Top 3 reasons why raids only attracted a small audience - Page 8 — Guild Wars 2 Forums

Top 3 reasons why raids only attracted a small audience

1456810

Comments

  • Jilora.9524Jilora.9524 Member ✭✭✭

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Jilora.9524 said:
    the only other explanation is that most of the first raiders were NOT original adopters.

    That is exactly what you said

    That's correct, I did say that. We have two scenarios:

    1. Most of the people that experienced the first raids were original adopters. I feel this is the most likely scenario. My point holds.
    2. Most of the people that experience the first raids were people that joined the game when raids were annouced/released. I believe this is not likely but ... even, if this scenario is reality, it's questionable that the size of this group was big enough to sustain raids for the remainder of the game to begin with.

    I feel like we made progress so I'm going to stop there. Gl with your next forum battle

  • Jilora.9524Jilora.9524 Member ✭✭✭
    edited March 15, 2020

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Jilora.9524 said:
    the only other explanation is that most of the first raiders were NOT original adopters.

    That is exactly what you said

    That's correct, I did say that. We have two scenarios:

    1. Most of the people that experienced the first raids were original adopters. I feel this is the most likely scenario. My point holds.
    2. Most of the people that experience the first raids were people that joined the game when raids were annouced/released likely because of raids. I believe this is not likely but ... even, if this scenario is reality, it's questionable that the size of this group was big enough to sustain raids for the remainder of the game to begin with.

    @Jilora.9524 said:
    deleted cause i bet you would get it deleted

    You bet wrong ... I'm just not petty like that. Maybe you take this personally, I don't.

    Well i showed frustration so someone would maybe. The caps lock and saying I can't comprehend annoyed me when I knew you say things and hate scrolling back up to find them

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited March 15, 2020

    @Jilora.9524 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Jilora.9524 said:
    the only other explanation is that most of the first raiders were NOT original adopters.

    That is exactly what you said

    That's correct, I did say that. We have two scenarios:

    1. Most of the people that experienced the first raids were original adopters. I feel this is the most likely scenario. My point holds.
    2. Most of the people that experience the first raids were people that joined the game when raids were annouced/released. I believe this is not likely but ... even, if this scenario is reality, it's questionable that the size of this group was big enough to sustain raids for the remainder of the game to begin with.

    I feel like we made progress so I'm going to stop there. Gl with your next forum battle

    The irony is that my point still relevant in the second scenario ... if raids were offered in a way that appealed to original adopters, then even if they weren't the majority raider population, it would be likely that raids would have had a healthier population and as a result, be be less sensitive to game changes, questionable decisions and schedules.

    If you think balancing is only driven by performance and justified by comparisons to other classes then prepare to be educated:

    https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/balance-updates-the-heralds-near-future-and-pvp-league-season-13/

  • Jilora.9524Jilora.9524 Member ✭✭✭

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Jilora.9524 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Jilora.9524 said:
    the only other explanation is that most of the first raiders were NOT original adopters.

    That is exactly what you said

    That's correct, I did say that. We have two scenarios:

    1. Most of the people that experienced the first raids were original adopters. I feel this is the most likely scenario. My point holds.
    2. Most of the people that experience the first raids were people that joined the game when raids were annouced/released. I believe this is not likely but ... even, if this scenario is reality, it's questionable that the size of this group was big enough to sustain raids for the remainder of the game to begin with.

    I feel like we made progress so I'm going to stop there. Gl with your next forum battle

    The irony is that my point still relevant in the second scenario ... if raids were offered in a way that appealed to original adopters, then even if they weren't the majority raider population, it would be likely that raids would be less sensitive to game changes and go into development pull back. Either way, I don't think I'm nonsensical or wrong.

    No. Your aren't always nonsensical and wrong just you think you can never be wrong or at least seems that way. I stand by my reasons I think they failed 50 comments ago and you can stand by yours just don't think we can prove who's right either way.

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited March 15, 2020

    @Jilora.9524 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Jilora.9524 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Jilora.9524 said:
    the only other explanation is that most of the first raiders were NOT original adopters.

    That is exactly what you said

    That's correct, I did say that. We have two scenarios:

    1. Most of the people that experienced the first raids were original adopters. I feel this is the most likely scenario. My point holds.
    2. Most of the people that experience the first raids were people that joined the game when raids were annouced/released. I believe this is not likely but ... even, if this scenario is reality, it's questionable that the size of this group was big enough to sustain raids for the remainder of the game to begin with.

    I feel like we made progress so I'm going to stop there. Gl with your next forum battle

    The irony is that my point still relevant in the second scenario ... if raids were offered in a way that appealed to original adopters, then even if they weren't the majority raider population, it would be likely that raids would be less sensitive to game changes and go into development pull back. Either way, I don't think I'm nonsensical or wrong.

    No. Your aren't always nonsensical and wrong just you think you can never be wrong or at least seems that way. I stand by my reasons I think they failed 50 comments ago and you can stand by yours just don't think we can prove who's right either way.

    Well, if you don't believe we can prove who's right, why are you telling me no and I'm wrong? That doesn't make sense.

    If you think balancing is only driven by performance and justified by comparisons to other classes then prepare to be educated:

    https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/balance-updates-the-heralds-near-future-and-pvp-league-season-13/

  • Jilora.9524Jilora.9524 Member ✭✭✭

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Jilora.9524 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Jilora.9524 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Jilora.9524 said:
    the only other explanation is that most of the first raiders were NOT original adopters.

    That is exactly what you said

    That's correct, I did say that. We have two scenarios:

    1. Most of the people that experienced the first raids were original adopters. I feel this is the most likely scenario. My point holds.
    2. Most of the people that experience the first raids were people that joined the game when raids were annouced/released. I believe this is not likely but ... even, if this scenario is reality, it's questionable that the size of this group was big enough to sustain raids for the remainder of the game to begin with.

    I feel like we made progress so I'm going to stop there. Gl with your next forum battle

    The irony is that my point still relevant in the second scenario ... if raids were offered in a way that appealed to original adopters, then even if they weren't the majority raider population, it would be likely that raids would be less sensitive to game changes and go into development pull back. Either way, I don't think I'm nonsensical or wrong.

    No. Your aren't always nonsensical and wrong just you think you can never be wrong or at least seems that way. I stand by my reasons I think they failed 50 comments ago and you can stand by yours just don't think we can prove who's right either way.

    Well, if you don't believe we can prove who's right, why are you telling me no and I'm wrong? That doesn't make sense.

    Because you kept saying that you were right which didn't make sense when we couldn't prove either way like 70 comments ago. I still think you are wrong I just can't prove it.

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited March 15, 2020

    @Jilora.9524 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Jilora.9524 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Jilora.9524 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Jilora.9524 said:
    the only other explanation is that most of the first raiders were NOT original adopters.

    That is exactly what you said

    That's correct, I did say that. We have two scenarios:

    1. Most of the people that experienced the first raids were original adopters. I feel this is the most likely scenario. My point holds.
    2. Most of the people that experience the first raids were people that joined the game when raids were annouced/released. I believe this is not likely but ... even, if this scenario is reality, it's questionable that the size of this group was big enough to sustain raids for the remainder of the game to begin with.

    I feel like we made progress so I'm going to stop there. Gl with your next forum battle

    The irony is that my point still relevant in the second scenario ... if raids were offered in a way that appealed to original adopters, then even if they weren't the majority raider population, it would be likely that raids would be less sensitive to game changes and go into development pull back. Either way, I don't think I'm nonsensical or wrong.

    No. Your aren't always nonsensical and wrong just you think you can never be wrong or at least seems that way. I stand by my reasons I think they failed 50 comments ago and you can stand by yours just don't think we can prove who's right either way.

    Well, if you don't believe we can prove who's right, why are you telling me no and I'm wrong? That doesn't make sense.

    Because you kept saying ....

    Again ... telling me what I'm saying ... NOT going to work for you. You want me to walk away based "hey we don't know because opinions" ... but then you want to end it with "hey you are wrong, I just can't prove it". Awesome. :astonished:

    If you think balancing is only driven by performance and justified by comparisons to other classes then prepare to be educated:

    https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/balance-updates-the-heralds-near-future-and-pvp-league-season-13/

  • Jilora.9524Jilora.9524 Member ✭✭✭

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Jilora.9524 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Jilora.9524 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Jilora.9524 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Jilora.9524 said:
    the only other explanation is that most of the first raiders were NOT original adopters.

    That is exactly what you said

    That's correct, I did say that. We have two scenarios:

    1. Most of the people that experienced the first raids were original adopters. I feel this is the most likely scenario. My point holds.
    2. Most of the people that experience the first raids were people that joined the game when raids were annouced/released. I believe this is not likely but ... even, if this scenario is reality, it's questionable that the size of this group was big enough to sustain raids for the remainder of the game to begin with.

    I feel like we made progress so I'm going to stop there. Gl with your next forum battle

    The irony is that my point still relevant in the second scenario ... if raids were offered in a way that appealed to original adopters, then even if they weren't the majority raider population, it would be likely that raids would be less sensitive to game changes and go into development pull back. Either way, I don't think I'm nonsensical or wrong.

    No. Your aren't always nonsensical and wrong just you think you can never be wrong or at least seems that way. I stand by my reasons I think they failed 50 comments ago and you can stand by yours just don't think we can prove who's right either way.

    Well, if you don't believe we can prove who's right, why are you telling me no and I'm wrong? That doesn't make sense.

    Because you kept saying ....

    Again ... telling me what I'm saying ... NOT going to work for you. You want me to walk away based "hey we don't know because opinions" ... but then you want to end it with "hey you are wrong, I just can't prove it". Awesome. :astonished:

    Last time I did I went and found what you said. I'm not doing that again and who knows maybe it was page 4 or another thread no idea I still think your wrong regardless of how I came up with it just can't prove it so even if you didn't say you were right the rest of the comment stands

  • Jilora.9524Jilora.9524 Member ✭✭✭

    Hey you are wrong and Hey I think you are wrong are 2 different things. One is Definite and 2 is an opinion which also could be wrong so we can walk away

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited March 15, 2020

    @Jilora.9524 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Jilora.9524 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Jilora.9524 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Jilora.9524 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Jilora.9524 said:
    the only other explanation is that most of the first raiders were NOT original adopters.

