total BS, check this guys bio, lol. either this is someone that has already been banned with his main, or some moron that just wants to start something. reported!
No, raiding is good, especially if some people dislike it.
I'll explain. Part of the beauty of a MMORPG is that it is shared with other people, who sometimes step upon one another's toes, have arguments, etc.... A lively game needs a little friction of this nature, and if it comes from a RAID not going as smoothly as planned, folks arguing over treasure or whatever, then so be it. At least it's alive.
Nothing would be more boring than a conflict-less MMORPG. So let their be raids and let some of these raids fall apart and cause a little grief and bring a little humor.
while i dont necessarily agree that you should have raiding because itll piss others off, i do agree that raiding is a good thing and something that should be included. like ive said before, i love to have options open for me. i dont raid generally, but theres nothing saying i wont want to eventually. so just by having the option, i feel more empowered. and like the game is more varied then the typical kill x, find y, type of stuff. kinda like being able to sit down in the game. there are some games that dont have this basic feature. granted, in those few games, its not really needed, but it would still be nice to have the option to sit if i wanna.
I think most mmorpg companies use/build elitest concepts like raiding in their games because they think it will bring in more subs. Their thinking is that people will continue to play because of the carrot just beyond reach while that is generally true such as when a soloer decides to group to be able to get that carrot that needs a group it's becoming less true for those that group and want that next carrot that can be had with raiding. What it takes to pull off a succesful raid and all of the poitics of raiding and other crap that goes with it has become onerous to groupers and soloers.
But companies and their devs have invested emotionally in the ideal of elitest concepts in gaming and no ones wants to be wrong or be proven wrong. A wildly popular non raid server would do just that, many rationales and justifications will be presented to avoid a non raid server and may have become a personal issue to some.
If Brad really wanted you to set yourself free he'd give you the choice of choosing between raid and non raid servers...
This is a subject that I find myself a little "torn" on. I've been a gamer since the early days of pong and the first atari. I used to play a game called "Adventure" (which IMO is the first medival game)
Having said all that, yeah, I'm in my 30's now and I don't have the time to play games all day long. Once upon a time I could play around the clock but now life's responsiblities require me to work, run erronds and spend time with other human beings. I do try to play a 2-3 hours a night and a few chunks of time on the weekends.
This is the part where I am at an impass. For the amount of time I can afford to play I want my character to remain competitive with the characters around me. I don't feel that is fair that my character can't hold a candle to someone who can play 24/7 and have the best of the best gear. While the amount of time might seem like small beans to the person with less or even no responsibilities it's pretty much ALL of my free time. Yous guys know how it is, you personalize your toon and work hard on it. When you have some kid following you around in full epics a month or two after release bugging you to duel then talking smack when you turn them down (or get your butt kicked) it feels kinda crappy. You know how gear can be the deciding factor in many a battle.
On the other hand, the person that puts the massive amount of time in should reap the rewards of their efforts. I don't feel the dude that burns up to the level cap with a few friends and raids like a maniac until he gets all the best gear should be penalized in any way. Seriously, they've earned it.
I'm going to play Vanguard regardless of what kind of servers the game has simply because I'm interested in the game. What will keep me playing longer is how the servers evolve. If splitting up raiding and non raiding servers can contribute to a better balance between the casual gamers and the ZOMG I UBER PWNED U LEETists then I'm all for it.
Cylus, since you popped in on this thread why don't you put an end to this by telling us that Sigil will never have a non-raiding server.
I know it will never happen because it pretty much goes against Brad's whole philosophy of game design. But some people seem to be under the false impression that Sigil might actually consider it.
So how about giving us a Thanksgiving gift and sparing some people from false hope.
Originally posted by anarchyart Originally posted by gestalt11 Well I applaud your ... mmm ... I don't want to say open-mindedness. How about facile mindedness?Facile? Not at all. I have thought long and hard about it. Look at the poll man, there is obviously an audience for it and I have to agree where I once did not.
Truly, in a game that separates things into servers/shards there really is no reason not too.
However, I will warn you, promulgating this line of reasoning is generally fruitless and depressing. You will almost never get a half-way decent counter argument and the greed is soul crushing. Just stay away from the topic. People will do anything to keep their peasants.Don't agree. I believe this is a good idea as it will bring more customers. I hate raiding, but I love the awesome rewards. Thousands feel the same.
BTW thesaurus much? I believe its a good idea too, but I believe that this will be fruitless. Seriously its not worth your effort.
