Amsai said: Yes Raids should be a thing, but I think it shouldn't be the only thing you need to do to be the best of the best. Split up loot drops so that if you want to have the best gear/skills/spells you have to do everything. Raiding, crafting, Factions, epic quests, open world and dungeon Named for normal party size. Not just Raid. You want the best weapon but only want to Raid? Too bad. Epic quest only. You want the best jewelry but only like to do factions and group size named? Tough. Learn to craft or pay through the nose.
I'm not disagreeing with you. It will definitely be much easier said than done to find this balance, but that doesn't mean it's a bad idea. As long as the amount of time/effort required for each is equal (that's the hard part to quantify), I think players should be encouraged to be well-rounded. Along with that, in my opinion, all players should also be pulled out of their comfort zone from time to time. So for example, the crafters that don't like to raid will be motivated to raid and vice versa.
@Bazgrim
I think we are more or less on the same page in that regard. Now saying that it is hard to quatify and equate different types of challenge, and therefore not sure they should other than make the thought process that for a particular type of content it should be rage quit hard if it offers best rewards. For Raid content I think we will get that.
I dont have a good EQ reference, but I thought the FFXI CoP missions would be where to start on top difficulty party based content. There were so many people that couldnt complete it that after a year or so SquareEnix nerfed the hell out of it. But as someone that completed it pre-nerf, I can say that it was pretty damn hard. It was like 8-9 missions. Took me and my static about 4 months to complete (there was more to it than just battles). And 95% of the population couldnt get past mission 2 so I think that says something.
And after a few lengthy discussions with community member Raidan I have to say Im impressed with the detail and depth involved with EQ style epic weapon quests as well as well as epic crating type quest like the Coldain Prayer Shawl.
As for faction stuff its a pros-cons kind of thing where doing something for one locks you out of another, and you really have to work for top faction to get a rare reward or chance at a faction quest for an item you could not get otherwise.
Things like this all sound really good to me. but its hard to equate them really, because while they are all challenging in their own ways, they arent equally quatifiable. But they should all reward in top tier items. This wouldnt mean you couldnt still have good gear though. Im sure a Raid or dungeon weapon could still be very good, just not as good as the epic quest one. Same with jewelry, different armor slots, etc. There should be acceptable alternatives so if all you want to do is raid and buy crafted goods, more power to you.
A variety of mechanics all intended to improve the longevity of the 'End-Game' raiding component of the game by incorporating the horizontal aspects of Quests and Crafting as well as turning 'Boss respawn timers' on its head by giving them AI personalities and allowing them self-determination when it comes to choosing their lair! Some of these mechanics may prove untenable or, even, counter productive. I leave such determination to the developers and the critical eye of the PROTF posters. Between them and their many lifetimes of combined experience at end-game, I am sure they will spot all the flaws in my suggestions! Hopefully they provide food for thought.
1. Reduce Raid contention
The worry, as expressed by many, is about all the top-end raid targets being locked up for a significant time by either a single top guild, or a cabal of the top 5 Guilds, say. They would not be doing it for exp, and so must either be doing it to get the 'best' gear for all Guildies/alts or to stop others from progressing and getting this gear. We need to retain non-instanced raiding but make the above all but impossible. Methods may include:
A. Slow levelling progression:
This is an interim step, but slower levelling means more chance for players to build relationships - even Guild to Guild ones, such that there will be less likelihood of a single 'uber' guild able to dominate against all comers.
B. Increased horizontal progression:
This is a massive component of this (whether content driven or 'AA' type). The nett effect is retard progress towards the 'end game'. There will always be a core who 'rush to the end', but my point here is to reduce this core to a tiny minority, not a 'default' for the majority of players. (Think WoW where everyone just steams towards the end-game, not just the tiny group of dedicated hard-core levellers).
C. Earlier Raid targets:
Start dungeon mini-bosses from level 20+. Have these as 'dungeon bosses' etc. There should be enough of them for 2-5 bosses at each band of levels. Thus a set for level 20-25, 30-35, 40-45 and then 'end-game' 50-60. The earlier raid bosses give others a taste for the methods and organisation of raiding, without having to wait until end-game to learn these skills.
D. More Raid Targets:
Preferably have a larger number of bosses, including 'pools' of bosses with rotations for some places. The increased number makes it much less likely that any one or two guilds will be able to lock down all content. *See also #2: ways to use Boss AI to change their spawn locations and times - but in a logical way.
E. Access/key to targets integrated with other skills:
As suggested in another thread, it could be made that access to higher tier bosses may need you to pass through a lower boss area (would want another Guild to pull that first) before being able to get to the entrance of the next tiered boss. Access to this may need work from crafters, say. Perhaps a bridge needs to be constructed over a chasm in order to access the gate. This may need lots of low level crafters, or fewer higher level ones. In either case, they would need to be protected from any wanderers or a respawn of the lower tier boss. The 'uber' Guild would not want to fight the lower tier boss since it may cause them to be locked out (see option 'I' below) from the higher tier boss. In this way they need another raiding guild on good terms with them.
