Including Strike Mission Achievements as a Required Part of the Zone Meta — Guild Wars 2 Forums

Including Strike Mission Achievements as a Required Part of the Zone Meta

Vayne.8563Vayne.8563 Member ✭✭✭✭

For the first time ever, in order to get a zone meta achievement, people are required to get achievements from ten man instanced content. Anet apparently believes that this will encourage people to try raids. My opinion is this will drive more people from the game than get more people to the content Anet wants us to play. It's too heavy handed. It's not a good enough encouragement.

In fact, zone metas have ever been the purview of casual players, who were probably the main people that played Living Story content and stayed in those zones. By adding Strike Missions to the requirement for getting the zone meta Anet has only made me less interested in doing the zone and I find myself wondering why I should go get achievements in there, if I don't want to do strike missions in the first place.

Raiders keep saying raids don't affect people who don't do them. This proves them wrong. This content has been changed to "encourage" people to get into raids. It encourages me to play less.

<13456712

Comments

  • Iris Ng.9845Iris Ng.9845 Member ✭✭✭

    My guild does strike missions after the guild missions every week to help people with their achievements. They aren't really harder than some overtuned PoF bounty. You can even make a 50-man squad for kitten and giggles. Do give it a try!

  • Vayne.8563Vayne.8563 Member ✭✭✭✭

    I don't particularly like bounties either. I gave them a try and I don't like them. They're not fun for me. Having them in the zone doesn't bother me. It's simply not my type of content and I absolutely believe it shouldn't be part of a zone meta achievement, regardless. I know I don't like them specifically because I've done them.

  • Jayden Reese.9542Jayden Reese.9542 Member ✭✭✭✭

    I encourage you to use the other 2 threads instead of another of the same. If you wan easy AP theres some simple one's in Kodan and Fraenir plus you get a raven gear if you do 20 from sanctifier. If you just get those 7 you get meta done w/o the hard ones

  • Randulf.7614Randulf.7614 Member ✭✭✭✭

    I'm OK with it. I like varied content in a meta.

    What sleep is here? What dreams there are in the unctuous coiling of the snakes mortal shuffling. weapon in my hand. My hand the arcing deathblow at the end of all things. The horror. The horror. I embrace it. . .

  • Randulf.7614Randulf.7614 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited February 13, 2020

    It might do. There's a reasonable argument for saying it will drive people away.

    However, it has done entirely the opposite for me. The map I found rather dull and unvaried. By adding a mix of content in the meta, it has engaged me more than it otherwise would have. The game's foundation is built on cooperation and no matter what side people sit on the whole raids/multi man instanced content argument, I think the meta set up encourages that rather well.

    The meta has a lot of variety in it. people will feel equally strongly about the mini Jp/puzzles as you do about the instanced content. I'm no big fan of Jps but the meta did encourage me to do them when perhaps I may not have been quite so enthusaiastic. And whilst a couple frustrated me due to time outs, I actually got a feeling of accomplishment by doing them.

    I'm also no raider, but the more I do the strikes, the more I enjoy them and these extra achievements are an additional carrot to aim for as well the actual fun of them.

    There is enough stuff in the meta that some of the harder strikes can at least be ignored. I would argue that rather than remove the strikes as a requirement, the better adjustment would be perhaps to lower the number of achievements required to complete. Then everyone wins.

    What sleep is here? What dreams there are in the unctuous coiling of the snakes mortal shuffling. weapon in my hand. My hand the arcing deathblow at the end of all things. The horror. The horror. I embrace it. . .

  • It had opposite effect for me as well. I am not a raider but the achievements and the fact strikes were supposed to be a way into raids thus easier made me try it. And I liked it. Now it’s something I do daily. If it wasn’t for that push into it I probably wouldn’t go for it.

  • Iris Ng.9845Iris Ng.9845 Member ✭✭✭

    There are two modes in strikes: you can do it with 9 others in {squad} or you can Zerg it in {public}. So it is not the matter of being hardcore orientation or who-carries-who. It gravitates towards player-player cooperation side of things, which seems poisonous to certain type of (solo) players. I don't see why the Meta Achievements should contain an opt-out. I did everything I could, therefore I achieved. It makes my effort worthy and not simply convenient.

  • Randulf.7614Randulf.7614 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited February 14, 2020

    Only their metrics will ever really tell that though.

    Their aim is bridge the gap between those who raid and those who don't. They need to do things like this to at least try and make that work. Even if it fails. But unless they commit, then they will never know. Anet are generally pretty bad at following through on things so I am pleased to see them go all in on this as best they can.

    There will be people will get annoyed by it, but I don't think the vast majority ultimately care. Just like the vast majority probably don't have the grievances that many of us on these forums. They just get on with it because the game asks them to - and I suspect that is just fine for most players. I can bang on about Drakkar devolving back to the dull zergfests of old which ignore years of constructive feedback which has kittened me right off, but it's clear people are just getting on and playing it. I don't think adding in a bit of instanced content is going to do much damage to the population.

    I also don't think anything has changed on a fundamental level. I think if anything the way things started off with dungeons and shortly after fractals and players were more conjoined. It was the way raids were implemented that splintered things in probably the strongest way. It feels like they are trying to get back to way things were by building bridges into content again.

    The more they make things like meta one dimensional in their approach, the more they continue to fracture the community in my opinion.

    Even if you don't agree, GW2 is an incredibly varied playerbase and I think trying to separate what players may or might like in the pve environment is probably a headache for the design team. There will always be something that will annoy players. Better to bung it all in and give players all sorts of different things to do. I find that a more positive approach personally.

    What sleep is here? What dreams there are in the unctuous coiling of the snakes mortal shuffling. weapon in my hand. My hand the arcing deathblow at the end of all things. The horror. The horror. I embrace it. . .

  • @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Sir Vincent III.1286 said:
    Casual players don't care about achievements. So the achievement requirements means literally nothing to casuals. If the player cares about it, then they are not casual players.

    Just saying.

    Sorry but people who identify as casuals often do care about achievements. I have a guild full of them. So I guess the question is, why is your definition of casuals better than theirs? I mean we can sit and discuss the definition of casuals I suppose but I'd make a thread to do this. I'm a person who always gets the meta, but I'm not a huge fan of getting together with 9 other players, organized or not. It's why I don't raid. Not because I'm not good enough to raid, but becaue it's not a casual activity. I engage, generally in more casual, pick up and play activities. This isn't one of them.

    I agree with everything you said. Casual is pick up and play activities.

    Achievements requires work, that's not a casual pick up and play activity.

    We're not in disagreement on what casual is. I disagree on the notion that Achievements are designed for casual players or should be designed to include casual activities. They are not and should not.

    In the beginning...there was Tarnished Coast...

  • Randulf.7614Randulf.7614 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @Randulf.7614 said:
    Only their metrics will ever really tell that though.

    Their aim is bridge the gap between those who raid and those who don't. They need to do things like this to at least try and make that work. Even if it fails. But unless they commit, then they will never know. Anet are generally pretty bad at following through on things so I am pleased to see them go all in on this as best they can.

    There will be people will get annoyed by it, but I don't think the vast majority ultimately care. Just like the vast majority probably don't have the grievances that many of us on these forums. They just get on with it because the game asks them to - and I suspect that is just fine for most players. I can bang on about Drakkar devolving back to the dull zergfests of old which ignore years of constructive feedback which has kittened me right off, but it's clear people are just getting on and playing it. I don't think adding in a bit of instanced content is going to do much damage to the population.

    I also don't think anything has changed on a fundamental level. I think if anything the way things started off with dungeons and shortly after fractals and players were more conjoined. It was the way raids were implemented that splintered things in probably the strongest way. It feels like they are trying to get back to way things were by building bridges into content again.

    The more they make things like meta one dimensional in their approach, the more they continue to fracture the community in my opinion.

    Even if you don't agree, GW2 is an incredibly varied playerbase and I think trying to separate what players may or might like in the pve environment is probably a headache for the design team. There will always be something that will annoy players. Better to bung it all in and give players all sorts of different things to do. I find that a more positive approach personally.

    We have all the metrics from 2015 that we need. The raid population is small, as mentioned by Andrew Gray, and that means the player base has spoken on the matter... The majority do not want raid type content in their currents forms, and it was a massive oversight to not include things like difficulty scaling in the first place.

    We have no metrics. Only Anet have metrics. Whether they show the strategy is working, they have yet to reveal and perhaps it is too soon because the entire process isn't complete yet since more Strikes are to come (and if my understanding is right, they are going to be harder/more complex)

    The raid population is small. They want to change that. The feedback they have is that raids are too hard or that players want to do them but feel left out by a perception of elitism. ANet are clearly trying to bring the two groups back together. Even trying to bring your communities together I think is a very sound strategy for a multi player game.

