Thats fine and you are welcome to your out-of-context opinion, however, answer this for me.
Whats the difference between someone who plays for 10 hours a week and takes 8 months to obtain said gear versus someone who plays 40 hours a week and obtains said gear in 2 months?
The only difference is play style and the type of player, which as I just explained in my above post, a good game should have options for many different types of players, as long as everyone can utilize any play style to truly progress their character.
I'd love bigger raids. I voted for 15-20.. though sadly a lot of people's computers couldn't handle it. Options would be nice though for those who could handle a 20-man.
So it has been confirmed that raids will be coming and 74% of the votes here want raiding.
Those who are against it, get over it. Time and time again it has been shown and proven that games with no end game content of any kind, shape or form fail to keep people interested and playing the game which only further makes it harder for the non-raiders to get stuff done in the form of small group content when raiders run quests, dungeons and dailies.
MMORPG's are a circle of life, we all feed each other. Take one away, the other fails.
Right, and this thread has more to do with implementing larger group content (whether you call that raids or not) than it is about NW having good end game. I am also of the belief that larger group content makes for better end game, but it is still two separate discussions. The vote was to see how many people wanted dungeons designed for more people, not whether or not it makes for better end game. I think it is a well known fact already that if an MMORPG has no end game, people will get bored fast, GW2 was a perfect example of this.
I'd love bigger raids. I voted for 15-20.. though sadly a lot of people's computers couldn't handle it. Options would be nice though for those who could handle a 20-man.
Honestly with the level of graphics this game has, I was suprised at how smooth it ran, even at max settings. I don't think it would be a huge problem. There are also ways of designing a 20 man raid that would not tax your system too much probably.
Honestly with the level of graphics this game has, I was suprised at how smooth it ran, even at max settings. I don't think it would be a huge problem. There are also ways of designing a 20 man raid that would not tax your system too much probably.
True! I was just stating the typical problem most people seem to have. I don't have a problem running a raid with max graphics.
0
drentikaMember, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Hero UsersPosts: 19Arc User
edited April 2013
Could live without the 10mens, but we need "bigger" challenges as in 15-25 raid content!
*Please!* begs!
Or even raids could be created in foundry. If that would be doable to "adjust" this tool.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
0
zeek29Member, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Guardian UsersPosts: 13Arc User
edited April 2013
I am curious has there been any mention about them adding raid type content? The people I game with are really excited about this game, but raid content is something that we want to have as an end game option. I am in favor of the smaller raid sizes 10-20 man just because it gives options of multiple raid groups for guilds. Though I really liked the idea i read somewhere in this thread about having a sliding scale for the days when you might only get like 8 of your 10 online.
0
ranncoreMember, Moderators, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Knight of the Feywild UsersPosts: 2,508
I am curious has there been any mention about them adding raid type content? The people I game with are really excited about this game, but raid content is something that we want to have as an end game option. I am in favor of the smaller raid sizes 10-20 man just because it gives options of multiple raid groups for guilds. Though I really liked the idea i read somewhere in this thread about having a sliding scale for the days when you might only get like 8 of your 10 online.
They've already said that Gauntlgrym has 20 man teams, and a PvP mode (20v20), and that they plan to add more raid style content as time goes on.
Everquest has 54 and yes, you deal with AFK'ers tons on a raid that size. Cutting it in half would be a wise thing to do.
But there is so much to do before we can even discuss raiding, so let's not put the cart before the horse.
0
berserkerkitten8Member, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Hero Users, Neverwinter Guardian Users, Neverwinter Knight of the Feywild UsersPosts: 0Arc User
edited April 2013
Personally, I don't enjoy raids. Never did, I'm happy with content for small groups, but I find the bigger stuff too stressful, time-consuming, yada, yada, yada. That said, if raid-rewards can be obtained by other means and through solo and/or 5man content, then I don't see the problem. Just because I don't care for a specific kind of content doesn't mean it's bad or it shouldn't be there. If people enjoy raids, give them raids. I just don't want to see super awesome gear, mounts and other goodies, which are raid-exclusive and otherwise impossible to get.