    That is exactly what you said

    That's correct, I did say that. We have two scenarios:

    1. Most of the people that experienced the first raids were original adopters. I feel this is the most likely scenario. My point holds.
    2. Most of the people that experience the first raids were people that joined the game when raids were annouced/released. I believe this is not likely but ... even, if this scenario is reality, it's questionable that the size of this group was big enough to sustain raids for the remainder of the game to begin with.

    I feel like we made progress so I'm going to stop there. Gl with your next forum battle

    The irony is that my point still relevant in the second scenario ... if raids were offered in a way that appealed to original adopters, then even if they weren't the majority raider population, it would be likely that raids would be less sensitive to game changes and go into development pull back. Either way, I don't think I'm nonsensical or wrong.

    No. Your aren't always nonsensical and wrong just you think you can never be wrong or at least seems that way. I stand by my reasons I think they failed 50 comments ago and you can stand by yours just don't think we can prove who's right either way.

    Well, if you don't believe we can prove who's right, why are you telling me no and I'm wrong? That doesn't make sense.

    Because you kept saying ....

    Again ... telling me what I'm saying ... NOT going to work for you. You want me to walk away based "hey we don't know because opinions" ... but then you want to end it with "hey you are wrong, I just can't prove it". Awesome. :astonished:

    Last time I did I went and found what you said. I'm not doing that again and who knows maybe it was page 4 or another thread no idea I still think your wrong regardless of how I came up with it just can't prove it so even if you didn't say you were right the rest of the comment stands

    This thread is speculating why raids have a small population. There isn't anything 'wrong' with the idea that raids have a small population because of how they were offered to the people that originally adopted the game. The only problem here is that you want to dismiss a completely reasonable idea just because you don't believe it.

    Actually the OTHER problem is that you keep telling me things I'm saying that I don't say and even worse, that I would never say, with the intention of trying to make it sound like I'm some kind of flake. Naughty Naughty.

    If you think balancing is only driven by performance and justified by comparisons to other classes then prepare to be educated:

    https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/balance-updates-the-heralds-near-future-and-pvp-league-season-13/

  • Jilora.9524Jilora.9524 Member ✭✭✭

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Jilora.9524 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Jilora.9524 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Jilora.9524 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Jilora.9524 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Jilora.9524 said:
    the only other explanation is that most of the first raiders were NOT original adopters.

    That is exactly what you said

    That's correct, I did say that. We have two scenarios:

    1. Most of the people that experienced the first raids were original adopters. I feel this is the most likely scenario. My point holds.
    2. Most of the people that experience the first raids were people that joined the game when raids were annouced/released. I believe this is not likely but ... even, if this scenario is reality, it's questionable that the size of this group was big enough to sustain raids for the remainder of the game to begin with.

    I feel like we made progress so I'm going to stop there. Gl with your next forum battle

    The irony is that my point still relevant in the second scenario ... if raids were offered in a way that appealed to original adopters, then even if they weren't the majority raider population, it would be likely that raids would be less sensitive to game changes and go into development pull back. Either way, I don't think I'm nonsensical or wrong.

    No. Your aren't always nonsensical and wrong just you think you can never be wrong or at least seems that way. I stand by my reasons I think they failed 50 comments ago and you can stand by yours just don't think we can prove who's right either way.

    Well, if you don't believe we can prove who's right, why are you telling me no and I'm wrong? That doesn't make sense.

    Because you kept saying ....

    Again ... telling me what I'm saying ... NOT going to work for you. You want me to walk away based "hey we don't know because opinions" ... but then you want to end it with "hey you are wrong, I just can't prove it". Awesome. :astonished:

    Last time I did I went and found what you said. I'm not doing that again and who knows maybe it was page 4 or another thread no idea I still think your wrong regardless of how I came up with it just can't prove it so even if you didn't say you were right the rest of the comment stands

    This thread is speculating why raids have a small population. There isn't anything 'wrong' with the idea that raids have a small population because of how they were offered to the people that originally adopted the game. The only problem here is that you want to dismiss a completely reasonable idea just because you don't believe it.

    And we gave many reasons and I disagree with that one that's all. Raids are presented as optional content wheter to original adopters or players joining after Hot or new players today. I can't see how optional content added at any time to any group is a reason it attracts a small audience. The size would remain small even if optional raids were there on release due to it not being casual friendly and overwhelming to most press 1 half afk open world player base.

  • Jilora.9524Jilora.9524 Member ✭✭✭

    Stop editing when I'm typing. No, you argue with many people so maybe your confused or I mixed it up idk. These threads are too long to sift thru to find out. I will try not to write unless I know for sure like the first time but as I said I hate scrolling up looking to confirm

  • Gaf.6709Gaf.6709 Member ✭✭

    in my opinion the reasons why there are so few players playing raid, is that ArenaNet is still allowing the stupit dps-meter. raid has simply become so terribly toxic, full of players thinking they are better the rest of us, just curse they remember the full fight on a few bosses who always do the same thing, and then they think they are better then all the rest, in all aspects of the game. I personally stopped raiding before wing 4 was released, and have only briefly tried wing 4, and not been in wing 5-7 at all. and i will never come back as long as ArenaNet allows thet all-destroying dps meter, it should be banned, it's just a tool so small toxic elite kids have someone to point fingers at .. I'm so tired of random pug commanders that kick you random and then you ask why, and he then tells, you only do 25k dmg on a build that is benchmarked to do 28k+ and the raid community is so small, that if you do low dps, the commander remember, at dont take you next time. The dps meter is the only reason most people dont play raid, ArenaNet need to bann the dps meter, or eliminate the ability to monitor others, and only seeing their own dps would help a lot. people stay away from raid solo because of toxic elite player who only goes up in what a 3 party dps meter says, it's the only thing that matters to them, it's a tool that gives them people to point out and give blame. and for good measure, whether you have 10k -17k or 25k + dps. it only make the boss dies 5 seconds faster whit high dps. thats all, low dps players is fine in raid, the boss just get down a few seconds slover thats all. if arenanet remove the dps meter. alot of players will come back and new players will dare to try now .. banning the dps meter is the best thing to do for the raid community..

    Quote : slow and steady wins the race!

  • Digit.1823Digit.1823 Member ✭✭✭

    @Gaf.6709 said:

    in my opinion the reasons why there are so few players playing raid, is that ArenaNet is still allowing the stupit dps-meter. raid has simply become so terribly toxic, full of players thinking they are better the rest of us, just curse they remember the full fight on a few bosses who always do the same thing, and then they think they are better then all the rest, in all aspects of the game. I personally stopped raiding before wing 4 was released, and have only briefly tried wing 4, and not been in wing 5-7 at all. and i will never come back as long as ArenaNet allows thet all-destroying dps meter, it should be banned, it's just a tool so small toxic elite kids have someone to point fingers at .. I'm so tired of random pug commanders that kick you random and then you ask why, and he then tells, you only do 25k dmg on a build that is benchmarked to do 28k+ and the raid community is so small, that if you do low dps, the commander remember, at dont take you next time. The dps meter is the only reason most people dont play raid, ArenaNet need to bann the dps meter, or eliminate the ability to monitor others, and only seeing their own dps would help a lot. people stay away from raid solo because of toxic elite player who only goes up in what a 3 party dps meter says, it's the only thing that matters to them, it's a tool that gives them people to point out and give blame. and for good measure, whether you have 10k -17k or 25k + dps. it only make the boss dies 5 seconds faster whit high dps. thats all, low dps players is fine in raid, the boss just get down a few seconds slover thats all. if arenanet remove the dps meter. alot of players will come back and new players will dare to try now .. banning the dps meter is the best thing to do for the raid community..

    Quote : slow and steady wins the race!

    Except for the fact that everything you typed here is wrong. DPS meters were a blessing in disguise for a lot of classes and players to find out they weren't actually doing terrible in raids.

    Remember what happened to every class that wasn't Elementalist in the first Era of raids when the first bench marks were released? Oh right you don't otherwise you wouldn't type what you just did so i'll explain it.

    So in the beginning we only had a static golem to go by to get our first damage "benchmarks". Elementalist seemed to be ahead of the curve by a gigantic margin, literally talking 10k dps over the second class that came close. So what happened during raids to any dps player that wasn't an elementalist? They got kicked at the slightest sign of trouble in killing the boss.

    Only to find out later when DPS meters were widely used that a lot of Ele players were actually doing horrible, horrible damage, and that Dragonhunter over there we used to kick out of raids in favor of Eles wasn't actually doing that bad. So it was an incredibly eye-opening experience for a lot of players and ushered in a new Era where people were actually judged on their performance and not discriminated against by the class they played. I know what sounds better to me...

    P.s. Slow and steady might win a race, but actually doing damage and killing a boss in 4 minutes instead of 8 minutes also wins the race y'know. Food for thought.

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited March 15, 2020

    @Jilora.9524 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Jilora.9524 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Jilora.9524 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Jilora.9524 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Jilora.9524 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Jilora.9524 said:
    the only other explanation is that most of the first raiders were NOT original adopters.

    That is exactly what you said

    That's correct, I did say that. We have two scenarios:

    1. Most of the people that experienced the first raids were original adopters. I feel this is the most likely scenario. My point holds.
    2. Most of the people that experience the first raids were people that joined the game when raids were annouced/released. I believe this is not likely but ... even, if this scenario is reality, it's questionable that the size of this group was big enough to sustain raids for the remainder of the game to begin with.

    I feel like we made progress so I'm going to stop there. Gl with your next forum battle

    The irony is that my point still relevant in the second scenario ... if raids were offered in a way that appealed to original adopters, then even if they weren't the majority raider population, it would be likely that raids would be less sensitive to game changes and go into development pull back. Either way, I don't think I'm nonsensical or wrong.

