Serpent's Ire Meta needs nerf

[Ayrilana.1396]

Or players could learn to do the simple mechanic of using their CC skills.

 

That said, I did make one suggestion many months ago, that if a nerf was to be done, reducing the damage reduction buff from 33% to 25% would be more than enough.

[Zaklex.6308]

In regards to the rewards, the only thing we do know is that the super rare item that drops from it(which I think is one of the Ultra Rare Mini's) has such a low drop rate that only 1 or 2 people have received it, at least that's what I've heard, whether it's true or not remains to be seen. It might even be the event that drops those mini's that people still have not seen in game(and I don't mean the 3 people talk about in the Ramona thread).

[Dante.1763]

> @"Ayrilana.1396" said:

> Or players could learn to do the simple mechanic of using their CC skills.

>

> That said, I did make one suggestion many months ago, that if a nerf was to be done, reducing the damage reduction buff from 33% to 25% would be more than enough.

 

Saddly without a full in depth, *mandatory* tutorial that explains *EVERY* little tidbit about CC, including *how much "cc damage"* each skill does it will never happen in this game, and do bear in mind in this game that a good player can do up to 5x as much as an average player, so obviously this game has fails at explaining things.

[ReV.6097]

> @"Randulf.7614" said:

> It is a mess of an event but what tops it off is how utterly unrewarding it is. Why that aspect wont be addressed it baffling. Sticking it in collections is not the answer to improving things.

 

And I wonder if ANet will ever learn this....

It's not just that one event or map, either. A ton of PoF events had been as equally unfuffilling, despite the effort put in by people.

[Maikimaik.1974]

> @"Gop.8713" said:

> > @"Maikimaik.1974" said:

> > No. If it's hard, keep it hard. If it's easy, keep it easy.

>

> If only I could give two thumbs up. This was hilarious, I literally laughed out loud, only bc it so perfectly encapsulates so many responses on the forums that assume the status quo is the best of all possible worlds, blithely unconcerned with how or whether something should be improved lol . . .

>

> For my part I'm blithely unconcerned with the serpent's ire meta, so I have no opinion . . .

 

Making something easier does not improve it, unless there's something severely going wrong with it. In case of Serpents Ire, yes, it's challenging. But it's possible, and therefore shouldn't be made easier.

[Maikimaik.1974]

~~Ignore pls.~~

[Blood Red Arachnid.2493]

I'm willing to bet that Clyans standard for "well organized" wouldn't even meet my standard of "serviceable" when it comes to commanding this event. Because if it did, then Clyan would have more to say on the matter than "get cc" and "what to do."

 

Back when I used to pug command, my explanation took 10-15 minutes to type out in map chat, and that is without the Q&A portion afterward. I'd have the preamble as the squad message, the full explanation, the brief explanation, the mini-review before each phase, and the recommended builds and tactics for each phase. That is just explaining things. Let alone all of the other stuff to get people to do it right.

[Gop.8713]

> @"Maikimaik.1974" said:

> > @"Gop.8713" said:

> > > @"Maikimaik.1974" said:

> > > No. If it's hard, keep it hard. If it's easy, keep it easy.

> >

> > If only I could give two thumbs up. This was hilarious, I literally laughed out loud, only bc it so perfectly encapsulates so many responses on the forums that assume the status quo is the best of all possible worlds, blithely unconcerned with how or whether something should be improved lol . . .

> >

> > For my part I'm blithely unconcerned with the serpent's ire meta, so I have no opinion . . .

>

> Making something easier does not improve it, unless there's something severely going wrong with it. In case of Serpents Ire, yes, it's challenging. But it's possible, and therefore shouldn't be made easier.

 

Making something easier improves it if it is failing at a rate that is higher than intended. As I said, I have no opinion as to whether Serpent' Ire falls into this category. But the presumably unintended irony in your original reply brought me such joy I felt it would have been wrong for me to withhold my appreciation, which was sincere :)

[Gop.8713]

> @"Dante.1763" said:

> > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:

> > Or players could learn to do the simple mechanic of using their CC skills.

> >

> > That said, I did make one suggestion many months ago, that if a nerf was to be done, reducing the damage reduction buff from 33% to 25% would be more than enough.

>

> Saddly without a full in depth, *mandatory* tutorial that explains *EVERY* little tidbit about CC, including *how much "cc damage"* each skill does it will never happen in this game, and do bear in mind in this game that a good player can do up to 5x as much as an average player, so obviously this game has fails at explaining things.