F. No 'absolute' best item:
To avoid bottle necks :
(i). Quests that need raid-encounters should only need either (a) more generic loot, (eg 'dragon scale' rather than 'Vox's scale') (b) interaction with the lair or corpse. (E.g. 'wash sword in dragon's blood)
(ii). Specific Items dropped from Raid-Bosses should have fewer 'singular' items. This is avoid the 'best tank item is from boss X' causing a guild to perma-cap it. The suggested method would be to have 3 different items of comparable strength that (rarely) drop from any of three bosses. These three drops would be different and would either cause the Guild to try camping all three bosses (this reducing locked time by 3) or to only camp one, leaving the other two bosses open.
(iii). Much of the loot table should be of crafting consumables/mats (e.g. gemstones, dragon bone, tooth, scale, blood etc). While a tier-1 boss may drop 9 low-end and 4 high-end pieces, a tier-2 boss may drop 12 low-end and 5 high-end. Tier-3 may drop 15 low-end and 6 high-end etc. This kind of system applied to bosses starting at lower level raid bosses (30-35, 40-45 etc) would mean guilds could get access to these high-end materials, just in smaller numbers.... even if the top guilds have locked top-tier content up.
G. Quest requirements in Raid zones
Since the idea is to have Raid zones starting at level 20+, this open the way to allow more quests to start, path through or end in Raid zones. This creates another reason for players to enter them and perhaps join in the combat - if for nothing else than to clear enough trash mobs to get to the required Quest point (not necessarily the end-boss in the Raid zone).
These additional players may not be here to kill the end-boss, but are likely to be essential in allowing fast-paced progress through the zone for raiding parties. Without them, they would be required to clear all the trash from entrance to end-Boss location.
This also provides a ready supply of nearby players available to harvest the end-Boss corpse for materials after the kill. (See #4 below).
H. Crafting requirements in Raid Zones (Also in a Crafting thread about Raids.)
Instead of having Raid mobs just drop the higher end crafting reagents / items:
(i). Crafter has to expose the reagent to the energy given off by a Raid Mob (or within X mins of death)
Just make sure you are wearing lead-lined pants!
(ii). Crafter has to bathe crafting component in mob's blood
Soak them rubies inside that red dragon if you want them to make higher end gear!
(iii). Crafter has to setup portable forge to re-forge the blade and quench it in the (still-warm) beast
Portable forges / anvils should be HEAVY!
(iv). Crafter needs blood/bile added to ready potion/poison bottle to complete.
Big needle and hose needed!
(v). Crafter needs to use the 'improvised' workstation in the lair :
These have accumulated X points of 'energy' at a rate of 'Boss Level per day', but loses 100 points per day after its death. Crafting can be done as long as 'Item top be crafted Level' of points remain - which is then removed upon use. Failure means you can retry - but still costs item's level in points.
This might be superheated stone rubble that acts as a forge, a large pool of ichor strong enough to act as a powerful tanning agent or bubbles of poisonous gas rising from black tar that can temporarily weaken the fibres of even the densest woods so they can be worked with ease.
(vi). Crafters are the only ones who can 'harvest' certain reagents from the Boss mob.
Type of reagent will depend on craft chosen (via choice of harvesting tool)
Quantity / Quality of reagent dependent on skill of crafter
Quality 'cap' level of reagents drops every 10 mins after death. Get it fresh for best quality! Vultures get lesser quality.
The idea here is to have raid bosses 'rot' instead of 'poof' immediately. It also requires Raid bosses starting at earlier levels, e.g. level 20+. The value/quality of reagents harvested from/near the boss/lair will weaken as time passes after its death. This, therefore, means opportunities for ninja-vultures/hyenas who try to feed off the corpses left by other raid parties. It also means crafters being integral to some raids for Guilds. I feel it would also slow inflation - since more reagents etc are dropped or harvested, thus meaning less cash-type loots, not to mention the reagents forming part of the cash-sink that is crafting!
Raid Leader (shouting) 'Oi, gnome! who said you could jump inside the Raid Boss to ninja loot all the gall stones?'
Gnome Alchemist (muffled) 'Hey, I didn't jump in! I was swallowed, you idiot! ... eewwww what did I just step in!'
Guild Crafter (muttering) 'Goddam gnomes! Ninjas the lot of them.... swallowed my backside.'
Raid Leader (screaming) 'All halflings here - get your backsides into that mob and gank that ninja gnome!'
I. Soft Lockout mechanism:
This is a type of content denial. When a player kills a boss they are splashed with a long-lasting debuff. It's strength is determined by the Raid-Boss and can overlap other bosses. E.g. Kill Vox (Dragon) debuffs with an 'all-Dragon' debuff. It takes 2-3 weeks for this effects to reduce to zero. Until then, exposure to any dragon will cause this debuff to have one of many possible effects (dependent on design). E.g. Lower RR vs Dragons, increased aggro from dragons (can smell the blood on you) etc.
This kind of mechanics should keep it more 'competitive' but make it unlikely the whole server can be locked out. A well balanced system incorporating something along these lines will be able to have a self-regulating system ensuring no Guild is 'super dominant' at the expense of all other without near 'chinese farmer' levels of industry!
2. Varied Spawns and Timers
Instead of Raid areas having either a single Boss or even a roster of Bosses, we could use smarter Boss AI to give them an identity - i.e. 'Lair preference list' and a 'Temperament' (e.g. vengeful). If one is killed, another will take its place after a certain amount of time - but this is the opportunity to have these decisions rely on the Raid Bosses 'identities' (via their AI) rather than a static roster of bosses that can inhabit the lair.
