Do raids need easy/normal/hard difficulty mode? [merged]

[nia.4725]

@Tyson.5160 said:

@nia.4725 said:

@Tyson.5160 said:

@Astralporing.1957 said:

@Sephylon.4938 said:Also I am interested in hearing your ideas on how we can further eliminate the chances of human errors in raids, such as what you described, in my other thread if you would be so inclined.

I do have ideas, but am now on holidays with poor in ternet access, so will likely engage in that discussion a week from now (if it will still be going on).

@nia.4725 said:Soulless Horror isn't easy and even less it would be for a noob raider... Its main problem is the insane amount of RNG it has and how it puts all the pressure on 3 or 4 people -chronos and druids. We could argue though that SH is easy for a DPS player, once he gets used to the horrible instakill walls.Indeed, i'd definitely rate SH as one of the top 3 most difficult raid encounters now.

@nia.4725 said:However what I understood from that quote is that there are some bosses that are "entry level", not that those entry level bosses are always the first ones in their respective wing.True. On the other hand, it's the difficulty of the first encounters in a wing that really matter. If the first encounter is prohibitively difficult, it won't matter for many players that the next one is easy. MO for example is one of the easier bosses, but what really matters is that Cairn, while a bit harder, is easy as well. Almost noone starts at MO.

@Miellyn.6847 said:All those other games have automated grouping features for the lowest difficulty, which won't happen in GW2 ArenaNet already said 5 years ago they don't want such systems in PvE.You do remember, that one of the reasons given was because they did not intent for raids to be pugged? And it was not about automated system alone, but about any LFG for raids at all? And they said it relatively shortly before they changed their minds about raids and pugs and remade LFG so it became raid-compatible?

@BlaqueFyre.5678 said:As intended and it is supposed to, remember just because certain people think it’s a problem doesn’t it’s actually a problem.The opposite is equally true.

I think astral has a point here. The raids would probably be less of an issue if each wing had its difficulty scaled so the first boss of the wing is always the easiest and the last one is always the hardest. Putting an easier raid boss in the middle like that seems strange to me. If I recall, Wow raids worked like this easier boss at the start with the hardest at the end. Kinda sucks that you have sloth, which has been a personal pain in the kitten to me come before an easier encounter like trio or like astral was saying Cairn then MO, Same with Gorseval then Vale Guardian. Progression itself would probably be more visual as well as in ok we can kill all the first bosses of every wing let’s try the 2nd one for each now.

Very true, this would help new raiders a lot. It's weird to have an easy boss behind a difficult boss.

Problem is they can’t physically rearrange the fights, without screwing up everything. So they would have to nerf Cairn, Vale Guardian and Sloth and then increased the difficulty of Gorseval, Trio and MO.

No, those are already done, leave them as they are and just take this into consideration when you design the new raid wing.

[Tyson.5160]

I mean, I felt wing 4 was designed better with the difficulty scaling, much better then wing 2 which felt hodge podged.

[Tyson.5160]

Would be interesting if the next raid was less linear, like if it was Garrenhoff for example.You could start the raid in a Lobby with portals that each go to a different boss. Could have an entry boss and two intermediate. Maybe after you defeat those you move on to the 4 th boss which is the hardest.

Kinda similar to gw1 underworld.

[Ohoni.6057]

@Cerioth.7062 said:Or lets make raids 5 man content. Accessibility issues solved.

Making it 5 man really solves nothing. For one thing it would be one of the harder changes to implement, since so many aspects would need to be overhauled, but even setting that aside, that alone would not make the encounters easier, it would just double each player's personal responsibility. They would still have to work just as hard to pull off the mechanics right.

@"BlaqueFyre.5678" said:One flaw to that reasoning, the current implementation of Raids is inline with the Raid Devs intentions and design goals for Raids so every thing is working as intended and therefore there is absolutely no problem.

"Working as intended" should never be confused for "working as it should." The pre-launch Battlefront II was "working as intended," but see how that worked out for them. The devs clearly intended raids to turn out how they have. My contention is that they could do a better job than they intended when it comes to accommodating players who do not enjoy the current challenge level of raiding.

There would be a problem if the Raid Devs intended for Raids to be easier and they weren’t, then their intentions and implementation would not coincide and that is a problem, but again that is not the case here.

