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

[Vayne.8563]

@Vilin.8056 said:

@"Cylent.6078" said:Kudos to Vayne for starting this thread. And kudos, also, for saying nearly everything that's been on my mind since the achievements for this chapter were released.

What do we all have in common? We all want to play the game using the modes we enjoy most

. Good intentions from ANet, but this is not the way. I want to see GW2 succeed, and I applaud every game mode that interests and challenges all players and prospective players. I like having an incentive to try new things. But making the Shadow In The Ice Mastery achievement reward dependent on mixing the modes (including strike missions)

with no option of substituting an equivalent participation

puts me, a loyal player, in a very negative space.

I'll be honest and a bit selfish here...I like the varied game modes. It gives L33t and/or competitive players a source of enjoyment and reduces the negativity in my map chat.

Please tell me, what category do I fit best? I log in every day (except a few maternity days off), do a few dailies (in different modes, mind you, but I prefer PvE). I have sunk some money into gems, and I love finishing collections & achievements, acquiring new skins, crafting, "fashion" wars, etc. I play the game to release a little steam, relax, and make some online friends. My screen time is limited (remember that maternity leave?), and I have a full time job. I play maybe 15-25 hours a week, across multiple accounts. I've never been good at jumping puzzles (however the light puzzles are much more fun for me). Maybe someone could offer a spiffy, stereotyped, category title for me? :)

My interests have changed along with my time availability, among other things, and are different from when I began playing GW in 2005. I want to achieve goals, but my hands are tied when it comes to Shadow in the Ice, which saddens me a great deal. I don't enjoy Strike and Raids. Maybe I'm good enough, maybe not. I don't have time or patience, and it's not my thing. I'd rather grind than suffer the RNG of trying to land in a fun group to Strike or Raid with. Almost all attempts of mine have been fruitless so far. It's either toxic, or takes more time than I can commit to, to be successful.

My husband and I have invested a great deal of time and money into this game, and we've also invested some hopes and dreams that when our little ones are old enough, this will be a source of entertainment for the whole family. We want to see it continue to succeed.

As Vayne has said, if ANet continues this strategy of leading players towards raiding, they're going to lose player interest rather than increase it. I liked an excellent suggestion I read somewhere between page 2 and 5 of this thread...maybe add more achievements to old maps as new content is released, to allow players to earn the reward w/o doing strike missions?

I have a lot less interest in the game when I am thinking ,"I'd like to, but..." Makes me want to channel my inner Sylvari...start a r.l. garden. My little ones are already mining precious ores (aka rocks) in our backyard. I have a kitchen and a sewing machine, and I'm pretty good a wielding a musical instrument, too. I suppose I have everything in r.l. that GW2 offers, except gliding, mounts, mobs of unfriendly creatures (perhaps bills, taxes, and traffic fit that description?), and large, shiny weapons. Don't take away my virtual rewards, ANet!

We have all grown up through out these years with since the first release of Guildwars2, and I too have given up many contents due to real life and families. I believe being able to appreciate life is truly a wonderful thing.

All I suggest is that you spent 20 minutes of your time with my community as we have been pugging with least half group of first timers with easy strategies and nearly 100% successful rate. I'm sure you will love the cheers of the aftermath.

I've succeeded in most strike missions. Unfortunately I still don't enjoy them. It's okay not to like specific content.

[Vayne.8563]

@Vilin.8056 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:Correct, they aren't ... even by their very nature they are intentionally designed around guild participation, which tends to require a good deal of organization to execute successfully. Of course, whether Guild missions are casual-oriented content or not has NOTHING to do with the post your are replying to or this thread. If you want to debate what is or isn't casual content, feel free to make a separate thread about it.It's the logic you used to

define

what is casual contents, in which you used to labeling out of any contents that requires "waiting for players organise into groups" from being casual. In this case the whole debate of meta achievements are irrelevant as nearly all living story meta achievements contain activities that require waiting for players to do as such, which makes meta achievement never meant for your definition of casual players.

@Obtena.7952 said:I don't know what you are talking about. Nothing I said should have given you any indication of what I am and am not willing to do. You should try to follow along better, ESPECIALLY if you are going to accuse someone of having a false agenda and that person is me.

This I apologise for falsely pointing onto you, but you should be aware the whole topic is about willing or not willing to do strike mission.

The whole topic isn't about willing or not willing to do a strike mission. The whole topic is about Anet adding content that was never there before as a required part of the meta. You're singling out the fact that I don't like the change, but the topic is about the change. If it was here all along there wouldn't be a conversation. But when a change occurs, if you don't like the change, you're well within you rights to say so. This is an unacceptble change to me, which ruins content I previously enjoyed. It's not about willing, it's about enjoyment.

[Etria.3642]

Vayne says:Edit: There are 46 people in my guild who are over 20k achievement points. They didn't get them ignoring achievements. They focus on achievements.

Folks with over 20k achievement points are NOT casuals in my book. I only justjustjust yesterday hit 20k. According to gw2 efficiency that puts me higher than 94% of the accounts registered with gw2 efficiency, which, let's face it, probably most folks who ARE truly casual do not register with at all.

Say the game has a million active players. Those who login at least once every couple months to get the episodes for free. 200,000 or so accounts have taken the additional time and effort to register there. Of /those/ only 12, 781 are higher than 20k. 50,327 have killed the Mursaat Overseer. 10,298 have defeated Whisper of Jormag. Fewer than that have completed the light puzzles achievement, Luminiferous. 8,930. Or for one that's been out longer: 33,952 have completed the Grothmar Strike mission. 14, 122 have completed Khan-Ur's Right Hand. By that logic it isn't Strike missions that should be removed but jumping puzzles. But in any case, someone with over 20k achievement points is far from your ordinary average player. In fact, Vayne has mentioned that he has over /38,000/ achievement points. That is not not not casual.

What it is, is impressive. It's also, perhaps, someone who greatly values his total, and fears the strike missions may be getting more difficult ahead, to rival the more difficult raid bosses, and if they do get that difficult, he would rather they not be required for the meta. While I have discovered I DO like strike missions, should they indeed ramp up the difficulty to a higher level, he is likely correct, most casuals will not partake. But casuals ALREADY do not partake in achievement hunting. What Vayne is in fact arguing, is that achievement hunters LIKE HIMSELF and the other achievement hunters he knows, do not want strikes included in the meta.

For what it's worth, even though I do like strikes, what I'm finding is that the raid community is turning up their noses at them. So if they make them more difficult, they risk indeed alienating Vayne and those players like him. And the game should try to keep its achievement hunters around, just like it should try to keep raiders around. And the other niche folks, because those are the ones who keep playing the game during the slower times when the true casuals are off trying Wolcen, or whatever. If you don't have the niche folks playing, when new players enter, they see empty maps with maybe a few gold farmers.

tl;dr I agree with not requiring strikes in future metas. I disagree that the reason is due to casuals.