Define the Bosses to have:
(i) A list of habitat requirements and preferences
Thus each Boss would have a 'starting home base' (if, indeed, it has one) and a set of habitat requirements (e.g. 'swampy', 'frozen', 'near Frostfell', 'areas indigenous to goblins', 'underground' etc.) This means that when a lair if 'free' (usually because the players have killed the previous occupant) there is then a competition run between those who consider this lair to be a viable one (it meets their 'needs'). The 'winner' gain occupation of the empty lair.
(ii) a defined temperament
Each boss world have its own temperament (or AI defined characteristics) which determine how it reacts to stimuli. In this case a 'vengeful' attitude would mean the boss is more likely to want to return and retake its own lair. Other temperaments may lend themselves to finding a 'safer' lair next time. This may well mean a change of Boss for a given lair - but there would be a certain logic that determines which Boss would likely take up residence next. Thus, studying lore would allow you insight into the temperaments of these Bosses.
3. Let players influence the world:
Perhaps in some cases, it may be possible for the players to influence which Boss is next, albeit indirectly. Imagine the following : Boss A is dead and the Ice goblin shamen have built a shrine to Boss B. Meanwhile, the Fire Goblin Shamen have built a shrine to Boss C. These two factions may skirmish each other, but player interactions may skew which shrine bets enough power to perform the summons for their boss first. Damage to the shrine, killing enough of one type of Gobbie over the other etc may influence which one does or doesn't get to have their Boss arrive next. Thus if their players want boss B, they need to kill Fire Goblins, particularly the shamen, and damage the Fire shrine. Of course, other players may not want this - or not realise - and kill the Ice Goblin shamen instead!
This would have wildly different effects in PvE and PvP servers respectively.
4. Allow Boss corpses to linger:
When mobs die they can be harvested for mats. Quality starts at a certain max and reduces over time. The body 'rots' slowly while mats remain, much faster when the body empty. While anyone in at death is 'splashed' with debuff (acts as a soft lockout), even after this death harvesting adds slightly to this debuff (even if you arrive after) but also adds an second 'active' debuff which gets worse more quickly. It decays in hours, rather than days, so you can return to harvest some more in 8-24 hours. If it is allowed to gets to higher levels it gets very bad.
This means, in practice, that Guilds would not be able to lock down all the mats derived from a Boss since the growing short-duration debuff would prove crippling. It would be easier for the 'top Guild' who took down the boss to 'sell off' access to the boss (escorting them to it) in return for a % return on harvested mats, or perhaps merely a flat fee. Denying access to the corpse would delay the rotting of the Boss corpse significantly, thus delaying the potential respawn time.
This would lend itself to increased co-operation between guilds and, hence, less likelihood for 'total lockdown' by any 'uber guild'.
Amsai said:@Bazgrim
I think we are more or less on the same page in that regard. Now saying that it is hard to quatify and equate different types of challenge, and therefore not sure they should other than make the thought process that for a particular type of content it should be rage quit hard if it offers best rewards. For Raid content I think we will get that.
I dont have a good EQ reference, but I thought the FFXI CoP missions would be where to start on top difficulty party based content. There were so many people that couldnt complete it that after a year or so SquareEnix nerfed the hell out of it. But as someone that completed it pre-nerf, I can say that it was pretty damn hard. It was like 8-9 missions. Took me and my static about 4 months to complete (there was more to it than just battles). And 95% of the population couldnt get past mission 2 so I think that says something.
And after a few lengthy discussions with community member Raidan I have to say Im impressed with the detail and depth involved with EQ style epic weapon quests as well as well as epic crating type quest like the Coldain Prayer Shawl.
As for faction stuff its a pros-cons kind of thing where doing something for one locks you out of another, and you really have to work for top faction to get a rare reward or chance at a faction quest for an item you could not get otherwise.
Things like this all sound really good to me. but its hard to equate them really, because while they are all challenging in their own ways, they arent equally quatifiable. But they should all reward in top tier items. This wouldnt mean you couldnt still have good gear though. Im sure a Raid or dungeon weapon could still be very good, just not as good as the epic quest one. Same with jewelry, different armor slots, etc. There should be acceptable alternatives so if all you want to do is raid and buy crafted goods, more power to you.
I had a nice, long, well-thought-out reply but it somehow just disappeared when I hit "Post" -_- Anyway, here's the gist:
I think it's best to try to quantify "risk" rather than the amount of time/effort put into something. I know Risk vs. Reward gets brought up a lot, and that's not a bad thing, but I think that's the best explanation for raids. In most games, raids have the greatest rewards because they also have the greatest risk. Back in the days of corpse runs in EQ1, raid bosses were way down deep in some dungeon somewhere far from civilization and if you died down there, it could be extremely difficult to get your corpse back. That's risk. I'm not saying we should have corpse runs again, but what I am saying is that almost anyone would rather just spend dozens of hours in town working on crafting levels because at least there's almost no risk involved. Therefore, we shouldn't be able to compare apples to oranges because that just opens up all sorts of arguments about "why would I do X if I can get an equivalent result by doing Y?" But I digress. I don't think that's what you're getting at anyway. I just like playing devil's advocate every once in a while haha.
