Even though I agree that this could easily be merged into one of the other threads on the topic, I’m glad to see these discussion continuing and reappearing from multiple people despite ongoing attempts to shame or belittle anyone that says anything about opening up difficulties for more playstyles.
It is an important topic and one that I am sure will keep coming up again and again.
It is WAY past time to split balance between the three game modes (PVE, PVP, WVW).
I know it may be a hassle for devs, but it really is the only way to ensure you don’t kill something fun/useful in one area simply to balance things out in another.
And, as MANY are saying here, if you’re going to balance, you really should start with Engineers/Scrappers in PVE.
Eh Not sure about a “story mode”
But I do feel like multiple difficulty lvls would be nice.
- Easy mode: Easier versions of what we have right now (10 man still) for people new to raids or casual people who want to see the story of the raids. (Shouldn’t give raid rewards.)
- Normal mode: what we have right now
- Hard mode: exactly what it sounds like, higher scaled difficulty, maybe add a mechanic to it if possible. (With improved rewards.)
Diffirent difficulties for diffirent people. Ofc, the higher the difficulty, the better the rewards should be.
I think this is the ideal model they will eventually shoot for – regardless of what the lower tier is called. And I do think a harder mode is needed almost as much as the easier mode. It really becomes an issue of dev resources or implementing a system that makes this more organically possible.
And agreed – rewards should be based on the effort needed.
The obvious answer is the military struggle against the risen in the base game. I think, even if you don’t look at personal story, they did a good job with building that up as we moved our way to Orr.
The second example that springs to my mind, unfortunately, would be Season One of the living story. While I understand the complaints about temporary content, I think they did a good job with that narrative in open world.
Outside of those, my favorites, that are still in the game, are the progression through Fireheart Rise, building up defenses against the Flame Legion – and supporting the Dredge rebels in southwestern Frostgorge. While both are dated and could be deeper, they were engaging the first time through and something I like to revisit from time to time.
My point is this, LFR, and Flex Raiding were both solutions that sought to bring players into raiding easily correct? A massive part of LFR and Flex Raiding, is that the actual encounters for both difficulties were passively easier than the normal mode. When you talk about implementing different difficulties, these methods were how Blizzard did it.
And they failed.
So please let us all know how exactly GW2 won’t make the same exact mistakes if they were to pursue different difficulties when based on cause and effect:
- Easier difficulties take development resources
- Easier difficulties do not adequately prepare players for harder difficulties
- Easier difficulties detract from one of the biggest merits in raiding: the First Epic Kill
- Easier difficulties divide the raiding playerbase…I’ll stop with these for now, have fun!
Because they didn’t fail.
I was raiding when the early iterations of multi mode raiding were introduced to WoW. The vast majority of negative comments, imo (and unsurprisingly), were from the groups that were just generally anti-change – a phenomenon we see a lot in gaming and MMOs. There are people who will always be against change of any kind. This was exacerbated by the chest thumping crowd, who just wanted to brag that they raided “when it was really hard” (when the reality was different – difficulties between something like KT, Lich King vs Deathwing or Ragnaros were pretty comparable).
The reality is these game modes accomplished what they were designed for in that game – they opened raids up to more people – and probably kept the game alive.
While there is some validity to the “more dev resources,” they most definitely did not split the playerbase in WOW and wouldn’t here as well. To the point about first epic kill, I can tell you that players killing Deathwing (or whatever) in LFR or easier modes had more respect for the groups achieving first hardmode kills, not less – because they had an understanding of what those mechanics might look like in harder situations.
This is something that GW2 needs to do. It opens raids up as a REAL storytelling tool, allows for multiple playstyles and gives them another way to fill the gaps between bigger open world content drops.
(edited by Blaeys.3102)
The LFR in That game literally had you specify what you were, a DPS, a Healer, or a Tank, and slotted you in a LFG automatically for that particular instance. You waited, then got notified when the raid was very close to filling up, and whammo you are all grouped together, tiny symbols of tank, healer, dps next to the corresponding pugs whom you grouped with.
You didn’t know what skill level these other people were running at, but you went through the instance anyways, the difficulty was tuned assuming this.
It took all the effort out of finding a group for raiding, the raids themselves were drastically reduced in difficulty so the players who randomly pugged with one another got a good experience “raiding” and everyone was happy…until the realization that Ghostcrawler spoke of came to light.
It took away the essence of raiding, as realizing that fighting something with trivialized mechanics diminished the effect of fighting the real thing, AND the so-called raiders who attempted to climb out of LFR did so at the expense of their fellow player. They were not adapting as intended to harder difficulties, and the encounters did not have that authenticity as finally killing the boss on its normal difficulty, as a LFR raider, did not have the same FIRST KILL experience.
The LFR raids were the easiest difficulty imaginable bent on trying to get all the players interested in raiding even a tiny bit, a space to go into. What ended up happening was the butchering of Raiding as a whole.
So please, tell us again how GW2 can possibly come up with a system as conforming and welcoming as LFR, yet still keep up the quality raiders have come to expect so far from Arenanet?
Because when the Design Lead of the ‘End of Raiding’ LFR tells you that kind of system that promotes bringing more players in was his worst kitten mistake, you god kitten know any solution similar to it will have very similar results.
The group finder in this game is very well done and doesn’t work anything like the LFR system from WoW.
The problem with the LFR system in WoW is that it throws 10 or 25 people randomly together based solely on their roles in the raid (tank, healer, dps) with no other considerations or functionality (other than a gear check, which is irrelevant to this conversation). That is the part that he probably feels takes the epic feel from raids.
Multiple difficulties exist in that game outside of LFR (they are two different concepts). Flex raiding has nothing to do with LFR. Those concepts do not suffer from the random and forced grouping that exist with the WoW LFR system. In the GW2 system, there is still a group lead that initiates the formation of a group. There is still a way to communicate group needs and see what you’re getting into before starting.
So, yes – WoW could do LFR much better (by, possibly, mirroring the group finder from GW2), but that has nothing to do with multiple difficulties or flexible group sizes. Those concepts have proven to value added in games like WoW (which is why they still exist in those games) – and they would be value additive in GW2.
The quote from the ex-WoW executive is, most likely, not applicable here (because again, it is about the LFR system – which has major disadvantages when compared to the group finder tool in GW2 – and not about the concept of multi-difficulty raids).
(edited by Blaeys.3102)
I like how people praise LFR, when even it’s creator and lead designer admits it was a flawed solution….
“To be clear, the goal of getting more players into raiding is a good one. But the way Raid Finder turned out removed, IMO anyway, a lot of the epicness of what made raiding raiding…”
Do we really need to say anything else?
Of course there is no way to tell, but I would guess that his statement is more about how the LFR tool works in WoW raids moreso than the idea of multiple difficulties (which exist outside the confines of LFR, btw). The raidfinder in that game dropped a bunch of random people together with no forethought – which isn’t how the group finder in GW2 works.