Originally posted by CylusSigil Originally posted by Anofalye If I don't raid and I am gimped by 20%, this is not acceptable. I don't care about that 20% content, but I do care about this 20% tools I am missing. A raid-free server is about giving this 20% tools in grouping as well, effectively removing raiding. The game is balanced with this extra 20% tools, the best grouping encounters are balanced with this gear. This gear has to be available throught grouping; at least on the raid-free server.
If that gear's only purpose is to enhance the capabilities of PCs in that 20% of missing ocntent, why would you need it for the other 80%?
Are you making the assumption that group content is balanced around PCs w/gear obtained from raid encounters?
Do you know something or are you just asking about people's underlying assumptions? How can raid gear not affect grouping?
Irregardless of what Sigil actually designa around, the combat mechanics of raid and group are still highly similar. Is Sigil going to put in some "+50 to ac when fighting raid con creature" on raid drops, which people would hate btw. Because otherwise whether Sigil balances around it or not people are still going to want the uber raid helm of rockheadedness if its the best tanking helm. Raid or group.
Diplomacy and grouping can certainly be made to be mechanically separate. Raiding and Grouping would take an incredible and ridiculous hack to do so.
So if people are assuming what you stated above then tell us why they shouldn't because it is actually a reasonable assumption. It is an assumption that is backed up by history and design theory.
How is raid and and grouping mechanically sepearate? How does Raid gear not matter for groupers? How is Raiding itself mechancially different than grouping? How is this expressed in your itemization model?
If Vanguard does not accomplish this then it is entirely reasonable for one to assume that raid gear will affect grouping. It is almost inevitable that without a mechanical separation that some of the best grouping gear will be in raids, even if it is not all of it, and if you have an equivalent item quality model, vice versa. My reading of Brad's posts on the matter seemed to confirm that he beleives it likely that at least a portion of the raid gear may become viewed by the community as the best piece for certain roles. Roles which are part of grouping. If my reading is correct than there is already a tacit admission of the bleed over between raid and group.
What you are saying is that people won't NEED it to complete the dungeon. Well so what? This is an item-centric game based almost completely around the idea of "progression". Even if the "progress" isa completely fake treadmill, people still want the best. I think you must on some level understand how this undermines the ambition that underlies one of the central motivating pillars of a game like this.
All you are saying is we balanced these encounters around being slightly mediocre so you are fine! Be happy with being mediocre because you can do all the group content since we balanced around your gimp asses.
If you expect people who hate raiding to play an Item-centric and extremely vertical level progression RPG and forces them to be perpetually mediocre simply because they do not like a certain gameplay style just because you have balanced the group content to be inline with their mediocrity then you do not understand your game or your audience. This isn't a MOO and I am quite certain Brad knows that. There is a reason there will never be a non-raid server and it is not because Brad thinks Vanguard will be some RP MOO or that he thinks this solution actually is satisfying in anyway.
It is a snowjob. It is just cheap sleight of hand. A simple variation on the magicican trick Blizzard tried to pull with its donut "core" philosophy. It will string a long some. But you will piss off as many people as Blizzard did in the end. The fact that many people involved still confuse casual and non-raider is one obvious tell among many.
So I will give you some, probably unwanted, advice. Stop treating your potential customers like children and marks and give them a choice with the actual facts laid out.
Originally posted by spiritglow I think most mmorpg companies use/build elitest concepts like raiding in their games because they think it will bring in more subs. Their thinking is that people will continue to play because of the carrot just beyond reach while that is generally true such as when a soloer decides to group to be able to get that carrot that needs a group it's becoming less true for those that group and want that next carrot that can be had with raiding. What it takes to pull off a succesful raid and all of the poitics of raiding and other crap that goes with it has become onerous to groupers and soloers.
But companies and their devs have invested emotionally in the ideal of elitest concepts in gaming and no ones wants to be wrong or be proven wrong. A wildly popular non raid server would do just that, many rationales and justifications will be presented to avoid a non raid server and may have become a personal issue to some.
If Brad really wanted you to set yourself free he'd give you the choice of choosing between raid and non raid servers...
Spiritglow
If you reward peoples who are unworthy and doesn't deserve the reward, these peoples in turn should be loyal...which is something they where not to their biggest surprise. Go see Afterlife and FoH website to see how these unworthy peoples, peoples who doesn't deserve what they have been given by devs, on a gold plating, they betray these devs, even when they buy them airplane tickets.
Bottom line: Raiding reward unworthy peoples who should not achieve anything special in group, but raiding grant them this unfair edge...in turn they should be loyal. But this is forgetting that they alienate far more peoples then the house of the Lames that is not even supporting them. Losing the groupers in order to get these players isn't a good trade.
Raid-free servers are a must. As peoples can progress into grouping by...grouping!