Anyway, I must say I like the idea of "faction shops." Let's say there's an independent group of renegades that has a big stash of amazing loot. But in order to trade with them, you have to build up trust with them first. Or perhaps an archaeologist that has a basement full of incredibly powerful artifacts, but he is only willing to part with any of them if you bring him certain types of runes, essences, etc. for him to study... the quantities of which are determined by which of his items you want.
With all that in mind, the best solution in my opinion: have the "best" gear come in sets and have each part of those sets be acquired through different means. (If I remember correctly, Aradune already said that item sets/synergy will be a big part of the game) I.e. - the helmet comes from a 6-man named, the chestplate comes from a raid, the leggings come from a regular quest, and the boots can be crafted. Or something along those lines. Each item gets more powerful depending on how many parts of that set you have equipped. In this case, the best geared toons will be those that are knowledgable in all aspects of the game.
So many ideas... just spitting them out there :) We are probably getting a little off topic tho haha
@Evoras
Really juicy stuff here. I appreciate you taking the time to post this. There are a lot of great ideas there that could be mixed and matched. One of my favorites is the soft lockout idea. But they are all good. I also really like how it ties in crafting/economy. And the potential PvP angle for guarding the Boss corpse sounds pretty sweet, though not sure how it works in PvE?
@Bazgrim
I like the approach of different pieces of a set coming from varied activities. A set effect is nice too. And I like that as well, but this concept has come up before and many just prefer to mix and match whatever they like. And its fine just spitting out ideas, until we have a game to play thats all we can do right?
Back on topic,
Still think the best way to help keep endgame encounters exciting is to have plenty, keep a lot of horizontal progression, and explore improved AI mechanics through the behaviors and dispositions feature.
Evoras said:C. Earlier Raid targets:
Start dungeon mini-bosses from level 20+. Have these as 'dungeon bosses' etc. There should be enough of them for 2-5 bosses at each band of levels. Thus a set for level 20-25, 30-35, 40-45 and then 'end-game' 50-60. The earlier raid bosses give others a taste for the methods and organisation of raiding, without having to wait until end-game to learn these skills.
D. More Raid Targets:
Preferably have a larger number of bosses, including 'pools' of bosses with rotations for some places. The increased number makes it much less likely that any one or two guilds will be able to lock down all content. *See also #2: ways to use Boss AI to change their spawn locations and times - but in a logical way.
E. Access/key to targets integrated with other skills:
As suggested in another thread, it could be made that access to higher tier bosses may need you to pass through a lower boss area (would want another Guild to pull that first) before being able to get to the entrance of the next tiered boss. Access to this may need work from crafters, say. Perhaps a bridge needs to be constructed over a chasm in order to access the gate. This may need lots of low level crafters, or fewer higher level ones. In either case, they would need to be protected from any wanderers or a respawn of the lower tier boss. The 'uber' Guild would not want to fight the lower tier boss since it may cause them to be locked out (see option 'I' below) from the higher tier boss. In this way they need another raiding guild on good terms with them.
G. Quest requirements in Raid zones
Since the idea is to have Raid zones starting at level 20+, this open the way to allow more quests to start, path through or end in Raid zones. This creates another reason for players to enter them and perhaps join in the combat - if for nothing else than to clear enough trash mobs to get to the required Quest point (not necessarily the end-boss in the Raid zone).
These additional players may not be here to kill the end-boss, but are likely to be essential in allowing fast-paced progress through the zone for raiding parties. Without them, they would be required to clear all the trash from entrance to end-Boss location.
This also provides a ready supply of nearby players available to harvest the end-Boss corpse for materials after the kill. (See #4 below).
H. Crafting requirements in Raid Zones (Also in a Crafting thread about Raids.)
Instead of Raid areas having either a single Boss or even a roster of Bosses, we could use smarter Boss AI to give them an identity - i.e. 'Lair preference list' and a 'Temperament' (e.g. vengeful). If one is killed, another will take its place after a certain amount of time - but this is the opportunity to have these decisions rely on the Raid Bosses 'identities' (via their AI) rather than a static roster of bosses that can inhabit the lair.
3. Let players influence the world:
Perhaps in some cases, it may be possible for the players to influence which Boss is next, albeit indirectly. Imagine the following : Boss A is dead and the Ice goblin shamen have built a shrine to Boss B. Meanwhile, the Fire Goblin Shamen have built a shrine to Boss C. These two factions may skirmish each other, but player interactions may skew which shrine bets enough power to perform the summons for their boss first. Damage to the shrine, killing enough of one type of Gobbie over the other etc may influence which one does or doesn't get to have their Boss arrive next. Thus if their players want boss B, they need to kill Fire Goblins, particularly the shamen, and damage the Fire shrine. Of course, other players may not want this - or not realise - and kill the Ice Goblin shamen instead!
This would have wildly different effects in PvE and PvP servers respectively.
This would lend itself to increased co-operation between guilds and, hence, less likelihood for 'total lockdown' by any 'uber guild'.