If people enjoy raids, give them raids. I just don't want to see super awesome gear, mounts and other goodies, which are raid-exclusive and otherwise impossible to get.
This sums up my opinion perfectly.
Back when WoW was new, I spent a couple years raiding. First 40-man and then 25-man raids. Initially, it was amazing as I had never experienced something on this scale. As time went by, it became a secondary job and a responsibility. I could have stopped, but I enjoyed other aspects of the game too, like PvP, and in order to be competitive I needed gear from raids, so I continued past the point where it was enjoyable.
I eventually did quit raiding because the time demands became troublesome, which then caused me to feel like second class player: couldn't further progress my character without needing a regular group of 10/25 players, couldn't get raid achievements, couldn't complete my pet and mount collections, felt like a leecher when I did 5-man instances with raid-geared people, got "owned" by people with raid weapons (which were better than PvP weapons), and so on. The choice was then to either commit to raid schedules and play with folks who I didn't want to play with, or to quit the game. I quit the game.
Like the Kitten above, I'm all for giving people choices and content they enjoy, as long as equal rewards are available to solo players too (this includes grouping with random folks, of course).
Back when WoW was new, I spent a couple years raiding. First 40-man and then 25-man raids. Initially, it was amazing as I had never experienced something on this scale. As time went by, it became a secondary job and a responsibility. I could have stopped, but I enjoyed other aspects of the game too, like PvP, and in order to be competitive I needed gear from raids, so I continued past the point where it was enjoyable.
I eventually did quit raiding because the time demands became troublesome, which then caused me to feel like second class player: couldn't further progress my character without needing a regular group of 10/25 players, couldn't get raid achievements, couldn't complete my pet and mount collections, felt like a leecher when I did 5-man instances with raid-geared people, got "owned" by people with raid weapons (which were better than PvP weapons), and so on. The choice was then to either commit to raid schedules and play with folks who I didn't want to play with, or to quit the game. I quit the game.
Like the Kitten above, I'm all for giving people choices and content they enjoy, as long as equal rewards are available to solo players too (this includes grouping with random folks, of course).
So please do explain how you implement *equal* rewards for a solo player versus a coordinated group of 10+ people.........
So please do explain how you implement *equal* rewards for a solo player versus a coordinated group of 10+ people.........
Three spontaneous ideas:
Different skins, same stats. A raid weapon could be more shiny than one obtained by a solo player, which would make it an attention-drawing status symbol, without giving an advantage in PvP or in heroic dungeons. Same for armour pieces.
You could use WoW's post-WotLK approach (when they equalized 10 and 25 man raids) and modify the drop chances depending on the difficulty of the encounter, both in terms of absolute (number of) drops and drop chance, without changing the drop quality.
Raid bosses could drop convenience items that are otherwise only available in the cash store or through AD, like respec tokens and possibly mass resurrection scrolls.
Back when WoW was new, I spent a couple years raiding. First 40-man and then 25-man raids. Initially, it was amazing as I had never experienced something on this scale. As time went by, it became a secondary job and a responsibility. I could have stopped, but I enjoyed other aspects of the game too, like PvP, and in order to be competitive I needed gear from raids, so I continued past the point where it was enjoyable.
I eventually did quit raiding because the time demands became troublesome, which then caused me to feel like second class player: couldn't further progress my character without needing a regular group of 10/25 players, couldn't get raid achievements, couldn't complete my pet and mount collections, felt like a leecher when I did 5-man instances with raid-geared people, got "owned" by people with raid weapons (which were better than PvP weapons), and so on. The choice was then to either commit to raid schedules and play with folks who I didn't want to play with, or to quit the game. I quit the game.
Like the Kitten above, I'm all for giving people choices and content they enjoy, as long as equal rewards are available to solo players too (this includes grouping with random folks, of course).
Most definitely. Agree 100%, and a point several have already made and agreed with. Good to see others adding their approval. We can only hope that when they add raids and larger group content, they will hear us.
5 man is prefect size.. This is based on D&D.. You don't have 100 ppl sitting around a table.
That said.. I'm all for 10 man as long as there will be a 5 man option..