No, that would not be a problem. If they intended the content to work a certain way, and it turned out that it didn't, but the players were totally happy with the result anyway, then that is not a problem. Something is only a problem if players are upset about it, regardless of how it ended up in that state.

Developer intention means absolutely nothing.

@"Sykper.6583" said:Explain to me why instanced group content should have even less instances of, the technical jargon is 'shenanigans' where things just aren't playing out as intended?

Because it's more intentional. Everyone who shows up shows up intending to win. Bad players can be kicked from the group. There are a fewer number of players, so it's easier to notice when players are behaving badly, which gives them more incentive to shape up. With open world encounters, you have all sorts of issues, like players taking up space in the map that have no interest in the encounter at all, players that are in the event area, but have no intention of taking it seriously, and are very easily lost in the pile of bodies. Obviously a player can intentionally sabotage a raid attempt if that's their goal, but most people who try to join a raid actually want it to succeed, and will try as best they can to make that happen.

It should be incumbent on instanced content, in theory and practicality, to be actually more prone to shenanigans or strictly harder. In other words it's against the design of instanced content to be of the same difficulty of open world, because it defeats the point of it. This is exactly why Dungeons back in the day were designed in this manner.

Agreed, which is why I think it's silly to even try to ask the question "should this be easier/harder than open world content?" There are way too many variable to weigh those two things. That's why the comparison I make is to other instanced content, I say that the easy mode raid should be comparable to dungeons and low-tier Fractals, how they can be compared to open world, there's no right answer to that question.

That's not particularly true, we've had several instances of hard content (eventually getting outdated by patches) that actively worked against several comps. The 'original' purpose behind the Meta, as I presume you are aware, is to be the most effective method to any encounter.

Yes, but that's the thing, a meta comp could beat a dungeon in half the time, and if you were playing for efficiency, you'd want to do that as often as possible, but non-meta comps could still clear it. So you'd have groups that would advertise "[meta only]," but there would also be more loose groups, and joining those wasn't any death sentence.

So there's a substantial amount of 'heresy' about what you are saying because no currently worked on instanced content, or SUPPORTED instanced content, simply allows any comps except for early fractal tiers. You can try working a complete off-meta comp for T4s and CMs if everyone brings the tools needed, but mixing it up randomly in pugs can easily lead to failure.

But again, I'm not talking about T4 or CM, I'm talking about T1. Players who want an experience like T4 or CM should be doing hard mode.

Well we have videos of full Minstrel's comps like Tempests spending an hour with complete defensive stats killing an Enraged Vale Guardian on normal difficulty, but that's full defense gear intentionally built around a boss that is supposed to kill you well before that.

So if they weren't doing that for the lulz, would you view that as a productive use of their time? Would it upset you if a group of full Minstrels could kill VG in easy mode (getting easy mode rewards) after spending an hour doing so? Wouldn't it be more productive of them to equip more offensive gear and kill him quicker, with only slightly increased risk?

I think that a hard-mode capable team would be able to clear easy mode faster and more effortlessly than a hodge-podge easy-mode team could, but this is fine, since it still wouldn't be as efficient a use of their time as clearing it on hard mode and getting hard mode rewards for their troubles.

How about you provide me with some numbers on what you expect some of Vale Guardian's attacks to hit for? For example Vale Guardian in normal mode does a cleave every 3 seconds, his auto hits for about 7k on a glass cannon. What would his autos do in this easy mode?

I just do not follow the details closely enough to do that. If I were the sort of player that did, I might be the sort of player who would already be doing hard mode, but I'm not.

"Tanks" are simply people running the highest toughness in order to tank the boss, thus forcing a build for them. I presume in the easy-mode there would be no such aggro system correct?

I think I discussed this elsewhere, but ideally I think it would be nice if there were a "shrine" near toughness-tank enemies that would provide one member of the group with a massive Toughness buff, allowing any player to snag the Tank "role" in the group regardless of gearing. My point there though was that while the enemy might decide on a tank, given the relative damage of easy mode it would be less vital for that player to behave any differently than normal, he could likely survive the damage he was taking, and the group could survive him being out of position. The boss would still react the same, and the player tanking could choose to perfeom that role to the best of his ability, it would just be less necessary to the outcome.

And I think this is where it gets a little vexing and difficult for us, because you have given a lot of vague answers. Many raiders here who are telling you 'It is easier than you think' understand the nuances behind a lot of the attacks from bosses, what the effect of them is, the conditions behind why certain moves have ended the raid.