    I can't say it will def work, but I agree with the way they are trying. You are correct about difficulty scaling and this their more innovative way of doing that - just a lot later than perhaps it should have been

    What sleep is here? What dreams there are in the unctuous coiling of the snakes mortal shuffling. weapon in my hand. My hand the arcing deathblow at the end of all things. The horror. The horror. I embrace it. . .

  • Iris Ng.9845Iris Ng.9845 Member ✭✭✭

    Casuals are indeed the largest player base of the game but they are not stagnant throughout 7 years the game is in operation. The casual players today do not take two days to have a world first on a open world boss. They are empowered by elite specs, by learning experience from raid training and simply by sharing information across many channels: discords, Reddit, guild chat. Casuals are not represented by a singular group that dislike group contents. They are simply players who spend less than 4 hours a day playing various contents out of habit. Easy access is the keyword. What they don't need is the ability to opt-out. They need a friendly invitation, an incentive hard to ignore and just slightly harder challenge to make an exciting game time. Then they can start incorporate Strike Mission into their daily rotation, much like Fractals. My guild is a casual guild of 500 and none has complained about having to do Strike Missions to finish Meta achievements. They are still slowly enjoying the story mode and still doing Strikes just for the company. So exactly what is the issue?

    Meta achievement hunters are not casual. You aim for total completion then you should prepare to do whatever it takes. I find your big words just conveniently project itself onto other players.

  • Vayne.8563Vayne.8563 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Randulf.7614 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @Randulf.7614 said:
    Only their metrics will ever really tell that though.

    Their aim is bridge the gap between those who raid and those who don't. They need to do things like this to at least try and make that work. Even if it fails. But unless they commit, then they will never know. Anet are generally pretty bad at following through on things so I am pleased to see them go all in on this as best they can.

    There will be people will get annoyed by it, but I don't think the vast majority ultimately care. Just like the vast majority probably don't have the grievances that many of us on these forums. They just get on with it because the game asks them to - and I suspect that is just fine for most players. I can bang on about Drakkar devolving back to the dull zergfests of old which ignore years of constructive feedback which has kittened me right off, but it's clear people are just getting on and playing it. I don't think adding in a bit of instanced content is going to do much damage to the population.

    I also don't think anything has changed on a fundamental level. I think if anything the way things started off with dungeons and shortly after fractals and players were more conjoined. It was the way raids were implemented that splintered things in probably the strongest way. It feels like they are trying to get back to way things were by building bridges into content again.

    The more they make things like meta one dimensional in their approach, the more they continue to fracture the community in my opinion.

    Even if you don't agree, GW2 is an incredibly varied playerbase and I think trying to separate what players may or might like in the pve environment is probably a headache for the design team. There will always be something that will annoy players. Better to bung it all in and give players all sorts of different things to do. I find that a more positive approach personally.

    We have all the metrics from 2015 that we need. The raid population is small, as mentioned by Andrew Gray, and that means the player base has spoken on the matter... The majority do not want raid type content in their currents forms, and it was a massive oversight to not include things like difficulty scaling in the first place.

    We have no metrics. Only Anet have metrics. Whether they show the strategy is working, they have yet to reveal and perhaps it is too soon because the entire process isn't complete yet since more Strikes are to come (and if my understanding is right, they are going to be harder/more complex)

    The raid population is small. They want to change that. The feedback they have is that raids are too hard or that players want to do them but feel left out by a perception of elitism. ANet are clearly trying to bring the two groups back together. Even trying to bring your communities together I think is a very sound strategy for a multi player game.

    I can't say it will def work, but I agree with the way they are trying. You are correct about difficulty scaling and this their more innovative way of doing that - just a lot later than perhaps it should have been

    There are multiple reasons people don't raid....difficulty is only one of them. I don't raid for other reasons. The difficulty I can handle just fine.

  • Strikes (most of them) have good rewards. How is that not encouraging people to try them out? On top of making gathering a group easier than, say, for raids. Just because something's not your style of a cake doesn't mean everyone hates it.

  • Randulf.7614Randulf.7614 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Randulf.7614 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @Randulf.7614 said:
    Only their metrics will ever really tell that though.

    Their aim is bridge the gap between those who raid and those who don't. They need to do things like this to at least try and make that work. Even if it fails. But unless they commit, then they will never know. Anet are generally pretty bad at following through on things so I am pleased to see them go all in on this as best they can.

    There will be people will get annoyed by it, but I don't think the vast majority ultimately care. Just like the vast majority probably don't have the grievances that many of us on these forums. They just get on with it because the game asks them to - and I suspect that is just fine for most players. I can bang on about Drakkar devolving back to the dull zergfests of old which ignore years of constructive feedback which has kittened me right off, but it's clear people are just getting on and playing it. I don't think adding in a bit of instanced content is going to do much damage to the population.

    I also don't think anything has changed on a fundamental level. I think if anything the way things started off with dungeons and shortly after fractals and players were more conjoined. It was the way raids were implemented that splintered things in probably the strongest way. It feels like they are trying to get back to way things were by building bridges into content again.

    The more they make things like meta one dimensional in their approach, the more they continue to fracture the community in my opinion.

    Even if you don't agree, GW2 is an incredibly varied playerbase and I think trying to separate what players may or might like in the pve environment is probably a headache for the design team. There will always be something that will annoy players. Better to bung it all in and give players all sorts of different things to do. I find that a more positive approach personally.

    We have all the metrics from 2015 that we need. The raid population is small, as mentioned by Andrew Gray, and that means the player base has spoken on the matter... The majority do not want raid type content in their currents forms, and it was a massive oversight to not include things like difficulty scaling in the first place.

    We have no metrics. Only Anet have metrics. Whether they show the strategy is working, they have yet to reveal and perhaps it is too soon because the entire process isn't complete yet since more Strikes are to come (and if my understanding is right, they are going to be harder/more complex)

    The raid population is small. They want to change that. The feedback they have is that raids are too hard or that players want to do them but feel left out by a perception of elitism. ANet are clearly trying to bring the two groups back together. Even trying to bring your communities together I think is a very sound strategy for a multi player game.

    I can't say it will def work, but I agree with the way they are trying. You are correct about difficulty scaling and this their more innovative way of doing that - just a lot later than perhaps it should have been

    There are multiple reasons people don't raid....difficulty is only one of them. I don't raid for other reasons. The difficulty I can handle just fine.

    Correct. Anet are focusing on the difficulty one because that is the one they apparently have the most feedback about. We can back and forth what we believe are the obstacles to raiding, but Anet are far better positioned to know what the main obstacle is given they see a vastly greater amount of feedback than any of us can ever claim to see on just forums or reddit.

    But, I'll stop there since I am contributing to pulling this thread off course

    What sleep is here? What dreams there are in the unctuous coiling of the snakes mortal shuffling. weapon in my hand. My hand the arcing deathblow at the end of all things. The horror. The horror. I embrace it. . .

  • Swagger.1459Swagger.1459 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited February 14, 2020

    @Randulf.7614 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Randulf.7614 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @Randulf.7614 said:
    Only their metrics will ever really tell that though.

    Their aim is bridge the gap between those who raid and those who don't. They need to do things like this to at least try and make that work. Even if it fails. But unless they commit, then they will never know. Anet are generally pretty bad at following through on things so I am pleased to see them go all in on this as best they can.

    There will be people will get annoyed by it, but I don't think the vast majority ultimately care. Just like the vast majority probably don't have the grievances that many of us on these forums. They just get on with it because the game asks them to - and I suspect that is just fine for most players. I can bang on about Drakkar devolving back to the dull zergfests of old which ignore years of constructive feedback which has kittened me right off, but it's clear people are just getting on and playing it. I don't think adding in a bit of instanced content is going to do much damage to the population.

    I also don't think anything has changed on a fundamental level. I think if anything the way things started off with dungeons and shortly after fractals and players were more conjoined. It was the way raids were implemented that splintered things in probably the strongest way. It feels like they are trying to get back to way things were by building bridges into content again.

    The more they make things like meta one dimensional in their approach, the more they continue to fracture the community in my opinion.

    Even if you don't agree, GW2 is an incredibly varied playerbase and I think trying to separate what players may or might like in the pve environment is probably a headache for the design team. There will always be something that will annoy players. Better to bung it all in and give players all sorts of different things to do. I find that a more positive approach personally.

    We have all the metrics from 2015 that we need. The raid population is small, as mentioned by Andrew Gray, and that means the player base has spoken on the matter... The majority do not want raid type content in their currents forms, and it was a massive oversight to not include things like difficulty scaling in the first place.