There is already a 5 man option and I don't believe anyone said anything about a 100 player raid, no? 8-10 players are what the majority of us, including you, want to see. Again, as with other points brought up, this was addressed in my OP as one of the arguments some use to say "no raids" but it's a weak one IMO. Just because you have more people in a dungeon does not mean NW is not like D&D, as long as it's not a ridiculous amount of people.
Besides, even if they do implement 20 or 25 man dungeons, as I pointed out already, there is already so much about this game that is different from D&D due to the type of game this is, if they want the majority of folks to enjoy it, providing multiple play styles, I don't believe it possible to stay 100% true to D&D because D&D is a very specific type of game. This is imply an MMORPG based on the D&D lore. I wish people could accept that and stop getting all up in arms over this aspect or that aspect not being like D&D.
Different skins, same stats. A raid weapon could be more shiny than one obtained by a solo player, which would make it an attention-drawing status symbol, without giving an advantage in PvP or in heroic dungeons. Same for armour pieces.
You could use WoW's post-WotLK approach (when they equalized 10 and 25 man raids) and modify the drop chances depending on the difficulty of the encounter, both in terms of absolute (number of) drops and drop chance, without changing the drop quality.
Raid bosses could drop convenience items that are otherwise only available in the cash store or through AD, like respec tokens and possibly mass resurrection scrolls.
I never said make solo rewards the same as raid dungeons, I said make them attainable by different means. My thinking was that they could create heroic 5 man dungeons or even a level above heroic that would be just as hard as a raid, only with the standard 5 people. They already have loot that is only attainable with a 5 man party, so all we are saying is, make hard mode dungeons playable with 8-10 people, and give them equal level loot as the best loot attainable by the 5 mans. Now that said, if it were possible to give the same level gear by playing strictly solo, I'd be open to suggestions like the ones above. We shall see.
There is already a 5 man option and I don't believe anyone said anything about a 100 player raid, no? 8-10 players are what the majority of us would like to see, and again, as with other points brought up, this was addressed in my OP as one of the arguments some use to say "no raids" but it's a weak one IMO. Just because you have more people in a dungeon does not mean NW is not like D&D, as long as it's not a ridiculous amount of people. Besides, even if they do implement 20 or 25 man dungeons, as I pointed out already, there is already so much about this game that is different from D&D due to the type of game this is, if they want the majority of folks to enjoy it, providing multiple play styles, I don't believe it possible to stay 100% true to D&D because D&D is a very specific type of game. This is imply an MMORPG based on the D&D lore. I wish people could accept that and stop getting all up in arms over this aspect or that aspect not being like D&D.
I know there is 5 man.. If it weren't there would be no argument here.
But some devs like to split up huge raids and small raids.
I don't think this game will fit well with big raids like WoW. It would ruin the game.
Thats _MY_ opinion. WoW raids are rather <font color="orange">HAMSTER</font>,.
I wish people would stop whining and wanting to change a brand new game then play it as its intended.
Its okey to voice your opinion but i don't think what this is..
Personally, I don't enjoy raids. Never did, I'm happy with content for small groups, but I find the bigger stuff too stressful, time-consuming, yada, yada, yada. That said, if raid-rewards can be obtained by other means and through solo and/or 5man content, then I don't see the problem. Just because I don't care for a specific kind of content doesn't mean it's bad or it shouldn't be there. If people enjoy raids, give them raids. I just don't want to see super awesome gear, mounts and other goodies, which are raid-exclusive and otherwise impossible to get.
Thank you, agree completely, and this is the most important point that you can make regarding this really, and one I've made several times because it's just logical. Again, if loot is attainable by other means, probably heroic 5 mans or a "raid" level 5 man dungeon, there is no reason not to have at least 10 man dungeons. The not "D&D" argument doesn't work, the loot argument doesn't work, the "I don't like raids therefore they shouldn't be there" argument doesn't work, the "majority doesn't want raids" argument doesn't work (as seen by the percentages), and the "I don't have time" argument doesn't work because as I said, you can either choose to only do the heroic 5 mans instead, or they could even create shorter raid dungeons.
If you consider all these points, there simply is no reason not to have them in game, especially since it's clear most want the option. The typical arguments people use to exclude it from the game are weak, as having options and play style choices make any MMORPG stronger.
