We have detected that cookies are not enabled on your browser. Please enable cookies to ensure the proper experience.
Page 8 of 11 FirstFirst ... 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 LastLast
Results 176 to 200 of 265
  1. #176
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Tamriel
    Posts
    4,457
    Quote Originally Posted by whheydt View Post
    HS has a set amount of damage, which you get after the induction completes. In order to get a DPS "time average" you have to be in a fight that permits it to be used multiple times. If you only get to use it once if a fight, you now get less damage from that single use than you used to. The average over time is irrelevant. In that sense, it's been nerfed. How many fights are you in that permit HS to be used more than once?
    I've used HS multiple times many times in a fight. I tend to utilize the Hunters CC abilities so I can take on multiple mobs at once, it makes the game more interesting.
    [center][color=red]Now roaming the earth searching for a fun, interesting game.......again.[/color][/center]

    [center][URL=http://s545.photobucket.com/user/fenderp61/media/ESO/Narcosys500_zpsaa2b6fce.jpg.html][IMG]http://i545.photobucket.com/albums/hh367/fenderp61/ESO/Narcosys500_zpsaa2b6fce.jpg[/IMG][/URL][/center]

  2. #177
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Tamriel
    Posts
    4,457
    Quote Originally Posted by Yula_the_Mighty View Post
    On Meneldor we had multi boxing Hunter groups. It was very possible to have 2-6 Heartseekers locking on for a one shot alpha strike. We could not kill these groups because Desperate Flight worked in the Moors. The only time I remember killing a Hunter was with a stealth warg pack operation. We have to stun the Hunter. Kill her before she woke and teleported away.

    First change was the reticle. Later on the disable on Desperate Flight.

    EC was a non problem because Rune Keepers did not exist yet. Guardians were ignored until everything else was dead because they could not force aggro. The damage output was so low that they were not dangerous.
    I still haven't seen any Release Notes where Turbine states that the reticule was added. DF wasn't disabled, you just had to be out of combat, and it was only in the moors, so it had no impact on PvE whatsoever.
    [center][color=red]Now roaming the earth searching for a fun, interesting game.......again.[/color][/center]

    [center][URL=http://s545.photobucket.com/user/fenderp61/media/ESO/Narcosys500_zpsaa2b6fce.jpg.html][IMG]http://i545.photobucket.com/albums/hh367/fenderp61/ESO/Narcosys500_zpsaa2b6fce.jpg[/IMG][/URL][/center]

  3. #178
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Everywhere
    Posts
    1,693
    OK. Some things have been said here that I feel the need to chime in on...

    Quote Originally Posted by Khafar View Post
    That's why some raider's insistence on exclusive access to the best gear annoys me so much. If there were broad agreement on a Comparable Incomparables approach to rewards, I'd shut up and just go enjoy it... Turbine's original vision for that is what I've always wanted in this game.
    Khafar
    Let's get this straight. You are annoyed that you don't have the same access to the same rewards as raiders? If you want access, suck it up and do the raids. Next you will be complaining that you can't access the PvP rewards...

    No, but that's not what Sapience said. He said that PvMP was in the "single digits" as a percentage of players, not time, and that raiders were in the same ballpark. That might mean raiders are 10% or 12% or something, but it's not going to mean they're 30% or 50%.
    I said it before and I'll say it again. People need to stop quoting what Sapience said. We do not have the rest of the data to go with his statement. We have no idea what "raider" means to them to know how they arrived at their numbers. We don't even know how many players that percentage translates into. Yet, somehow it gets quoted every time someone wants to argue *against* more raids.
    Dagranhad - Burglar | Aldgarea - Loremaster | Barathrothir - Hunter | Golladhar - Captain

  4. #179
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    10,510
    Quote Originally Posted by TheCrossbow View Post
    Let's get this straight. You are annoyed that you don't have the same access to the same rewards as raiders? If you want access, suck it up and do the raids. Next you will be complaining that you can't access the PvP rewards...
    No one has been asking for the "same access" to the "same rewards". They've been asking for "a path" to "comparable rewards". Many people have expressed an opinion that having raiding be a *faster* path is okay, so long as there IS a solo path. So the point Khafar made stands...it's the assertion that such rewards must be *exclusive* to raiding that sticks in various craws.