 

More breakbars on world bosses -- esp some of the easy starter zone ones -- would probably go a long way towards helping new ppl learn about cc . . .

[sigur.9453]

> @"Gop.8713" said:

> > @"Dante.1763" said:

> > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:

> > > Or players could learn to do the simple mechanic of using their CC skills.

> > >

> > > That said, I did make one suggestion many months ago, that if a nerf was to be done, reducing the damage reduction buff from 33% to 25% would be more than enough.

> >

> > Saddly without a full in depth, *mandatory* tutorial that explains *EVERY* little tidbit about CC, including *how much "cc damage"* each skill does it will never happen in this game, and do bear in mind in this game that a good player can do up to 5x as much as an average player, so obviously this game has fails at explaining things.

>

> More breakbars on world bosses -- esp some of the easy starter zone ones -- would probably go a long way towards helping new ppl learn about cc . . .

 

Nah, i dont think this will help. they will ignore the breakbar like they ignore the breakbar on other content.

The only thing that could fix that is a "tutorial" or at least 1 door in every 3 story instances that needs to be broken/smashed open with cc skills.

And of course (like others have already said) they need to add the cc value in the tooltipps (write it in the same colour then the cc bars are) so CC is present right from the start when you first read through your skills

 

Edit:

and to the topic, i don´t think it needs a nerf.

i have only done this event (3 times) shorty after collection releases that needed it, so the "quality/experiece" of the other players was on the level that it SHOULD be on a lvl 80map in a 6 year old game. and it was quite easy to complete. this is not a starting area, so a bit of "a challenge" is fine.

[Clyan.1593]

> @"Blood Red Arachnid.2493" said:

> I'm willing to bet that Clyans standard for "well organized" wouldn't even meet my standard of "serviceable" when it comes to commanding this event. Because if it did, then Clyan would have more to say on the matter than "get cc" and "what to do."

>

> Back when I used to pug command, my explanation took 10-15 minutes to type out in map chat, and that is without the Q&A portion afterward. I'd have the preamble as the squad message, the full explanation, the brief explanation, the mini-review before each phase, and the recommended builds and tactics for each phase. That is just explaining things. Let alone all of the other stuff to get people to do it right.

 

Again: I already said many times now that 4 further attempts from different coms failed as well. And then you go on explaining you even recommended builds for a meta event. How much more ridiculous will this become? This is just typical: You want a nerf? You must be bad lulz.

 

The fifth attempt by the way did finish the event successfully.

And guess what: Noone gave recommendations for builds (lol!), neither were the phases explained in detail.

- The first one wasn't explained at all.

- The second one was set up already with marks, just as I did

- The third one (which I couldn't get to on my other attempts) only had a simple mark on the snake champ, so people wouldn't focus on the hydra.

 

So what was different compared to my squad?

Well we had two squads this time, just as I said probably is necessary.

The first squad had full 50 people that would spread to each champ in the second phase, so 10 for each.

The second squad who's commander was in the same guild as our commander (meaning they obviously had set up this together already beforehand) then zerged from one champ to the next. The bar for the bomb had about 20% left when we killed the last champ.

 

I don't know why some people have to make examples of squads with only 20 people in it, when clearly this is an extremely rare case. Trying to make a point on a case that is an exception is just silly and doesn't work. And trying to shit on the person who's complaining by claiming he or she is lacking the skills as a commander proves how you have no real argument.

 

Now here we are: From 5 attempts only 1 was able to get it done, and it was organized by a guild with 2 squads. My commander however told me that even this doesn't always guarantee a successful run on this event, usually from 4 attempts they do 1 will fail.

[ButcherofMalakir.4067]

A revolution. Meta event that can actualy fail. What is the problem?

[Laila Lightness.8742]

To expect cc in mechanics for meta in my opinion is to much to ask for. Alot of people dont want to use cc abillities. Some proffesions dont have alot of cc

[Gehenna.3625]

> @"Clyan.1593" said:

> > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:

> > > @"Clyan.1593" said:

> > > > @"Illconceived Was Na.9781" said:

> > > > > @"Clyan.1593" said:

> > > > > My run was well organized as I said,

> > > > How was it actually organized? I've seen commanders do a stellar job of rounding up people, without taking responsibility for ensuring that folks know what skills to bring and when to use them. Also important in that fight is positioning, something that also gets neglected.

> > > >

> > > > > although I precicley explained how to do it.

> > > > Would you share with us the explanation? I've seen some that are technically accurate but not helpful to someone unfamiliar with the mechanics beforehand.

