the exact reward to the feat requested then becomes just marketing. Or is marketing impossible, too?

 

Nah, it just has nothing to do with actual _balancing_.

You can't reasonably balance things when the main balance factors are subjective.

 

> @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > > How is that a challenge? I do everything perfectly, but we still fail because of some clueless newbie. So in order to succeed it is not my skill that matters, it's the pure luck of the newbie not getting any mechanic. That's not a challenge, that's lottery.

> > Ironically, that lottery _is_ the main challenge factor of raids.

> >

> > > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > > I encourage you to actually play before forming strong opinions based on someone else's reflection on the content in a variety of different contexts.

> > I happen to raid, and i still mostly agree with Ohoni on that one. The main difficulty of raid encounters _is_ other people.

>

> And I do not. We seem to have reached an impasse.

>

> If we assumed you were right, then we'd have to conclude raids are played by the worst players and world bosses are where the top players are. Because raids then to fail much more often than world bosses. Right?

No, it just means that world bosses mostly removed that lottery kind of challenge from their design, while raids did not.

 

Notice also, that i didn't say raids don't contain other forms of challenge. Just that the _main_ difficulty comes from other people.

 

 

[Feanor.2358]

> @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > And why can't I? Exclusivity works very well. You want that reward? You play by the rules of getting it. Simple. Balancing the exact reward to the feat requested then becomes just marketing. Or is marketing impossible, too?

>

> Nah, it just has nothing to do with actual _balancing_.

> You can't reasonably balance things when the main balance factors are subjective.

 

In a sense, all rewards in a game are subjective. You can't balance them... "mathematically correctly"? But reasonably? Yeah, you can.

 

> @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > > @"Astralporing.1957" said:

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

> > > > How is that a challenge? I do everything perfectly, but we still fail because of some clueless newbie. So in order to succeed it is not my skill that matters, it's the pure luck of the newbie not getting any mechanic. That's not a challenge, that's lottery.

> > > Ironically, that lottery _is_ the main challenge factor of raids.

> > >

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

> > > > I encourage you to actually play before forming strong opinions based on someone else's reflection on the content in a variety of different contexts.

> > > I happen to raid, and i still mostly agree with Ohoni on that one. The main difficulty of raid encounters _is_ other people.

> >

> > And I do not. We seem to have reached an impasse.

> >

> > If we assumed you were right, then we'd have to conclude raids are played by the worst players and world bosses are where the top players are. Because raids then to fail much more often than world bosses. Right?

> No, it just means that world bosses mostly removed that lottery kind of challenge from their design, while raids did not.

>

> Notice also, that i didn't say raids don't contain other forms of challenge. Just that the _main_ difficulty comes from other people.

>

>

 

Oh, the main difficulty *can* come from other people, although it doesn't necessarily do. Or raid selling wouldn't exist. But that was never the point of raiding.

[vesica tempestas.1563]

> @"nia.4725" said:

> > @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > Forgive me for saying so, but those guys sound like real kittenhats. I'm glad I don't have to associate with them in game, that sounds like a horrible experience.

>

> I get your point, but I think it depends. I mean, there's nothing wrong in wanting people with a experience similar to yours in your squad. It's natural. You don't always have the will or the time to help newer players or to spend more time killing a boss. Sometimes you just want a smooth, fast kill, and high requirements reduce the chance of not enough experienced players joining. But as I say it depends on how you treat people -you can say "I'm sorry, I want more experienced people" and that's okay, or you can say "sorry no noobs here" and that's not okay at all.

>

>

>

>

 

ask yourself this, if you were doing a dungeon in GW2 would you apply the same mentality? I'm sure you don't, so think why is that - difficulty is the key. When myself or guildies group up with people, we dont 'evaluate' them, we simple try and enjoy the run, and don't get triggered by diversity, its all part of the fun. If you tune a raid to the same difficulty level as a dungeon (10 man dungeon in effect) then things should be relaxed enough you can focus on enjoying stuff rather than being anal/fearful about performance

 

Imagine a game where hundreds of thousands of players all treated each other this way - measuring everything in terms if performance, toxic right.

[nia.4725]

> @"vesica tempestas.1563" said:

> > @"nia.4725" said:

> > > @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > > Forgive me for saying so, but those guys sound like real kittenhats. I'm glad I don't have to associate with them in game, that sounds like a horrible experience.