    I said it before and I'll say it again. People need to stop quoting what Sapience said. We do not have the rest of the data to go with his statement. We have no idea what "raider" means to them to know how they arrived at their numbers. We don't even know how many players that percentage translates into. Yet, somehow it gets quoted every time someone wants to argue *against* more raids.
    Without the additional data you want, the numbers still tell us one very important thing. *Turbine* sees the raiding community (however *Turbine* defines it) as being less than 10% of the player base. Turbine also sees raids as extremely expensive content to develop. The intersection of those data shows why raid development is slow and sporadic. Disliking the result won't change that. Attracting more people to raiding (so they show up in *Turbine's* statistics) has the best chance of changing the development dynamic.

    You want more raids? Find a way to attract more people to raiding.

  5. #180
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    12,677
    Quote Originally Posted by whheydt View Post
    No one has been asking for the "same access" to the "same rewards". They've been asking for "a path" to "comparable rewards"... it's the assertion that such rewards must be *exclusive* to raiding that sticks in various craws.
    100% correct, including the part about grouping = faster access to incomparable rewards. Turbine came up with this idea in the first place - I'm just asking them to fulfill it. It was and is a superb idea. Unfortunately, it's fairly difficult to do (5x9 sets per expansion is rather painful... perhaps it would be more achievable if they could come up with some awesome, customizable, upgradeable armor... something which could last more than one expansion).

    Khafar
    Last edited by Khafar; Oct 07 2013 at 02:44 AM.

  6. #181
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    921
    Quote Originally Posted by Khafar View Post
    100% correct, including the part about grouping = faster access to incomparable rewards. Turbine came up with this idea in the first place - I'm just asking them to fulfill it. It was and is a superb idea. Unfortunately, it's fairly difficult to do (5x9 sets per expansion is rather painful... perhaps it would be more achievable if they could come up with some awesome, customizable, upgradeable armor... something which could last more than one expansion).

    Khafar
    Well it seems with big battles it will be same rewards but slower to get (Bonus medals for the group instances). That's kinda what i asked for.
    Although i would like cosmetically differentiated Armour between the group sizes, let the group players have something to show for even though it's not more powerful.
    Nothing here matters.

  7. #182
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Everywhere
    Posts
    1,693
    Quote Originally Posted by whheydt View Post
    No one has been asking for the "same access" to the "same rewards". They've been asking for "a path" to "comparable rewards". Many people have expressed an opinion that having raiding be a *faster* path is okay, so long as there IS a solo path. So the point Khafar made stands...it's the assertion that such rewards must be *exclusive* to raiding that sticks in various craws.
    Yes, people have basically been asking for access to the same kind of rewards you get from raids. The problem with this assertion is you already have access to many of the same rewards that raids would give you... for little if any extra effort. When you consider Hytbold, Wildermore, and all of the incredibly easy 3-6 man instances available... you can have access to raid quality gear without ever setting foot in a 12-man raid. In fact, most of what is available from the 3-6 man instances can be sold on the AH. So you don't even really need to set foot into a smaller instance if you are willing to pay for what is on the AH.

    What people are asking for is for Turbine to do *extra* work to make sure that every single play style is satisfied. That is incredibly arrogant and selfish to expect that kind of special attention. If they are willing to do so, then that is up to them. But, asking them to go out of their way and do extra work so that the "non raider" can have the same quality of rewards and expecting them to fulfill your demands is a bit much.

    Without the additional data you want, the numbers still tell us one very important thing. *Turbine* sees the raiding community (however *Turbine* defines it) as being less than 10% of the player base. Turbine also sees raids as extremely expensive content to develop. The intersection of those data shows why raid development is slow and sporadic. Disliking the result won't change that. Attracting more people to raiding (so they show up in *Turbine's* statistics) has the best chance of changing the development dynamic.

    You want more raids? Find a way to attract more people to raiding.
    I'm sorry but... you still don't get my point...