> > > >

> > > > One thing that affects the success of Serpent's Ire versus Istan or TD Metas is that there are very few people who repeat it so often that they need no explanation to usefully contribute. There are always enough people in Hot metas to ensure success, but that didn't used to be the case; even after the Chak Gherent was nerfed, it failed often because of lack of familiarity.

> > > >

> > > > So it's not surprising that commanders can show up to SI thinking that they don't need to do much, whereas, for now, it takes so much more.

> > > >

> > > > > Even if you have seen many people do it, the event is almost ignored every time I go the map.

> > > > This is true.

> > > >

> > > > > Compared to other metas this one is fairly low populated because of its difficulty.

> > > > No, it's really not that much harder than Octovine or Dragon's Stand. What's different is that people have succeeded feel little reason to return. There's no amazingly-valuable reward like an infusion or special weapon, it's not required for earning map currency, there are other sources of mosaics, and it's certainly not needed for important, repeat collections.

> > > >

> > > > In short, people have a vested interest in learning & repeating other metas; they have few reasons to do this one more than 2-3x at most. It's not the difficulty (or at least, not that alone).

> > > >

> > > > > Everytime someone goes to the forum complaining about a certain issue, people like you show up and tell them the most impossible things like you telling me now you have "seen" squads doing it with only 20 people just to raise a counter point. It's rediculous at least.

> > > > Unless you think people are making this up or faking videos, it absolutely happens. I more commonly see big zergs, organized by one of the major challenging-meta-communities. But I've also participated with less-famous guilds, who literally just call out for people in LFG and /map. They don't have highly-publicized calendars.

> > > >

> > > > > Beside that there is nothing challenging about the fights itself as you are trying to make it seem like. It's the usual stuff, spread evenly among the marks, cc and dmg.

> > > > That's what I said: it's not that challenging mechanically. It really is a matter of organizing people. And that turns out to be incredibly difficult when a large chunk of people are new each time.

> > > >

> > > > > This isn't fractal 99 cm or 100 cm in which you really have to understand the various mechanics. Neither is it a raid boss. It's just a meta that rarely gets played - and the reason for it is its cc bars.

> > > > In fact, in every meta, a core group does need to understand the mechanics. In commonly-successful ones, that core group exists without training, because people have reason to return again & again. In SI, there's no such reason, so it's much harder to succeed because one has to start from scratch each time.

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > At this point it becomes clear that you don't want to change your mind but rather are interested in deconstructing everything I have said or done or not done. **As usual with people who are against something without any good reason** they tend to focus on the person complaining and start to compromise and distract him/her by getting them entangled in a huge and pointless discussion in which the OP has to answer more and more questions/accusations that warp the whole thopic into a mess.

> > >

> > > Typical forum mentality.

> > >

> > > So naturally I'm not going to play your game. I'm not here to satisfy your lust in discussions nor do I feel the need to change your mind, just because you have another opinion. That's fine with me. I am here to state the facts: That this event is too difficult, that it nearly never gets played - and if more than often fails. After 4 further attempts since this thread was made I still haven't succesfully completed it (4 different commanders as well). In 20 minutes there will be another run, and I have a feeling it's gonna fail again. We'll see.

> > >

> >

> > Someone could say the exact same thing about posts that take issue with Serpent’s Ire.

> >

>

> But I do have a good reason. Read again.

 

But do you? You say you had a well-organized squad and failed. Yet there are video's of people completing it with one squad. It sounds more like you have a different idea of what a well-organized squad is.

 

For me it means that you have a full squad with people who know what to do and when, yet you are arguing that you can't be expected to know what everyone's doing etc. That to me doesn't sound like a well-organized squad.

 

Personally I feel it's good that there is content that is harder to do and that not everything is a matter of showing up and just doing whatever. Not everybody may like that there is content that is difficult but since it's few and far between, I do not think it's problematic.

 

Now, I'm not familiar with all the details but unless there is something connected to this meta that is important to a large amount of players beyond being able to do it, it's fine to have some harder content. I will say though that if it ends up being something that 90% of the people aren't able or willing to do, you can question the wisdom of making it a map meta, but then again the location of it does seem right for something more difficult.

 

So the question for me is whether or not this meta is intended for people who like a real challenge or the average player. And to have some things for the first group is not unreasonable I would think.

 

[Blood Red Arachnid.2493]

> @"Clyan.1593" said:

>

> Again: I already said many times now that 4 further attempts from different coms failed as well. And then you go on explaining you even recommended builds for a meta event. How much more ridiculous will this become? This is just typical: You want a nerf? You must be bad lulz.

