CDP Topic: Game Content Accessibility

145791015

Comments

  • milehighxr#1299
    milehighxr#1299 Member Posts: 429 Arc User

    > @milehighxr#1299 said:

    > (Quote)

    > Don't forget all the people that have spent tons of time or real money on those comps post mod 16 to get the stats for ToMM. I think nerfing the comps is a bad idea. Better to buff up character stats. I do agree though on bring back the feat trees and such. I had really great hybrid paladin that was designed for dps/heals/tanking in mod 15. He was in a good place then, but now just boring as all he does is stand there and get hammered by the boss. Leading up to boss it's basically either try to outrun everyone else and grab aggro for 2 seconds, or just keep up with them enough to not get too far behind.



    Yeah, of course. But I would argue that the investment would be worth more (companion powers, bolster etc) if the ridiculous op bonding runestones were corrected or “nerfed” if you wish. I don’t really care if they are kept as is though as long as the main issue with everyone capping every stat is addressed.

    I would also not like the old system back(even though I like it better than the current one) but a reworked system that is valid.







    > @rjc9000 said:

    > (Quote)

    > There were a lot wrong with the old feat trees. It could be a lengthy document nitpicking, but I'd argue that the main issues were that there were a lot of ... "fake" choices:* a decent amount of times, you had to pick between two equally bad options that never really expended your build

    >

    > * there were choices that presented a great feat versus a laughably useless one, which meant that the only choice ended up being "pick the non terrible feat or waste your points"

    >

    > * feats that asked players to use powers that sucked or had their usefulness overestimated (huh, why does this sound familiar...?)

    >

    > * lots of stuff that ran in the background but didn't actually differentiate the role that much (not necessarily as bad as the above issues, just not as interesting to put points in)

    >

    >

    > The main exceptions to these trends were the feats that actually made builds, the capstones, and the few feats that upgraded powers players were planning to use.

    >

    > So, I understand why the amount of feats was reduced to 10, and picking 5. Instead of confusing new players with paralysis of what to pick when there were a lot of poor choices, make a smaller amount of choices but with much greater effects.

    >

    > The main issue I can think of was that instead of getting 10 capstone like feats with a choice of 5, the feat choices presented now usually end up forcing players to use terrible powers, or have overly flashy effects with 0 substance, or barely change how players approach combat.

    >

    > Again, this issue could be explained in further depth, but I'd think the more in depth explanations on "how class feats/passives/progression/powers should be reworked" would be better in its own CDP topic.

    >

    > Ideally, this CDP topic that would be really useful to have before putting out the DPS Cleric/DPS Fighter reworks so there could be a state set for how to rework all other classes when the time comes, like, say, how to rework the poor Hellbringer Warlock, or Hunter Ranger, or Whisperknife Rogue...

    >

    > No Mr. Whitside, I'm "not" suggesting anything at all while responding to another person, why do you ask?



    Well said, I couldn’t agree more.

    Absolutely no to any nerfs at all. Everyone is so tired of things being nerfed. They need to buff up the things that aren't perfect.

    I much preferred the old system too, I didn't feel like I absolutely needed 6 legendary comps just to feel like I progressed my toon when I got to new harder areas and then mastered them.
  • darthpotater
    darthpotater Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 1,162 Arc User

    Hello,

    I will be brief.

    We want more content like ToMM. Its great. Makes players have a goal to upgrade their characters. We also want easier versions of hardest content with lesser rewards for other players so they can enjoy and learn the mechanics.

    We want variety of ways to play each class. That means more relevant feats and class features. Now 90% of them are so bad that its embarassing. Also class bugfixes should be a priority.

    We want that some items behind RNG are also obtainable grinding. No matter if the grind is hard but putting some very important class items only available for RNG makes you feel so bad when you have bad luck. (For example companion gear and armor from ZOK boxes or alabaster weapons)

    Thank you and good luck

    Hi Darthpotater,

    Again thanks for taking the time to be part of the CDP. Looking forward to evolve the game with your and and the communities help.

    When you say 'we' it comes across as though you are speaking for everyone who plays. So my question is to you: what about players who want to experience ToMM but who can't gain entry and obviously can't get close to completing any of therelated content. Note i am not looking for thoughts in regard to normalization. Instead how do we make all of our content more inclusive to our players. What are the benefits for all the players of this?

    We want that some items behind RNG are also obtainable grinding. No matter if the grind is hard but putting some very important class items only available for RNG makes you feel so bad when you have bad luck. (For example companion gear and armor from ZOK boxes or alabaster weapons)

    I believe our systems team have plans for just this that relates to players of all levels globally. I will follow up.

