Suggestion - Single player Strike modes

[CrashTestAuto.9108]

Okay, I'm sure some people will object to this, but I'll throw it out anyway.

Simple suggestion, add a single player mode for both normal and challenge mode strikes.  Give some, but lower rewards, and don't include them in daily/weekly (or add them as separate achievements).

A big barrier to strikes (and raids) is that players need to find a group, which is especially difficult if you don't know the mechanics, and don't have kill proofs.  By adding a single player option, players can practice the mechanics without the pressure of trying to avoid wiping the party, and also removing the need to find a group willing to take you.  If a particular phase is difficult for you, you can just throw yourself at it over and over until you succeed.

I think a small reward would be good, just so players can log in and do  a couple of strikes when they have time and still get something, but in order to keep the major interest in group content, the rewards should be lower (and shouldn't replace dailies/weeklies).

Another benefit is that this would serve as a gentle nudge for players to learn their class, without giving a full on DPS meter.  It will alert players that maybe they need to make some adjustments who might otherwise not know they're getting carried (obviously doesn't teach everything, and not for support builds, but it could be a starting point).

Doing this with strikes keeps development time to a minimum, whilst adding what is essentially an entirely new mode (Single player instanced content).

[yoni.7015]

There already are single player strike missions, the story missions. Finding a group for strike missions is not a big deal, you just have to use LFG. 

Edited September 7, 2022 by yoni.7015

[CrashTestAuto.9108]

18 minutes ago, yoni.7015 said:

There already are single player strike missions, the story missions. Finding a group for strike missions is not a big deal, you just have to use LFG. 

Story missions do nothing to teach mechanics, or let you know if you're being carried.  They also aren't that interesting to replay.  They aren't even comparable...

 

Finding a group for challenge mode in LFG is not easy (normal is fairly easy, depending on the time of day and strike you want to do, but you can't practice without risking wiping the party).  

[Ashen.2907]

In many cases the mechanics would have to be changed so dramatically for solo play that learning them would do nothing for your understanding of the group version. Others, in some cases, are already soloable.

[Cyninja.2954]

28 minutes ago, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

Story missions do nothing to teach mechanics, or let you know if you're being carried.  They also aren't that interesting to replay.  They aren't even comparable...

 

Finding a group for challenge mode in LFG is not easy (normal is fairly easy, depending on the time of day and strike you want to do, but you can't practice without risking wiping the party).  

an yet the current story missions of the strikes are just that: simplified strike missions reduced to be doable solo (with even an easy mode on top if using the Aurene buff). They teach the basics of the fights allowing players to get used to them before entering normal mode. In fact the story fights are intentionally placed in areas and designed in a way to mimic the strike mission encounter area.

We also know that the development process, according to developer quotes, was from hard to easy, meaning they started with the strike mission (maybe even the CM as concept) and then worked backwards in removing mechanics and making the fights easier for the story (with the story concept being the lore background for the strike).

What exactly separates your strike mission idea from what is already present? Increase the difficulty and you phase out the players these would be intended for, keep it as is and you end up having exactly the story/strike missions we have now. Plus they are already incorporated into the story and the story rewards.

Edited September 7, 2022 by Cyninja.2954

[CrashTestAuto.9108]

37 minutes ago, Cyninja.2954 said:

an yet the current story missions of the strikes are just that: simplified strike missions reduced to be doable solo (with even an easy mode on top if using the Aurene buff). They teach the basics of the fights allowing players to get used to them before entering normal mode. In fact the story fights are intentionally placed in areas and designed in a way to mimic the strike mission encounter area.

We also know that the development process, according to developer quotes, was from hard to easy, meaning they started with the strike mission (maybe even the CM as concept) and then worked backwards in removing mechanics and making the fights easier for the story (with the story concept being the lore background for the strike).

What exactly separates your strike mission idea from what is already present? Increase the difficulty and you phase out the players these would be intended for, keep it as is and you end up having exactly the story/strike missions we have now. Plus they are already incorporated into the story and the story rewards.

 

They'd be different in pretty much the same ways strikes are different to doing the story with a group.

 

1) They'd be harder.  The players they're intended for are those who want to do strike level content, but either don't want to burden groups by wiping (they want to practice), or only have limited time to play and want to just quickly log in and do something fun.

2) They'd be repeatable.  You wouldn't need to be at a specific story step and go through all the various cut scenes and dialogue.

3) They'd give different rewards (probably prophet shards, but lower rate than group content).

4) They'd have challenge modes so you could try for harder content when you're ready.

 

The development process you describe is ideal for this, because it means the design process is basically done.  They know what mechanics to keep/disregard, so it's just a question of choosing them and scaling the health etc.

[Cyninja.2954]

1 hour ago, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

 

They'd be different in pretty much the same ways strikes are different to doing the story with a group.

