One mans view of 2.0 and neccessary changes.

[zodium]

i need a huge

puking smaller

which in turn will puke even smaller syduck: to make a proper response to this thread

 

[articbre]

As I see it raising the cap will allow a few more players to be able to get in there and hopefully with some kindness from other players actual "mains" will be allowed to get in. What I would see hurting this even more is the fact of people botting other characters. Deciding

"Well this <Insert Class Here> here is my bot that I've geared out and have better aa's and all my relics on.. so why should we bring an inferior mained <Insert Class Here>."

As a bard I've accepted to take back seat to a botted bard in my guild, for the better of the guild. Although I've had other players start sending me tells about how can I accept that and crying about it happing to them. This is the reason why I think that DCing should be disallowed on raids. It cuts down on the people that are actually playing. I believe when I left last night there were at least 4 bots in the raid that could have been passed on to another character or maybe even a random 65 who got left out and is looking for some action. I'm persionally not complaining about it, but I am taking a stand for those people who've sent me tells but haven't made a voice upon it on the forums to be looked at.

 

[volvov2]

Are you running 3 of each class or 2 of each class groups? When you've got more than 2 people sitting out per raid, it really sounds like you need to trim down your active raiding roster, rather than calling for an increase to the raid size. We all knew that 18-man changes were going in well in advance and the current raid size allows for each class to play a key role. Is it really necessary to include more than one of each class in every raid?

So we should just take up the core raiders and leave the rest of the guild without anything to do or a MT?? Because thats the only way to 'trim' a raid roster, Ruin is full of casual players and some nights, we get 18, somenights we get 24 on any given night, we enjoy having a possible extra ranger, and not sending one packing because we already had another.

 

[Jinxat]

Are you running 3 of each class or 2 of each class groups? When you've got more than 2 people sitting out per raid, it really sounds like you need to trim down your active raiding roster, rather than calling for an increase to the raid size. We all knew that 18-man changes were going in well in advance and the current raid size allows for each class to play a key role. Is it really necessary to include more than one of each class in every raid?

Well first of all we didnt know that 18 man raids were going in well in advance (1 to 2 weeks?) and judging from the polls Im going to assume that the majority of people thought that we would be keeping 36 main raids for this server. Even IF we knew, what do you want us to say to the existing members of our guilds? Tough shit, but the people that dont have the best gear/attendance can't raid so you have to leave the guild?

Also, the problem isnt with regards to including more than one of each class in every raid, the problem is including ONE of every class in each raid. Currently the best setup for raids is to stack up on dps, and healing and have one or two maintanks depending on the target that you are raiding. There are very few extra spots for random classes to sneak in because most mobs require a certain mix of classes to beat the encounter. If the raid cap is increased then more room will open up for random classes that are often over-looked such as necromancers, mages, beastlords, rangers, monks, warriors, shadowknights, paladins, etc. Like I said before, the problems does not come from the lack of classes being able to stack or having to have more than one class in every raid, the problem is getting one of every class in every raid due to their usefullness and lack there of with regards to most raid mobs.

 

[volvov2]

If the lower cap is indeed intended to make the raid game more accessible to the average player, and not just the hardcore, then a guild shouldnt be punished because it has an extra ranger or beastlord on said raid, playing only a few times a week and not 5 hours a night 6 days a week. Most of the *key* classes get very boring once you do it for a while, frankly I dont know how clerics stay sane. And the average player is probably more likely to be a necro, or a mage or ranger, some none uber but well rounded class. Instead you get raids restricted to 1 warrior, 1 monk, 1 bard, 3 clerics, 2 druids, 2 shaman, etc. etc.

 

[Lufia]

Well first of all we didnt know that 18 man raids were going in well in advance (1 to 2 weeks?) and judging from the polls Im going to assume that the majority of people thought that we would be keeping 36 main raids for this server. Even IF we knew, what do you want us to say to the existing members of our guilds? Tough shit, but the people that dont have the best gear/attendance can't raid so you have to leave the guild?