    Sapience is quoted as saying that the "raiding community is not more than 10% of the player base." But that statement is said with a lot of additional data missing to put it into perspective:

    1. What is Turbine's definition of a "raider"? Could it include every single person who has ever set foot in a 12-man raid? If so, 12-man raids are greatly outnumbered by the number of 3/6 man instances available. So, that could mean multiple things... maybe only 10% of the instances run are "raid" size? Maybe only 10% of the players run "raid" size groups?

    2. What is Turbine's definition of "non-raider"? Is it simply someone who never sets foot in a "raid" size encounter? Does it mean that those people have never set foot in any group at all?

    3. How many people cross the "raider and non raider" divide? How many of those people might be counted as "raiders" if the definition of "a raider" was changed slightly?

    Can you not see all of the missing pieces? Can you not see why quoting Sapience doesn't work because we do not have the additional data to put that "10%" into proper context?

    The fact is that LOTRO already has a variety of 3, 6, and 12 man instances/raids. Those who enjoy doing that aspect of the game are simply asking for Turbine to maintain that content, which is already in the game... and when feasible... add to it.
    Also, what people conveniently forget is that all of the instances/raids in the game are set up to be inter-twined with the rest of the content to tell the [complete] story that Turbine is trying to tell. I'd argue that even the PvMP stuff is there because it "tells the story" of the war against Angmar, though Turbine has opted to keep the Moors totally optional content.

    Perhaps, if you are someone who doesn't really like raiding/grouping and doesn't want to be forced into it... maybe you should seek out a different game that doesn't force it on you... instead of forcing your anti-raiding play style on the rest? Otherwise, you will have Turbine driving away the people who (IMHO) have the most incentive to spend [real] money on the game.

    I wonder how all the anti-raiding crowd will cope with Helms Deep where you can't get away with completely ignoring the group content if you wish to do the epic.
    Dagranhad - Burglar | Aldgarea - Loremaster | Barathrothir - Hunter | Golladhar - Captain

  8. #183
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    your mind
    Posts
    3,880
    Quote Originally Posted by TheCrossbow View Post
    ...will cope with Helms Deep where you can't get away with completely ignoring the group content if you wish to do the epic.
    FYI, there's no group content with Helm's Deep's epic, as all the Battles are available in solo form (and those solo spaces are also accessible by couples). As it is, there are really only two group battles, as the three-person will just be done solo or duo by those group sizes. That leaves one available six person, and one available raid size, both of which can be done in solo form instead.
    Link to our community LOTRO store google spreadsheet pricelist and conversion rates, please contribute too!: https://goo.gl/wxPqCm

  9. #184
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    627
    Quote Originally Posted by Gladgilrian View Post
    If you can get off 3 Heart Seekers in the time it would take for the old HS to get off of cool down, it's still an increase in DPS, for say a mob with a huge amount of hit points. On normal mobs I 1 shot 50% of the time with dev crit.
    Actually, using HS at all besides opening combat with it lowers my dps.

  10. #185
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    921
    Quote Originally Posted by TheCrossbow View Post
    What people are asking for is for Turbine to do *extra* work to make sure that every single play style is satisfied. That is incredibly arrogant and selfish to expect that kind of special attention. If they are willing to do so, then that is up to them. But, asking them to go out of their way and do extra work so that the "non raider" can have the same quality of rewards and expecting them to fulfill your demands is a bit much.
    Again this is exactly what turbine is doing, you can get the same rewards at the solo/duo setting, just at a slower pace. How difficult getting the different medals will be in each of the group sizes is yet to be seen but on paper I'm fine with that setup.
    I don't think it's really much more work for them to adjust the acquisition rate but it's definately a balancing act.
    Now it would be fair if all 5 instances had a 3, 6 and 12 man setting so everyone can play what he likes best but i guess that is outside of the scope of their resources.
    Nothing here matters.

  11. #186
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    10,510
    Quote Originally Posted by TheCrossbow View Post
    I'm sorry but... you still don't get my point...

