Obtena.7952

That's a weird conclusion; no vertical progression in theory means all content maintains a range of difficulty that is relevant to an individual player. As long as there are REASONS for players to continue visiting content and the content presents a 'solvable' problem to people, content doesn't become stagnant, regardless of its difficulty to the individual. HoT is a great example ... still being done with regularity and has been for the last 9 years since release, by people with all kinds of different skill levels ... because it still offers relevance to the players. People are just not willing to accept the fact that the 'formula' that this game's difficulty is based on is already set because that formula is fundamental to how the game works as part of a business. I would say at this point, if the game isn't appealing to people because too easy, they just need to find game more appropriate for their capabilities. Also, Anet already experimented with massive shifts in difficulty at HoT release. That didn't end well for anyone.

Right, so more maps isn't actually a comprehensive answer to WvW/PvP problems. IMO, the whole problem with WvW and PVP is that there isn't anything in the GS that is monetized that is useful in those game modes. SO mainly PVP/WvW players have much less reason to spend in the GS than PVE players do and therefore, those game modes will never get the attention for development that PVE does.

WvW players THINK they want new maps ... but that's not what the history of the game tells us what is actually desired by these players. I mean, they DID get new maps, twice IIRC. That wasn't exactly the success that people thought it would be. Anet is going to do that a third time because ... ?

Not surprised ... I think there have been enough instances to indicate that Anet are willing to make change that over reach their targets to get an achieved result. In otherwords, if they don't have a direct way to nerf Power QBerserker, they don't have a problem nerfing PBerserker as a whole because maintaining a role-based framework for endgame content is probably a significant goal. If that has some collateral damage, they are OK with that because it's NOT part of their role-based endgame team approach. But hey, people wanted "balance" ... this is way better than what we had before roles.

No, your calculations are not 'prime examples of things Anet balance team isn't doing', because you don't know what Anet balancing team isn't doing just because you did a calculation. That's absolute nonsense. Your own actions are not indications of Anet's process.

Good, because you are wrong. Your calculation is not demonstrative of things Anet balancing team is or isn't doing in their balancing process. For all you know, Anet did the EXACT calculation you did ... and wanted to see how it would work anyways by putting it in the game. Your calculation is neither a crystal ball telling the future of things to avoid NOR is it an view into the details of a completely unrelated activity.

No, there is NO relationship between your choice to do some math calculation, its difficulty and how Anet executes their balancing process, whatsoever. Those are completely independent things. Therefore, it's nonsense to conclude that your calculation demonstrates Anet's not doing something.

You don't know that. You don't know what they do or aren't doing. What we DO know is they have a balancing process and it's highly unlikely they are substituting any 'balancing math work' they should be doing with fishing the forum for players to give them the answers they need to make game changes.

Right ... which is exactly my point because I never said the OP's idea wasn't correct. That's not my beef with this thread. It's with the claims about how the OP believes they are some substitute for Anet's own (or lack of) balancing calculation work. That "do their own, more precise math to adjust stuff properly" is part of the balancing process I'm referring to that you seem hellbent to argue with me about. I don't know why you would try to argue with me about that ... obviously being aware they have one.

It's simple ... because they aren't basing their changes on what someone calculates on the forums. Again, if you don't think Anet are following some process for making changes, you aren't paying attention to how the game works.

I don't think that's their process. I'm not sure what you see that suggest that what it is either. I didn't say the nerf wasn't justified. I didn't 'pretend' to know exactly ANYTHING. There, whatever argument you are trying to have with me ... avoided. You should probably stick to Fast Hands should be baseline or something. My point was that there should NEVER be nerfs based on some player-based calculations like the OP was attempting to suggest be done. It seems like the change is vindication for the OP. It's not, because the change wasn't based on his proposed calculations. It's based on what Anet sees happening in the game and their comfort levels for such things.

Absurd ... you get your gift on the anniversary of your character creation, otherwise it's not a BIRTHDAY gift. This shouldn't even be a topic. But here is a thought while we are delving in the pool of absurd 'what ifs' ... if your 'birthday' gift distribution date is some aggregate of all your characters (which is literally some absolutely meaningless, random day of the year), then I propose that the LEVEL of the gift is ALSO some aggregate of the ages of all your characters.

Certainly. Also take note that the 'good stuff' here is that Anet didn't make some pre-emptive nerf based on a player armchair calculation. There is a process, it's clear they are following it. Relevant for the next time someone thinks Anet should make game changes because of 'calculations'.

Your interpretation that the OP's LFG observations having anything to do with a lack of raiders (whether that's true or not) ... ... has NOTHING to do with ANYTHING I said in this thread. Therefore, there should be NO reason for you to be quoting me to try having some argument about it with me. We already did that over 3 years ago. I won. Please find new tenets for your headspace.

OK ... except the OP's post had nothing to do with increasing the people playing raids. In fact, he made NO indication he couldn't get a team or couldn't find people to raid with or more people were needed to do raids. The situation the OP points out has always been a problem with LFG, regardless of participation levels. Somehow you assumed his observations about LFG was some plea for solutions conveniently coincidental to a problem you had over 3 years ago. But of course, your post makes sense from the perspective that your total post count is related to complaints about not being enough people to raid with and apparently the implication I live rent free in your head.