    No. Your aren't always nonsensical and wrong just you think you can never be wrong or at least seems that way. I stand by my reasons I think they failed 50 comments ago and you can stand by yours just don't think we can prove who's right either way.

    Well, if you don't believe we can prove who's right, why are you telling me no and I'm wrong? That doesn't make sense.

    Because you kept saying ....

    Again ... telling me what I'm saying ... NOT going to work for you. You want me to walk away based "hey we don't know because opinions" ... but then you want to end it with "hey you are wrong, I just can't prove it". Awesome. :astonished:

    Last time I did I went and found what you said. I'm not doing that again and who knows maybe it was page 4 or another thread no idea I still think your wrong regardless of how I came up with it just can't prove it so even if you didn't say you were right the rest of the comment stands

    This thread is speculating why raids have a small population. There isn't anything 'wrong' with the idea that raids have a small population because of how they were offered to the people that originally adopted the game. The only problem here is that you want to dismiss a completely reasonable idea just because you don't believe it.

    And we gave many reasons and I disagree with that one that's all. Raids are presented as optional content wheter to original adopters or players joining after Hot or new players today. I can't see how optional content added at any time to any group is a reason it attracts a small audience. The size would remain small even if optional raids were there on release due to it not being casual friendly and overwhelming to most press 1 half afk open world player base.

    I can't see how content being optional is a reason either ... but if you are suggesting that optional factor is somehow part of my own reasoning for low populatoin, be assured it never even crossed my mind. Maybe you are just thinking out loud here, that's OK. It's worth exploring ideas with others. I mean, lots of PVE content is optional also ... but it's audience is arguably the largest in the game ... so being optional doesn't really make sense as a factor into why raids have a small audience.

    If you think balancing is only driven by performance and justified by comparisons to other classes then prepare to be educated:

    https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/balance-updates-the-heralds-near-future-and-pvp-league-season-13/

  • hellsqueen.3045hellsqueen.3045 Member ✭✭✭

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:
    There isn't any ignoring and to be fair, this thread IS a speculative exercise so ...

    It's COMPLETELY REASONABLE to believe that raids aren't successful in this game because of reasons rooted in how the content was offered and ultimately leading to financials. Don't be like others and blame Anet through some complicated web of their actions for attempting to commit corporate suicide ... that's nonsense.

    I think it's much simpler than that; people didn't adopt GW2 for raids in the way Anet offered them. It just doesn't have the right player profile to support the raid content. If it did, we would have seen Anet maintain the raid release schedule.

    Sure, but that still does not in any way explain why raids were very successful in the beginning.

    You said it yourself, unless you have access to the correct data to backup your OPINION, you are runnikg on fumes.

    • They were new.
    • They offered unique items.
    • Progress was blocked in obtaining max mastery level regardless of if you used them or not.

    For example, I was progress blocked for years. I only go my first raid kill last year and I only got the game just before HOT came out.
    I have over 5,899 hours in the game and I have been playing for 4 and a half years. Which means for 3-4 years I did not have a boss kill which meant I kept going back until I got lucky enough to have some guy get cocky enough to prove you can take anything into a raid and anyone can pass and it isn't intimidating and that I should do them.

    That same guy proved he was biased toward me because he made my boyfriend redo his entire dare devil build and make him hit 30k consistently on the training golem before taking him to get his done.

    After all this, I haven't really been back into a raid since. I got my masteries and now I don't have a group to do it with because you can't just join anyone. I have made the builds to hit reasonable DPS, etc. but I still fear the community and nothing in there is worth dealing with the community that is there. I don't even like to join fractals full of jargon and BS that excludes people. I just want to get them done, I don't need a kitten speed run.

    Basically:
    The raiding community is shrinking.
    And people don't want to join it to keep it alive because the are shamed/feared out of it and the only way to become part of it is through training groups that force you to become as cookie cutter as everyone else.

    Founder of Affinitus Nemus [AFNM]
    "Join Us, We're Lonely" - Our Guild At Some Point

    JUST LIKE THE LORAX, WE SPEAK FOR THE TREES!

  • maddoctor.2738maddoctor.2738 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Obtena.7952 said:
    Raids suffered from lots of things and the primary reason IMO is the reason I keep telling you. I get you have a problem with how I said only ... get over it. It doesn't make my point any less relevant.

    As Scarlet would say "Hooray for progress!" Btw I'm not a psychic, I respond to what is written.
    As for your actual "point", you already admitted that it doesn't explain the first 2 years of Raids. We have delays and bad schedules (and other things as already explained in page 1) that can justify the reduction in Raid population/popularity over time, while explaining the first 2 years, and another point, "not being consistent content offering" that doesn't... I can't change opinions so I will leave it at that.

  • maddoctor.2738maddoctor.2738 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @hellsqueen.3045 said:
    The raiding community is shrinking.

    Like the dungeon community... abandoning content does that.

  • Astralporing.1957Astralporing.1957 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited March 16, 2020

    @maddoctor.2738 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:
    Raids suffered from lots of things and the primary reason IMO is the reason I keep telling you. I get you have a problem with how I said only ... get over it. It doesn't make my point any less relevant.

    As Scarlet would say "Hooray for progress!" Btw I'm not a psychic, I respond to what is written.
    As for your actual "point", you already admitted that it doesn't explain the first 2 years of Raids.

    Legendary armor. That's it. A lot of "raiders" were never interested in raids in the first place. They were there only for the goodies. Once they got them, they quit, because the content itself was not fun for them.

    Also, i think you put way too much value in that single "succesful" statement. Not only we don't know what they really meant by it then (because they were very, very vague), but Anet devs have been known to make very enthusiastic statements about their newest creations, that, in retrospect, we found, were perhaps way too enthusiastic, and didn't really match up to reality.

    We have delays and bad schedules (and other things as already explained in page 1) that can justify the reduction in Raid population/popularity over time,

    Yes, but what i think you are missing is that the reduction would have happened anyway. There might have been some delays, but as far as we know, their actual release schedule wasn't any longer than their development schedule. Raid wings still did take them upward of 9 months to make on average. We just didn't see it initially, due to the very same development-release schedules mismatch you are blaming for later failures. And that was way, way too long for the raiding community.

    In the end, raider disappointment was not due to Anet "failing" them. It was due to raiders having way too big expectations, that never matched reality. It's just that in the "raid honeymoon" period, the raiding community started to think that they're the most important part of the GW2 player community, so important to Anet, that whatever they'll ask of devs, they will get. Finding out that it's not true, that there are limits to this, and that thse limits are quite low at that, was a bucket of cold water. But, instead of making the community recognize reality for what it was, it caused many players to think of "betrayal" and "failure". Perhaps because the reality in which the raiders were not the golden children, and weren't the privileged part of the game community, was simply too harsh to face.

    The whole point of a social game is to play with the people you want to play with, not be forced to play with the people you don't.

  • maddoctor.2738maddoctor.2738 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Astralporing.1957 said:
    They were there only for the goodies. Once they got them, they quit, because the content itself was not fun for them.

    I'm sure those still running Silverwastes RIBA, those that exhausted AB ML and Istan ML and the champion train runners are doing it/ were doing it because it's the most fun for them and not because of the rewards. When is the last time you run Stepping Stones JP? Any of the Griffon or Beetle races? Adventures maybe? Have you been to living world Season 3 maps lately to see how deserted they are? Even those that are on the daily. Do you think those killing Drakkar nowadays are all there because it's the most exciting fight in the game or because it's new/achievements? I'm not sure how the "they were there for the goodies" argument applies only to Raids but if you say so it might.

    Also, i think you put way too much value in that single "succesful" statement. Not only we don't know what they really meant by it then (because they were very, very vague), but Anet devs have been known to make very enthusiastic statements about their newest creations, that, in retrospect, we found, were perhaps way too enthusiastic, and didn't really match up to reality.

    I don't put any value on that statement, but rather on the fact that even as late as summer 2018 they were promising faster releases.
    Also, the argument about Raids failing to attract population is only based on a single statement by Arenanet, which was also very very vague. How are you sure that the statement was about the actual popularity of Raids and not their attempt to lure players towards their new content? It wouldn't be the first time.

    Yes, but what i think you are missing is that the reduction would have happened anyway. There might have been some delays, but as far as we know, their actual release schedule wasn't any longer than their development schedule. Raid wings still did take them upward of 9 months to make on average. We just didn't see it initially, due to the very same development-release schedules mismatch you are blaming for later failures. And that was way, way too long for the raiding community.

    From the information we actually have it took them about 7 months to make a new Raid wing, while at the same time creating 1 new fractal in the in-between time. Which fits the initial statement of taking 5-6 months to make a Raid wing (and 1-3 months for a Fractal?)

    In the end, raider disappointment was not due to Anet "failing" them. It was due to raiders having way too big expectations, that never matched reality.

    Expecting a Raid wing every 5-6 months is unrealistic?

  • hellsqueen.3045hellsqueen.3045 Member ✭✭✭
    edited March 16, 2020

    @maddoctor.2738 said:

    @hellsqueen.3045 said:
    The raiding community is shrinking.

    Like the dungeon community... abandoning content does that.

    But dungeon content is old and many of them didn't update well and they moved their focuses else where and it made sense to which stopped people from being interested, regardless of new blood joining. The amount of times there are stun bars on the bosses in those dungeons and then stuns just flat out work on them so the bosses practically never attack. They tried to update the bosses to match the new direction of the game and it didn't work out well for them and perhaps they tried to make it work but the design of that instanced content was too ingrained that they were better off abandoning and leaving them as they were and creating new types of dungeons for the largest aspect of their community, the max level players got fractals and it caused them to need to continue to grow their level via agony.

    The raiding community is newer content and it is still shrinking, you need fresh players in order to keep up enough participation in order to put resources toward it.
    But the players are leaving and there aren't enough new ones taking place to justify putting resources toward it.