[flog.3485]

@Vayne.8563 said:

@Vilin.8056 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:Correct, they aren't ... even by their very nature they are intentionally designed around guild participation, which tends to require a good deal of organization to execute successfully. Of course, whether Guild missions are casual-oriented content or not has NOTHING to do with the post your are replying to or this thread. If you want to debate what is or isn't casual content, feel free to make a separate thread about it.It's the logic you used to

define

what is casual contents, in which you used to labeling out of any contents that requires "waiting for players organise into groups" from being casual. In this case the whole debate of meta achievements are irrelevant as nearly all living story meta achievements contain activities that require waiting for players to do as such, which makes meta achievement never meant for your definition of casual players.

@Obtena.7952 said:I don't know what you are talking about. Nothing I said should have given you any indication of what I am and am not willing to do. You should try to follow along better, ESPECIALLY if you are going to accuse someone of having a false agenda and that person is me.

This I apologise for falsely pointing onto you, but you should be aware the whole topic is about willing or not willing to do strike mission.

The whole topic isn't about willing or not willing to do a strike mission. The whole topic is about Anet adding content that was never there before as a required part of the meta. You're singling out the fact that I don't like the change, but the topic is about the change. If it was here all along there wouldn't be a conversation. But when a change occurs, if you don't like the change, you're well within you rights to say so. This is an unacceptble change to me, which ruins content I previously enjoyed. It's not about willing, it's about enjoyment.

No offense but this mental gymnastic has to stop.You created this topic about you being unwilling to do the content because so far all you have to argue about is being a player complaining because your habits are being changed. Therefore it is precisely about being willing or unwilling to do the content.

The Icebrood saga was about changing the formula of the game. That is the main reason why it is not called Living story season 5. Had the devs clearly stated at the start of the season that they would just do a copy pasta of season 3 and 4, then I personally would have agreed with your complaint but it really isn’t the case here.

You can’t ignore the fact that before, even if most players could do the meta achievement without doing instance content, the number of players actually doing it was rather low.In a similar token, you also can’t also ignore the fact that players were complaining about the lack of group up and incentives (like guild missions) and frankly only proposing open world as the “main group up option” where people are forced to wait for an event to pop up is not the best way for people to stick with the game.You know why ? Because the more maps the devs add, the more people are spread. The more they are spread, the harder it becomes for an event to be regularly and successfully completed to the point which the devs are going to need to make easier and easier events (based on feedback because obviously open world needs to very casual and easy like any other game). And the easier it becomes, the more shallow the maps become to the point where the participation within the maps will tank so hard because players would just rush the events as fast as possible within one week).Just think about that: season 3 and and 4 alone mean 12 maps and we all know that the events within these maps weren’t regularly completed because the devs actually needed to update the daily system of these maps.

Other than that, you know what is sad: the fact that some random passionate GW2 player can’t be bothered to group up with 9 other players at any time of the day even though he had no problem doing it before with 30+ more in the past while needing to show up at a specific time as well as doing fractals.Nobody is forcing you to do raids (only a few strike missions), the game is only making you feel like achieving the meta of a map will require a bit more than spending your majority of your time only on open world (I would argue that it is a reasonable expectation since you are a veteran player). But you can’t ignore the fact that some players (even new players) want to see more than open world and they are being restricted because the bridge that allow them to transition from one sub to another isn’t there because there is no achievement incentive to do so (since players have been used to skip it before).

On a personal level my majority of the time playing the game has been busy doing open world content. Yet, even if I am still at tier 2 fractals while not having participated in the fractals since the beginning of season 3, I still got my first boneskinner SM kill (even though I died in the first 20% burn phase). My point being: no matter what content you play, it will always be very easy to get carried in instanced content just like the majority of players are being carried in open world as well. Later on I participated in the drakkar meta at prime time EU: the event failed with a commander tag. Three days before I tried to do the blood legion grothmar valley event: it failed even with a commander a tag because not enough people showed up.

TLDR: as much as I like the very focused open world nature of the game, the game needs to incentive players to group up outside of open world -one time you can miss- events and requiring people to do the strike missions (just so they have a better basic understanding of the game) is the best way possible to sustain the game so far.

[Vayne.8563]

@flog.3485 said:

@Vayne.8563 said:

@Vilin.8056 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:Correct, they aren't ... even by their very nature they are intentionally designed around guild participation, which tends to require a good deal of organization to execute successfully. Of course, whether Guild missions are casual-oriented content or not has NOTHING to do with the post your are replying to or this thread. If you want to debate what is or isn't casual content, feel free to make a separate thread about it.It's the logic you used to

define

what is casual contents, in which you used to labeling out of any contents that requires "waiting for players organise into groups" from being casual. In this case the whole debate of meta achievements are irrelevant as nearly all living story meta achievements contain activities that require waiting for players to do as such, which makes meta achievement never meant for your definition of casual players.

@Obtena.7952 said:I don't know what you are talking about. Nothing I said should have given you any indication of what I am and am not willing to do. You should try to follow along better, ESPECIALLY if you are going to accuse someone of having a false agenda and that person is me.

This I apologise for falsely pointing onto you, but you should be aware the whole topic is about willing or not willing to do strike mission.

The whole topic isn't about willing or not willing to do a strike mission. The whole topic is about Anet adding content that was never there before as a required part of the meta. You're singling out the fact that I don't like the change, but the topic is about the change. If it was here all along there wouldn't be a conversation. But when a change occurs, if you don't like the change, you're well within you rights to say so. This is an unacceptble change to me, which ruins content I previously enjoyed. It's not about willing, it's about enjoyment.

No offense but this mental gymnastic has to stop.You created this topic about you being unwilling to do the content because so far all you have to argue about is being a player complaining because your habits are being changed. Therefore it is precisely about being willing or unwilling to do the content.

The Icebrood saga was about changing the formula of the game. That is the main reason why it is not called Living story season 5. Had the devs clearly stated at the start of the season that they would just do a copy pasta of season 3 and 4, then I personally would have agreed with your complaint but it really isn’t the case here.

You can’t ignore the fact that before, even if most players could do the meta achievement without doing instance content, the number of players actually doing it was rather low.In a similar token, you also can’t also ignore the fact that players were complaining about the lack of group up and incentives (like guild missions) and frankly only proposing open world as the “main group up option” where people are forced to wait for an event to pop up is not the best way for people to stick with the game.You know why ? Because the more maps the devs add, the more people are spread. The more they are spread, the harder it becomes for an event to be regularly and successfully completed to the point which the devs are going to need to make easier and easier events (based on feedback because obviously open world needs to very casual and easy like any other game). And the easier it becomes, the more shallow the maps become to the point where the participation within the maps will tank so hard because players would just rush the events as fast as possible within one week).Just think about that: season 3 and and 4 alone mean 12 maps and we all know that the events within these maps weren’t regularly completed because the devs actually needed to update the daily system of these maps.