    Chris
    I think part of the problem is that every mod makes almost all the content obsolete, so new players dont have a learning progression, the hardcore ones learn asking, watching videos and reading the forum but the game is not friendly to players that want to learn but they dont know how or where.

    Making easy versions of hard content would help, and also removing class bugs and wrong tooltips because you cant optimize your character if half the things doesnt work or do different things that should be.

    Also, I said in other posts, the game should have incentives to mix experienced players with new players in dungeons, with according rewards to everyone, encouraging experienced players to teach the runs, because they will get something good for the effort. Lets say parties with 2 experienced players and 3 new players to run epic dungeons for example.

    In regarding the builds and playstile, people wants more "good options" I mean when I am building my character and loadout, It would be great to think: "I want all the feats but I only can have half of them" and the same with powers and class features.

    Now is the opposite, 80% are totally useless, and I pick the less bad of each one, with some exceptions.
    Lescar PvE Wizard - Sir Garlic PvE Paladin
    Caturday Survivor
    Elemental Evil Survivor
    Undermontain Survivor
    Mod20 Combat rework Survivor
    Mod22 Refinement rework Survivor
  • thefiresidecat
    thefiresidecat Member Posts: 4,486 Arc User
    rjc9000 said:


    I do agree though on bring back the feat trees and such. I had really great hybrid paladin that was designed for dps/heals/tanking in mod 15. He was in a good place then, but now just boring as all he does is stand there and get hammered by the boss. Leading up to boss it's basically either try to outrun everyone else and grab aggro for 2 seconds, or just keep up with them enough to not get too far behind.

    There were a lot wrong with the old feat trees. It could be a lengthy document nitpicking, but I'd argue that the main issues were that there were a lot of ... "fake" choices:
    • a decent amount of times, you had to pick between two equally bad options that never really expended your build
    • there were choices that presented a great feat versus a laughably useless one, which meant that the only choice ended up being "pick the non terrible feat or waste your points"
    • feats that asked players to use powers that sucked or had their usefulness overestimated (huh, why does this sound familiar...?)
    • lots of stuff that ran in the background but didn't actually differentiate the role that much (not necessarily as bad as the above issues, just not as interesting to put points in)
    The main exceptions to these trends were the feats that actually made builds, the capstones, and the few feats that upgraded powers players were planning to use.

    So, I understand why the amount of feats was reduced to 10, and picking 5. Instead of confusing new players with paralysis of what to pick when there were a lot of poor choices, make a smaller amount of choices but with much greater effects.

    The main issue I can think of was that instead of getting 10 capstone like feats with a choice of 5, the feat choices presented now usually end up forcing players to use terrible powers, or have overly flashy effects with 0 substance, or barely change how players approach combat.

    Again, this issue could be explained in further depth, but I'd think the more in depth explanations on "how class feats/passives/progression/powers should be reworked" would be better in its own CDP topic.

    Ideally, this CDP topic that would be really useful to have before putting out the DPS Cleric/DPS Fighter reworks so there could be a state set for how to rework all other classes when the time comes, like, say, how to rework the poor Hellbringer Warlock, or Hunter Ranger, or Whisperknife Rogue...


    No Mr. Whitside, I'm "not" suggesting anything at all while responding to another person, why do you ask?
    imo though the current tree is just as useless as before. the feat trees as they were were great, the problem was the years of the nerf buff cycle breaking each one systematically.
  • arcticblitz
    arcticblitz Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 126 Arc User
    edited December 2019
    So much good stuff and too much to quote

    Scaling : As many have suggested I feel scaling was implemented in a confusing way, my thoughts on this were if you have reached a stat cap for unscaled content you should be scaled to the stat cap of the scaled content.

    Dungeon Difficulty : a few people have suggested it and i think one of the great things implemented by the team was the whole Tarokka card system for difficulty. it gave you choice of difficulty and rewards, I would love to see that incorporated into all dungeons, it could be 0 cards = story mode up to 5 cards for Extreme Pain Mode.
    Post edited by arcticblitz on
    Blitzy : PVE only Barbarian
    Martin ConDion PVE only Ranger

    Guild Founder: -HunterS-
  • joey#5668
    joey#5668 Member Posts: 10 Arc User
    Hi Neverwinter dev team.

    Here's is my feedback on what i would like to see changed, its a small thing, but every small thing helps.

    Feedback Overview: so this is more for people with multiple characters, its about the Reward Reroll token,
    Currently is bound to character, so has the character you play the most on, close to none reward reroll tokens left if you dungeon regulary. Would like to see it changed that instead of Bound to Character, it could be Bound to Account ( like we can do now with Companion upgrade tokens and tradebars and that sort of stuff.

