We have detected that cookies are not enabled on your browser. Please enable cookies to ensure the proper experience.
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 118
  1. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by MaxDetroit View Post
    This is what I doubt.
    Most statistics are not that advanced that they create player-profiles and look at them individualy.
    Sadly, that is not the case. Trust me, if you have a bad analyst, this guy can ruin your game.
    I don't disagree with you that statistics can be used to justify just about any conclusion depending on what you gather, what you use, and what you leave out.

    But I think what's missing here is realizing that the Turbine devs don't operate in a vacuum. If I understand what they've been telling us for years, they play the game, they belong to kinships, they have friends and family who play. That means they get feedback in addition to any metrics that they run. I do assume they get some "directives" based on marketing and profitability, but I also assume they can be assertive with their own beliefs too. So I can't imagine this company basing all their decisions - or even the vast majority of them - on metrics alone. I would more assume that if they're getting feedback (from playing, from their contacts, from these forums, from player sites, etc) they'll compare that with metrics and see if each bears out the other.

  2. #27
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    872
    Quote Originally Posted by Brodrick View Post
    So everyone else be damned? I think there is a middle ground that would make most people happy....
    Very happy for a middle ground, if Turbine decide to produce an instance a month that's all good too, still doesn't affect me. Still won't be running them.
    Just because I don't run them doesn't mean I don't want them to be available. Another oft-stated fallacy.

  3. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by Silverbullets View Post
    Hello, everyone.

    As the title implies, I am a VERY casual player. Supposedly, I belong to the demographic that Turbine has been more and more targeting over the years.

    What disturbs me is Turbine's misconception of what a casual player is. Apparently, they think a casual player is a hermit who hates people and wants to pay, pay, pay to play solo in a massively multiplayer online game. Where they got this bizarre idea, I don't know.
    They might have gotten that idea from me, since I hate having to play in groups and love seeing their incredible game world while avoiding as much group content as possible. The only thing that got me interested in skirmishes at all was the Skirmish Crafting Vendor. Of course, I get the discounted full year pass every year, instead of pay pay paying per month, so I don't know where they got the idea that people like me want "to pay, pay, pay".

  4. #29
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Santa Fe, NM
    Posts
    38
    I agree with the OP. It's harder and harder for me to find time to play any game in group content that will require 3+ hours of being at the computer the whole time. This is precisely the reason I keep returning to LotRO the ease of playability as a mainly solo player. Although there are times where I can dedicate 3+ hours to doing group content/raiding and it would be nice to have that option but for the majority of the time I am a lone-wolf.

    Turbine should find that balance and keep everyone happy. (In a perfect world.)
    Zoofro Fireloins - Level 85 Dwarf Hunter (Active) - Landroval
    Zoofro Healfro - Level 64 Dwarf Runekeeper (Inactive) - Brandywine

  5. #30
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    12,677
    Quote Originally Posted by Grimdi View Post
    The problem with this type of data is how you interpret it:
    Quote Originally Posted by MaxDetroit View Post
    Then, here, you describe exactly what is in my opinion the biggest problem with collecting player data and interpretation.
    I agree that data alone cannot answer these questions, but they also get lots of feedback from people on forums, in their NDA programs, etc.

    And none of that invalidates data which says things like "~10% of active players raid regularly". (Don't get all wound up about the exact number... it's somewhere in that ballpark, based on statements Sapience has made). That particular piece of data is fairly unambiguous, because a high majority of players obviously aren't soloing to prepare for "the good stuff", as you put it. They're just soloing. Or maybe duoing, or 3-mans, or instances now and again. And have been for a long time.

    As I've said many times before, I don't think any of that means that they should stop doing any raids. However, the economics there aren't great - you have a smallish minority of players consuming what's far and away the most expensive content to create, and some of them are further demanding that they should have exclusive itemization besides (which adds to the cost, and annoys many non-raiders). That probably means they'll do fewer of them.

    What to do? I think "Epic Battles" is their response to that set of facts... they're trying to include a much broader set of players in the "endgame". Yes, it will still cost a lot to produce such content, but at least far more people will actually use it. Or at least that's the theory - if that turns out to be incorrect, they'll have to make further adjustments.