    Sapience is quoted as saying that the "raiding community is not more than 10% of the player base." But that statement is said with a lot of additional data missing to put it into perspective:
    And you have missed my point, so we're even on that score. In the end, we're going to have to agree to disagree, but since you see fit to repeat your point (which I do understand), I will repeat mine...

    It's doesn't really matter just how Turbine defines "raider", so long as they have a metric to measure the activity they define that way. Further, so long as their data mining shows that the number of players playing as "raiders" is in single digits, they will allocate resources based on that assessment. It's basic economics. You put your development resources where you think they'll pay off. So long as *Turbine* believes that something they define as "raiders" is small fraction of the players, they will allocate resources accordingly.

    *IF* you want there to be more raids in LotRO, *THEN* you need to find a way to cause more people to raid. So...what are you doing to actively recruit people to raiding?

  12. #187
    Quote Originally Posted by whheydt View Post
    *IF* you want there to be more raids in LotRO, *THEN* you need to find a way to cause more people to raid. So...what are you doing to actively recruit people to raiding?
    Heheh as always, blame everything on the player. It's not player's job to recruit people to raid. The game has done a horrible job with the latest raids and cluster. Raiders have moved on to other games. No one will recruit anyone to raid in this terrible state of the game, not even recommend the game.

    And that's a poor and false logic anyways. Back in the days where the game had awesome raids on level and many raiders, nobody needed to recruit anyone to raid. And that got us more raids? Or Turbine destroyed raiding with the excuse of raiders being 10 percent something (without a proof or a reliable way to count raiders) to cover up their plans to cut down development costs by 80 percent.

    Now we are looking at the emptiest 'expansion' yet. Well done. At this rate, only place we will recruit people is to other games...

  13. #188
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    1,495
    Quote Originally Posted by whheydt View Post
    *IF* you want there to be more raids in LotRO, *THEN* you need to find a way to cause more people to raid. So...what are you doing to actively recruit people to raiding?
    But what about the self-fulfilling prophecy aspect of this? How can you attract new people to raid if there aren't good new raids to do? If the content isn't fun, nobody will want to do it, and then there's an easy excuse to not develop any more content. If it's made more attractive by offering more attractive loot, then we get into the endlessly discussed issue of loot fairness across multiple play styles, so that's a non-starter. Round and round we go. Yes, I understand that there's a role for people who can teach new raiders in a respectful way, but there's so little interest in that at this point that lack of trainers isn't a huge factor in the low numbers of people trying raids.

    This is probably a dead horse anyway at this point--I'd bet that the reason Sapience's numbers are so low is because the people who like raids have mostly either moved on or accepted things as they are and changed the way they play. The raiders aren't coming back. I just level up alts with landscape quests now, make new ones when the old ones hit cap, and when my slots fill up I'll delete and start again. Just killing time, because it's hard for me to get interested in something not based in Middle-earth. Hopefully at some point I'll find something with a little more life in it.

  14. #189
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    8,740
    Quote Originally Posted by Minquinn View Post
    If you enjoy any part of the 3, 6 or 12 man content you are classified as a raider. Even though it is called an Instance Cluster it should be called a Raider cluster.
    I see what you're saying (I first though you were the one wanting to call all of us raiders). I think this comes from other games where the sole point of lesser instances is as a precursor to doing raids, or a way to gear up or unlock raids.

    Rohan messed up here I think, as they only had one 6 person instance, but three 3 and 12 person instances each. I always felt that 3 and 12 were the hardest options (for 3 it's because you have so much less flexibility in who you can invite).

    I have definitely seen the attitudes you list below with raiders, even if they're stereotypes. Quite a lot of people in these forums are very clear that they do not want any one to get top tier gear by doing solo quests or deeds, I've even seen some unhappy with Moria moving to medallion system even though it was no longer at level cap.

    I have personally seen raiders becoming angry and shouting when someone makes mistakes, though that was rarer. It seemed more common when game was new and more players bringing over attitudes from other games, and it also briefly happens at the start of every expansion when there's a surge of returning players anxious to gear up as fast as possible (sometimes pvp players gearing up in pve before returning back to the moors for the rest of the year). Definitely this game and it's players allow PUGs and is not stuck in the guild-members-only attitudes from other games.