    Feedback Goal: This small change would give players with more characters a chance to keep on dungeoning without having to accept the first thing they see out of the chest. and get some RNG for better drops, also might encourage players to create more characters (buy character slots and VIP) to claim the daily Green bag that holds those reward reroll tokens (VIP).


    Feedback Functionality: Im pretty sure it would improve the gameplay for people, more enjoyment, and a pretty nice positive overall, it wont causes errors with the current design of neverwinter.


    Risks & Concerns: I'm seeing no direct problems or issues that will cause harm or any negativity.

    I hope this is a good feedback/idea and it will improve the gameplay and enjoyment of gaming in Neverwinter.

    Kind Regards,

    Joey
  • iimrpomii
    iimrpomii Member Posts: 9 Arc User

    iimrpomii said:

    Feedback Overview
    Make the Cleric Healer viable in new qued content, such as TOMM & Citadel.


    Feedback Goal
    The goal is to allow cleric healers to be able to join the new qued content and enjoy the game likewise. Currently, OP healers are a preferred choice in groups because of the temporary shield that they grant to the team, allowing the party members to fight without fear of losing HP and stay at one place fighting, and therefore, making the most of "combat advantage" stat. Also, players prefer to "lose temporary HP than their actual HP." Hence, allowing them to play with less stress and more effectively.


    Feedback Functionality
    Clerics could once again become part of the new content by significantly improving the effectiveness of Healing Word, which basically restores HP once it goes down. It has its similarity to the OP shield, except that it only works once the actual HP starts decreasing. So, if Healing Word is effective enough to deal with once-shots, AOE, and other damages then, I think, people would pick clerics in their teams instead of looking for OPs only.

    Healing Word could also provide some shield once the players' HP drop to 50%. This would, at least, let the players know that they will not die fast so as to waste revive scrolls and would also allow the cleric in team to heal back. I know I have only focused on Healing WOrd here, but what other choice do the clerics (and other classes) have considering the post16 class skill limitations?

    Risks & Concerns
    <> Warlock healers may feel left out because the ops and dcs will be needed, but not them. Currently, they share the same position with Cleric healers. So they are not alone.

    Disagree. Before I start on cleric - I used to main warlock, parked him for two last mods due to nerf hammer and absolutely ridiculous lack of synergy and lack of damage due to heavy nerfs. Only few days ago, reading dps path will finally get a buff and after testing it on preview, I started playing warlock again, got him r15 bondings and all good stuff as I really love the class and refuse to stop playing it, more, it wil be my main again once devs show it some love. When my warlock was resting I made wizard and cleric and cleric is absolutely fine in every content including ToMM. No idea where did you find out that clerics are unwanted in ToMM, actually ppl ask for both Oathkeeper and Devout for their runs. They have diffirent functions, paladin provides shields but cleric provides burst heals and this awesome "oh ***" skill (Intercession). In my last ToMM run I had cleric (me) and paladin and we were cooperating in a way I really would like to see more in game (but that also depends on player's will to cooperate and understand their class role in a content) - whenever his shields were gone and HP started dropping, I was popping burst heal followed immediately by his shields to keep HP full. I had no issues with divinity but that's the way I play, I learned the class and even survived latest nerf healers received.
    I don't use Healing Word. Waste of divinity honestly. For regenerating HP when below 50% you have Anointed Army, again this needs skill to use it in proper moment, you need to predict when players can risk big HP loss and you need your AP gain as high as possible to use it often. And clerics have the best burst heals in game, take Bastion of Health, main spammable. I can easily get 600k+ crit with it, having proper power/crit stats following specific healers crit chance formula. So it's not about cleric being not viable or not wanted in ToMM, it is the skill it needs to play ALONG with pally as these two healing classes work together very well. The problem is warlock Soulweaver that needs more resources to build, more skill to heal efficiently and generally the class is so broken I truly hope someone actually playing warlock will take a look into this to find out why the class is so badly treated. Neither dps path nor heal path are wanted in ToMM and this makes me wonder if the trial was really done only for wizards/rangers/pallys/clerics.
    Warlocks already feel left out.

    Obviously you are advocating for SW as it was once (and is now?) your main. You miss the point here. I never said DCs are bad at healing. They are good at it, no doubt. What I was pointing out was OP shields are better in terms that it allow for the less stressful fights. Players are able to fight without worrying much as temporary HP is almost always up by a good OP, which gives them the advantage to fight in combat advantage mode.