 

How many commanders failed the event is meaningless when it comes to adequate commanding skills and you. They could've all easily been just as bad.

 

> @"Clyan.1593" said:

> The fifth attempt by the way did finish the event successfully.

> And guess what: Noone gave recommendations for builds (lol!), neither were the phases explained in detail.

> - The first one wasn't explained at all.

> - The second one was set up already with marks, just as I did

> - The third one (which I couldn't get to on my other attempts) only had a simple mark on the snake champ, so people wouldn't focus on the hydra.

>

> So what was different compared to my squad?

> Well we had two squads this time, just as I said probably is necessary.

> The first squad had full 50 people that would spread to each champ in the second phase, so 10 for each.

> The second squad who's commander was in the same guild as our commander (meaning they obviously had set up this together already beforehand) then zerged from one champ to the next. The bar for the bomb had about 20% left when we killed the last champ.

 

You know, the lowest number of people I ever successfully did this event with in a pug run was around 35-40. We were all in the same squad, using the outdated "5 CC groups, one murder group" strat, much like what happened here. The lowest number in a guild run was around 30, using the three prong strat. Of course, in a guild run you can expect most people to be cooperative, since they joined those guilds specifically to be cooperative and helpful. That small group slammed that event hard, leaving nearly 40% of the bar up by the time it ended.

 

Without good commanding and without good players, there are two ways that someone can accomplish this event. The first is with sheer numbers. There's a limit to how much the group event scales, so if you throw enough bodies at it anyone can win. The second is if a group happens to merge with a guild that is skilled enough to carry everyone else.. It looks like you happened upon both. Congrats, you got lucky. This, however, does not absolve you of any shortcomings. You still haven't provided your methods and actions while commanding the squad, so I'm forced to assume that the only things you've done is mark some points and said "CC."

 

> @"Clyan.1593" said:

> I don't know why some people have to make examples of squads with only 20 people in it, when clearly this is an extremely rare case. Trying to make a point on a case that is an exception is just silly and doesn't work. And trying to kitten on the person who's complaining by claiming he or she is lacking the skills as a commander proves how you have no real argument.

>

> Now here we are: From 5 attempts only 1 was able to get it done, and it was organized by a guild with 2 squads. My commander however told me that even this doesn't always guarantee a successful run on this event, usually from 4 attempts they do 1 will fail.

 

Actually, the guild that runs it with 30 or so every other Sunday night has a 100% success rate. As far as I can tell, most guilds do. After the initial loss or two, once success is determined it is hard not to screw up again with the same people. You just say "do the same thing that we did last time", and then it works again. Look, you're trying to argue here that Giraffes don't exist, and that all of the Giraffes that everyone's seen and touched don't count, for reasons. That kind of logic doesn't fly. You can stomp around all angry about it, but everyone here has seen Giraffes. Many of them. Any mental gymnastics you use to try and convince us otherwise is clearly transparent in light of witnessing Giraffes. All you are accomplishing is making everyone dislike you, because you get angry and hostile whenever someone calls you out on your anti-Giraffe BS.

 

The hair pulling comes from pug runs. Largely because the player pool is being drained of its best players, either by them vowing to never do the event again or by them joining a guild that does Serpent's Ire. If you want to command a pug run, you have to try hard. The key word here is **hard.** The opposite of easy. You go to war. You have to dump an entire world of effective tactics and theory onto random players, and do so in a way that will get them to cooperate and not tune you out. You have to micromanage, be ever vigilant, be kind yet stern. You have to squeeze every bit of advantage you can muster, to pry open the jaws of defeat and grab that sweet victory. You have to do so much to get this event done successfully that it is _impossible for any reasonable bystander to say that you were inadequate._ It doesn't matter how good the average commander is, because "average" is a meaningless value here. The benchmark is success, and either you are good enough or you aren't. Even if the event fails, you should imbue enough knowledge into everyone such that they know what is necessary to complete the event, and how to improve next time.

 

As far as suggestions to improve the event goes, if Anet wants the event to be one more often, then it needs to have better rewards. The event isn't too hard at all. All that is lacking is sufficient motivation.

[Sleepwalker.1398]

> @"Clyan.1593" said:

> In the meantime since I opened this thread there had been 3 further attempts from other commanders to do the event, all of them failed despite the fact that everything has been explained in detail.

>

> Some players from those squads are well aware of how difficult this event is and many of them find it just as rediculous as me.

>

> So in total from 4 events non had been successfully completed, and I am yet to try another one. Let's see how many it takes until it works out...