 

1) They'd be harder.  The players they're intended for are those who want to do strike level content, but either don't want to burden groups by wiping (they want to practice), or only have limited time to play and want to just quickly log in and do something fun.

2) They'd be repeatable.  You wouldn't need to be at a specific story step and go through all the various cut scenes and dialogue.

3) They'd give different rewards (probably prophet shards, but lower rate than group content).

4) They'd have challenge modes so you could try for harder content when you're ready.

 

The development process you describe is ideal for this, because it means the design process is basically done.  They know what mechanics to keep/disregard, so it's just a question of choosing them and scaling the health etc.

This assumes that there is a net benefit to the game to offer competing content to the already existing group content. How exactly does this not undermine all the effort undertaken to encourage players to join groups and socialize since EoD?

It seems to me your suggestion simply bypasses the grouping aspect to make even more content solo-able. It certainly is not needed for training purposes given that is already provided.

I don't think this is something the developers have in their plans atm, at least not going by the efforts undertaken to promote group content. What is next? Solo raids at reduced rewards? Solo open world bosses at reduced rewards? Why not solo everything, then there'd be absolutely no reason to ever group. At what point does a MMO stop being a MMO and just a game a lot of players play but not together?

Edited September 7, 2022 by Cyninja.2954

[CrashTestAuto.9108]

2 hours ago, Cyninja.2954 said:

This assumes that there is a net benefit to the game to offer competing content to the already existing group content. How exactly does this not undermine all the effort undertaken to encourage players to join groups and socialize since EoD?

It seems to me your suggestion simply bypasses the grouping aspect to make even more content solo-able. It certainly is not needed for training purposes given that is already provided.

I don't think this is something the developers have in their plans atm, at least not going by the efforts undertaken to promote group content. What is next? Solo raids at reduced rewards? Solo open world bosses at reduced rewards? Why not solo everything, then there'd be absolutely no reason to ever group. At what point does a MMO stop being a MMO and just a game a lot of players play but not together?

There isn't training provided.  Story missions are basically face roll, and you do them once (unless you do a second character through the whole story).

 

The people I'm talking about either already aren't doing group content, or if they are would do both.  Getting people confident in their build and mechanics would help encourage them, as would the increased group rewards (including dailies, weeklies, exclusive achieves...).

 

As you said, the devs work is basically done because strikes were designed to scale in difficulty and number of mechanics.

 

As for other solo activities.  Sure, why not?  Giving people who want solo content more to do makes them more likely to log in, bring friends, get better, buy gems...

[Sobx.1758]

28 minutes ago, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

There isn't training provided.  Story missions are basically face roll, and you do them once (unless you do a second character through the whole story).

Training is provided. You can train in groups just like anyone else does. Story missions can be replayed by launching the related story part again and going to the specific (in most cases probably non-green, I think it's purple?) star on the map.

28 minutes ago, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

As you said, the devs work is basically done because strikes were designed to scale in difficulty and number of mechanics.

And that's what they do. And yet you're still complaining, because one is too faceroll and the other... I don't know, not faceroll enough?

 

28 minutes ago, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

Giving people who want solo content more to do makes them more likely to log in, bring friends

Riiight. I know people here like throwing empty phrases in an attempt to justify their more selfish motivated complaints by making them appear as if they're doing it "for the game" or w/e, but come on.

Edited September 7, 2022 by Sobx.1758

[Ashen.2907]

21 minutes ago, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

Getting people confident in their build and mechanics would help encourage them,

Except that their build and the mechanics for a solo version would have almost no correlation to the group version. Being confident in your solo build and with solo mechanics, and playing so, would make you a hindrance, or at best a null, to a group doing the full version of the instance.

[Einsof.1457]

Why not just play a single player game?

[CrashTestAuto.9108]

8 hours ago, Sobx.1758 said:

Riiight. I know people here like throwing empty phrases in an attempt to justify their more selfish motivated complaints by making them appear as if they're doing it "for the game" or w/e, but come on.

Are you under the impression that people who like the option to do difficult solo content don't have friends?

[CrashTestAuto.9108]

8 hours ago, Einsof.1457 said:

Why not just play a single player game?

I mean firstly, people will.  But secondly, people like GW2.  The mechanics are fun, they can talk to friends about it, they can earn rewards that apply to the game...  Plus, they might like the look of the raid/strike bosses but not want/be able to get into an organised group.  

[CrashTestAuto.9108]

8 hours ago, Ashen.2907 said:

Except that their build and the mechanics for a solo version would have almost no correlation to the group version. Being confident in your solo build and with solo mechanics, and playing so, would make you a hindrance, or at best a null, to a group doing the full version of the instance.