And, just as importantly, he recognizes the importance of expanding the raiding community, which is the whole point of adding multiple difficulties (which again, is separate from the LFR/group finder functionality discussion)
I really loved the WoW LFR thing. You get worse loot but still could experience the whole raid. For the people who wanted a challenge there is normal, heroic or now mythic mode. I like this solution. In my opinion – especially in WoW – it’s pointless to grind/raid 2-3 times/week only to realize that the best gear is crap a couple of months later.
Anyway, in GW2 there is the problem we don’t have different gear in the same rarity. So that means ascended always have the same stats. To solve that I’d suggest an easy mode where you get less items or lower chance for items/tokens which takes longer to get the same rewards etc.
Agreed.
It works well in WoW, as does flex raiding (apparently, from what I hear, this is VERY popular now – ironically an idea they probably borrowed from GW2) and multiple tiers.
And the reasons they would work well here are pretty much the same. It allows for greater storytelling/lore tie-ins without the worry of exclusion, it offers a wider experience for more players, it offers stepping stones for people wanting to ease into raiding, it gives guilds/friends/etc more to do together, etc.
It just makes sense.
Let’s keep irrelevant side-stories to the raids. It’s a perfect means to maybe finish some loose ends from Guild Wars 1 that are utterly unrelated to the main story in GW2.
Never should the main story require any raid to get a full understanding of.
I think they also have to be careful with anything that is heavily tied into lore from the first game. That is usually something that has mass appeal and generates excitement from multiple groups .Placing that kind of content in raids – which are admittedly designed and tuned for a smaller group – would create some justifiable ill feelings of exclusion among many players.
I hadn’t actually registered the use of the term “raiding party” as being related to raids, and instead assumed they meant like the first group on the islands. It would be pretty fabulous if we found Cami’s body at the entrance to the Door of Komalie, though, and had to bust in to stop whatever was trying to come out.
hype intensifies
And then our “friend” Lazarus will use his newfound power from the bloodstone to re-seal the gate. OR he might use it to OPEN the gate so we go inside for some other purpose. Maybe Primordus will go inside and start making Titan Destroyers to conquer Tyria. Endless possibilities
Another reason raids need multiple difficulty tiers or modes – it would allow them to incorporate content or zones (like the above examples) that tie more heavily into lore and story.
The current model doesn’t allow for this kind of thing without causing more issues than it solves.
There is a reason this topic keeps getting reposted in various forums (and then all moved to this one) – all by different people.
This is something people want – and it just makes sense.
This does need to happen, but, yes, this topic has been raised a few times.
zero need for a story mode.
do LS3 and you can get a recap. Walk into wing 3 and talk to glenna and you can get a recap. YOUTUBE still exist…..
At this point if you still truly care about the story, you’d have used any of these options.
It’s even better, because at this point you don’t even need to play ls3 either. After all, if Youtube covers all your needs…
It’s basically what you guys are asking for because it’s clearly not the gameplay your after. May as well just sit back and watch cinematics all day long.
It really isn’t.
It is possible to simply tone the mechanics down rather than completely remove or invalidate them when developing tiered difficulties. It doesn’t have to be one extreme or the other.
Oversimplification like this doesn’t really address the issue.
I am very glad to see this thread. My guess is the thread was recently moved from a different subforum, which is unfortunate. It really does make for a more lopsided opinion.
To the topic, yes, a way for more people to experience the raid content/story is definitely needed.
There are many ways this could manifest in this game -
- Actual tiered difficulties
- scalable group sizing
- Training/story motes similar to how challenge motes work now
- Opening the instances up/scaling them down in difficulty then adding them to the guild mission roster.
Some of these we see work well in other games. Some would just fit well with the current game model. And I am sure there are solutions the creative developers at Anet could come up with.
Obviously, this isn’t the first thread on the topic. This is something a decent number of players (and yes, I am guessing based on anecdotal evidence when I say that) would like to see. I have to believe this is something Anet will eventually come to realize.
Overall great update. Still needs some work to improve a few of the encounters (Sloth and Worm fights specifically are very bland).
While not technically about rising flame, another thought is that this would have been the perfect place/time to give us some new guild missions. Really seems like a neglected game mode (more than 3.5 years since the last new PVE mission).
Here is a new idea/thought -
What if, after a raid has been out for 6-8 months (or when the next one is introduced), the devs hand a project off to the guild mission team and let them use the raid instances/ bosses (with as many intact mechanics as make sense) to make new scalable guild missions out of the instance and bosses?
That way, we get a lower difficulty mode and new guild missions at the same time.
Ive always thought guild mission would be the perfect way to keep old content alive and interesting – no reason that couldn’t apply to raids as well.
This general concept has come up before, but I think the room from the Taimi’s Game story step would make a perfect addition for guild halls – a place for guilds to have fun, test builds/group comps/etc.
Unique. Engaging. Fun. I think this is definitely a home run of an update.
Only criticism I have is that there are still no new guild missions. This would have been a great place to add some new ones.
It’s hard to do PVP as a guild seeing that your party is limited to 5. The WvW ones are aimed at WvW guilds that hate pve.
What Blaeys is asking for is NEW pve content for Guild Missions. The current ones are getting stale. The same puzzles, challenges and rushes over and over again. Sure the bounties are variable, but they could add more bounties. The treks are decent, but they could add a few more points, say in the new regions.
Yea. I like that they added PVP and WVW guild missions, but for guilds that enjoy PVE content, we have been doing the same missions – every week – for 3.5 years now.
At this point, I would just like to see a dev say the word guild missions at least once to show that they are still on the radar.
It really feels like the most neglected element of the current game.
I am more than happy to let the min/max people get away from the rest of us and hang out in raids or such. Unfortunately they insist on bringing their gaming culture everywhere, like gaming missionaries forcing their ideas on everyone.
I think the opposite is also true. Players who don’t follow the meta want to enter min-max groups and thus we get threads like this one.
It is very possible (likely) that both are true -
which is exactly why game modes like raids need varied difficulty/tiered experiences where possible.
The meta is only an issue in areas where the game incorporates mechanics, most notably enrage timers and hard DPS checks, that are designed around a meta. Vary the experience for different playstyles and it becomes much less of an issue.
When people post videos of 8 for VG, 6 for gorseval, I think people misinterpret what that really represents (which we have talked about many times in these threads).
The hard core and specialized raid groups/guilds did the same thing in WoW. They microanalyze the fights/builds/stats and tailor make the smaller groups to take advantage of particular boons or aspects of the fights (same is true of the groups that do the fights with 10 eles and blast water fields). They then practice and practice until that one pull they get perfect (often for hours or months), which they then post online.
That is an admirable accomplishment, but it is in no way whatsoever representative of how the vast majority of groups approach raids – and it definitely has nothing to do with or justifies diminishing the need for a training or variable difficulty mode . Anyone who has raided in any game has seen it dozens of times and understands that simple fact.