This is the same situation that has faced each of the guilds, I'm not sure why you feel immune. We've got more enjoyable raids via 18-man caps, so we should adapt and adjust our guild sizes accordingly. We run the same 18-man setup nearly every night and it makes things very effective. Would it be hard for us to recruit three more super-active players? No. Would it make encounters much more dull due to the ability to stack 9 healers on a raid? For sure.

Phoenix Rising, Forsaken, Steel, Exodus, and Ruin all raided today with the 18-man cap in place. We've all thoroughly enjoyed the raid setup and experience thus far. I don't see the purpose in changing the raid size because one guild refuses to trim down... Perhaps the posters making up 90+% of the 'pro-increased raid size' posts, Ruin, should attempt the same split seen thus far in Defiance and Phoenix Rising.

If the lower cap is indeed intended to make the raid game more accessible to the average player, and not just the hardcore, then a guild shouldnt be punished because it has an extra ranger or beastlord on said raid, playing only a few times a week and not 5 hours a night 6 days a week. Most of the *key* classes get very boring once you do it for a while, frankly I dont know how clerics stay sane. And the average player is probably more likely to be a necro, or a mage or ranger, some none uber but well rounded class. Instead you get raids restricted to 1 warrior, 1 monk, 1 bard, 3 clerics, 2 druids, 2 shaman, etc. etc.

Sorry, but your logic is entirely flawed. You are arguing that increasing the number of players from 18/2 to 21/3 would PROMOTE diversity? In doing this, it is possible to bring MORE of the core classes than before (3 clerics, 3 druids, 3 wizards), thus taking up even more space in your raid. The extra spots would undoubtedly be taken up by the same classes, because a mob is encountered where the tank can't be kept up, the solution is always to throw more healers at it. What you SHOULD be pushing for, however, is an increase in the overall raid cap to 21, while maintaining the 2-per-class limit. This would keep the number of 'core' required classes low, while still opening space for the rest. The downside to this would be the inefficient group heal necessary in the 4th 'half' group due to the removal of raid-wide heals, along with the possibility of having encounters that require more tanks than your guild has.

In closing, I think that many of your guild's problems would be solved by adhering to the planned 2-per-cap setup. If you truly want to work more of your non-essential classes into your raid, try dropping from 3 clerics down to two and see how things go. I'm assuming that you also run 3 wizards, which would open another spot.

 

[junius]

I think what you are missing about this lufia is that these arent cattle, or numbers we are trimming but our friends and family we have gamed with for years. Wake up tomorrow when you read this and call your brother/sister/mother/bestfriend, tell them "sorry but you dont make the cut, now piss off."
The people turned away are my guildies and I will fight against anything that cause them detriment, they have earned my respect. Your guildies may be expendable but mine are not.

"Phoenix Rising, Forsaken, Steel, Exodus, and Ruin all raided today with the 18-man cap in place. We've all thoroughly enjoyed the raid setup and experience thus far." ~lufia
Those who werent the 18 I can tell you with extreme authority did not enjoy the setup and experience so far.

Over the years I have watched every guild from gotw onwards come and go. Ruin has been a constant force for reasons every guild on this server could take a lesson from. It is partly due to how we look out for each other and mostly due to how we treat each other especially in the face of adversity from young upstarts who every month or so reform under a different name/leader/whatever the wind blows by them.

There will come a day when I watch you leave this server lufia and all these changes that benefit you in the shortrun will still be affecting us who choose to stay. I will watch you and all like you come and go like so many before you.

 

[volvov2]

Perhaps the posters making up 90+% of the 'pro-increased raid size' posts, Ruin, should attempt the same split seen thus far in Defiance and Phoenix Rising.

When you say this, you act like we still have a 36 man raid crew with lots of tanks and healers to go around, most of Ruin has quit with the new changes, the highest night has been 24 maybe during a raid, so you suggest kicking out 6-8 people and telling them to get their own guild? Ruin doesnt take its core group and leave its own behind in a shell of a guild with no main tank or decently equipped people. I wonder why Defiance didnt raid today, I bet you the answer is easier to figure out than you think.

A big problem IS how E-Q has game mechanics set up, which is why the big 72 man raids on live were around, while the server certainly cant support 72, 18 man caps cuts it down to essentially (with the 2 per class rule): 2 cleric, 2 shaman, 2 druid, 2 wizard, 2 rogue, 1 warrior (2 if you need to offtank) and the rest misc. classes (6-7 open slots). No matter what the cap is, those dps and healing classes will always be there. a higher cap would easily allow more flexablility.