I am curious has there been any mention about them adding raid type content? The people I game with are really excited about this game, but raid content is something that we want to have as an end game option. I am in favor of the smaller raid sizes 10-20 man just because it gives options of multiple raid groups for guilds. Though I really liked the idea i read somewhere in this thread about having a sliding scale for the days when you might only get like 8 of your 10 online.
See my updated OP update. There was a video about it from a popular gamer news channel.
Everquest has 54 and yes, you deal with AFK'ers tons on a raid that size. Cutting it in half would be a wise thing to do.
But there is so much to do before we can even discuss raiding, so let's not put the cart before the horse.
I agree. They need to iron out the overall game first, totally. This thread is simply to let the developers know and others know that raids and large group content is important to a lot of people and to facilitate discussion regarding this.
Different skins, same stats. A raid weapon could be more shiny than one obtained by a solo player, which would make it an attention-drawing status symbol, without giving an advantage in PvP or in heroic dungeons. Same for armour pieces.
You could use WoW's post-WotLK approach (when they equalized 10 and 25 man raids) and modify the drop chances depending on the difficulty of the encounter, both in terms of absolute (number of) drops and drop chance, without changing the drop quality.
Many WoW players considered WotLK to be the failure of the series.
Raid bosses could drop convenience items that are otherwise only available in the cash store or through AD, like respec tokens and possibly mass resurrection scrolls.
Again, refer to GW2.
At the end of the day this is not a pissing contest. People who raid, raid to become stronger to overcome the next obstacle. We don't raid to buy items for free from a cash shop that is specifically designed for fluff itemization as a means of revenue for the games future progression and longevity.
The fact is and will always remain that you can't *equally* reward a solo player on the same level as a coordinated group of 10, 20 or 40+ people who take the time to do something monumental that requires a large group to over come.
See, the problem is that the system you advocate failed in WoW, in vanilla and especially TBC. The system that supposedly failed in GW2 succeeded in WoW's Cataclysm and MoP. So it's a bit of stalemate because you can find evidence for the validity of either side of the argument.
Many WoW players considered WotLK to be the failure of the series.
That was my point. WotLK used the system where 10 and 25 man raids gave rewards that were different in quality. They changed it AFTER WotLK, and the Cataclysm system (close to suggestion #2) worked much better (a weapon obtained from a 25-man raid was not better than one obtained from a 10-man raid -- it just had a different color, and people were fine with that).
The fact is and will always remain that you can't *equally* reward a solo player on the same level as a coordinated group of 10, 20 or 40+ people who take the time to do something monumental that requires a large group to over come.
This is not a fact, that is your opinion. I gave you three specific suggestions how to possibly do this, and you didn't really offer any other reasons or arguments than "doesn't work". I do respect your opinion and your views, but I don't share them, and unless you offer actual reasons (why this or that doesn't work), we'll probably go in circles. Let me talk some more about where I come from with my perspective, and why I think about this the way I do.
When I was raiding in WoW (40 man, later some 25), I did it in the server's top raiding group. Most of the people I raided with were all about status and wanting to be seen as "better" than everyone else. It was more important to have those glowing shoulders than to defeat the content, unless defeating the content came with rewards like title or even brighter glowing shoulders. Case in point? On raid nights where we killed bosses that we could easily get down, we had a ton of sign-ups, because the loot would flow. When it was a raid night where we would probably wipe for 5 hours on a boss that we couldn't get down reliably (you know, the one that was a challenge and an obstacle), we could much fewer sign-ups and plenty of people were suddenly busy.
Many raid guilds had exactly the same problem, which is why DKP systems often give extra points for defeating wipefest bosses. Others wanted raid gear so they could own non-raiders in PvP, which they (we) did. You essentially had to do raid in order to be competitive in PvP, and that is one of the concerns with rewarding raiders with gear that doesn't only look better, but that actually is better.