I have talked about this exact topic and reasoning before. I understand some don’t see it the same way, but anyone that has raided hardcore in other raiding games understands it. Ive been in some of those groups that take advantage of mechanics or boons (in WoW, specifically) to do some things the developers obviously didn’t think would be possible. It is a very particular playstyle – and can be fun. But it isn’t representative of how standard raiding works or fits into a game.
Looking at those groups to justify the exclusion of easier modes is disingenuous, imo. I can see how people who haven’t seen this kind of thing in the past can connect the dots, but it really is apples and oranges.
Are you now talking about Low-Manning Stuff ( Running it with less Members than intended ) or Scaling the Boss Mechanics to the Members you have at the attempt? From what I see you are mixing both Things up. Things which are completely different.
Sorry for the confusion. I’m talking about low manning stuff as I assume that is what the previous poster was talking about.
I would like to see scaling to party size as a solution (for lower tier difficulties only), but that has nothing to do with the post I was responding to.
(edited by Blaeys.3102)
I have been very vocal about this very topic, but from a different perspective.
Personally, I feel the issue is with the limited design of the raids themselves. While I do think playing at the highest level (which does include min/maxing) should result in the highest reward, there should be a raiding experience for people like the OP who enjoy different playstyles.
To me, the answer is variable difficulties with scaling rewards, thus offering raid experiences for people with a wider range of playstyles. This isn’t unprecedented (in fact, most of the game works this way) and is something the raid developers should strongly consider.
I definitely don’t mean any personal offense. I understand that you believe the stories are 100% unrelated. I feel differently – for the reasons I have listed.
I am also willing to accept that this is a fairly subjective topic and where the acceptable line is drawn varies from person to person. That doesn’t change the fact that I (and others) do see the raid as part of the current story arc – and as a part that should have (imo) been more accessible to a greater percentage of the population. I do not see it as irrelevant.
Again, different people will have different opinions on this topic. My opinion was never meant to include all players. But this is something I feel they mishandled and, more important – something I feel will be detrimental to the game if they mishandle in the same way in the future. It doesn’t mean I’m ignoring what you believe to be true – it just means that I believe something different.
This isn’t a matter of belief, you aren’t allowed to dismiss facts as opinions. There’s a confirmed reality of the events happening in the Forsaken Thicket regardless of our intervention, there was nothing we could have done to shape the end result one way or another.
Accepting that the story can be interpreted one way or another is very similar to accepting the view that the Earth is Flat, that facts are not true. We all can ‘perceive’ the horizon and thus justify the Flat Earth reasoning, but there is overwhelming evidence that supports otherwise. It renders holding the opinion that the Earth is still flat illogical.
I am done with this particular topic at this point unless there is a clear objective point made that definitively shows the Raid is directly tied to the main story. All the points so far being made though, points that there is no direct tie-in.
You’re telling us your opinion is fact and comparing it to something that has nothing to do with it to try and justify.
Like I said, you can enjoy LS 3 without having played the raid, but it is hard to say that the two aren’t dealing with the same characters, setting and (yes) storyline. They are. The conflict with the white mantle (the NPC in bloodstone fen even calls the raid cutscene the introduction to them), the concept of drawing magic from/messing with a bloodstone (in a modern game setting), the idea of bloodstone magic corrupting people, the White Mantle trying to gain power and resurrect Mursaat – these are all things that became a part of the storyline in the raid – and were expanded upon in Living Story 3/Bloodstone Fen. You can say that isn’t true, but I (and others) believe it is. I also believe that the events in Bloodstone Fen (and LS3) are, at least in part, a result of what happened in the raid.
So yes, it is a matter of opinion – it is what I believe to be true, just as what you believe to be true is your opinion. As I said, people draw that line in different places.
I really don’t think that what we have is a sustainable model in this game.
Can I just ask how an easy mode would be sustainable? You would arguably need months more to create both systems. Not only would it set future raids back because they first need to create an easy mode for forsaken thicket, those new raids would also be double the work.
At this point with the crazy power creep in the now utterly broken dungeons and the boon and power build hate in fracs (which we’ve been doing for 4 years now btw), could you rly call a system where we get raids on an even less frequent basis in any way “sustainable”?
In an effort to get this thread back onto the actual topic, let’s backtrack to this post (which is actually really good feedback/reasoning/criticisms with no personal insults or attacks whatsoever).
If they had to make completely different versions of the raid between difficulty levels, I agree that it would take months. However, if they can develop a scaling mechanism that relies more on math than actually changing the mechanics (altering attack/health numbers, changing enrage mechanics, etc), I think the actual time needed to implement tiered difficulty would be very reasonable – and, in the process justify the implementation of difficulties far and above what we have now.
And, of course, rewards would have to scale as well – top end raiders obviously deserve greater reward.
Basically, by ensuring more accessibility, they would no longer have to worry about making them too difficult. This would be a win-win as far as I am concerned. It would address the idea of training, accessibility, making future raids too easy, etc.
And I agree with your thoughts/concerns regarding power creep in dungeons. Dungeons are not in a good place and don’t really work well/offer much of a challenge post-ascended gear. To me, that is yet another example of why a tiered scaling difficulty system is needed for raids long term. It helps alleviate stagnation of raids at both the easier and the harder levels (offering a moving target for ongoing challenge/reward levels).
And, once again – EVERYONE (me included), let’s stop talking about things that have absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand (and definitely stop with the personally directed comments/insults/etc). This conversation is going to continue – in one way or another – no matter how much some people don’t want it to or try to derail it. Let’s refocus and get back to productive dialogue.
So you are talking again about the scalling system, see what you said about “A child saying i dont wanna listen i dont wanna listen”.
There was proof and people gave example that scalling raids are really bad, you will get the option size for each boss fight. Like 8 for VG, 6 for gors… you will get kicked after a fight because for the next one, less people is better etc…
So unless you have something to bring to the table ( backed with proofs ) stop bringing the same argument that was already taken down.
When people post videos of 8 for VG, 6 for gorseval, I think people misinterpret what that really represents (which we have talked about many times in these threads).
The hard core and specialized raid groups/guilds did the same thing in WoW. They microanalyze the fights/builds/stats and tailor make the smaller groups to take advantage of particular boons or aspects of the fights (same is true of the groups that do the fights with 10 eles and blast water fields). They then practice and practice until that one pull they get perfect (often for hours or months), which they then post online.
That is an admirable accomplishment, but it is in no way whatsoever representative of how the vast majority of groups approach raids – and it definitely has nothing to do with or justifies diminishing the need for a training or variable difficulty mode . Anyone who has raided in any game has seen it dozens of times and understands that simple fact.
I have talked about this exact topic and reasoning before. I understand some don’t see it the same way, but anyone that has raided hardcore in other raiding games understands it. Ive been in some of those groups that take advantage of mechanics or boons (in WoW, specifically) to do some things the developers obviously didn’t think would be possible. It is a very particular playstyle – and can be fun. But it isn’t representative of how standard raiding works or fits into a game.