    Khafar

  6. #31
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,129
    Quote Originally Posted by Khafar View Post

    And none of that invalidates data which says things like "~10% of active players raid regularly". (Don't get all wound up about the exact number... it's somewhere in that ballpark, based on statements Sapience has made). That particular piece of data is fairly unambiguous, because a high majority of players obviously aren't soloing to prepare for "the good stuff", as you put it. They're just soloing. Or maybe duoing, or 3-mans, or instances now and again. And have been for a long time.



    What to do? I think "Epic Battles" is their response to that set of facts... they're trying to include a much broader set of players in the "endgame". Yes, it will still cost a lot to produce such content, but at least far more people will actually use it. Or at least that's the theory - if that turns out to be incorrect, they'll have to make further adjustments.

    Khafar
    Please make source of that statistics, raiders are definetly more than 10% population like your saying?

    First, Epic Battles promise to be the bridge between solo and raiders, because you can solo it. or group for more objectives.

    Seems to me that group-content is fine, the problem is that it doesn't come out as fast as people would like, possibly making older instances just grind material. My solution is to focus on group content for kinships and rewards for solo, let players get rewards for raids (EPIC GEAR) while doing some objectives for their Kinship like getting perks for everyone to use (Kinship Crafting Materials, Gems, bigger Vaults, etc).

    People like to interact mostly with their kinship, they group rarely and only if they need to.

    By focusing in kinships, people would raid more, even more with epic battles.

  7. #32
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    12,677
    Quote Originally Posted by Al. View Post
    Please make source of that statistics, raiders are definetly more than 10% population like your saying?
    Actually, it was Sapience, who would have access to Turbine's numbers. What he actually said was that PvMP participants were in the "single digits" as a percentage of their active players, and later... that raiders were in that same range. So it could be even less than 10%, or perhaps somewhat more. But like I said - in the ballpark.

    Agreed with some of the rest of what you said - they're doing Epic Battles to try and include more players on their most expensive content. Not only solo/duo (which is far and away the largest subgroup), but even players who don't have any characters at the actual endgame yet. All of that will encourage a broader group to buy the expansion, and to participate in Epic Battles.

    I disagree with the rewards, though. People who go for higher scores and more objectives should get bigger rewards - perhaps more of some type of barter so they can buy the best stuff earlier than anyone else. Not exclusive, however. That's just going to tick off many of the very people they're trying to include. What can be bought should vary based on level (so a level 20 player can buy awesome level 20 stuff, not awesome level 95 stuff), but not on group size.

    Khafar

  8. #33
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,129
    Ok, I get that, yes some groups like rewards faster and should be able to, but also everyone else should be able to get things for the whole kinship not depending on lvl or skill, like buffs for a next try or something on those lines.

    Kinships/Groups should be rewarded by things for group use, also things for solo. At this point there isn't an incentive for a good group tactic besides solo rewards.

    If that incentive existed, Groups would become more important and try to do it better in next round focusing on teamwork, that could make LOTRO long lasting.

  9. #34
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,456
    Quote Originally Posted by mjk47 View Post
    But the key thing is that you spent 40% of your time grouped in either instances or raids. That makes you count heavily towards the raiding end of the spectrum.

    The big difference is between you and the person who played the whole 20 hours solo and never grouped, and did the same the week before, and the week before that, etc.

    Your play record is very different to the solo players, and Turbine will see that and understand where to count you in the statistics.
    I think the problem here is that a bean counter far away from the game may not realize that those 4 hours of raiding is what drives the other 20 hours of soloing. Remove those 4 hours and you loose another 20 in the bargain. I work the same way. When I cannot raid on a regular basis I tend to log on less often and my sessions in-game are shorter. There's a direct, almost 1:1 link between how much I raid and how much money I spend in the store.

    There is also another factor that bean counters probably don't think about and that's the "hive mind" of the game. How did I (we) manage to down Saruman T2C on-level? I (we) learned from others and figured out some for myself. How did I learn how to heal/DPS? I learned from those who were more experienced than me. How did they get more experienced? By running difficult group content.

    If we remove difficult group content from the game we'll see the early adopters move on. The early adopters are those who figure out how to make classes really work and they show/inspire other to get better. (There will still be some players who are driven to get better but they'll be far fewer) If no-one gets better we'll end up in a situation where people believe it should be possible to clear a "raid" using auto-attack only. (Don't believe me? Go do LFR/LFD in WoW...)

