Could we redefine "group," please?

[BriarHaven]

Why should groups demand six people?  Why not 2 - 4 also?    This is why, I believe, we need a scaleing system with rewards rated to difficulty.        

[Kordran]

Kendricke wrote:

"The reason that SOE is unlikely to change this in any significant way doesn't have to do with lore, or anything along those lines. It primarily has to do with money. Players in guilds who have established social ties within the context of the game are much more likely to maintain their subscription and continue playing. Players who have no such ties and are "lone wolves" are more likely to hop around from game to game, cancel their subscription, etc. because there's little or no social aspect which ties them to the game beyond the game itself. SOE will do everything they reasonably can to reinforce those social ties, to make it so that leaving the game isn't just pressing the cancel button, it also means walking away from your (virtual) friends and encouraging guilds is a great tool towards that end." -Kordran, September 10, 2008

Do you remember saying that, Kordran?  Because it's a great post.  It sums up my thoughts regarding folks who have trouble finding groups outside of guilds, who are here to be around other players but not to necessarily bond with other players, who are here to primarily solo without putting in the effort to group or find guilds. 

Sure, I remember it and I think it's true. What I said about soloing and APs was an observation, not a statement that it was wrong. I was simply commenting on Atan's post where he said that after 12 hours of soloing in MoY he had barely scratched the surface -- my point was that, in terms of solo content in TSO there's not much surface to scratch. The solo quests are basically in line with the RoK solo quest lines in terms of difficulty (read: not difficult at all), they're just significantly fewer in number.

Also, by extension, I don't think that people who group should have access to the same kind of gear that people who raid can get. I'm absolutely fine with the tiers of itemization in the game, and I'm also fine with the few exceptions to the rule. In other words, I have no problem if one or two long, involved solo quests have a fabled reward. And I have no problem with a fabled item rarely dropping in a group instance. But I think those should continue to be the rare exception, and not the norm.

I am one of those people who think that it is in the designer's best interest to encourage grouping as much as possible. I don't think soloers should be excluded by any stretch of the imagination, but I do think that the social aspect of MMOs is what makes the game greater than the sum of its parts.

In these serveral posts that discuss the issue of TSO's difficulty, you'll not find a single post from me stating that I think soloers should be able to complete group content, or that they should get the same rewards as those who group. Nowhere have I stated that I think soloers should even have the ability to get a single void shard, nor have I stated that I think there should be solo adventure instances. I believe that decision, in particular, would be a destructive force in the game because most players would naturally follow the path of least resistance.

The only argument that I have made is that in recognition that there are players who want to group and want to run the instances in TSO -- but they are experiencing frustration due to a variety of issues -- perhaps it would be a good idea to provide easier content for them. Something on the same level of difficulty of CoA or VoES. I have also said that they should not be given the same rewards as those running the current TSO instances, and that nothing should be taken away from the current instances that many players are enjoying, such as your friends and the folks in your guild. I have never asked for anything to be "nerfed" here. I've simply suggested that it may be in SOE's interest to add some new, easier instances for those players who simply aren't up to running through the group content as it is now.

In summary: I don't think soloers should have the same rewards as groupers. I don't want instances nerfed. I don't want existing content removed or simplified. I do think that adding even easier content to TSO, with lesser rewards, would provide an additional path of progression would encourage more players to buy the expansion. Telling players to run through the RoK instances to progress does not make SOE additional money. Players buying TSO does. And no one is going to cancel or choose not to come back to the game because easier content has been added.

In the end, it'll come down to how SOE decides to manage their developer resources. How many players have returned and are enjoying the new content, versus how many are feeling frustrated and leaving or deciding not to buy the expansion. None of us, not you, not I, know the answer to this. The most we have is anecdotal evidence from the servers we play on, and the extremely skewed feedback on these forums. Hopefully everyone does complete the in-game survey, and that will give SOE the information that they need to make a decision. But when in doubt, I always tend to fall on the side of giving players more options unless it's completely time/cost prohibitive. And the only people who can make that decision with any kind of intelligence work for SOE. I'm sure we'll find out which way they're going with the next few game updates.

[RafaelSmith]

Ceneen@Lucan DLere wrote:

Gaylon@Mistmoore wrote:

Ceneen@Lucan DLere wrote:

Nevertheless though, adding solo quests that would offer shards would do more harm than good from my view. The void shard armor is the class set armor of TSO and it should require adequate content (group and raids) to get the respective armor quality. I wouldn't mind enabling a certain solo reward system which utilizes daily solo missions, but the rewards shouldn't be the void shard armor that is currently on the merchants.