Looking at those groups to justify the exclusion of easier modes is disingenuous, imo. I can see how people who haven’t seen this kind of thing in the past can connect the dots, but it really is apples and oranges.
Not completely accurate, activities in the Bloodstone Fen were happening regardless of the circumstances in the raid, there was communication between the two groups certainly, but as you would have noticed if you played the Living Story, the White Mantle activities in the Forsaken Thicket were from the other half of the White Mantle that were trying to bring back Lazarus.
The result, whether you did the raid or did not, was the same. It is precisely why after defeating Xera, Lazarus’s condition was in question. Why do you think our characters mentioned the possibility that we killed Lazarus by interrupting Xera’s little plan? That he might have been destroyed when we beat Xera?
What it came down to, is the same result that we came into the raid to begin with, is Lazarus dead or alive? Nobody knew until the first episode, where everyone is on the same footing.
This is also why Bennett’s ‘nod’ to raiders saving him from Matthias doesn’t break the story either, if you hadn’t raided at all what you would understand from both Bennett and the notes found in the Fen was that a group of mercenaries directly interfered with the Forsaken Thicket, they promptly saved Bennett, and some of the subtle events that transpired in the raid would be left unknown. If you did raid, the same messages apply, Bennett will mention that it was you and your allies who saved him, but nothing else.
If you can’t understand why the above renders the raid for a main-story perspective utterly meaningless, I do not know what else to tell you.
The raising of these questions – the tension and mystery they create (however small) – it’s all part of the storytelling process.
Stop. There’s no questions being risen, you are not understanding me here. The raid’s story is insignificant and does not impact anything the main story that happened in the Fen. The events would have occurred even if the Forsaken Thicket never existed. That’s the difference.
Can you enjoy Season Three if you didn’t experience the raid? Of course you can. That doesn’t mean that the raid story wasn’t part of the current story arc (of course it was).
Just because you think it was doesn’t mean it actually was. Please read my post rather than quoting it.
I agree that Forsaken Thicket is a just small piece of the story, but it is still a piece (and in this instance, the first piece) of this particular story – and something that many more players would like to experience for themselves (without having to significantly change their playstyles).
I never actually agreed that Forsaken Thicket was part of the main story, it is actually side-story. An incident that occurred between the events of Mordremoth’s death and the Living Story Episode 1. Irrelevant to the main story of the direct events that happened in the Bloodstone Fen, but alluded to like a small tale.
I am starting to take a little bit of offense if you continue to ignore my points. If you want to continue the discussion at the very least argue against why you believe the Forsaken Thicket story is proven to be part of the main story even though I pointed out why it is not.
I definitely don’t mean any personal offense. I understand that you believe the stories are 100% unrelated. I feel differently – for the reasons I have listed.
I am also willing to accept that this is a fairly subjective topic and where the acceptable line is drawn varies from person to person. That doesn’t change the fact that I (and others) do see the raid as part of the current story arc – and as a part that should have (imo) been more accessible to a greater percentage of the population. I do not see it as irrelevant.
Again, different people will have different opinions on this topic. My opinion was never meant to include all players. But this is something I feel they mishandled and, more important – something I feel will be detrimental to the game if they mishandle in the same way in the future. It doesn’t mean I’m ignoring what you believe to be true – it just means that I believe something different.
I really don’t think that what we have is a sustainable model in this game.
Can I just ask how an easy mode would be sustainable? You would arguably need months more to create both systems. Not only would it set future raids back because they first need to create an easy mode for forsaken thicket, those new raids would also be double the work.
At this point with the crazy power creep in the now utterly broken dungeons and the boon and power build hate in fracs (which we’ve been doing for 4 years now btw), could you rly call a system where we get raids on an even less frequent basis in any way “sustainable”?
In an effort to get this thread back onto the actual topic, let’s backtrack to this post (which is actually really good feedback/reasoning/criticisms with no personal insults or attacks whatsoever).
If they had to make completely different versions of the raid between difficulty levels, I agree that it would take months. However, if they can develop a scaling mechanism that relies more on math than actually changing the mechanics (altering attack/health numbers, changing enrage mechanics, etc), I think the actual time needed to implement tiered difficulty would be very reasonable – and, in the process justify the implementation of difficulties far and above what we have now.
And, of course, rewards would have to scale as well – top end raiders obviously deserve greater reward.
Basically, by ensuring more accessibility, they would no longer have to worry about making them too difficult. This would be a win-win as far as I am concerned. It would address the idea of training, accessibility, making future raids too easy, etc.
And I agree with your thoughts/concerns regarding power creep in dungeons. Dungeons are not in a good place and don’t really work well/offer much of a challenge post-ascended gear. To me, that is yet another example of why a tiered scaling difficulty system is needed for raids long term. It helps alleviate stagnation of raids at both the easier and the harder levels (offering a moving target for ongoing challenge/reward levels).
And, once again – EVERYONE (me included), let’s stop talking about things that have absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand (and definitely stop with the personally directed comments/insults/etc). This conversation is going to continue – in one way or another – no matter how much some people don’t want it to or try to derail it. Let’s refocus and get back to productive dialogue.
(edited by Blaeys.3102)
Not completely accurate, activities in the Bloodstone Fen were happening regardless of the circumstances in the raid, there was communication between the two groups certainly, but as you would have noticed if you played the Living Story, the White Mantle activities in the Forsaken Thicket were from the other half of the White Mantle that were trying to bring back Lazarus.
The result, whether you did the raid or did not, was the same. It is precisely why after defeating Xera, Lazarus’s condition was in question. Why do you think our characters mentioned the possibility that we killed Lazarus by interrupting Xera’s little plan? That he might have been destroyed when we beat Xera?
What it came down to, is the same result that we came into the raid to begin with, is Lazarus dead or alive? Nobody knew until the first episode, where everyone is on the same footing.
This is also why Bennett’s ‘nod’ to raiders saving him from Matthias doesn’t break the story either, if you hadn’t raided at all what you would understand from both Bennett and the notes found in the Fen was that a group of mercenaries directly interfered with the Forsaken Thicket, they promptly saved Bennett, and some of the subtle events that transpired in the raid would be left unknown. If you did raid, the same messages apply, Bennett will mention that it was you and your allies who saved him, but nothing else.
If you can’t understand why the above renders the raid for a main-story perspective utterly meaningless, I do not know what else to tell you.
The raising of these questions – the tension and mystery they create (however small) – it’s all part of the storytelling process.
Can you enjoy Season Three if you didn’t experience the raid? Of course you can. That doesn’t mean that the raid story wasn’t part of the current story arc (of course it was).
When you give that story experience to a small percentage of players, those players who are excluded from it have every right to feel a bit left out. With one raid, it may not be as evident, but if the trend continues, I can guarantee it will be. That is exactly how you make players feel less important than others and, eventually, disenfranchised from the story the game is trying to tell.
I agree that Forsaken Thicket is a just small piece of the story, but it is still a piece (and in this instance, the first piece) of this particular story – and something that many more players would like to experience for themselves (without having to significantly change their playstyles).