Not really true on a DPS class, and even for support, a lot of people don't even know what quick/alac is, and realising they can't complete solo content because they don't have it will be educational.

 

As for the mechanics, this is barely true at all.  Learning attack patterns and how to evade/block/move absolutely translates to group content (ignoring a stack and heal through approach).

[Cyninja.2954]

3 hours ago, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

Not really true on a DPS class, and even for support, a lot of people don't even know what quick/alac is, and realising they can't complete solo content because they don't have it will be educational.

This idea falls appart the moment you look at how a majority of players react when they are faced with a boss which they do not understand. Let's just say it becomes a hot topic on the forums.

Players not being able to complete content solo most often did not result in many magically improving. Most complain and/or give up.

This assumption that some will do research, rework their build, read up, that simply does not apply or if at all, applies over proportionately to players which enjoy problem solving, and many of those are already engaged or able to join group content.

3 hours ago, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

As for the mechanics, this is barely true at all.  Learning attack patterns and how to evade/block/move absolutely translates to group content (ignoring a stack and heal through approach).

That is not true. There are significant differences between solo play and group content exactly because instead of having dedicated roles, you are on your own.

There is a reason why players go out of their way to create "open world builds" next to dedicated group/squad builds.

I'm sorry, I still disagree with this idea. You are making up arguments which have neither been reflected in past behavior of players in this game, nor do they make sense to actually improve grouping. 

You are free to ask or suggest an idea for solo content, but don't try to sell this as an improvement to get more players into group content because it quite frankly is not. 

Edited September 8, 2022 by Cyninja.2954

[Sobx.1758]

10 hours ago, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

Are you under the impression that people who like the option to do difficult solo content don't have friends?

No, I am under the impression that if people want to do difficult content, they can already invite their friends and form the group even easier instead of pretending that to invite their friends they somehow need... more solo content.

Edited September 8, 2022 by Sobx.1758

[Ashen.2907]

10 hours ago, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

Not really true on a DPS class, and even for support, a lot of people don't even know what quick/alac is, and realising they can't complete solo content because they don't have it will be educational.

 

As for the mechanics, this is barely true at all.  Learning attack patterns and how to evade/block/move absolutely translates to group content (ignoring a stack and heal through approach).

 

A solo player would need to build in a way that would not be a real contribution to a group setting. If you are building sustain, extra toughness, extra health, defensive utilities, etc into your DPS group build then you are not doing your job as well as others on the team.

You do not need instanced content to  learn how to dodge. 

Mechanics such as needing multiple people to stand in a green circle so that it doesn't kill the person its targeted on, mechanics such as needimg to use CC in three different locations within a small window of opportunity to avoid an enrage like effect, mechanics such as an AoE that one character needs to pull away from the group, and the list goes on. A solo version of an encounter would teach almost nothing that would be useful when coordinating with 9 other players.

 

[IAmNotMatthew.1058]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massively_multiplayer_online_game

GW2 is an MMO, not a single player game.

Besides, 3/4 EoD Strikes can be done solo already.

[Zohane.7208]

On 9/7/2022 at 5:24 PM, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

Okay, I'm sure some people will object to this, but I'll throw it out anyway.

Simple suggestion, add a single player mode for both normal and challenge mode strikes.  Give some, but lower rewards, and don't include them in daily/weekly (or add them as separate achievements).

A big barrier to strikes (and raids) is that players need to find a group, which is especially difficult if you don't know the mechanics, and don't have kill proofs.  By adding a single player option, players can practice the mechanics without the pressure of trying to avoid wiping the party, and also removing the need to find a group willing to take you.  If a particular phase is difficult for you, you can just throw yourself at it over and over until you succeed.

I think a small reward would be good, just so players can log in and do  a couple of strikes when they have time and still get something, but in order to keep the major interest in group content, the rewards should be lower (and shouldn't replace dailies/weeklies).

Another benefit is that this would serve as a gentle nudge for players to learn their class, without giving a full on DPS meter.  It will alert players that maybe they need to make some adjustments who might otherwise not know they're getting carried (obviously doesn't teach everything, and not for support builds, but it could be a starting point).

Doing this with strikes keeps development time to a minimum, whilst adding what is essentially an entirely new mode (Single player instanced content).

Let's dig a bit further into this; since you apparently think there's a viable layer between story mission and the corresponding strikes, and that it would be right for a single-player strike mission, capable of being played in normal and challenge modes, how would you design this version?

Let's take the Ankka strike as an example. Today the story mission requires you to do a single-player version of the mechanics as well as dps the boss. In the strike mission the mechanics are basically the same but more of them occur in parallel, and the boss is more or less the same, except for a larger HP pool. Can you break down how the single-player strike mission would differ from these two?