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
What he is saying, since you seem to have not grasped it, is not that people with uber gear obtained from raids will not have an advantage in groups, but that people who do NOT have uber gear obtained from raids will not be gimped during group encounters because of it. Group encounters are going to be balanced based on group obtainable gear.
Noting that I havn't read this thread yet, and I'm going completely off of thread title here:
First, I'd like to say that I am in no way looking forward to Vanguard. For all I care, the game could do great, or it could bomb.. IE, I don't care about it at all. I don't like raid-oriented games.
But, the game is clearly designed with raids in mind for the -main- focus of the end-game. Removing the MAIN gameplay feature of a game is quite possibly the stupidest thing ever. It would be like removing raids from WoW.. that's the end-game. Remove those, and all you're left to do is PvP grind for different types of gear instead.
Now.. I'm all for sandbox MMOs that -have- raids, but don't give unbalancing rewards for doing them. I'd rather my game not focus on having to grind the same mob over and over to get a piece of armor. I'd rather do it for the cool factor, or to get something rare that I could show off.
Originally posted by z80paranoia If they made a non-raiding server, vanguard would be my main game and I would force all of my gaming friends to join.
And to the peoples arguing that you don't need raid-gear in groups...well, you NEED it. Brad won't do game balancing twice, he do it once. And he does it with ALL gear. Thereby, you need raid-gear if you are to enjoy grouping with the game balancing as it was done. Removing 20% of the gear would require to rework the GAME BALANCING all over, I don't care if the raid gear is given automatically to all players on raid-free servers, if they are on merchants or whatever, but they have to be there! Game balancing was made with it.
Raiding is merely 20% of the game according to devs, thereby making raid-free servers with all loot distributed in an "easier" way is a good solution, peoples would play and enjoy such servers. Raid-free servers would be the MAIN aspect of the next successfull MMO.
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
Originally posted by gestalt11 (bunch of Rain Man type blathering)
What he is saying, since you seem to have not grasped it, is not that people with uber gear obtained from raids will not have an advantage in groups, but that people who do NOT have uber gear obtained from raids will not be gimped during group encounters because of it. Group encounters are going to be balanced based on group obtainable gear.
Jeez.
Group encounters will be balanced once, with ALL gear in mind. Best groupers deserve to be groupers, not raiders. This is the basic. You want groupers to desire groupers, not raiders. You want groupers to favor peoples who would not ditch group because a raid is start, you want groupers to ENJOY the game. Been a weaker character is not enjoying the game, you can't really succeed.
Not to mention, we know Brad. Some zones "aren't" meant to be grouped...but...with the BEST gear, including raid-gear, peoples will group there. And it HAVE to be groupers, not raiders. Otherwise grouping is screwed before the game is even release.
See, in doubt favor grouping, no other gameplay. This is what Verant use to say. Well, full logic here, favor grouping, if it clash with raiding, you have to make a decision, and you better pick grouping otherwise you lose the majority of players.
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
see, this is what im talking about right here. you guys start a thread called, "Official "We want a non-raiding server" thread". and then you get people that havent read up on the game at all coming in here and stating that this is a raid only game and leaving without ever reading anything else.
besides, none of us have actually played the damn game (except the NDA breakers, and the ones that dont break the NDA are the ones that prolly are the most knowledgeable about the game anyway). but yet, some of you are arguing about the games mechanics as if you know something about them. you dont. get that through youre overly huge and thick heads, you dont.
im going to be laughing me ass off when open beta hits and you naysayers are ingame enjoying the game as much as the rest of us. i have a very good memory, and will more than likely call you out. i mean, come on, this is stupid and just speculation. besides, if the only reason you play a game is to be the uberest, there are already a number of games out that cater to you. and frankly, youre never going to enjoy a game more than 6 months anyway. no matter how they build it.
Originally posted by anarchyart Originally posted by gestalt11(bunch of Rain Man type blathering)
What he is saying, since you seem to have not grasped it, is not that people with uber gear obtained from raids will not have an advantage in groups, but that people who do NOT have uber gear obtained from raids will not be gimped during group encounters because of it. Group encounters are going to be balanced based on group obtainable gear.
Jeez.
I know that is what he is saying. I specficially said that and stated that such a scheme is worthless. Because balancing around mediocrity is still medicore. These games have strong component of ambition and "progression". People don't want to play this game for a year and be doomed to perpetual mediocrity. Why even start if you are screwed before you begin?
Grouping encountes will be on the short bus balance track. Raids will be balanced for real. They are setting themselves up for failure by undermining one of the pillars of the game.
They think they are setting themselves up for success by using the elitism of raids to add extra incentive to those who are especially ambitious.
However they are wrong. There are many people who are ambitious but will not stoop to do an activity they hate.