Raiding in GW2 is far too exclusionary and divisive. Story is one place where this is clearly evident (imo).
(edited by Blaeys.3102)
Maybe the Raid will be inside the Foundry!
As long as they insist on the restrictive raid model they currently employ, they really need to stay away from popular lore-based landmarks/settings/scenarios – and definitely stay away from anything to do with the story the current game is trying to tell.
I realize that is an unpopular opinion among a subset of the community, but it is the situation they have created for themselves if they want to avoid alienating or frustrating a sizeable number of their players.
Why? Look at Forsaken Thicket. The raiders roleplayed as a group of mercenaries that attempted to stop Lazarus Resurrection and failed. It tied into the current Living Story without impacting the Living Story in any way. Key example of the raid impacting the Living Story: Having Lazarus the Dire as a raid boss would be a big no, no.
Why would this alienate a sizeable number of players? It does not impact new GW players, Raiders, or any player who does not care about the story of GW, which is definitely the largest subset of players in the game. Sure, it may alienate a group of GW1 lorehounds who cannot complete the raid, but that is a minority of a minority. And while they may be vocal, they have plenty of options in terms of free cleared instances, in game dialogues and story journals, and out of game youtube videos for catching up on any lore they missed in the raid.
So my point is it would not alienate players to have the raid tie in to the current direction of the Living Story as long as the raid does not impact that direction.
It was a bit more than a tie in. It was the player’s introduction to the story arc and primary antagonists.
Did we see Caudecus?
Did we see Lazarus the Dire?Were the events in Forsaken Thicket remotely related to Bloodstone Fen activity outside of the well-known use of Bloodstone by White Mantle? Were we even aware that was our next stop?
Nope. None of the things you mentioned were part of the raid story. Try again.
Many of the activities in Bloodstone Fen and Season Three were a direct result of what happened within the raid.
Even the game itself recognizes this – when you talk to the NPC in Bloodstone Fen (which you are asked to do as part of season three) and ask him to “replay” the White Mantle’s origin, he shows the cutscene from the raid.
I honestly do think the devs think this acceptable because other MMOs use raids as part of the story. However, it only works there because those raids offer multiple levels of accessibility that encompass more playstyles and skill levels. The current raiding model in GW2 definitely does not (something that needs to be fixed, imo – especially if they want to tell parts of the story through the raids).
(edited by Blaeys.3102)
Maybe the Raid will be inside the Foundry!
As long as they insist on the restrictive raid model they currently employ, they really need to stay away from popular lore-based landmarks/settings/scenarios – and definitely stay away from anything to do with the story the current game is trying to tell.
I realize that is an unpopular opinion among a subset of the community, but it is the situation they have created for themselves if they want to avoid alienating or frustrating a sizeable number of their players.
Why? Look at Forsaken Thicket. The raiders roleplayed as a group of mercenaries that attempted to stop Lazarus Resurrection and failed. It tied into the current Living Story without impacting the Living Story in any way. Key example of the raid impacting the Living Story: Having Lazarus the Dire as a raid boss would be a big no, no.
Why would this alienate a sizeable number of players? It does not impact new GW players, Raiders, or any player who does not care about the story of GW, which is definitely the largest subset of players in the game. Sure, it may alienate a group of GW1 lorehounds who cannot complete the raid, but that is a minority of a minority. And while they may be vocal, they have plenty of options in terms of free cleared instances, in game dialogues and story journals, and out of game youtube videos for catching up on any lore they missed in the raid.
So my point is it would not alienate players to have the raid tie in to the current direction of the Living Story as long as the raid does not impact that direction.
It was a bit more than a tie in. It was the player’s introduction to the story arc and primary antagonists.
Story is an important part of the GW2 experience for a lot of players (probably more than you think). Event those who say they don’t care about story would probably feel less engaged if the story wasn’t there.
If part of that story is unavailable (for whatever reason), then that is a bad design.
Other games can get away with this because they make provisions for players of many different skill levels, playstyles and interests. If Anet insists on setting raids to the side for a subset of PVEers, then they definitely should not include story that the rest of the community would find engaging or that ties in with the main story (and DEFINITELY not if it serves as the introduction of the antagonists and current story arc).
Now that the “challenging content” is here, it is time to logically expand on that content to create a system that encourages advancement, fits with the other storytelling tools in the game and opens new experiences for players with multiple playstyles and interests.
It already does all of those things. Guess we can close the thread now since the existing raid satisfies your requirements.
Your reply shows exactly why the conversation needs to continue. It is about degrees and the perspective of the player. While you find the system open and meeting the criteria I list, there are others (myself obviously among them) who do not. All of those opinions are important and of value to both the community and Anet.
Debating (calmly and respectfully) where the lines are drawn and if/how they can be improved upon is exactly why the thread should remain open and active.
I played Flex when it got released. It seemed quite good for us as the small guild we were because we could have a roster of 14 people without fearing to exclude people.
Nevertheless, iirc it was not a way to play the raid with less than 10 people but to accommodate between 10 and 30. Not meant to be a training in any kind.
Also there was rapidly a Meta for each boss in the raid based on the number of people because there were different threshold for every boss skill on its intensity (damage) or number of people affected. So it turned out to be Boss 1 should be done with 12, boss 2 with 14, boss 3 with 11….. I think it has been changed as RNG based on number of people by now.
And last but not least, it did not really help to sort out key archetypes, namely tanks and healers because boss mechanics imposed the number of tanks and total number of people the number of healer. Problem was that those two were not the easiest to be found, finding DPS is not hard. We actually had to reject players several times because we had not enough healers for the amount of people who wanted to play.So Flex did not really bring more people in the raid scene and I would not compare it to any training mode. It had some usefulness for limited roster guilds but it also created new issues we hadn’t before.
Exactly this, a flex system will just create a meta of people by boss. For example VG you will only want to do as 4 people because with 4 people you dont get the green mechanic. For X boss you want exactly Y people because any number will make it harder. And most fight will be cheated with this system as you will avoid mechanics.
So you will exclude a lot of people from groups, as you dont want to reach some threshold with number of party members( as of know even if your group can 7 man VG you will still invite 3 more people because why not?).
With the system we have now for 10 people, as proven you can do with less people its actually a really good system for not let people out.Unless you significantly reduce the rewards and use it solely for what it is intended – to “preview mechanics” and improve accessibility of raiding to the community.
It would never be intended as a replacement for the current raids.
You want to create the most toxic system ever.
You know what will happen, for VG 8 people are the meta, for gors 6.
Then you pug VG kill it and proced to gors. As gors is for 6 people, 2 people will get kicked. Really fun right?
This thread should be locked just as the other.
I do not believe it would be nearly as toxic as you try to make it sound – and definitely not as toxic as what we see with the existing raid system.
When you decrease the reward and the barrier to entry, then the meta becomes less of an issue – not more, which would be the whole point. The flex raid (or whatever system they come up with) would be the more casual raiding experience for those guilds and groups that are looking for that kind of thing (and there are plenty out there).
