Showing Posts For Archeon.7693:
+1 here. In the halloween event I bought the mini-pet 3-pack, and bought a second pack to make the skeleton. I would happily do the same with the Wintersday minis but I absolutely will not risk throwing money at it until I randomly get 6 minis out of boxes.
Of course, this has the nifty bonus effect that, having decided I won’t go that far for these ones, I feel freed of my obsession to own all mini-pets. Thanks Anet, for ensuring that I will never again need to give you my money!
Yep, only troll here is the OP. I did the event pretty smoothly and finished it with my overflow group within somewhere between 2 and 3 hours. I was called away right at the end of the event and I missed the chest. Luckily, a guildie invited me to an overflow where it was still going on and I jumped at the chance, only to find that there were maybe 15-20 people in that overflow and we spent the next 4 hours completing it. 4 kittening hours. I got 3 exotics, 3 rares, 2 of which I could use, and my only complaint in the whole thing is that it should scale better to smaller groups.
tl;dr – you don’t have it even remotely bad, move along and stop whining.
I said this while doing the JP and I’ll say it again, the Charr and Norn had little to no effect on me (I play Sylvari, don’t know if that matters). In the puzzle you need to be looking a fair bit further ahead than the head of that guy’s avatar, and if they’re far enough ahead of you to block your view of where you’re going then odds are you’re going too slowly anyway…
I’m going to go as far as to say that people are using it as an excuse for failing, purely because I was once in a instance of the puzzle with no Charr or Norn and, without these to complain about, people turned to things like “too many people here, I can’t see”. It’s a tough puzzle, I finally got it yesterday but failed a lot on the way – I’m just aware enough to say that I screwed up every time I failed, and I had great fun trying again and improving.
I can see why people get stressed, I can even accept that some are distracted by all the other jumping characters, but none of it is excuse enough for trying to push other players out of content they are just as entitled to play as the rest of us.
Add my vote to this, I reported on this morning and had to tag them as spamming, which I have two problems with: firstly, for me spamming is hardly even an offence, where gold selling is a serious violation of the EULA and I don’t want to see it, which means the report feels rather understated, and part of me worries that Anet get so many reports for spam for all sorts of minor and unsubstantial reasons that my report may be overlooked.
Secondly, the one I reported wasn’t actually spamming, they said it only once. Which (and I know this isn’t actually likely) makes me think of the possibility of the report being dismissed due to the fact that the player wasn’t actually guilty of the crime I reported, or even worse, making it look like I cried wolf (as I’m sure many players will for all sorts of minor and petty reasons).
So yes, any way to report them for a reason more accurate/substantial than spamming gets a thumbs up from me!
Why not just have the difficulty rampup branch out with the chain when its starting to go the other direction – such has going a step further down in difficulty everytime players lose an event, and then heads the other direction – that way the difficulty won’t be entirely removed and otherwise be pushed back from the players right away, or atleast not as easily.
So if I am understanding this it will go like this.
server reset DE set to Dif 1
win set to 2
win set to 3
….
win set to 12
lose set to 11
lose set to 10
win set to 11and so on?
See, to me this will just mean that it cycles two events rather than 1. When #1 gets to difficulty 11 where people fail, it goes back down the chain to #2 at difficulty 10 where people win, so it goes back to #1 at difficulty 11 so it goes back to #2 at 10….
If they were to implement something that works on a simple win/loss counter, I think it would have to only change difficulty at the extreme ends of the chain. ie if an event can lead to 2 different events depending whether it is won or lost then it doesn’t have any effect on difficulty. An event that can only lead to a different event if it is lost will raise the difficulty of the whole chain each time it is won, and an event that can only lead to a different event if it is won will lower the difficulty of the chain each time it is lost.
I’d still prefer something more sophisticated, but again, I imagine that the above is technically challenging enough!
While I like the idea of the OP since personally I really enjoy the interaction of the NPCs with the story of the event chain, I think there need to be more events going on in many areas of the game before it could happen. I often find myself running back to areas where I know events frequently run, just so that I can find 5 to do for my daily chest. If they’re going to be less noticable, we definitely need more of them.
Another one heading off topic, we’re good at this! So my simple reply to the OP is nope. My plea to Anet is nope. And I doubt it would be changed to work that way either – karma was put in almost purely so that Anet didn’t need to reward “those that work hardest”, because Anet want to reward everyone who has fun playing their game.
{snip}
I agree. The problem is not tagging “per se”, but bad scaling of the “time to die” of the mob. It has to be much slower with more people around.
Agreed, though this would depend on the level of damage to ‘tag’ a mob being a flat number rather than a percentage, or at the very least being a percentage that scales to number of people participating. If it taks 5% of a mobs health to tag it, only 20 people can get credit for it no matter whether they have to do 5% of 10000 or 5% of 500000.
This thread seems to have two different arguments going on, and it’s going to massively detract from getting the OP’s point across! The thread is about DEs increasing in difficulty in proportion to their success/fail rate because as things are we don’t get to see half the events in the game since we follow the same chain of success, success, success, and many DE series are actually now stuck showing only one event repeatedly, because in order to show any others that one would need to be failed.
I definitely agree with this, we shouldn’t be able to win every time, so the best idea I’ve seen is to have DE chains keep some sort of record of the success:failure ratio and vary the difficulty based on that, to ensure that when an event has been won 7 or 8 times out of 10 it gets more likely to fail, and vice versa. Of course, to me that sounds like a lot of programming, so maybe a simpler solution is to incrementally increase the health/damage/number/skills of enemies after each win, and decrease them after each loss?
Definitely agree on the scout side of things, even if I saw it the first time I hate the fact that I can never get that information again if I come back to the area. For renown hearts it’s a little more difficult, since you have already helped them; maybe implement a second dialogue to the NPCs with a little detail on what they’re doing there and maybe even how your contribution helped.
That side is a toughie, because leaving the dialogue there removes the only change that is made when you complete a heart, but removing it excludes some people from ever hearing it…
To the original point, not sure how Anet could implement a DE not contributing to hearts, given that for most of them killing a certain type of enemy adds to completion, and nearby DEs cause you to kill that type of enemy. I suppose they could flag spawns due to DE to not contribute, but that doesn’t help where the enemies are already in the world.