So, no, I don't buy the "we want a challenge" argument. If you want a challenge, why does it matter to get gear that has better stats? Why must it be a mount that otherwise cannot be obtained, not even in a recolored version? Raid weapons don't HAVE to be better than what is available to 5-man groups, because difficulty can just be scaled to a larger group. You always need more coordination if you have a larger group. You can also add mechanics that require more coordination but not better gear (encounters were movement matters, where attention is required, where you have to come together or move away, where you cannot just zerg a boss, etc. -- stuff that requires brain, not gear).
So, why do raid drops need to have better stats and why can't the difference just be cosmetic? If raid drops are better, in terms of stats, it will affect PvP and trivialize all other content, which then leads to raiders whining about how boring everything else is in the game. WoW has shown this more clearly than any other game, and I think it is worthwhile for a developer to learn from their mistakes.
To recap, I'm not against raids. I just don't feel raids should give better (quality) gear.
See, the problem is that the system you advocate failed in WoW, in vanilla and especially TBC. The system that supposedly failed in GW2 succeeded in WoW's Cataclysm and MoP. So it's a bit of stalemate because you can find evidence for the validity of either side of the argument.
That was my point. WotLK used the system where 10 and 25 man raids gave rewards that were different in quality. They changed it AFTER WotLK, and the Cataclysm system (close to suggestion #2) worked much better (a weapon obtained from a 25-man raid was not better than one obtained from a 10-man raid -- it just had a different color, and people were fine with that).
Yes, they woke up after people left in droves and simply implemented more loot drops on 25 man raids and less on 10 man raids but same quaility, which it should of been all along.
One could argue here that 10 man raids are more challenging then 25 man raids due to the amount of people who can be bad on a 25 and get carried versus how many can be bad on 10 man and fail. 3 people dead on a 10 man is the same as 7 - 8 on a 25 man or 30%, but anyways, we wont go there as this is going off topic.
This is not a fact, that is your opinion. I gave you three specific suggestions how to possibly do this, and you didn't really offer any other reasons or arguments than "doesn't work". I do respect your opinion and your views, but I don't share them, and unless you offer actual reasons (why this or that doesn't work), we'll probably go in circles. Let me talk some more about where I come from with my perspective, and why I think about this the way I do.
When I was raiding in WoW (40 man, later some 25), I did it in the server's top raiding group. Most of the people I raided with were all about status and wanting to be seen as "better" than everyone else. It was more important to have those glowing shoulders than to defeat the content, unless defeating the content came with rewards like title or even brighter glowing shoulders. Case in point? On raid nights where we killed bosses that we could easily get down, we had a ton of sign-ups, because the loot would flow. When it was a raid night where we would probably wipe for 5 hours on a boss that we couldn't get down reliably (you know, the one that was a challenge and an obstacle), we could much fewer sign-ups and plenty of people were suddenly busy.
Many raid guilds had exactly the same problem, which is why DKP systems often give extra points for defeating wipefest bosses. Others wanted raid gear so they could own non-raiders in PvP, which they (we) did. You essentially had to do raid in order to be competitive in PvP, and that is one of the concerns with rewarding raiders with gear that doesn't only look better, but that actually is better.
It is a fact because what you speak of is simply wardrobe slot itemization that people strive to get for simply looking cool while it adds no direct benefit to the player themselves.
At some point in a raiders game life, they all do this which generally comes after gaining all the best stat based gear, hence why we get wardrobe slots or I should say why wardrobe slots have become a common feature in MMORPG's.
No point looking cool if you can't heal the group, no one cares how cool you look if you are constantly wiping.
So, no, I don't buy the "we want a challenge" argument. If you want a challenge, why does it matter to get gear that has better stats? Why must it be a mount that otherwise cannot be obtained, not even in a recolored version? Raid weapons don't HAVE to be better than what is available to 5-man groups, because difficulty can just be scaled to a larger group. You always need more coordination if you have a larger group. You can also add mechanics that require more coordination but not better gear (encounters were movement matters, where attention is required, where you have to come together or move away, where you cannot just zerg a boss, etc. -- stuff that requires brain, not gear).
So, why do raid drops need to have better stats and why can't the difference just be cosmetic? If raid drops are better, in terms of stats, it will affect PvP and trivialize all other content, which then leads to raiders whining about how boring everything else is in the game. WoW has shown this more clearly than any other game, and I think it is worthwhile for a developer to learn from their mistakes.