    We have no metrics. Only Anet have metrics. Whether they show the strategy is working, they have yet to reveal and perhaps it is too soon because the entire process isn't complete yet since more Strikes are to come (and if my understanding is right, they are going to be harder/more complex)

    The raid population is small. They want to change that. The feedback they have is that raids are too hard or that players want to do them but feel left out by a perception of elitism. ANet are clearly trying to bring the two groups back together. Even trying to bring your communities together I think is a very sound strategy for a multi player game.

    I can't say it will def work, but I agree with the way they are trying. You are correct about difficulty scaling and this their more innovative way of doing that - just a lot later than perhaps it should have been

    There are multiple reasons people don't raid....difficulty is only one of them. I don't raid for other reasons. The difficulty I can handle just fine.

    Correct. Anet are focusing on the difficulty one because that is the one they apparently have the most feedback about. We can back and forth what we believe are the obstacles to raiding, but Anet are far better positioned to know what the main obstacle is given they see a vastly greater amount of feedback than any of us can ever claim to see on just forums or reddit.

    But, I'll stop there since I am contributing to pulling this thread off course

    And players said the exact same stuff when raids were launched, and here we are 5 years later... “the small audience they attract”

  • Randulf.7614Randulf.7614 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited February 14, 2020

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @Randulf.7614 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @Randulf.7614 said:
    Only their metrics will ever really tell that though.

    Their aim is bridge the gap between those who raid and those who don't. They need to do things like this to at least try and make that work. Even if it fails. But unless they commit, then they will never know. Anet are generally pretty bad at following through on things so I am pleased to see them go all in on this as best they can.

    There will be people will get annoyed by it, but I don't think the vast majority ultimately care. Just like the vast majority probably don't have the grievances that many of us on these forums. They just get on with it because the game asks them to - and I suspect that is just fine for most players. I can bang on about Drakkar devolving back to the dull zergfests of old which ignore years of constructive feedback which has kittened me right off, but it's clear people are just getting on and playing it. I don't think adding in a bit of instanced content is going to do much damage to the population.

    I also don't think anything has changed on a fundamental level. I think if anything the way things started off with dungeons and shortly after fractals and players were more conjoined. It was the way raids were implemented that splintered things in probably the strongest way. It feels like they are trying to get back to way things were by building bridges into content again.

    The more they make things like meta one dimensional in their approach, the more they continue to fracture the community in my opinion.

    Even if you don't agree, GW2 is an incredibly varied playerbase and I think trying to separate what players may or might like in the pve environment is probably a headache for the design team. There will always be something that will annoy players. Better to bung it all in and give players all sorts of different things to do. I find that a more positive approach personally.

    We have all the metrics from 2015 that we need. The raid population is small, as mentioned by Andrew Gray, and that means the player base has spoken on the matter... The majority do not want raid type content in their currents forms, and it was a massive oversight to not include things like difficulty scaling in the first place.

    We have no metrics. Only Anet have metrics. Whether they show the strategy is working, they have yet to reveal and perhaps it is too soon because the entire process isn't complete yet since more Strikes are to come (and if my understanding is right, they are going to be harder/more complex)

    The raid population is small. They want to change that. The feedback they have is that raids are too hard or that players want to do them but feel left out by a perception of elitism. ANet are clearly trying to bring the two groups back together. Even trying to bring your communities together I think is a very sound strategy for a multi player game.

    I can't say it will def work, but I agree with the way they are trying. You are correct about difficulty scaling and this their more innovative way of doing that - just a lot later than perhaps it should have been

    We have 5 years of the majority of players saying they do not want to be forced into raids or forced into raid content, and that was clarified by Andrew Gray.

    Did he say players do not want to be forced into it though? Or that it was too difficult for them and there was no bridge for that

    @Fire Attunement.9835 said:
    We gathered data to determine why, and the most common answer was that there is a giant leap in difficulty between raids and other endgame content, and there >isn't anything to help players work their way up.

    That suggests players do want to do raids, but there obstacles players want removing.

    I am willing to retract that if I have missed a statement somewhere else

    What sleep is here? What dreams there are in the unctuous coiling of the snakes mortal shuffling. weapon in my hand. My hand the arcing deathblow at the end of all things. The horror. The horror. I embrace it. . .

  • Randulf.7614Randulf.7614 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited February 14, 2020

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @Randulf.7614 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @Randulf.7614 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @Randulf.7614 said:
    Only their metrics will ever really tell that though.

    Their aim is bridge the gap between those who raid and those who don't. They need to do things like this to at least try and make that work. Even if it fails. But unless they commit, then they will never know. Anet are generally pretty bad at following through on things so I am pleased to see them go all in on this as best they can.

    There will be people will get annoyed by it, but I don't think the vast majority ultimately care. Just like the vast majority probably don't have the grievances that many of us on these forums. They just get on with it because the game asks them to - and I suspect that is just fine for most players. I can bang on about Drakkar devolving back to the dull zergfests of old which ignore years of constructive feedback which has kittened me right off, but it's clear people are just getting on and playing it. I don't think adding in a bit of instanced content is going to do much damage to the population.

    I also don't think anything has changed on a fundamental level. I think if anything the way things started off with dungeons and shortly after fractals and players were more conjoined. It was the way raids were implemented that splintered things in probably the strongest way. It feels like they are trying to get back to way things were by building bridges into content again.

    The more they make things like meta one dimensional in their approach, the more they continue to fracture the community in my opinion.

    Even if you don't agree, GW2 is an incredibly varied playerbase and I think trying to separate what players may or might like in the pve environment is probably a headache for the design team. There will always be something that will annoy players. Better to bung it all in and give players all sorts of different things to do. I find that a more positive approach personally.

    We have all the metrics from 2015 that we need. The raid population is small, as mentioned by Andrew Gray, and that means the player base has spoken on the matter... The majority do not want raid type content in their currents forms, and it was a massive oversight to not include things like difficulty scaling in the first place.

    We have no metrics. Only Anet have metrics. Whether they show the strategy is working, they have yet to reveal and perhaps it is too soon because the entire process isn't complete yet since more Strikes are to come (and if my understanding is right, they are going to be harder/more complex)

    The raid population is small. They want to change that. The feedback they have is that raids are too hard or that players want to do them but feel left out by a perception of elitism. ANet are clearly trying to bring the two groups back together. Even trying to bring your communities together I think is a very sound strategy for a multi player game.

    I can't say it will def work, but I agree with the way they are trying. You are correct about difficulty scaling and this their more innovative way of doing that - just a lot later than perhaps it should have been

    We have 5 years of the majority of players saying they do not want to be forced into raids or forced into raid content, and that was clarified by Andrew Gray.

    Did he say players do not want to be forced into it though? Or that it was too difficult for them and there was no bridge for that

    @Fire Attunement.9835 said:
    We gathered data to determine why, and the most common answer was that there is a giant leap in difficulty between raids and other endgame content, and there >isn't anything to help players work their way up.

    That suggests players do want to do raids, but there obstacles players want removing.

    I am willing to retract that if I have missed a statement somewhere else

    These “stepping stone” will not make raids magically better, not will they finally attract a larger audience. And by forcing raid type content to complete a new zone will only serve to alienate players from that content and the game itself.

    Again, the majority hate/dislike/don’t wanna do raids in GW2 period. That is a fact. These strike missions will do nothing to change that.

    And you could be spot on. Or you could be wrong. There is no fact here yet because what they are trying to do isn't complete. For all we know, it could actually be working according to their metrics. Or it could be failing miserably. I don't know. You don't know.
    What we do know is what ANet have gathered feedback about the opinion on raids and that seemingly is players want the obstacles removed and a smoother transition, not that they don't want them at all. Not one of us are better positioned to overturn that feedback.

    I guess we can refer back to this in a few months and see if the attempt as indeed successful or not.

    But going right the way back to the OP's original concerns. I support what they are doing and have no issues with them continuing to add lots of varied content to the meta achievement. I think such things fit nicely there.

    What sleep is here? What dreams there are in the unctuous coiling of the snakes mortal shuffling. weapon in my hand. My hand the arcing deathblow at the end of all things. The horror. The horror. I embrace it. . .

  • Randulf.7614Randulf.7614 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @Randulf.7614 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @Randulf.7614 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @Randulf.7614 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @Randulf.7614 said:
    Only their metrics will ever really tell that though.

    Their aim is bridge the gap between those who raid and those who don't. They need to do things like this to at least try and make that work. Even if it fails. But unless they commit, then they will never know. Anet are generally pretty bad at following through on things so I am pleased to see them go all in on this as best they can.

    There will be people will get annoyed by it, but I don't think the vast majority ultimately care. Just like the vast majority probably don't have the grievances that many of us on these forums. They just get on with it because the game asks them to - and I suspect that is just fine for most players. I can bang on about Drakkar devolving back to the dull zergfests of old which ignore years of constructive feedback which has kittened me right off, but it's clear people are just getting on and playing it. I don't think adding in a bit of instanced content is going to do much damage to the population.

