How the new Fractal CM KP(Killproof) system promotes toxicity. - Page 2 — Guild Wars 2 Forums
Home Fractals/Dungeons/Strike Missions/Raids

How the new Fractal CM KP(Killproof) system promotes toxicity.

2>

Comments

  • @Lord of the Fire.6870 said:

    -> You need an awful amount of cc in this fractal cc consumables became mandatory
    ->In the sorrow phase the fps drops heavy for many players because of the light show + your are really get blinded on the screen on this. - This is the main reason of 90% of the wipes. The only way around is using level 22 rocks

    Anet did its magic again. No more consumables fam. Killing CM pug runs 1 update at a time. Next update disable portal and next gg and mistlock doesn't reset skills.

    But I like their flawless logic. 4K cc bar for 10 man raids and in 100cm 3.5K cc bar for 5 people with 100 stuff hitting you and if you fail CC no worries you just all die.

  • @Abysswalker.5319 said:

    @Lord of the Fire.6870 said:

    -> You need an awful amount of cc in this fractal cc consumables became mandatory
    ->In the sorrow phase the fps drops heavy for many players because of the light show + your are really get blinded on the screen on this. - This is the main reason of 90% of the wipes. The only way around is using level 22 rocks

    Anet did its magic again. No more consumables fam. Killing CM pug runs 1 update at a time. Next update disable portal and next gg and mistlock doesn't reset skills.

    But I like their flawless logic. 4K cc bar for 10 man raids and in 100cm 3.5K cc bar for 5 people with 100 stuff hitting you and if you fail CC no worries you just all die.

    I know bad timing . I had no problem today but I could here other gildies screaming when they done 100 cm . What things makes worse is cFB main cc is ax on which ax 3 is buggy since they nerfed it. In general me and our members(+ allied members) have the feeling the responsible developers looking just for a quick fix without thinking about the consequences ... which are a lot nicer words then they used.

    But really back when chrono could stack boons into the minutes they didn't change the mistlocks or something like that they went for the easy solution and nerfed the SoI into the ground. It an ironie that they finally done what needs to be done in 100 cm only to do something similar again . Don't get me wrong it okay when they remove the consumable but then they need also lower the cc bar.

  • @Lord of the Fire.6870 said:

    @Abysswalker.5319 said:

    @Lord of the Fire.6870 said:

    -> You need an awful amount of cc in this fractal cc consumables became mandatory
    ->In the sorrow phase the fps drops heavy for many players because of the light show + your are really get blinded on the screen on this. - This is the main reason of 90% of the wipes. The only way around is using level 22 rocks

    Anet did its magic again. No more consumables fam. Killing CM pug runs 1 update at a time. Next update disable portal and next gg and mistlock doesn't reset skills.

    But I like their flawless logic. 4K cc bar for 10 man raids and in 100cm 3.5K cc bar for 5 people with 100 stuff hitting you and if you fail CC no worries you just all die.

    I know bad timing . I had no problem today but I could here other gildies screaming when they done 100 cm . What things makes worse is cFB main cc is ax on which ax 3 is buggy since they nerfed it. In general me and our members(+ allied members) have the feeling the responsible developers looking just for a quick fix without thinking about the consequences ... which are a lot nicer words then they used.

    But really back when chrono could stack boons into the minutes they didn't change the mistlocks or something like that they went for the easy solution and nerfed the SoI into the ground. It an ironie that they finally done what needs to be done in 100 cm only to do something similar again . Don't get me wrong it okay when they remove the consumable but then they need also lower the cc bar.

    Maybe stop using condi fb and use a condi with cc , condi fb isnt that good its ireplaceable

  • @Laila Lightness.8742 said:

    @Lord of the Fire.6870 said:

    @Abysswalker.5319 said:

    @Lord of the Fire.6870 said:

    -> You need an awful amount of cc in this fractal cc consumables became mandatory
    ->In the sorrow phase the fps drops heavy for many players because of the light show + your are really get blinded on the screen on this. - This is the main reason of 90% of the wipes. The only way around is using level 22 rocks

    Anet did its magic again. No more consumables fam. Killing CM pug runs 1 update at a time. Next update disable portal and next gg and mistlock doesn't reset skills.

    But I like their flawless logic. 4K cc bar for 10 man raids and in 100cm 3.5K cc bar for 5 people with 100 stuff hitting you and if you fail CC no worries you just all die.

    I know bad timing . I had no problem today but I could here other gildies screaming when they done 100 cm . What things makes worse is cFB main cc is ax on which ax 3 is buggy since they nerfed it. In general me and our members(+ allied members) have the feeling the responsible developers looking just for a quick fix without thinking about the consequences ... which are a lot nicer words then they used.