Not entirely sure I agree. I prefer to group...so that is how I will get my shards....I could honestly care less how someone else gets them...assuming time/dificulty to do so scales appropriately....If a system could be put in place which would let a soloer get 1 shard every 48hours or something the advantage and incentive to group remains intact. Or if the designers would actually attempt to be creative they could make whatever the final objective of the solo-shard quest is be different depending on class...and make it something dificult for that class. Another thing would be to make the solo-shard quest involve a solo-only instance..that way you are forced to solo it. Often I think people ask for solo content when what they really want is stuff 2-3 people can blow thru without effort.

There are million ways that MMO designers could go about catering equally to all playstyles...they just refuse to break from old says and get creative.

This issues has nothing to do with Solo -vs Group -vs- Raid...

Its entirely about the lack of creativity from MMO designers in balancing reward -vs- effort/challenge.

As there are different playstyles, I'd like to play a game that offers rewards adequate to the playstyles you get them from. Which means group dungeons offer group reward, solo content offers solo reward and raid content offers raid reward. Certainly under the premise, that gear gained by soloing is quite enough to engage into serious grouping and so on.

If you start 'watering' the borders down with regards to solo/group, I could go ahead and ask for getting fractions of the raid patterns for the fabled set pieces by grouping. One fragment of a pattern every 48 hours, a definite amount of fragments make a pattern. Takes quite a while to get a full set of fabled probably then, but eventually I'd be able to get it via grouping alone. This doesn't look like a solution I ever want to see implemented.

From my view, the reward should be adequate and designed for that playstyle and that is how TSO handles it currently. I am all for new content for soloers and small groupers alike, but I certainly don't like to see the rewards intermangled. As the content got progression, the rewards should follow the progression also.

All true.

But they need put more thought into how and what gear players get.  Currently in TSO there is one set of shard gear...all requring the same type of shards...all gotten from group content.  Add to that the lack of viable gear rewards from TSO 'solo' quests..at least from what I have seen...you essentially have the soloers without ways to "progress".

I actually would prefer seeing solo-shard quests reward a different type of shard that can only be used to buy shard gear not quite as good as the current basic shard gear.  Or if we want to tier everything we need a Tier 0.  But basically a full set of this "solo-shard gear" should be such that its a viable minimum set for doing the lower tiered group stuff...etc..etc.

That or they need to add a whole bunch of more quests offering large variety of reward options.

But in the end people need to accept that whatever playstyle they choose has limits on what items they will have access too.  If you see such and such with nice stuff you dont have....instead of comming here and complaining/demanding...either accept that you chose not too do what is required to get it or make efforts to migrate to the playstyle required.  I always strive to get the best of what I and my playstyle gives me access too...There are 100s of gear items that I would love to have...someday I might get to them...but I accept that unless I am willing to switch playstyles I may never get them.

[Gnova]

Given that there can only be a given amount of new content added to the game with each expansion SOE needs to look at ways to make it rewarding to it's playerbase to at least dabble in the three fundamentally different content types that players seek out.Those are solo, group, and raid.

There is a pile of solo content in EQ2.  The number of solo quests in RoK was almost staggering and they have added few more in TSO and usually add a few quests here and there with events.  The biggest issue with solo quest content is that it is usually not repeatable, except for the writ system, and people are stuck in the mindset that solo content=questing.  Because of this, there can never be enough solo content added to a game to satisfy a solo oriented player with a medium playtime.There are a load of new areas filled to bursting with solo mobs in the new expansion but unless a solo player has a quest to explore the area and kill the mobs there they aren't interested.

Until the release of TSO the amount of group content was lacking.  People ran the same few instances over and over and over because that was the only choice.  Now there is a bonanza of group instances to choose from.  Some have asked for shared dungeons but let's be serious, the only time 95% of the people visited these dungeons was to work on their epic questlines or to do a full runt-hrough once in order to kill all the named for AA.  Other then that, or people enroute to raids/instances, they were empty.

There is a pretty decent raid progression in EQ2 atm with the casual playerbase being able to dabble in the RoK T1 content, and the more serious raid people progressing further into the content.

Okay, that being said, let's look at what content is offered to it's playerbase.

Solo oriented player.  Possible to level 1-80 never grouping with another individual and probably get your AAs to a decent level (170ish) at the same time.  The gear from these questlines will allow you to do the easier group, and raid content if you choose.  Solo players still have the advantage because it is possible to get the max level and get a load of AA points playing there preferred playstyle exclusively.