    Experience (about some things in the game) flow from those who are heavy into raiding/grouping down to those who dabble in grouping down to those who solo. Remove the source in that chain and the waterfall of knowledge dries up. A player who only plays solo is highly unlikely to be a good tank or a good healer simply because they're not exposed to that kind of game-play. How should that player become a good healer/tank? Well... By grouping with those who can teach or by reading how-tos written by those with experience. And there's always the down and dirty do-it-until-you-learn strategy but few people have thick enough skin for that. If they have they would already be grouping from level 20...

    No, I don't believe that all knowledge comes from raiders but I do believe that raiders and those heavy into group play are the ones that teach solo:ers how to play. It's like believing that the undergraduate education system will maintain it's competence even if we remove all higher education institutions. Sure, some will be self taught but not the masses.

    Maybe I'm arrogant in stating this but all my experience from both lotro and wow tells me it's 100% true. I've gotten to where I am because I've had experienced players around me who could teach me when I needed help.
    [I]A small cog in a big machine.
    [/I]
    Life has no "Undo" button, only "I'm sorry". Thinking before doing is a good thing.

  10. #35
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Pacific Northwest
    Posts
    4,363
    Quote Originally Posted by Khafar View Post
    Agreed with some of the rest of what you said - they're doing Epic Battles to try and include more players on their most expensive content. Not only solo/duo (which is far and away the largest subgroup), but even players who don't have any characters at the actual endgame yet. All of that will encourage a broader group to buy the expansion, and to participate in Epic Battles.
    Khafar
    Eredor was a disappointment where their raids were concerned. Turbine's reward system was a disappointment in scaled content as well, so raiders didn't really have a reason to go back there either. Without an instance cluster or traditional raid being released during Helm's Deep, which they have already stated they are not going to do, we are left with only one form of grouping - Epic Battles. Unless it plays out with interesting mechanics, challenge and reward I don't see it appealing to the crowd that likes raiding and instances.

    It's like when they added skirmishes or Mounted Combat. I never liked either and they didn't encourage me to play or participate in something I dislike overall. I do them when I have to, they're not why I play. At this point there's no assurance to me Epic Battles will satisfy my desire to raid.

    When I think of endgame content I also don't think of all levels of characters from 10 on up. I am not sure that you can put complicated and interesting mechanics in a battle that will be easy enough for a level 10 and satisfying for a level 95. Personally it feels like Turbine is appealing to newer, more transient players, not their established player base that have been here for the long haul. I hope I'm wrong.
    I'd explain it to you, but I'm all out of Puppets and Crayons.
    ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
    GLADDEN SERVER
    Moochy, 105 Minstrel R10

  11. #36
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    316
    Quote Originally Posted by Beaniemooch View Post

    When I think of endgame content I also don't think of all levels of characters from 10 on up. I am not sure that you can put complicated and interesting mechanics in a battle that will be easy enough for a level 10 and satisfying for a level 95. Personally it feels like Turbine is appealing to newer, more transient players, not their established player base that have been here for the long haul. I hope I'm wrong.
    I think part of Turbine's decision to allow upscaled players was also influenced by the brutal fact that a lot of raiders (and players, in general) have already jumped ship and moved onto other games. In Helm's Deep, endgamers will no longer be stuck with picking from a pool of endgame players, but they will now be picking from a much larger pool of level 10 and above. Supposedly, per Sapience, the raiding community is less than 10% of the total player population, so losing any raiders at all is already putting a damper on the ability to form raids on some servers.

  12. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by whheydt View Post
    Well, let's see... I defended the existence of group content, at least mildly. I opposed unnecessary "solo only" content. Perhaps you want me to threaten to hold my breath until I turn blue in support of "end game group content in the form of traditional raids"? Sorry, I'm just not that sort of fanatic.

    In order to speak of "screwed up classes" or "no good group based end game" in HD, one would have to be in the beta program and if one were to be in the beta program, one would be forbidden to discuss what is there. So...on what are you drawing those conclusions?

    And he's off again....For someone who claims not to be a 'fanatic' you're certainly fanatical on this subject! Please don't make out this to be a casual response of yours, and by that I mean your continued banging the solo-content-drum and putting the boot into posts that promote the need for more group content. We know your feelings well enough on raiding and group content because you are right in there every thread I see on the subject.