    But really back when chrono could stack boons into the minutes they didn't change the mistlocks or something like that they went for the easy solution and nerfed the SoI into the ground. It an ironie that they finally done what needs to be done in 100 cm only to do something similar again . Don't get me wrong it okay when they remove the consumable but then they need also lower the cc bar.

    Maybe stop using condi fb and use a condi with cc , condi fb isnt that good its ireplaceable

    You can always change your build a bit to take more cc with you e.g for fb Bane Signet but in general condi dps builds have extremely bad cc . Yes they have a lot of soft cc but this is way too slow e.g on Scourge your only big cc is F4 well you can swap Shadow Fiend for Spectral Ring(which is the only options). Some builds have great access to cc condi builds aren't on the list.

  • lare.5129lare.5129 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Lord of the Fire.6870 said:
    on Scourge

    we talk about CM or about scourge ? "instant kick" biulds and classes is not valid solution.

    want solid balance ? - play chess.

  • Teratus.2859Teratus.2859 Member ✭✭✭✭

    The way I see it is while it's true that Anet and a great deal of players don't like this kind of thing, there is an option in the game for you to play with other players on your skill level.
    Isn't this is exactly what guilds are supposed to be about?

    If you really only want to play with certain people and you don't want to play with others who can't or wont play up to your level then why not just make guilds that exclusively only accept people who fit what you're looking for?
    Surely a maxed out guild or two like that would always have a decent amount of players online for this high level content and you'd rarely have to bother with the LFG again.. thus avoiding problems and players like that.

  • lare.5129lare.5129 Member ✭✭✭✭

    some people already use some cm fratal discord chanels. Bot ask api key, and have some history .. I don't use but some people from guilds use and like it.

    want solid balance ? - play chess.

  • Armen.1483Armen.1483 Member ✭✭✭
    edited October 28, 2020

    @Astralporing.1957 said:

    @Armen.1483 said:
    Here is another example: https://imgur.com/a/ptToMUU
    They even use the killproof.me hoping we won't check that, then become toxic when we do.

    Perhaps it would have been better understandable with more context, but what i see is someone posting their killproof, then someone else putting up an LFG requirement that doesn't match that killproof.

    Here is the context:
    The LFG was open before with 200 KP requirement, someone hops in, says he's a dps and puts a killproof.me link. I open the link and see the guy has done the cms only 8 times. Asked him nicely why and he told me "kitten off". Edit: the thing with lfg search is because I've changed the roles, I've removed the dps role from lfg, because that guy joined and said he was a dps, so no more dps was needed.

  • People conveniently don't talk about how many , casuals I guess, who want to get into cm's or raids behave pretty toxic themselves towards experienced people. Theres toxic people on both sides that try to push their expectations onto the other ones and it just creates problems. Anet has done a poor job in trying to solve this. The KP change has achieved nothing, considerably made things even worse, especially for beginners of such content.

  • AliamRationem.5172AliamRationem.5172 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @ReiDIH.3548 said:
    People conveniently don't talk about how many , casuals I guess, who want to get into cm's or raids behave pretty toxic themselves towards experienced people. Theres toxic people on both sides that try to push their expectations onto the other ones and it just creates problems. Anet has done a poor job in trying to solve this. The KP change has achieved nothing, considerably made things even worse, especially for beginners of such content.

    Really? I'm pretty sure that particular topic comes up in every thread regarding elitism. The typical premise is that elitists are the gatekeepers preventing casual players from participating in available content. Inevitably, the questions follow: Do other players owe you a spot in their raid when you are perfectly capable of forming your own group with whatever requirements you like?

    As a former hardcore player (long ago in my WoW days!), I know what is required for progression raiding. It is not a casual activity. It requires time and effort, in particular for those who are responsible for organizing and leading the raids. GW2 is far more casual than raiding in WoW (pre-LFR), but raiding is still not a casual activity. So, unless you have a solid group that can handle things with or without your help and are okay dragging your dead weight around, it's expected that you learn the encounters and contribute just like everybody else.

    If that sounds a bit too much like a job to you and less like a game, you're not alone! It's why I'm a casual player. It's not that I don't have the time or the ability. It's that 1) I dislike the "tryhard" mentality where players act more like they're doing work on a deadline than playing a game, and 2) I'm not really interested in joining a static raid group for progression. I prefer to just do what I feel like doing in the moment.

    That's my choice. I don't inflict it upon others by demanding they invite me to raids and carry me through encounters I've never put the time in to learn and refuse to gear/build appropriately for. Nor do I demand that such content be removed and replaced with content I personally find more palatable. FWIW, I find that attitude every bit as repulsive as the so-called "elitists".

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 29, 2020

    @ReiDIH.3548 said:
    People conveniently don't talk about how many , casuals I guess, who want to get into cm's or raids behave pretty toxic themselves towards experienced people. Theres toxic people on both sides that try to push their expectations onto the other ones and it just creates problems. Anet has done a poor job in trying to solve this. The KP change has achieved nothing, considerably made things even worse, especially for beginners of such content.