 

[Jun]

Did Ruin not have to turn people away from raids even with the 36 man cap? I am almost sure at one point Ruin had over 36 active members and certain people could not raid. So, if you have 36 people who still enjoy each others company enough to remain guilded, make up two raiding teams. Judging by your roster, which may or may not be up to date, you have the setup required to do this easily, as long as you have 36 actives. If you dont have 36 actives, I dont see how raising the cap back up and cutting out duo boxing is going to help your situation.

Basically, I don't see any guilds having a problem with the 18 man cap. Defiance recovered in a matter of days, PR will recover like they always do, and I'm sure Ruin will find a way to move on as well.

 

[zodium]

A big problem IS how E-Q has game mechanics set up, which is why the big 72 man raids on live were around, while the server certainly cant support 72, 18 man caps cuts it down to essentially (with the 2 per class rule): 2 cleric, 2 shaman, 2 druid, 2 wizard, 2 rogue, 1 warrior (2 if you need to offtank) and the rest misc. classes (6-7 open slots). No matter what the cap is, those dps and healing classes will always be there. a higher cap would easily allow more flexablility.

I'm gonna do something I really shouldn't and dignify this thread with a serious response. Volvo, your argument is dumb because under any raid system where the individual matters, something that I would put the cutoff mark for at 42 people, inherently carries with it an "optimal" setup depending on how the classes are balanced and what caps are in place at the current time, such as the two of any class cap. Every class but the very top DPS class and Clerics suffer from a lack of scalability because their contribution to the raid is subject to diminishing returns. Going from 0 to 1 Shadowknight you see a definite change in what the raid can do because every class, even Shadowknights (despite my best efforts), has something unique to offer a raid, but going from 1 to 2 Shadowknights, you see a significantly lessened benefit because part of what this second Shadowknight would do is already covered by the first. As I said, this is true for every single class but the top DPS class and Clerics.

Finding the optimal raid setup is simply a matter of calculating just how diminished the returns from adding an additional member of that class would be compared to the current amount, then calculating it for all the others and seeing which one adds the most to the killing efficiency of the raid, then repeating it until you can kill a given mob for maximum loot per member. Thus, you actually don't have any choice at all in which classes (or even how many people) to bring if it's a matter of efficiency, only the illusion of choice generated by a general ignorance about the subject.

You don't have to take my word for it either, this was the founding philosophy of Legacy and well, that really speaks for itself.

 

[Tarutao]

Basically, I don't see any guilds having a problem with the 18 man cap. Defiance recovered in a matter of days, PR will recover like they always do, and I'm sure Ruin will find a way to move on as well.

Really? I could have sworn Defiance invited a level 55 mage a couple hours ago (even if he is level 56 now) because we're no longer even picky enough to only take level 65's. I hope we'll be able to raid again in a couple of months, but we're back at square one and recruiting.

 

[shanara99]

Ok, so I usually think horizontally, instad vertically (yah, there's those 2 types of thinking, according to some psigolocists). And, besides the increased cap, I just thought that, if there was a raid target that REQUIRED a certain class, that class would be in raid, for sure. Of course this would mean you wouldn't be able to beat that target unless it would be trivia already, or you had those classes you need... but, hey, that's life. You can't expect to bring down Ulaz with Lavascale gear, either.

And I'm confident on our CDs to be able to think some encounters that would require necros/BL/mages/monks, etc... As a matter of fact, I'm thinking now an encounter that'd require a necro (but dunno if it'd be doable... guess it can be coded in script, just not 100 % sure). Same for mages (2 less chosen class on raids).

So.. what about it? making a raid zone that needed a certain class would force raids to adapt, and have that class... and, if we had ALTERNATIVES to that raid zone, noone would complain about "not being able to raid there"...