[CrashTestAuto.9108]

14 hours ago, Cyninja.2954 said:

This idea falls appart the moment you look at how a majority of players react when they are faced with a boss which they do not understand. Let's just say it becomes a hot topic on the forums.

Players not being able to complete content solo most often did not result in many magically improving. Most complain and/or give up.

This assumption that some will do research, rework their build, read up, that simply does not apply or if at all, applies over proportionately to players which enjoy problem solving, and many of those are already engaged or able to join group content.

That is not true. There are significant differences between solo play and group content exactly because instead of having dedicated roles, you are on your own.

There is a reason why players go out of their way to create "open world builds" next to dedicated group/squad builds.

I'm sorry, I still disagree with this idea. You are making up arguments which have neither been reflected in past behavior of players in this game, nor do they make sense to actually improve grouping. 

You are free to ask or suggest an idea for solo content, but don't try to sell this as an improvement to get more players into group content because it quite frankly is not. 

The forums are in not a reflection of the player base.  There are plenty of players who would enjoy difficult single player content (possibly even ones drawn into the game by it), see the popularity of Souls-likes for evidence (and also me, who is a sample of at least one).

 

The problem solving aspect is another reason single player strikes are a good idea.  Currently, unless you're in a world first type guild, you are expected to know the mechanics in most pug groups.  If you want to actually figure out the mechanics you'd have to find a really niche set of players to do that with (who are free at the same time).  Single player strikes would let people do the problem solving in an environment where they wouldn't annoy 9 other people.

[CrashTestAuto.9108]

4 hours ago, Sobx.1758 said:

No, I am under the impression that if people want to do difficult content, they can already invite their friends and form the group even easier instead of pretending that to invite their friends they somehow need... more solo content.

Okay I don't really see this conversation going anywhere useful.  If you think that solo players who have friends therefore have 9 friends who are specifically interested in difficult group content, and also are available at the times that person wants to do group content (assuming they even do, as this idea would also apply to people who have no interest in group instances)...  We just have fundamentally different experiences of the world.

[CrashTestAuto.9108]

1 hour ago, IAmNotMatthew.1058 said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massively_multiplayer_online_game

GW2 is an MMO, not a single player game.

Besides, 3/4 EoD Strikes can be done solo already.

So lets make all story instances single player?  Let's force people to find a group to enter the open world?  Shall we remove single queuing for PvP and WvW?  Remove all mounts except the turtle?

[Sobx.1758]

7 minutes ago, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

Okay I don't really see this conversation going anywhere useful.  If you think that solo players who have friends therefore have 9 friends who are specifically interested in difficult group content, and also are available at the times that person wants to do group content (assuming they even do, as this idea would also apply to people who have no interest in group instances)...  We just have fundamentally different experiences of the world.

I never said anything about "9 friends", can you focus on responding to what I actually wrote and not what you hope I wrote? If you fill -lets say- half of your group with your friends, it's still easier to fill up a group. Duh, if you add one friend it still is easier, because now you're looking for 1 person less. I don't know where you took that "9 friends" from, but it sure wasn't from my post.

Same about "all of them liking group content". And "online all the time". None of that changes (or even directly addresses) what I actually wrote.

Edited September 8, 2022 by Sobx.1758

[Sobx.1758]

13 minutes ago, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

The forums are in not a reflection of the player base.  There are plenty of players who would enjoy difficult single player content (possibly even ones drawn into the game by it), see the popularity of Souls-likes for evidence (and also me, who is a sample of at least one).

If that's what you/they want then you/they can solo bounties or dungeons, right?

Edited September 8, 2022 by Sobx.1758

[CrashTestAuto.9108]

1 hour ago, Zohane.7208 said:

Let's dig a bit further into this; since you apparently think there's a viable layer between story mission and the corresponding strikes, and that it would be right for a single-player strike mission, capable of being played in normal and challenge modes, how would you design this version?

Let's take the Ankka strike as an example. Today the story mission requires you to do a single-player version of the mechanics as well as dps the boss. In the strike mission the mechanics are basically the same but more of them occur in parallel, and the boss is more or less the same, except for a larger HP pool. Can you break down how the single-player strike mission would differ from these two?

Good question that I don't have the exact answer to (the devs have more detail than me, and obviously it would need some play testing).

 

With the limited information I have, I'd suggest keeping the more complex/combined mechanics, reducing the health pool, and also reducing the damage on some of the attacks (basically the ones you'd usually be reliant on a healer for).  Stability is a bit more complex, so I'm not sure what to do with that (I do not pretend to understand the mechanics in that detail).

 

The broad concept is to make the fight repeatable quickly (unlike story), increase the difficulty to something that requires actual engagement with the mechanics, and reduce the health pool so that (1) the fight isn't really dull, and (2) you don't have to slog through one long phase you've mastered before dying at another that you haven't.  This isn't really ground breaking.