To recap, I'm not against raids. I just don't feel raids should give better (quality) gear.
And this is your opinion, but I disagree and as I said this is not a pissing contest but the challenge is in gaining the gear to overcome the next challenge level of content.
Many games have tried and tried again to break away from the linear model of gear progression to achieve content progression and it fails time and time again.
MMORPG's are a very simple concept that people generally over look. What you put in to them is what you get back out of them, it is no more simple then that. However, everyone still has access to gain any item and see all the content, it is peoples expectations of time spent to recieve said rewards that is flawed in todays genre.
Like I keep asking people which no one seems to be able to give me a solid answer or answer at all, what is the difference between someone who spends 10 hours a week playing but takes 10 months to see all the game has to offer versus someone who plays 40 hours a week and takes 3 months to see all the game has to offer?
Comments
The only difference is play style and the type of player, which as I just explained in my above post, a good game should have options for many different types of players, as long as everyone can utilize any play style to truly progress their character.
Right, and this thread has more to do with implementing larger group content (whether you call that raids or not) than it is about NW having good end game. I am also of the belief that larger group content makes for better end game, but it is still two separate discussions. The vote was to see how many people wanted dungeons designed for more people, not whether or not it makes for better end game. I think it is a well known fact already that if an MMORPG has no end game, people will get bored fast, GW2 was a perfect example of this.
Honestly with the level of graphics this game has, I was suprised at how smooth it ran, even at max settings. I don't think it would be a huge problem. There are also ways of designing a 20 man raid that would not tax your system too much probably.
True! I was just stating the typical problem most people seem to have. I don't have a problem running a raid with max graphics.
*Please!* begs!
Or even raids could be created in foundry. If that would be doable to "adjust" this tool.
They've already said that Gauntlgrym has 20 man teams, and a PvP mode (20v20), and that they plan to add more raid style content as time goes on.
Everquest has 54 and yes, you deal with AFK'ers tons on a raid that size. Cutting it in half would be a wise thing to do.
But there is so much to do before we can even discuss raiding, so let's not put the cart before the horse.
This sums up my opinion perfectly.
Back when WoW was new, I spent a couple years raiding. First 40-man and then 25-man raids. Initially, it was amazing as I had never experienced something on this scale. As time went by, it became a secondary job and a responsibility. I could have stopped, but I enjoyed other aspects of the game too, like PvP, and in order to be competitive I needed gear from raids, so I continued past the point where it was enjoyable.
I eventually did quit raiding because the time demands became troublesome, which then caused me to feel like second class player: couldn't further progress my character without needing a regular group of 10/25 players, couldn't get raid achievements, couldn't complete my pet and mount collections, felt like a leecher when I did 5-man instances with raid-geared people, got "owned" by people with raid weapons (which were better than PvP weapons), and so on. The choice was then to either commit to raid schedules and play with folks who I didn't want to play with, or to quit the game. I quit the game.
Like the Kitten above, I'm all for giving people choices and content they enjoy, as long as equal rewards are available to solo players too (this includes grouping with random folks, of course).
So please do explain how you implement *equal* rewards for a solo player versus a coordinated group of 10+ people.........
Three spontaneous ideas:
Different skins, same stats. A raid weapon could be more shiny than one obtained by a solo player, which would make it an attention-drawing status symbol, without giving an advantage in PvP or in heroic dungeons. Same for armour pieces.
You could use WoW's post-WotLK approach (when they equalized 10 and 25 man raids) and modify the drop chances depending on the difficulty of the encounter, both in terms of absolute (number of) drops and drop chance, without changing the drop quality.
Raid bosses could drop convenience items that are otherwise only available in the cash store or through AD, like respec tokens and possibly mass resurrection scrolls.
That said.. I'm all for 10 man as long as there will be a 5 man option..
Twitter ~ Google+ ~ Raptr ~ Siren Sanctuary ~ MMO-Society
Siren is recruiting mature players for Neverwinter
Most definitely. Agree 100%, and a point several have already made and agreed with. Good to see others adding their approval. We can only hope that when they add raids and larger group content, they will hear us.