 

[Momatose]

I'm probably going to try 21 and see how that works out, I'd rather take things slowly now that the big changes are over.

i'm very mixed on my feelings about this..

on one hand my experience in steel 2.0 has been extremely fun, we all work together perfectly with about a 20 man roster, while this doesnt feel like the raiding of old, it is sort of reminiscent of specialized strike teams that have only the essential people they need.. the encounters have been amazing, and we can't wait to keep progressing. however we did form with ONLY the essentials from the very start, this is why you see steel members arguing against this change, we're already playing the game the best way we can.. we're not looking at /who all guild and deciding who comes and who stays.. when the entire guild is online, we roll

on the other i feel for the people left behind, or guilds with 25-28 person rosters who regularly leave 3-5 people behind. i know what it's like to be a class that's generally left behind and i know it's never fun when you're forced to leave your guild because of game changes out of your control

increasing it by 3 players i feel only paves the way for extra healers and safety nets, which is something we shouldn't need.. guilds with 24 person rosters may benefit from getting the cap to 21.. but what about guilds with 28 people? they're still screwed. 32 people? still screwed. a 21 cap won't do anything to help players left behind

extra classes that are useless under an 18 person system will be just as useless under a 21 person system, do you honestly think that guild X is going to add a 2nd beastlord, or a 2nd warrior to their regular lineup? no, they're going to go with the absolute most efficient: another druid, another shaman, another wiz/rog and substituting as neccessary

if we just leave it at 18 then guilds will either adapt or move on.. it's cutthroat, but i feel it's neccessary

and i know this is probably quite a biased opinion, but i felt it best if i shared it anyway

 

[mr_g]

I edited this into my last post, but other people posted before I was done editing o gosh!

Also, I liked the 18 man thing because it reinforced the skill idea.  You remember the post: "what if you were THE (insert class here) on a raid, the force dependent on YOU and your skills?"

If each class has a positive raid-filling role (and particularly with the changes to aux tanking, I see this happening) there's really no reason to raise the cap so much.   Doing so won't make room for more of those non-raid-desired classes, it will just mean that 3rd wizard, 3rd rogue, etc.

If you want a better distribution of classes in raids, then the clear solution is to make sure every class has a positive raid function.

Which is practically impossible with 15 different classes because there isn't really 15 different roles.

It would require rebuilding the game from ground up.

yes, there are not 15 different roles, i.e. there's more  than just 1 dps class. BUT if all dps were equally good (not saying they should parse at the same dps, but equally good in terms of all of their utilities bringing about the same advantage to a raid) then all dps classes would be equally desired on a raid. or am i wrong?

 

[Jinxat]

Did I once ever say that this situation was exclusive to ruin alone? Did I ever say that we are the only ones that are being shit on right now with these changes? I never once mentioned that and as raids currently stand RIGHT now, its a 18/3 system you should know this. As far as I have seen it hasnt only been ruin that has stacked up on mandatory classes such as clerics. I have consistently seen forsaken with three clerics on raids.

As it currently stands now Lufia, having a third cleric or a third druid lets say, or hell even a third wizard is MUCH more beneficial as opposed to say having a second beastlord, paladin, monk, warrior, shadowknight, ranger, mage, necromancer, enchanter, or any non-essential class. The thing is that most of the encounters CAN NOT be done with anything less than a certain amount of healing, especially mobs which need to be split tanked (mirror golems for example or even double/triple pulls in IP). Now is this a balancing issue? It might be, but when the dps of the majority of the raid mobs has NOT changed, and you are trying to keep up one or two main tanks with at most 6 healers (2 clerics, 2 druids, 2 shamen) that leaves room for 3 healers per tank in the OPTIMAL situation. This doesnt even count for healing misc. people who get AE'd or who take rampage damage or who take riposte/whirlwind damage while aux tanking. This also doesnt account for the first 5-10 % of the fight where shamen are most likely going to be slowing/debuffing the mob, dropping your healers down to 5 and maybe 4 people if you have one shamen working per mob if its 2.

Volkov's logic is NOT flawed because ruin has sported 3 clerics per raid nightly. Some nights we even get 3 druids, and we are almost always carrying 3 wizards with 1 sitting out. If we are ALREADY sporting 3 of said class, and our raids are full then bumping the raid max up to 21 would allow room for 3 more random classes seeing as we already are MAXXING the other mandatory classes. I dont understand how you can't comprehend this, but it seems like a fairly easy idea to grasp.