    I also don't think anything has changed on a fundamental level. I think if anything the way things started off with dungeons and shortly after fractals and players were more conjoined. It was the way raids were implemented that splintered things in probably the strongest way. It feels like they are trying to get back to way things were by building bridges into content again.

    The more they make things like meta one dimensional in their approach, the more they continue to fracture the community in my opinion.

    Even if you don't agree, GW2 is an incredibly varied playerbase and I think trying to separate what players may or might like in the pve environment is probably a headache for the design team. There will always be something that will annoy players. Better to bung it all in and give players all sorts of different things to do. I find that a more positive approach personally.

    We have all the metrics from 2015 that we need. The raid population is small, as mentioned by Andrew Gray, and that means the player base has spoken on the matter... The majority do not want raid type content in their currents forms, and it was a massive oversight to not include things like difficulty scaling in the first place.

    We have no metrics. Only Anet have metrics. Whether they show the strategy is working, they have yet to reveal and perhaps it is too soon because the entire process isn't complete yet since more Strikes are to come (and if my understanding is right, they are going to be harder/more complex)

    The raid population is small. They want to change that. The feedback they have is that raids are too hard or that players want to do them but feel left out by a perception of elitism. ANet are clearly trying to bring the two groups back together. Even trying to bring your communities together I think is a very sound strategy for a multi player game.

    I can't say it will def work, but I agree with the way they are trying. You are correct about difficulty scaling and this their more innovative way of doing that - just a lot later than perhaps it should have been

    We have 5 years of the majority of players saying they do not want to be forced into raids or forced into raid content, and that was clarified by Andrew Gray.

    Did he say players do not want to be forced into it though? Or that it was too difficult for them and there was no bridge for that

    @Fire Attunement.9835 said:
    We gathered data to determine why, and the most common answer was that there is a giant leap in difficulty between raids and other endgame content, and there >isn't anything to help players work their way up.

    That suggests players do want to do raids, but there obstacles players want removing.

    I am willing to retract that if I have missed a statement somewhere else

    These “stepping stone” will not make raids magically better, not will they finally attract a larger audience. And by forcing raid type content to complete a new zone will only serve to alienate players from that content and the game itself.

    Again, the majority hate/dislike/don’t wanna do raids in GW2 period. That is a fact. These strike missions will do nothing to change that.

    And you could be spot on. Or you could be wrong. There is no fact here yet because what they are trying to do isn't complete. For all we know, it could actually be working according to their metrics. Or it could be failing miserably. I don't know. You don't know.
    What we do know is what ANet have gathered feedback about the opinion on raids and that seemingly is players want the obstacles removed and a smoother transition, not that they don't want them at all. Not one of us are better positioned to overturn that feedback.

    I guess we can refer back to this in a few months and see if the attempt as indeed successful or not.

    But going right the way back to the OP's original concerns. I support what they are doing and have no issues with them continuing to add lots of varied content to the meta achievement. I think such things fit nicely there.

    This is the opening sentence in the OP... " For the first time ever, in order to get a zone meta achievement, people are required to get achievements from ten man instanced content."

    Forcing players to do raid type content, when the devs full well know that the majority hate said content... and 5 years later the result of raids is... “the small audience they attract”... isn't going to make players happy. We don't need any metrics to know that forcing players to do what they don't want to do is BAD.

    As I said above - the feedback that Anet have is that players appear to want to do it, they just find obstacles to doing it and have asked for those obstacles to be removed. The desire seems to exist based on that reply from Andrew Gray. That is why they are pushing these strikes so hard. Any statement from us otherwise flows against the feedback they have gathered.

    The question and subject of this thread isn't whether players want to raid. It's whether pushing the strikes as a part of the meta is the right strategy. I am not dismissing the OP's feedback, I just disagree with it because I like how they have implemented it

    What sleep is here? What dreams there are in the unctuous coiling of the snakes mortal shuffling. weapon in my hand. My hand the arcing deathblow at the end of all things. The horror. The horror. I embrace it. . .

  • Swagger.1459Swagger.1459 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited February 14, 2020

    @Randulf.7614 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @Randulf.7614 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @Randulf.7614 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @Randulf.7614 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @Randulf.7614 said:
    Only their metrics will ever really tell that though.

    Their aim is bridge the gap between those who raid and those who don't. They need to do things like this to at least try and make that work. Even if it fails. But unless they commit, then they will never know. Anet are generally pretty bad at following through on things so I am pleased to see them go all in on this as best they can.

    There will be people will get annoyed by it, but I don't think the vast majority ultimately care. Just like the vast majority probably don't have the grievances that many of us on these forums. They just get on with it because the game asks them to - and I suspect that is just fine for most players. I can bang on about Drakkar devolving back to the dull zergfests of old which ignore years of constructive feedback which has kittened me right off, but it's clear people are just getting on and playing it. I don't think adding in a bit of instanced content is going to do much damage to the population.

    I also don't think anything has changed on a fundamental level. I think if anything the way things started off with dungeons and shortly after fractals and players were more conjoined. It was the way raids were implemented that splintered things in probably the strongest way. It feels like they are trying to get back to way things were by building bridges into content again.

    The more they make things like meta one dimensional in their approach, the more they continue to fracture the community in my opinion.

    Even if you don't agree, GW2 is an incredibly varied playerbase and I think trying to separate what players may or might like in the pve environment is probably a headache for the design team. There will always be something that will annoy players. Better to bung it all in and give players all sorts of different things to do. I find that a more positive approach personally.

    We have all the metrics from 2015 that we need. The raid population is small, as mentioned by Andrew Gray, and that means the player base has spoken on the matter... The majority do not want raid type content in their currents forms, and it was a massive oversight to not include things like difficulty scaling in the first place.

    We have no metrics. Only Anet have metrics. Whether they show the strategy is working, they have yet to reveal and perhaps it is too soon because the entire process isn't complete yet since more Strikes are to come (and if my understanding is right, they are going to be harder/more complex)

    The raid population is small. They want to change that. The feedback they have is that raids are too hard or that players want to do them but feel left out by a perception of elitism. ANet are clearly trying to bring the two groups back together. Even trying to bring your communities together I think is a very sound strategy for a multi player game.

    I can't say it will def work, but I agree with the way they are trying. You are correct about difficulty scaling and this their more innovative way of doing that - just a lot later than perhaps it should have been

    We have 5 years of the majority of players saying they do not want to be forced into raids or forced into raid content, and that was clarified by Andrew Gray.

    Did he say players do not want to be forced into it though? Or that it was too difficult for them and there was no bridge for that

    @Fire Attunement.9835 said:
    We gathered data to determine why, and the most common answer was that there is a giant leap in difficulty between raids and other endgame content, and there >isn't anything to help players work their way up.

    That suggests players do want to do raids, but there obstacles players want removing.

    I am willing to retract that if I have missed a statement somewhere else

    These “stepping stone” will not make raids magically better, not will they finally attract a larger audience. And by forcing raid type content to complete a new zone will only serve to alienate players from that content and the game itself.

    Again, the majority hate/dislike/don’t wanna do raids in GW2 period. That is a fact. These strike missions will do nothing to change that.

    And you could be spot on. Or you could be wrong. There is no fact here yet because what they are trying to do isn't complete. For all we know, it could actually be working according to their metrics. Or it could be failing miserably. I don't know. You don't know.
    What we do know is what ANet have gathered feedback about the opinion on raids and that seemingly is players want the obstacles removed and a smoother transition, not that they don't want them at all. Not one of us are better positioned to overturn that feedback.

    I guess we can refer back to this in a few months and see if the attempt as indeed successful or not.

    But going right the way back to the OP's original concerns. I support what they are doing and have no issues with them continuing to add lots of varied content to the meta achievement. I think such things fit nicely there.

    This is the opening sentence in the OP... " For the first time ever, in order to get a zone meta achievement, people are required to get achievements from ten man instanced content."

    Forcing players to do raid type content, when the devs full well know that the majority hate said content... and 5 years later the result of raids is... “the small audience they attract”... isn't going to make players happy. We don't need any metrics to know that forcing players to do what they don't want to do is BAD.

    As I said above - the feedback that Anet have is that players appear to want to do it, they just find obstacles to doing it and have asked for those obstacles to be removed. The desire seems to exist based on that reply from Andrew Gray. That is why they are pushing these strikes so hard. Any statement from us otherwise flows against the feedback they have gathered.

    The question and subject of this thread isn't whether players want to raid. It's whether pushing the strikes as a part of the meta is the right strategy. I am not dismissing the OP's feedback, I just disagree with it because I like how they have implemented it

    That's great, you are entitled to feel the way you feel. Just be aware that forcing strike missions on players will backfire and not grow raid participation, and we don't need metrics on what we already know from past experiences.