    Although beware of stereotypes based on forums. There have been some people that I thought were intransigent die hards, then when I saw the same person in some betas they turned into someone very polite and reasonable even when I grouped with them to test instances. Similarly in GLFF there were some people I also thought were overall rude persons, until I ended up in groups with them where they seemed much more reasonable (one guy was much nicer after he had a break to go have a smoke :-).

  15. #190
    Getting people into raiding is tough at the moment. With Orthanc it was nice as it had tactics on t1 and was tricky, at least at the start. The Erebor runs however were incredibly poor on t1 considering doing them allowed access to bartering of 1st Age Symbols. The reason they were poor on t1 is that 1st Age symbols allow you to access the best LI's in the game. But lets be honest. When you do a T1 raid first time on the day it comes out with a pug with no one in the group doing beta... and succeed easily there is a problem with the content. It was too easy. Very few tactics, and not particularly gripping. That will have put off a lot of people thinking about getting into raiding. I got into raiding when OD was the main raid and loved it since trying the challenges and wanting to do them for the challenge not the rewards. However these Erebor raids were so easy on t1, combined with no locks, made the raids very boring very fast. No wonder the percentage of raiders is reportedly low. But even if the raiding community is 10% (which judging by my server and ingame friends i doubt as most try or do raid) if they are not catered too, there goes 10% of your income as, again looking at the ppl i know ingame, 95% ish are vip. I dont give a rats behind if soloer's can get raid quality loot. It don't make a difference to me at all. Just give us a raid as difficult as OD, BG and Orthanc were on level, T1 and T2. Please!!!

  16. #191
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Everywhere
    Posts
    1,693
    Quote Originally Posted by RJFerret View Post
    FYI, there's no group content with Helm's Deep's epic, as all the Battles are available in solo form (and those solo spaces are also accessible by couples). As it is, there are really only two group battles, as the three-person will just be done solo or duo by those group sizes. That leaves one available six person, and one available raid size, both of which can be done in solo form instead.
    Yes, this is true. My point is that those who are anti-raiding will have to do content intended for grouping... even if only set for solo/duo. The anti-raid/grouping crowd won't be able to completely ignore the Big Battles like they can with most of the other instances.
    Dagranhad - Burglar | Aldgarea - Loremaster | Barathrothir - Hunter | Golladhar - Captain

  17. #192
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Everywhere
    Posts
    1,693
    Quote Originally Posted by whheydt View Post
    And you have missed my point, so we're even on that score. In the end, we're going to have to agree to disagree, but since you see fit to repeat your point (which I do understand), I will repeat mine...

    It's doesn't really matter just how Turbine defines "raider", so long as they have a metric to measure the activity they define that way. Further, so long as their data mining shows that the number of players playing as "raiders" is in single digits, they will allocate resources based on that assessment. It's basic economics. You put your development resources where you think they'll pay off. So long as *Turbine* believes that something they define as "raiders" is small fraction of the players, they will allocate resources accordingly.

    *IF* you want there to be more raids in LotRO, *THEN* you need to find a way to cause more people to raid. So...what are you doing to actively recruit people to raiding?
    It doesn't matter what their metric is. We do not know enough to adequately quote Sapience IN CONTEXT. I'm sure you are educated enough to know that the *context* of information is just as important.

    Yet, people (like you) keep trying to use it as a way to say that "the raiding community is too small to bother with." So, you would rather turn away a "minority" in which exists the greatest incentive to spend money on the game (translate... provide repeat customers)? I'm pretty sure that would be a dumb move. Even if raiders are a minority... if they are repeat customers, wouldn't it be smart to keep enough of that product (in good quality) on the shelf to keep them coming back?

    However, I think there is greater evidence that the number of people who participate in any grouping/raiding/instances at all is far greater than the 10% classified as part of the "raiding community." There are a large number of people who don't raid as much as the "raiding community" but they participate enough to enjoy the raiding they do.