And I get that, which is why I WANT you guys to be helping rather than hindering. I fully agree that you have more actual knowledge and could do a better job than I at designing an easy mode, IF you were at all interested in doing so. The problem is, most of the responses I get are filtered through a complete disinterest in providing the mode that players want provided. You claim that the raids are easy, because you have the mindset that views them that way, and have had the mechanics drilled into you in such a way that it's second nature. It's like someone raised bilingual just not understanding how someone could have difficulty learning a new language.

So long as you operate under the theory that it's us players who "need to be fixed," that there is nothing wrong with the content and all you have to do is figure out the best way to indoctrinate us into your philosophies, you will get nowhere. You need to set that mindset aside. Instead, whether you personally believe it or not, you need to operate under the assumption that the current raid mechanics themselves ARE actually too much of a barrier of entry for a significant group of players. IF you believe that to be true, what changes do you think to the mechanics could reduce that barrier of entry.

Basically, these discussions are like discussing banking regulation with bankers. I get that a banker understand banking way more than I do, and could probably figure out better ways to regulate banks than I could, but I also get that what he really wants is for banks to not be regulated at all, so he's going to avoid being helpful, and I'll have to muddle through as best I can.

People who play this game casually will find the safest and easiest strat to killing a boss, they will ENDURE the mechanics while pressing buttons randomly to end the boss, doing all the 'don'ts' from Vale Guardian to Dhuum.

Ok. If that's what they prefer, who's problem would that be?

Vale Guardian's Enrage timer is normally 8 minutes, easy mode won't have an enrage timer but we can assume an average pug group with balanced damage and defensive stats is going to hit that mark. If I had to assume the comp was built to be 25% more defensive at the same rough cost, it's 2 extra minutes to kill Vale Guardian at a significantly less chance to wipe. Two Minutes, that's NOTHING in the casual pug standards for things like T4s, and those would be harder than this.

So you've posed a problem here, what would you suggest as a solution, without significantly increasing the risk of a total wipe? Would it help to actually increase VG's HP, so that a "meta hard mode" team comp would actually take about twice as long to kill him, and a bumbling easymode pug would take 15-20 minutes? Considering that the rewards would be reduced from hard mode, what outcomes would you see as "fair?"

And again we come back to damage numbers. Would Vale Guardian have an Damage Aura? How much would the Damage floors tick for? Things like this will gauge how far many of the low effort comps go.

And again, details like that I leave to more knowledgeable players/developers. I'm discussing general aspirational targets, and I defer achieving those targets to those that know better.

To give you an idea, if you cut all the damage from Vale Guardian in half, from all of it's attacks...it would still be too hard for a lot of people running average comps. There would still be wipes from the raw damage, or at least a lot of downs that would frustrate players.

Ok, but could you reduce some attacks while leaving others alone? Which do you think should be reduced, and by how much? I don't mind players getting downed from time to time, so long as enough players stay up that they can rez the rest. I don't mind players getting defeated occasionally, so long as the rest of the group can still clear the encounter without them (and hopefully they managed to contribute a decent amount before that). And I don't mind the party wiping some of the time, so long as it is by far the exception, rather than the rule, even for uncoordinated random pugs.

@Tyson.5160 said:Would be interesting if the next raid was less linear, like if it was Garrenhoff for example.

Man, if they ever made Garrenhoff into a raid without introducing an easy mode version at the same time, it would be hard to find a table in Tyria that hadn't been flipped.

[STIHL.2489]

@"Tyson.5160" said:I think astral has a point here. The raids would probably be less of an issue if each wing had its difficulty scaled so the first boss of the wing is always the easiest and the last one is always the hardest. Putting an easier raid boss in the middle like that seems strange to me. If I recall, Wow raids worked like this easier boss at the start with the hardest at the end. Kinda sucks that you have sloth, which has been a personal pain in the kitten to me come before an easier encounter like trio or like astral was saying Cairn then MO, Same with Gorseval then Vale Guardian. Progression itself would probably be more visual as well as in ok we can kill all the first bosses of every wing let’s try the 2nd one for each now.