    Edit- And out of curiosity, do you run spvp MATs or seasons?

    Edit 2- So now is the time to annoy casual players who hate raid type content? Right?

    ..."Not exactly positive. Less funds mean less content. And given the reduction in both quantity and quality per episode, it doesn't bode well for what is to come.
    There's also a case for what more is there people want to buy 8 years on? Especially given things are only in the store for a brief period then removed for a long while."

  • Jayden Reese.9542Jayden Reese.9542 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @Randulf.7614 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @Randulf.7614 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @Randulf.7614 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @Randulf.7614 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @Randulf.7614 said:
    Only their metrics will ever really tell that though.

    Their aim is bridge the gap between those who raid and those who don't. They need to do things like this to at least try and make that work. Even if it fails. But unless they commit, then they will never know. Anet are generally pretty bad at following through on things so I am pleased to see them go all in on this as best they can.

    There will be people will get annoyed by it, but I don't think the vast majority ultimately care. Just like the vast majority probably don't have the grievances that many of us on these forums. They just get on with it because the game asks them to - and I suspect that is just fine for most players. I can bang on about Drakkar devolving back to the dull zergfests of old which ignore years of constructive feedback which has kittened me right off, but it's clear people are just getting on and playing it. I don't think adding in a bit of instanced content is going to do much damage to the population.

    I also don't think anything has changed on a fundamental level. I think if anything the way things started off with dungeons and shortly after fractals and players were more conjoined. It was the way raids were implemented that splintered things in probably the strongest way. It feels like they are trying to get back to way things were by building bridges into content again.

    The more they make things like meta one dimensional in their approach, the more they continue to fracture the community in my opinion.

    Even if you don't agree, GW2 is an incredibly varied playerbase and I think trying to separate what players may or might like in the pve environment is probably a headache for the design team. There will always be something that will annoy players. Better to bung it all in and give players all sorts of different things to do. I find that a more positive approach personally.

    We have all the metrics from 2015 that we need. The raid population is small, as mentioned by Andrew Gray, and that means the player base has spoken on the matter... The majority do not want raid type content in their currents forms, and it was a massive oversight to not include things like difficulty scaling in the first place.

    We have no metrics. Only Anet have metrics. Whether they show the strategy is working, they have yet to reveal and perhaps it is too soon because the entire process isn't complete yet since more Strikes are to come (and if my understanding is right, they are going to be harder/more complex)

    The raid population is small. They want to change that. The feedback they have is that raids are too hard or that players want to do them but feel left out by a perception of elitism. ANet are clearly trying to bring the two groups back together. Even trying to bring your communities together I think is a very sound strategy for a multi player game.

    I can't say it will def work, but I agree with the way they are trying. You are correct about difficulty scaling and this their more innovative way of doing that - just a lot later than perhaps it should have been

    We have 5 years of the majority of players saying they do not want to be forced into raids or forced into raid content, and that was clarified by Andrew Gray.

    Did he say players do not want to be forced into it though? Or that it was too difficult for them and there was no bridge for that

    @Fire Attunement.9835 said:
    We gathered data to determine why, and the most common answer was that there is a giant leap in difficulty between raids and other endgame content, and there >isn't anything to help players work their way up.

    That suggests players do want to do raids, but there obstacles players want removing.

    I am willing to retract that if I have missed a statement somewhere else

    These “stepping stone” will not make raids magically better, not will they finally attract a larger audience. And by forcing raid type content to complete a new zone will only serve to alienate players from that content and the game itself.

    Again, the majority hate/dislike/don’t wanna do raids in GW2 period. That is a fact. These strike missions will do nothing to change that.

    And you could be spot on. Or you could be wrong. There is no fact here yet because what they are trying to do isn't complete. For all we know, it could actually be working according to their metrics. Or it could be failing miserably. I don't know. You don't know.
    What we do know is what ANet have gathered feedback about the opinion on raids and that seemingly is players want the obstacles removed and a smoother transition, not that they don't want them at all. Not one of us are better positioned to overturn that feedback.

    I guess we can refer back to this in a few months and see if the attempt as indeed successful or not.

    But going right the way back to the OP's original concerns. I support what they are doing and have no issues with them continuing to add lots of varied content to the meta achievement. I think such things fit nicely there.

    This is the opening sentence in the OP... " For the first time ever, in order to get a zone meta achievement, people are required to get achievements from ten man instanced content."

    Forcing players to do raid type content, when the devs full well know that the majority hate said content... and 5 years later the result of raids is... “the small audience they attract”... isn't going to make players happy. We don't need any metrics to know that forcing players to do what they don't want to do is BAD.

    As I said above - the feedback that Anet have is that players appear to want to do it, they just find obstacles to doing it and have asked for those obstacles to be removed. The desire seems to exist based on that reply from Andrew Gray. That is why they are pushing these strikes so hard. Any statement from us otherwise flows against the feedback they have gathered.

    The question and subject of this thread isn't whether players want to raid. It's whether pushing the strikes as a part of the meta is the right strategy. I am not dismissing the OP's feedback, I just disagree with it because I like how they have implemented it

    That's great, you are entitled to feel the way you feel. Just be aware that forcing strike missions on players will backfire and not grow raid participation, and we don't need metrics on what we already know from past experiences.

    Edit- And out of curiosity, do you run spvp MATs or seasons?

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @Randulf.7614 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @Randulf.7614 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @Randulf.7614 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @Randulf.7614 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @Randulf.7614 said:
    Only their metrics will ever really tell that though.

    Their aim is bridge the gap between those who raid and those who don't. They need to do things like this to at least try and make that work. Even if it fails. But unless they commit, then they will never know. Anet are generally pretty bad at following through on things so I am pleased to see them go all in on this as best they can.

    There will be people will get annoyed by it, but I don't think the vast majority ultimately care. Just like the vast majority probably don't have the grievances that many of us on these forums. They just get on with it because the game asks them to - and I suspect that is just fine for most players. I can bang on about Drakkar devolving back to the dull zergfests of old which ignore years of constructive feedback which has kittened me right off, but it's clear people are just getting on and playing it. I don't think adding in a bit of instanced content is going to do much damage to the population.

    I also don't think anything has changed on a fundamental level. I think if anything the way things started off with dungeons and shortly after fractals and players were more conjoined. It was the way raids were implemented that splintered things in probably the strongest way. It feels like they are trying to get back to way things were by building bridges into content again.

    The more they make things like meta one dimensional in their approach, the more they continue to fracture the community in my opinion.

    Even if you don't agree, GW2 is an incredibly varied playerbase and I think trying to separate what players may or might like in the pve environment is probably a headache for the design team. There will always be something that will annoy players. Better to bung it all in and give players all sorts of different things to do. I find that a more positive approach personally.

    We have all the metrics from 2015 that we need. The raid population is small, as mentioned by Andrew Gray, and that means the player base has spoken on the matter... The majority do not want raid type content in their currents forms, and it was a massive oversight to not include things like difficulty scaling in the first place.

    We have no metrics. Only Anet have metrics. Whether they show the strategy is working, they have yet to reveal and perhaps it is too soon because the entire process isn't complete yet since more Strikes are to come (and if my understanding is right, they are going to be harder/more complex)

    The raid population is small. They want to change that. The feedback they have is that raids are too hard or that players want to do them but feel left out by a perception of elitism. ANet are clearly trying to bring the two groups back together. Even trying to bring your communities together I think is a very sound strategy for a multi player game.

    I can't say it will def work, but I agree with the way they are trying. You are correct about difficulty scaling and this their more innovative way of doing that - just a lot later than perhaps it should have been

    We have 5 years of the majority of players saying they do not want to be forced into raids or forced into raid content, and that was clarified by Andrew Gray.

    Did he say players do not want to be forced into it though? Or that it was too difficult for them and there was no bridge for that

    @Fire Attunement.9835 said:
    We gathered data to determine why, and the most common answer was that there is a giant leap in difficulty between raids and other endgame content, and there >isn't anything to help players work their way up.

    That suggests players do want to do raids, but there obstacles players want removing.

    I am willing to retract that if I have missed a statement somewhere else

    These “stepping stone” will not make raids magically better, not will they finally attract a larger audience. And by forcing raid type content to complete a new zone will only serve to alienate players from that content and the game itself.

    Again, the majority hate/dislike/don’t wanna do raids in GW2 period. That is a fact. These strike missions will do nothing to change that.

    And you could be spot on. Or you could be wrong. There is no fact here yet because what they are trying to do isn't complete. For all we know, it could actually be working according to their metrics. Or it could be failing miserably. I don't know. You don't know.
    What we do know is what ANet have gathered feedback about the opinion on raids and that seemingly is players want the obstacles removed and a smoother transition, not that they don't want them at all. Not one of us are better positioned to overturn that feedback.