    Have you not noticed in TOMM and in the new dungeon (Citadel) on preview, like how hard hits there are? Do you expect people to take DC alone as a healer to finish these new contents? The simple answer is NO. People have finished TOMM and Citadel with just 1 OP healer. Take DC alone into these and suffer the consequences. You shouldn't expect teams to be made of Op healer + DC healer/SW healer + 1 tank and 2 dps in new dungeons where, in fact, it can be done with 1 op + 1 tank and 3 dps. Hence, saving time. Thus, the point here is not how great DC can heal, the point is: what is the purpose of that healing if people get multiple shots and die in a split second in the new content and to avoid that, why not just take OP healer in qued content, excluding DC?
  • xtremoz
    xtremoz Member Posts: 300 Arc User

    Feedback Overview (short description of the proposed feedback):

    remove DPS and Healing checks from the game

    Feedback Goal (what this feedback would target and accomplish):

    make more party compositions viable and reduce the amount of focus on pure DPS.

    Feedback Functionality (how would your feedback work in relation to the current design of Neverwinter)


    Several dungeons introduced DPS and healing checks. For example destroying Souls in the Ras Nsi fight in Tomb of the Nine Gods, healing the cocooned character in Lair of the Mad Mage, certain phases in TOMM, etc.

    This forces party compositions in certain directions (everybody wants the current "meta" DPS and Heals, or the current meta "buffs" as dual clerics in previous mods) and reduces the variety of builds in the game.

    Taking away checks will make the dungeons more accessible to different combinations of party members.

    Risks & Concerns (what problems can you foresee with implementing your feedback that you would like input on from members of this subforum)

    How to substitute these checks with more interesting challenges for a wider range of party compositions.


    Thats specially true, when u think about helping new members/players, I remember Pre mod 16 finishing dungeons with 2 players dead, meaning 3 in fight. the fight was slow and long but since we could survive we would end up finishing it. now with all this DPS checks its impossible... lets say the groups can survive but its slow killing the check comes and u have 10 sec's to kill something or its over. if your tank and and healer are Strong enough to survive but the dps is slow why cant we take 25min to kill a boss slowlly?
  • jules#6770
    jules#6770 Member Posts: 708 Arc User
    edited December 2019


    The real problem here isn't even that there isn't a "normal, easier" version of ToMM. It's that somewhere along the lines players decided that, regardless of skill level, everyone should be able to do everything. I say baloney. Earn it.

    I agree, I just want to add that the current way of the game supports this behaviour of especially new players.
    If everything is handed to you on a silver platter already, you think you can do (and should be able to) all content.

    The thing we all that have played NW before know is that buyouts, shortcuts and a high IL won't enable you to be decent in group content, thankfully there is more to it.
    But the game tries its hardest now to not let new players know that.

    - bye bye -
  • micky1p00
    micky1p00 Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 3,540 Arc User
    edited December 2019

    the point of the epic and normal variant is so that people can both learn the mechanics and be able to participate even if they are not yet ready for the harder version and with it, the best rewards. being able to complete it on a lower difficulty is a good incentive for people to gear up because they can see it. they can see doing it.. they just need the power boost now to get those tasty high end rewards.


    the direction this game has been going with the participation trophies is a good way to kill the game. if you don't give people a thing to grind for (in a reasonable fashion) they stop playing. the problem is they've been systematically cutting out all the things (and/or reasons) to grind for (things).

    The question then becomes will any reward be worth the grind if I can join the easy version every foreseeable mod.

    A lot can be said about ToMM, good and bad, but one thing to its credit, is that it has an entire phase that acts like a tutorial, with all the mechanics in it, and then the actual one also increases difficulty though in a steep curve, but still a curve.
    What perhaps should have been done, IMO, is adding a symbolic reward after finishing phase 2 ( the first dps check) to encourage groups to train more.

    Having two versions, a player finishes the easy, goes fails the difficult, and now what? I'm very sure that the quitters rate would be much higher than the current system where even today, on PC, players still do training runs and aim to finish it.
    The request for easier (tiered) version by many (not all ofc) is not to learn the mechanics, this can be done on the hard version, but just to put the checkbox on "completed x" and wait for next mod.
  • jules#6770
    jules#6770 Member Posts: 708 Arc User
    edited December 2019

    the direction this game has been going with the participation trophies is a good way to kill the game. if you don't give people a thing to grind for (in a reasonable fashion) they stop playing. the problem is they've been systematically cutting out all the things (and/or reasons) to grind for (things).