Some of the things that popped out of your fine post, Evoras was the following- should there be any Dev types looking for already existing examples:
C. earlier raid targets. Example the Muglwump in the warrens, It was a tadpole- I think level 18? or 21? the zone was I think 15-18? and this monster acted like a mini dragon with AE's, rampaging, all the dragon stuff, but toned down to the level. UIt as no joke and a hard event with even a good group. this was before raid mechanics were putin and it could be done with 9, or two half groups. The rewards were decent and snarky- the warrior always got the heal potion, the cleric some invis item, ther ewas a lantern for the chanter and the mage got the booby prize of the actually decent fishing pole- it just didnt look cool- lol.
D. More raid Group targets: although a raid type event, the M'Sha's in the GoD expansion were always a good fight and multiple targets in the zone, with maleable rewards in that various classes could take advantage of the quest related gear turn ins. Or the events in Yxtta. A quest to get access to the answer the riddles to open the doors- frought with danger- as the riddles you had to answer in order had monsters pathing through- high level monsters so there as heightened urgency just to get into the danger zone. thankfully the riddles werre intuitive and bizarre like "kiss of death? you mean Eruds tonic!" kind of thing. three tough trials, different monsters.
E. Tower of Frozen Shadow, or Charasis. Easy mechanics witin which to add a crafting element
G. Vex Thall and the shard progression- although certainly a time sink, the need to collect and combine the elements to get the key was a neat idea- same with plane of time and the shields.
H. ok, ony thng with this>? is having a drop rate that is amenable to allowing crafting to occur. From personal experience, as a mage- carrying 10 backpacks full of junk in the off chance to get one item to drop, just to makee a research combine in the hopes to get half- was irritating when you were sitting next to a wizard thatw as making combines for reaseach with whatever dropped in Highpass- and not the real things, but the test things togive skill ups- I can stil find my frustrated vent on Ring mail drops on allahs.
Neat idea, but the stuff has to always be there to craft it.
3. players influence: 10th coldain Ring war, where you actually ordered the dwarves- playerwwould get into the swing of things and fill in the ranks in the regiment of dwarves as their NPC comerades died- when the lined up, the dead dwarves were missing like the black squares ona checkerboard and players would fillin the ranks.
and the shadeweavers thicket grimling/sonic wolves/ owlbears war. made smithing fun as you could start the war, and keep whomever you wanted in power to grab smithing items. And the rockhopper caves in maidens eye. Had tailors cursing the knucklheads that killed the named rockhopper to allow the cavemen to take over- everyone knew- (it was stewardship by Gosh!) you leave the named rockhopper alone? and you could farm rockhopepr hides to your content and get many flawless for those preciosu skill ups.
(where did MATs come from? as a term, I am not familair- it s notmust mats, you mean lie a pattern? as a pattern is flat and clith, so is a mat like a door mat, otherwise theya re trade skil items- or is this a conjunction like the scientists that got itred of saying "completely collapsed gravitational object" and came up with "Black hole"- so what is the lengthy thing thatw as said,m that caused "mats" so be used for tradeskills, why nnot just "trades"" or "skilling")
I would love to see cooperations bewteen guilds- maybe as a GM event where the GM or Dev is running the dragon.
Bazgrim said:Amsai said: Yes Raids should be a thing, but I think it shouldn't be the only thing you need to do to be the best of the best. Split up loot drops so that if you want to have the best gear/skills/spells you have to do everything. Raiding, crafting, Factions, epic quests, open world and dungeon Named for normal party size. Not just Raid. You want the best weapon but only want to Raid? Too bad. Epic quest only. You want the best jewelry but only like to do factions and group size named? Tough. Learn to craft or pay through the nose.I'm not disagreeing with you. It will definitely be much easier said than done to find this balance, but that doesn't mean it's a bad idea. As long as the amount of time/effort required for each is equal (that's the hard part to quantify), I think players should be encouraged to be well-rounded. Along with that, in my opinion, all players should also be pulled out of their comfort zone from time to time. So for example, the crafters that don't like to raid will be motivated to raid and vice versa.
I think a fantastic example of this was multiple things in the Scars of Velious, MOST notably, the Coldain Ring quest. This was solo content and crafting up through the tiers until you get to the last two where you need a group and then a raid. This entire quest line was glorious. It utilized almost every single different facet the game had in one quest line. Camping, Crafting, Questing, Foraging, Group content, Raid boss, OPEN WORLD raid target that everyone in the Great Divide participated in. This quest line had it all. And the reward? a top tier ring. Hats off to the devs of that quest line.
More like "Why Raid Bosses are Only Fun Once to YOU", since that is an opinion. I find raid bosses fun to kill all the time and have killed several over an over just perfectioning my raid style. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. You find killing them once just as satisfactory as me killing them over 50 times. I do not think scaling is the answer for your needs, more like enough bosses available to keep YOU entertained. Maybe having events to keep you entertained and poping a unique boss per week event may do it for you.
I see that many have issues with the scaling of content and I agree with many of the reasons put forth. To try and sum them up they are:
1) Weaker guilds are blocked from content. Newer members of top end guilds would have issues keeping up.
Certainly true. The whole concept of my idea is to have player-driven difficulty, which is driven by the top end.
2) People like becoming stronger than content to achieve farm status and progress through the grind. Increasingly difficulty in a wholesale approach would provide an undue stress on the grind.