Gimp doesn't mean unable to do stuff in the game. Gimp is about not being maximally effective. And that is what people want in a game like Vanguard. They set goals to reach the top. That is the whole point of these tiered itemcentric games with extrememly vertical level in which you get well defined feats in small little bits. They throw all kinds of progression carrots your way to give you treats. A majority of people play these games to put in the work so that they may achieve maximal power for the configuration they have decided to play.
But they aren't doing that. They are saying we won't stop you from being able to do group activities, but no you won't be allowed to be maximally effective. Only people who raid and group will be maximally effective fighters.
People put a lot of time into testing and reasearching skill and item builds. They spend a lot of time and energy obtaining the xp and items. They plan these things ahead of time and set their goals and are one of the major reasons they even continue playing these games that have so much grind in them. If you deny them the ability to fully realize their plans and dreams they will be pissed.
Yes fine when you play in the minor leagues (grouping) you won't need to worry about facing a major league pitcher. So what? Who wants to play in the minor leagues? Everyone who plays in the minor leagues in basball dreams of playing in the major leagues. And this is what they want to have happen in Vanguard, just like Rob Pardo intended WoW to work that way with the "core" of his donut.
The flaw with this thinking is that many group players hate raiding, and yet are still forced to play in the minor leagues even though they are usually the majority of the playerbase of almost every MMORPG.
My reading of BMQ's stuff indicates that he intends to change the the Pardo of vision of Raiders being completely uber in all ways to making Raiders have 1/5 of their items be better (assuming they group).
Well so what? Even if the group stuff doesn't need 1/5 of their items to be better to do group encounters they are still just minor leaguers. They can never fully realize the potential of their character unless they raid.
Every measure of power in this game will be completely arbitrary and imaginary. But people want to fully and completely realize the potential of their characters relative to whatever is existant in the system. People who only group will never be able to do so.
The 80%/20% model is flawed on a very basic model. It is still exclusive. Is it better than the WoW model? Yes. But people want to play in a manner that they enjoy and be able to fully realize the potential of their character and neither model allows this.
BMQ is on a track where only those who participate in all the playstyles and thus maximally use all content can fully realize their character. This is a mistake. Letting people play in any of those three ways and still fully realize their character is the best way to go. I would be willing to bet that 90% of all players dislike at least one of the playstyles. So only 10% of people can actually enjoy themselves full time and realize their goals? That's crazy. You want people to enjoy themselves and you want people to be striving for their goals. Even if they never actually reach those goals it is important for those goals to be possible or they will give up.
I like solo and I like grouping and I hate raiding. I will never fully realize my character in Vanguard and therefore I won't even bother to start. Afterall what is the point since i can never reach my goal? A non-raid server would allow me to fully realize my character becuase I like both solo and group and would do them. However it should be noted that a non-raid server will still not satisfy the exclusive grouper who never soloes (if we belive Brad that there is an Uber solo only item in the game).
The fact is that a non-raid server is just a hack. The real problem is BMQ's stubborn adherence to an exclusive item model.
Although it is a hack I could live with it. But in the end the ideal solution is to allow all playstyles to reward equally. But people won't stand for that because, after all raiders are the best and soloers are slack jawed morons who should be playing Oblivion.
But until you either get playstyle tailored server sets or a non-playstyle exclusive item reward model (such as a token system) there will be serious problem. Especially if you favor a minority playstyle like raiding.
Because once things are avaiable only to people who play a certain way and not to anyone else who plays a different way you have completely changed the potentials of the game and therefore you have changed people's goals and analysis of how they fit into the game. Why should I play 20 hours a week for a year just to get second best? or get something that is "good enough"? Does that really sound inspiring? Good enough? No its not inspiring. Its not even an issue whether or not I will get it, it is merely whether or not it is possible. Then you can dream.
But that is all Cylus has said. Although it was a question, it was really a statement. And it was "Don't worry, the stuff you will get will be 'good enough' to do your group encounters because they will be balanced on group only stuff."
Oh boy. Now that is progression. Good enough. Whoopee.
Now contrast that to "Be all you can be". Which is more inspiring? Which makes you want to spend a bunch of time developing your character?
"Be all you can be" vs. "Don't worry you will be good enough". And there is no doubt that if you do not raid you cannot "Be all you can be". You must solo, group, and raid to "Be all you can be". But I hate to raid and refuse to do so, all I can ever hope for is "good enough". Well I'm sorry that is not exciting and is contrary to one of the major motivations for a majority of people who play this game. They want to work towards excellence.
