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

[STIHL.2489]

@BlaqueFyre.5678 said:Again just because certain player think there is a problem because it doesn’t conform to their viewpoint doesn’t mean it’s a problem.

It is 100% a problem if a company wants to maintain them as clients.

If the company is fine with losing them, then it is not a problem.

That of course is for the company to decide what they feel is an acceptable loss, and not a decision that their clients are in any place to make for them.

[BlaqueFyre.5678]

@STIHL.2489 said:

@BlaqueFyre.5678 said:Again just because certain player think there is a problem because it doesn’t conform to their viewpoint doesn’t mean it’s a problem.

It is 100% a problem if a company wants to maintain them as clients.

If the company is fine with losing them, then it is not a problem.

That of course is for the company to decide what they feel is an acceptable loss, and not a decision that their clients are in any place to make for them.

Please try to stay on topic this post is about if Hardmode or Easymode not about Anets business needs or wants.

[Astralporing.1957]

@BlaqueFyre.5678 said:Your analogy has no bearing on the this topic since that is a Failure Of the Heater which intended purpose is to heat a room, you know failing to do what it’s intended to do, while Raids are working perfectly as intendedThe main purpose of the raids actually is not what the devs say is their intention for them. It's the same as with any other content - to help with player retention.So, it's entirely possible for raids to fulfill 100% the original dev intention for them, while failing at their main purpose.

@BlaqueFyre.5678 said:Again just because certain people think their is a problem doesn’t mean there is oneAnd again, just because some people think there is no problem, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

based upon Anet posts have been exceeding goals and expectations.Sure, shortly after they were introduced (and we don't know how bad their expectations were). Besides, remember that the previous trait system, according to Anet was doing just fine up until the very moment they changed it? And that WvW desert map was a smashing success?

Intentions change. In this case, it's almost certain they will change. The only questions are when, how, and whether it will be fast enough or not.

[BlaqueFyre.5678]

@Astralporing.1957 said:

@BlaqueFyre.5678 said:Your analogy has no bearing on the this topic since that is a Failure Of the Heater which intended purpose is to heat a room, you know failing to do what it’s intended to do, while Raids are working perfectly as intendedThe main purpose of the raids actually is

not

what the devs say is their intention for them. It's the same as with any other content - to

help with player retention

.So, it's entirely possible for raids to fulfill 100% the original dev intention for them, while failing at their main purpose.

@BlaqueFyre.5678 said:Again just because certain people think their is a problem doesn’t mean there is oneAnd again, just because some people think there is no problem, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

based upon Anet posts have been exceeding goals and expectations.Sure, shortly after they were introduced (and we don't know how bad their expectations were). Besides, remember that the previous trait system, according to Anet was doing just fine up until the very moment they changed it? And that WvW desert map was a smashing success?

Intentions change. In this case, it's almost certain they will change. The only questions are when, how, and whether it will be fast enough or not.

That’s great, saying that the intentions of Raids aren’t what the creators of the Raid say they are, wow really wow.

Again there is no problem since everything is functioning and doing exactly what it was designed/intended to do for exactly who it was designed and intended for, there would only be a problem if it failed to do either of those things.

Are the Raids fulfilling the design/intention and role that they were made for? Yes? Ok. What does that mean? Oh right working as intended, actually working better than expected based on the multiple comments by the Raid Devs.

The problem is loud and clear and it’s not with the Raids.

[Tyson.5160]

@Grogba.6204 said:

@"Feanor.2358" said:That's an interesting question. I don't think a full-fledged raid wing is necessary for this, but I can totally see the value of training instances focused on these. Imagine a training area composed of a "boss" golem and "allied" golems which take a lot of damage from the boss one. Your goal is to tank it, diverting damage from your "teammates" until they kill it. Or alternatively, heal them to the same effect. Perhaps just different "programs" in the SFTA. It could definitely help new players get faster the basics of tanking and healing.

FFXIV does that. In fact you can't queue for the dungeonfinder unless you progressed through the role training. All three trinity roles are explained:Tank: Move out of casts/build aggro/deal with adds/pull mobs off of other playersHealer: Move out of casts/heal a single ally/heal your group/deal with aggroDamage Dealer: Move out of casts/focus a target/target priority/encounter mechanics

naturally, certain aspect cannot apply for GW2

I like this idea and could be used in a wing 0 or introductory wing if you will. Even teaching the way a raid works with a group of 10 people and the different sub groups, another thing this game doesn’t teach you about.

[Tyson.5160]

I mean jeez really you could have an introductory instance just in the aerodrome, could have a boss or two and maybe an escort style encounter using the lions arch tour guide.