    Yeah, quite. Which also includes SH and MW.
    People wouldn't only be discussing Tomm if it wasn't the only thing on their mind. By constantly reviving and letting some things (Professions, in this example) die again people that cannot spend an absurd amount of AD on it will simply learn to ignore it in favor of not being constantly shut down.
    I knew various people that I'm sure couldn't be bothered to do Tomm now, if they were still here and didn't leave after the "BIS for a while" MW Mod 15 (or huntgate, cause many not too-avid dungeon runners actually liked normal hunts + salvage and had a grand time)
    As it is, if you constantly kill every feature in the game that can last you through dry-inbetween-mods-times everybody will be even more concerned about (the lack of) dungeons and skirms.
    - bye bye -
  • thefiresidecat
    thefiresidecat Member Posts: 4,486 Arc User
    micky1p00 said:

    the point of the epic and normal variant is so that people can both learn the mechanics and be able to participate even if they are not yet ready for the harder version and with it, the best rewards. being able to complete it on a lower difficulty is a good incentive for people to gear up because they can see it. they can see doing it.. they just need the power boost now to get those tasty high end rewards.


    the direction this game has been going with the participation trophies is a good way to kill the game. if you don't give people a thing to grind for (in a reasonable fashion) they stop playing. the problem is they've been systematically cutting out all the things (and/or reasons) to grind for (things).

    The question then becomes will any reward be worth the grind if I can join the easy version every foreseeable mod.

    A lot can be said about ToMM, good and bad, but one thing to its credit, is that it has an entire phase that acts like a tutorial, with all the mechanics in it, and then the actual one also increases difficulty though in a steep curve, but still a curve.
    What perhaps should have been done, IMO, is adding a symbolic reward after finishing phase 2 ( the first dps check) to encourage groups to train more.

    Having two versions, a player finishes the easy, goes fails the difficult, and now what? I'm very sure that the quitters rate would be much higher than the current system where even today, on PC, players still do training runs and aim to finish it.
    The request for easier (tiered) version by many (not all ofc) is not to learn the mechanics, this can be done on the hard version, but just to put the checkbox on "completed x" and wait for next mod.

    ofc, they would still do the hard version for better rewards. don't you remember mdemo ndemo? imo that's a perfect example of how it can work well. everyone trained in ndemo until they had it and then rocked the HAMSTER out of mdemo for the better rewards. you just have to have something worth the grind. in that case higher chance of leg ring and twisted to earn the weap set. I think the belt only dropped in one or the other didn't it? can't remember for sure.
  • lantern22
    lantern22 Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 1,111 Arc User
    edited December 2019

    micky1p00 said:

    the point of the epic and normal variant is so that people can both learn the mechanics and be able to participate even if they are not yet ready for the harder version and with it, the best rewards. being able to complete it on a lower difficulty is a good incentive for people to gear up because they can see it. they can see doing it.. they just need the power boost now to get those tasty high end rewards.


    the direction this game has been going with the participation trophies is a good way to kill the game. if you don't give people a thing to grind for (in a reasonable fashion) they stop playing. the problem is they've been systematically cutting out all the things (and/or reasons) to grind for (things).

    The question then becomes will any reward be worth the grind if I can join the easy version every foreseeable mod.

    A lot can be said about ToMM, good and bad, but one thing to its credit, is that it has an entire phase that acts like a tutorial, with all the mechanics in it, and then the actual one also increases difficulty though in a steep curve, but still a curve.
    What perhaps should have been done, IMO, is adding a symbolic reward after finishing phase 2 ( the first dps check) to encourage groups to train more.

    Having two versions, a player finishes the easy, goes fails the difficult, and now what? I'm very sure that the quitters rate would be much higher than the current system where even today, on PC, players still do training runs and aim to finish it.
    The request for easier (tiered) version by many (not all ofc) is not to learn the mechanics, this can be done on the hard version, but just to put the checkbox on "completed x" and wait for next mod.

    ofc, they would still do the hard version for better rewards. don't you remember mdemo ndemo? imo that's a perfect example of how it can work well. everyone trained in ndemo until they had it and then rocked the HAMSTER out of mdemo for the better rewards. you just have to have something worth the grind. in that case higher chance of leg ring and twisted to earn the weap set. I think the belt only dropped in one or the other didn't it? can't remember for sure.
    I agree, particularly if we are comparing nDEMO / eDEMO when they first came out. If the rewards are scaled down appropriately, players will run the harder content for the better rewards. And if they just want to run the easy version, who cares, let them.