While this is also an opinion and cannot be argued, I actually agree that this is a major part of what makes games comforting and pleasant. The status quo is what it is for a reason. Getting guilds through difficult content causes in-fighting, stress, and major time commitments. You guys are 100% right here.
3) Fun can be produced through other means (encounter variability, quest lines, more encounters).
I am ALL FOR this type of discussion! I, like you all, want to see a more varied approach to the standard gameplay loop. I also would very much appreciate more variance in raid targets as suggested by many, but this does indeed come at a cost in terms of development time.
Despite all these valid arguments, I still see no reason why my scaling idea could not be used on one or two raid targets per expansion (or however the tiers of end game content are split). As long as it does not provide a key part of the gear progression scheme, this type of idea would not retard the progression of anyone if used only on a few raid targets. You could have the raid targets just drop visually appealing (but stat-equivalent) loot, clickables, or quality of life improvement items, so as not to interfere with the gear progression of the community at large. This would allow all guilds to get on the same footing gear-wise and compete for the difficulty-scaled target(s). This would just add to the diversity of the gameplay loop as many people have said they desire.
My intention was to present player-driven difficulty scaling as an interesting approach to be explored. It was not my intention to say that the current status quo of raiding should be tossed on its head. The idea was presented as a starting point and I (opinion) believe this is an area where the baby sdhould not be thrown out with the bathwater. I just want to see an outlet where PvE prowess is tested, but you guys have absolutely convinced me that it would have to be heavily limited in scope. Also, I'm not a malcontent and my title was chosen to be provocative, so please don't get too mad about that.
With all that said, Evoras (as usual) brought up some awesome points of discussion in the same spirit of friendly constructive discussion on upping the fun factor of end game content. I would like to comment on a few of his thoughts.
Evoras said:B. Increased horizontal progression:
C. Earlier Raid targets:
F. No 'absolute' best item:
H. Crafting requirements in Raid Zones (Also in a Crafting thread about Raids.)
I. Soft Lockout mechanism:
Horizontal progression seems like it would absolutely fit in Pantheon where levelling is a the main part of the game. I would love to see horizontally progression as a means to keep groups together throughout the levelling curve.
Earlier raid targets are things I've seen in other games that just didn't work out. Teamwork requires coordination, which requires leadership and organization, which just doesn't seem to happen in most games before end game. I'd love to be proven wrong, but I just don't see this as being fulfilling unless things are significantly different than they have been before.
Having no 'absolute' best item is certainly the ideal, but is a daunting balancing task that I would be afraid to undertake. I could certainly see this as being the goal for every itemization pass, but it would be tough to do.
Crafting requirements in raid zones just seems like a no-brainer to me and would increase the interdependence between the different forms of gameplay. Pure crafters would complain thugh I guess.
Soft lockouts are something that I am highly in favor of. Not much else to say with that.
Senthin said:Bazgrim said:Amsai said: Yes Raids should be a thing, but I think it shouldn't be the only thing you need to do to be the best of the best. Split up loot drops so that if you want to have the best gear/skills/spells you have to do everything. Raiding, crafting, Factions, epic quests, open world and dungeon Named for normal party size. Not just Raid. You want the best weapon but only want to Raid? Too bad. Epic quest only. You want the best jewelry but only like to do factions and group size named? Tough. Learn to craft or pay through the nose.I'm not disagreeing with you. It will definitely be much easier said than done to find this balance, but that doesn't mean it's a bad idea. As long as the amount of time/effort required for each is equal (that's the hard part to quantify), I think players should be encouraged to be well-rounded. Along with that, in my opinion, all players should also be pulled out of their comfort zone from time to time. So for example, the crafters that don't like to raid will be motivated to raid and vice versa.
I think a fantastic example of this was multiple things in the Scars of Velious, MOST notably, the Coldain Ring quest. This was solo content and crafting up through the tiers until you get to the last two where you need a group and then a raid. This entire quest line was glorious. It utilized almost every single different facet the game had in one quest line. Camping, Crafting, Questing, Foraging, Group content, Raid boss, OPEN WORLD raid target that everyone in the Great Divide participated in. This quest line had it all. And the reward? a top tier ring. Hats off to the devs of that quest line.
Yes that is perfect. I figured there were probably some quests like that, but I couldn't think of any examples. Hopefully we will have a lot more of this sort of thing in Pantheon. Velious was a wonderful time.
I would like to see more dynamic fights, ones that required you to observe what the boss was doing or casting. Vanguard had spell indentification with interupts and counters which if associated with random mob abilities would make for a more dynamc fight. The timer based rubbish promoted theses days with addons that near automate fights defeats the point of playing and just makes everything a walk through looter.
I think bosses should be one off named bosses that spawn in a similar location but have differing abilities and and classes, ie Boss#1 might be a figher one week and a caster the next week, but drop an Item with similar stats, just with a unique name. "Greatsword of Bob" for example. now if another greatsword droped of Boss#1 it would have the same stats, maybe different skin, but a unique name "Greatsword of Tim". Bob and Tim should have slightly different abilities so the fights would be somewhat different, they might use abilities in a different order or some different abilities out of the fighter skill set.
Theres alot that could be done to make raids more immersive and unique experiences while keeping the level of challenge we all enjoy.