Yah, there is no doubt that raids feel awkward with how they were put in poorly in this game, in compairosn to many other MMO's. But I believe that was because their original intent was to put something hard at the onset, but only a little above T4 fractals, so their first Raid was designed to be a challenge to those that have already trivialized other content. The fact they did not put in a hard gate, like fractals have, led to most of their problems. But, I think there is little doubt their original plan was to have VG be the easiest, and then ramp up the difficulty as they went along, the fact they started to put easier raids mid way though things, can be taken a few ways. While we may not know for sure, the step down in difficulty would normally be caused by either a lack of planning for their original raids, and they started at too high a difficult and needed to go down, which, that is not a good way to do things, if that was the case, they would have been better served to adjust the difficulties of the raids, lowering VG, so they could build them up as they went along, as, anyone could tall you, "Starting" at the middle just feels disjointed. The other reason could be a lack of continual interest in raids, and thus their effort to make some of them Easier was a move to help build participation.

So the easier raids could have been Anets attempt at difficulty tiers or easy mode raids.. without actually saying that or telling anyone, and that becomes the problem, as players that want easier raids also want to enjoy the story in a logical sense, starting in the middle for those players is disjointed to say the least, so if that was their effort, no doubt it's appeal was vastly lost on it's target market.

[Turin.6921]

@"Tyson.5160" said:I mean, I felt wing 4 was designed better with the difficulty scaling, much better then wing 2 which felt hodge podged.

Just for clarification on w4 design: https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/comment/113984/#Comment_113984

[Tyson.5160]

@Turin.6921 said:

@"Tyson.5160" said:I mean, I felt wing 4 was designed better with the difficulty scaling, much better then wing 2 which felt hodge podged.

Just for clarification on w4 design:

https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/comment/113984/#Comment_113984

I liked the progression of the difficulty then compared to wing 2.

[Turin.6921]

@Tyson.5160 said:

@Turin.6921 said:

@Tyson.5160 said:I mean, I felt wing 4 was designed better with the difficulty scaling, much better then wing 2 which felt hodge podged.

Just for clarification on w4 design:

https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/comment/113984/#Comment_113984

I liked the progression of the difficulty then compared to wing 2.

In terms of progression i think the philosophy is the same as in other wings. I think deliberately they do not put the easiest encounter 1st since it can be easily exploited like ppl do with escort. w2, w4 and w5 seem to do this ; having a relatively tougher encounter at the start( even though the balancing in w4 was a bit rushed) . Then more relaxed ones in the middle and the real tough one at the end. So their difference is not the progression as much as the fact that w2 is tougher overall.

[Tyson.5160]

@Turin.6921 said:

@Tyson.5160 said:

@Turin.6921 said:

@Tyson.5160 said:I mean, I felt wing 4 was designed better with the difficulty scaling, much better then wing 2 which felt hodge podged.

Just for clarification on w4 design:

https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/comment/113984/#Comment_113984

I liked the progression of the difficulty then compared to wing 2.

In terms of progression i think the philosophy is the same as in other wings. I think deliberately they do not put the easiest encounter 1st since it can be easily exploited like ppl do with escort. w2, w4 and w5 seem to do this ( even though the balancing in w4 was a bit rushed) . Relatively tougher encounter at the beginning, more relaxed ones in the middle and the real tough one at the end. So their difference is not the progression as much as the fact that w2 is tougher overall.

Sorry, I’m misunderstanding, w2, w4 and w5, start with easy bosses?

I think having the tough one at the end is logically and makes sense. Would be odd for it to end with an easy boss.

I think it would have been easier for new raiders to get into the content, had they started with an easy boss to get their feet wet and continue that pattern for the rest of the wings.

[Turin.6921]

@Tyson.5160 said:

@Turin.6921 said:

@Tyson.5160 said:

@Turin.6921 said:

@Tyson.5160 said:I mean, I felt wing 4 was designed better with the difficulty scaling, much better then wing 2 which felt hodge podged.

Just for clarification on w4 design:

https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/comment/113984/#Comment_113984

I liked the progression of the difficulty then compared to wing 2.

In terms of progression i think the philosophy is the same as in other wings. I think deliberately they do not put the easiest encounter 1st since it can be easily exploited like ppl do with escort. w2, w4 and w5 seem to do this ( even though the balancing in w4 was a bit rushed) . Relatively tougher encounter at the beginning, more relaxed ones in the middle and the real tough one at the end. So their difference is not the progression as much as the fact that w2 is tougher overall.

Sorry, I’m misunderstanding, w2, w4 and w5, start with easy bosses?

I think having the tough one at the end is logically and makes sense. Would be odd for it to end with an easy boss.