Other than that, you know what is sad: the fact that some random passionate GW2 player can’t be bothered to group up with 9 other players at any time of the day even though he had no problem doing it before with 30+ more in the past while needing to show up at a specific time as well as doing fractals.Nobody is forcing you to do raids (only a few strike missions), the game is only making you feel like achieving the meta of a map will require a bit more than spending your majority of your time only on open world (I would argue that it is a reasonable expectation since you are a veteran player). But you can’t ignore the fact that some players (even new players) want to see more than open world and they are being restricted because the bridge that allow them to transition from one sub to another isn’t there because there is no achievement incentive to do so (since players have been used to skip it before).

On a personal level my majority of the time playing the game has been busy doing open world content. Yet, even if I am still at tier 2 fractals while not having participated in the fractals since the beginning of season 3, I still got my first boneskinner SM kill (even though I died in the first 20% burn phase). My point being: no matter what content you play, it will always be very easy to get carried in instanced content just like the majority of players are being carried in open world as well. Later on I participated in the drakkar meta at prime time EU: the event failed with a commander tag. Three days before I tried to do the blood legion grothmar valley event: it failed even with a commander a tag because not enough people showed up.

TLDR: as much as I like the very focused open world nature of the game, the game needs to incentive players to group up outside of open world -one time you can miss- events and requiring people to do the strike missions (just so they have a better basic understanding of the game) is the best way possible to sustain the game so far.

You might think 20k is hard core, but it's not necessarily so for a lot of reasons.

The standings are about people who made accounts and played some for only a couple of weeks or even a couple of days. THere are 11 million plus accounts according to ANet. If there are a million active players that means there are 10 million inactive ones. Of course 20,000 AP is going to be near the top of the food chain.

You also have to understand that many of us are playing since season 1 when the ability to get points were higher and many of us have been in the guld for that long. A few of us are here since day one of head start without many breaks. That means just doing dailies (or dailies and monthlies) would give you 15,000 points if that's all you did. You'd only need 5,000 points to break 20,000. Longevity adds a lot to the process.

But being in a guild adds some too. We help each other with achievements making some of them that would be hard easier and faster. We enjoy playing together because we have fun together, not because we're hard core.

Today for example, one of our guys wanted an achievement on a second account that he couldn't get and a few of us joined him in the instance to get it. It was killing the last boss in A Crack in the Ice in five minutes. He didn't really do the achievement, my wife did. He just benefited. Having a helpful guild makes it seem like he's a hard core player, but he's really not. Maybe my wife and I could be considered hard core casuals, because though we don't like instanced content nearly as much we certainly love doing stuff in the open world and even in story instances.

Anyway, just my thoughts on your thoughts.

[maddoctor.2738]

@"Vayne.8563" said:And yet the Anet data card is the only card that actually matters

And yet you find all the different nonsensical excuses to "validate" your point. As @"Obtena.7952" said, if you simply stayed with the inconsistency issue it would be fine. But of course not, you had to type things like:

a) The majority of the game is self-identified casuals AND the majority of self-identified go for the zone meta achievements. As I said, data suggests that ONE of these can be true because they are mutually exclusiveb) The zone meta achievements are being completed by casuals because hardcore players have a different "end game" even though you have zero evidence or data to back that up.c) Using the "in my guild" argument over and over, projecting what is happening in your guild to the entire game

I don't mind your point in the thread, which didn't even come from you, but @"Obtena.7952" , but I do mind when you try to justify your point by using easily disproved nonsensical arguments. And then instead of owning up to your errors and admitting what you typed was wrong, you play the "Anet has the data" card. And then continue doing so. Congratulations

[Vayne.8563]

@maddoctor.2738 said:

@"Vayne.8563" said:And yet the Anet data card is the only card that actually matters

And yet you find all the different nonsensical excuses to "validate" your point. As @"Obtena.7952" said, if you simply stayed with the inconsistency issue it would be fine. But of course not, you had to type things like:

a) The majority of the game is self-identified casuals AND the majority of self-identified go for the zone meta achievements. As I said, data suggests that ONE of these can be true because they are mutually exclusiveb) The zone meta achievements are being completed by casuals because hardcore players have a different "end game" even though you have zero evidence or data to back that up.c) Using the "in my guild" argument over and over, projecting what is happening in your guild to the entire game

I don't mind your point in the thread, which didn't even come from you, but @"Obtena.7952" , but I do mind when you try to justify your point by using easily disproved nonsensical arguments. And then instead of owning up to your errors and admitting what you typed was wrong, you play the "Anet has the data" card. And then continue doing so. Congratulations

I"m stating my beliefs. I'm entitled to them. You can have beliefs that don't matter. The stats do matter. Anet will have those. I'm under no illusions. If the stats don't match my beliefs, nothing will change.

[Swagger.1459]

@Vayne.8563 said:

@Vilin.8056 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:Correct, they aren't ... even by their very nature they are intentionally designed around guild participation, which tends to require a good deal of organization to execute successfully. Of course, whether Guild missions are casual-oriented content or not has NOTHING to do with the post your are replying to or this thread. If you want to debate what is or isn't casual content, feel free to make a separate thread about it.It's the logic you used to

define

what is casual contents, in which you used to labeling out of any contents that requires "waiting for players organise into groups" from being casual. In this case the whole debate of meta achievements are irrelevant as nearly all living story meta achievements contain activities that require waiting for players to do as such, which makes meta achievement never meant for your definition of casual players.

@Obtena.7952 said:I don't know what you are talking about. Nothing I said should have given you any indication of what I am and am not willing to do. You should try to follow along better, ESPECIALLY if you are going to accuse someone of having a false agenda and that person is me.

This I apologise for falsely pointing onto you, but you should be aware the whole topic is about willing or not willing to do strike mission.

The whole topic isn't about willing or not willing to do a strike mission. The whole topic is about Anet adding content that was never there before as a required part of the meta. You're singling out the fact that I don't like the change, but the topic is about the change. If it was here all along there wouldn't be a conversation. But when a change occurs, if you don't like the change, you're well within you rights to say so. This is an unacceptble change to me, which ruins content I previously enjoyed. It's not about willing, it's about enjoyment.

That’s the best summary! I feel a ton of others, myself included obviously, feel the same way. And I’m sure every player has had different experiences like it.