    I would say that is the whole point of Strikes. To get players into Raids, by somewhat building their confidence.

    • Each Strike release is supposed to be harder than the last (like a fractal)
    • Each Strike is supposed to progressively reach toward the idea of raid style content

    However, each strike uses bosses that inexperienced players have become familiar with throughout the story, so if they beat it in the story they get this confidence that "I did it once, I can do it again with a group of people."
    By making them familiar, it makes players more comfortable and if they don't succeed, there might be a higher chances of them wanting to work harder to defeat it and improving because they want to defeat this familiar thing again.
    Not to mention, if a handful of these new players that have enjoyed strikes but avoided raids find out that maybe the last strike of the story or W/E is now almost as hard as a raid, they might be more confident to approach raiding content which could result in new players joining the mode and justifying putting time and resources into raids.

    Founder of Affinitus Nemus [AFNM]
    "Join Us, We're Lonely" - Our Guild At Some Point

    JUST LIKE THE LORAX, WE SPEAK FOR THE TREES!

  • Cyninja.2954Cyninja.2954 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited March 16, 2020

    @hellsqueen.3045 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:
    There isn't any ignoring and to be fair, this thread IS a speculative exercise so ...

    It's COMPLETELY REASONABLE to believe that raids aren't successful in this game because of reasons rooted in how the content was offered and ultimately leading to financials. Don't be like others and blame Anet through some complicated web of their actions for attempting to commit corporate suicide ... that's nonsense.

    I think it's much simpler than that; people didn't adopt GW2 for raids in the way Anet offered them. It just doesn't have the right player profile to support the raid content. If it did, we would have seen Anet maintain the raid release schedule.

    Sure, but that still does not in any way explain why raids were very successful in the beginning.

    You said it yourself, unless you have access to the correct data to backup your OPINION, you are runnikg on fumes.

    • They were new.
    • They offered unique items.
    • Progress was blocked in obtaining max mastery level regardless of if you used them or not.

    We are talking about over 2 years of successful implementation of content. Raids were not that new by then. Max level mastery was not required once fixed. Even then, there was/is a ton of very easy fights which allow players to get 1 kill. That does not reflect an overall interest in raids.

    @hellsqueen.3045 said:
    For example, I was progress blocked for years. I only go my first raid kill last year and I only got the game just before HOT came out.
    I have over 5,899 hours in the game and I have been playing for 4 and a half years. Which means for 3-4 years I did not have a boss kill which meant I kept going back until I got lucky enough to have some guy get cocky enough to prove you can take anything into a raid and anyone can pass and it isn't intimidating and that I should do them.

    Be honest:
    How much effort did you put in for actually getting into raids or playing the content? This sounds to me more as though you were not interested in the content and join a run by accident. That is perfectly fine, but please don't use this as an argument for difficult access. Unless you spent 4 years trying to get into raids, at which point I would try to understand what the limiting factors were in order to recommend how to approach this.

    @hellsqueen.3045 said:
    That same guy proved he was biased toward me because he made my boyfriend redo his entire dare devil build and make him hit 30k consistently on the training golem before taking him to get his done.

    I can't speak as to the "guy" and I certainly did not put such harsh restrictions on new players (though I always recommend players practice, and recommend easy classes), hitting 30k on a Daredevil on the golem is not really difficult or an amazing feat requirement. Half of that is pure auto attack, and the other half is using 2-3 skills every few seconds without even requiring weapon swapping. So while I disagree that such a requirement needs to be put up for training runs, I can't comment on why or how this transpired.

    I would recommend though not to judge thousands of players based on a singular event.

    @hellsqueen.3045 said:
    After all this, I haven't really been back into a raid since. I got my masteries and now I don't have a group to do it with because you can't just join anyone. I have made the builds to hit reasonable DPS, etc. but I still fear the community and nothing in there is worth dealing with the community that is there. I don't even like to join fractals full of jargon and BS that excludes people. I just want to get them done, I don't need a kitten speed run.

    Again, honest question:
    How much have you actually tried finding a guild or getting into one? Once again, perfectly fine to not want to join or find other people to play with, but please be critical enough of what the actual reasons are. If 1 bad experience is all it takes for you to never want to raid, I'd question your actual desire to play this content, which directly means you are not the target audience, which is fine.

    @hellsqueen.3045 said:
    Basically:
    The raiding community is shrinking.
    And people don't want to join it to keep it alive because the are shamed/feared out of it and the only way to become part of it is through training groups that force you to become as cookie cutter as everyone else.

    Find better training groups.

  • maddoctor.2738maddoctor.2738 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @hellsqueen.3045 said:
    But dungeon content is old and the moved their focuses else where which stopped people from being interested, regardless of new blood joining.

    Indeed. Just like they scrapped dungeons for fractals, they scrapped raids for strike missions. It's the same story all over again, when they want to redirect players towards their new content.

    However, each strike uses bosses that inexperienced players have become familiar with throughout the story, so if they beat it in the story they get this confidence that "I did it once, I can do it again with a group of people."

    The Icebrood Construct and the Fraenir of Jormag (the easiest ones) are the strike mission bosses that you fight in the story, the others are very much new.

  • hellsqueen.3045hellsqueen.3045 Member ✭✭✭
    edited March 16, 2020

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @hellsqueen.3045 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:
    There isn't any ignoring and to be fair, this thread IS a speculative exercise so ...

    It's COMPLETELY REASONABLE to believe that raids aren't successful in this game because of reasons rooted in how the content was offered and ultimately leading to financials. Don't be like others and blame Anet through some complicated web of their actions for attempting to commit corporate suicide ... that's nonsense.

    I think it's much simpler than that; people didn't adopt GW2 for raids in the way Anet offered them. It just doesn't have the right player profile to support the raid content. If it did, we would have seen Anet maintain the raid release schedule.

    Sure, but that still does not in any way explain why raids were very successful in the beginning.

    You said it yourself, unless you have access to the correct data to backup your OPINION, you are runnikg on fumes.

    • They were new.
    • They offered unique items.
    • Progress was blocked in obtaining max mastery level regardless of if you used them or not.

    We are talking about over 2 years of successful implementation of content. Raids were not that new by then. Max level mastery was not required once fixed. Even then, there was/is a ton of very easy fights which allow players to get 1 kill. That does not reflect an overall interest in raids.

    @hellsqueen.3045 said:
    For example, I was progress blocked for years. I only go my first raid kill last year and I only got the game just before HOT came out.
    I have over 5,899 hours in the game and I have been playing for 4 and a half years. Which means for 3-4 years I did not have a boss kill which meant I kept going back until I got lucky enough to have some guy get cocky enough to prove you can take anything into a raid and anyone can pass and it isn't intimidating and that I should do them.

    Be honest:
    How much effort did you put in for actually getting into raids or playing the content? This sounds to me more as though you were not interested in the content and join a run by accident. That is perfectly fine, but please don't use this as an argument for difficult access. Unless you spent 4 years trying to get into raids, at which point I would try to understand what the limiting factors were in order to recommend how to approach this.

    @hellsqueen.3045 said:
    That same guy proved he was biased toward me because he made my boyfriend redo his entire dare devil build and make him hit 30k consistently on the training golem before taking him to get his done.

    I can't speak as to the "guy" and I certainly did not put such harsh restrictions on new players (though I always recommend players practice, and recommend easy classes), hitting 30k on a Daredevil on the golem is not really difficult or an amaing feat requirement. Half of that is pure auto attack, and the other half is using 2-3 skills every few seconds without even requiring weapon swapping. So while I disagree that such a requirement needs to be put up for training runs, I can't comment on why or how this transpired.

    I would recommend though not to judge thousands of players based on a singular event.

    @hellsqueen.3045 said:
    After all this, I haven't really been back into a raid since. I got my masteries and now I don't have a group to do it with because you can't just join anyone. I have made the builds to hit reasonable DPS, etc. but I still fear the community and nothing in there is worth dealing with the community that is there. I don't even like to join fractals full of jargon and BS that excludes people. I just want to get them done, I don't need a kitten speed run.

    Again, honest question:
    How much have you actually tried finding a guild or getting into one? Once again, perfectly fine to not want to join or find other people to play with, but please be critical enough of what the actual reasons are. If 1 bad experience is all it takes for you to never want to raid, I'd question your actual desire to play this content, which directly means you are not the target audience, which is fine.

    @hellsqueen.3045 said:
    Basically:
    The raiding community is shrinking.
    And people don't want to join it to keep it alive because the are shamed/feared out of it and the only way to become part of it is through training groups that force you to become as cookie cutter as everyone else.

    Find better training groups.

    As I mentioned before, I was carried.
    Not joined some sort of run by accident.
    But that experience with the player was a turn off because of his bad attitude.

    Getting kicked out of groups I had made in my earlier days with my friends. Bad experience.

    We later had a much nicer person join who was familiar with raids and he was much different but he openly admitted to being toxic at one point in his raiding time but he was done with that, he was going to play what he liked and not worry about others too much. He took me in on a druid of VG and we made it to some part with a platform or W/E and we probably could have stood to clear the entire wing but unfortunately my internet at the time was pretty terrible and gradually got worse and worse as we progressed through the wing so we had to give up after a while because I was dragging the team down by the second last boss or something.

    This was a more positive raid experience for sure and rekindled my interest but I had too many technology based limitations at that point that I couldn't.
    But also I spoke to him about his time and why it made him so toxic, and he couldn't really explain why but it just did.

    I tried when they first came out, obviously it was a disaster. No one knew what was happening, no one knew anything.
    Came back later, but possibly too late in the bandwagon, at a point where too many people already had their expectations and I didn't know the jargon or anything else.
    And unlike some people, when I see jargon that reminds me of "LEVEL 80 EXP ONLY EXPLORABLE" I knew better than to join.

    This weekend my guild and I had a crack at Cairn because we now have 2 experienced raiders who are lovely people, big ole memers and we love them and they really want to get us to raid because they don't like playing with the raiding community either and don't really enjoy their raid guilds, they are bored because it's all business to them.