    I guess we can refer back to this in a few months and see if the attempt as indeed successful or not.

    But going right the way back to the OP's original concerns. I support what they are doing and have no issues with them continuing to add lots of varied content to the meta achievement. I think such things fit nicely there.

    This is the opening sentence in the OP... " For the first time ever, in order to get a zone meta achievement, people are required to get achievements from ten man instanced content."

    Forcing players to do raid type content, when the devs full well know that the majority hate said content... and 5 years later the result of raids is... “the small audience they attract”... isn't going to make players happy. We don't need any metrics to know that forcing players to do what they don't want to do is BAD.

    As I said above - the feedback that Anet have is that players appear to want to do it, they just find obstacles to doing it and have asked for those obstacles to be removed. The desire seems to exist based on that reply from Andrew Gray. That is why they are pushing these strikes so hard. Any statement from us otherwise flows against the feedback they have gathered.

    The question and subject of this thread isn't whether players want to raid. It's whether pushing the strikes as a part of the meta is the right strategy. I am not dismissing the OP's feedback, I just disagree with it because I like how they have implemented it

    That's great, you are entitled to feel the way you feel. Just be aware that forcing strike missions on players will backfire and not grow raid participation, and we don't need metrics on what we already know from past experiences.

    Edit- And out of curiosity, do you run spvp MATs or seasons?

    I can't see it backfire. Before there were raiders and non-raiders only.
    Now there are raiders and non-raiders and players who do strikes but not raids.
    I'm sure some who never raided will try raids after strikes but someone who won't even do strikes when some are easy were never gonna do raids anyway.
    The only question is will players quit because they couldn't do one meta because they refuse to do strikes I mean maybe but doubt it will be a mass exodus. Now if they continue next meta with and added strikes being even harder it could chase some away

  • Jayden Reese.9542Jayden Reese.9542 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Jayden Reese.9542 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @Randulf.7614 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @Randulf.7614 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @Randulf.7614 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @Randulf.7614 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @Randulf.7614 said:
    Only their metrics will ever really tell that though.

    Their aim is bridge the gap between those who raid and those who don't. They need to do things like this to at least try and make that work. Even if it fails. But unless they commit, then they will never know. Anet are generally pretty bad at following through on things so I am pleased to see them go all in on this as best they can.

    There will be people will get annoyed by it, but I don't think the vast majority ultimately care. Just like the vast majority probably don't have the grievances that many of us on these forums. They just get on with it because the game asks them to - and I suspect that is just fine for most players. I can bang on about Drakkar devolving back to the dull zergfests of old which ignore years of constructive feedback which has kittened me right off, but it's clear people are just getting on and playing it. I don't think adding in a bit of instanced content is going to do much damage to the population.

    I also don't think anything has changed on a fundamental level. I think if anything the way things started off with dungeons and shortly after fractals and players were more conjoined. It was the way raids were implemented that splintered things in probably the strongest way. It feels like they are trying to get back to way things were by building bridges into content again.

    The more they make things like meta one dimensional in their approach, the more they continue to fracture the community in my opinion.

    Even if you don't agree, GW2 is an incredibly varied playerbase and I think trying to separate what players may or might like in the pve environment is probably a headache for the design team. There will always be something that will annoy players. Better to bung it all in and give players all sorts of different things to do. I find that a more positive approach personally.

    We have all the metrics from 2015 that we need. The raid population is small, as mentioned by Andrew Gray, and that means the player base has spoken on the matter... The majority do not want raid type content in their currents forms, and it was a massive oversight to not include things like difficulty scaling in the first place.

    We have no metrics. Only Anet have metrics. Whether they show the strategy is working, they have yet to reveal and perhaps it is too soon because the entire process isn't complete yet since more Strikes are to come (and if my understanding is right, they are going to be harder/more complex)

    The raid population is small. They want to change that. The feedback they have is that raids are too hard or that players want to do them but feel left out by a perception of elitism. ANet are clearly trying to bring the two groups back together. Even trying to bring your communities together I think is a very sound strategy for a multi player game.

    I can't say it will def work, but I agree with the way they are trying. You are correct about difficulty scaling and this their more innovative way of doing that - just a lot later than perhaps it should have been

    We have 5 years of the majority of players saying they do not want to be forced into raids or forced into raid content, and that was clarified by Andrew Gray.

    Did he say players do not want to be forced into it though? Or that it was too difficult for them and there was no bridge for that

    @Fire Attunement.9835 said:
    We gathered data to determine why, and the most common answer was that there is a giant leap in difficulty between raids and other endgame content, and there >isn't anything to help players work their way up.

    That suggests players do want to do raids, but there obstacles players want removing.

    I am willing to retract that if I have missed a statement somewhere else

    These “stepping stone” will not make raids magically better, not will they finally attract a larger audience. And by forcing raid type content to complete a new zone will only serve to alienate players from that content and the game itself.

    Again, the majority hate/dislike/don’t wanna do raids in GW2 period. That is a fact. These strike missions will do nothing to change that.

    And you could be spot on. Or you could be wrong. There is no fact here yet because what they are trying to do isn't complete. For all we know, it could actually be working according to their metrics. Or it could be failing miserably. I don't know. You don't know.
    What we do know is what ANet have gathered feedback about the opinion on raids and that seemingly is players want the obstacles removed and a smoother transition, not that they don't want them at all. Not one of us are better positioned to overturn that feedback.

    I guess we can refer back to this in a few months and see if the attempt as indeed successful or not.

    But going right the way back to the OP's original concerns. I support what they are doing and have no issues with them continuing to add lots of varied content to the meta achievement. I think such things fit nicely there.

    This is the opening sentence in the OP... " For the first time ever, in order to get a zone meta achievement, people are required to get achievements from ten man instanced content."

    Forcing players to do raid type content, when the devs full well know that the majority hate said content... and 5 years later the result of raids is... “the small audience they attract”... isn't going to make players happy. We don't need any metrics to know that forcing players to do what they don't want to do is BAD.

    As I said above - the feedback that Anet have is that players appear to want to do it, they just find obstacles to doing it and have asked for those obstacles to be removed. The desire seems to exist based on that reply from Andrew Gray. That is why they are pushing these strikes so hard. Any statement from us otherwise flows against the feedback they have gathered.

    The question and subject of this thread isn't whether players want to raid. It's whether pushing the strikes as a part of the meta is the right strategy. I am not dismissing the OP's feedback, I just disagree with it because I like how they have implemented it

    That's great, you are entitled to feel the way you feel. Just be aware that forcing strike missions on players will backfire and not grow raid participation, and we don't need metrics on what we already know from past experiences.

    Edit- And out of curiosity, do you run spvp MATs or seasons?

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @Randulf.7614 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @Randulf.7614 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @Randulf.7614 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @Randulf.7614 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @Randulf.7614 said:
    Only their metrics will ever really tell that though.

    Their aim is bridge the gap between those who raid and those who don't. They need to do things like this to at least try and make that work. Even if it fails. But unless they commit, then they will never know. Anet are generally pretty bad at following through on things so I am pleased to see them go all in on this as best they can.

    There will be people will get annoyed by it, but I don't think the vast majority ultimately care. Just like the vast majority probably don't have the grievances that many of us on these forums. They just get on with it because the game asks them to - and I suspect that is just fine for most players. I can bang on about Drakkar devolving back to the dull zergfests of old which ignore years of constructive feedback which has kittened me right off, but it's clear people are just getting on and playing it. I don't think adding in a bit of instanced content is going to do much damage to the population.

    I also don't think anything has changed on a fundamental level. I think if anything the way things started off with dungeons and shortly after fractals and players were more conjoined. It was the way raids were implemented that splintered things in probably the strongest way. It feels like they are trying to get back to way things were by building bridges into content again.

    The more they make things like meta one dimensional in their approach, the more they continue to fracture the community in my opinion.

    Even if you don't agree, GW2 is an incredibly varied playerbase and I think trying to separate what players may or might like in the pve environment is probably a headache for the design team. There will always be something that will annoy players. Better to bung it all in and give players all sorts of different things to do. I find that a more positive approach personally.

    We have all the metrics from 2015 that we need. The raid population is small, as mentioned by Andrew Gray, and that means the player base has spoken on the matter... The majority do not want raid type content in their currents forms, and it was a massive oversight to not include things like difficulty scaling in the first place.