 

OP, if you want to succeed and are on NA, the TTS guys i think still run this event couple times a week.

I had so much trouble with this event when trying to make the backpiece a while back.

Someone suggested them to me and i got it on the 2nd try with them.

Hope this helps: https://ttsgamers.com/event-calendar/

[zombyturtle.5980]

I cant believe people are defending this event or saying its OP's fault it failed because hes a bad commander. In EU at least, people just do not care and wont use CC skills on anything, nomatter how much explanation and hand holding you give them.

 

This event doesnt need a nerf. It needs a full scale rework. The pre is far too long, and the final 2 bosses are nothing but a massive failure of fps problems and visual overload.

 

Suggestions:

- remove the 'hunting feature' in the pre and just show on the map where the champions are. Flying around in circles aimlessly with no direction looking for them is a time waste

- rework the second stage, making the champs break and be stunned for much longer and take increased dmg while broken.

- give the final 2 bosses separate parts of the map and keep them seperate. Make snake get a buff that stacks as long as hydra is alive, to ensure its worth killing hydra a few times.

- and ofc increase rewards to be comparable with DS as it takes a similar amount of time.

[Clyan.1593]

> @"Gehenna.3625" said:

> For me it means that you have a full squad with people who know what to do and when, yet you are arguing that you can't be expected to know what everyone's doing etc. That to me doesn't sound like a well-organized squad.

 

Now I don't even know why I should justify myself here, because your claim that I can magically control or know if people actually LISTEN to what I said in chat and broadcasts, is very silly.

 

> @"Blood Red Arachnid.2493" said:

> Look, you're trying to argue here that Giraffes don't exist, and that all of the Giraffes that everyone's seen and touched don't count, for reasons. That kind of logic doesn't fly. You can stomp around all angry about it, but everyone here has seen Giraffes. Many of them. Any mental gymnastics you use to try and convince us otherwise is clearly transparent in light of witnessing Giraffes. All you are accomplishing is making everyone dislike you, because you get angry and hostile whenever someone calls you out on your anti-Giraffe BS.

 

No, what I am saying is that a rare case isn't a valid point.

It's not mental gymnastics - it's quite easy: You try to shift the actual problem onto me in the believe you can somehow make me look dumb or unskilled because you can't raise a better argument. This gets even more obvious when you talk about how I make people not like me - even though that's not important at all.

If you could stay on the subject maybe we would have a more constructive conversation, but unfortunately you have nothing else left than an unsubstantiated bias towards me as a commander. If that's the only solution you have I suppose it's only fair to ignore you from here on, because you're incapable to see beyond that idea.

 

 

[Blood Red Arachnid.2493]

> @"Clyan.1593" said:

> > @"Gehenna.3625" said:

> > For me it means that you have a full squad with people who know what to do and when, yet you are arguing that you can't be expected to know what everyone's doing etc. That to me doesn't sound like a well-organized squad.

>

> Now I don't even know, why I should justify myself here, because your claim that I can magically control or know if people actually LISTEN to what I said in chat and broadcasts, is very silly.

>

> > @"Blood Red Arachnid.2493" said:

> > Look, you're trying to argue here that Giraffes don't exist, and that all of the Giraffes that everyone's seen and touched don't count, for reasons. That kind of logic doesn't fly. You can stomp around all angry about it, but everyone here has seen Giraffes. Many of them. Any mental gymnastics you use to try and convince us otherwise is clearly transparent in light of witnessing Giraffes. All you are accomplishing is making everyone dislike you, because you get angry and hostile whenever someone calls you out on your anti-Giraffe BS.

>

> No, what I am saying is that a rare case isn't a valid point.

> It's not mental gymnastics - it's quite easy: You try to shift the actual problem onto me in the believe you can somehow make me look dumb or unskilled because you can't raise another argument. This gets even more obvious when you talk about how I make people not like me - even though that's not important at all.

> If you could stay on the subject maybe we would have a more constructive conversation, but you have nothing more left than an unsubstantiated bias against me as a commander. If that's the only solution you have I suppose it's only fair to ignore you from here on.

>

>

 

Naw. We're shifting the problem on to you because you charged onto the forums making hyperbolic complaints and looking for a fight. You come here, demand people prove you wrong, and refuse to accept contrary evidence. You've come here with the myopic belief that your experiences are the only true representation of what this event is like, and everyone contradicting you is the result of some cliquish forum culture and thus not valid.