There is already a 5 man option and I don't believe anyone said anything about a 100 player raid, no? 8-10 players are what the majority of us, including you, want to see. Again, as with other points brought up, this was addressed in my OP as one of the arguments some use to say "no raids" but it's a weak one IMO. Just because you have more people in a dungeon does not mean NW is not like D&D, as long as it's not a ridiculous amount of people.
Besides, even if they do implement 20 or 25 man dungeons, as I pointed out already, there is already so much about this game that is different from D&D due to the type of game this is, if they want the majority of folks to enjoy it, providing multiple play styles, I don't believe it possible to stay 100% true to D&D because D&D is a very specific type of game. This is imply an MMORPG based on the D&D lore. I wish people could accept that and stop getting all up in arms over this aspect or that aspect not being like D&D.
I never said make solo rewards the same as raid dungeons, I said make them attainable by different means. My thinking was that they could create heroic 5 man dungeons or even a level above heroic that would be just as hard as a raid, only with the standard 5 people. They already have loot that is only attainable with a 5 man party, so all we are saying is, make hard mode dungeons playable with 8-10 people, and give them equal level loot as the best loot attainable by the 5 mans. Now that said, if it were possible to give the same level gear by playing strictly solo, I'd be open to suggestions like the ones above. We shall see.
I know there is 5 man.. If it weren't there would be no argument here.
But some devs like to split up huge raids and small raids.
I don't think this game will fit well with big raids like WoW. It would ruin the game.
Thats _MY_ opinion. WoW raids are rather <font color="orange">HAMSTER</font>,.
I wish people would stop whining and wanting to change a brand new game then play it as its intended.
Its okey to voice your opinion but i don't think what this is..
Twitter ~ Google+ ~ Raptr ~ Siren Sanctuary ~ MMO-Society
Siren is recruiting mature players for Neverwinter
Thank you, agree completely, and this is the most important point that you can make regarding this really, and one I've made several times because it's just logical. Again, if loot is attainable by other means, probably heroic 5 mans or a "raid" level 5 man dungeon, there is no reason not to have at least 10 man dungeons. The not "D&D" argument doesn't work, the loot argument doesn't work, the "I don't like raids therefore they shouldn't be there" argument doesn't work, the "majority doesn't want raids" argument doesn't work (as seen by the percentages), and the "I don't have time" argument doesn't work because as I said, you can either choose to only do the heroic 5 mans instead, or they could even create shorter raid dungeons.
If you consider all these points, there simply is no reason not to have them in game, especially since it's clear most want the option. The typical arguments people use to exclude it from the game are weak, as having options and play style choices make any MMORPG stronger.
See my updated OP update. There was a video about it from a popular gamer news channel.
I agree. They need to iron out the overall game first, totally. This thread is simply to let the developers know and others know that raids and large group content is important to a lot of people and to facilitate discussion regarding this.
With this modern combat system there is no way that a 40 man would work. Especially without the ability of zoom out.
Tried and failed with GW2.
Many WoW players considered WotLK to be the failure of the series.
Again, refer to GW2.
At the end of the day this is not a pissing contest. People who raid, raid to become stronger to overcome the next obstacle. We don't raid to buy items for free from a cash shop that is specifically designed for fluff itemization as a means of revenue for the games future progression and longevity.
The fact is and will always remain that you can't *equally* reward a solo player on the same level as a coordinated group of 10, 20 or 40+ people who take the time to do something monumental that requires a large group to over come.
Wrong, D&D had conventions and large group based table top venues back in the day, look it up, hundreds of people.
See, the problem is that the system you advocate failed in WoW, in vanilla and especially TBC. The system that supposedly failed in GW2 succeeded in WoW's Cataclysm and MoP. So it's a bit of stalemate because you can find evidence for the validity of either side of the argument.
That was my point. WotLK used the system where 10 and 25 man raids gave rewards that were different in quality. They changed it AFTER WotLK, and the Cataclysm system (close to suggestion #2) worked much better (a weapon obtained from a 25-man raid was not better than one obtained from a 10-man raid -- it just had a different color, and people were fine with that).