[Avster.1935]

The only thing I don't agree with is the reward structure, easy mode should not give you magnetite shards. You want to encourage people to eventually move into normal mode for the loots. Easy mode should be a stepping stone.

[Tyson.5160]

@Avster.1935 said:The only thing I don't agree with is the reward structure, easy mode should not give you magnetite shards. You want to encourage people to eventually move into normal mode for the loots. Easy mode should be a stepping stone.

I’m not even really talking about an easy mode anymore, I’m thinking more of an introductory instance or introductory wing that better bridges the gap between open world dungeons fractals into the raids, as there are a bunch of things in raids that occur that you never really experience until you are in raids. Essentially setting people up for success, so it’s not such a shock to the system when you are jumping into W1or W4.

[Astralporing.1957]

@BlaqueFyre.5678 said:That’s great, saying that the intentions of Raids aren’t what the creators of the Raid say they are, wow really wow.You might have had a point if i really said that. I did not. You might want to reread my post, and think about a difference between a general goal, and design intentions (hint:those aren't the same things)

@BlaqueFyre.5678 said:Again there is no problem since everything is functioning and doing exactly what it was designed/intended to do for exactly who it was designed and intended for, there would only be a problem if it failed to do either of those things.If it fails to result in positive impact on player retention, then it will be a failure of intentions. No matter how closely those intentions were followed.(so, basically, something working according to a design is not in any way an argument about the design not being flawed)

@BlaqueFyre.5678 said:Are the Raids fulfilling the design/intention and role that they were made for? Yes? Ok. What does that mean? Oh right working as intended, actually working better than expected based on the multiple comments by the Raid Devs.

The problem is loud and clear and it’s not with the Raids.Agreed. The problem is not that the raids aren't working as intended. It's that Raids when working as intended have negative impact on the game. The flaw lies not in execution, but in the design. And as such, the design should be adjusted.

[BlaqueFyre.5678]

@Astralporing.1957 said:

@BlaqueFyre.5678 said:That’s great, saying that the intentions of Raids aren’t what the creators of the Raid say they are, wow really wow.You might have had a point if i really said that. I did not. You might want to reread my post, and think about a difference between a general goal, and design intentions (hint:those aren't the same things)

@BlaqueFyre.5678 said:Again there is no problem since everything is functioning and doing exactly what it was designed/intended to do for exactly who it was designed and intended for, there would only be a problem if it failed to do either of those things.If it fails to result in positive impact on player retention, then it will be a failure of intentions. No matter how closely those intentions were followed.(so, basically, something working according to a design is not in any way an argument about the

design

not being flawed)

@BlaqueFyre.5678 said:Are the Raids fulfilling the design/intention and role that they were made for? Yes? Ok. What does that mean? Oh right working as intended, actually working better than expected based on the multiple comments by the Raid Devs.

The problem is loud and clear and it’s not with the Raids.Agreed. The problem is not that the raids aren't working as intended. It's that Raids

when working as intended

have negative impact on the game. The flaw lies not in execution, but in the design. And as such, the design should be adjusted.

Interesting your words say otherwise and this is what you said.

@Astralporing.1957 said:

@BlaqueFyre.5678 said:Your analogy has no bearing on the this topic since that is a Failure Of the Heater which intended purpose is to heat a room, you know failing to do what it’s intended to do, while Raids are working perfectly as intended

The main purpose of the raids actually is

not

what the devs say is their intention for them.

I wonder what’s another word for intention? Oh right purpose.

Can you prove that the Raids have had a Negative Impact overall to the game? So far from Statements by Devs they have been improving the game and is reinforced by those claims with them continuing to stick to their original goals and intentions/purpose of Raids which is to provide the most difficult content in game for players that asked for challenging content.

[STIHL.2489]

Not dealing with this.. post removed.

[Ohoni.6057]

I love how the conversation has shifted from "they can't possibly made easy mode versions of the raids, that would take way too much work and they could never fit it into their schedules!!!!" to "They should just make a completely new raid, a 'raid wing zero' that would inevitably take a lot more work than the sum total of all easy mode raids, and would really serve no function except as an onramp to the existing raids that people can play already." I guess it really is all about the loot for the raider community (ie "keeping it away from everyone outside").

[Feanor.2358]

@Tyson.5160 said:

@Grogba.6204 said:

@"Feanor.2358" said:That's an interesting question. I don't think a full-fledged raid wing is necessary for this, but I can totally see the value of training instances focused on these. Imagine a training area composed of a "boss" golem and "allied" golems which take a lot of damage from the boss one. Your goal is to tank it, diverting damage from your "teammates" until they kill it. Or alternatively, heal them to the same effect. Perhaps just different "programs" in the SFTA. It could definitely help new players get faster the basics of tanking and healing.