I think it would have been easier for new raiders to get into the content, had they started with an easy boss to get their feet wet and continue that pattern for the rest of the wings.

I meant a relatively more difficult one at the start...I will edit if i did not express it correctly...

[nia.4725]

@Turin.6921 said:

@Tyson.5160 said:

@Turin.6921 said:

@Tyson.5160 said:

@Turin.6921 said:

@Tyson.5160 said:I mean, I felt wing 4 was designed better with the difficulty scaling, much better then wing 2 which felt hodge podged.

Just for clarification on w4 design:

https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/comment/113984/#Comment_113984

I liked the progression of the difficulty then compared to wing 2.

In terms of progression i think the philosophy is the same as in other wings. I think deliberately they do not put the easiest encounter 1st since it can be easily exploited like ppl do with escort. w2, w4 and w5 seem to do this ( even though the balancing in w4 was a bit rushed) . Relatively tougher encounter at the beginning, more relaxed ones in the middle and the real tough one at the end. So their difference is not the progression as much as the fact that w2 is tougher overall.

Sorry, I’m misunderstanding, w2, w4 and w5, start with easy bosses?

I think having the tough one at the end is logically and makes sense. Would be odd for it to end with an easy boss.

I think it would have been easier for new raiders to get into the content, had they started with an easy boss to get their feet wet and continue that pattern for the rest of the wings.

I meant a relatively more difficult one at the start...I will edit if i did not express it correctly...

I get the point: if you always place the easy encounter at the start of the wing, there will be people who will only play that first encounter in a farm mode. It makes sense to put the easy boss behind a not so easy but also very very approachable boss.

Also it's true that W2 is tougher than W4 overall -Sloth is a difficult boss, Matthias too. The only easy thing is Bandit Camp, and yet it requires some coordination and being aware of your surroundings.

[Turin.6921]

@Tyson.5160 said:I think having the tough one at the end is logically and makes sense. Would be odd for it to end with an easy boss.

I think it would have been easier for new raiders to get into the content, had they started with an easy boss to get their feet wet and continue that pattern for the rest of the wings.

I think the danger they are fearing is that people would just end up doing the easier ones only like that and never bother with the tougher ones (similar to the older CoF situation of mindless farm of p1 and 2 and mostly ignoring the p3). If this was the case with every encounter you could just buy the boss kills you needed and just exploit the easy 1st encounters and get all the rewards like that (5 bosses to weakly farm instead of the single one now). Thus cheapening the rewards for people playing the raids straight.

Plus you can still use an opener to get to the easy bosses to train which does encourage at least some basic communication with more experienced players. Training guilds do this all the time.

[Ohoni.6057]

@Turin.6921 said:I think the danger they are fearing is that people would just end up doing the easier ones only like that and never bother with the tougher ones (similar to the older CoF situation of mindless farm of p1 and 2 and mostly ignoring the p3).

But what would be the harm in that, if that's what players wanted to do? Since the rewards are capped weekly anyway, players still have plenty of reason to want to clear the later phases. So long as the rewards for each phase are weighted relative to their difficulty, I really don't see the harm in allowing players to only do the easiest one.

All the current system seems to require is that at least one player on the team has cleared the raid out to the most desirable phase. I think the argument you make here would have more merit if every member of a raid team would have to clear the first boss before being able to join a raid on the second (for better or worse overall).

[Tyson.5160]

@Turin.6921 said:

@Tyson.5160 said:I think having the tough one at the end is logically and makes sense. Would be odd for it to end with an easy boss.

I think it would have been easier for new raiders to get into the content, had they started with an easy boss to get their feet wet and continue that pattern for the rest of the wings.

I think the danger they are fearing is that people would just end up doing the easier ones only like that and never bother with the tougher ones (similar to the older CoF situation of mindless farm of p1 and 2 and mostly ignoring the p3). If this was the case with every encounter you could just buy the boss kills you needed and just exploit the easy 1st encounters and get all the rewards like that (5 bosses to weakly farm instead of the single one now). Thus cheapening the rewards for people playing the raids straight.

Plus you can still use an opener to get to the easy bosses to train which does encourage at least some basic communication with more experienced players. Training guilds do this all the time.

Fair enough, but people farm the easy bosses already, mind you it’s a slow farm when you only get the kills weekly. Also in order to gain the armor you need to kill all the bosses etc. So they can farm all they want eventually they will have to the achieves from the other bosses.