    Plus, it is absurd to claim that it is *my* job to get more people to raid. I don't recall Turbine knocking on my door and asking me to help them get more people to raid. It is Turbine's job to sell their product.
    Dagranhad - Burglar | Aldgarea - Loremaster | Barathrothir - Hunter | Golladhar - Captain

  18. #193
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    8,740
    Quote Originally Posted by Calta View Post
    I saved up medallions and got my mighty verse set.
    But that's essentially "farming xxx and buying" in many ways. The original moria did not have medallions, you could not just do Grand Stairs and Forges over and over to earn the gear. I do not mind the change myself but there are some players out there unhappy with it still, mostly because of the idea that all the gear should be hard to earn.

    It's silly in a way because even in the older raids the gear was still "farming xxx and buying". Ie, run Rift over and over and over (farming) until you can trade in a gem for a piece of armor at a barter vendor (buying). Sure people will disagree with that because they want to make the point of "older is better". I can tell you that my first piece of teal gear in Moria was not "earned", I only got it because everyone else was geared up and didn't roll on the coin so I got it even though it was my first run of the instance ever. After adding the medallion system I really had to work a lot harder to get the gear.

    Where things are now seems about right with gear - very good gear gotten by solo activities, but raiders can still get incrementally better gear that can not be acquired without luck in instances. The good gear from Hytbold absolutely is good enough to get into instances and raids which is an advantage (get rid of the gear check gating). However there's no easy way to get top notch jewelry without doing instances so that's another differentiator.

    I actually liked the Great River model myself; get the barter items and rep via landscape quests, and the final item you need is only from a hard instance but you'll always get that item if you succeed (granted that's a very difficult 6 person instance).

  19. #194
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    8,740
    Quote Originally Posted by Thorwyn99 View Post
    Again this is exactly what turbine is doing, you can get the same rewards at the solo/duo setting, just at a slower pace.
    You won't get the "platinum" barter items as solo/duo though as I understood it. Ie, it's a bit like earning seals.

  20. #195
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    12,677
    Quote Originally Posted by TheCrossbow View Post
    My point is that those who are anti-raiding will have to do content intended for grouping... even if only set for solo/duo.
    I'm not quite sure what this means. I did every soloable single skirmish they've produced (nearly all of them), many, many times. That content is scalable from 1-12, pretty much like Epic Battles will be. I plan to do lots of Epic Battles as well, and am quite thankful that all 5 of them offer a solo option. I might do them 3-man sometimes, just like I did a few 3-man skirmishes. But it worked perfectly well for soloing. Awesome.

    Quote Originally Posted by TheCrossbow View Post
    Yet, people (like you) keep trying to use it as a way to say that "the raiding community is too small to bother with."
    No... more like "spend on your content development proportional to playing style". That doesn't mean 0 raids, ever. But it makes a ton of sense for them to try and make their most compelling content as accessible and appealing to the broadest set of gamers possible.

    Plus, it is absurd to claim that it is *my* job to get more people to raid.
    Maybe not, but the most common way game companies "get more people to raid" is by bribing them. This is of course part of why so many raiders insist that raiding must be the only means by which incomparable rewards can be earned... they think that if there's any other way to earn it, nobody (or at least a whole lot fewer people) will raid. Basically, that means they're perfectly willing to coerce other people into raiding even if they don't like it so they'll have a bigger pool of players to group with. Which sucks, to the extent people actually hold those beliefs.

    Turbine had the right idea: let people earn awesome rewards playing in the various ways they actually *enjoy* playing. If that's PvMP, great. Fellowships or raiding, also great. Soloing... cool. Crafting: have a great time! Many would want to earn the best gear from multiple playing styles... raid gear for raiding, solo gear for soloing, crafted gear because it looks cool, whatever.

    Khafar
    Last edited by Khafar; Oct 08 2013 at 02:03 AM.

  21. #196
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    8,740
    Quote Originally Posted by choon_blaze View Post
    Back in the days where the game had awesome raids on level and many raiders, nobody needed to recruit anyone to raid.
    Back in the day, a lot of players would discourage others from raiding, even overtly. If they had poor gear or skills they would be laughed at. It's not unique to this game, and certainly LotRO is better than most games in welcoming players of all types, but there was definitely some exclusivity going on. I do think most of those early players also left the game early but some damage was done.

