Dragon's End Meta failing

[Dean Calaway.9718]

4 minutes ago, Sobx.1758 said:

Ok, can you now cover the rest of my post and how you compare dps/boons/heals against each other?

During group events you track 3 leaderboards, for DPS, for Healing, for Boon application, at the end anyone that's on bottom 10% on all 3 categories gets no loot and a message they didn't meet the requirement. Simple as.

With the Olympics running this shouldn't be hard to grasp, no shortage of people "doing their best" walking away with no medals because they weren't good enough.

 

[Sobx.1758]

15 minutes ago, Dean Calaway.9718 said:

During group events you track 3 leaderboards, for DPS, for Healing, for Boon application, at the end anyone that's on bottom 10% on all 3 categories gets no loot and a message they didn't meet the requirement. Simple as.

With the Olympics running this shouldn't be hard to grasp, no shortage of people "doing their best" walking away with no medals because they weren't good enough.

If you want to make a comparison to olympics, why isn't your idea rewarding only top 3 people in each category instead? Well, it's because it's a bad comparison for a bad idea. You're targetting leechers/slackers/"participation rewards" (in a sense that "you just show up and get rewarded for tagging a boss", right?), but that's not what your idea really aims at, which is what I keep pointing out.

Edited August 16 by Sobx.1758

[Randulf.7614]

32 minutes ago, Sobx.1758 said:

It's not even about participation trophies, with your idea people can perform perfectly and 10% of them will still not get the rewards because the rest of the squad was basically just as good. 

Exactly this. I mean there’s not much more to say here. It kills one of the worst ideas I’ve seen stone dead. There will always be a bottom 10% even if everyone’s brilliant.

Its basic stuff - you don’t shut active players out of rewards in a non competitive game..

[Dean Calaway.9718]

27 minutes ago, Sobx.1758 said:

If you want to make a comparison to olympics, why isn't your idea rewarding only top 3 people in each category instead?

Because you're already crying about only the bottom 10% not getting anything, imagine if only the top 3 guys got loot.

[Toraseishin.1932]

37 minutes ago, Dean Calaway.9718 said:

During group events you track 3 leaderboards, for DPS, for Healing, for Boon application, at the end anyone that's on bottom 10% on all 3 categories gets no loot and a message they didn't meet the requirement. Simple as.

With the Olympics running this shouldn't be hard to grasp, no shortage of people "doing their best" walking away with no medals because they weren't good enough.

 

It's not a competition - it's a team effort to complete an event. And like others have said, going by a percentage compared to others will always result in someone getting shafted no matter how well he/she does. If you have 100 people doing an event and they all have full participation and perform perfectly, you'll still have 10 people at the bottom - even if they're lower in damage/healing/boons by a minuscule amount.

This also doesn't take into consideration the roles that are involved in meta events outside of the boon ball. Let's take Dragon's End for example: Who is going to plummet to the bottom of your suggested leaderboard? Anyone who stands in the circles to do the wisp phase. Guess they're kitten outta luck. Those who happen to get caught in a bubble? They're screwed as well. And nobody will want to risk dropping down on the leaderboard to help their teammates out of the bubble, or res downed players since they'd get more healing % out of staying in the fight directly.
Even things like Dragonfall won't work with this proposal. Anyone who is tasked with pylon duty will most certainly be within the bottom 10%.

However, there already is a tiered reward system based on % of participation compared to the event itself. Idk how much it helps encourage active participation, but maybe the HoT meta reward system should be standard for all or most metas.

Edited August 16 by Toraseishin.1932
typo

[Sobx.1758]

2 minutes ago, Dean Calaway.9718 said:

Because you're already crying about only the bottom 10% not getting anything, imagine if only the top 3 guys got loot.

I'm not remotely crying about it, I wouldn't have an issue to get rewards each time. It doesn't change the fact that it's a bad idea for the previously mentioned reasons. So count your attempted shot at me to be a rather bad miss.

