why is there no solo end-game content?

[Sobx.1758]

33 minutes ago, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

Okay, you seem to think that the few people arguing in this thread somehow constitute that list?  Or that the hypothetical new player I referenced is for some reason the person making the argument?

 

I'm not really interested in arguing against a literal "I know best".  So thank you for your time.

You're not interested in arguing against a literal "I know it best", but for the sake of having (hard solo) content you want, you're inventing a hypothetical new player you can speak for. I fail to see how what you're attempting to do here is any better than what "you don't want to argue against". At least those (so called, by you) "know it all" players exist, which can't be said about the "just think about new players who need my hard solo content to progress in the game" bit you're trying to use as an argument here while forgetting anything anyone wrote about the progression path available in the game.

 

50 minutes ago, Mungo Zen.9364 said:

Much laughter at this response. You sound like you either do not know the value of running a Strike or you don’t care.

Good point. Interestingly enough despite not knowing the numbers, he was still repeatedly dismissing every other response with "low rewards" or similar.

Edited January 10, 2023 by Sobx.1758

[Mungo Zen.9364]

1 hour ago, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

Or, as I said, I wasn't sure exactly.  I knew roughly that they work out as strong, but limited to daily.  Checking [fast], that's broadly true, depending on the strike and what's daily.

 

Now that's established, 75% of "strong", and limited to daily sounds pretty reasonable.  So...?

Do the rewards matter more to you than the actual content you are proposing?  As a reader of your posts, it appears that like many before you, you want an easy path to rewards from content you don't want to engage in.

I am going to suggest you remove any consideration of rewards from your posts going forward.

As you 'aren't exactly sure' on this topic, it means you are talking without knowledge.  If you do not know or understand the value of these rewards, then asking for 'slightly less' could be anything.  Since the rewards matter so little that you don't actually know what they are or propose a set value, I again suggest you stop adding this as part of the conversation.

This should free you up to solidify what Solo instanced content would look like in your vision.

As an aside, I actually would be interested in more Solo content, Instanced, Story or otherwise, regardless of the rewards.  I do enjoy alternatives to Golem bashing and have solo'd most of the Bounties, DRM etc on several professions.  I am looking for new challenges in game that push my skills within the profession.  Maybe Dungeon solos are next?

Either way, I suggest you tighten up your request into the key elements that you think would make for great solo content and skip the rewards as you will never get a satisfactory consensus from the forum users.

[Obtena.7952]

The problem with this thread is that it's inherently dishonest. It requires people to literally ignore, exclude and deny the existence of soloable endgame content. If you can solo it, it's soloable, period. What is soloable is simply a matter of player ability, so long as there aren't mechanics that prevent it. 

Edited January 11, 2023 by Obtena.7952

[Izzy.2951]

You can do full story solo, plus 80% of the game solo. What do u wanna do a raid solo in a multiplayer game? balanced for multiplayers? My god...

Perphaps a pvp game solo vs yourself? 

Edited January 11, 2023 by Izzy.2951

[kharmin.7683]

8 hours ago, Mungo Zen.9364 said:

Do the rewards matter more to you than the actual content you are proposing?  As a reader of your posts, it appears that like many before you, you want an easy path to rewards from content you don't want to engage in.

I

 

Hey, I think you're on to something here.

[T G.7496]

Haven't read the whole thread, someone probably suggested this, but you could try solo roaming in WvW. It's a dying breed, and not for the faint hearted. But, if you manage your expectations and frustrations, it can be good fun.

[T G.7496]

6 hours ago, Obtena.7952 said:

The problem with this thread is that it's inherently dishonest. It requires people to literally ignore, exclude and deny the existence of soloable endgame content. If you can solo it, it's soloable, period. What is soloable is simply a matter of player ability, so long as there aren't mechanics that prevent it. 

The problem with this post is that it's inherently dishonest since a) it seems to me the meat of the responses collectively make the same point as you and, b) the OP itself isn't denying that point but seems to me to be asking, rather, why there is so little endgame content *designed specifically* for solo play - at least that's how I read it.