Amsai said: Yes Raids should be a thing, but I think it shouldn't be the only thing you need to do to be the best of the best. Split up loot drops so that if you want to have the best gear/skills/spells you have to do everything. Raiding, crafting, Factions, epic quests, open world and dungeon Named for normal party size. Not just Raid. You want the best weapon but only want to Raid? Too bad. Epic quest only. You want the best jewelry but only like to do factions and group size named? Tough. Learn to craft or pay through the nose.
In response to the people who quoted me on the previous page: Amsai is saying what I hoped to convey in my message. Essentially that NOT _ALL_ of the best gear has to come from raids, which is unfortunately the paradigm that the genre has adopted. Sure, some of the best gear should come from raid content but you do not have to present the player with the "raid and have the best gear OR don't raid and have inferior gear in nearly every slot" dilemma. There are better ways to itemize the game and not funnel players into a tiny portion of the world.
My point was that the only real argument, as evidenced by previous posters, is that "raids are the most challenging content and require the most time". THIS DOES NOT HAVE TO BE THE CASE! There are plenty of ways to make single group content just as challenging, if not more so, than raids and scale the rewards accordingly. You can make crafting into such an epic journey that its rewards scale. In a game that is supposed to focus on group content there is a strong argument to be made that the most challenging and time consuming content does not neccessarily have to be raid-oriented. My plea is that the game is diverse and rewards the player for having a rounded out character by doing all types of content at end-game, not just raiding. Please shift the paradigm.
Lucid said:Amsai said: Yes Raids should be a thing, but I think it shouldn't be the only thing you need to do to be the best of the best. Split up loot drops so that if you want to have the best gear/skills/spells you have to do everything. Raiding, crafting, Factions, epic quests, open world and dungeon Named for normal party size. Not just Raid. You want the best weapon but only want to Raid? Too bad. Epic quest only. You want the best jewelry but only like to do factions and group size named? Tough. Learn to craft or pay through the nose.
In response to the people who quoted me on the previous page: Amsai is saying what I hoped to convey in my message. Essentially that NOT _ALL_ of the best gear has to come from raids, which is unfortunately the paradigm that the genre has adopted. Sure, some of the best gear should come from raid content but you do not have to present the player with the "raid and have the best gear OR don't raid and have inferior gear in nearly every slot" dilemma. There are better ways to itemize the game and not funnel players into a tiny portion of the world.
My point was that the only real argument, as evidenced by previous posters, is that "raids are the most challenging content and require the most time". THIS DOES NOT HAVE TO BE THE CASE! There are plenty of ways to make single group content just as challenging, if not more so, than raids and scale the rewards accordingly. You can make crafting into such an epic journey that its rewards scale. In a game that is supposed to focus on group content there is a strong argument to be made that the most challenging and time consuming content does not neccessarily have to be raid-oriented. My plea is that the game is diverse and rewards the player for having a rounded out character by doing all types of content at end-game, not just raiding. Please shift the paradigm.
I agree with both of you on this. Raiding has its place, but all the other facets of the game should yield ample rewards as well.
I agree with the sentiment that end-game Raiding does not have to be the only worthwhile content to progress through. However, in a game with the central theme of grouping and character socialization I find it difficult to not allow end-game Raiding be the penultimate ideal of those themes.
If there is one major task I ask for end-game Raiding it would be to not allow gear creep to take over the game as a whole. And to also have the task of gearing characters towards Raiding be specific to the types of bosses and Raids a group might be attempting to bring down (perhaps things like Fire resistance for example be important for a certain raid or boss) and not just have increasing levels of BiS (best in slot) gear for your characters were all other forms of obtaining gear or progression be useless once those items are obtained.
DrBrewski said:I agree with the sentiment that end-game Raiding does not have to be the only worthwhile content to progress through. However, in a game with the central theme of grouping and character socialization I find it difficult to not allow end-game Raiding be the penultimate ideal of those themes.
If there is one major task I ask for end-game Raiding it would be to not allow gear creep to take over the game as a whole. And to also have the task of gearing characters towards Raiding be specific to the types of bosses and Raids a group might be attempting to bring down (perhaps things like Fire resistance for example be important for a certain raid or boss) and not just have increasing levels of BiS (best in slot) gear for your characters were all other forms of obtaining gear or progression be useless once those items are obtained.
Just thought it was relevant but Brad has classified what type of game this is and further broken down 3 types of content. When they first started talking about how the game would focus on group content, I too read that as "not solo". But on a couple of occaisions Brad has said (paraphrase) that there is solo, single group and multi-group content (raids). But that Pantheon would focus on single group content, with the other 2 being the exception and not the rule. So yes there will be solo, and yes there will be raid, but the primary focus is apparently normal group content. So by that line of thinking, then single group content should be the end all be all of content. I get what you are saying, though. But unless they have changed stances, when VR says the game will focus on group content, they define that as single group content aqnd not multi-group content. Now Im not advocating that only single group content should have the best rewards, just clarifiying what the ultimate focus of the game is to be according to multiple statements in the past from devs.