Edited August 16 by Sobx.1758

[Dean Calaway.9718]

1 minute ago, Toraseishin.1932 said:

going by a percentage compared to others will always result in someone getting shafted no matter how well he/she does

So?

[RoseofGilead.8907]

58 minutes ago, Dean Calaway.9718 said:

So?

So it's a crappy way to design rewards for open world content, but you already know that.

[Dean Calaway.9718]

2 minutes ago, RoseofGilead.8907 said:

So it's a crappy way to design rewards for open world content, but you already know that.

It pays to be a winner.

[RoseofGilead.8907]

2 minutes ago, Dean Calaway.9718 said:

It pays to be a winner.

That's why we already have it set up that succeeding gives more rewards than failing, and all without the pointless appendage measuring contest.

[Dean Calaway.9718]

7 minutes ago, RoseofGilead.8907 said:

That's why we already have it set up that succeeding gives more rewards than failing, and all without the pointless appendage measuring contest.

Give it away to all those 800 DPS 👍

So precious.

[lummuss.6850]

Guess which meta-event failed again here?

https://i.imgur.com/9zcZYaD.jpeg

[Vargs.6234]

Anet should implement this guy's deranged bottom 10% idea because it would be a fantastic opportunity to find new and creative ways to grief each other. Every event would be a minefield of mesmer portals trying to send you straight to hell so that you're the one who misses out on rewards instead of them. The teq meta would be 100% focused on trying to kill other players with creepers, just like Colin intended. Ranger Longbow 4 and Mesmer Greatsword 5 see a huge resurgence as you attempt to push mobs away so that nobody else can tag them. Drop meteors right on top of whoever seems the squishest during convergences and try to balance putting out enough aoe condi cleanse to barely succeed against Umbriel, but not too much aoe condi cleanse because you want as many people as possible to die.

[Sobx.1758]

18 hours ago, Dean Calaway.9718 said:

Give it away to all those 800 DPS 👍

So precious.

That can be solved without denying 10% no matter how well they perform just because they're in a group of equally well performing players. There's a difference between "not wanting to reward 800 dps complete slackers" and "denying 10% no matter how well they and the group does".

 

14 hours ago, lummuss.6850 said:

Guess which meta-event failed again here?

https://i.imgur.com/9zcZYaD.jpeg

Ok, after seeing this post, I decided to conduct my own experiment, joined late after the escort events (unintentionally, there was one group after I logged in and opened lfg so that's what I joined), we had about 43 players in a squad, 1 main group without any additional subgroups, I had 100% quickness because I was providing it and 20% alacrity because who cares. Splits were done by someone writing "split evenly between bosses!" in chat (😄) and finished with about 3 minutes left.
But the event isn't a guaranteed success so it's bad (and requires raid-like organisation, of course)!

If there's something I dislike about this meta -and some of the others like KO- it's the boring escort preevents.

Edited August 17 by Sobx.1758

[Dean Calaway.9718]

3 hours ago, Sobx.1758 said:

denying 10% no matter how well they and the group does

Why not?

If they're at the bottom 10% they did less than the top 90% and next time should fight harder.

[Sobx.1758]

43 minutes ago, Dean Calaway.9718 said:

Why not?

If they're at the bottom 10% they did less than the top 90% and next time should fight harder.

Because you're complaining about rewarding people with 800 dps, not about people doing what they're supposed to do but happen to be in an equally active/good squad.
Is your goal punishing people who play well? And yes, that's a retorical question, it obviously isn't the goal here, but that's exactly what your idea does, which is why it's simply bad. I already explained that, so I'm not sure why you're asking "why not?" again. Which part of what I wrote is unclear for you?

Edited August 17 by Sobx.1758

[Batel.9206]

50 minutes ago, Dean Calaway.9718 said:

Why not?

If they're at the bottom 10% they did less than the top 90% and next time should fight harder.

What happens if the margin between "best" and "worst" is a couple of percentage points?