    We went in with maybe half of us with raid ready builds and the rest of the guild we didn't really worry about too much because we wanted to just put them in the environment and see what happened to better see how we can help them grow. I don't want to just point them to snowcrows and make them follow some rotation. I get that it is effective but I am not going to turn them into little raid robots who end up hating their builds that we forced them to take. We might be using the information as a guide but we are doing our best to make it fit them and advising better ways to build that still reflects them.

    Even with these suboptimal conditions, we nearly got the newbies their first boss kills. Obviously 30% is still a long way to go but it was actually a fun experience for them and they weren't scared because even our experienced player who was doing shard kiting was making mistakes but she would jokingly say "omg im throwing" and everyone would laugh and no one was miserable. This week we are helping people work on their builds before we try again next week. As I said, we don't care about the most optimal, we just want to see these players grow enough that we can do them at the bare minimum.

    At the end of the day I would rather die a thousand times and learn at my own pace and see my little bits of growth, then be forced to just skip that learning and become the same cookie cutter build just grinding out raids because they are there.

    I am still learning in this game every day, and I love that. I am still making mistakes and working on things. This game will be stale when I can't keep learning something new about everything I play.

    Founder of Affinitus Nemus [AFNM]
    "Join Us, We're Lonely" - Our Guild At Some Point

    JUST LIKE THE LORAX, WE SPEAK FOR THE TREES!

  • hellsqueen.3045hellsqueen.3045 Member ✭✭✭
    edited March 16, 2020

    @maddoctor.2738 said:

    @hellsqueen.3045 said:
    But dungeon content is old and the moved their focuses else where which stopped people from being interested, regardless of new blood joining.

    Indeed. Just like they scrapped dungeons for fractals, they scrapped raids for strike missions. It's the same story all over again, when they want to redirect players towards their new content.

    However, each strike uses bosses that inexperienced players have become familiar with throughout the story, so if they beat it in the story they get this confidence that "I did it once, I can do it again with a group of people."

    The Icebrood Construct and the Fraenir of Jormag (the easiest ones) are the strike mission bosses that you fight in the story, the others are very much new.

    There is also the Boneskinner, which while not story, it is something in the map that people fight, so again is one of those ones that becomes less intimidating to deal with.

    I don't think that Raids were scrapped for Strikes however.

    Dungeons were already old and for whatever reason when they tried to update the bosses, etc, they just kind of broke and didn't really update. They have stun bars but you can still stun past it and such. It just seems like dungeons were too set in their way that when they tried to update it, it broke things here and there.

    It's like a friend of mine pointed out, WoW tried to remove the bag system but it was ingrained in WoW's design that things just didn't work and it couldn't be done.

    It seems to me like dungeons suffered the same problem, they were designed so early and rigidly that to properly update the content, they would have needed to remake it. So why spend so much time focusing on it and re-implementing the exact same thing just updated, when they could focus their efforts toward making end game content in a similar design to dungeons that allowed progression for max level players.

    The dungeons still have value for leveling but reworking them to fit the games new direction just didn't seem worth the effort.

    Raids aren't in that same position as dungeons, they can continue to implement new mechanics, etc. and keep them up to date with the game's direction, so why haven't they?
    You can't say "it's to push people toward strikes", because if strikes is just supposed to end up being as hard as raids, then at the end of the day it is pretty much is a raid and then all of this content could have been raids.

    At this stage Strikes are too easy to be raids. But the most recent one is harder than the ones before it.

    I don't think Raids are scrapped and left in the dust like dungeons.
    I think Strikes are meant to be the equivalent of the easy mode raids people asked for, they are meant to be the 10 man practice progression towards real raids.

    I think if Strikes at their maximum difficulty push enough people into raiding, they can justify spending more resources on making more.

    There needs to be some way of attracting players who have never done it before. There are so many who don't have the confidence to get there, this is the approach they are taking to attract the new blood they are hoping for.

    If people are leaving and there is no new blood coming in, there isn't going to be a point in continuing to release more content. I want more raids to be released, I still haven't completed a wing of anything yet, I still want there to be more of them because raiding is a cool end game thing. But I can't expect Anet to release more if more raid players are leaving than there are joining.

    Founder of Affinitus Nemus [AFNM]
    "Join Us, We're Lonely" - Our Guild At Some Point

    JUST LIKE THE LORAX, WE SPEAK FOR THE TREES!

  • maddoctor.2738maddoctor.2738 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @hellsqueen.3045 said:
    There is also the Boneskinner, which while not story, it is something in the map that people fight, so again is one of those ones that becomes less intimidating to deal with.

    If by fighting them you mean seeing their graphics then all strike mission bosses appeared in some capacity. But they have vastly different mechanics, the two boneskinners and the two whispers of jormag have very little in common.

    At this stage Strikes are too easy to be raids. But the most recent one is harder than the ones before it.

    Boneskinner and Whisper of Jormag are harder than the easier Raid bosses. I don't expect future strikes to be harder than the current ones but rather provide a mix of challenge levels.

    There needs to be some way of attracting players who have never done it before.

    For one thing, Strikes were designed with clear progression in mind with achievements rewarding faster kills. Someone that fails Strike B can always go back to Strike A until they get a better rating, then go back to Strike B. The only thing missing is a CLEAR and VISIBLE in-game difficulty rating for Strike Missions, just like the fractal tiers.

    Raid difficulty is a mess, not only the full wings are of varied difficulty, but inside the same wing the difficulty is all over the place. You can't expect a player to finish the hard achievements of Wing 5 first and then go finish the easier ones in W6 and W7. For future reference, they should've started with the easiest wing first, and the bosses inside the wing should have proper difficulty progression. Strikes are doing this, which is a move to a good direction for the game. We'll see how much more support they'll get

  • lare.5129lare.5129 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited March 16, 2020

    I can answer why raid is not attractable for me
    Raid can be attracted if I know what I can close ALL achievements in this part. If I know what I can do all- I don't start it at all.
    So the way do it - add random raid achievement openner in pvp/wvw track in some raid final chest. So in this way I will go in raid, open what I can, and after that finalize that whit track.

  • lare.5129lare.5129 Member ✭✭✭✭

    about strike and someone try is compare with raid. Oh, hope no. Hope idea was another who create strike.
    Anyway I do only grot strike, I get 99% kill, get % to valuable drop on tp, and do it fast.

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited March 16, 2020

    @maddoctor.2738 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:
    Raids suffered from lots of things and the primary reason IMO is the reason I keep telling you. I get you have a problem with how I said only ... get over it. It doesn't make my point any less relevant.

    As Scarlet would say "Hooray for progress!" Btw I'm not a psychic, I respond to what is written.
    As for your actual "point", you already admitted that it doesn't explain the first 2 years of Raids. We have delays and bad schedules (and other things as already explained in page 1) that can justify the reduction in Raid population/popularity over time, while explaining the first 2 years, and another point, "not being consistent content offering" that doesn't... I can't change opinions so I will leave it at that.

    Actually, I did explain how my POV can coexist with all these these things in several posts with someone else. /shrug.

    If you think balancing is only driven by performance and justified by comparisons to other classes then prepare to be educated:

    https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/balance-updates-the-heralds-near-future-and-pvp-league-season-13/

  • @Vinceman.4572 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @maddoctor.2738 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @maddoctor.2738 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:
    We are simply talking about why we think raids have such a small audience. I think it's because the game's original audience didn't adopt the game because of raids.

    Which doesn't explain why they were successful, as proven by developer comments about their success, and their intent to have faster releases.

    No it doesn't ... but that's not the question anyways.

    It IS the question. You claimed that raids weren't successful because the original audience didn't adopt the game because of Raids, if that was the case Raids would've failed a long time ago.

    I get it ... you want to show they were, at some point, successful to justify that Anet ruined your game experience by doing something bad to something good.

    Because it's a fact that it was good and Anet ruined the experience by their inconsistent cadence and failed release schedule?

    The fact remains that if raids met ROI target, they would still be around.

    The fact remains that if raids didn't meet the ROI target they would've failed a long time ago. Also the fact remains that content can miss their target by decisions that have nothing to do with it. Like scheduling/delay issues. You think the content drought before Heart of Thorns played no role in the revenue of the game? You think the lack of episodes after the release of Heart of Thorns played no role in the revenue of the game? If you do, that's awesome, but far away from reality. Was it the fault of Season 2 that revenue dropped during the content drought between it and Heart of Thorns. Delays hurt I'm not sure how can this be disputed.

    Seems you think Anet purposefully trashed raids inspite of themselves

    Because all facts indicate that they did. Delaying the release of a Raid wing by 3 full months, although it was ready, shows us that.

    Of course, that's nonsense to someone like you with an axe to grind.

    Of course scheduling issues and delays mean nothing to someone with such a passion against Raids to begin with.

    consistencyinofferings

    Fortunately Anet doesn't follow that, otherwise we'd still have one-time events, as that was their way of offering content.

    Sure, if you say so. I'm really just at the point where I don't think you are listening to what I'm saying anyways. Hopefully you find a way to get past your unhappiness about the game instead of thinking blaming Anet or ignoring how things work is going to fix something. Raids are being throttled back and that's not because Anet loves to not make money or give things to people they want. It's a business reason and a huge factor in business reasons is related to revenues and profits. I know you talked yourself into the fact that Raids were this big money-printing machine for Anet in GW2 ... I see no evidence of that. The fact that raids throttled back suggests the opposite.

    Raids weren't the money printing-machince but they were (still are but in a smaller scale) a solid part of the game that kept enough players playing. What the anti-raid crowd is forgetting in every new tirade against raids is the fact that the overwhelming majority of raiders are playing the open world content as well including achievement hunting, weapon & armor collections.

    what the pro-raider crowd is forgetting that anet balanced everything around raids, almost killing pvp and wvw. And hasn't recovered even after the big balance patch a couple of weeks ago.

    So raids actually HURT the game. Very, very hard.