    How many times have you used Sapience's post on raider numbers to justify your point now? These figures have been put out there to justify the lack of group content development, when we all know the reason is that raids & instances cost more money and Turbine is cutting back.

  13. #38
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    3,437
    Pretty decent explanation, OP. I started playing LOTRO because of the lifetime account option and Turbine's ability to cater to multiple play styles. Without BOTH of those, I would have never installed the game. I'm 99% "casual" in terms of how I enjoy my gametime... seeing the "grouping" changes over the last 2 years has been very sad to watch.

    there is a disconnect when they see people choosing the quick/easy path and assume that means people don't like to group. There is a disconnect when they release an unfinished instance finder that actually has fewer features than we previously had, cementing people into the logic that it needs to be avoided. There is a disconnect when they think that "GAMERS" (not soloers or raiders, but GAMERS) want to spin a wheel to win prizes in Middle Earth instead of conquer challenging content to win instead. There is a disconnect when instances take months/years to fix major bugs. There is a disconnect when they provide multiple, stacking xp boosts at will and yet the disabler is a store exclusive that is bound per toon. Not sure if I should mention Hytbold/Wildermore where rewards are calendar based...

    However, I've seen a few positive, forward moving decisions recently, and am hopeful that they can see these disconnects and correct them over time. the core game is still quite good. The gimmicks around that gameplay are less than impressive.

  14. #39
    Quote Originally Posted by whheydt View Post
    You have mistaken "multiplayer" for "MUST group".
    The OP wasn't saying that players MUST GROUP. He was saying that in an MMO it's usual for there to be content developed for players who WANT to group. LOTRO has in the past supported both and all players are solo players too. Is it unreasonable to expect group content to be developed in an MMO?

    I enjoy 'Hermit Style' myself sometimes...I also own Skyrim which is great for this. I have played LOTRO for the last 6 years to not only enjoy wandering Middle Earth, but also to enjoy a challenging group experience.


    Quote Originally Posted by whheydt View Post
    And, indeed, the shift to more solo/soloable content was driven by *player* demand, not Turbine's desires.
    Do you really believe this? Turbine desires to bring costs down in an MMO that has seen it's best days. Lotro has become a shop for RPers to buy the latest in Middle Earth fashion and for people to fritter away their money on gumf. This means less cost for Turbine and there's a lot less risk, work & investment in it for them than developing instances & raids.

    Yes, Turbine said that players asked for more soloable content, but where have they stated that players have said this should come at the expense of group content?

    Quote Originally Posted by whheydt View Post
    I am not opposed to group content. In fact, I'm all for group content.
    Your posting history suggests otherwise.

    Quote Originally Posted by whheydt View Post
    The constraint on it needs to be that it doesn't lock soloers out of character or story line advancement. The group instances in the Epic Quest had problems that way, and since those quests are more or less the "backbone" on which LotRO is hung (beyond the main plot elements of LotR), that was a serious problem.
    I agree and now the entire Epic storyline is solable, and rightly so...but this is off the point. Lame group content is now the order of the day and it's been developed to let everyone 'win'.



    Quote Originally Posted by whheydt View Post
    I think you will find that there are very, very few people that are actually against Turbine adding more group content.
    To reference a previous thread where you asked for specifics, can you define very, very few people? I know that there has been a visible negative impact on raiding numbers on Laurelin and also on the chat channels over the last year, so there are certainly fewer people now, because many have already left the game.

  15. #40
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    579
    Quote Originally Posted by Al. View Post
    Seems to me that group-content is fine, the problem is that it doesn't come out as fast as people would like, possibly making older instances just grind material. My solution is to focus on group content for kinships and rewards for solo, let players get rewards for raids (EPIC GEAR) while doing some objectives for their Kinship like getting perks for everyone to use (Kinship Crafting Materials, Gems, bigger Vaults, etc).

    People like to interact mostly with their kinship, they group rarely and only if they need to.

    By focusing in kinships, people would raid more, even more with epic battles.
    First off the speed of content release has never really been a major complaint recently amongst groupers. People who speed through the content will usually run alts through it as well.

    The lack of quality when compared to past content has been the number 1 complaint, with #### loot system being second (Random, Random, Random) and challenge or time vs reward being third.