I agree with you final assertion though.

Edited January 11, 2023 by T G.7496

[CrashTestAuto.9108]

10 hours ago, Mungo Zen.9364 said:

Do the rewards matter more to you than the actual content you are proposing?  As a reader of your posts, it appears that like many before you, you want an easy path to rewards from content you don't want to engage in.

I am going to suggest you remove any consideration of rewards from your posts going forward.

As you 'aren't exactly sure' on this topic, it means you are talking without knowledge.  If you do not know or understand the value of these rewards, then asking for 'slightly less' could be anything.  Since the rewards matter so little that you don't actually know what they are or propose a set value, I again suggest you stop adding this as part of the conversation.

This should free you up to solidify what Solo instanced content would look like in your vision.

As an aside, I actually would be interested in more Solo content, Instanced, Story or otherwise, regardless of the rewards.  I do enjoy alternatives to Golem bashing and have solo'd most of the Bounties, DRM etc on several professions.  I am looking for new challenges in game that push my skills within the profession.  Maybe Dungeon solos are next?

Either way, I suggest you tighten up your request into the key elements that you think would make for great solo content and skip the rewards as you will never get a satisfactory consensus from the forum users.

Okay, this was a substantive post, so apologies for being a little frustrated at this point.  But allow me to quote myself from page one of the thread:

 

"The problem with things like "Go solo fractals and dungeons (and CRMs)" is that this gets fairly dull quite quickly because the health pools aren't designed for it.  It's like in a single player game when the hard mode just turns enemies into bullet sponges.  Moreover, because gold per hour is a thing, you have the nagging feeling that you're wasting your time as you slowly chip down enemy health that isn't designed for one player."

 

It is naïve to think that players will repeatedly log in and play completely unrewarding content.  So yes, rewards matter.  However, they don't matter that much, so long as the player feels like they're wasting their time.  You have interpreted me only vaguely knowing the gold per hour of strikes off the top of my head as an indication I have no idea whatsoever, or no interest whatsoever.  Neither of these is true, I just don't spend all my time making sure I'm doing the absolute best gold per hour in the game, and therefore know that the rewards are "good", and "75% of good" will still be fine.

 

I understand that removing rewards from the design would get more consensus from some specific posters in this thread, but my intent is to describe a system I think will actually work, not just one that gets approval here.

[CrashTestAuto.9108]

7 hours ago, Obtena.7952 said:

The problem with this thread is that it's inherently dishonest. It requires people to literally ignore, exclude and deny the existence of soloable endgame content. If you can solo it, it's soloable, period. What is soloable is simply a matter of player ability, so long as there aren't mechanics that prevent it. 

I can actually use the same quote from page one here:

 

"The problem with things like "Go solo fractals and dungeons (and CRMs)" is that this gets fairly dull quite quickly because the health pools aren't designed for it.  It's like in a single player game when the hard mode just turns enemies into bullet sponges.  Moreover, because gold per hour is a thing, you have the nagging feeling that you're wasting your time as you slowly chip down enemy health that isn't designed for one player."

 

You could get in a group and remove your armour and go fight a world boss for challenge too, so the devs could have saved a ton of resources by not building raids/strikes/dungeons etc.  But, the idea that this would actually make players happy is a bit silly, so accusing people of wanting something else of "dishonesty" seems a bit... weird?

[T G.7496]

8 minutes ago, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

I can actually use the same quote from page one here:

 

"The problem with things like "Go solo fractals and dungeons (and CRMs)" is that this gets fairly dull quite quickly because the health pools aren't designed for it.  It's like in a single player game when the hard mode just turns enemies into bullet sponges.  Moreover, because gold per hour is a thing, you have the nagging feeling that you're wasting your time as you slowly chip down enemy health that isn't designed for one player."

 

You could get in a group and remove your armour and go fight a world boss for challenge too, so the devs could have saved a ton of resources by not building raids/strikes/dungeons etc.  But, the idea that this would actually make players happy is a bit silly, so accusing people of wanting something else of "dishonesty" seems a bit... weird?