[Zok.4956]

@flog.3485 said:

@Vayne.8563 said:

@Vilin.8056 said:

@"Obtena.7952" said:Correct, they aren't ... even by their very nature they are intentionally designed around guild participation, which tends to require a good deal of organization to execute successfully. Of course, whether Guild missions are casual-oriented content or not has NOTHING to do with the post your are replying to or this thread. If you want to debate what is or isn't casual content, feel free to make a separate thread about it.It's the logic you used to

define

what is casual contents, in which you used to labeling out of any contents that requires "waiting for players organise into groups" from being casual. In this case the whole debate of meta achievements are irrelevant as nearly all living story meta achievements contain activities that require waiting for players to do as such, which makes meta achievement never meant for your definition of casual players.

@"Obtena.7952" said:I don't know what you are talking about. Nothing I said should have given you any indication of what I am and am not willing to do. You should try to follow along better, ESPECIALLY if you are going to accuse someone of having a false agenda and that person is me.

This I apologise for falsely pointing onto you, but you should be aware the whole topic is about willing or not willing to do strike mission.

The whole topic isn't about willing or not willing to do a strike mission. The whole topic is about Anet adding content that was never there before as a required part of the meta. You're singling out the fact that I don't like the change, but the topic is about the change. If it was here all along there wouldn't be a conversation. But when a change occurs, if you don't like the change, you're well within you rights to say so. This is an unacceptble change to me, which ruins content I previously enjoyed. It's not about willing, it's about enjoyment.

The Icebrood saga was about changing the formula of the game.

Are these words coming from Anet, or from your own interpretation?

That is the main reason why it is not called Living story season 5. Had the devs clearly stated at the start of the season that they would just do a copy pasta of season 3 and 4, then I personally would have agreed with your complaint but it really isn’t the case here.

Oh, interesting. I thought it was because, it is a season that also will include expansion style content without an expansion. But whatever Anet intended, players still call it Season 5 because there is not much difference between the Sage and a Season visible, yet

And Anet makes the same mistakes they made in the past: When they see a problem, they make a workaround instead of fixing the problem.

Raids, as stated by Anet, attract only a small part of the players. Thats OK, because it is a type of content not everyone likes or is able to do. This has not changed since the beginning of raids in GW2. But now Anet stated that raids attract too few players to make new Raids. But instead of fixing the problems of raids (including: make more and better raids, make them more accessible themself, make them more attractive, etc. -this is another topic that was already discussed) they make strikes as a cheap(er) work-around to get more new players into raiding.

Fact is: We do not know why Anet put the strike achievements as required in the zone-meta. It could be part of their strategy to "force" more players into strikes, or to "change the formula of the game" like you wrote, or maybe it was only an over-motivated strike-loving employee, or maybe it was just a bug because of the seperation of one episode into two, etc.

But whatever reasons Aner had for putting it in the Zone-achievement, the existence of this thread is proof, that there are players that think it is a bad design decision and that this will be bad for the game and that, if it was intentional, it will be counter-productive in the end.

However: I did not see (maybe I have overlooked it) a reason, why it would be bad for the game if Anet would reduce the achievement count for the Zone-meta achievement, so the strike-missions would become optional for the zone-meta.

Also: Why is it a good design choice, that even WvWer have to do this for the reward and why can they not do this with a wvw reward track anymore?

[Zok.4956]

@Zok.4956 said:

@Vayne.8563 said:

@Zok.4956 said:

@"Inculpatus cedo.9234" said:I can't find where the Devs said, "We aren't sure we can support Raids moving forward"; I only see this:

"...we want to find better ways to support (Raids)..." and "Regardless of if that succeeds or not (Strike Missions), we understand the importance of balancing our efforts between accessible content with broad appeal, and content that appeals to the more hard core audience, and recognize that we need to do a

better job of supporting the latter

."

To me, and, of course, that's just me, it sounds like they are committed to creating more 'hard core' content, i.e. Raids.

"the biggest challenge in creating more (raids) is the small audience they attract."

They have a problem to justify to put more money/devs into development of more raids because of the small audience.

After raids started, the devs where happy, how many players the raids attracted.

@Vayne.8563 said:Where do you get the idea that the devs were happy how many people raids attracted? I'm curious because I've never seen a quote about that.

@Zok.4956 said:I am not sure if it was at a guild chat or on the forum, so I can not give you the exact quote. But I remember that someone from Anet stated, that they were happy about how many players were doing raids, more than expected, without giving the exact numbers/percentages.

I have now found a quote about this that I want to share: From: http://dulfy.net/2016/03/05/gw2-reddit-developer-ama-summary/

@Developer AMA SummaryRaid in MMOs are high-end content designed for the more hardcore player. However, from an analytics standpoint, the participation is higher than other games we’ve seen. This is likely due to the nature of our progression system in GW2.

Anet did know that the raid participation in general is small in MMOs because they are "high-end content designed for the more hardcore player" but that was OK for creating raids in the first place and they were (kind of) happy at the time that the raid participation was is higher in GW2 than in other MMOs. Because they created more raids after that.

@Developer AMA SummaryRaid teams are smaller than teams for Living World releases. For example, with Salvation Pass, we had only about 5-6 people working on it full time for 4 months.

If Anet can not justify anymore to assign only "5-6 people working on it full time for 4 months" to make a new raid, then I guess the raid participation must be really low at the moment.

[Vayne.8563]

@Zok.4956 said:

@Zok.4956 said:

@Vayne.8563 said:

@Zok.4956 said:

@"Inculpatus cedo.9234" said:I can't find where the Devs said, "We aren't sure we can support Raids moving forward"; I only see this:

"...we want to find better ways to support (Raids)..." and "Regardless of if that succeeds or not (Strike Missions), we understand the importance of balancing our efforts between accessible content with broad appeal, and content that appeals to the more hard core audience, and recognize that we need to do a

better job of supporting the latter

."

To me, and, of course, that's just me, it sounds like they are committed to creating more 'hard core' content, i.e. Raids.

"the biggest challenge in creating more (raids) is the small audience they attract."

They have a problem to justify to put more money/devs into development of more raids because of the small audience.

After raids started, the devs where happy, how many players the raids attracted.

@Vayne.8563 said:Where do you get the idea that the devs were happy how many people raids attracted? I'm curious because I've never seen a quote about that.

@Zok.4956 said:I am not sure if it was at a guild chat or on the forum, so I can not give you the exact quote. But I remember that someone from Anet stated, that they were happy about how many players were doing raids, more than expected, without giving the exact numbers/percentages.