    Also . . . .

    if you're not in a strong guild / alliance it isn't always easy to get into training runs if you are a weak toon.

    if you're having to wait to run content because your gear isn't good enough and you need extra time to build up then you miss the time period when people are running training runs. That was a problem for me and CoDG. Watching utube videos didn't really prepare you for the push / pull.

    imo a lot of players aren't that forgiving or willing to train up inexperienced players. Baby versions of dungeons would help, if you could just pug them and get to the end. In FBI a pug run would more often than not fail on the first hill climb.

    anyway, my 2 cents

  • ecrana#2080
    ecrana#2080 Member Posts: 1,654 Arc User
    micky1p00 said:

    The question then becomes will any reward be worth the grind if I can join the easy version every foreseeable mod.

    A lot can be said about ToMM, good and bad, but one thing to its credit, is that it has an entire phase that acts like a tutorial, with all the mechanics in it, and then the actual one also increases difficulty though in a steep curve, but still a curve.
    What perhaps should have been done, IMO, is adding a symbolic reward after finishing phase 2 ( the first dps check) to encourage groups to train more.

    Having two versions, a player finishes the easy, goes fails the difficult, and now what? I'm very sure that the quitters rate would be much higher than the current system where even today, on PC, players still do training runs and aim to finish it.
    The request for easier (tiered) version by many (not all ofc) is not to learn the mechanics, this can be done on the hard version, but just to put the checkbox on "completed x" and wait for next mod.

    I get what you're saying in regards to some players thinking "i finished this on easy why stress myself". Those are the players I don't really want to run something like ToMM with anyway.

    But as @thefiresidecat stated, we have had successful implementations of the easy/normal version with NDemo & EDemo. The loot tables were different so there was incentive to run Edemo once you got Ndemo down. Same with SVA & MSVA. If anything, it seems like this setup on a trial is something that is easier for them to implement.

    I don't remember 100% but I think you could only get the legendary rings out of Edemo. The weapons had a chance to drop in Edemo but not in normal. You could still get epic rings in normal. Etc.

    The format is there if they want to revisit it but, as you say, the rewards have to match the required effort.
  • darthpotater
    darthpotater Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 1,162 Arc User
    If I remember well once people got the weapons in epic demo, everyone was running normal demo because the ring had the same chances and was faster. IMO demogorgon was a bad example of a good implementation of easy version because the rewards were the same except the weapons.
    Lescar PvE Wizard - Sir Garlic PvE Paladin
    Caturday Survivor
    Elemental Evil Survivor
    Undermontain Survivor
    Mod20 Combat rework Survivor
    Mod22 Refinement rework Survivor
  • milehighxr#1299
    milehighxr#1299 Member Posts: 429 Arc User
    micky1p00 said:

    What the game can improve on, to make content more accessible in a way, is a spectator/observer mode, allowing new players to be invited into runs as spectators can both help teach mecahnics and classes.

    Said spectator / learning tools can be taken a step further, add to that an option for, for example, a private training instance option with slowing down / pausing time, allowing people to explain mistakes on the spot, and allowing looking from other players PoV.

    No, I don't want the end spoiled by watching someone else do it, which is why I don't watch youtube vids on mechanics for dungeons. I didn't have to for anything before, why should I start with ToMM(or even some people said you had to for LoMM). It's a game I shouldn't have to spend any time studying mechanics, or whatever to play it. I don't care how hard the content is, or if Cryptic is sending me real gold/cash in the mail when I beat the content. For me this is about blowing off steam and escaping the stress of the real world.
  • milehighxr#1299
    milehighxr#1299 Member Posts: 429 Arc User

    micky1p00 said:

    The question then becomes will any reward be worth the grind if I can join the easy version every foreseeable mod.

    A lot can be said about ToMM, good and bad, but one thing to its credit, is that it has an entire phase that acts like a tutorial, with all the mechanics in it, and then the actual one also increases difficulty though in a steep curve, but still a curve.
    What perhaps should have been done, IMO, is adding a symbolic reward after finishing phase 2 ( the first dps check) to encourage groups to train more.

    Having two versions, a player finishes the easy, goes fails the difficult, and now what? I'm very sure that the quitters rate would be much higher than the current system where even today, on PC, players still do training runs and aim to finish it.
    The request for easier (tiered) version by many (not all ofc) is not to learn the mechanics, this can be done on the hard version, but just to put the checkbox on "completed x" and wait for next mod.

    I get what you're saying in regards to some players thinking "i finished this on easy why stress myself". Those are the players I don't really want to run something like ToMM with anyway.

    But as @thefiresidecat stated, we have had successful implementations of the easy/normal version with NDemo & EDemo. The loot tables were different so there was incentive to run Edemo once you got Ndemo down. Same with SVA & MSVA. If anything, it seems like this setup on a trial is something that is easier for them to implement.

    I don't remember 100% but I think you could only get the legendary rings out of Edemo. The weapons had a chance to drop in Edemo but not in normal. You could still get epic rings in normal. Etc.