    That in NO WAY is Anet's problem to solve .. they aren't here to give free behaviour adjustment sessions or create ways to segregate people into bins based on behaviour assessments. It's the players job to figure out how to find people they are willing to team with. No system Anet could conceive can do that for us.

    If you're on a highway and roadrunner goes "beep beep"
    Just step aside or you might end up in a heap

  • AliamRationem.5172AliamRationem.5172 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @ReiDIH.3548 said:
    People conveniently don't talk about how many , casuals I guess, who want to get into cm's or raids behave pretty toxic themselves towards experienced people. Theres toxic people on both sides that try to push their expectations onto the other ones and it just creates problems. Anet has done a poor job in trying to solve this. The KP change has achieved nothing, considerably made things even worse, especially for beginners of such content.

    That in NO WAY is Anet's problem to solve .. they aren't here to give free behaviour adjustment sessions or create ways to segregate people into bins based on behaviour assessments. It's the players job to figure out how to find people they are willing to team with. No system Anet could conceive can do that for us.

    That's a little ridiculous. I mean what do you think game design is all about but making your game appeal to whatever audience you're looking for?

    WoW's LFR system is an example of a system that attempts to do exactly that and they've had some success with it.

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @AliamRationem.5172 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @ReiDIH.3548 said:
    People conveniently don't talk about how many , casuals I guess, who want to get into cm's or raids behave pretty toxic themselves towards experienced people. Theres toxic people on both sides that try to push their expectations onto the other ones and it just creates problems. Anet has done a poor job in trying to solve this. The KP change has achieved nothing, considerably made things even worse, especially for beginners of such content.

    That in NO WAY is Anet's problem to solve .. they aren't here to give free behaviour adjustment sessions or create ways to segregate people into bins based on behaviour assessments. It's the players job to figure out how to find people they are willing to team with. No system Anet could conceive can do that for us.

    That's a little ridiculous. I mean what do you think game design is all about but making your game appeal to whatever audience you're looking for?

    WoW's LFR system is an example of a system that attempts to do exactly that and they've had some success with it.

    I don't think it's ridiculous ... people behaving badly isn't an Anet problem to solve ... EVEN if WoW did something somewhat success that does so.

    If you're on a highway and roadrunner goes "beep beep"
    Just step aside or you might end up in a heap

  • AliamRationem.5172AliamRationem.5172 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @AliamRationem.5172 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @ReiDIH.3548 said:
    People conveniently don't talk about how many , casuals I guess, who want to get into cm's or raids behave pretty toxic themselves towards experienced people. Theres toxic people on both sides that try to push their expectations onto the other ones and it just creates problems. Anet has done a poor job in trying to solve this. The KP change has achieved nothing, considerably made things even worse, especially for beginners of such content.

    That in NO WAY is Anet's problem to solve .. they aren't here to give free behaviour adjustment sessions or create ways to segregate people into bins based on behaviour assessments. It's the players job to figure out how to find people they are willing to team with. No system Anet could conceive can do that for us.

    That's a little ridiculous. I mean what do you think game design is all about but making your game appeal to whatever audience you're looking for?

    WoW's LFR system is an example of a system that attempts to do exactly that and they've had some success with it.

    I don't think it's ridiculous ... people behaving badly isn't an Anet problem to solve ... EVEN if WoW did something somewhat success that does so.

    It's not a justification for any individual's behavior. However, the fact is the source of this conflict is that having one difficulty for this type of content places players with different expectations and play styles together when they don't necessarily need to be. WoW found a solution that alleviated much of these issues.

  • Ayrilana.1396Ayrilana.1396 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 29, 2020

    It not an issue in regards to difficulty. It’s an issue with different players having different expectations in regards to their groups for that content and one side getting upset for being excluded and refusing to create their own groups.

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @AliamRationem.5172 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @AliamRationem.5172 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @ReiDIH.3548 said:
    People conveniently don't talk about how many , casuals I guess, who want to get into cm's or raids behave pretty toxic themselves towards experienced people. Theres toxic people on both sides that try to push their expectations onto the other ones and it just creates problems. Anet has done a poor job in trying to solve this. The KP change has achieved nothing, considerably made things even worse, especially for beginners of such content.

    That in NO WAY is Anet's problem to solve .. they aren't here to give free behaviour adjustment sessions or create ways to segregate people into bins based on behaviour assessments. It's the players job to figure out how to find people they are willing to team with. No system Anet could conceive can do that for us.

    That's a little ridiculous. I mean what do you think game design is all about but making your game appeal to whatever audience you're looking for?

    WoW's LFR system is an example of a system that attempts to do exactly that and they've had some success with it.