Again, the goal is to open the experience to more players – something that will only benefit the game and raiding as a whole (justifying more dev resources, encouraging greater interest in learning to raid, etc).
The only reason we don’t see it in the game now is because Anet wanted key words for a press release at the launch of HOT – to encourage the hardcore raiding community from other games to migrate to GW2.
I really don’t think that what we have is a sustainable model in this game.
Now that the “challenging content” is here, it is time to logically expand on that content to create a system that encourages advancement, fits with the other storytelling tools in the game and opens new experiences for players with multiple playstyles and interests.
And as a side note – the other thread was closed because a small group people there couldn’t discuss the topic in that particular thread like adults (resorting to insults, personal attacks, etc), not because the conversation was finished. This is a topic that warrants further discussion. The fact that it raises so many conflicting points of view is further proof of that, not less. To peoples’ credit, so far, this thread has been a lot more civil.
(edited by Blaeys.3102)
I played Flex when it got released. It seemed quite good for us as the small guild we were because we could have a roster of 14 people without fearing to exclude people.
Nevertheless, iirc it was not a way to play the raid with less than 10 people but to accommodate between 10 and 30. Not meant to be a training in any kind.
Also there was rapidly a Meta for each boss in the raid based on the number of people because there were different threshold for every boss skill on its intensity (damage) or number of people affected. So it turned out to be Boss 1 should be done with 12, boss 2 with 14, boss 3 with 11….. I think it has been changed as RNG based on number of people by now.
And last but not least, it did not really help to sort out key archetypes, namely tanks and healers because boss mechanics imposed the number of tanks and total number of people the number of healer. Problem was that those two were not the easiest to be found, finding DPS is not hard. We actually had to reject players several times because we had not enough healers for the amount of people who wanted to play.So Flex did not really bring more people in the raid scene and I would not compare it to any training mode. It had some usefulness for limited roster guilds but it also created new issues we hadn’t before.
Exactly this, a flex system will just create a meta of people by boss. For example VG you will only want to do as 4 people because with 4 people you dont get the green mechanic. For X boss you want exactly Y people because any number will make it harder. And most fight will be cheated with this system as you will avoid mechanics.
So you will exclude a lot of people from groups, as you dont want to reach some threshold with number of party members( as of know even if your group can 7 man VG you will still invite 3 more people because why not?).
With the system we have now for 10 people, as proven you can do with less people its actually a really good system for not let people out.
Unless you significantly reduce the rewards and use it solely for what it is intended – to “preview mechanics” and improve accessibility of raiding to the community.
It would never be intended as a replacement for the current raids.
I quit WOW well before Flex raiding was introduced, but my friends still playing that game tell me it is awesome – not so much for pugs (where most of the hate online is coming from – but again, LFR raids are really for pugs there), but definitely for guilds looking to do training or conduct more casual raids with more diverse groups of players.
This is obviously a concept inspired by GW2 in WoW. Seems like it would work very well in GW2.
Maybe the Raid will be inside the Foundry!
As long as they insist on the restrictive raid model they currently employ, they really need to stay away from popular lore-based landmarks/settings/scenarios – and definitely stay away from anything to do with the story the current game is trying to tell.
I realize that is an unpopular opinion among a subset of the community, but it is the situation they have created for themselves if they want to avoid alienating or frustrating a sizeable number of their players.
Now the ArenaNet representative is telling to use a VPN – and in the same sentence telling me doing so may result in a “false flag” ban from the game.
I have no idea how VPNs works – and am skeptical of any “solution” that costs me a monthly fee (and might result in an account ban).
I have no idea what I should be doing.
Your ISP is wrong. They do have some control over the route your internet takes to Anet servers in Texas. If you played any other games in Texas you would have the same exact issue. Your ISP uses that node owner when going to Texas just like mine used mostly Comcast nodes. Anet has no control over how you get connected to their servers except for the last hop. Your ISP is very unlikely to change their route which is why Anet is telling you to use a VPN which will change your route.
I’m getting that feeling. I invested in VPN software, but it really hasn’t resolved the issue.
I’m starting to think there may be no real solution to the problem.
Now the ArenaNet representative is telling to use a VPN – and in the same sentence telling me doing so may result in a “false flag” ban from the game.
I have no idea how VPNs works – and am skeptical of any “solution” that costs me a monthly fee (and might result in an account ban).
I have no idea what I should be doing.
Here is the “adventure” I have been on the past few days.
After submitting a ticket to Anet due to the skill lag, they had me run three different tests – the one listed on the support section of this site, then “gameadvisor” – a software download that does a traceroute and finally a WinMTR test.
Based on the WinMTR, they first told me it might be my wireless router, which I bypassed immediately afterward. The problem got worse. Since then I have been asked to run 3 additional WinMTR and one more “gameadvisor” traceroutes.
Then they told me to contact my ISP – that the issue was there. I called my ISP this morning and shared the WinMTR reports. They took ONE look and told me the issue was not with my ISP but with an interim step in the path (64.53.15.117 , which is apparently Spirit Telecomm). They told me that since this isn’t part of their company, they probably wont be able to do anything (but to their credit, they are looking into it).
They told me the software chooses the path. I have now communicated that back to the Anet reps trying to help me and am awaiting yet another response.
I feel stuck in the middle here. Someone has to be able to fix this and both sides are telling me the other is responsible. All I know for sure is that all of the people I am actually giving (have given) money too are telling me they can’t do anything. I tend to believe that, if the software controls the route, then the software developer should be responsible for fixing the issue (by changing the route if needed). The fact that GW2 appears to be the only game affected by this backs that up.
However, I’m also willing to admit I am not technically knowledgeable about any of this. I just want someone to help.
The game is pretty much unplayable for me tonight. In the past 24 hours, I have run four WinMTR reports at Anet’s request, as well as two additional tests they asked for, communicated with two service reps – one of whom told me to bypass my wireless router, which I did (but the issue has only gotten worse).
I’m at a loss. The game is close to broken for me because of this. I have no idea what is going on.
Simply saying ‘It will generate interest’ or ‘It will increase those numbers raiding’ are not good enough reasons to hijack the purpose of raiding as a whole in this game.
No one wants to hijack anything.
It is very much about ensuring the health of raids for years to come. Like you said, there is a gear/level treadmill in WoW that eventually causes raids to fall behind. But there is a time toward the end of each expansion that more casual players can experience the raids (not LFG) due to the gear transitions. That is by design because developers realize there is a need for that – for both story progression and general content reasons.
There is no gear treadmill in GW2 (and hopefully never will be). While that alleviates many issues when compared to a game like WoW, it creates others. Less hardcore players will always be a step behind the hardcore raiders – and there will always be an experience just out of their reach. While I agree that the upper level rewards and satisfaction of beating an encounter at the highest level remain important concepts, I also believe there needs to be an intermediate step for those players to experience the raids – both for story and to enjoy the content. Without that, you risk alienating large groups of people, disenfranchising them from the story (however thin the connection) and making them feel like they are somehow less important to the makers of the game.