Group oriented player.  Pretty much forced to do solo questlines for a significant period of leveling since they offer good AA progression which are essential for doing level 80 group content.  The gear from the solo quests that they need to complete and from the group instances give them a decent leg up into the raid content if they wish to raid casually.  Most groups want reasonably challenging content so if it was made so a group of 3 or 4 people could do it, it would make it trivial for full balanced groups.

Raid oriented player.  Same as the group preferred player since they need the AAs as much or even more.  They also will do group content for a few "golden egg" drops that help fill their raid gear sets.

Basically the only playstyle that has a true choice to only play the game the way they most enjoy it is the solo player.  They can gear up to a level that will make them successful for their content niche, can acheive max leve, and get a load of AAs.  Perhaps they should put together a load of solo instances together with named in them that will drop a ornate 10% of the time, fabled 1% of the time, and you could get a partial shard for completion (maybe 1/4 of a shard that could be combined to make full shards).

[Renpatsu]

Gaylon@Mistmoore wrote:

...

All true.

But they need put more thought into how and what gear players get.  Currently in TSO there is one set of shard gear...all requring the same type of shards...all gotten from group content.  Add to that the lack of viable gear rewards from TSO 'solo' quests..at least from what I have seen...you essentially have the soloers without ways to "progress".

I actually would prefer seeing solo-shard quests reward a different type of shard that can only be used to buy shard gear not quite as good as the current basic shard gear.  Or if we want to tier everything we need a Tier 0.  But basically a full set of this "solo-shard gear" should be such that its a viable minimum set for doing the lower tiered group stuff...etc..etc.

That or they need to add a whole bunch of more quests offering large variety of reward options.

But in the end people need to accept that whatever playstyle they choose has limits on what items they will have access too.  If you see such and such with nice stuff you dont have....instead of comming here and complaining/demanding...either accept that you chose not too do what is required to get it or make efforts to migrate to the playstyle required.  I always strive to get the best of what I and my playstyle gives me access too...There are 100s of gear items that I would love to have...someday I might get to them...but I accept that unless I am willing to switch playstyles I may never get them.

I cut down all the quoted overhead, so that it's not too long with the quoting.

I don't think that getting gear for soloers is even an issue really. True enough, soloers look at groupers and see what they can get as rewards as do groupers look at raiders and see what they can get. And you'll always get some people who state 'why can't I have that one also with my playstyle?!?', but I really think most accept the boundaries.

The rewards you get from soloing in TSO are adequate, there is nothing really special though, that I'd agree with. RoK was quite exceptional in that regard, as the rewards you could get by soloing were also quite exceptional, Thuuga as one item that shines, but also faction bought legendary wasn't that bad really or faction crafted for that matter.

Something like a armor quest line for soloers/small groupers would certainly be nice (with unique look perhaps), I know quite a few people who did the level 20 AQs and enjoyed them. Also one or two dungeons that are not aimed at level 80 players, meaning that those stay at level 75 for example, so that casual small groupers that are 80 are able to run those instances as 2/3/4 group or so. It could be some more obvious scripting in those as well, to give a small nudge in that direction. Another game I played had a nicely designed solo dungeon - could be grouped also certainly - but essentially had nice scripting that could be performed solo. Doesn't matter that I personally wouldn't have much fun to go through such content over and over again, but some others might do and I respect that.

As you can see, I am not too far off from your view really

[RafaelSmith]

I actually wish there were more 2x Raid content.

For casual raiding guild like mine...often we cannot field enough even for the easier raids.

Having some new 2x stuff we can go after...if for no other reason than practice and learning would be cool.

The only problem I see that the soloers have is their "content" is game over when they have completed it...no repeat.

As boring as repeating CoA over and over was at least it was something...with always having  the slight chance at a master or something.

[RafaelSmith]

Ceneen@Lucan DLere wrote:

Something like a armor quest line for soloers/small groupers would certainly be nice (with unique look perhaps), I know quite a few people who did the level 20 AQs and enjoyed them.

I never understoof why they never followed thru with those level 20 AQs at subsequent tiers.

Even though I knew that gear was not all the great...I thought those quests were done well and gave you something to fill in the gaps while going thru the tier.

Would have been nice to continue the series at 30,40,50,60,70,80 all the while upgrading pieces.  Maybe even tag on a few minor set bonuses.

[Kordran]

Gnova wrote:

Most groups want reasonably challenging content so if it was made so a group of 3 or 4 people could do it, it would make it trivial for full balanced groups. 