    Even today you can see some attitudes out there; advertisements to join group content will have some language implying that only the best need apply, or if someone asks for some help with a landscape quest there will always be a few who will laugh at that as being too easy to need help for, or if you get stuck in a group with with "serious" players who keep criticizing someone for not doing it right. Any time in the forums that someone says they wish there were fewer casual players, or that gear wasn't so trivial to earn, that will discourage a player from attempting more difficult content. Maybe the content is "too easy" but a lot of players still avoid it because they think they won't be good enough and don't want to be the person blamed for failure like the last time they tried group content.

    Exclusive clubs are inherently small. If you want the club to be bigger then you need to allow more people in and encourage them to join.

  22. #197
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    10,510
    Quote Originally Posted by choon_blaze View Post
    And that's a poor and false logic anyways. Back in the days where the game had awesome raids on level and many raiders, nobody needed to recruit anyone to raid. And that got us more raids? Or Turbine destroyed raiding with the excuse of raiders being 10 percent something (without a proof or a reliable way to count raiders) to cover up their plans to cut down development costs by 80 percent.
    Except for one thing...Sapience also said that the percentage of raiders has been, essentially, constant. So in your idealized past, there weren't (proportionally) any more raiders then than there are now. Is it any wonder that Turbine looked at that data and cut back on spending a big chunk of the development budget on raids?

  23. #198
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Pacific Northwest
    Posts
    4,424
    I believe Sapience is using some form of new math, as I remember well when I hit 60 and MoM had just come out there were multiple medium to hard-core raiding kins on Gladden. They recruited and they ran raids frequently. Now there's only a couple left, and even those are struggling. Many of my old raiding buddies left the game a couple years ago and haven't come back. More left a year ago and haven't come back. Still more have announced they aren't coming back for HD..... like it or not it's a trend I've seen and one that has made me very sad.

    Do you determine the percentage of raiders by the amount of time raid content is in use as opposed to the amount of time players are online? That's a false reading as we used to play 30-40 hours a week to make sure we were ready to raid a total of 6 hours? So my actual raiding time was only about 15-20% of my playing time, but all my playing time was spent preparing for raiding essentially.

    Do you count the number of people who have raided at least once? Most have been in at least once. Certainly more than 10% have been in at least once.

    So when someone says a stable single digit percentage I still want to know how do they determine that percentage? And do they factor in the time raiders spend doing things other than raiding?

    Regardless, the number of raiders who do the content regularly as their main play style is diminishing quickly due to lack of any worthwhile content. And with only one of the big battles being for a raid size I don't expect that to improve.
    I'd explain it to you, but I'm all out of Puppets and Crayons.
    ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
    GLADDEN: Moochy, 105 Minstrel R10 + alts CRICKHOLLOW: Moochy, 21 Minstrel

  24. #199
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    921
    Quote Originally Posted by Lohi View Post
    You won't get the "platinum" barter items as solo/duo though as I understood it. Ie, it's a bit like earning seals.
    That's not how i read it, it seemed like bigger group sizes give you a bonus to acquisition rate not higher medal qualities.
    It'd be nice to get a clarification on that.
    Nothing here matters.

  25. #200
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    921
    Quote Originally Posted by TheCrossbow View Post
    Yes, this is true. My point is that those who are anti-raiding will have to do content intended for grouping... even if only set for solo/duo. The anti-raid/grouping crowd won't be able to completely ignore the Big Battles like they can with most of the other instances.
    I don't think the spaces are the problem. It's waiting to fill the team and having to run with 4 other people(in case of a 6 man) that i don't want to run with that's the problem.
    I guess during SOA and Moria it was also problematic that people stopped running the epic instances after getting what they want so newer people that came in late had a hard time finishing them,hence why Turbine went away from any grouping for the epics.
    The epic instances in itself were never the problem.
    Nothing here matters.

 

 
Page 8 of 11 FirstFirst ... 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 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