So the person who messed up a few times and didn't get out of the way of one of the many insta-kill attacks should be punished with absolutely nothing to show for their efforts, even though they performed incredibly well the rest of the time? How about the person who showed up a few minutes late and thus wasn't able to contribute every bit of DPS/boons/healing/whatever they possibly could for every second? How about the person with a bad internet connection that lagged out for a moment? How about the person who got distracted for a minute or two? Or even, in the unlikely scenario, absolutely everyone in the entire squad does perfectly with full flawless raid rotations? Is it random, then, who gets nothing and who gets full loot? Or even just the (far more likely) scenario of someone who doesn't have perfect class awareness but is still following mechanics and doing their best - well, too bad for them, they weren't perfect and thus their hours of effort are wasted. Ha-ha, next time fight harder, you scrub.

You get the idea.

Your suggestion sounds good on paper, but in practice would be horrible.

To stay somewhat on topic: frankly, maybe an extra minute on the timer wouldn't be a bad idea. As it is now, it's still cutting it pretty close even if everyone is dutifully doing their part. The one time I got into a meta that succeeded, we almost wiped because the champions phase was uneven - I had to yell at my team to SLOW DOWN, we're killing the boss too fast, let the others catch up. If we had messed up there, the entire meta would have failed due to running out of time, with about thirty seconds of wiggle-room. A tiny bit more leniency with the timer would be nice.

[Dean Calaway.9718]

1 minute ago, Batel.9206 said:

What happens if the margin between "best" and "worst" is a couple of percentage points?

Then they don't get nothing and can fight harder next time.

 

[Sobx.1758]

1 hour ago, Dean Calaway.9718 said:

The bottom 10% are below the top 90% there isn't a way in which I could explain this more simplistic to you, how ever good those players would do, if they ended in the bottom 10% that means they're below everyone else in that group and they could do better

I don't know at which point you concluded I don't understand what 10%/90% values mean, although it's funny how you intentionally cut out the majority of the post that shows why your idea is terrible. Your complaint wasn't even about "somehow being better", it was about "rewarding slackers/800 dps players". You're dodging on what I'm writing because at this point you know you're wrong.

Here's an example of a squad: 45 people deal 30k dps, 5 people deal 29,9k. Are any of them heavily slacking, "not doing enough", "not playing well" and subsequently don't deserve the rewards? Not really. Yet your idea punishes... good group for being part of a good group. Being "bottom 10%" doesn't equate playing badly or slacking. And that doesn't even touch anything about anyone taking care of the additional mechanics.
Once again, it's clear why you keep dodging the point I keep making and it's not because you think you're correct.

As for the last sentence in your post... clearly not 😉 

 

But yes, changing participation levels and afk detection could help with something here, I think it was dragonstorm that at one point included some changes which targeted afkers and -at least at the time- it seemed to bring noticable results.

Edited August 17 by Sobx.1758

[lummuss.6850]

It happened again, guys. Fail.

https://i.imgur.com/wmOA0nr.jpeg

[Krzysztof.5973]

If ANet actually wants to bump up open world (dragon's end meta) success rate, they could introduce solo trials with unique rewards that teach you in-game mechanics and info about the game. Doesn't even have to be mandatory, just make an appealing carrot on the stick. 

[Cyninja.2954]

10 hours ago, lummuss.6850 said:

It happened again, guys. Fail.

https://i.imgur.com/wmOA0nr.jpeg

Loving those subgroups. Let's ignore for a moment the absolute LACK of any reasonable boon supports being distributed to subgroups, this just looks like "baby's first attempts at making a squad".

The entire reason for subgroups is to make sure boons are distributed evenly. Making subgroups without ANY boon support, as is the case for almost all those subgroups given most of them lack elite specializations which could even provide the necessary boon, makes even less sense then just running as a mono subgroup.

Sorry but working as intended. My condolences that not a single players who understands group management was willing to help your commander and call out for players to swap to quickness/alac roles.