I have now found a quote about this that I want to share: From:

http://dulfy.net/2016/03/05/gw2-reddit-developer-ama-summary/

@Developer AMA SummaryRaid in MMOs are high-end content designed for the more hardcore player. However, from an analytics standpoint, the participation is higher than other games we’ve seen. This is likely due to the nature of our progression system in GW2.

Anet did know that the raid participation in general is small in MMOs because they are "high-end content designed for the more hardcore player" but that was OK for creating raids in the first place and they were (kind of) happy at the time that the raid participation was is higher in GW2 than in other MMOs. Because they created more raids after that.

@Developer AMA SummaryRaid teams are smaller than teams for Living World releases. For example, with Salvation Pass, we had only about 5-6 people working on it full time for 4 months.

If Anet can not justify anymore to assign only "5-6 people working on it full time for 4 months" to make a new raid, then I guess the raid participation must be really low at the moment.

I'm just guessing here, but conversations I have with people suggest that some of them raided just long enough to get the legendary armor and then stopped because they really didn't enjoy it. I was just talking to someone who told me this today, and I've heard it before as well. I'm one of those people who would have done that, or could have, but took a stand and decided I'd rather not play content I have no interest in, even if it gives me a reward I'd want.

At least some of the people who raided only raided for whatever reward they wanted and once they had it they moved on to things they enjoy.

I'm pretty sure putting legendary armor with skins that animate behind raids can account for the excessive popularity of them from the time that was introduced. And the lack of interest subsequently is because people probably, on the whole, don't enjoy them more than other content.

[maddoctor.2738]

@"Zok.4956" said:Anet did know that the raid participation in general is small in MMOs because they are "high-end content designed for the more hardcore player" but that was OK for creating raids in the first place and they were (kind of) happy at the time that the raid participation was is higher in GW2 than in other MMOs. Because they created more raids after that.

There is also this:

We are planning to release raids with more regularity this season.from this link: http://dulfy.net/2017/11/29/gw2-living-world-season-4-daybreak-ama-summary/

Meaning at the time of Daybreak (1 month after Path of Fire was released) the Raid population justified the development of further Raids as they planned to release more regular Raids.

@"Vayne.8563" said:And the lack of interest subsequently is because people probably, on the whole, don't enjoy them more than other content.

Arenanet has the data, they both said judging by their data that Raid population was higher than expected AND furthermore they said that they were going to release more regular Raids.

The lack of interest and the drop in Raid population was due to the following factors:a) Hall of Chains was too hard, even for more hardcore teamsb) It took them 10 full months to release the next Raid even though they promised more regular releasesc) The rewards of Path of Fire Raids was lackluster, meaning it's better to train your new players in the old Raids, rather than go for the new ones

From the people I talked to, those are the major reasons (especially the 2nd) for stopping running Raids. I'm sure there were those that stopped raiding after getting their legendary armor, but there were far far more pressing issues with Raids than "enjoyment".

[Zok.4956]

@maddoctor.2738 said:

@"Zok.4956" said:Anet did know that the raid participation in general is small in MMOs because they are "high-end content designed for the more hardcore player" but that was OK for creating raids in the first place and they were (kind of) happy at the time that the raid participation was is higher in GW2 than in other MMOs. Because they created more raids after that.

There is also this:

We are planning to release raids with more regularity this season.from this link:

http://dulfy.net/2017/11/29/gw2-living-world-season-4-daybreak-ama-summary/

Meaning at the time of Daybreak (1 month after Path of Fire was released) the Raid population justified the development of further Raids as they planned to release more regular Raids.

Thanks for the quote. So Anet was "happy" with raid population for quite some time.

@"Vayne.8563" said:And the lack of interest subsequently is because people probably, on the whole, don't enjoy them more than other content.

Arenanet has the data, they both said judging by their data that Raid population was higher than expected AND furthermore they said that they were going to release more regular Raids.

The lack of interest and the drop in Raid population was due to the following factors:a) Hall of Chains was too hard, even for more hardcore teamsb) It took them 10 full months to release the next Raid even though they promised more regular releasesc) The rewards of Path of Fire Raids was lackluster, meaning it's better to train your new players in the old Raids, rather than go for the new ones

From the people I talked to, those are the major reasons (especially the 2nd) for stopping running Raids. I'm sure there were those that stopped raiding after getting their legendary armor, but there were far far more pressing issues with Raids than "enjoyment".

These are valid points. But none of the issues you listed, will be fixed with strike missions like Anet is hoping. Strikes look like a work-around and will probably only create a temporary influx of new raid players. If Anet wants a bigger raid population, they should work on fixing raid problems and also make new raids.

[maddoctor.2738]

@"Zok.4956" said:Thanks for the quote. So Anet was "happy" with raid population for quite some time.

They were until at least until Hall of Chains was released. The main issue with Raids was combining them with episode releases, which is why Mythright Gambit took so long to be released, as we all know Season 4 had a lot of problems with the release schedule. They -finally- gave up on that and decided to release Raids when they were done instead of waiting for an episode but it was too late at that point.

These are valid points. But none of the issues you listed, will be fixed with strike missions like Anet is hoping. Strikes look like a work-around and will probably only create a temporary influx of new raid players. If Anet wants a bigger raid population, they should work on fixing raid problems and also make new raids.

Well, Strike Missions have a better difficulty curve, there are easy ones and hard ones while at the same time they start with the easiest and go higher as time progresses. The big mistake they did with Hall of Chains was releasing the hardest Raid first and then progressively go easier. This means those that hated Hall of Chains stopped caring about Raids, and those that beat it found the next ones too easy. So far with Strike Missions they fixed that, meaning if they ever go back to making more Raids they won't repeat the mistakes of the past (wishful thinking I know). The issue of difficulty is covered by Strikes so far.

Broken promises are really hard to mend and I'm not sure "fixing" the problems of Raids would help there. I can understand why Anet chose to make Strike Missions instead of tweaking the previous Raids. At the very least if Strike Missions fail to bring more players into Raids, they can succeed at being new content that is run by many players, to justify their own existence. If that happens, at the very least Strike Missions can continue to be released and exist, so Strike Missions have two possibilities of success. Meanwhile, any tweak to Raids has only one (bringing more players to run them) so it's a much harder goal to achieve.

[flog.3485]

@Vayne.8563 said:

@flog.3485 said:

@Vayne.8563 said:

@Vilin.8056 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:Correct, they aren't ... even by their very nature they are intentionally designed around guild participation, which tends to require a good deal of organization to execute successfully. Of course, whether Guild missions are casual-oriented content or not has NOTHING to do with the post your are replying to or this thread. If you want to debate what is or isn't casual content, feel free to make a separate thread about it.It's the logic you used to

define

what is casual contents, in which you used to labeling out of any contents that requires "waiting for players organise into groups" from being casual. In this case the whole debate of meta achievements are irrelevant as nearly all living story meta achievements contain activities that require waiting for players to do as such, which makes meta achievement never meant for your definition of casual players.