  • Cyninja.2954Cyninja.2954 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited March 17, 2020

    @VAHNeunzehnsechundsiebzig.3618 said:

    @Vinceman.4572 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @maddoctor.2738 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @maddoctor.2738 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:
    We are simply talking about why we think raids have such a small audience. I think it's because the game's original audience didn't adopt the game because of raids.

    Which doesn't explain why they were successful, as proven by developer comments about their success, and their intent to have faster releases.

    No it doesn't ... but that's not the question anyways.

    It IS the question. You claimed that raids weren't successful because the original audience didn't adopt the game because of Raids, if that was the case Raids would've failed a long time ago.

    I get it ... you want to show they were, at some point, successful to justify that Anet ruined your game experience by doing something bad to something good.

    Because it's a fact that it was good and Anet ruined the experience by their inconsistent cadence and failed release schedule?

    The fact remains that if raids met ROI target, they would still be around.

    The fact remains that if raids didn't meet the ROI target they would've failed a long time ago. Also the fact remains that content can miss their target by decisions that have nothing to do with it. Like scheduling/delay issues. You think the content drought before Heart of Thorns played no role in the revenue of the game? You think the lack of episodes after the release of Heart of Thorns played no role in the revenue of the game? If you do, that's awesome, but far away from reality. Was it the fault of Season 2 that revenue dropped during the content drought between it and Heart of Thorns. Delays hurt I'm not sure how can this be disputed.

    Seems you think Anet purposefully trashed raids inspite of themselves

    Because all facts indicate that they did. Delaying the release of a Raid wing by 3 full months, although it was ready, shows us that.

    Of course, that's nonsense to someone like you with an axe to grind.

    Of course scheduling issues and delays mean nothing to someone with such a passion against Raids to begin with.

    consistencyinofferings

    Fortunately Anet doesn't follow that, otherwise we'd still have one-time events, as that was their way of offering content.

    Sure, if you say so. I'm really just at the point where I don't think you are listening to what I'm saying anyways. Hopefully you find a way to get past your unhappiness about the game instead of thinking blaming Anet or ignoring how things work is going to fix something. Raids are being throttled back and that's not because Anet loves to not make money or give things to people they want. It's a business reason and a huge factor in business reasons is related to revenues and profits. I know you talked yourself into the fact that Raids were this big money-printing machine for Anet in GW2 ... I see no evidence of that. The fact that raids throttled back suggests the opposite.

    Raids weren't the money printing-machince but they were (still are but in a smaller scale) a solid part of the game that kept enough players playing. What the anti-raid crowd is forgetting in every new tirade against raids is the fact that the overwhelming majority of raiders are playing the open world content as well including achievement hunting, weapon & armor collections.

    what the pro-raider crowd is forgetting that anet balanced everything around raids, almost killing pvp and wvw. And hasn't recovered even after the big balance patch a couple of weeks ago.

    So raids actually HURT the game. Very, very hard.

    While I won't disagree that it took way to long to get skill splits, let's stay honest here: the competitive modes, especially spvp, were hurting long before raids and the biggest lack of resources here was content and variety, hardly balance. I mean over the years the devs have tried to encourage play of spvp and wvw, mostly to no avail.

    Face the simple reality: many players do not enjoy them and never have or will enter them. This in part shares a similarity to raids, but unlike raids, which are still to some extent pve content, competitive modes are player versus player content, which a large part of any player base disagrees with in MMORPGs (see Eve Online statistics, or comparative MMORPGs and the ratio of pve to pvp players).

    So while yes, the balance around pve and pve competitive content will not have helped, it was hardly the cause for these game modes decline and certainly not the reason for them being in the place they are now (which in case of spvp can be attributed to many other factors, a big one especially that it reigns supreme as most toxic game mode in this game bar none for casual players).

  • @Swagger.1459 said:
    1- No forms of difficulty scaling.

    2- The way your professions were designed... https://massivelyop.com/2019/03/28/massively-overthinking-thoughts-on-the-holy-trinity-in-mmos/

    “Brianna Royce (@nbrianna, blog): Fun fact: I still remember when “holy trinity” meant tank, healer, and mezzer – the DPS players were a given, the warm bodies that filled out the rest of the group, and not part of the trinity back in the early pre-WoW days of MMO group content. The fact that this shifted over time really says all you need to know about how MMO class and combat design have changed, and not necessarily for the better.

    Don’t mistake me; I no longer believe we need or must respect a trinity of either type. But what I truly resent is the loss of class variation and combat flow that naturally accompanied the demise of the classic trinity, specifically the fact that crowd control, buffing, and debuffing classes have all but disappeared in the modern rush to make nearly everyone a damage-dealer, even the healers and tanks.

    As an example, I can still think of none better than City of Heroes, which offered all of the old trinity and new trinity class types (and then some) but made none of them actually mandatory to clear content. Yes, tanks and healers and CCers and buffers and debuffers and damage dealers all existed, but it was completely possible to get through the game with no healers, or all healers. With a scrapper tanking ahead of a fleet of corruptors. With a stalker and four controllers. With three bubblers and three tankers. Whatever. I don’t want to see strict trinity MMOs, but I’m even grumpier about the “everyone deeps” MMOs even more, especially when the end result is cluster**** combat where nobody ever has control over the fight. It didn’t have to be that way, but modernish devs keep reinventing the wheel, convinced they can do better. Maybe someday, they will, but so far, nah.”

    Note- that "cluster" comment was a link to the GW2 section on MOP.

    3- Combining number 1 + 2 ultimately created a toxic environment for instanced content that most people don't want to be part of.

    I totally agree, raids are the most toxic environment of the game, since there is no well-defined raid system, practically the players do what they want to the point of deciding who can and cannot play since they are 7 years old and ARENANET at no does nothing about it! It seems irresponsible to me that despite having bought the 2 expansions I do not have access to the raids!
    Ask for 500 li for a VG and as if that was not enough ask for the PIN.
    I think 7 years has been a lot of abuse and that the raids need a change !!

  • @Shikaru.7618 said:
    You people need to stop joining groups that clearly dont want you. If you're joining 500 kp groups and you have 2 that's not the group being toxic. That's on you.

    Why not join the many other people who also complain about toxicity on this forum and form your own welcoming group? The key to successful raiding is like minded individuals. If you want to play a minion reaper, form a group of other players that want to play longbow dh, shortbow thief, etc

    don't you understand the problem?
    It is logical that if I join a group that asks for 500 kp they will not accept me !!
    But that is called private or custom groups, they can ask for what they want and it would not be a problem if there was a raids system, the problem is that the only way to play a raid is by joining a group of that?

    Did you understand or I explain it with apples?

  • @Odysseus.6317 said:
    Ask for 500 li for a VG and as if that was not enough ask for the PIN.

    In EU i see a decent amount of trainings (mostly during the WE) in the lfg. Theres also several discord servers dedicated to teaching people the mechanics of the bosses.
    While they might not do Dhuum or Qadim, you might find a static that is willing to take you and teach you the more demanding encounters.

    I think 7 years has been a lot of abuse and that the raids need a change !!

    Uh Raids arent 7 years old though.

  • @maddoctor.2738 said:

    @Stalvros.9217 said:
    At least, that's just the statistics that we can see from gw2 efficiency? (Only less then 5% of the population that registered their API with the site has Legendary Insight?)

    29.989% of the 223,689 accounts tracked on gw2 efficiency have killed Vale Guardian.

    So the OP is wrong about Raids attracting small audience. We even had comments by the developers telling us that Raids exceeded their expectations in terms of popularity. But that was during Heart of Thorns, when the game had a more active overall population.

    The highest number of the Key of Adhasim is 6.094% and it does look bad, but we have to take into account that the active population is also much lower now

    It's not a problem with the population of Raids, it's a problem with the population of the game.

    Do you think that more population will see more people playing raids?
    Or do you think that if 1 million people register now and start playing gw2, Adhasim will increase 6.094%?
    If for the regular player it is impossible to play raid due to the problem of the "raid system" which does not exist since it is the same players who decide who can and cannot play, 1 million new players have a chance?

  • Katary.7096Katary.7096 Member ✭✭

    @Odysseus.6317 said:

    Do you think that more population will see more people playing raids?
    Or do you think that if 1 million people register now and start playing gw2, Adhasim will increase 6.094%?
    If for the regular player it is impossible to play raid due to the problem of the "raid system" which does not exist since it is the same players who decide who can and cannot play, 1 million new players have a chance?

    The "raidplayers" only have a monopoly on raidgroups as long as the "regular players" do not take advantage of their ability to start their own groups, for which they get to set rules and requirements.

  • Cyninja.2954Cyninja.2954 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Odysseus.6317 said:

    @Shikaru.7618 said:
    You people need to stop joining groups that clearly dont want you. If you're joining 500 kp groups and you have 2 that's not the group being toxic. That's on you.

    Why not join the many other people who also complain about toxicity on this forum and form your own welcoming group? The key to successful raiding is like minded individuals. If you want to play a minion reaper, form a group of other players that want to play longbow dh, shortbow thief, etc

    don't you understand the problem?
    It is logical that if I join a group that asks for 500 kp they will not accept me !!
    But that is called private or custom groups, they can ask for what they want and it would not be a problem if there was a raids system, the problem is that the only way to play a raid is by joining a group of that?

    Except: that is not the only way to play raids. Why? Because there is groups that do NOT demand 500 LI/KP (or even any amount).

    Your entire argument falls apart the moment you realize that groups, player skill level and raid participation is not a binary system.

  • Killthehealersffs.8940Killthehealersffs.8940 Member ✭✭✭
    edited March 17, 2020

    Could we program a system where you get lower gold per time you spent on the raid ? (just like PvP matches - full reward after the 8:30 min )
    Or typically get less rewards
    And you can counter that by creating a Group in the aerodrome (where your message can be seen across all other aerodrome + Lions Ark +WvWvW +PvP + Personal Story (but not open PvE))

    Aerodrome is called a Hub ...because its a hub for same minded people ?