    We have no metrics. Only Anet have metrics. Whether they show the strategy is working, they have yet to reveal and perhaps it is too soon because the entire process isn't complete yet since more Strikes are to come (and if my understanding is right, they are going to be harder/more complex)

    The raid population is small. They want to change that. The feedback they have is that raids are too hard or that players want to do them but feel left out by a perception of elitism. ANet are clearly trying to bring the two groups back together. Even trying to bring your communities together I think is a very sound strategy for a multi player game.

    I can't say it will def work, but I agree with the way they are trying. You are correct about difficulty scaling and this their more innovative way of doing that - just a lot later than perhaps it should have been

    We have 5 years of the majority of players saying they do not want to be forced into raids or forced into raid content, and that was clarified by Andrew Gray.

    Did he say players do not want to be forced into it though? Or that it was too difficult for them and there was no bridge for that

    @Fire Attunement.9835 said:
    We gathered data to determine why, and the most common answer was that there is a giant leap in difficulty between raids and other endgame content, and there >isn't anything to help players work their way up.

    That suggests players do want to do raids, but there obstacles players want removing.

    I am willing to retract that if I have missed a statement somewhere else

    These “stepping stone” will not make raids magically better, not will they finally attract a larger audience. And by forcing raid type content to complete a new zone will only serve to alienate players from that content and the game itself.

    Again, the majority hate/dislike/don’t wanna do raids in GW2 period. That is a fact. These strike missions will do nothing to change that.

    And you could be spot on. Or you could be wrong. There is no fact here yet because what they are trying to do isn't complete. For all we know, it could actually be working according to their metrics. Or it could be failing miserably. I don't know. You don't know.
    What we do know is what ANet have gathered feedback about the opinion on raids and that seemingly is players want the obstacles removed and a smoother transition, not that they don't want them at all. Not one of us are better positioned to overturn that feedback.

    I guess we can refer back to this in a few months and see if the attempt as indeed successful or not.

    But going right the way back to the OP's original concerns. I support what they are doing and have no issues with them continuing to add lots of varied content to the meta achievement. I think such things fit nicely there.

    This is the opening sentence in the OP... " For the first time ever, in order to get a zone meta achievement, people are required to get achievements from ten man instanced content."

    Forcing players to do raid type content, when the devs full well know that the majority hate said content... and 5 years later the result of raids is... “the small audience they attract”... isn't going to make players happy. We don't need any metrics to know that forcing players to do what they don't want to do is BAD.

    As I said above - the feedback that Anet have is that players appear to want to do it, they just find obstacles to doing it and have asked for those obstacles to be removed. The desire seems to exist based on that reply from Andrew Gray. That is why they are pushing these strikes so hard. Any statement from us otherwise flows against the feedback they have gathered.

    The question and subject of this thread isn't whether players want to raid. It's whether pushing the strikes as a part of the meta is the right strategy. I am not dismissing the OP's feedback, I just disagree with it because I like how they have implemented it

    That's great, you are entitled to feel the way you feel. Just be aware that forcing strike missions on players will backfire and not grow raid participation, and we don't need metrics on what we already know from past experiences.

    Edit- And out of curiosity, do you run spvp MATs or seasons?

    I can't see it backfire. Before there were raiders and non-raiders only.
    Now there are raiders and non-raiders and players who do strikes but not raids.
    I'm sure some who never raided will try raids after strikes but someone who won't even do strikes when some are easy were never gonna do raids anyway.
    The only question is will players quit because they couldn't do one meta because they refuse to do strikes I mean maybe but doubt it will be a mass exodus. Now if they continue next meta with and added strikes being even harder it could chase some away

    I don't think players quit for one reason. But players accumulate reasons until they quit. For me this is a big one. I really don't want to play and I'm not going to play as much. I'm certainly not feeling like spending money in the gem store. I might not quit but it will affect my hours in game.

    And that's your choice. I avoided jumping puzzles forever then over time I did almost them all. Still not a fan. The light puzzles I had no interest but this meta kinda made me do um. Stikes are similar. I don't look forward to new ones but It's just a world boss with a 10 player cap. You join and even if you suck most times the 8 left alive kill it esp groth kodan and fraenir. It's not like after I'm like omg that Vayne dude sucked and send you whispers. You try if you like it great if not do the bare minimum beat um each once or ignore a meta which isn't the end of the world. Up to you but I say at least try.

  • Swagger.1459Swagger.1459 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Jayden Reese.9542 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @Randulf.7614 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @Randulf.7614 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @Randulf.7614 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @Randulf.7614 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @Randulf.7614 said:
    Only their metrics will ever really tell that though.

    Their aim is bridge the gap between those who raid and those who don't. They need to do things like this to at least try and make that work. Even if it fails. But unless they commit, then they will never know. Anet are generally pretty bad at following through on things so I am pleased to see them go all in on this as best they can.

    There will be people will get annoyed by it, but I don't think the vast majority ultimately care. Just like the vast majority probably don't have the grievances that many of us on these forums. They just get on with it because the game asks them to - and I suspect that is just fine for most players. I can bang on about Drakkar devolving back to the dull zergfests of old which ignore years of constructive feedback which has kittened me right off, but it's clear people are just getting on and playing it. I don't think adding in a bit of instanced content is going to do much damage to the population.

    I also don't think anything has changed on a fundamental level. I think if anything the way things started off with dungeons and shortly after fractals and players were more conjoined. It was the way raids were implemented that splintered things in probably the strongest way. It feels like they are trying to get back to way things were by building bridges into content again.

    The more they make things like meta one dimensional in their approach, the more they continue to fracture the community in my opinion.

    Even if you don't agree, GW2 is an incredibly varied playerbase and I think trying to separate what players may or might like in the pve environment is probably a headache for the design team. There will always be something that will annoy players. Better to bung it all in and give players all sorts of different things to do. I find that a more positive approach personally.

    We have all the metrics from 2015 that we need. The raid population is small, as mentioned by Andrew Gray, and that means the player base has spoken on the matter... The majority do not want raid type content in their currents forms, and it was a massive oversight to not include things like difficulty scaling in the first place.

    We have no metrics. Only Anet have metrics. Whether they show the strategy is working, they have yet to reveal and perhaps it is too soon because the entire process isn't complete yet since more Strikes are to come (and if my understanding is right, they are going to be harder/more complex)

    The raid population is small. They want to change that. The feedback they have is that raids are too hard or that players want to do them but feel left out by a perception of elitism. ANet are clearly trying to bring the two groups back together. Even trying to bring your communities together I think is a very sound strategy for a multi player game.

    I can't say it will def work, but I agree with the way they are trying. You are correct about difficulty scaling and this their more innovative way of doing that - just a lot later than perhaps it should have been

    We have 5 years of the majority of players saying they do not want to be forced into raids or forced into raid content, and that was clarified by Andrew Gray.

    Did he say players do not want to be forced into it though? Or that it was too difficult for them and there was no bridge for that

    @Fire Attunement.9835 said:
    We gathered data to determine why, and the most common answer was that there is a giant leap in difficulty between raids and other endgame content, and there >isn't anything to help players work their way up.

    That suggests players do want to do raids, but there obstacles players want removing.

    I am willing to retract that if I have missed a statement somewhere else

    These “stepping stone” will not make raids magically better, not will they finally attract a larger audience. And by forcing raid type content to complete a new zone will only serve to alienate players from that content and the game itself.

    Again, the majority hate/dislike/don’t wanna do raids in GW2 period. That is a fact. These strike missions will do nothing to change that.

    And you could be spot on. Or you could be wrong. There is no fact here yet because what they are trying to do isn't complete. For all we know, it could actually be working according to their metrics. Or it could be failing miserably. I don't know. You don't know.
    What we do know is what ANet have gathered feedback about the opinion on raids and that seemingly is players want the obstacles removed and a smoother transition, not that they don't want them at all. Not one of us are better positioned to overturn that feedback.

    I guess we can refer back to this in a few months and see if the attempt as indeed successful or not.

    But going right the way back to the OP's original concerns. I support what they are doing and have no issues with them continuing to add lots of varied content to the meta achievement. I think such things fit nicely there.

    This is the opening sentence in the OP... " For the first time ever, in order to get a zone meta achievement, people are required to get achievements from ten man instanced content."

    Forcing players to do raid type content, when the devs full well know that the majority hate said content... and 5 years later the result of raids is... “the small audience they attract”... isn't going to make players happy. We don't need any metrics to know that forcing players to do what they don't want to do is BAD.

    As I said above - the feedback that Anet have is that players appear to want to do it, they just find obstacles to doing it and have asked for those obstacles to be removed. The desire seems to exist based on that reply from Andrew Gray. That is why they are pushing these strikes so hard. Any statement from us otherwise flows against the feedback they have gathered.

    The question and subject of this thread isn't whether players want to raid. It's whether pushing the strikes as a part of the meta is the right strategy. I am not dismissing the OP's feedback, I just disagree with it because I like how they have implemented it

    That's great, you are entitled to feel the way you feel. Just be aware that forcing strike missions on players will backfire and not grow raid participation, and we don't need metrics on what we already know from past experiences.