Originally posted by gestalt11 (bunch of Rain Man type blathering)
What he is saying, since you seem to have not grasped it, is not that people with uber gear obtained from raids will not have an advantage in groups, but that people who do NOT have uber gear obtained from raids will not be gimped during group encounters because of it. Group encounters are going to be balanced based on group obtainable gear.
Jeez.
I know that is what he is saying. I specficially said that and stated that such a scheme is worthless. Because balancing around mediocrity is still medicore. These games have strong component of ambition and "progression". People don't want to play this game for a year and be doomed to perpetual mediocrity. Why even start if you are screwed before you begin?
I hope you are wrong.
Because if you balance toward mediocrity, then grouping has no purpose whatsover, since peoples with superior gear (acquired in raids) storm through it and make it irrelevant, before you even start. So they actually destroy any achievement feeling anyone else might get from grouping, with their superior gear.
So when you balance, you have to take ALL gear into account...a raid free server would work extremely well if the end-grouping is balanced with raid-gear, as long as the raiding gear is distributed in a way or another within a grouping logic (be it free, merchant, loot, whatever).
Group is 60% of the game according to these devs, I certainly hope it isn't balanced toward mediocrity, which would kill it before peoples even play it. However, to avoid enforcing raiding, it pretty much make the raid-free server a necessity, isn't it?
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
Originally posted by PlanoMM im going to be laughing me ass off when open beta hits and you naysayers are ingame enjoying the game as much as the rest of us. i have a very good memory, and will more than likely call you out. i mean, come on, this is stupid and just speculation. besides, if the only reason you play a game is to be the uberest, there are already a number of games out that cater to you. and frankly, youre never going to enjoy a game more than 6 months anyway. no matter how they build it.
If there is a raid-free server, I will be happy to be playing, no matter if you laugh at me or not. However, I will wait for release.
"Been uber" is not the main reason why I play a game, however, it is the driving goal. I play (and complete) NWN2...my toon was freaking uber in the end. Did I play NWN2 only for uberest? Nope I was far more uber in BG or Torment anyway. However, if you deny me this uberest for some lame reason that has nothing to do with the game I am playing, I will just not play that game. Working toward the uberness is important, EXTREMELY important. I won't settle for subpar stuff. The fact that I achieve it, or not, is irrelevant...however if the game ask me to raid (or to PvP), I play another game. I don't want to raid, I want to be the best grouper on the server; or work toward that goal...I will endure these diplomacy stings, these tradeskills, I will solo and all if you want me to, but I will not, no matter what, endure raiding. The peoples inside these uberguilds are worser than anything else, I rather bang myself into a wall than be into an elevator with raiders. I rather PvP than raid, and you honestly would consider my PvP-portfolio as desesperate, so we shall continue on the PvE and Raid-free focus...work on the positive from your players...and I know that MANY players will not bear raiding again.
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
Originally posted by PlanoMM im going to be laughing me ass off when open beta hits and you naysayers are ingame enjoying the game as much as the rest of us. i have a very good memory, and will more than likely call you out. i mean, come on, this is stupid and just speculation. besides, if the only reason you play a game is to be the uberest, there are already a number of games out that cater to you. and frankly, youre never going to enjoy a game more than 6 months anyway. no matter how they build it.
If there is a raid-free server, I will be happy to be playing, no matter if you laugh at me or not. However, I will wait for release.
"Been uber" is not the main reason why I play a game, however, it is the driving goal. I play (and complete) NWN2...my toon was freaking uber in the end. Did I play NWN2 only for uberest? Nope I was far more uber in BG or Torment anyway. However, if you deny me this uberest for some lame reason that has nothing to do with the game I am playing, I will just not play that game. Working toward the uberness is important, EXTREMELY important. I won't settle for subpar stuff. The fact that I achieve it, or not, is irrelevant...however if the game ask me to raid (or to PvP), I play another game. I don't want to raid, I want to be the best grouper on the server; or work toward that goal...I will endure these diplomacy stings, these tradeskills, I will solo and all if you want me to, but I will not, no matter what, endure raiding. The peoples inside these uberguilds are worser than anything else, I rather bang myself into a wall than be into an elevator with raiders. I rather PvP than raid, and you honestly would consider my PvP-portfolio as desesperate, so we shall continue on the PvE and Raid-free focus...work on the positive from your players...and I know that MANY players will not bear raiding again.
Anofalye: i wasnt actually talking about you anyway. youve not been a naysayer. youve stated your opinion and i respect your opnion. youre not saying how the game is going to go to pot and how noone will play it because of this or that. those are the ones that im going to laugh at, if you want, you can laugh with me. i dont mind.
the difference here is that youve stated why you want the "non-raiding servers", i dont agree with you about it, but i can respect your opinion on the matter. what i dont like is the attitude of "if they dont do the game the way i think they should, then the game is gonna fail". thats just stupid. those are the people that im talking about.