@Obtena.7952 said:I don't know what you are talking about. Nothing I said should have given you any indication of what I am and am not willing to do. You should try to follow along better, ESPECIALLY if you are going to accuse someone of having a false agenda and that person is me.

This I apologise for falsely pointing onto you, but you should be aware the whole topic is about willing or not willing to do strike mission.

The whole topic isn't about willing or not willing to do a strike mission. The whole topic is about Anet adding content that was never there before as a required part of the meta. You're singling out the fact that I don't like the change, but the topic is about the change. If it was here all along there wouldn't be a conversation. But when a change occurs, if you don't like the change, you're well within you rights to say so. This is an unacceptble change to me, which ruins content I previously enjoyed. It's not about willing, it's about enjoyment.

No offense but this mental gymnastic has to stop.You created this topic about you being unwilling to do the content because so far all you have to argue about is being a player complaining because your habits are being changed. Therefore it is precisely about being willing or unwilling to do the content.

The Icebrood saga was about changing the formula of the game. That is the main reason why it is not called Living story season 5. Had the devs clearly stated at the start of the season that they would just do a copy pasta of season 3 and 4, then I personally would have agreed with your complaint but it really isn’t the case here.

You can’t ignore the fact that before, even if most players could do the meta achievement without doing instance content, the number of players actually doing it was rather low.In a similar token, you also can’t also ignore the fact that players were complaining about the lack of group up and incentives (like guild missions) and frankly only proposing open world as the “main group up option” where people are forced to wait for an event to pop up is not the best way for people to stick with the game.You know why ? Because the more maps the devs add, the more people are spread. The more they are spread, the harder it becomes for an event to be regularly and successfully completed to the point which the devs are going to need to make easier and easier events (based on feedback because obviously open world needs to very casual and easy like any other game). And the easier it becomes, the more shallow the maps become to the point where the participation within the maps will tank so hard because players would just rush the events as fast as possible within one week).Just think about that: season 3 and and 4 alone mean 12 maps and we all know that the events within these maps weren’t regularly completed because the devs actually needed to update the daily system of these maps.

Other than that, you know what is sad: the fact that some random passionate GW2 player can’t be bothered to group up with 9 other players at any time of the day even though he had no problem doing it before with 30+ more in the past while needing to show up at a specific time as well as doing fractals.Nobody is forcing you to do raids (only a few strike missions), the game is only making you feel like achieving the meta of a map will require a bit more than spending your majority of your time only on open world (I would argue that it is a reasonable expectation since you are a veteran player). But you can’t ignore the fact that some players (even new players) want to see more than open world and they are being restricted because the bridge that allow them to transition from one sub to another isn’t there because there is no achievement incentive to do so (since players have been used to skip it before).

On a personal level my majority of the time playing the game has been busy doing open world content. Yet, even if I am still at tier 2 fractals while not having participated in the fractals since the beginning of season 3, I still got my first boneskinner SM kill (even though I died in the first 20% burn phase). My point being: no matter what content you play, it will always be very easy to get carried in instanced content just like the majority of players are being carried in open world as well. Later on I participated in the drakkar meta at prime time EU: the event failed with a commander tag. Three days before I tried to do the blood legion grothmar valley event: it failed even with a commander a tag because not enough people showed up.

TLDR: as much as I like the very focused open world nature of the game, the game needs to incentive players to group up outside of open world -one time you can miss- events and requiring people to do the strike missions (just so they have a better basic understanding of the game) is the best way possible to sustain the game so far.

You might think 20k is hard core, but it's not necessarily so for a lot of reasons.

The standings are about people who made accounts and played some for only a couple of weeks or even a couple of days. THere are 11 million plus accounts according to ANet. If there are a million active players that means there are 10 million inactive ones. Of course 20,000 AP is going to be near the top of the food chain.

You also have to understand that many of us are playing since season 1 when the ability to get points were higher and many of us have been in the guld for that long. A few of us are here since day one of head start without many breaks. That means just doing dailies (or dailies and monthlies) would give you 15,000 points if that's all you did. You'd only need 5,000 points to break 20,000. Longevity adds a lot to the process.

But being in a guild adds some too. We help each other with achievements making some of them that would be hard easier and faster. We enjoy playing together because we have fun together, not because we're hard core.

Today for example, one of our guys wanted an achievement on a second account that he couldn't get and a few of us joined him in the instance to get it. It was killing the last boss in A Crack in the Ice in five minutes. He didn't really do the achievement, my wife did. He just benefited. Having a helpful guild makes it seem like he's a hard core player, but he's really not. Maybe my wife and I could be considered hard core casuals, because though we don't like instanced content nearly as much we certainly love doing stuff in the open world and even in story instances.

Anyway, just my thoughts on your thoughts.

I think you answered to the wrong person. I haven’t mentioned anything about the 20k.

[Seth Moonshadow.2710]

All the bickering aside the point is as they mentioned:

@"Vayne.8563" said:This content has been changed to "encourage" people to get into raids. It encourages me to play less.

This is a problem for us PvEr's! For the first time in Guild Wars 2 history in my case this marks the first time I did not complete a story "meta"!!! That is sad because it proves Vayne's point that it encourages less play on the part of PvEr's. LESS PLAY IS NOT what you want from any mode in a video game, I think that would be an obvious "Danger danger danger will Rob..." sign.

I've already pointed out why attaching Story Rewards to Strike missions is bad. I'll elaborate, Strike missions are already heading the way of dungeons. We've all seen it. The empty or 1 or 2 lfg listings for them. Zero listings for groups working toward the achievements tied to the story rewards. Why!? Welp, because strike missions are full of X-RAIDers who gear check, bail/leave on first run fail vs sticking with it and HELPING encourage those "stepping stone" to raids. The mantra for them "Time is money". IF...IF they do stay beyond the first attempt and try to teach the nuubs chat becomes filled with condescending comments and crapchat leading to others leaving. We've all seen it from either side. It's why I've never finish a single riad to date. It's why we (my family, and maybe other PvErs?) don't want or would stop playing that content. That's not good for anyone. Having the CHOICE to play your character in any mode is AWESOME, but it is still a choice. Attaching rewords from one content to another does "force" a choice. The hope is it will be played. And before you go there!!! YES raids ARE PvE content. It is widely considered END GAME PvE content. As is Fractals for Dungeoneers, Leagues for PvP and WvW. That doesn't mean every one will participate in END GAME content. Guild Wars 2 is so great a game that there is tons of choice for you to pick what fits your Play/Life style. That is another part of why strike mission having Story line rewards is bad. Strike missions, RAIDs, Dungeons, PvP matches, WvW skirmishes ALL require something many PvErs don't do. 100% focus on the keyboard, screen and mouse 100% of the time. PvErs tend to go afk for multiple reasons multiple times in just a 10 mintue period! I'd say in any 10m period my wife or I will be stopped at least half the time just for munchkins. Yes, a strike mission CAN take less than 10m with a well organized or well "built/build" group. Otherwise it can take longer and there is were a PvEr will step away for a second and when returning POOF the gorp is gone and they are left alone in a cave going..."echOOoooo". So after that happens multiple times guess what?..........waiting.........waiting..........yep you guessed it. We stop trying. The next time that content is released we just strait up don't do it, we lower our goals, we decrease our play time, our desire to purchase diminished, all leading to lower player base.