FFXIV does that. In fact you can't queue for the dungeonfinder unless you progressed through the role training. All three trinity roles are explained:Tank: Move out of casts/build aggro/deal with adds/pull mobs off of other playersHealer: Move out of casts/heal a single ally/heal your group/deal with aggroDamage Dealer: Move out of casts/focus a target/target priority/encounter mechanics

naturally, certain aspect cannot apply for GW2

I like this idea and could be used in a wing 0 or introductory wing if you will. Even teaching the way a raid works with a group of 10 people and the different sub groups, another thing this game doesn’t teach you about.

Frankly, the subgroups thing is just optimization. You can beat the encounters just as well in a single group, only the boons/healing you get would be somewhat worse due to them sometimes going to other players instead. If anything, that's something to teach players in WvW.

[Feanor.2358]

@"Ohoni.6057" said:I love how the conversation has shifted from "they can't possibly made easy mode versions of the raids, that would take way too much work and they could never fit it into their schedules!!!!" to "They should just make a completely new raid, a 'raid wing zero' that would inevitably take a lot more work than the sum total of all easy mode raids, and would really serve no function except as an onramp to the existing raids that people can play already." I guess it really is all about the loot for the raider community (ie "keeping it away from everyone outside").

It's just a matter of fairness. I don't shoo newcomers away, in fact I would welcome and encourage every player who wants to become a raider. It's just that we earned said rewards through no small effort. It is only fair to require newcomers do the same we did.

[Tyson.5160]

@Feanor.2358 said:

@Tyson.5160 said:

@Grogba.6204 said:

@Feanor.2358 said:That's an interesting question. I don't think a full-fledged raid wing is necessary for this, but I can totally see the value of training instances focused on these. Imagine a training area composed of a "boss" golem and "allied" golems which take a lot of damage from the boss one. Your goal is to tank it, diverting damage from your "teammates" until they kill it. Or alternatively, heal them to the same effect. Perhaps just different "programs" in the SFTA. It could definitely help new players get faster the basics of tanking and healing.

FFXIV does that. In fact you can't queue for the dungeonfinder unless you progressed through the role training. All three trinity roles are explained:Tank: Move out of casts/build aggro/deal with adds/pull mobs off of other playersHealer: Move out of casts/heal a single ally/heal your group/deal with aggroDamage Dealer: Move out of casts/focus a target/target priority/encounter mechanics

naturally, certain aspect cannot apply for GW2

I like this idea and could be used in a wing 0 or introductory wing if you will. Even teaching the way a raid works with a group of 10 people and the different sub groups, another thing this game doesn’t teach you about.

Frankly, the subgroups thing is just optimization. You can beat the encounters just as well in a single group, only the boons/healing you get would be somewhat worse due to them sometimes going to other players instead. If anything, that's something to teach players in WvW.

I see your point, it is probably better for to teach that in a WvW environment.

[Ohoni.6057]

@"Feanor.2358" said:It's just a matter of fairness. I don't shoo newcomers away, in fact I would welcome and encourage every player who wants to become a raider. It's just that we earned said rewards through no small effort. It is only fair to require newcomers do the same we did.

Why? Nothing in life has ever worked that way. Most things get discounted eventually, and in cases where that doesn't happen, people point to it as an actual problem in the system. Games launch at around $60 with the expectations that they will drop to half that or less within a few months. Consoles launch at around $300-400, and typically fall to a couple hundred cheaper after a few years. If you got a VR headset a few years back, you can likely get the same model today for about half the price with added accessories. Does that "devalue" the work that people put into earning the money they spent on those things? Of course not, the value they got out of it is that they got it first. If you buy a car then within a few years it will be worth less than half what you paid, and a new card for the same price you paid will be a lot better. If you bought a large screen HD TV a few years back you could likely get a better model for less than half what you paid. And in many cases that is even before you factor in inflation, which causes the baseline to rise over time.

When they added Wardrobes to the mix, suddenly players could run around with multiple copies of a given Legendary weapon skin, at a fraction of the price such flamboyance would originally have cost. Did ANet compensate anyone for that? Only with an Achievement.

If you got Legendary armor the current way, great. You get to keep it. That doesn't mean that it's somehow "wrong" for other players to get it at a "discounted" rate.

Just because you "worked hard" to "earn" something does not entitle you to gatekeep how other players gain access to it. Their success does not in any way "devalue" yours, it is not a "harm" done to you for which you are entitled a say in the matter, much less compensation. It is not "unfair" to you that an easier path is opened up for them.