Originally groups were designed to be exactly that. If you even look at the descriptions when you con a heroic mob, it talks about the difficulty requiring a group of three or more players. And that holds true though most of EQ2, until you start getting into T8, and particularly the TSO instances. I'm not saying that's a bad thing, just making an observation that up to a year ago, for the most part group content was not designed so that it required full, balanced groups. The new content leans much further in that direction. In the past, people wanted to build balanced groups because it meant they could do more content, more easily. Today, you want balanced groups to simply ensure a reasonable chance at success without putting the mender's kids through college.

Basically the only playstyle that has a true choice to only play the game the way they most enjoy it is the solo player.  They can gear up to a level that will make them successful for their content niche, can acheive max leve, and get a load of AAs. 

I would disagree with this. People who want to group have a real choice, and from what I can see, there's plenty of opportunity for it. The only issue comes down to class balance, where at a particular time a group may have difficulty finding a certain type of healer, an enchanter or a bard that is online and available. That's temporary though, and usually resolved with a bit of persistence.

Of your three playstyles, the only real hitch is raiding. If you want to raid -- and by that, I mean eventually run through all of the raid content, not just run through PR over and over -- then you have to find yourself a raiding guild, or you have to start one yourself. Both of those are non-trivial exercises. Good raiding guilds usually have an extended application process, and a certain set of minimum requirements (already having masters for your core spells, having your epic, etc.) and you have to earn your keep. And for certain classes, such as plate tanks, the only way that you're going to get yourself a slot in an existing guild is to be a very good player, and be recommended by an existing guild member (even when a raiding guild is looking for an MT or MA, they rarely advertise openly for it, they fill the position by word-of-mouth recommendations). Raiding is something that you "earn" your way into, it's not something that you can just wake up one morning and decide you're going to do, like soloing and grouping.

[Felshades]

Faenril@Nagafen wrote:

I would like to remind the complainers that this expansion is supposed to last 1 year... Ppl keep asking for easymode instances, but let's imagine their wish is granted ... what will they do in a month from now when they got their complete shard armor set ? Quit and let the servers quiet for another 11 months ? Some content is too hard for you now ? Well, good news... take it as a challenge. You have 1 year left to beat it, why should you be able to clean everything on release day ? Work in ROK instances and easiest TSO instances to gear up. Get better at your class - sigh ! - learn who you can reliably group with and who you should not. Learn how to build a balanced group, suitable to target content, not a guard fury and 4 wizards pug...Adapt and overcome, stop asking for everything to be handed on a silver plate.

my problem isnt gear, my problem is getting a pug coordinated to run it.

till your run of the mill average idiot can run it flawlessly in an hour, im not interested.

[Kordran]

Gaylon@Mistmoore wrote:

I never understoof why they never followed thru with those level 20 AQs at subsequent tiers. 

This is OT, but if they did that, you might as well remove the armorer tradeskill from the game. They're virtually superfluous now with the increase in leveling speed. Offer full sets of questable armor at every tier that, while not as good, would be "good enough" and you've just killed the tradeskill class.

Of course, there's those who argue that it's already dead, SOE just hasn't gotten around to throwing the dirt over the corpse. That's for another topic of discussion though.

[Yimway]

Gaylon@Mistmoore wrote:

I actually wish there were more 2x Raid content.

For casual raiding guild like mine...often we cannot field enough even for the easier raids.

Having some new 2x stuff we can go after...if for no other reason than practice and learning would be cool.

The only problem I see that the soloers have is their "content" is game over when they have completed it...no repeat.

As boring as repeating CoA over and over was at least it was something...with always having  the slight chance at a master or something.

1) Your x2 content is everywhere, it's last expansions x4 content.  Gear in TSO and run PR with 2 groups, you should be fine.  VP with 2 groups will be a stretch, but in general you can do most of the previous expansions x4 with only 2 groups.

2) Hate to say it, but organize and recruit.  My guild is at the point that we have 30-35 people reserving spots on 24 man raids.  There are tons of players out there looking for a casual raid guild, they just want one that has a fair loot policy and has organization and competent leadership.  Demonstrate those things and you'll do fine.

3) The repeat button for solo content is rolling a new toon.  Maybe its not the best option, but looking at what repeatable solo quests are, why would you want to repeat them exactly? I'm open to ideas for repeatable solo quests that wouldn't be a 100% grind.  My best idea would make them treasure hunts where you have to get a drop off 12 different mob types in 6 different zones.  Randomize it out and go explore.