What constructive feedback do you think should be brought here (that mind you ... you didn't bring either)? This coming from someone that simply sat around on social media for hours an waited for raids to fall in their lap. The thread was most certainly made to be rhetorical. LFG is a cess pool and it always has been.

So I'm not honest if I don't compile a comprehensive list of reasons and rank them ... based on what? ... my own personal biases? That makes no sense. That's actually absurd. As I already told you, no one has data to suggest what that ranking would be so I'm not being baited into playing some speculation game with you so you can control some argument you want to have. Meanwhile, we don't need to 'check' the reality of the point I'm making here. There simply isn't a question if how players interact impacts how the community forms and that the community contributes to the success or failure of content. I don't get why anyone would have an issue with the truth of that, unless they have some strong personal reasons to suppress or ignore it.

Actually, no. I never claimed to know what percent is attributed to any specific reason. In fact, I actually said you CAN'T do this. The fact you say such a thing is just a demonstration you want to argue with me in bad faith and aren't being objective when you read my posts.

Why do you assume it's a balancing issue? What builds are you using? It's hard to tell what the actual problem is with builds you are using. Pretty much every spec can be built to tag and kill stuff in a reasonable time in OW content. If you provide more info, people can give you more specific help.

If you think that, you just aren't reading my posts. What is REALLY happening here is that some people are taking offense to a particular reason of the numerous ones I listed in my first post. Of course, no one disagreed with the reasons I listed related to mistakes Anet made ... but the second I mention some players contributed with their behaviours , the place blows up. People just can't deal with the consequences of their own actions ... so they try to deny those actions have an impact, or that it's insignficant ... or EVEN the absurdity of gaslighting us to think those behaviours was some scheme to help people improve. I think it's actually REALLY important we look back on the things WE control and ask what went wrong on our side. We can't do much with the Anet side of things, but we can with ours. SOME people in this thread have been advocating better community behaviour for over ten years, warning of similar bad results. People that acted in their own interests did so at the expense of community health and took raid content for granted ... some introspection is in order there. I'm sure OTHER people in this thread are loathe to admit the SOME people's warnings were actually valid.

Yup, there are are lots of reasons; I've said so myself. I haven't denied any particular reason isn't a contributor. I'm not trying to list them all. I also haven't made an attempt to rank any of them, because doing so is nonsense as there simply isn't any data to suggest their relative significance. It's simply absurd that anyone would argue gatekeeping should be excluded from that contribution list, regardless of how much a hot take it might be for people that think gatekeeping is awesome because it 'improves players'.

No, that wasn't my point. i will not be misunderstood. My point is that the practice of gatekeeping is just ONE of many reasons raids were not successful which led to their discontinued development. Obviously, that's a hard pill to swallow, especially for people that practiced that 'improvement approach' as you labelled it. I know you have a problem with the finger being pointed at this small part of the raid community ... but it's true. As for the rest, I'm assuming that the creative nature of what you think you understand about what I'm saying continues throughout the remainder of your post and not really worth replying to.

I understand what you think SHOULD happen. That's not relevant to how the game works. The nonsense part is that what you think is opposite to how it does work and has always worked. There isn't a discussion here. What your asking for just doesn't make sense.

Nice ... but that still doesn't change the absurdity of expecting people to not interact with you and your open world fights in an MMO.

Maybe you are ... I'm not. I made no claim 'how bad' it was; that's just you searching for an 'in' to have a go at me as someone looking to blame Anet for all the things that happened to raids that you don't like and pretend players have no role in that. I just know that it existed, wasn't some isolated incident and it contributed to the current state of raids in the game. You're going to paint the lovely picture that the gatekeeping was something awesome because "it improved players". That's probably true for some people. But for others it wasn't ... and the fact that this bad approach to 'improve players' resulting in unnecessary bad will and negative views of endgame content by some continues to be glossed over or ignored is just denial in the role metapushers had in "growing" a community that eventually couldn't justify Anet continuing raid development. It's almost insulting you try to sell kicking people as 'improvement' technique because the reason to kick them had nothing to do with their ability to do the content. It did have everything to do with you not wanting to play with non-optimal players. I'm calling you on that BS. Like, THAT was what you were thinking when you kicked people ... I'm 'helping' ... yeah, YOURSELF. Nothing you can say will change the fact that the behaviours you are implying was an 'improvement approach' had a negative impact on raid sustainability. All those players that were joining teams to do raids were ALREADY committed to participate ... the "improvement approach" you chose made some better BUT at the expense of others who weren't going to subject themselves to the community behaviours they saw. The irony is that in the end, this improvement approach came at your expense because what do we hear now? "Anet what raids doing?" for the last 4 years AMIRITE? The non-participant players moved on and you're sitting here lamenting the lack of raid development and pretending players that think like you had a positive impact on participation. 🤡 FAFO.