'dishonesty' is one of his favourite words to use, but he often misses catching himself in the mirror.

[vares.8457]

16 hours ago, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

I'm not sure on the gold per hour exactly, but I don't think 75% would be particularly high relative to other content, especially on a daily restriction.  I'd also add shards, but slightly lower.

You must be kidding. Solo strike reward should be one tenth of normal strike missions and no shards. Everything else is unacceptable. Otherwise everyone would just do solo strikes because they are easier.  But strike missions were implemented as group content. 

Edited January 11, 2023 by vares.8457

[CrashTestAuto.9108]

1 hour ago, vares.8457 said:

You must be kidding. Solo strike reward should be one tenth of normal strike missions and no shards. Everything else is unacceptable. Otherwise everyone would just do solo strikes because they are easier.  But strike missions were implemented as group content. 

I'm not sure why you think they'd have to be easier.  There's nothing presented that would necessitate that, and it would be very easy to simply set the health pools to take longer than average group kills for anyone achieving x% of top benchmarks.  If people would still choose to do solo content because they prefer it to group content then... well I don't really see it as an argument against. 

[vares.8457]

19 minutes ago, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

I'm not sure why you think they'd have to be easier.  There's nothing presented that would necessitate that, and it would be very easy to simply set the health pools to take longer than average group kills for anyone achieving x% of top benchmarks.  If people would still choose to do solo content because they prefer it to group content then... well I don't really see it as an argument against. 

Of course they will be easier. Many mechanics that make some strike missions difficult wouldn’t work. 
People that prefer to play solo content should play single player games.  GW2 already has a lot of solo content but instanced endgame content should be group content. 
Do you go to a forum for a basketball video game and demand that you can play golf in that game? 

Edited January 11, 2023 by vares.8457

[The Boz.2038]

7 minutes ago, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

very easy to simply set the health pools to take longer than average group kills for anyone achieving x% of top benchmarks

This thread has had some grade-A absolute banger ideas, but this one?
Whew, lad!

[AliamRationem.5172]

35 minutes ago, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

I'm not sure why you think they'd have to be easier.  There's nothing presented that would necessitate that, and it would be very easy to simply set the health pools to take longer than average group kills for anyone achieving x% of top benchmarks.  If people would still choose to do solo content because they prefer it to group content then... well I don't really see it as an argument against. 

Just make the game easier if you perform poorly and harder if you perform well!  Great idea!  Heck, why not just skip the "game" part entirely and just give you rewards every time you hit a button? 🙄

[The Boz.2038]

13 minutes ago, AliamRationem.5172 said:

Just make the game easier if you perform poorly and harder if you perform well!  Great idea!  Heck, why not just skip the "game" part entirely and just give you rewards every time you hit a button? 🙄

But only according to a set timer!

The timer, naturally, is based on the time it takes to complete the activity. The activity that the timer dictates the pace of. 

[Sobx.1758]

4 hours ago, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

I understand that removing rewards from the design would get more consensus from some specific posters in this thread, but my intent is to describe a system I think will actually work, not just one that gets approval here.

Replaying EoD story already has rewards for replaying it. Except you don't know it because you didn't even know EoD story is replayable on the same character, so much for being interested in solo content.

And, still, if you want to fight champions, solo bounties.

1 hour ago, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

I'm not sure why you think they'd have to be easier.  There's nothing presented that would necessitate that

If only because you shifted into "story version would be ok!" now (but, really, not only that, the false reasoning behind your request is clear since at least september 😄 ), it's rather clear it's not about "harder content", but about skipping group play completely and just easly farming up those specific rewards solo. If you want harder solo content, it's already in the game, a range of it in fact. But you're dismissing all of it simply because it doesn't let you have easier access to rewards. So... Probably that's why.

Edited January 11, 2023 by Sobx.1758

[The Boz.2038]

5 minutes ago, Sobx.1758 said:

And, still, if you want to fight champions, solo bounties.

He specifically does not, because that is not rewarding enough, or hard enough, or engaging enough, or something enough.