I still would like to see different "BiS" (using that phrase loosely due to horizontal gear progression: Best Fire sword vs Best Ice sword, etc) items come from various content types. As I se it this could be done in 3 different ways or some combination of the 3:
A. Horizontal Progression Focus: (Example)
1. Best Ice Sword comes from Raid X
2. Best Fire sword comes from Epic quest Y
3. Best Poison sword comes from Epic Craft Z
B. Class Item Focus: (Example)
1. Best Warrior weapon comes from Raid X
2. Best Shaman weapon comes from Dungeon Y
3. Best Bard weapon comes from Faction Quest Z
Note: This scenario also means that other classes BiS gear other than weapons would still be present at those content types. Like maybe the Shaman doesnt get his best weapon from Raid X, but he does get his best chest piece from it, so its not like he wouldnt have a reason to do that Raid or that Faction quest or need that Crafted item, etc. to have "BiS"
C. Item Slot Focus: (Example)
1. Best Head, hand and feet for any class comes from Dungeons
2. Best Chest amd Legs for any class comes from Raids
3. Best Weapons for any class come from Epic Quests
4. Best Back and Belts for any class comes from Faction Quests
5. Best Jewelry (rings, bracelets, necklesses) for any class comes from Epic Crafts
As I said before this would not mean that these different content types might not also offer very good items. Just not as good as the content that offers the best of that type. (Example: Best Bard instruments come from Epic weapon craft, but you could still get very good ones from Raids, high end dungens, etc). The 2 things I like the most about this approach is that it mixes up end game a bit, gives you different and varied content so that you dont get Burnt out on ONLY raids at endgame. But it would have the secondary effect of helping to split up the player population so that at endgame everyone wouldnt be at the same content, and that everyone wouldnt always NEED to do the same content. Guilds wouldnt Be camping raids 7 days a week, they would want to switch up to high end dungeons, faction, or work on epic crafts or epic Quests, because different "BiS" items would come from different activities. Lastlly this would also help the OP concern to some degree as well, by increasing the types of endgame content.
Amsai said:DrBrewski said:I agree with the sentiment that end-game Raiding does not have to be the only worthwhile content to progress through. However, in a game with the central theme of grouping and character socialization I find it difficult to not allow end-game Raiding be the penultimate ideal of those themes.
If there is one major task I ask for end-game Raiding it would be to not allow gear creep to take over the game as a whole. And to also have the task of gearing characters towards Raiding be specific to the types of bosses and Raids a group might be attempting to bring down (perhaps things like Fire resistance for example be important for a certain raid or boss) and not just have increasing levels of BiS (best in slot) gear for your characters were all other forms of obtaining gear or progression be useless once those items are obtained.
Just thought it was relevant but Brad has classified what type of game this is and further broken down 3 types of content. When they first started talking about how the game would focus on group content, I too read that as "not solo". But on a couple of occaisions Brad has said (paraphrase) that there is solo, single group and multi-group content (raids). But that Pantheon would focus on single group content, with the other 2 being the exception and not the rule. So yes there will be solo, and yes there will be raid, but the primary focus is apparently normal group content. So by that line of thinking, then single group content should be the end all be all of content. I get what you are saying, though. But unless they have changed stances, when VR says the game will focus on group content, they define that as single group content aqnd not multi-group content. Now Im not advocating that only single group content should have the best rewards, just clarifiying what the ultimate focus of the game is to be according to multiple statements in the past from devs.
I still would like to see different "BiS" (using that phrase loosely due to horizontal gear progression: Best Fire sword vs Best Ice sword, etc) items come from various content types. As I se it this could be done in 3 different ways or some combination of the 3:
A. Horizontal Progression Focus: (Example)
1. Best Ice Sword comes from Raid X
2. Best Fire sword comes from Epic quest Y
3. Best Poison sword comes from Epic Craft Z
B. Class Item Focus: (Example)
1. Best Warrior weapon comes from Raid X
2. Best Shaman weapon comes from Dungeon Y
3. Best Bard weapon comes from Faction Quest Z
Note: This scenario also means that other classes BiS gear other than weapons would still be present at those content types. Like maybe the Shaman doesnt get his best weapon from Raid X, but he does get his best chest piece from it, so its not like he wouldnt have a reason to do that Raid or that Faction quest or need that Crafted item, etc. to have "BiS"
C. Item Slot Focus: (Example)
1. Best Head, hand and feet for any class comes from Dungeons
2. Best Chest amd Legs for any class comes from Raids
3. Best Weapons for any class come from Epic Quests
4. Best Back and Belts for any class comes from Faction Quests
5. Best Jewelry (rings, bracelets, necklesses) for any class comes from Epic Crafts
As I said before this would not mean that these different content types might not also offer very good items. Just not as good as the content that offers the best of that type. (Example: Best Bard instruments come from Epic weapon craft, but you could still get very good ones from Raids, high end dungens, etc). The 2 things I like the most about this approach is that it mixes up end game a bit, gives you different and varied content so that you dont get Burnt out on ONLY raids at endgame. But it would have the secondary effect of helping to split up the player population so that at endgame everyone wouldnt be at the same content, and that everyone wouldnt always NEED to do the same content. Guilds wouldnt Be camping raids 7 days a week, they would want to switch up to high end dungeons, faction, or work on epic crafts or epic Quests, because different "BiS" items would come from different activities. Lastlly this would also help the OP concern to some degree as well, by increasing the types of endgame content.
+1 Great post Amsai. Sounds like a wonderful system. This could really bring some diversity to the game and some great horizontal progression as well.