    The format is there if they want to revisit it but, as you say, the rewards have to match the required effort.
    I can definitely get behind normal version and an epic version. The only thing I would change is increase the rad rewards for the epic versions. I seem to recall always getting the same rad out of nDemo/eDemo, but eDemo gave the legendary rings, weapons.
  • micky1p00
    micky1p00 Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 3,540 Arc User
    edited December 2019

    micky1p00 said:

    What the game can improve on, to make content more accessible in a way, is a spectator/observer mode, allowing new players to be invited into runs as spectators can both help teach mecahnics and classes.

    Said spectator / learning tools can be taken a step further, add to that an option for, for example, a private training instance option with slowing down / pausing time, allowing people to explain mistakes on the spot, and allowing looking from other players PoV.

    No, I don't want the end spoiled by watching someone else do it, which is why I don't watch youtube vids on mechanics for dungeons. I didn't have to for anything before, why should I start with ToMM(or even some people said you had to for LoMM). It's a game I shouldn't have to spend any time studying mechanics, or whatever to play it. I don't care how hard the content is, or if Cryptic is sending me real gold/cash in the mail when I beat the content. For me this is about blowing off steam and escaping the stress of the real world.
    Completely valid, you want something that you can mindlessly bash after work day and so on, I think everyone want at least at some days. But then you will need to accept that not all content will be available to you, because others fall asleep and quit games that are only clicker simulators. Same way I accept that there are sleep inducing brain dead dailies that I try to avoid at all costs. It have to be some sort of compromise, and while we all want to mindlessly bash from time to time, some / sometimes need something more that can occupy and entertain longer. A challenge.

    Also, you didn't watch for anything before, and you actually don't have to now (though I wouldn't recommend it, as ToMM is more difficult). Assemble a similar minded individuals and learn as you go, it is completely valid, and even more rewarding (As accomplishment), but you can do this right now, nothing that prevents that from you, and what I ask doesn't take that away, it will help me and like minded individuals to help learn mechanics faster, and help people to catch up to a group that already knows it, without feeling like they are hindering 9 people time. You don't need to join as observer the same way you can not watch streams or youtube videos or read guides. Nothing is mandatory.

    I've typed the mechanics of every boss in the game more times that I want to know to new players, in guild / pugs and where not, many other people want to learn before they go in, to feel ready and more confident and it is at least as valid as someone not want to see anything.

    PS: A game being a game doesn't automatically sets it as one way or another, there are easy games, and there are more complex and with depth games, and there are those that try to be both. Learning mechanics in a game is not mutually exclusive.
  • micky1p00
    micky1p00 Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 3,540 Arc User

    If I remember well once people got the weapons in epic demo, everyone was running normal demo because the ring had the same chances and was faster. IMO demogorgon was a bad example of a good implementation of easy version because the rewards were the same except the weapons.

    I remember more or less the same, once we got our twisted weapons, I don't think I've set foot in edemo until recent trial queues.
    It is one of the reasons why I tend to go against the same content in tiered model.

    Btw, the other attempt, MSVA, ended more or less the same way, but probably worse. And I still have those silly marks from there stored on some alt.
  • gabrieldourden
    gabrieldourden Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 1,212 Arc User
    xtremoz said:

    Feedback Overview (short description of the proposed feedback):

    remove DPS and Healing checks from the game

    Feedback Goal (what this feedback would target and accomplish):

    make more party compositions viable and reduce the amount of focus on pure DPS.

    Feedback Functionality (how would your feedback work in relation to the current design of Neverwinter)


    Several dungeons introduced DPS and healing checks. For example destroying Souls in the Ras Nsi fight in Tomb of the Nine Gods, healing the cocooned character in Lair of the Mad Mage, certain phases in TOMM, etc.

    This forces party compositions in certain directions (everybody wants the current "meta" DPS and Heals, or the current meta "buffs" as dual clerics in previous mods) and reduces the variety of builds in the game.

    Taking away checks will make the dungeons more accessible to different combinations of party members.

    Risks & Concerns (what problems can you foresee with implementing your feedback that you would like input on from members of this subforum)

    How to substitute these checks with more interesting challenges for a wider range of party compositions.