    Just let me have fun for a while

  • aspirine.6852aspirine.6852 Member ✭✭✭✭

    My number 1, it looks boring?

  • I can't wait to start raiding once I have enough experience

  • voltaicbore.8012voltaicbore.8012 Member ✭✭✭
    edited March 17, 2020

    I think the thread is long past the point of certain important concepts I deem more significant for discussion, but I'll just add this (TLDR at end):

    1. Raids were indeed successful at some stage. I do not challenge this idea, if for no other reason than the devs said this was the case at some point. What constitutes "success" is a potentially complicated discussion for any context, especially for in a gaming situation where clearly measurable indicators of "success" (increased revenue, player engagement - which in and of itself could spawn it's own discussion as to what that means - with the game mode, etc).

    2. Raids were almost guaranteed to fail in the long run. This is the point that I think @Obtena.7952 has been unfairly criticized for by a number of you. One of the best things about GW2, in my opinion, is how un-demanding the vast majority of its pve is. You can get so much and get so far in this game without ever realizing how downright awful you are at combat. If that's true, then it wouldn't be surprising to find (as almost any veteran player can anecdotally agree) that the vast majority of players you come across in this game are just not well-suited to pay (in terms of time and effort) to become a solid raider. In turn, it shouldn't surprise anyone that a portion of the pve defined by how much harder it is than everything else, and designed for people who enjoy challenge for the sake of challenge, just doesn't retain the attention of such a huge portion of people who love most everything else about GW2 pve. It would be like trying to sell super expensive, hard-to-drive, but also extremely high-performing cars to a market populated mostly by consumers who are primarily interested in commuting to work safely and shuttling their kids to after-school activities on time. It's not that it's a bad car, it's that the people you're trying to sell it to have so many other options that fit their desires much better, and at lower cost.

    3. Raids could have been managed better, perhaps to the extent that they could have avoided the near-certain failure I describe in point 2 above. Since I did not participate in raids until very recently, I can't offer any direct experience about how I saw the delayed release of wing 6 affect the raiding community. However, I did very recently land my first boss kill in Stronghold of the Faithful, thanks to a great leader (who portal carried us through cannon captures and explained everything clearly) and a fun training group. I can see that with proper leadership and just a few heavy hitters, some raid encounters can be cleared even if most people are new and there to learn. Perhaps if raiding (particularly the release schedule) was managed in such a way that more people stayed interested in it and got good enough (and invested enough) to stick around to carry others, more patient raiding groups would be more widespread.

    I find this situation very, very weakly analogous to the state of some of the explorable dungeon paths (particularly niche ones like the Aetherpath). So many players who come into my groups are just... bad. Even after telling them what to do, many just don't hit very hard, struggle to survive, aren't providing useful team benefits their class is capable of putting out, and fail to do mechanics. However, I can still carry people through much of the hardest stuff on my own, because I managed to learn dungeons and enjoyed them enough to keep doing them. The learning threshold is of course much, much lower for soloing dungeons, so it's not hard to teach newer folks to get closer to where I am with dungeons. If dungeons were kept alive long enough to generate more players like me, they'd probably see a lot more traffic. But dungeons were not managed well, and now there's just so much else to do in the game that doesn't involve farming a million bags of Purloined Goods or the dungeon frequenter achievement; most people are just happy to get carried through a few then call it quits. If the opportunity cost is already so unfavorable for a fast and easy activity like dungeons, how much more so must that be true for raids?

    TLDR: Raids were set to fight a steeply uphill battle from the very beginning. However, if raids had been managed better just long enough to generate and retain players capable of hard carrying learners, raids might have had a better chance. Instead, it seems ANet fumbled raids a bit, lost the chance to develop and retain greater numbers of raiders in the process, and now we have a relatively small slice of the raiding community valiantly trying to get new people hooked.

  • Dante.1508Dante.1508 Member ✭✭✭
    edited March 18, 2020

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Dante.1508 said:
    1. Content is too hard for the masses.

    True given the lack of incentive to improve for large parts of the player base.

    Untrue for even the simplest "easy" builds, similar to the open world builds on metabattle, which trivialize any open world content.

    There are rather simple and safe builds which bring more than enough performance while being very easy to play. That leaves only boss attacks and strategies as difficulty, and those can be practiced or simplified with certain setups.

    @Dante.1508 said:
    2. The population that does raids is beyond toxic and elitist.

    First, I'd question how you'd know since you are not known to be a player who actually engages in said content. So this is a pure hear say from your side. (If you haven't participated in at least a certain set amount of raids, given this content is over 4 years old, don't presume to make judgements on an entire part of the player base. Either make a personal subjective statement based on your own experience, or refrain from unqualified judgments).

    Second, from the thousands of raid players I've met, the vast majority were casual raiders within their own guild groups or social circles, and I daresay, 99% of them were very friendly and great people (from the short time I had with many, others I have as friends and help out in their casual raids).

    I assume the toxicity you are referring to is the age old:"oh I wasn't taken along", the "oh the barrier is to high with thousands of KP and LI requirements" or "random toxic person xyz was mean to me". To that all I can say:

    1. PUG raids are not representative of the entire raid community, just as open world toxicity when a more difficult meta fails is not representative of the average open world player (and man can players in open world get toxic in chat).

    2. a lot of players who are interested in playing raid content regularly are organized in many different types of social communities and guilds. Toxicity is not present to a large extent here or otherwise the toxic individuals get removed. These "non toxic" players will not be present to a large extent in the PUG raiding pool while still being a large part of the community.

    3. the term elitism gets thrown around a lot. Most often in this games in context of:"every one who enjoys to improve or improves their game play is elitist". I don't consider players who enjoy taking on challenging content elitist, and given the huge performance disparities between even successful raiders, I find that notion rather offensive against a large part of this games player base.

    @Dante.1508 said:
    3. The rewards are not equal to the content.

    Sure, raid rewards are on the low side. This has been complained about on multiple occasions. That's a benefit though since it makes raids less a requirement (but would directly affect why less players do them).

    @Dante.1508 said:
    On a side note most modern customers do not have time to spend hours in these things failing over and over..

    Then this content is not for you if you are unwilling to dedicate enough time to it.

    I know enough players who have very busy real life issues taking up time (kids, work, family, renovation, vacations, etc.). Some carve out room for raid content because it's the content they enjoy, others spend time on other things. Time commitment and devotion is a matter of personal availability to leisure time and preference.

    TL;DR:
    For someone who calls other players toxic and elitist, the casual approach to marginalize an entire part of the player base seems a rather toxic approach to this issue. Especially since it's not support with any facts. That's called having a bias.

    Its not my first mmorpg i've done many raids in other mmo's, raids are all the same content and those elitists flock to the content, in all mmos.. GW2 is no different, i gave up the tread mill of raids a long time back its a horrible experience.

  • Cyninja.2954Cyninja.2954 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited March 18, 2020

    @Dante.1508 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Dante.1508 said:
    1. Content is too hard for the masses.

    True given the lack of incentive to improve for large parts of the player base.

    Untrue for even the simplest "easy" builds, similar to the open world builds on metabattle, which trivialize any open world content.

    There are rather simple and safe builds which bring more than enough performance while being very easy to play. That leaves only boss attacks and strategies as difficulty, and those can be practiced or simplified with certain setups.

    @Dante.1508 said:
    2. The population that does raids is beyond toxic and elitist.

    First, I'd question how you'd know since you are not known to be a player who actually engages in said content. So this is a pure hear say from your side. (If you haven't participated in at least a certain set amount of raids, given this content is over 4 years old, don't presume to make judgements on an entire part of the player base. Either make a personal subjective statement based on your own experience, or refrain from unqualified judgments).

    Second, from the thousands of raid players I've met, the vast majority were casual raiders within their own guild groups or social circles, and I daresay, 99% of them were very friendly and great people (from the short time I had with many, others I have as friends and help out in their casual raids).

    I assume the toxicity you are referring to is the age old:"oh I wasn't taken along", the "oh the barrier is to high with thousands of KP and LI requirements" or "random toxic person xyz was mean to me". To that all I can say:

    1. PUG raids are not representative of the entire raid community, just as open world toxicity when a more difficult meta fails is not representative of the average open world player (and man can players in open world get toxic in chat).

    2. a lot of players who are interested in playing raid content regularly are organized in many different types of social communities and guilds. Toxicity is not present to a large extent here or otherwise the toxic individuals get removed. These "non toxic" players will not be present to a large extent in the PUG raiding pool while still being a large part of the community.

    3. the term elitism gets thrown around a lot. Most often in this games in context of:"every one who enjoys to improve or improves their game play is elitist". I don't consider players who enjoy taking on challenging content elitist, and given the huge performance disparities between even successful raiders, I find that notion rather offensive against a large part of this games player base.

    @Dante.1508 said:
    3. The rewards are not equal to the content.

    Sure, raid rewards are on the low side. This has been complained about on multiple occasions. That's a benefit though since it makes raids less a requirement (but would directly affect why less players do them).

    @Dante.1508 said:
    On a side note most modern customers do not have time to spend hours in these things failing over and over..

    Then this content is not for you if you are unwilling to dedicate enough time to it.

    I know enough players who have very busy real life issues taking up time (kids, work, family, renovation, vacations, etc.). Some carve out room for raid content because it's the content they enjoy, others spend time on other things. Time commitment and devotion is a matter of personal availability to leisure time and preference.

    TL;DR:
    For someone who calls other players toxic and elitist, the casual approach to marginalize an entire part of the player base seems a rather toxic approach to this issue. Especially since it's not support with any facts. That's called having a bias.

    Its not my first mmorpg i've done many raids in other mmo's, raids are all the same content and those elitists flock to the content, in all mmos.. GW2 is no different, i gave up the tread mill of raids a long time back its a horrible experience.