Originally posted by anarchyart I never thought we would actually need something like this, but there are so many people who hate raiding nowadays, I thought it worthy. I myself at first thought it was crazy, but I have to admit, a non-raiding server would probably draw me in also. If they re-arranged the loot tables so that there were no raids at all and groups could do all the content, my casual playing butt would probably like that. They might have to add instances to certain areas which would be tough for the devs to do as they have said from the beginning they would never do this. However, if they could do it without instances it might bring in a whole bunch of people to this wonderful looking game.
A non raiding server? Never on my beloved vanguard.
Why should Sigil listen to the likes of you anyway, its getting better and better, I dont see the need for this kind of ruleset. Besides, everyone in the vanguard forums agrees with what i say. Your in the wrong game forum pal.
People like Anofalye are just suggesting the game to be watered down easy mode, and so far Sigil is listening to us the core gamers and not lazy people like Anofalye. By the way, noone will miss you Anofalye for not playing Vanguard. On the contrary, we'd be glad people like you not playing vanguard.
Whatever happens I will be giving Vanguard a try and if they give me the option of playing on a PvP-Non Raiding server that will be my choice.
Raiding sucks the life and the comunity out of every MMORPG game that it has ever touched.
I have played in almost every MMORPG game since EQ and always Raiding has ruined the game for me.
WOW is an good example of how much raiding can damage a game, it has such a poor end game centred on Raiding that just ruins the whole MMORPG experience.
Don't get me wrong I don't dislike WOW, I took 4 characters to level 60 and another 8 to 40+, I mastered every crafting profession and even managed to get to Rank 10 in PvP.
I enjoyed 1.5 years playing WOW but in the end Raiding destroyed the game for me.
I would love for Vanguard to have non-raiding servers, in-fact sign me up for one :-)
Originally posted by SilentWisper Whatever happens I will be giving Vanguard a try and if they give me the option of playing on a PvP-Non Raiding server that will be my choice. Raiding sucks the life and the comunity out of every MMORPG game that it has ever touched. I have played in almost every MMORPG game since EQ and always Raiding has ruined the game for me. WOW is an good example of how much raiding can damage a game, it has such a poor end game centred on Raiding that just ruins the whole MMORPG experience. Don't get me wrong I don't dislike WOW, I took 4 characters to level 60 and another 8 to 40+, I mastered every crafting profession and even managed to get to Rank 10 in PvP. I enjoyed 1.5 years playing WOW but in the end Raiding destroyed the game for me. I would love for Vanguard to have non-raiding servers, in-fact sign me up for one :-)
My WOW experience is very much the same as yours, and I feel the same way about raiding. I had to laugh at the developer's explaination that in some extreme cases, 12 hour raids might be required, or ..broken up into "manageable" 3 and 4 hour blocks.
This might be acceptable if I only have to run the raid one time.....and get from the raid all of the items I need in one run. But if I have to run 3 and 4 hour mini raids over and over... I'm not going to be happy.
Raiding would be fine if you only had to do it one time to compete the objective..but repetitive raiding is the suck... and I'm hoping my next game doesn't depend on it.
After reading everything here, I'm still of the opinion that Vanguard will favor raiders over non-raiders...
And I really doubt they'll release a raid - free server, better to look for another game.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Originally posted by Vanguarde People like Anofalye are just suggesting the game to be watered down easy mode, and so far Sigil is listening to us the core gamers and not lazy people like Anofalye. By the way, noone will miss you Anofalye for not playing Vanguard. On the contrary, we'd be glad people like you not playing vanguard.
It is people like you who will scare people off from playing Vanguard. It is YOU who are in the wrong gaming forum, sport. I have been waiting for this game since it was announced and I have been a member of the official forums for over 2 years. I did not say the game should be watered down to easy mode nor is that my intention. I simply think that a lot of people who will not play Vanguard WOULD play it if there were a server that did not have raiding.
I will be playing Vanguard no matter what, but I, unlike you, would like to play alongside people who despise raiding because I have a similar dislike of 4 hour raids. See you on the PVP server.
Comments
total BS, check this guys bio, lol. either this is someone that has already been banned with his main, or some moron that just wants to start something. reported!
edit: thank you, mods. for deleting that post.
______________________________
1) To be official, it would be over at the VSoH site.
2) If you don't want to raid, don't. You can get equally good stuff from crafted goods and Elite Drops.
3) Non-Raid servers are a LOT harder then redoing loot tables. Areas would need to be redesigned as well.