    Back when we were waiting long period between content sure that may have been a complaint. But as it is today we are simply begging the developer for 1 single multi boss raid, 2 to 3 six mans and a couple 3 mans. Not much to ask for if you ask me.

    Also asking the developer to revamp the kin system seems like a long shot considering the recent announcements with the housing revamp. Although I like that idea.

    Sadly we don't work for turbine so most likely we will be getting the opposite.

  16. #41
    Quote Originally Posted by BackAgainAndThere View Post
    I think part of Turbine's decision to allow upscaled players was also influenced by the brutal fact that a lot of raiders (and players, in general) have already jumped ship and moved onto other games. In Helm's Deep, endgamers will no longer be stuck with picking from a pool of endgame players, but they will now be picking from a much larger pool of level 10 and above. Supposedly, per Sapience, the raiding community is less than 10% of the total player population, so losing any raiders at all is already putting a damper on the ability to form raids on some servers.
    How is Sapience defining a raider?

    I would call myself a casual raider. When the cap was 75 I raided Orthanc & Draigoch 4 times a week but I haven't been in a raid for 6 months because I don't like the current endgame raids and I have not been playing much LOTRO.

    If he's referring to 10% of players raid 'regularly' then he's talking about the tip of the iceberg that is currently raid active.

  17. #42
    Quote Originally Posted by Minquinn View Post
    First off the speed of content release has never really been a major complaint recently amongst groupers. People who speed through the content will usually run alts through it as well.

    The lack of quality when compared to past content has been the number 1 complaint, with #### loot system being second (Random, Random, Random) and challenge or time vs reward being third.
    This.

    If ToO had a level 85 cap I would still be running it. I reckon my old kin wouldn't have fallen apart either due to there being no interesting raid content to run. Time between content is not a problem if the content is of the right quality and the challenge is set well.

    High quality progressive raids with raid-locks were dumped in favour of short, repeatable boss fights dropping random loot, causing all sorts of problems like the insane farming that dropped so many first agers when the most recent raids were launched.

  18. #43
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    12,677
    Quote Originally Posted by MullaramSullaram View Post
    Do you really believe this?
    Yes. Do you want me to supply you with some quotes from their Executive Producer in 2008 , back when they were riding high after the SoA launch, saying almost precisely that? I'd be happy to if you'd like.

    Yes, Turbine said that players asked for more soloable content, but where have they stated that players have said this should come at the expense of group content?
    With limited budgets, time, and resources, doing more of X means doing less of "not X". That's just reality. You can argue about where cuts should be made, but given that raids are so expensive to make (and that Epic Battles are aimed at groups too), it doesn't seem a huge surprise they'd cut back some there.

    Khafar
    Last edited by Khafar; Sep 27 2013 at 09:00 PM.

  19. #44
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,129
    Quote Originally Posted by Minquinn View Post
    First off the speed of content release has never really been a major complaint recently amongst groupers. People who speed through the content will usually run alts through it as well.
    I think it is still, some radiers just speed up and quit after they done all content available.

    The lack of quality when compared to past content has been the number 1 complaint, with #### loot system being second (Random, Random, Random) and challenge or time vs reward being third.
    Fair enough, But I think Ill be arbitrary on this:

    Raiders want these things: Quality, Speed of Release, Skill vs Reward and Loot system in that order. why?

    Because Quality Raids are few, speed of release is slow, skill vs reward is not really a challenge for some while impossible for others, loot system last because most raider complained "too much luck on rolls" before now they get random and hate it too.


    Back when we were waiting long period between content sure that may have been a complaint. But as it is today we are simply begging the developer for 1 single multi boss raid, 2 to 3 six mans and a couple 3 mans. Not much to ask for if you ask me.

    Also asking the developer to revamp the kin system seems like a long shot considering the recent announcements with the housing revamp. Although I like that idea.

    Sadly we don't work for turbine so most likely we will be getting the opposite.
    Its not much to ask, but raider aren't very creative at glance, multi boss raids and smaller raids is that all you ask? How about Raids with phasing technology, how about epic battle system integrated to normal raids? why don't people think more.

    Kinship revamp is a must and I think Turbine its hitting on the nail, because Big Battles is another way to play with Kinmates from all lvls range so in essense all are raiders now...

    Kinship need more focus that raiding because its the backbone of raiding. its that simple.