What i would like to see is unlocking server chat channels by account.  So a soloist can work on an alt while looking for or monitoring for a group forming/needing thier main.

[Yimway]

Kordran wrote:

Basically the only playstyle that has a true choice to only play the game the way they most enjoy it is the solo player.  They can gear up to a level that will make them successful for their content niche, can acheive max leve, and get a load of AAs. 

I would disagree with this. People who want to group have a real choice, and from what I can see, there's plenty of opportunity for it. The only issue comes down to class balance, where at a particular time a group may have difficulty finding a certain type of healer, an enchanter or a bard that is online and available. That's temporary though, and usually resolved with a bit of persistence.

I think you missed the point.

I want to group doing heroic content and level 1-80 with 160 aa when I ding 80.

How exactly in eq2 do I do that?  You simply can not do it, if you run heroic content, your going to ding 80 with about 50aa at best.  You are virtualy forced to soloquest. So yes, as a group (heroic) / raid (epic) playstyle gamer, Solo content / playstyle is forced on me. Where as, I believe if someone rolls a new toon today they *can* get 80/200 without doing anything but soloquest.

I've been rallying for an XP slider to eliminate my need to ever do a soloquest again, but I'll be surprised if that ever goes in. The soloer on the other hand I believe does have a plausible path to max level/aa without every experiencing the other styles of gameplay.  So, with TSO the soloer maybe has to do some group content to reach max aa.  Not going to get much sympathy from me on that after I suffered thru RoK soloquest 6 times.

[Kordran]

Atan@Unrest wrote:

I want to group doing heroic content and level 1-80 with 160 aa when I ding 80.

How exactly in eq2 do I do that?  You simply can not do it, if you run heroic content, your going to ding 80 with about 50aa at best.  You are virtualy forced to soloquest.

Remove the requirement for heroic content only, and you can group from 1-80 and have around 160 APs. You just need to group together doing the soloable quest lines; because those lines can be soloed doesn't mean they have to be soloed. The game won't refuse to give you XP or AP if you're grouped with someone else. The only wrinkle is that you can end up backtracking and duplicating some steps if the people you're grouped are at different stages of the quest lines (something, by the way, that exists with heroic quest lines as well). Point of fact, when RoK was released last year, I duoed and trioed the Kunark quests; while not challenging, it was fun to just run through them with friends and banter over vent while farming this or that mob, get our updates and move along. Honestly, the the sheer number of quests that gets firehosed on you with Kunark, I'm glad most of them were brainless. Like another poster here said, I get all the challenge I want from raiding. Everything else is my "down time".

Regardless, you are not forced to do anything in this game, virtually or otherwise. You have choices, and while certain choices may not be as efficient as others, or conform to a min/max playstyle, they are indeed choices.

[Yimway]

Kordran wrote:

Atan@Unrest wrote:

I want to group doing heroic content and level 1-80 with 160 aa when I ding 80.

How exactly in eq2 do I do that?  You simply can not do it, if you run heroic content, your going to ding 80 with about 50aa at best.  You are virtualy forced to soloquest.

Regardless, you are not forced to do anything in this game, virtually or otherwise. You have choices, and while certain choices may not be as efficient as others, or conform to a min/max playstyle, they are indeed choices.

Whether I do soloquest solo or as a group, if I want to get to 80 and be functional, I'm forced to do the soloquest.

This wasn't true at launch, it wasn't true at DoF, It wasn't true at KoS, but when EoF hit the aa levels got far enough ahead, that you had to stop leveling your alts in dungeons and suffer soloquest.  As AA limits continue to expand and new ways of achieving them outside of soloquest are not created, yes, you have to do more and more soloquest to finish leveling out.

[Kordran]

Atan@Unrest wrote:

There are tons of players out there looking for a casual raid guild, they just want one that has a fair loot policy and has organization and competent leadership.  Demonstrate those things and you'll do fine.

That's fine, if all you aspire to is T1 raids. Beyond that, you're not going to find many casual raids who are going to be able to move on to T2 and kill the Overking and Venril. Those are fights that require a degree of coordination that you're not generally going to find with people who raid together every once in a while, and where the lineup is constantly changing.

[Yimway]

Kordran wrote:

That's fine, if all you aspire to is T1 raids. Beyond that, you're not going to find many casual raids who are going to be able to move on to T2 and kill the Overking and Venril. Those are fights that require a degree of coordination that you're not generally going to find with people who raid together every once in a while, and where the lineup is constantly changing.

Really?

We're a casual guild and clear VP.

It took us 11 months to do it, but we did it just fine.