[Tyson.5160]

I’m just wondering if the raids would have been more inviting had they stuck to a gradual scaling difficulty concept from the start.

I mean it’s a moot point now.

[Tyson.5160]

It’s almost like they need a pre raid wing or a wing 0 to kinda of prep people on what to expect with Raids from a beginners point of view.

[nia.4725]

@Tyson.5160 said:

@Turin.6921 said:

@Tyson.5160 said:I think having the tough one at the end is logically and makes sense. Would be odd for it to end with an easy boss.

I think it would have been easier for new raiders to get into the content, had they started with an easy boss to get their feet wet and continue that pattern for the rest of the wings.

I think the danger they are fearing is that people would just end up doing the easier ones only like that and never bother with the tougher ones (similar to the older CoF situation of mindless farm of p1 and 2 and mostly ignoring the p3). If this was the case with every encounter you could just buy the boss kills you needed and just exploit the easy 1st encounters and get all the rewards like that (5 bosses to weakly farm instead of the single one now). Thus cheapening the rewards for people playing the raids straight.

Plus you can still use an opener to get to the easy bosses to train which does encourage at least some basic communication with more experienced players. Training guilds do this all the time.

Fair enough, but people farm the easy bosses already, mind you it’s a slow farm when you only get the kills weekly. Also in order to gain the armor you need to kill all the bosses etc. So they can farm all they want eventually they will have to the achieves from the other bosses.

That's right, too. If they want the shiny they can't farm Escort. The rewards of a farm of 1 or 2 bosses are so low that I don't think it's worth to do it.

[Turin.6921]

@Tyson.5160 said:I’m just wondering if the raids would have been more inviting had they stuck to a gradual scaling difficulty concept from the start.

I am not sure it would solve much. In think the lack of in-game tools for accessibility so that people know how to basically start is a more important factor. A training category on LFG where trainers and new people could easily congregate (separated from the more unpleasant part of the pugging experience) or more options on the training golem to learn mechanics for example. If there where such things in game i think the actual progression within the wing would not matter that much.

[Tyson.5160]

@Turin.6921 said:

@Tyson.5160 said:I’m just wondering if the raids would have been more inviting had they stuck to a gradual scaling difficulty concept from the start.

I am not sure it would solve much. In think the lack of in-game tools for accessibility so that people know how to basically start is a more important factor. A training category on LFG where trainers and new people could easily congregate or more options on the training golem to learn mechanics for example. If there where such things in game i think the actual progression within the wing would not matter that much.

What about instead of an easy mode per say, if they had a new wing that comes before wing 1. Can call it wing 0. You could try and introduce some of the standard raids themes and mechanics to this wing, and maybe keep the difficulty low, like a Cairn, MO and Samarog kinda difficulty. That way you could let this wing introduce and better equip the new raiders for what’s in store.

[nia.4725]

@Tyson.5160 said:

@Turin.6921 said:

@Tyson.5160 said:I’m just wondering if the raids would have been more inviting had they stuck to a gradual scaling difficulty concept from the start.

I am not sure it would solve much. In think the lack of in-game tools for accessibility so that people know how to basically start is a more important factor. A training category on LFG where trainers and new people could easily congregate or more options on the training golem to learn mechanics for example. If there where such things in game i think the actual progression within the wing would not matter that much.

What about instead of an easy mode per say, if they had a new wing that comes before wing 1. Can call it wing 0. You could try and introduce some of the standard raids themes and mechanics to this wing, and maybe keep the difficulty low, like a Cairn, MO and Samarog kinda difficulty. That way you could let this wing introduce and better equip the new raiders for what’s in store.

I really like this idea. A kind of easy wing more forgiving without actually gifting the kills or allowing things like undergeared or autoattacking being able to clear it, with mechanics that would intruduce new raiders. Yeah! This would actually help them get in touch with raids. It could serve as a mid step between open world and raids and help them get comfortable and fear less the other raid wings.

[Turin.6921]

@Tyson.5160 said:

@Turin.6921 said:

@Tyson.5160 said:I’m just wondering if the raids would have been more inviting had they stuck to a gradual scaling difficulty concept from the start.

I am not sure it would solve much. In think the lack of in-game tools for accessibility so that people know how to basically start is a more important factor. A training category on LFG where trainers and new people could easily congregate or more options on the training golem to learn mechanics for example. If there where such things in game i think the actual progression within the wing would not matter that much.