    I don't think it's ridiculous ... people behaving badly isn't an Anet problem to solve ... EVEN if WoW did something somewhat success that does so.

    It's not a justification for any individual's behavior. However, the fact is the source of this conflict is that having one difficulty for this type of content places players with different expectations and play styles together when they don't necessarily need to be. WoW found a solution that alleviated much of these issues.

    OK ... but that's still not Anet's responsibility to sort this out. I mean ... the expectation's players have and how they act on those ... there isn't a solution there for Anet to implement ... I mean, what do you suggest? A button people would click to self-identify as badly behaved with high expectations?

    If you're on a highway and roadrunner goes "beep beep"
    Just step aside or you might end up in a heap

  • AliamRationem.5172AliamRationem.5172 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @AliamRationem.5172 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @AliamRationem.5172 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @ReiDIH.3548 said:
    People conveniently don't talk about how many , casuals I guess, who want to get into cm's or raids behave pretty toxic themselves towards experienced people. Theres toxic people on both sides that try to push their expectations onto the other ones and it just creates problems. Anet has done a poor job in trying to solve this. The KP change has achieved nothing, considerably made things even worse, especially for beginners of such content.

    That in NO WAY is Anet's problem to solve .. they aren't here to give free behaviour adjustment sessions or create ways to segregate people into bins based on behaviour assessments. It's the players job to figure out how to find people they are willing to team with. No system Anet could conceive can do that for us.

    That's a little ridiculous. I mean what do you think game design is all about but making your game appeal to whatever audience you're looking for?

    WoW's LFR system is an example of a system that attempts to do exactly that and they've had some success with it.

    I don't think it's ridiculous ... people behaving badly isn't an Anet problem to solve ... EVEN if WoW did something somewhat success that does so.

    It's not a justification for any individual's behavior. However, the fact is the source of this conflict is that having one difficulty for this type of content places players with different expectations and play styles together when they don't necessarily need to be. WoW found a solution that alleviated much of these issues.

    OK ... but that's still not Anet's responsibility to sort this out. I mean ... the expectation's players have and how they act on those ... there isn't a solution there for Anet to implement ... I mean, what do you suggest? A button people would click to self-identify as badly behaved with high expectations?

    It's not worth arguing about. I've already explained with a perfect example. Bottom line: part of what game design can do to impact player behavior is to provide various difficulty levels to encourage players to self-seggregate. Is that their responsibility? Yes! Who else could be responsible for designing the game?

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 29, 2020

    @AliamRationem.5172 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @AliamRationem.5172 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @AliamRationem.5172 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @ReiDIH.3548 said:
    People conveniently don't talk about how many , casuals I guess, who want to get into cm's or raids behave pretty toxic themselves towards experienced people. Theres toxic people on both sides that try to push their expectations onto the other ones and it just creates problems. Anet has done a poor job in trying to solve this. The KP change has achieved nothing, considerably made things even worse, especially for beginners of such content.

    That in NO WAY is Anet's problem to solve .. they aren't here to give free behaviour adjustment sessions or create ways to segregate people into bins based on behaviour assessments. It's the players job to figure out how to find people they are willing to team with. No system Anet could conceive can do that for us.

    That's a little ridiculous. I mean what do you think game design is all about but making your game appeal to whatever audience you're looking for?

    WoW's LFR system is an example of a system that attempts to do exactly that and they've had some success with it.

    I don't think it's ridiculous ... people behaving badly isn't an Anet problem to solve ... EVEN if WoW did something somewhat success that does so.

    It's not a justification for any individual's behavior. However, the fact is the source of this conflict is that having one difficulty for this type of content places players with different expectations and play styles together when they don't necessarily need to be. WoW found a solution that alleviated much of these issues.

    OK ... but that's still not Anet's responsibility to sort this out. I mean ... the expectation's players have and how they act on those ... there isn't a solution there for Anet to implement ... I mean, what do you suggest? A button people would click to self-identify as badly behaved with high expectations?

    It's not worth arguing about. I've already explained with a perfect example. Bottom line: part of what game design can do to impact player behavior is to provide various difficulty levels to encourage players to self-seggregate. Is that their responsibility? Yes! Who else could be responsible for designing the game?

    Right ... but Anet isn't going to take all the instanced group content and simply segregate it by difficulty because some players behave badly. There simply isn't any value for Anet to do that ... so it's very unlikely to happen. This is a problem that players have to deal with.

    Even if they did ... that doesn't ensure people in those various difficulties change their behaviour. This isn't a psychological experiment and Anet doesn't have deep pockets. The truth is this ... people that behave badly will eventually weed themselves out anyways because of self-restrictions with who they are willing to play with. #self-extinction ... it's a thing and it's happens as we speak. This thread is proof.

    If you're on a highway and roadrunner goes "beep beep"
    Just step aside or you might end up in a heap