102 accounts, 220 characters, vastly different raid make-up every night.  Solid communication and leadershiip is all it took.

http://www.eq2innercircle.org/raidw...x.php/Main_Page

We created a wiki with all the information every member needed to understand the raid content and their role.  Communicated that out to the members, ran thru complicated encounters with walk-thru/talk-thru explanations then executed.

[RafaelSmith]

Kordran wrote:

Gaylon@Mistmoore wrote:

I never understoof why they never followed thru with those level 20 AQs at subsequent tiers.

This is OT, but if they did that, you might as well remove the armorer tradeskill from the game. They're virtually superfluous now with the increase in leveling speed. Offer full sets of questable armor at every tier that, while not as good, would be "good enough" and you've just killed the tradeskill class.

Of course, there's those who argue that it's already dead, SOE just hasn't gotten around to throwing the dirt over the corpse. That's for another topic of discussion though.

Yeah a different topic of discussion for sure.

But I will say that MC gear is a form of gear/reward for soloers.

Its very possible to group even PUG the 4 easiest TSO instances in MC gear.

[Kordran]

Atan@Unrest wrote:

Whether I do soloquest solo or as a group, if I want to get to 80 and be functional, I'm forced to do the soloquest.

Again, that's based on what your definition of "functional" is. No one is forcing you to do anything, you are forcing yourself to meet a minimum threshold and chosing what the most efficient path is.

What you're really complaining about is that SOE isn't providing you with an alternate path of advancement through heroic content that is as effecient as soloing. But that's not forcing you do do anything in the game. Technically you could hit level 80 with 200 APs strictly doing heroic content. It would take a long time due to the XP curve and AP conversion rate, but it is possible.

As an aside, a simple way for them to address the AP issue in particular would be to award AXP for each heroic named you kill, reagardless of the number of times you kill it. Give a large amount of AXP for the first kill, and a reduced amount for subsequent kills, but still move the bar forward. That way, people could increase APs by repeating instances and clearing named in contested dungeons, and not be forced to go the solo route just to get their points up.

[RafaelSmith]

Atan@Unrest wrote:

Kordran wrote:

That's fine, if all you aspire to is T1 raids. Beyond that, you're not going to find many casual raids who are going to be able to move on to T2 and kill the Overking and Venril. Those are fights that require a degree of coordination that you're not generally going to find with people who raid together every once in a while, and where the lineup is constantly changing.

Really?

We're a casual guild and clear VP.

It took us 11 months to do it, but we did it just fine.

Aye as are we...still probably a month or two from being able to hit VP but to say its not doable by casual guilds is false.

We are really looking forward to VS...should be a good lesson for us.

[Yimway]

Kordran wrote:

Atan@Unrest wrote:

Whether I do soloquest solo or as a group, if I want to get to 80 and be functional, I'm forced to do the soloquest.

What you're really complaining about is that SOE isn't providing you with an alternate path of advancement through heroic content that is as effecient as soloing. But that's not forcing you do do anything in the game. Technically you could hit level 80 with 200 APs strictly doing heroic content. It would take a long time due to the XP curve and AP conversion rate, but it is possible.

Symantics.

You can tell the same dribble to the solo players complaining about where to get the last 40 aa from.  I'm sure they'll like killing 900,000 boars as much as I would have found killing 1 mil drolvarg in KC a viable means to max level/aa.

[Kordran]

Atan@Unrest wrote:

We're a casual guild and clear VP.

It took us 11 months to do it, but we did it just fine. 

/shrug

You and I have a different definition of what "casual raiding" means then. By the looks of your schedule and guild page, you raid 5 nights a week and have a core raid force (I would presume your "dedicated" and "officer" rank members). I wouldn't exactly call that casual, I'd call it typical. I see guilds like yours as the middle ground between casual, occasional raiding guilds and the hardcore guilds that maintain call lists and all the rest.

[Kordran]

Atan@Unrest wrote:

Symantics.

You can tell the same dribble to the solo players complaining about where to get the last 40 aa from.  I'm sure they'll like killing 900,000 boars as much as I would have found killing 1 mil drolvarg in KC a viable means to max level/aa.

It's not semantics. Saying that you are forced to do something has a specific meaning, and in this case, you're just wrong. The game forces you to start with standard race and class combinations (e.g.: you cannot start out as an iksar paladin). The game forces you to run through the betrayal quest lines if you want to change to a non-standard combination (e.g.: to become an iksar paladin). The game forces you to choose an alignment, you cannot be neutral to all cities. The game does not force you to progress through the content any particular way. The path that you take is determined by your choices, based on your preferences.