Fact is ArenaNet, while a competitive minded company (appearently), built a large Open world / PvE / Casual player base that DOES NOT want or will be lead into other modes. The same can be said for players in the other modes. Problem is, can ArenaNet provide for all modes? Or are they at a point they have bitten off more than can be chewed?

Strike Missions as a "stepping stone to raids" should have their own riadesk or strike mission rewards akin to raids. They should be "Optional", as they were in previous story, to complete for the story meta not required.

I am holding out hope for the future. Andrew Grays post. "but I can tell you the map is meta-focused with a push-and-pull feel similar to WvW in a PvE setting." Worries a little, after all SilverWastes is a lot like that and that map is some times heralded as THE BEST map of the game, though I'm interested to see what they think will "We want maps this season to bring something to them that makes them a permanent part of your play experience."? Because if it's more like Shadows in the Ice, then probably not for us. I loved every bit up until strike missions were required to complete the story meta. As it stands that is the only thing we have not completed and we keep trying but we are getting very discouraged from the random join or even the squad, since often the squads are there for the weekly NOT the achievements!

What gives me the MOST hope is:"Generally, as a team, we are placing a greater emphasis on repeatable content (open world events, world bosses, WvW, and yes, even Fractals (hint hint)). We want to make the types of content that have a lasting, positive impact on the game, so expect that design approach to focus on that more going forward." AND "We want it to be a unique, fun, and rewarding experience that will be part of your daily/weekly play cycle."

Because as PvErs with RL we definitely have play cycles we enjoy. Not being able to complete story metas is not one of them!

My hope is that this help not spawn more finger pointing......but it is the interwebz :o

<3

[Nephalem.8921]

@Seth Moonshadow.2710 said:Its an achievement not something blocking game progress. Requiring the player to not be afk to earn it should be a given or required for every meta achievement. You can do some of the achievements solo. You only need half of them. Most are super easy.Yes gw2 is focussing on open world only currently and its hard outperformed by ff14 and wow and eso. Coincidence?

[Vayne.8563]

@Nephalem.8921 said:

@Seth Moonshadow.2710 said:Its an achievement not something blocking game progress. Requiring the player to not be afk to earn it should be a given or required for every meta achievement. You can do some of the achievements solo. You only need half of them. Most are super easy.Yes gw2 is focussing on open world only currently and its hard outperformed by ff14 and wow and eso. Coincidence?

I wish people would stop saying that the reason some other products are outperforming this one is because of one specific thing that they happen to like. You should look up confirmation bias.

Did you know WoW is the number 1 MMO of all time and has been, largely because of when it launched and the money they had to advertise? You have no idea if the reason for WoW's popularity is hard core content or not, and you can't back up the claim that it is. Particularly since WoW's own devs have said that only a tiny percent of the playerbase does the hardest content.

Then there's ESO and Final Fantasy. You do realize that Final Fantasy is a series with 15 games in it that were available on both console and PC? And you do realize there's a Final Fantasy Movie that came out before Guild Wars 2 ever did? Even then Final Fantasy wasn't that far ahead of Guild Wars 2 until they introduced a console version and ESO wasn't ahead of Guild Wars 2 until the launched a console version.

Not really surprising that a bigger pool of players leads to more people playing. A console version makes a huge difference. You can say it's because they have harder content, but that's not why people are playing ESO, I can tell you that at least. I can give you other examples of harder core games that did worse, like Wildstar which was centered around raids. But i won't bring that up because Wildstar had other issues that means we can't be sure.

I'm relatively sure the majority of WoW players are casual, btw.

[Nephalem.8921]

@"Vayne.8563" said:I'm relatively sure the majority of WoW players are casual, btw.

Might be true but they dont complain every time an achievement needs a group to beat. the worldbosses in wow actually need you to search a group since they dont work like "jump to map and afk leech the whole thing" like in gw2.Strike missions are included in the map meta so people actually try them out. Most of them are even easier than world bosses. In what other way can you get players to try content besides open world?Maybe you didnt like them but what if the majority actually likes them but they would have never found out because they wouldn't have tried them without the meta achievement?

@"Seth Moonshadow.2710" said:Because as PvErs with RL we definitely have play cycles we enjoy. Not being able to complete story metas is not one of them!

The rl argument doesnt hold at all. Sports need 1-3h time investments WITHOUT BREAKS! aswell and even more for tournaments and i've never heard somebody say: "i cant play football because i have rl".The strikes need 3-5min time investment without interruptions and maybe copying a decent build for pve from a site. Everything except boneskinner and whisper of jormag dont need any special tactic. Just grab at least 1 healer to make it easy. So maybe if enough players learn the fighting system with strikes all the story missions dont have to bore fractal, raid and even better pvp players to death because story bosses just die after 3 attacks. And i include that taimi golem in this. Because multiple open world heroes love to complain about it while it phases in like 10sec vs a decent dps build. a full facetanking dps build.

[Vayne.8563]

@Nephalem.8921 said:

@"Vayne.8563" said:I'm relatively sure the majority of WoW players are casual, btw.

Might be true but they dont complain every time an achievement needs a group to beat. the worldbosses in wow actually need you to search a group since they dont work like "jump to map and afk leech the whole thing" like in gw2.Strike missions are included in the map meta so people actually try them out. Most of them are even easier than world bosses. In what other way can you get players to try content besides open world?Maybe you didnt like them but what if the majority actually likes them but they would have never found out because they wouldn't have tried them without the meta achievement?

@"Seth Moonshadow.2710" said:Because as PvErs with RL we definitely have play cycles we enjoy. Not being able to complete story metas is not one of them!