I'll start my own SWG... with Black Jack... and Hookers!!!
In fact, forget the SWG!!!!
Guild Wars 2 is my religion
No, raiding is good, especially if some people dislike it.
I'll explain. Part of the beauty of a MMORPG is that it is shared with other people, who sometimes step upon one another's toes, have arguments, etc.... A lively game needs a little friction of this nature, and if it comes from a RAID not going as smoothly as planned, folks arguing over treasure or whatever, then so be it. At least it's alive.
Nothing would be more boring than a conflict-less MMORPG. So let their be raids and let some of these raids fall apart and cause a little grief and bring a little humor.
______________________________
I think most mmorpg companies use/build elitest concepts like raiding in their games because they think it will bring in more subs. Their thinking is that people will continue to play because of the carrot just beyond reach while that is generally true such as when a soloer decides to group to be able to get that carrot that needs a group it's becoming less true for those that group and want that next carrot that can be had with raiding. What it takes to pull off a succesful raid and all of the poitics of raiding and other crap that goes with it has become onerous to groupers and soloers.
But companies and their devs have invested emotionally in the ideal of elitest concepts in gaming and no ones wants to be wrong or be proven wrong. A wildly popular non raid server would do just that, many rationales and justifications will be presented to avoid a non raid server and may have become a personal issue to some.
If Brad really wanted you to set yourself free he'd give you the choice of choosing between raid and non raid servers...
Spiritglow
This is a subject that I find myself a little "torn" on. I've been a gamer since the early days of pong and the first atari. I used to play a game called "Adventure" (which IMO is the first medival game)
Having said all that, yeah, I'm in my 30's now and I don't have the time to play games all day long. Once upon a time I could play around the clock but now life's responsiblities require me to work, run erronds and spend time with other human beings. I do try to play a 2-3 hours a night and a few chunks of time on the weekends.
This is the part where I am at an impass. For the amount of time I can afford to play I want my character to remain competitive with the characters around me. I don't feel that is fair that my character can't hold a candle to someone who can play 24/7 and have the best of the best gear. While the amount of time might seem like small beans to the person with less or even no responsibilities it's pretty much ALL of my free time. Yous guys know how it is, you personalize your toon and work hard on it. When you have some kid following you around in full epics a month or two after release bugging you to duel then talking smack when you turn them down (or get your butt kicked) it feels kinda crappy. You know how gear can be the deciding factor in many a battle.
On the other hand, the person that puts the massive amount of time in should reap the rewards of their efforts. I don't feel the dude that burns up to the level cap with a few friends and raids like a maniac until he gets all the best gear should be penalized in any way. Seriously, they've earned it.
I'm going to play Vanguard regardless of what kind of servers the game has simply because I'm interested in the game. What will keep me playing longer is how the servers evolve. If splitting up raiding and non raiding servers can contribute to a better balance between the casual gamers and the ZOMG I UBER PWNED U LEETists then I'm all for it.
Cylus, since you popped in on this thread why don't you put an end to this by telling us that Sigil will never have a non-raiding server.
I know it will never happen because it pretty much goes against Brad's whole philosophy of game design. But some people seem to be under the false impression that Sigil might actually consider it.
So how about giving us a Thanksgiving gift and sparing some people from false hope.
I believe its a good idea too, but I believe that this will be fruitless. Seriously its not worth your effort.
If that gear's only purpose is to enhance the capabilities of PCs in that 20% of missing ocntent, why would you need it for the other 80%?
Are you making the assumption that group content is balanced around PCs w/gear obtained from raid encounters?
Do you know something or are you just asking about people's underlying assumptions? How can raid gear not affect grouping?
Irregardless of what Sigil actually designa around, the combat mechanics of raid and group are still highly similar. Is Sigil going to put in some "+50 to ac when fighting raid con creature" on raid drops, which people would hate btw. Because otherwise whether Sigil balances around it or not people are still going to want the uber raid helm of rockheadedness if its the best tanking helm. Raid or group.
Diplomacy and grouping can certainly be made to be mechanically separate. Raiding and Grouping would take an incredible and ridiculous hack to do so.
So if people are assuming what you stated above then tell us why they shouldn't because it is actually a reasonable assumption. It is an assumption that is backed up by history and design theory.
How is raid and and grouping mechanically sepearate? How does Raid gear not matter for groupers? How is Raiding itself mechancially different than grouping? How is this expressed in your itemization model?
If Vanguard does not accomplish this then it is entirely reasonable for one to assume that raid gear will affect grouping. It is almost inevitable that without a mechanical separation that some of the best grouping gear will be in raids, even if it is not all of it, and if you have an equivalent item quality model, vice versa. My reading of Brad's posts on the matter seemed to confirm that he beleives it likely that at least a portion of the raid gear may become viewed by the community as the best piece for certain roles. Roles which are part of grouping. If my reading is correct than there is already a tacit admission of the bleed over between raid and group.