    Edit- And out of curiosity, do you run spvp MATs or seasons?

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @Randulf.7614 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @Randulf.7614 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @Randulf.7614 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @Randulf.7614 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @Randulf.7614 said:
    Only their metrics will ever really tell that though.

    Their aim is bridge the gap between those who raid and those who don't. They need to do things like this to at least try and make that work. Even if it fails. But unless they commit, then they will never know. Anet are generally pretty bad at following through on things so I am pleased to see them go all in on this as best they can.

    There will be people will get annoyed by it, but I don't think the vast majority ultimately care. Just like the vast majority probably don't have the grievances that many of us on these forums. They just get on with it because the game asks them to - and I suspect that is just fine for most players. I can bang on about Drakkar devolving back to the dull zergfests of old which ignore years of constructive feedback which has kittened me right off, but it's clear people are just getting on and playing it. I don't think adding in a bit of instanced content is going to do much damage to the population.

    I also don't think anything has changed on a fundamental level. I think if anything the way things started off with dungeons and shortly after fractals and players were more conjoined. It was the way raids were implemented that splintered things in probably the strongest way. It feels like they are trying to get back to way things were by building bridges into content again.

    The more they make things like meta one dimensional in their approach, the more they continue to fracture the community in my opinion.

    Even if you don't agree, GW2 is an incredibly varied playerbase and I think trying to separate what players may or might like in the pve environment is probably a headache for the design team. There will always be something that will annoy players. Better to bung it all in and give players all sorts of different things to do. I find that a more positive approach personally.

    We have all the metrics from 2015 that we need. The raid population is small, as mentioned by Andrew Gray, and that means the player base has spoken on the matter... The majority do not want raid type content in their currents forms, and it was a massive oversight to not include things like difficulty scaling in the first place.

    We have no metrics. Only Anet have metrics. Whether they show the strategy is working, they have yet to reveal and perhaps it is too soon because the entire process isn't complete yet since more Strikes are to come (and if my understanding is right, they are going to be harder/more complex)

    The raid population is small. They want to change that. The feedback they have is that raids are too hard or that players want to do them but feel left out by a perception of elitism. ANet are clearly trying to bring the two groups back together. Even trying to bring your communities together I think is a very sound strategy for a multi player game.

    I can't say it will def work, but I agree with the way they are trying. You are correct about difficulty scaling and this their more innovative way of doing that - just a lot later than perhaps it should have been

    We have 5 years of the majority of players saying they do not want to be forced into raids or forced into raid content, and that was clarified by Andrew Gray.

    Did he say players do not want to be forced into it though? Or that it was too difficult for them and there was no bridge for that

    @Fire Attunement.9835 said:
    We gathered data to determine why, and the most common answer was that there is a giant leap in difficulty between raids and other endgame content, and there >isn't anything to help players work their way up.

    That suggests players do want to do raids, but there obstacles players want removing.

    I am willing to retract that if I have missed a statement somewhere else

    These “stepping stone” will not make raids magically better, not will they finally attract a larger audience. And by forcing raid type content to complete a new zone will only serve to alienate players from that content and the game itself.

    Again, the majority hate/dislike/don’t wanna do raids in GW2 period. That is a fact. These strike missions will do nothing to change that.

    And you could be spot on. Or you could be wrong. There is no fact here yet because what they are trying to do isn't complete. For all we know, it could actually be working according to their metrics. Or it could be failing miserably. I don't know. You don't know.
    What we do know is what ANet have gathered feedback about the opinion on raids and that seemingly is players want the obstacles removed and a smoother transition, not that they don't want them at all. Not one of us are better positioned to overturn that feedback.

    I guess we can refer back to this in a few months and see if the attempt as indeed successful or not.

    But going right the way back to the OP's original concerns. I support what they are doing and have no issues with them continuing to add lots of varied content to the meta achievement. I think such things fit nicely there.

    This is the opening sentence in the OP... " For the first time ever, in order to get a zone meta achievement, people are required to get achievements from ten man instanced content."

    Forcing players to do raid type content, when the devs full well know that the majority hate said content... and 5 years later the result of raids is... “the small audience they attract”... isn't going to make players happy. We don't need any metrics to know that forcing players to do what they don't want to do is BAD.

    As I said above - the feedback that Anet have is that players appear to want to do it, they just find obstacles to doing it and have asked for those obstacles to be removed. The desire seems to exist based on that reply from Andrew Gray. That is why they are pushing these strikes so hard. Any statement from us otherwise flows against the feedback they have gathered.

    The question and subject of this thread isn't whether players want to raid. It's whether pushing the strikes as a part of the meta is the right strategy. I am not dismissing the OP's feedback, I just disagree with it because I like how they have implemented it

    That's great, you are entitled to feel the way you feel. Just be aware that forcing strike missions on players will backfire and not grow raid participation, and we don't need metrics on what we already know from past experiences.

    Edit- And out of curiosity, do you run spvp MATs or seasons?

    I can't see it backfire. Before there were raiders and non-raiders only.
    Now there are raiders and non-raiders and players who do strikes but not raids.
    I'm sure some who never raided will try raids after strikes but someone who won't even do strikes when some are easy were never gonna do raids anyway.
    The only question is will players quit because they couldn't do one meta because they refuse to do strikes I mean maybe but doubt it will be a mass exodus. Now if they continue next meta with and added strikes being even harder it could chase some away

    I don't think players quit for one reason. But players accumulate reasons until they quit. For me this is a big one. I really don't want to play and I'm not going to play as much. I'm certainly not feeling like spending money in the gem store. I might not quit but it will affect my hours in game.

    Yup

  • Ayrilana.1396Ayrilana.1396 Member ✭✭✭✭

    For all of those that don't like having to do strike mission achievements for the meta: have you actually done strikes and put as much effort into them as you would have done for any story or open world achievement? I have a suspicion that a lot of those that don't like it probably have never actually done strikes or at least put much effort into it.

  • Blocki.4931Blocki.4931 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Every way that gets people to do parts of the game they wouldn't otherwise check out is worth it. If any minor inconvenience drives them away from achieving their goal of completing a meta achievement then I must ask why they wanted to do it in the first place.

    I rather choose death.

  • Ayrilana.1396Ayrilana.1396 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited February 14, 2020

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @Ayrilana.1396 said:
    For all of those that don't like having to do strike mission achievements for the meta: have you actually done strikes and put as much effort into them as you would have done for any story or open world achievement? I have a suspicion that a lot of those that don't like it probably have never actually done strikes or at least put much effort into it.

    Doesn’t matter. The strike mission requirements should be removed from the completion equation.

    Based on what? That you don't like them? I didn't particularly enjoy grinding events so those should be removed too.

  • Dante.1763Dante.1763 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Blocki.4931 said:
    Every way that gets people to do parts of the game they wouldn't otherwise check out is worth it. If any minor inconvenience drives them away from achieving their goal of completing a meta achievement then I must ask why they wanted to do it in the first place.

    Up to a point.

    WVW: im forced into this to obtain the gift of battle when im working on legendarys, i dont like WVW but i can flip camps for the GOB. Otherwise i dont go set foot there
    PVP: i dont enjoy at all, i dont set foot there.
    Dungeons: No need to go into them, i have all the items.
    Fractals: Only run these maybe once or twice a month when my friend gets on, otherwise i dont set foot there as i dont enjoy them.
    Raids: Only run these maybe once or twice a -year- when my friend has a spare room in his pre made, and feels like taking me along. Would never touch otherwise.
    Strikes: only for the achievements if required. Dont enjoy them otherwise.

    Once one has tried the content once or even a few times they will be able to know if they enjoy the content. Again, metas have never forced players into instanced content, not in 7 years. Instanced content has been kept out of them so -everyone- including the ultra casuals and the hard core raiders could obtain them.

    Past making them do it once, all its going to do is force players into content they dont want to do which creates a toxic mixing pool of player types.

    Amana Silentchild; My Main
    Ember Wandertooth; The Kingslayer, Kianda Redpaw; The Blazing Light
    Why GW is Called Guildwars

  • Swagger.1459Swagger.1459 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Ayrilana.1396 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @Ayrilana.1396 said:
    For all of those that don't like having to do strike mission achievements for the meta: have you actually done strikes and put as much effort into them as you would have done for any story or open world achievement? I have a suspicion that a lot of those that don't like it probably have never actually done strikes or at least put much effort into it.

    Doesn’t matter. The strike mission requirements should be removed from the completion equation.

    Based on what? That you don't like them? I didn't particularly enjoy grinding events so those should be removed too.

    Refer back to my other posts.