  20. #45
    Quote Originally Posted by MullaramSullaram View Post
    How is Sapience defining a raider?

    I would call myself a casual raider. When the cap was 75 I raided Orthanc & Draigoch 4 times a week but I haven't been in a raid for 6 months because I don't like the current endgame raids and I have not been playing much LOTRO.

    If he's referring to 10% of players raid 'regularly' then he's talking about the tip of the iceberg that is currently raid active.
    If you used to raid 4 times a week, you're not casual anything. Casual players probably log in 2-3 times a week, much less raid.

  21. #46
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    12,677
    Quote Originally Posted by MullaramSullaram View Post
    How is Sapience defining a raider?
    No idea, but they do probably know about the habits of raiders - most game developers are avid gamers, after all. Back when PlayOn was analyzing the habits of raiders in WoW, I believe they defined a "regular" raider as someone who raided 3+ times per month... once a week, with a "miss" on occasion. The percentage of level-capped characters which met that criteria was in the ballpark of 5%. Yes, I know that raiders often (or typically) have multiple level-capped characters, but of course many players don't have any at all. It's not even slightly hard to believe that the percentage of players who were "regular" raiders in WoW at the time (2006) was around 10%.

    Khafar

  22. #47
    Quote Originally Posted by Vexendynamus View Post
    You are not alone and that, in a nutshell, is why Turbine stopped pouring resources into the development of complicated raid spaces: Poor return on investment.
    Excuse me, but are u just plain stupid now? Seriously, back in moria raiding was a BIG part of the game, in mirkwood aswell. And most people did all the dungeons in moria. If there is no group content, how do you like to explore your class? Are u going to spec you class to tank/healer/ or support if there is no group content? Back in moria days, most of the people that hit max level had been doing instances, or raids. And what is the deal to get geared if there is no group content that you need it for, or maybe you need good gear to be able to do your dailies to kill all the mobs even faster ?

    You have 10 levels of solo content, with the epic story included, isnt that enough? So after those 10 levels it might be fun to do some actual group content, rather than doing daily quests to get the best gear in-game, wich you have no use for anyway. I dont get how those solo players defend the fact that turbine dont add group content. Whats the point with the holy trinity if there is no dungeons ? Yea sure now we have "big battles" but it dont even count that as end-game as you can start doing it at level 10. And these "Big battles" are going to be so easy now when its adjusted for the upscaling low level players. If they dont add an instance cluster or something like that later on, then i hope the game fails. I have nothing against causual players, if they dont like to ride fine. But i also think everyone will enjoy Dungeons more, rather than daily quests at level 95. This is just a cheap way for turbine to make easy money, it has nothing to do with the amount of players doing group content. That is just a stupid lie they tell players. And if you dont like Group content, you have your quests. They will always be there.

  23. #48
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    The Highlands of Scotland
    Posts
    5,419
    Quote Originally Posted by yafga View Post
    Excuse me, but are u just plain stupid now? Seriously, back in moria raiding was a BIG part of the game, in mirkwood aswell. And most people did all the dungeons in moria. If there is no group content, how do you like to explore your class? Are u going to spec you class to tank/healer/ or support if there is no group content? Back in moria days, most of the people that hit max level had been doing instances, or raids. And what is the deal to get geared if there is no group content that you need it for, or maybe you need good gear to be able to do your dailies to kill all the mobs even faster ?

    You have 10 levels of solo content, with the epic story included, isnt that enough? So after those 10 levels it might be fun to do some actual group content, rather than doing daily quests to get the best gear in-game, wich you have no use for anyway. I dont get how those solo players defend the fact that turbine dont add group content. Whats the point with the holy trinity if there is no dungeons ? Yea sure now we have "big battles" but it dont even count that as end-game as you can start doing it at level 10. And these "Big battles" are going to be so easy now when its adjusted for the upscaling low level players. If they dont add an instance cluster or something like that later on, then i hope the game fails. I have nothing against causual players, if they dont like to ride fine. But i also think everyone will enjoy Dungeons more, rather than daily quests at level 95. This is just a cheap way for turbine to make easy money, it has nothing to do with the amount of players doing group content. That is just a stupid lie they tell players. And if you dont like Group content, you have your quests. They will always be there.
    Now, now, there is no need to be just plain rude. You may disagree, but name-calling is not going to convince people you are right.
    TANSTAAFL

  24. #49
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    1,495
    Quote Originally Posted by trancejeremy View Post
    The funny thing is, this game isn't all that solo orientated right now. You can't get any decent gear soloing, until I guess 85? (So I've heard).