And I would say exactly the same thing to anyone who claimed that the game "forces" you to group, or "forces" you to raid. It is simply not true.

[Yimway]

Kordran wrote:

/shrug

You and I have a different definition of what "casual raiding" means then. By the looks of your schedule and guild page, you raid 5 nights a week and have a core raid force (I would presume your "dedicated" and "officer" rank members). I wouldn't exactly call that casual, I'd call it typical. I see guilds like yours as the middle ground between casual, occasional raiding guilds and the hardcore guilds that maintain call lists and all the rest.

To me there is exactly two words that seperates a casual guild from a raid/hardcore guild.

"Attendance Policy."

As i said, we're a very different raid force from night to night, or week to week.  Members become active and inactive as their lives allow them.  The dedicated rank is the list of people that paricipated in over 60% of last months raids.  But, I guess others would call organization the distinction between casual and hardcore.

[Kordran]

Atan@Unrest wrote:

To me there is exactly two words that seperates a casual guild from a raid/hardcore guild.

"Attendance Policy."

By that definition, my guild would be considered "hardcore", because raid attendance is mandatory (we don't have non-raiding members) unless there are extenuating circumstances and you can't get in-game. If someone is logged in on a raid night, and we need them, they don't have the option to go off and do some TSO instance; well, not if they want to stay in the guild.

However, I don't consider us to be hardcore at all. There's no call lists, no one is ringing my cell at 3am if a contested pops. We don't make recruits camp contested or pay refundable deposits. We don't doghouse recruits that have a single bad night. We have a fairly liberal looting policy that allows even the newest recruits a chance at loot, as long as it's not something needed by a member. So I think we're pretty much middle-of-the-road, similar to you.

[Yella]

As far as raiding is concerned, you are "hard core" if you field full raids on mostly consistent players and raid 4 or more days a week on a regular basis. If you have a consistent organized program, you are hardcore by definition. It is a description of playstyle, not progression status. A casual raiding guild is one that fields lower numbers, has inconsistent players and/or generally raids fewer than 4 days a week. Those folks generally "go with the flow" depending on who is online at the time and what content is feasible.

[Full_Metal_Mage]

Atan@Unrest wrote:

 Solid communication and leadershiip is all it took.

Two elements that are very scarce in the MMO universe.

[Faenril]

Meridia@Lucan DLere wrote:

Faenril@Nagafen wrote:

I would like to remind the complainers that this expansion is supposed to last 1 year... Ppl keep asking for easymode instances, but let's imagine their wish is granted ... what will they do in a month from now when they got their complete shard armor set ? Quit and let the servers quiet for another 11 months ? Some content is too hard for you now ? Well, good news... take it as a challenge. You have 1 year left to beat it, why should you be able to clean everything on release day ? Work in ROK instances and easiest TSO instances to gear up. Get better at your class - sigh ! - learn who you can reliably group with and who you should not. Learn how to build a balanced group, suitable to target content, not a guard fury and 4 wizards pug...Adapt and overcome, stop asking for everything to be handed on a silver plate.

my problem isnt gear, my problem is getting a pug coordinated to run it.

till your run of the mill average idiot can run it flawlessly in an hour, im not interested.

Well, by definition, pugs lack on coordination side. Some ppl just are not that good at the game, or do not put the time or the effort to gear up.

But what can SOE do ? Dumb down the content ? Then all players who are decent and get steady groups by picking in their guild and friendlist will blast through the content and miss a real challenge.

Well, there is already some content that is 100% pug-able: ROK instances and few first TSO instances. There is some harder content not really pug-able currently unless you get lucky and put 6 good players together by accident.

I think it's just fine this way: this is a MMORPG, a social game. Those who develop regular relationship with other players through their friendlist or by joining a guild have an edge at clearing harder content and it's fine this way.

There are pros, there are average players, and there are noobs in any MMO. The game should provide content for all kind of players, but all players can not clean all content and it's fine this way.

Not all content should be cleared by PUGs, especially right after an xpac release.

Could the average pug clear HOF when KOS was released, could the average pug clear Nizara at T7 ? What about Unrest or Castle MistMoore until late EOF ?

No. And it's the way it's meant to be.