The rl argument doesnt hold at all. Sports need 1-3h time investments WITHOUT BREAKS! aswell and even more for tournaments and i've never heard somebody say: "i cant play football because i have rl".The strikes need 3-5min time investment without interruptions and maybe copying a decent build for pve from a site. Everything except boneskinner and whisper of jormag dont need any special tactic. Just grab at least 1 healer to make it easy. So maybe if enough players learn the fighting system with strikes all the story missions dont have to bore fractal, raid and even better pvp players to death because story bosses just die after 3 attacks. And i include that taimi golem in this. Because multiple open world heroes love to complain about it while it phases in like 10sec vs a decent dps build. a full facetanking dps build.

First of all, plenty of people complain about stuff. You saying they don't complain doesn't mean they don't. In fact, more people have quit playing WoW than have ever played this game. There are entire sites dedicated to hating WoW or there were anyway. Trying to say that people don't complain about content being too hard in WoW is demonstrably false.

Secondly, the raids in WoW are tank and spank for the most part. But devs have said almost no one does Mythic raids in WoW. The raid finder tank and spank stuff isn't particularly hard content. And people do it because they want gear with the highest stats. You don't know how many people wouldn't if there were other ways to get that gear.

[Nephalem.8921]

@Vayne.8563 said:Secondly, the raids in WoW are tank and spank for the most part. But devs have said almost no one does Mythic raids in WoW. The raid finder tank and spank stuff isn't particularly hard content. And people do it because they want gear with the highest stats. You don't know how many people wouldn't if there were other ways to get that gear.

Mythic also requires everyone to be on the same server. mythic dungeons are quite popular.

Gw2 strikes are just spank no tank. you dont have to dodge except boneskinner and whisper and both are not required for the meta. heck even most raidbosses dont require dodging or reflexes at all.

[Vayne.8563]

@Nephalem.8921 said:

@Vayne.8563 said:Secondly, the raids in WoW are tank and spank for the most part. But devs have said almost no one does Mythic raids in WoW. The raid finder tank and spank stuff isn't particularly hard content. And people do it because they want gear with the highest stats. You don't know how many people wouldn't if there were other ways to get that gear.

Mythic also requires everyone to be on the same server. mythic dungeons are quite popular.

Gw2 strikes are just spank no tank. you dont have to dodge except boneskinner and whisper and both are not required for the meta. heck even most raidbosses dont require dodging or reflexes at all.

It was a long time ago, but even back then, I remember the head dev of WoW saying less than 5% of the population plays mythic raids. You saying they're popular doesn't actually make them popular. Their clear rates is very low.

As for what Guild Wars 2 strike missions are or aren't, I've done them. With the lag we currently get due to Amazon servers and living in Australia they're not optimal content even if I like them. You may find them fine, others don't. No one player gets to decide what's easy or hard for other players. Trying some of this stuff with Tasmanian ping might give you a slightly different view as well.

[Nephalem.8921]

@"Vayne.8563" said:It was a long time ago, but even back then, I remember the head dev of WoW saying less than 5% of the population plays mythic raids. You saying they're popular doesn't actually make them popular. Their clear rates is very low.

As for what Guild Wars 2 strike missions are or aren't, I've done them. With the lag we currently get due to Amazon servers and living in Australia they're not optimal content even if I like them. You may find them fine, others don't. No one player gets to decide what's easy or hard for other players. Trying some of this stuff with Tasmanian ping might give you a slightly different view as well.

I meant mythic dungeons. they are better fractals since they are not capped like fractals and go from faceroll to super hard unlike fractals which just go up to small inconvenience. mythic raids require 25 players from the same server and a server transfer costs 20€ and they dont scale.

Also strikes are more comparable to lfr. and like i said, just get 1-2 healers and you dont need to dodge anything in the easier ones so lag is a non issue. only exception is boneskinner which needs dodges and jormag needs some skill. thats why strikes are probably there. to show how big of an influence certain support builds have so the importance and influence of team composition is shown to players outside of raids/fractals. and trust me there are even some supports that could carry not dodging players even through boneskinner and whisper.i could even show that to you if you would play on eu.

the "dont want to get carried" thing i read here somewhere before is also just a funny double standard. 80% of the players get carried through world bosses all the time but in strikes its suddenly bad? just use arc on chak or drakkar or any other world boss. unless its reset with a map full of fractal/raid players there will be a group of like 5-10 players doing the majority of the damage.sometimes the top 5 do even more than the entire rest of the squad combined

[Vayne.8563]

@Nephalem.8921 said:

@"Vayne.8563" said:It was a long time ago, but even back then, I remember the head dev of WoW saying less than 5% of the population plays mythic raids. You saying they're popular doesn't actually make them popular. Their clear rates is very low.

As for what Guild Wars 2 strike missions are or aren't, I've done them. With the lag we currently get due to Amazon servers and living in Australia they're not optimal content even if I like them. You may find them fine, others don't. No one player gets to decide what's easy or hard for other players. Trying some of this stuff with Tasmanian ping might give you a slightly different view as well.

I meant mythic dungeons. they are better fractals since they are not capped like fractals and go from faceroll to super hard unlike fractals which just go up to small inconvenience. mythic raids require 25 players from the same server and a server transfer costs 20€ and they dont scale.

Also strikes are more comparable to lfr. and like i said, just get 1-2 healers and you dont need to dodge anything in the easier ones so lag is a non issue. only exception is boneskinner which needs dodges and jormag needs some skill. thats why strikes are probably there. to show how big of an influence certain support builds have so the importance and influence of team composition is shown to players outside of raids/fractals. and trust me there are even some supports that could carry not dodging players even through boneskinner and whisper.i could even show that to you if you would play on eu.

the "dont want to get carried" thing i read here somewhere before is also just a funny double standard. 80% of the players get carried through world bosses all the time but in strikes its suddenly bad? just use arc on chak or drakkar or any other world boss. unless its reset with a map full of fractal/raid players there will be a group of like 5-10 players doing the majority of the damage.sometimes the top 5 do even more than the entire rest of the squad combined

I don't get carried through world bosses and don't want to be. But there's a distinct difference between a world boss and a strike mission. At any rate, it's completely irrelevant if you personally or any harder core player thinks a strike mission is easy. That's really not the issue. It's certainly not the issue for me. It's about the strike mission being something I don't want to do and never had to do before. It's about changing the game I'm playing for the benefit of raids which weren't in the game when I bought it. Raids which I campaigned against putting in the game in the first place. Raids which now doesn't have a big enough audience to survive without changing the game I was already enjoying. Frankly I wouldn't care if raids were removed from the game altogether but i know that will never happen. What I will complain about is my content being changed for the benefit of building a bridge to a content type I didn't want in the game in the first place.

[Nephalem.8921]

@Vayne.8563 said:I don't get carried through world bosses and don't want to be.Are you sure about this? Have you ever checked that? its impossible to tell without something like a dps meter.