We also heard about these changes with about one week notice. We didnt have ample time, and Im not about to go and tell all the people that have helped myself and others get to where we are that they are shit out of luck because they have a real life and can't raid every day, or that they cant raid because they are xxx # of xxx class and we have too many of that and they arent in the top 2-3 for said class. Im not about to go and deny people that are my friends fun simply because they live on the west coast and dont get home until after our raid time starts. You have to remember that these are people and within guilds friendships are formed that alot of people dont want to just piss away.

Again this all might be a balancing issue where mobs dps needs to be toned down to match the healing capacity, but at the moment without having a good mix of healers (3 clerics, 2-3 druids, 1-2 shamen) alot of raid encounters are not doable due to the sheer damage output that mobs have at their disposal. The raid setup in its current form supports 18 people with a max of 3 classes. I am not trying to increase the class range to 3 its already set at 3. If we increase the raid setup to 21/22 people and 3 of each class max then it will open up 3-4 spots for people who would generally get overlooked, let alone people that login 30 minutes to an hour late due to real life situations.

 

[phlit]

Volkov summed up pretty much perfectly why this change is pro-hardcore and not, as it's being somewhat touted by Wiz & crew, pro the less hardcore (smaller guilds etc).
You basically have to have 18 at a raid now. PR sure as heck rarely 'had to have' 36 before, more usually(99%) it was 20-30. That leaves room for casuals*... where's the room now?

* And as everyone knows, the hardcore need the casuals, and not vice versa. Not to mention.... friends?

Gonret sums up the problem with slots in the raid just about perfectly. What Wiz says about raids always needed X class is just 'how the game works' and somewhat impossible to fix, is true but missing the point. Sure, you need a MT and CLRs. But why's it not sensible you need a <random 'dps' class> as much as a wizard or rogue? That's just a question of balance, and wouldn't require the whole game to be changed from the ground up at all....

Sure, there's aren't 15 raid roles. But there are classes who can better share and be more balanced in doing the same roles, making the class choice itself less important.

 

[Jinxat]

Finding the optimal raid setup is simply a matter of calculating just how diminished the returns from adding an additional member of that class would be compared to the current amount, then calculating it for all the others and seeing which one adds the most to the killing efficiency of the raid, then repeating it until you can kill a given mob for maximum loot per member. Thus, you actually don't have any choice at all in which classes (or even how many people) to bring if it's a matter of efficiency, only the illusion of choice generated by a general ignorance about the subject.

You don't have to take my word for it either, this was the founding philosophy of Legacy and well, that really speaks for itself.

Most guilds dont have the luxury of having even "18 regulars" that they can count on every night. And I will humour you and say that we could manage to get 18 regulars with the perfect setup for most raid encounters, what would happen if somebody quits? What would happen if people get bored with their main class and would rather play something else so they reroll into a non-beneficial class to the perfect raid setup? There are so many possibly situations that oppose the whole idea of the 18 man dream team with excess slack that its a moot point anyways. With the 36 person raid cap I can see this as a viable way to go for guilds seeing that you need a solid core, but anything beyond that is just gravy and as people quit/join you can arrange your raid accordingly and recruit more classes and have them not be so detrimental to your raid force if they are significantly below your level. With the 18 man cap it has been said time and time again that each person is essential to the performance of the raid. If people are significantly below the level of a raid guild it is going to hinder everything they do. What do you want us to do? Go back and bottom feed and hinder the younger guilds just so that we can hopefully get 1 drop off of a mob's loot table? Then what happens if that person quits in a month or two? We are stuck in the same position we were in before, having to regear people from the ground up, instead of being able to get them things on the fly with the rest of us.

So, I can see your raid model working in a perfect world, but this is not a perfect world and as such people arent perfect either. Things come up, people quit, other people reroll, the possibilities are endless and as such make your argument of the dream team with an 18 man raid cap "dumb" as you so eloquently put it.

 

[Noktar]

Phoenix Rising, Forsaken, Steel, Exodus, and Ruin all raided today with the 18-man cap in place. We've all thoroughly enjoyed the raid setup and experience thus far.