[Feanor.2358]

@Ohoni.6057 said:

@Feanor.2358 said:It's just a matter of fairness. I don't shoo newcomers away, in fact I would welcome and encourage every player who wants to become a raider. It's just that we earned said rewards through no small effort. It is only fair to require newcomers do the same we did.

Why? Nothing in life has

ever

worked that way.

Most

things get discounted eventually, and in cases where that doesn't happen, people point to it as an actual

problem

in the system.

The things that get discounted usually come with a drawback. For instance, they're second-hand. Or outdated. Or both. You're asking for the full, unhindered reward. So unless you can convince Ferrari to sell me a discounted car of my choosing from their current model line for the price of a Fiat, you're just wrong here, very wrong. On the other hand, if you manage to do that, I vow my support for your cause. Fair enough?

[Ohoni.6057]

@Feanor.2358 said:

@Ohoni.6057 said:

@Feanor.2358 said:It's just a matter of fairness. I don't shoo newcomers away, in fact I would welcome and encourage every player who wants to become a raider. It's just that we earned said rewards through no small effort. It is only fair to require newcomers do the same we did.

Why? Nothing in life has

ever

worked that way.

Most

things get discounted eventually, and in cases where that doesn't happen, people point to it as an actual

problem

in the system.

The things that get discounted usually come with a drawback. For instance, they're second-hand. Or outdated. Or both. You're asking for the full, unhindered reward. So unless you can convince Ferrari to sell me a discounted car of my choosing from their current model line for the price of a Fiat, you're just wrong here,

very

wrong. On the other hand, if you manage to do that, I vow my support for your cause. Fair enough?

That example has nothing to do with my argument. Ferarri discontinues older models and starts making new ones. The new ones are not discounted because they are new, but you can find older ones on the secondary market. Your response was that this "only" happens in cases where the item is used or outdated, but that is not true. I gave the example of Legendary Weapons and their interaction with the Wardrobe system, and those are neither used nor outdated. A large screen TV may not be as good as the newest model, but it is still plenty functional to purpose. By that measure, they have added two new Legendary armors since the Envoy set, so wouldn't that make the Envoy set "out and outdated," and open to a discount?

[Feanor.2358]

@Ohoni.6057 said:

@Feanor.2358 said:

@Ohoni.6057 said:

@Feanor.2358 said:It's just a matter of fairness. I don't shoo newcomers away, in fact I would welcome and encourage every player who wants to become a raider. It's just that we earned said rewards through no small effort. It is only fair to require newcomers do the same we did.

Why? Nothing in life has

ever

worked that way.

Most

things get discounted eventually, and in cases where that doesn't happen, people point to it as an actual

problem

in the system.

The things that get discounted usually come with a drawback. For instance, they're second-hand. Or outdated. Or both. You're asking for the full, unhindered reward. So unless you can convince Ferrari to sell me a discounted car of my choosing from their current model line for the price of a Fiat, you're just wrong here,

very

wrong. On the other hand, if you manage to do that, I vow my support for your cause. Fair enough?

That example has nothing to do with my argument. Ferarri discontinues older models and starts making new ones. The new ones are not discounted because they are new, but you can find older ones on the secondary market. Your response was that this "only" happens in cases where the item is used or outdated, but that is not true. I gave the example of Legendary Weapons and their interaction with the Wardrobe system, and those are neither used nor outdated. A large screen TV may not be as good as the newest model, but it is still plenty functional to purpose. By that measure, they have added two new Legendary armors since the Envoy set, so wouldn't that make the Envoy set "out and outdated," and open to a discount?

So you really want an outdated, worn-out version of the Envoy, right? Like, ascended quality no combat mode?

[Turin.6921]

@Tyson.5160 said:I mean jeez really you could have an introductory instance just in the aerodrome, could have a boss or two and maybe an escort style encounter using the lions arch tour guide.

That could easily be even the golem. Emulating and actual boss encounter and the basic mechanics for ppl to train at. I generally like the idea of a w0 as well but i am not sure if it would be easier to expend the golem or make an introductory wing as part of the content rotation. I think the golem would have more potential on that respect. You reuse the same code and balancing it a bit lower for training, add some allies to emulate a squad and maybe use the current event team to make an achievement category for it. Still good amount of work (tbh from what they said they might not even have a way to fit that into the process) but i have the impression its more doable.

@"Astralporing.1957" said:It's very possible. In this case however the value of having easier encounters as far as increasing interest in new players go is completely wasted. That hard encounter at the beginning of the raid wing is enough to negate any possible gains they might have had from the next encounters.Basically, easy encounters that are placed after a harder one do nothing for the people that ask for easy mode, and shouldn't be brought up as "but we already have this" argument.