 

Do you know what normal people do? They ask questions. They try harder. They improve. They accept randomness and try again later. This is all done because a normal person has enough sense to know that if they don't succeed at something, then there's more that they can do better. What they don't do is what you're doing right now, which is trounce around high aggro under the mistaken idea that if you're stubborn enough you'll "win." The only time people do this is when they don't know how to improve. If you don't know how to improve, then either one of two things is happening:

 

1: The person has reached the apex of skill at the task and there really is nothing that can be done to get better. This is unlikely, because generally the best of the best are successful, let alone unlikely to make hyperbolic claims about their failures.

2: The person lacks the experience or the wit to figure out the ways to improve, thus they cannot perceive their inadequacies. Thus, the only option available to them is to vent.

 

A lot of people don't have the verbiage to express this notion, but they definitely have the experience or the wit to see it. Thus, everyone is forced to conclude that you're just not that good. All in all, this is so many words to express one simple idea to solve most of your problems: git gud.

[Blood Red Arachnid.2493]

> @"zombyturtle.5980" said:

> I cant believe people are defending this event or saying its OP's fault it failed because hes a bad commander. In EU at least, people just do not care and wont use CC skills on anything, nomatter how much explanation and hand holding you give them.

>

> This event doesnt need a nerf. It needs a full scale rework. The pre is far too long, and the final 2 bosses are nothing but a massive failure of fps problems and visual overload.

>

> Suggestions:

> - remove the 'hunting feature' in the pre and just show on the map where the champions are. Flying around in circles aimlessly with no direction looking for them is a time waste

> - rework the second stage, making the champs break and be stunned for much longer and take increased dmg while broken.

> - give the final 2 bosses separate parts of the map and keep them seperate. Make snake get a buff that stacks as long as hydra is alive, to ensure its worth killing hydra a few times.

> - and ofc increase rewards to be comparable with DS as it takes a similar amount of time.

 

Us pug commanders have lamented a few times on the difficulty of being pug commanders. The harder you try the more likely you are to succeed, but at the end of the day the event is out of your hands. I've explained the subconscious reasoning that people have above, but the short version is that most people's complaints about it stem from generally low skill base of the average player. This is actually a problem that Anet expressed at one point, mentioning how the difference in DPS between players can be many times higher than each other (8 times I think? I didn't archive this stuff).

 

Because of this, we've (sort-of) all come to an agreement on how to improve the success rate for this event. First, is to have a CC tutorial earlier in the game. This is one of the biggest flaws with the game overall, as breakbars are an important mechanic that has no explanation or tutorial anywhere in the game. Second, is to have really good rewards for this event. The rewards for this event are pretty low for how hard it is. The most valuable thing you might get is a weapon recipe, but those are hard to manage and sell. Combine these two together and you'll get the good ole' capitalist approach. Give players the tools, and reward them for using it right.

 

Making the event easier has some caveats. First, we'll just experience a new wave of brain drain, where all of the players who beat this easier version will stop doing the event, and then we'll be left with unskilled players all over again. Second, making the event easier doesn't necessarily incentivize people to do it. You may have noticed that Forged Warmonger and the Legendary Hounds are nearly abandoned content. They have similar rewards to Serpent's Ire, but even fewer people try to do them. Third, the low average skill floor of the playerbase remains a problem. You don't want a massive change between sectioned off content and overworld, because otherwise players will get difficulty shock. Having bad players limits the creativity and complexity that can be put into events. Overall, if the difficulty of the CC phase does receive a nerf, it would have to be a pretty small one.

 

However I digress: The hunting stage is more important than you'd think. For one, it gives us PUG commanders a lot of leeway when it comes to explanations and Q&A. Second, a lot of people arrive late, and having a long preamble means that it is easy to organize all the latecomers. Third, having people split up and search helps to weed out ill prepared groups, since a systematic seek and destroy requires at least some cooperation and awareness of what is going on. Fourth, it gives commanders ample time to see which players are AFK or are blindly following the tag.

[Turin.6921]

I do think that the event could be scaled better but i have done in the past in organized groups with 5 ppl per boss (plus non squad players). It is more an issue of people in the open world not knowing how to do CC effectively enough. The rest of the game does not make much of an effort for teaching that and most CC bars can be ignored. Even when it does in the story instances (which is probably the best place to teach individuals on how to CC) everyone is just crying "nerf!" when that happens. So when an actual CC check comes up most ppl just fail.

[Clyan.1593]

> @"Blood Red Arachnid.2493" said:

>

> Naw. We're shifting the problem on to you because you charged onto the forums making hyperbolic complaints and looking for a fight. You come here, demand people prove you wrong, and refuse to accept contrary evidence. You've come here with the myopic belief that your experiences are the only true representation of what this event is like, and everyone contradicting you is the result of some cliquish forum culture and thus not valid.