This is not a fact, that is your opinion. I gave you three specific suggestions how to possibly do this, and you didn't really offer any other reasons or arguments than "doesn't work". I do respect your opinion and your views, but I don't share them, and unless you offer actual reasons (why this or that doesn't work), we'll probably go in circles. Let me talk some more about where I come from with my perspective, and why I think about this the way I do.
When I was raiding in WoW (40 man, later some 25), I did it in the server's top raiding group. Most of the people I raided with were all about status and wanting to be seen as "better" than everyone else. It was more important to have those glowing shoulders than to defeat the content, unless defeating the content came with rewards like title or even brighter glowing shoulders. Case in point? On raid nights where we killed bosses that we could easily get down, we had a ton of sign-ups, because the loot would flow. When it was a raid night where we would probably wipe for 5 hours on a boss that we couldn't get down reliably (you know, the one that was a challenge and an obstacle), we could much fewer sign-ups and plenty of people were suddenly busy.
Many raid guilds had exactly the same problem, which is why DKP systems often give extra points for defeating wipefest bosses. Others wanted raid gear so they could own non-raiders in PvP, which they (we) did. You essentially had to do raid in order to be competitive in PvP, and that is one of the concerns with rewarding raiders with gear that doesn't only look better, but that actually is better.
So, no, I don't buy the "we want a challenge" argument. If you want a challenge, why does it matter to get gear that has better stats? Why must it be a mount that otherwise cannot be obtained, not even in a recolored version? Raid weapons don't HAVE to be better than what is available to 5-man groups, because difficulty can just be scaled to a larger group. You always need more coordination if you have a larger group. You can also add mechanics that require more coordination but not better gear (encounters were movement matters, where attention is required, where you have to come together or move away, where you cannot just zerg a boss, etc. -- stuff that requires brain, not gear).
So, why do raid drops need to have better stats and why can't the difference just be cosmetic? If raid drops are better, in terms of stats, it will affect PvP and trivialize all other content, which then leads to raiders whining about how boring everything else is in the game. WoW has shown this more clearly than any other game, and I think it is worthwhile for a developer to learn from their mistakes.
To recap, I'm not against raids. I just don't feel raids should give better (quality) gear.
Keep it at the standard 5 players. 126 33.16%
8-10 player content. 190 50.00%
15-20 player content. 97 25.53%
So, there is 108.79%???????
126 is not 33% of 413. 33% of 413 is 137.3
190 is not 50% of 413. 50% of 413 is 206.5
97 is not 25% of 413. 25% of 413 is 103.25
The actual percentages should be:
31%/46%/23% respectively.
AKA Cyber Troll and Euben Hadd
Yes, they woke up after people left in droves and simply implemented more loot drops on 25 man raids and less on 10 man raids but same quaility, which it should of been all along.
One could argue here that 10 man raids are more challenging then 25 man raids due to the amount of people who can be bad on a 25 and get carried versus how many can be bad on 10 man and fail. 3 people dead on a 10 man is the same as 7 - 8 on a 25 man or 30%, but anyways, we wont go there as this is going off topic.
It is a fact because what you speak of is simply wardrobe slot itemization that people strive to get for simply looking cool while it adds no direct benefit to the player themselves.
At some point in a raiders game life, they all do this which generally comes after gaining all the best stat based gear, hence why we get wardrobe slots or I should say why wardrobe slots have become a common feature in MMORPG's.
No point looking cool if you can't heal the group, no one cares how cool you look if you are constantly wiping.
And this is your opinion, but I disagree and as I said this is not a pissing contest but the challenge is in gaining the gear to overcome the next challenge level of content.
Many games have tried and tried again to break away from the linear model of gear progression to achieve content progression and it fails time and time again.
MMORPG's are a very simple concept that people generally over look. What you put in to them is what you get back out of them, it is no more simple then that. However, everyone still has access to gain any item and see all the content, it is peoples expectations of time spent to recieve said rewards that is flawed in todays genre.
Like I keep asking people which no one seems to be able to give me a solid answer or answer at all, what is the difference between someone who spends 10 hours a week playing but takes 10 months to see all the game has to offer versus someone who plays 40 hours a week and takes 3 months to see all the game has to offer?
Answer is nothing, they both have access to it.