This is not true at all we really struggled with this 18 man thing. We had to change who was in the raid several times and had to sit some people out for botted dps cause we needed to up our dps alot. In other words we didnt enjoy it as we could have.

 

[Lufia]

Most guilds dont have the luxury of having even "18 regulars" that they can count on every night. And I will humour you and say that we could manage to get 18 regulars with the perfect setup for most raid encounters, what would happen if somebody quits? What would happen if people get bored with their main class and would rather play something else so they reroll into a non-beneficial class to the perfect raid setup? There are so many possibly situations that oppose the whole idea of the 18 man dream team with excess slack that its a moot point anyways.

So, I can see your raid model working in a perfect world, but this is not a perfect world and as such people arent perfect either. Things come up, people quit, other people reroll, the possibilities are endless and as such make your argument of the dream team with an 18 man raid cap "dumb" as you so eloquently put it.

Sorry, but as you said before, you're already running 3 of each of the 'essential' classes. As such, your setup out many of the extra classes by your doing, not due to the current ruleset. Encounters should be balanced for 4-6 healers, and if they aren't, you need to talk to Xeldan about the individual encounters... not to Wiz about overhauling the entire raid structure.

Your arguments of 'what if someone gets bored and quits' and 'we can't have casuals with 18-players' are both moot because they apply equally to an 18-man, 21-man, 24-man, or 36-man setups. Whenever you have an active player that quits, it hurts your guild. This was the case under the previous raid model as well as the current. The only difference was that back then you could easily stick someone on them to bot, or recruit someone in their place to gear up, since 36-man encounters required much less skill, attention, and activity from each class as a whole. Now, you actually have to replace them with a real player, and yes, that player WILL have to be geared up, but changing the raid cap will never solve this. Similarly with casuals, you're only dealing with this issue because you have too many people in the guild. As I see it, there are 9 core classes that are absolutely required on every raid: 5 healers, 2 tanks, 2 wiz. These core classes SHOULD be played by people that are on every day but there is nothing that is saying they have to. They could easily be played by regular or casual players, and increasing the cap only creates a few more spots for you to recruit or use regular players. Pumping casuals into the guild will still be inefficient and tough to deal with under 21-man raids, because their individual contributions are still much more important than with a 36-man squad. If the cap is increased to 21, will we still see you in the forums fighting the good fight for 24, 27, and each iteration until we return to the 36-man model?

I'm sorry that you feel that you can't cut anyone from your guild, but it's something that guilds have been dealing with in every MMO and I ensure you that we felt the same feelings in Defiance when we were figuring out our 18-man roster. Some of the players in there have raided with us since the beginning, and whether you see that as inferior to Ruin's span or not, it was tough for us to cut. Look at WoW moving to the 25-man raids for the expansion, look at game jumping from 72 to 36 man raids, look at DAOC moving from RvR raids to 8-man gank groups... These type of changes affect guilds all of the time in order to make for better and more enjoyable content and it's up to you as a guild to make the best of it.

This is not true at all we really struggled with this 18 man thing. We had to change who was in the raid several times and had to sit some people out for botted dps cause we needed to up our dps alot. In other words we didnt enjoy it as we could have.

Sorry, my 'We've all thoroughly enjoyed...' was referring to my guild, Steel.

 

[volvov2]

Your arguments of 'what if someone gets bored and quits' and 'we can't have casuals with 18-players' are both moot because they apply equally to an 18-man, 21-man, 24-man, or 36-man setups.

Bull, Ruin has always been 20% hardcore, never miss a raid except once in a great while players, and the rest are casual, 3-4 times a week players. I challenge any upcoming (not reformed) 'new' guild leader to post "I have a team of 18 people that raids every single raid without fail we dont need ANY other people to round out the team".  The 36 man cap had allowed Ruin to keep a roster of 45ish people and because so many people were just casual players, it averaged out to 30 to 36 a night, the only night where we might run over and have to camp bots, was Sunday nights (typically when everyone has free time).

Ruin will not be recruiting again for a long time, and when/if we do, it will be hardcore only, because we cant afford to have casual players with such a small raid cap.