> >

> > I get your point, but I think it depends. I mean, there's nothing wrong in wanting people with a experience similar to yours in your squad. It's natural. You don't always have the will or the time to help newer players or to spend more time killing a boss. Sometimes you just want a smooth, fast kill, and high requirements reduce the chance of not enough experienced players joining. But as I say it depends on how you treat people -you can say "I'm sorry, I want more experienced people" and that's okay, or you can say "sorry no noobs here" and that's not okay at all.

> >

> >

> >

> >

>

> ask yourself this, if you were doing a dungeon in GW2 would you apply the same mentality? I'm sure you don't, so think why is that - difficulty is the key. When myself or guildies group up with people, we dont 'evaluate' them, we simple try and enjoy the run, and don't get triggered by diversity, its all part of the fun. If you tune a raid to the same difficulty level as a dungeon (10 man dungeon in effect) then things should be relaxed enough you can focus on enjoying stuff rather than being anal/fearful about performance

>

> Imagine a game where hundreds of thousands of players all treated each other this way - measuring everything in terms if performance, toxic right.

 

Raids are much difficult than dungeons, yeah. So the need to have decent players is bigger. But it's not "difficulty" per se, but "mechanics". I've been in dungeon runs with LFG people who didn't know the mechanics and just run whatever build they had, and the dungeon was cleared only after I explained AND only after 1'5 hours. 1'5 hours. For a dungeon. My party was full of nice people and I laughed a lot, but it also consumed a lot of my time that I was not planning to spend there. I stayed because I felt like helping. Of course dungeons are less punishing, but you can't really faceroll them unless you bring a) good composition or b) good players.

 

Would I apply the same mentality? I would, if I was about to do dungeons with LFG people, which I really don't nowadays. I duo the majority of dungeons I clear (I do them with my raid leader), so I don't need to bring anyone else. But if I did I would want them to be experienced players, because I don't like dungeons much, so the last thing I want is a long and difficult run. I wouldn't ask for stupid things like AP, but I wouldn't want lv60 players either.

 

Even in raids I don't really care about the builds people run if they do their job and do mechanics in a decent way. I mean. If you are DPS, do enough DPS to kill the boss. Nothing else. I don't care about insane DPS, really. I don't care if you hit 20k or 30k. Just do enough. Same with supports. I myself have brought sometimes non-meta classes to some bosses, even when pugging: every pug Matthias I've done has required me to swap from druid to heal firebrand. Few pugs understand the change and the benefits of a firebrand as a healer there. But as soon as I swap, the boss gets killed. Also, with my static, I play power revenant. Power revenant, yes. Ask any pug if power rev is viable. They will tell you it's completely useless and their DPS is too bad. Well, I do not think the same nor does my raid leader, so I play power rev. And hell, the boss gets killed anyway.

 

So that's it. I don't care about big numbers, I just want smooth mechanics. It's perfectly possible to raid in a relaxed way. But pugs will always be pugs, don't be fooled. When doing challenging content people always get frustrated. Does that mean that the content is flawed? Nah, the problem is that group of players who are rude. The thing I don't really understand, I don't agree on it, is some people here saying that everyone should be accepted everywhere; that content should be made in a way that no one can mess up or be kicked. If the game was like that we wouldn't have anything challenging or competitive. Everyone has the right to play with whoever they want, being that a specific person or a specific type of player, and the LFG being full of high requirement groups does not prevent you from creating your own LFG, placing your own rules and accepting whoever you want. Yes, it can be hard to start raiding and accessibility is a problem in raids. Yup, I will never deny that. But that is very different from claiming that raids aren't accessible, that you're locked out of them. You aren't. If you do not want to play by the raiding community rules, that's okay. Make your own groups and play how you want.

 

(Yes, it's toxic when someone kicks you or yells at you for not doing more than X amount of DPS. But it's not toxic to kick you if your DPS is, let's say, less than half of what the average pug DPS does. If you do 2k with your weaver, I'm sorry but you're not doing your job -DPS. If you're support chrono and your boon uptime is 2, I'm sorry but you're not doing your job -giving me boons. If a kick or a comment is toxic depends on the situation.)