>

> Do you know what normal people do? They ask questions. They try harder. They improve. They accept randomness and try again later. This is all done because a normal person has enough sense to know that if they don't succeed at something, then there's more that they can do better. What they don't do is what you're doing right now, which is trounce around high aggro under the mistaken idea that if you're stubborn enough you'll "win." The only time people do this is when they don't know how to improve. If you don't know how to improve, then either one of two things is happening:

>

> 1: The person has reached the apex of skill at the task and there really is nothing that can be done to get better. This is unlikely, because generally the best of the best are successful, let alone unlikely to make hyperbolic claims about their failures.

> 2: The person lacks the experience or the wit to figure out the ways to improve, thus they cannot perceive their inadequacies. Thus, the only option available to them is to vent.

>

> A lot of people don't have the verbiage to express this notion, but they definitely have the experience or the wit to see it. Thus, everyone is forced to conclude that you're just not that good. All in all, this is so many words to express one simple idea to solve most of your problems: git gud.

 

That's all pure bias, as I said before and you still can't see beyond that idea. If you'd had been with me in the squad I could understand that, but you haven't. And to make an even stronger point you now also claim me to be angry and stubborn as if I was a child just so you can feel better about your inability to take another stance.

 

Stating facts like the event is low populated or the event rarely gets successfully done isn't hyperbolic at all, so I don't know where you're trying to get at with that. It's just another meaningless word to attack me personally.

 

I'm sorry, but I can't take you seriously anymore, you're trying so hard to make me look bad and all you have to offer to make up for it is a "git gud". At least you mean it, so I take it into consideration. Thanks

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Gehenna.3625]

> @"Clyan.1593" said:

> > @"Gehenna.3625" said:

> > For me it means that you have a full squad with people who know what to do and when, yet you are arguing that you can't be expected to know what everyone's doing etc. That to me doesn't sound like a well-organized squad.

>

> Now I don't even know why I should justify myself here, because your claim that I can magically control or know if people actually LISTEN to what I said in chat and broadcasts, is very silly.

 

You made the claim that you had a good reason but you didn't specify what that reason was and just telling people to read what you said doesn't tell me what you are referring to specifically. The main element I saw was your example of your squad failing. That's anecdotal evidence and compared to the fact that others did manage, it just means that for your group the content was too hard. To that I answered that I feel it's ok that the game has some content that is challenging, which by they way also means that many people will not manage. To me that's fine.

 

As it stands you don't have to do anything as far as I'm concerned, but the problem is this: you believe you have a good reason and if people disagree then you automatically assume that they haven't read your comments properly. This is how I perceive it because of how you reply.

 

I have read all your posts here and based on what you wrote I am not convinced you have a point. That could mean that you didn't actually write what you meant or you overestimate your version of the truth, or it is entirely possible that I misread or misunderstood something (which can always happen) but as long as you keep replying in generalities about people not listening or reading your words, I cannot say what the core of the matter is to you (since you seem to think I didn't address it I guess).

 

So feel free to ignore my posts and carry on or feel free to actually succinctly state what in your posts is the "smoking gun" that proves to you this needs to change. I can already tell you that if it comes down to your group not being able to do it, you already have my answer.

 

It's up to you. You don't have to reply but I am willing to try to understand your point better. Do what you will.

 

 

[Clyan.1593]

> @"Gehenna.3625" said:

> > @"Clyan.1593" said:

> > > @"Gehenna.3625" said:

> > > For me it means that you have a full squad with people who know what to do and when, yet you are arguing that you can't be expected to know what everyone's doing etc. That to me doesn't sound like a well-organized squad.

> >

> > Now I don't even know why I should justify myself here, because your claim that I can magically control or know if people actually LISTEN to what I said in chat and broadcasts, is very silly.

>

> You made the claim that you had a good reason but you didn't specify what that reason was and just telling people to read what you said doesn't tell me what you are referring to specifically. The main element I saw was your example of your squad failing. That's anecdotal evidence and compared to the fact that others did manage, it just means that for your group the content was too hard. To that I answered that I feel it's ok that the game has some content that is challenging, which by they way also means that many people will not manage. To me that's fine.

>

> As it stands you don't have to do anything as far as I'm concerned, but the problem is this: you believe you have a good reason and if people disagree then you automatically assume that they haven't read your comments properly. This is how I perceive it because of how you reply.