I believe it is. It is really easy to find an opener for the easy bosses. Training groups and ppl in the aerodrome do it all the time and even pushes ppl to some basic communication and interaction. I think this is an ok compromise actually. A mix of encounter difficulties just not at the start to be easily exploitable.Although i never brought it up as a ¨but we already have this argument¨ i do think that the fact that you have mixed difficulties in the wing helps accessibility. Even the rushed balancing of w4, even though not planned, also helps.

[Ohoni.6057]

@Feanor.2358 said:So you really want an outdated, worn-out version of the Envoy, right? Like, ascended quality no combat mode?

You understand that this is not how things in game age, right?

Why do all of your examples seem to rely on things not working how reality works?

[Feanor.2358]

@Ohoni.6057 said:

@Feanor.2358 said:So you really want an outdated, worn-out version of the Envoy, right? Like, ascended quality no combat mode?

You understand that this is not how things in game age, right?

Why do all of your examples seem to rely on things not working how reality works?

Look who's talking about things not working the way described by someone. Oh, the irony.

And just as a reminder, it was you who brought up real-life discounting to the debate, despite it having exactly the same problem you outlined here when used as an analogy. So pick one - are we using real life examples to illustrate our points or are we sticking to the way things work in a video game? You can't flip back and forth between both when it suits you.

[Ohoni.6057]

@Feanor.2358 said:

@Ohoni.6057 said:

@Feanor.2358 said:So you really want an outdated, worn-out version of the Envoy, right? Like, ascended quality no combat mode?

You understand that this is not how things in game age, right?

Why do all of your examples seem to rely on things not working how reality works?

Look who's talking about things not working the way described by someone. Oh, the irony.

And just as a reminder, it was you who brought up real-life discounting to the debate, despite it having exactly the same problem you outlined here when used as an analogy. So pick one - are we using real life examples to illustrate our points or are we sticking to the way things work in a video game? You can't flip back and forth between both when it suits you.

But the things that are discounted over time aren't typically markedly worse than they were when they first came out. A three month old game is still just as good as it was at launch, often considerably better due to patches in between. You just decide to arbitrarily "rough up" the Envoy armor as if this is a process that must be a part of the discount, when in reality, that is not the case.

[Feanor.2358]

@Ohoni.6057 said:

@Feanor.2358 said:

@Ohoni.6057 said:

@Feanor.2358 said:So you really want an outdated, worn-out version of the Envoy, right? Like, ascended quality no combat mode?

You understand that this is not how things in game age, right?

Why do all of your examples seem to rely on things not working how reality works?

Look who's talking about things not working the way described by someone. Oh, the irony.

And just as a reminder, it was you who brought up real-life discounting to the debate, despite it having exactly the same problem you outlined here when used as an analogy. So pick one - are we using real life examples to illustrate our points or are we sticking to the way things work in a video game? You can't flip back and forth between both when it suits you.

But the things that are discounted over time aren't typically markedly worse than they were when they first came out.

In effect they are. A new model line comes out, or a new technology. The item is the same, but the appeal isn't. That's why they're discounted. If you want a discounted Envoy, it has to be less appealing - meaning either ours get upgraded or yours get downgraded. There's nothing arbitrary here. Market basics. And, notably, fairness. You do less, you get less. You want more, you have to pay/do more. Simple.

[STIHL.2489]

@Feanor.2358 said:

@Ohoni.6057 said:

@Feanor.2358 said:It's just a matter of fairness. I don't shoo newcomers away, in fact I would welcome and encourage every player who wants to become a raider. It's just that we earned said rewards through no small effort. It is only fair to require newcomers do the same we did.

Why? Nothing in life has

ever

worked that way.

Most

things get discounted eventually, and in cases where that doesn't happen, people point to it as an actual

problem

in the system.

The things that get discounted usually come with a drawback. For instance, they're second-hand. Or outdated. Or both. You're asking for the full, unhindered reward. So unless you can convince Ferrari to sell me a discounted car of my choosing from their current model line for the price of a Fiat, you're just wrong here,

very

wrong. On the other hand, if you manage to do that, I vow my support for your cause. Fair enough?

Hummm did they make Core Worn & Outdated when they made it Free to Play? Like is all the Dungeon Armor now "Worn out" and Fractals suddenly only provide "Out Dated Skins?"

But I wonder what your goal is here, I mean, what are you hoping to accomplish? To shout down those that are unhappy with the current situation and think that if you brow beat them on the forums that somehow magically that will make the problem go away.. well.. would it surprise you that.. you are kinda right, and if that is your goal, well, wish you victory in your endeavor.

Take that as you will.