[Sobx.1758]

1 hour ago, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

and it would be very easy to simply set the health pools to take longer than average group kills for anyone achieving x% of top benchmarks.

Ah and "soloing what you guys tell me to solo is bad because HP sponges and takes too long!", but "if it would be too easy/fast, just increase hp pools so it takes much longer!".

As if anyone needed even more proof about false reasoning behind these posts.

[CrashTestAuto.9108]

2 hours ago, vares.8457 said:

Of course they will be easier. Many mechanics that make some strike missions difficult wouldn’t work. 
People that prefer to play solo content should play single player games.  GW2 already has a lot of solo content but instanced endgame content should be group content. 
Do you go to a forum for a basketball video game and demand that you can play golf in that game? 

As has been emphasised by many people in this thread, 95% of GW2 is solo/solable.  The idea that the end game should be instanced group content is, at best, rooted in tradition.  There's no "should" about any type of content being included (heck, a load of people have set up roller-beetle racetracks in guild halls, and I would absolutely support a more official version of that).  The last holiday event we had included a bell choir.  This isn't even vaguely comparable to a basketball game (though plenty of very specifically focussed games do include random mini-games, so your argument wouldn't work even if the analogy held).

[Sobx.1758]

5 minutes ago, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

As has been emphasised by many people in this thread, 95% of GW2 is solo/solable.  The idea that the end game should be instanced group content is, at best, rooted in tradition.  There's no "should" about any type of content being included (heck, a load of people have set up roller-beetle racetracks in guild halls, and I would absolutely support a more official version of that).  The last holiday event we had included a bell choir.  This isn't even vaguely comparable to a basketball game (though plenty of very specifically focussed games do include random mini-games, so your argument wouldn't work even if the analogy held).

And none of those rollerbeetle racers or "random mini-games" enjoyers say they won't do it because the rewards are not enough (or straight up say they should grant them rewards from another content). And yet despite you wanting to solo champions, you're not soloing champions since even though they have rewards behind them, you -vaguely!- claim it's not enough.

Edited January 11, 2023 by Sobx.1758

[vares.8457]

5 minutes ago, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

As has been emphasised by many people in this thread, 95% of GW2 is solo/solable.  The idea that the end game should be instanced group content is, at best, rooted in tradition.  There's no "should" about any type of content being included (heck, a load of people have set up roller-beetle racetracks in guild halls, and I would absolutely support a more official version of that).  The last holiday event we had included a bell choir.  This isn't even vaguely comparable to a basketball game (though plenty of very specifically focussed games do include random mini-games, so your argument wouldn't work even if the analogy held).

You want to play Golf in a basketball court, that’s not a good idea. A golf court is a better place to play golf. 

[CrashTestAuto.9108]

1 minute ago, vares.8457 said:

You want to play Golf in a basketball court, that’s not a good idea. A golf court is a better place to play golf. 

Do you think this actually engaged with what I said?

[Sobx.1758]

1 minute ago, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

Do you think this actually engaged with what I said?

I mean... I would say it did. This also did:

And none of those rollerbeetle racers or "random mini-games" enjoyers say they won't do it because the rewards are not enough (or straight up say they should grant them rewards from another content). And yet despite you wanting to solo champions, you're not soloing champions since even though they have rewards behind them, you -vaguely!- claim it's not enough.

But convenient dodge is convenient 😄

Edited January 11, 2023 by Sobx.1758

[CrashTestAuto.9108]

1 hour ago, AliamRationem.5172 said:

Just make the game easier if you perform poorly and harder if you perform well!  Great idea!  Heck, why not just skip the "game" part entirely and just give you rewards every time you hit a button? 🙄

A few people argue that I should be deterred by the number of people disagreeing with me here, but so many posts are complete strawmen, so it really doesn't mean anything.  A huge number of posts are like this one (and several immediately after it), which are just pretending I said something I didn't, which is a pretty effective way to make me think there wasn't a good counter to the point I actually made.

 

It's disappointing the forum is like this, because the noise between actually substantive engagement with what I said makes having actually productive conversations much more difficult 😞