For all of those reasons, there needs to be some kind of variable difficulty built into the raid experience in GW2. Other games realized this – even ones that started off with the “go hardcore or go home” approach to raids. It will happen in GW2 eventually. Doing it now – and building into the system – ensures that it will have a minimal impact on the hardcore experience so many people wish to retain.
I asked this same question almost a year ago here -
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/hot/Wrapping-Up-Guild-Week-on-Guild-Chat/first
and the following answer was provided during day four of “guild week” by one of the developers:
https://youtu.be/W1WBYEfJVb4?t=334
(including the phrase “I’m excited to see what the guild team will do with that in the future”)
http://dulfy.net/2015/10/02/gw2-guild-week-day-4-livestream-qa/
This really seems like one area they haven’t touched in a really really long time. Should we consider guild missions as no longer part of the update plans? Is it something that has just slipped through the cracks?
I know they have a policy of not talking about future plans, and most of the time, I think that is a good policy.
But something that hasn’t been touched in 3+ years (the last missions were added on May 28th, 2013 (https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Last_Stand_at_Southsun) other than an interface overhaul that didn’t add anything new content-wise – and hasn’t been discussed other than 4 words almost a year ago – raises concerns.
At least let us know they are still on the radar (or not, if that is the case). Believe it or not, this is still content many people care about.
As an FYI, people keep bringing up LFR as if it somehow resolved all easy-mode solutions, the mechanics of the fights are actually ignored outright. For instance raid boss attacks that would normally force a tank swap in the normal encounter are negligible in the LFR version. And players in there are woefully unprepared for the actual normal difficulty encounters, it’s just a loot fiesta under the pretext of being raiding. You can agree that if that sort of solution was implemented in GW2 would be counter-productive no?
I don’t really see people pointing to LFR as a viable example of what this thread is about – and I am definitely not talking about adding something like LFR raids from WoW – that would be too watered down for GW2. Mechanics would still need to be part of the fight.
I would look at something like the OPs example of scaling the fights down to 5 people or the example I used in another thread (remove enrage and heavy dps reliant mechanics, then add a bronze, silver, gold reward system). It’s also likely that neither of these is the right solution. Anet is good at innovation and moving away from the MMO norm. Surely they could come up with a unique solution that rivals anything we could dream up here.
Now, if they did come up with an easily scalable system, I could see something faceroll being part of it solely for the very casual players, but that isn’t really what this thread is about.
That’s the issue though Blaeys. You acknowledge that we can’t have something like the LFR system WoW put into place, yet the ‘scalable’ raid difficulty you speak of needs to accommodate even players running around in their most comfortable armor and stats, regardless of what they be. That’s what is making this so painful, you are effectively telling Arenanet to come up with a difficulty setting that doesn’t trivialize the mechanics too much, yet allows anyone running their most comfortable gear and traits and builds, form up a 10 or maybe even a 5 man setting, and still do this mode and learn about what it will take to do the normal mode.
I don’t mean to insult the devs here, they have done a fantastic job with the first iteration of raiding with the first raid ever in GW2. But what you ask of them is something so insanely improbable on so many factors from not just what the players might be utilizing but what the boss is supposed to do, that it’s not just a matter of toning down the numbers it is ‘Can this easy-mode sustain itself’.
Rather than go through the dozen or so metrics I myself can conceive would make this easy-mode problematic, why not consider the option of having raid wings have paths as suggested and populate them with varied encounters of different difficulties? The easy-mode trio would be the same as the normal-mode trio, however the normal path would adjust for more bosses, which are significantly harder than previously.
Honestly, the best advice I would say to the devs is to truly make the encounters get progressively harder. Spirit Vale and Stronghold of the Faithful do this, Salvation Pass somehow has Slothasor before Trio…who knows why?
I didn’t say we couldn’t have it. I said it really doesn’t address the OP’s issue. In reality, something like LFR would probably work well – just not as a training mode. It would work to address the accessibility issue for more casual players. I just think more would probably be needed.
The issue with raids in their current form, imo, really is that they discourage playstyle diversity. Multiple or flexible difficulties would address that – while still retaining the higher end challenges.
And it is definitely not as problematic as you imply. Other raiding games do this very well. My understanding is that WoW has even implemented flex raiding that scales to party size now – and from what friends tell me, it is easier without being faceroll.
There are several ways they could go about this. They could implement variable paths the way other games do. They could implement training motes that tone down damage and stats. They could allow groups of more than 10 to enter the instance, giving players control over how easy they want to make it. They could scale the bosses down for 5 man parties as the OP recommends. They could remove the enrage/heavy dps requirements (allowing for players to create their own “easy mode” through survivability armor). Or they could come up with something creative we haven’t thought of.
There is definitely precedent – both in other games (I think WoW has 4 or five difficulty levels now, as an example) and in GW2 (fractal levels). Yes, these would take developer resources. Without knowing what those requirement might be, I can only say I think it would be worth it – and I’m positive it would be good for the game – and for raiding.
(edited by Blaeys.3102)
As an FYI, people keep bringing up LFR as if it somehow resolved all easy-mode solutions, the mechanics of the fights are actually ignored outright. For instance raid boss attacks that would normally force a tank swap in the normal encounter are negligible in the LFR version. And players in there are woefully unprepared for the actual normal difficulty encounters, it’s just a loot fiesta under the pretext of being raiding. You can agree that if that sort of solution was implemented in GW2 would be counter-productive no?
I don’t really see people pointing to LFR as a viable example of what this thread is about – and I am definitely not talking about adding something like LFR raids from WoW – that would be too watered down for GW2. Mechanics would still need to be part of the fight.
I would look at something like the OPs example of scaling the fights down to 5 people or the example I used in another thread (remove enrage and heavy dps reliant mechanics, then add a bronze, silver, gold reward system). It’s also likely that neither of these is the right solution. Anet is good at innovation and moving away from the MMO norm. Surely they could come up with a unique solution that rivals anything we could dream up here.
Now, if they did come up with an easily scalable system, I could see something faceroll being part of it solely for the very casual players, but that isn’t really what this thread is about.
(edited by Blaeys.3102)
Just as an FYI.
Before the other thread was closed, a new poster created a really interesting take on what I believe is a more sensible solution and middleground: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/dungeons/Different-Raid-Difficulty-Would-Satisfy-Most/page/17#post6319985
The merit of the proposal which consists of a few posts is that maybe not for Forsaken Thicket, but future raids could deliver different ‘paths’ in the same instance that have different encounters. One path might be strictly easy bosses in other words.
This is actually not a bad idea.
This would be a step in the right direction (and is definitely a good sign in that people are willing to consider compromise).
I worry that this might actually take more work than implementing a true tiered difficulty system, though, due to new character models, mechanic designs, etc. It is something worth considering, however. Depending on how the developers did it, it might be the right level of compromise for all involved (only the developers have insight into how it might work).