[Yella]

Faenril@Nagafen wrote:

Meridia@Lucan DLere wrote:

Faenril@Nagafen wrote:

I would like to remind the complainers that this expansion is supposed to last 1 year... Ppl keep asking for easymode instances, but let's imagine their wish is granted ... what will they do in a month from now when they got their complete shard armor set ? Quit and let the servers quiet for another 11 months ? Some content is too hard for you now ? Well, good news... take it as a challenge. You have 1 year left to beat it, why should you be able to clean everything on release day ? Work in ROK instances and easiest TSO instances to gear up. Get better at your class - sigh ! - learn who you can reliably group with and who you should not. Learn how to build a balanced group, suitable to target content, not a guard fury and 4 wizards pug...Adapt and overcome, stop asking for everything to be handed on a silver plate.

my problem isnt gear, my problem is getting a pug coordinated to run it.

till your run of the mill average idiot can run it flawlessly in an hour, im not interested.

Well, by definition, pugs lack on coordination side. Some ppl just are not that good at the game, or do not put the time or the effort to gear up.

But what can SOE do ? Dumb down the content ? Then all players who are decent and get steady groups by picking in their guild and friendlist will blast through the content and miss a real challenge.

Well, there is already some content that is 100% pug-able: ROK instances and few first TSO instances. There is some harder content not really pug-able currently unless you get lucky and put 6 good players together by accident.

I think it's just fine this way: this is a MMORPG, a social game. Those who develop regular relationship with other players through their friendlist or by joining a guild have an edge at clearing harder content and it's fine this way.

There are pros, there are average players, and there are noobs in any MMO. The game should provide content for all kind of players, but all players can not clean all content and it's fine this way.

Not all content should be cleared by PUGs, especially right after an xpac release.

Could the average pug clear HOF when KOS was released, could the average pug clear Nizara at T7 ? What about Unrest or Castle MistMoore until late EOF ?

No. And it's the way it's meant to be.

You are not reading what he saying. He is not talking about the hardest instances, he is talking about the easiest ones.

The issue is that the easiest ones are too hard, not that the hardest ones are too hard.

[Faenril]

Yella wrote:

Faenril@Nagafen wrote:

Meridia@Lucan DLere wrote:

Faenril@Nagafen wrote:

I would like to remind the complainers that this expansion is supposed to last 1 year... Ppl keep asking for easymode instances, but let's imagine their wish is granted ... what will they do in a month from now when they got their complete shard armor set ? Quit and let the servers quiet for another 11 months ? Some content is too hard for you now ? Well, good news... take it as a challenge. You have 1 year left to beat it, why should you be able to clean everything on release day ? Work in ROK instances and easiest TSO instances to gear up. Get better at your class - sigh ! - learn who you can reliably group with and who you should not. Learn how to build a balanced group, suitable to target content, not a guard fury and 4 wizards pug...Adapt and overcome, stop asking for everything to be handed on a silver plate.

my problem isnt gear, my problem is getting a pug coordinated to run it.

till your run of the mill average idiot can run it flawlessly in an hour, im not interested.

Well, by definition, pugs lack on coordination side. Some ppl just are not that good at the game, or do not put the time or the effort to gear up.

But what can SOE do ? Dumb down the content ? Then all players who are decent and get steady groups by picking in their guild and friendlist will blast through the content and miss a real challenge.

Well, there is already some content that is 100% pug-able: ROK instances and few first TSO instances. There is some harder content not really pug-able currently unless you get lucky and put 6 good players together by accident.

I think it's just fine this way: this is a MMORPG, a social game. Those who develop regular relationship with other players through their friendlist or by joining a guild have an edge at clearing harder content and it's fine this way.

There are pros, there are average players, and there are noobs in any MMO. The game should provide content for all kind of players, but all players can not clean all content and it's fine this way.

Not all content should be cleared by PUGs, especially right after an xpac release.

Could the average pug clear HOF when KOS was released, could the average pug clear Nizara at T7 ? What about Unrest or Castle MistMoore until late EOF ?

No. And it's the way it's meant to be.

You are not reading what he saying. He is not talking about the hardest instances, he is talking about the easiest ones.

The issue is that the easiest ones are too hard, not that the hardest ones are too hard.

My illy hit 80 last sunday. I went in Scion of Ice in a pug, with a craptastic tank. Yes we died several times but we did clear it. The easiest TSO instances are just fine. It is very possible to clear them unless you get very unlucky or get a terrible group setup.

Regardless of the difficulty you will always be able to find 6 morons that can't clear the stuff. I'm pretty sure some ppl thought nest of the great egg was too hard at T7 days.

[Kendricke]

Yella wrote:

If you have a consistent organized program, you are hardcore by definition.

Please link to where you found this particular definition.  I couldn't find it in Webster's or Random House.