    I've now worked myself halfway through Isengard to 72nd level, and all the reward armor is worse than the 65 raid armor I'm wearing (which I didn't get from raiding, but from the lottery, back when we had it).

    And in any event, I've now again reached the point where landscape mobs have more morale than my character (a champ) does. Is it really a good design for 2/3 of your stats (or more) to come from gear?

    And I'm still using a 65 Second Ager as my weapon, too. I guess none of the solo quests give out weapons, and I don't seem to be able to craft a new one until 75.

    So if this game has a problem with people leaving, it's because it's not particularly friend to people unless they group for gear.
    RoI has some *interesting* gear options, that's for sure. However, it was the transition from one type of gearing to another, and we all just have to deal with it for a few levels until we get to Great River where it seems to get a little better. It's frustrating in some regards, because there is a big tradeoff between the old style of balanced stats to a 1-2-stat focus for each class, as well as some armour value issues. But as far as weapons go, there is no end of 3rd age drops that quickly surpass the 2nd age 65. It's painful to drop it, I know, but I recommend it, as soon as you get a 3rd age around 72. However, on my 76 guard that's now soloing through Rohan, I still have my 65 sword and it works just fine, even for the baby warbands.

    But the idea that mobs have more morale than your character--how is that a bad thing? I've now soloed a hunter, captain, and guard through RoI and into Rohan, without a single piece of barter armour--all crafted or quest reward. Lots of mobs have more morale than me. So what? I still kill them. In Limlight Gorge most mobs have 70k morale, and I've soloed them on all 3 of those classes.

    You can function just fine without any gear that requires grouping. Sure you get better stuff if you group, but I've just played 3 toons through to 75 and above without grouping, and I've had no trouble with anything on the landscape except for a couple of annoying RoI quests that have always been a royal pain.

  25. #50
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    579
    Quote Originally Posted by MullaramSullaram View Post
    The OP wasn't saying that players MUST GROUP. He was saying that in an MMO it's usual for there to be content developed for players who WANT to group. LOTRO has in the past supported both and all players are solo players too. Is it unreasonable to expect group content to be developed in an MMO?

    I enjoy 'Hermit Style' myself sometimes...I also own Skyrim which is great for this. I have played LOTRO for the last 6 years to not only enjoy wandering Middle Earth, but also to enjoy a challenging group experience.




    Do you really believe this? Turbine desires to bring costs down in an MMO that has seen it's best days. Lotro has become a shop for RPers to buy the latest in Middle Earth fashion and for people to fritter away their money on gumf. This means less cost for Turbine and there's a lot less risk, work & investment in it for them than developing instances & raids.

    Yes, Turbine said that players asked for more soloable content, but where have they stated that players have said this should come at the expense of group content?



    Your posting history suggests otherwise.



    I agree and now the entire Epic storyline is solable, and rightly so...but this is off the point. Lame group content is now the order of the day and it's been developed to let everyone 'win'.





    To reference a previous thread where you asked for specifics, can you define very, very few people? I know that there has been a visible negative impact on raiding numbers on Laurelin and also on the chat channels over the last year, so there are certainly fewer people now, because many have already left the game.
    What you need to do is just ignore these folks. As you can see all of them have congregated to this thread because they all saw the words raid, group, casual and hermit. In my opinion this forum is now over run with these posts. Any chance they get to put a boot heel on the throats of raiders, groupers etc they will be here.
    I wouldn't expect even 1 question you asked to get answered in a rational way by these posters.

    It's seriously becoming a gang mentality at this point so from now on we should just ignore these folks when the content we like is being discussed. Responding to them only gives them more reason to continue posting in these threads. 10 bucks says I start a thread with the word raid in it and these same individuals will be there pressing hard on the boot heel but in the same breath saying they support group play. Making any request we make to the developer seem as though it would not be used.

    This forum is becoming a joke. Can someone please do something about this so we are not having this battle in every single thread?

    Community Manager manage.

 

 
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

This form's session has expired. You need to reload the page.

Reload