Which ultimately brings me back to what I have been telling people for ages by now: it's about boons.

Edited August 18 by Cyninja.2954

[Luthan.5236]

When not playing on off-time it usually should work - if you join the map early. (At least 20-30 mins before the whole thing actually starts. Which means ... best to plan in like 1.5 or 2 hours.) Though I only do it if it is on weekly at the vault atm (might happen less frequently with JW release soon and other stuff available for weeklies). Then more people might try to finish it - playing more seriously.

[Gehenna.3625]

Anet does need to inject some harder content into OW from time to time. Triple Trouble comes to mind, for example and that's fair enough. And besides the DE meta has been nerfed multiple times already since EoD launched. I hadn't done this meta in a while but recently decided to follow a meta train for all 4 EoD metas and it succeeded both times, so I dunno what to make of this complaint. Sure, if you don't have a comm and lots of new/inexperienced players the meta will likely fail. But that's the same for Triple Trouble.

What was a mistake was making that meta part of the Turtle mount acquisition, but they fixed that. Also making an entire map around it was also a mistake imo since outside of the meta, there's very little else to do in that map and EoD really couldn't afford to sacrifice a map to a more difficult meta. They did that with Dragon's Stand in HoT as well, but there was a lot more to do in that expansion to begin with and by now it's gotten much easier with power creep.

So, my opinion is that it's fine and I get that doing that meta and have it fail is an investment in time, but I suppose you can pretty much tell whether or not it's going to fail beforehand. No comm and a comm that's not organising groups are two signs to look out for. If you have no comm, forget it. If you do have a comm but they're not organising the squad into subgroups, don't waste your time. 

There's always a very small chance that you get lucky but it's not a high enough chance to waste your time on imo.

 

[Katary.7096]

On 8/15/2024 at 11:25 PM, Dean Calaway.9718 said:

I've made the suggestion before, bottom 10% of players in DPS/Boons/Heal during a group event should not get any loot, that's the only way you'll get some people to do more than press 1 occasionally during the events.

There are several ways in which that suggestion is terribly stupid.
1. I can simply semi afk a meta event until the boss gets very close to dying, then I jump in on a highly bursty DPS build and perform my opener on the boss, claming one of the top spots among the DPS builds and I will get full loot with minimal participation. Additionally I will be pushing another player, who presumably did more for the event's success than me, out of the group of players who get loot.
2. In a meta event group in which the top DPS player has 40K DPS at the end of the event, with everyone else falling somewhere in the 10K-20K range, a player with 10.200 DPS is going to get no loot while someone who finished with 11.900 DPS can get the same amount of loot that the 40K DPS player receives.
3. Halfway through a meta event boss fight a DPS player takes note of the fact that he/ she is currently among the bottom 10% in DPS. Knowing that the probability of moving up into the top 90% group is small, they decide to leave and do something else with their time, since a meta event with no rewards is not worth doing. Because the pool of DPS players shrank, someone who was in the top 90% group now drops into the bottom 10% group. They too decide to leave the map because they can predict that they are not getting rewards either way. As a result, yet another player who was previously among the 90% highest DPS players drops down into the "no loot" group and quits the map to do something else. This cycle continues until the number of pure DPS players gets down to either 9 or 0, depending on how the loot rule is being applied. If it is "being inside the bottom 10% group means you get no loot" then you end up with 0 rational players doing the meta event. If it is "being outside the bottom 10% means you do get loot" then meta events would be left with 9 rational players per performance category, all of which would qualify to receive loot, thus making the loot rule effectively pointless.

I'm surprised that this isn't the first time that you have made this suggestion, as it looks like you never considered the consequences of it being implemented.

 

On the topic of the Dragon's End meta: I don't think the content needs a nerf. The relative difficulty is likely going to go down over time since GW2 has consistently been powercreept. What I consider to be more useful is some form of long term motivation for players to keep doing this event.