    Well thanks for at least being so open about this, here:

    prejudice
    /ˈprɛdʒʊdɪs/
    Learn to pronounce
    noun
    noun: prejudice; plural noun: prejudices

    1.
    preconceived opinion that is not based on reason or actual experience.
    

    or, if you want the one from the Cambrdige Dictionary:

    prejudice
    noun [ C or U ]
    uk
    /ˈpredʒ.ə.dɪs/ us
    /ˈpredʒ.ə.dɪs/
    B2
    an unfair and unreasonable opinion or feeling, especially when formed without enough thought or knowledge

    I get it, you are opinionated and have strong feelings on this subject, but even you must realize how prejudicial your approach is on this matter. You are basically judging thousands of players and content whom you have neither interacted with, nor even played the content in a substantial way to make any judgments.

    As far as other MMO's, I've raided in most that I've played, be it Dark Age of Camelot during Atlantis, World of Warcraft, Warhammer Online, Eve Online, etc. and I would absolutely not call all of them equal or even similar in approach. I would even less dare make judgement calls about the player who play them, since the spectrum of characters and play styles I've seen could fill books.

  • maddoctor.2738maddoctor.2738 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited March 18, 2020

    @Odysseus.6317 said:
    Or do you think that if 1 million people register now and start playing gw2, Adhasim will increase 6.094%?

    It depends on their attitude. If those 1 million people that register now are toxic and want to take advantage of others and join groups they don't belong to, it will only lead to more complaint posts on the forums instead of more players playing raids. Complaints by toxic people, blaming other toxic people. Instead if they lose the toxic/entitled attitude, join actual guilds and find like-minded individuals to play with, then the raid population will increase. Remember that KP and LI requirements exist because such toxic players exist, if all players were true and honest there would be no need for those.

    Edit: and in the end it wouldn't increase the Key of Ahdashim rates, new raiders will always be directed to the initial Heart of Thorns Raids instead, Path of Fire Raids will always lack in popularity due to their rewards not worth the time and effort to learn them. Also, to earn the specific/unique reward of the Path of Fire Raids, you need to finish the hardest Raid in the game, Hall of Chains, before proceeding to the much easier Key of Ahdashim (or Mythright Gambit).

    Meaning, if you want raid rewards like Ascended items, go play Heart of Thorns Raids, if you want exclusive rewards (Legendary) go play Heart of Thorns Raids. The Path of Fire raids have the hard lock of Hall of Chains for their unique reward (the Legendary Ring), barring further progress and making playing the later Raids of the expansion rather pointless. No matter how many new players join, and how much they love Raids, Path of Fire Raids were so badly managed and designed that only a major rework of their reward structure can "save" them.

  • Shikaru.7618Shikaru.7618 Member ✭✭✭

    @Dante.1508 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Dante.1508 said:
    1. Content is too hard for the masses.

    True given the lack of incentive to improve for large parts of the player base.

    Untrue for even the simplest "easy" builds, similar to the open world builds on metabattle, which trivialize any open world content.

    There are rather simple and safe builds which bring more than enough performance while being very easy to play. That leaves only boss attacks and strategies as difficulty, and those can be practiced or simplified with certain setups.

    @Dante.1508 said:
    2. The population that does raids is beyond toxic and elitist.

    First, I'd question how you'd know since you are not known to be a player who actually engages in said content. So this is a pure hear say from your side. (If you haven't participated in at least a certain set amount of raids, given this content is over 4 years old, don't presume to make judgements on an entire part of the player base. Either make a personal subjective statement based on your own experience, or refrain from unqualified judgments).

    Second, from the thousands of raid players I've met, the vast majority were casual raiders within their own guild groups or social circles, and I daresay, 99% of them were very friendly and great people (from the short time I had with many, others I have as friends and help out in their casual raids).

    I assume the toxicity you are referring to is the age old:"oh I wasn't taken along", the "oh the barrier is to high with thousands of KP and LI requirements" or "random toxic person xyz was mean to me". To that all I can say:

    1. PUG raids are not representative of the entire raid community, just as open world toxicity when a more difficult meta fails is not representative of the average open world player (and man can players in open world get toxic in chat).

    2. a lot of players who are interested in playing raid content regularly are organized in many different types of social communities and guilds. Toxicity is not present to a large extent here or otherwise the toxic individuals get removed. These "non toxic" players will not be present to a large extent in the PUG raiding pool while still being a large part of the community.

    3. the term elitism gets thrown around a lot. Most often in this games in context of:"every one who enjoys to improve or improves their game play is elitist". I don't consider players who enjoy taking on challenging content elitist, and given the huge performance disparities between even successful raiders, I find that notion rather offensive against a large part of this games player base.

    @Dante.1508 said:
    3. The rewards are not equal to the content.

    Sure, raid rewards are on the low side. This has been complained about on multiple occasions. That's a benefit though since it makes raids less a requirement (but would directly affect why less players do them).

    @Dante.1508 said:
    On a side note most modern customers do not have time to spend hours in these things failing over and over..

    Then this content is not for you if you are unwilling to dedicate enough time to it.

    I know enough players who have very busy real life issues taking up time (kids, work, family, renovation, vacations, etc.). Some carve out room for raid content because it's the content they enjoy, others spend time on other things. Time commitment and devotion is a matter of personal availability to leisure time and preference.

    TL;DR:
    For someone who calls other players toxic and elitist, the casual approach to marginalize an entire part of the player base seems a rather toxic approach to this issue. Especially since it's not support with any facts. That's called having a bias.

    Its not my first mmorpg i've done many raids in other mmo's, raids are all the same content and those elitists flock to the content, in all mmos.. GW2 is no different, i gave up the tread mill of raids a long time back its a horrible experience.

    What other mmo allows you to raid in optimal gear without having completed any raids to begin with? Your issue is not elitists. It is trying to join a group that clearly has different standards and expectations than your own instead of finding one that matches. Dont want a group that dps checks? Post that in your lfg listing, or start your own guild.

  • Killthehealersffs.8940Killthehealersffs.8940 Member ✭✭✭
    edited March 18, 2020

    @voltaicbore.8012 said:
    and now we have a relatively small slice of the raiding community valiantly trying to get new people hooked.

    Nahhh
    For 3 years they did and say the same things , like in these posts .
    The one thing they are doing , they believe they can brainwash ppl to see their point of view ...
    Rather to stay silent for 2 months .. let them express their pain and forget about anything .... but they keep reminding them
    In the oppression game , there are bigger fish out there ..in summer..with less mods

    1,5 year in the future ...3 raids afterwards and we will be in the same situation ...
    Thats my Oracle Balls sais :P

    Just let me have fun for a while

  • Ooops.8694Ooops.8694 Member ✭✭

    @VAHNeunzehnsechundsiebzig.3618 said:
    what the pro-raider crowd is forgetting that anet balanced everything around raids

    That's one of the best jokes ever.

    Nerfing engineers from a hard to play but solidly performing pve class again and again was a pve decision? Reworking and gutting scrapper multiple times so no pve player would ever touch the spec again was pve balancing? Reducing necromancer's damage to the point not even epidemic in a room full of add mobs can justify their usage wasn't done because they did not know how else to balance necros in pvp without removing their their core class ability's tankiness? Having to endure months and months of elementalists doing more damage by a wide margin than everyone else was not caused by pvp balancing where their squishiness actually mattered and could justify their abnormal high damage output?

    I mean... seriously... can we base discussions on reality please?

  • Henry.5713Henry.5713 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited March 19, 2020

    This argument is always fun.
    PvE players: They balance everything around PvP. Kitten this game.
    PvP players: They balance everything around PvE. Kitten casuals.
    WvW players: I hate everyone, myself included.

    Progress isn't made by early risers. It's made by lazy men trying to find easier ways to do something. ~ Robert Heinlein

  • psyt.9415psyt.9415 Member ✭✭✭
    edited March 20, 2020

    Ease of Partying, Difficulty and Rewards.

    In FFXIV They have a daily random 8 man raid and a daily random 24 man raid. Outside of the fact that its fun you also get tombstones which allow you to get armor thats a few points under the current raid tier. I click a button and bam it finds me a group. If you havent unlocked the current raid tier then it cycles through previous raids but adjusts the ilvl of your gear so you actually out gear it. This way any filthy casual can enjoy the previous tier raid experience for good rewards and can blow through it in under 30 minutes unless you hit a few select bosses with hard mechanics.

    All GW2 needs to do is put an actual legit dungeon/ raid finder that auto groups you by alacrity/ dps/ etc.. The fact people get to pick and choose who they want for dungeons and raids just breeds selective elitism. I dont even bother with GW2 group content because I cant be bothered to assemble a group or meet someone elses class bar. If they want that style of play they can make a custom group but have a daily auto party queue that scales the previous raid tier to be on par to yellow or orange gear so casuals can get through it and give me X amount of gold or reduced tokens for legendary gear or something like 1 token out of 1000 per armor piece or something one or two times daily and I bet you you'll get tons of casuals and hardcores doing it for fun and gold/ tokens. They say its a lot of work for only 6% of the population..... so make it more accessible so that your regular player base can do it....

    TLDR: Give us a good daily gold reward, an actual dungeon/ raid auto party system, scale the encounters to yellow or orange gear for the daily previous raid tier queue and people will run them every day that's a guarantee

  • Astralporing.1957Astralporing.1957 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited March 20, 2020

    In FFXIV the Duty Finder works, because:
    1. Each class is assigned one of the 3 basic roles (tank, healer, dps)
    2. different classes within the role are very balanced (there are differences, but are relatively small - compared to what can happen in gw2 they are basically negligible)
    3. effectiveness due to skill (within same class), while important, is also much, much smaller than what we're used to see here.
    As such, there's a reasonable assumption that a random group that fulfills basic role requirements, enforced by the Finder, should be fully capable of clearing the content, and the normal content (unlike Savage or Ultimate difficulties) can be balanced around such a random party.

    None of those assumptions hold true for GW2 however, making creation of such a system an exercise in futility.

    The whole point of a social game is to play with the people you want to play with, not be forced to play with the people you don't.