    Thats specially true, when u think about helping new members/players, I remember Pre mod 16 finishing dungeons with 2 players dead, meaning 3 in fight. the fight was slow and long but since we could survive we would end up finishing it. now with all this DPS checks its impossible... lets say the groups can survive but its slow killing the check comes and u have 10 sec's to kill something or its over. if your tank and and healer are Strong enough to survive but the dps is slow why cant we take 25min to kill a boss slowlly?
    That's the point.
    Le-Shan: HR level 80 (main)
    Born of Black Wind: SW Level 80
  • thefiresidecat
    thefiresidecat Member Posts: 4,486 Arc User
    micky1p00 said:

    micky1p00 said:

    What the game can improve on, to make content more accessible in a way, is a spectator/observer mode, allowing new players to be invited into runs as spectators can both help teach mecahnics and classes.

    Said spectator / learning tools can be taken a step further, add to that an option for, for example, a private training instance option with slowing down / pausing time, allowing people to explain mistakes on the spot, and allowing looking from other players PoV.

    No, I don't want the end spoiled by watching someone else do it, which is why I don't watch youtube vids on mechanics for dungeons. I didn't have to for anything before, why should I start with ToMM(or even some people said you had to for LoMM). It's a game I shouldn't have to spend any time studying mechanics, or whatever to play it. I don't care how hard the content is, or if Cryptic is sending me real gold/cash in the mail when I beat the content. For me this is about blowing off steam and escaping the stress of the real world.
    Completely valid, you want something that you can mindlessly bash after work day and so on, I think everyone want at least at some days. But then you will need to accept that not all content will be available to you, because others fall asleep and quit games that are only clicker simulators. Same way I accept that there are sleep inducing brain dead dailies that I try to avoid at all costs. It have to be some sort of compromise, and while we all want to mindlessly bash from time to time, some / sometimes need something more that can occupy and entertain longer. A challenge.

    Also, you didn't watch for anything before, and you actually don't have to now (though I wouldn't recommend it, as ToMM is more difficult). Assemble a similar minded individuals and learn as you go, it is completely valid, and even more rewarding (As accomplishment), but you can do this right now, nothing that prevents that from you, and what I ask doesn't take that away, it will help me and like minded individuals to help learn mechanics faster, and help people to catch up to a group that already knows it, without feeling like they are hindering 9 people time. You don't need to join as observer the same way you can not watch streams or youtube videos or read guides. Nothing is mandatory.

    I've typed the mechanics of every boss in the game more times that I want to know to new players, in guild / pugs and where not, many other people want to learn before they go in, to feel ready and more confident and it is at least as valid as someone not want to see anything.

    PS: A game being a game doesn't automatically sets it as one way or another, there are easy games, and there are more complex and with depth games, and there are those that try to be both. Learning mechanics in a game is not mutually exclusive.
    this highlights why a easy mode and harder mode are a valid way to go. people that want to learn without studying have a valid path to play until they do understand. and the people that want to study can go straight to it without being bothered by the other type of person :)
  • thefiresidecat
    thefiresidecat Member Posts: 4,486 Arc User
    edited December 2019
    micky1p00 said:

    If I remember well once people got the weapons in epic demo, everyone was running normal demo because the ring had the same chances and was faster. IMO demogorgon was a bad example of a good implementation of easy version because the rewards were the same except the weapons.

    I remember more or less the same, once we got our twisted weapons, I don't think I've set foot in edemo until recent trial queues.
    It is one of the reasons why I tend to go against the same content in tiered model.

    Btw, the other attempt, MSVA, ended more or less the same way, but probably worse. And I still have those silly marks from there stored on some alt.
    everyone always hated msva though. (I kind of liked it) because the rewards at the time weren't really relevant. and afterwards they were even less relevant. it's not the fault of the material imo. I thought it was a fun trial. it was just the rewards made it so everyone was all meh. and the keys to access the chests were prohibitively difficult to grind for and expensive if you just had to make them in contrast with ndemo who had super easy keys to grind for.

    Mdemo and Ndemo as time went on were only relevant at all for either one because ndemo was a really fast way to make rough ad. again not the fault of the content. no one was doing it because it was fun or they needed to grind specific rewards by that time in the cycle. if it had just been mdemo left no one would have used it for easy rough ad because the greater keys were more expensive and making it not economical to grind for. the only thing that made ndemo grindable was the cheapness of the keys.

    does it really matter at that point if people are doing N or M for grinding currency? When it still means something is when it is still difficult for at least some of the population and the reason for doing it is for something that content still gives you that is unique to that instance. Like Codg is still relevant for a fast way to make UES. there were still a huge chunk of the population that hadn't learned the mechanics yet to this day what a year and a half or 2 years later.. if there had been a ncodg people would have had a way to learn it and they wouldn't have had to nerf the mversion. and it probably would have been ues only drop in Mcodg. but you have Ncodg to put in the random ques.


    btw, the marks from the svas are decent rp if you break them down. at least they used to be.
This discussion has been closed.