What about instead of an easy mode per say, if they had a new wing that comes before wing 1. Can call it wing 0. You could try and introduce some of the standard raids themes and mechanics to this wing, and maybe keep the difficulty low, like a Cairn, MO and Samarog kinda difficulty. That way you could let this wing introduce and better equip the new raiders for what’s in store.

I am thinking something similar when i refer to adding the mechanics to the training golem. That can be a wing ¨0¨. Being able to activate the bosses attack patterns or mechanics on the golem. Well those that made sense at least (it would be really complex to be able to emulate dhuum greens for example). And that could be for all bosses not just the easy ones. But again as much as a like the idea i am not sure how easy it would be to implement with their current distribution of work.

[Tyson.5160]

@nia.4725 said:

@Tyson.5160 said:

@Turin.6921 said:

@Tyson.5160 said:I’m just wondering if the raids would have been more inviting had they stuck to a gradual scaling difficulty concept from the start.

I am not sure it would solve much. In think the lack of in-game tools for accessibility so that people know how to basically start is a more important factor. A training category on LFG where trainers and new people could easily congregate or more options on the training golem to learn mechanics for example. If there where such things in game i think the actual progression within the wing would not matter that much.

What about instead of an easy mode per say, if they had a new wing that comes before wing 1. Can call it wing 0. You could try and introduce some of the standard raids themes and mechanics to this wing, and maybe keep the difficulty low, like a Cairn, MO and Samarog kinda difficulty. That way you could let this wing introduce and better equip the new raiders for what’s in store.

I really like this idea. A kind of easy wing more forgiving without actually gifting the kills or allowing things like undergeared or autoattacking being able to clear it, with mechanics that would intruduce new raiders. Yeah! This would actually help them get in touch with raids. It could serve as a mid step between open world and raids and help them get comfortable and fear less the other raid wings.

Just another opportunity to add a new raid wing with new bosses, new area, new story and if does indeed bridge the gap sorta speak then the next step would to try W4 and so on. By that point that two out of six raid wings and then they could do W1-3.

[Turin.6921]

@Tyson.5160 said:

@nia.4725 said:

@Tyson.5160 said:

@Turin.6921 said:

@Tyson.5160 said:I’m just wondering if the raids would have been more inviting had they stuck to a gradual scaling difficulty concept from the start.

I am not sure it would solve much. In think the lack of in-game tools for accessibility so that people know how to basically start is a more important factor. A training category on LFG where trainers and new people could easily congregate or more options on the training golem to learn mechanics for example. If there where such things in game i think the actual progression within the wing would not matter that much.

What about instead of an easy mode per say, if they had a new wing that comes before wing 1. Can call it wing 0. You could try and introduce some of the standard raids themes and mechanics to this wing, and maybe keep the difficulty low, like a Cairn, MO and Samarog kinda difficulty. That way you could let this wing introduce and better equip the new raiders for what’s in store.

I really like this idea. A kind of easy wing more forgiving without actually gifting the kills or allowing things like undergeared or autoattacking being able to clear it, with mechanics that would intruduce new raiders. Yeah! This would actually help them get in touch with raids. It could serve as a mid step between open world and raids and help them get comfortable and fear less the other raid wings.

Just another opportunity to add a new raid wing with new bosses, new area, new story and if does indeed bridge the gap sorta speak then the next step would to try W4 and so on. By that point that two out of six raid wings and then they could do W1-3.

You could also add a few training achievement and titles as well (completing the training regiment on the golem on bosses mechanics or what ever wing 0 might be that uses the mechanics of the actual raids wing) so that people can show off the fact that they at least went through the basics without having to link anything.

[Dami.5046]

I just wish there was a way to unlock the mastery to the get the magic 262 other than having to find a kind group to kill a Boss, period. It seems my Guild friend who warned me about even trying was correct. No wonder there aren't more raiders since you get batted out before you even start.

[Turin.6921]

@Dami.5046 said:I just wish there was a way to unlock the mastery to the get the magic 262 other than having to find a kind group to kill a Boss, period. It seems my Guild friend who warned me about even trying was correct. No wonder there aren't more raiders since you get batted out before you even start.

You can just do escort. Its a pretty easy encounter. Also the masteries just give QoL and pros that are only raid related. If you do not raid you do not need them.