I think raid one was a good start, but it was far from what it needs to be. With a little creativity and effort, I think they can develop a raid that meets the playstyles of multiple groups without watering down the challenge they are trying to provide. Anet is known for innovative solutions (this game is built on many of them). It’s time to use that creativity and innovation in moving raids to the next step (which, imo, has to be more inclusive).
Here we go again…
If you are practicing against a version of a boss with detoothed mechanics, you are not practicing against the boss. You have no way of knowing which mechanics are important on a detoothed boss.
Why do you need a special practice mode when you can just practice in the existing raid mode?
I actually talked about the reasoning a few posts higher – https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/dungeons/Practice-Raid-mode/first#post6320834
The OP has also made a few strong points supporting this.
For me, though, the reason extends beyond just allowing for training, however. It is also about bringing new blood into the game mode to justify continued resource investment, build up more people to play with (at all levels) and just plain give more people something fun to do.
It has been more than 3 years since the last new guild missions were added to the game.
It really seems like Anet is getting its stride back. Is there ANY chance that might include something new for guild missions?
To implement a practice mode almost one year after release of wing 1 would be a farce and absurd.
Not at all if the goal is to encourage greater interest in raiding and extend the experience to a larger audience. Not really a unique idea or practice either.
I agree that the best step might be to actually start with the next raid though. Going in with the practice and system would likely be easier than retrofitting one.
The real question is : What is so difficult in the raid right now that needs an extra mode to overcome?
I mean the encounters are already ramping up in term of difficulty during the phases so normally once you get the basic mechanics of P1, you jump to P2 and learn the new added mechanics and so on.
Why have an easy mode to learn P3 if one is not able to go past P1?Let’s go scientific!
- Link to Survey made by Mind101 reddit user;
https://www.reddit.com/r/Guildwars2/comments/4nvt7z/results_raiding_in_guildwars2_a_survey_on_your/I’m going to copy and paste his highlights of the survey;
What has kept people from trying out raids:
I have no GW2 raiding experience, and despite having the right ascended gear for it, people refuse to bring me along and I don’t get access/invited to guilds that do or might do learning parties.
It sounds like (from posts on places like Reddit) Raids require top-notch skill and equipment, and you are considered a hindrance if you don’t have both. That’s a bit intimidating…
I’m a casual, guildless player who doesn’t play often, and more importantly not regularly (maybe twice a month, when i can?). I wasn’t there at the beginning, and now, if I try to join a group, i can only try find pugs who are training for the raid. Those groups never fill. The other option is to join an “experienced group”, well, I’m not experienced, that would be a lack of respect for the other party if i were to join such a group.Why people stopped raiding:
The gameplay is not fun at all since most of the time, you don’t even know what’s healing you or where damage comes from. You barely even have to dodge in order to survive. Raids in general don’t take advantage of GW2’s combat system in order to create fun, engaging gameplay. There are pretty much no exciting moments during a boss fight, so I tend to fall asleep before the boss is even finished.
Bored of looking for a guild that I both have fun with and can raid with. I hate corner staking and skipping mobs in instances, finding such a guild not disgusted by raid is a bit hard.
Not out of choice – most of my friends quit the game due to the state of things and time differences are hard. I’’d love to get into it but am worried if I don’t have the ‘right’ gear or knowledge that I’ll be kicked from squad. Worried about the opinions of 9 other players and not letting the team down.From that survey we can see that players that are willing to raid feel their lack of raid exp, general lack of coordination and know-how in pug groups are putting them off from actively participating in raids. Therefore, it might be a good idea to have some system in place for those new players to practice boss mechanic and improve raid coordination.
I think this is very important – and telling, especially since the information comes from a source other than the raiding subforum (which has always, understandably, been a little lopsided).
I think some people are worried that any changes would mean they will lose their challenging content.
That simply doesn’t have to be the case. The OP’s idea is about generating more interest in raiding – to ensure the game mode remains healthy and actually warrants continued long term development support.
Yes, the current raids are starting to get stale for a lot of raiders. That isn’t going to get better anytime soon. Unlike games like WoW where raids are the primary focus at end game, raids are just a small part of the GW2 developers endgame efforts (and will likely take a back seat to things like fractals and open world moving forward).
Long term, the only thing that will keep them alive is community support for the game mode – and that means getting more people involved in them. It can’t be the special club for a small group and expect to warrant large scale support.
training and encouraging them to move on to harder content
This is what their fractal rebalance project is trying to do.
There will always be a reticence to jump from fractals to raids because raids define difficulty differently than fractals do (for example, no enrage timers or hard tanking requirements in fractals – among a range of other differences), so, while that system will help people move from Tier 1 to Tier 4 fractals, it doesn’t really apply to raids. They remain two separate game modes played differently.
Fractals are actually a good model for them to emulate in raids (just not the agony part, of course). Tiered content is played at all tiers (as seen in fractals and other games) and can be used to train encourage interest in higher difficulty versions within the same game mode.
Additionally, the change to fractals really doesn’t address the OP’s issue regarding training on specific bosses to learn/experience the mechanics in a stepping stone style of progression.
If you think things like Swamp T4 doesnt prepare people to raids,then easy mode raid will be even worst, it will not prepare people, and will make people create bad habits on raids. T4 hard fractals is the best thing as stepping stone/training, not easier/ignorable easy mode raids mechanics.
The issue with fractals has nothing to do with difficulty. It has to do with mechanics. Fractals and raids are completely separate game modes imo.
And I disagree that a tiered system would instill bad habits. There are many ways to learn. Incremental experiential learning works exactly like the OP discusses – it teaches the mechanics and then asks you to up your game at the next level (this is the one thing the raiding system could take from fractals).
Alternatively, the current system requires repeated failure to encourage improvement. While that system can be effective, it also results in attrition as many people just get frustrated and move on to other things (which isn’t good for the future of raids).
The idea that a tiered system will instill bad habits is provably false, as it is a system used successfully, not only in other games (as well as this one in fractals), but in many real life examples as well.
Anectodal evidence also shows that lower tiers would be replayed, just as Tier 1 fractals and lower tier raids in other games remain popular even as the top ends of those content flourish.
(edited by Blaeys.3102)
training and encouraging them to move on to harder content
This is what their fractal rebalance project is trying to do.
There will always be a reticence to jump from fractals to raids because raids define difficulty differently than fractals do (for example, no enrage timers or hard tanking requirements in fractals – among a range of other differences), so, while that system will help people move from Tier 1 to Tier 4 fractals, it doesn’t really apply to raids. They remain two separate game modes played differently.
Fractals are actually a good model for them to emulate in raids (just not the agony part, of course). Tiered content is played at all tiers (as seen in fractals and other games) and can be used to train encourage interest in higher difficulty versions within the same game mode.
Additionally, the change to fractals really doesn’t address the OP’s issue regarding training on specific bosses to learn/experience the mechanics in a stepping stone style of progression.
(edited by Blaeys.3102)