>

> I have read all your posts here and based on what you wrote I am not convinced you have a point. That could mean that you didn't actually write what you meant or you overestimate your version of the truth, or it is entirely possible that I misread or misunderstood something (which can always happen) but as long as you keep replying in generalities about people not listening or reading your words, I cannot say what the core of the matter is to you (since you seem to think I didn't address it I guess).

>

> So feel free to ignore my posts and carry on or feel free to actually succinctly state what in your posts is the "smoking gun" that proves to you this needs to change. I can already tell you that if it comes down to your group not being able to do it, you already have my answer.

>

> It's up to you. You don't have to reply but I am willing to try to understand your point better. Do what you will.

>

>

 

This is a misunderstanding. You highlighted a specific sentence I wrote earlier in this thread in which I said something about people who have no good reason to be against something. And I said that compared to them I did have a good reason to complain, mainly that the event is lowly populated and almost always fails.

So I was referring to those who attack me personally as a commander, how they try to shift the whole thing onto my person. I was talking about the mentality of the forums, this passive aggressive stance where people love to bash on someone who asks for a nerf, and immediately jump on the "you must be bad, git gud" train and then act like they have anything worthwhile to offer when they tell you to improve. Another example for this is how people will bombard you with accusations or ridiculous questions that more and more will dig deeper into a microcosmos of details until they find something to point at and say: See, this is why you failed!

This thread is exactly that, with the difference that I don't play along so now the opposing side starts to get more personal towards me.

 

[Gehenna.3625]

> @"Clyan.1593" said:

> > @"Gehenna.3625" said:

> > > @"Clyan.1593" said:

> > > > @"Gehenna.3625" said:

> > > > For me it means that you have a full squad with people who know what to do and when, yet you are arguing that you can't be expected to know what everyone's doing etc. That to me doesn't sound like a well-organized squad.

> > >

> > > Now I don't even know why I should justify myself here, because your claim that I can magically control or know if people actually LISTEN to what I said in chat and broadcasts, is very silly.

> >

> > You made the claim that you had a good reason but you didn't specify what that reason was and just telling people to read what you said doesn't tell me what you are referring to specifically. The main element I saw was your example of your squad failing. That's anecdotal evidence and compared to the fact that others did manage, it just means that for your group the content was too hard. To that I answered that I feel it's ok that the game has some content that is challenging, which by they way also means that many people will not manage. To me that's fine.

> >

> > As it stands you don't have to do anything as far as I'm concerned, but the problem is this: you believe you have a good reason and if people disagree then you automatically assume that they haven't read your comments properly. This is how I perceive it because of how you reply.

> >

> > I have read all your posts here and based on what you wrote I am not convinced you have a point. That could mean that you didn't actually write what you meant or you overestimate your version of the truth, or it is entirely possible that I misread or misunderstood something (which can always happen) but as long as you keep replying in generalities about people not listening or reading your words, I cannot say what the core of the matter is to you (since you seem to think I didn't address it I guess).

> >

> > So feel free to ignore my posts and carry on or feel free to actually succinctly state what in your posts is the "smoking gun" that proves to you this needs to change. I can already tell you that if it comes down to your group not being able to do it, you already have my answer.

> >

> > It's up to you. You don't have to reply but I am willing to try to understand your point better. Do what you will.

> >

> >

>

> This is a misunderstanding. You highlighted a specific sentence I wrote earlier in this thread in which I said something about people who have no good reason to be against something. And I said that compared to them I did have a good reason to complain, mainly that the event is lowly populated and almost always fails.

> So I was referring to those who attack me personally as a commander do not have a good reason to be against my suggestions, because then they wouldn't try to shift the whole thing onto my person. I was talking about the mentality of the forums, this passive aggressive stance where people love to bash on someone who asks for a nerf, and immediately jump on the "you must be bad, git gud" train.

>

Thank you for explaining. It does make it a lot clearer to me what you meant.

 

As for me, I think that I agree that most open world content should be beatable by a big majority of players. And with most open world content I mean like 95% or more. However, I also think that there should be room for content that is so challenging that only a small percentage of players manage to be successful. This should be done sparingly but I believe there is a value in such content.

 

Now if this works prohibitive for other goals then it would be more problematic. For example if it blocks map completion or a collection to be completed that is meant to be completed by more people then it's different. But otherwise the location of this meta is the kind of place where something like this makes sense to me.

 

So I think the difference in our views lies there that if I understand you correctly, you feel it should be made easier because you feel most people can't manage this event and my view is that it's ok to have a few exceptions to that "rule".