What you are saying is that people won't NEED it to complete the dungeon. Well so what? This is an item-centric game based almost completely around the idea of "progression". Even if the "progress" isa completely fake treadmill, people still want the best. I think you must on some level understand how this undermines the ambition that underlies one of the central motivating pillars of a game like this.
All you are saying is we balanced these encounters around being slightly mediocre so you are fine! Be happy with being mediocre because you can do all the group content since we balanced around your gimp asses.
If you expect people who hate raiding to play an Item-centric and extremely vertical level progression RPG and forces them to be perpetually mediocre simply because they do not like a certain gameplay style just because you have balanced the group content to be inline with their mediocrity then you do not understand your game or your audience. This isn't a MOO and I am quite certain Brad knows that. There is a reason there will never be a non-raid server and it is not because Brad thinks Vanguard will be some RP MOO or that he thinks this solution actually is satisfying in anyway.
It is a snowjob. It is just cheap sleight of hand. A simple variation on the magicican trick Blizzard tried to pull with its donut "core" philosophy. It will string a long some. But you will piss off as many people as Blizzard did in the end. The fact that many people involved still confuse casual and non-raider is one obvious tell among many.
So I will give you some, probably unwanted, advice. Stop treating your potential customers like children and marks and give them a choice with the actual facts laid out.
I know that is harsh, but I think it is true.
/sigh
you got all that from what CylusSigil posted? damn, either youre incredibly good or assuming a hella lot.
______________________________
If you reward peoples who are unworthy and doesn't deserve the reward, these peoples in turn should be loyal...which is something they where not to their biggest surprise. Go see Afterlife and FoH website to see how these unworthy peoples, peoples who doesn't deserve what they have been given by devs, on a gold plating, they betray these devs, even when they buy them airplane tickets.
Bottom line: Raiding reward unworthy peoples who should not achieve anything special in group, but raiding grant them this unfair edge...in turn they should be loyal. But this is forgetting that they alienate far more peoples then the house of the Lames that is not even supporting them. Losing the groupers in order to get these players isn't a good trade.
Raid-free servers are a must. As peoples can progress into grouping by...grouping!
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
What he is saying, since you seem to have not grasped it, is not that people with uber gear obtained from raids will not have an advantage in groups, but that people who do NOT have uber gear obtained from raids will not be gimped during group encounters because of it. Group encounters are going to be balanced based on group obtainable gear.
Jeez.
First, I'd like to say that I am in no way looking forward to Vanguard. For all I care, the game could do great, or it could bomb.. IE, I don't care about it at all. I don't like raid-oriented games.
But, the game is clearly designed with raids in mind for the -main- focus of the end-game. Removing the MAIN gameplay feature of a game is quite possibly the stupidest thing ever. It would be like removing raids from WoW.. that's the end-game. Remove those, and all you're left to do is PvP grind for different types of gear instead.
Now.. I'm all for sandbox MMOs that -have- raids, but don't give unbalancing rewards for doing them. I'd rather my game not focus on having to grind the same mob over and over to get a piece of armor. I'd rather do it for the cool factor, or to get something rare that I could show off.
And to the peoples arguing that you don't need raid-gear in groups...well, you NEED it. Brad won't do game balancing twice, he do it once. And he does it with ALL gear. Thereby, you need raid-gear if you are to enjoy grouping with the game balancing as it was done. Removing 20% of the gear would require to rework the GAME BALANCING all over, I don't care if the raid gear is given automatically to all players on raid-free servers, if they are on merchants or whatever, but they have to be there! Game balancing was made with it.
Raiding is merely 20% of the game according to devs, thereby making raid-free servers with all loot distributed in an "easier" way is a good solution, peoples would play and enjoy such servers. Raid-free servers would be the MAIN aspect of the next successfull MMO.
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
What he is saying, since you seem to have not grasped it, is not that people with uber gear obtained from raids will not have an advantage in groups, but that people who do NOT have uber gear obtained from raids will not be gimped during group encounters because of it. Group encounters are going to be balanced based on group obtainable gear.
Jeez.
Group encounters will be balanced once, with ALL gear in mind. Best groupers deserve to be groupers, not raiders. This is the basic. You want groupers to desire groupers, not raiders. You want groupers to favor peoples who would not ditch group because a raid is start, you want groupers to ENJOY the game. Been a weaker character is not enjoying the game, you can't really succeed.
Not to mention, we know Brad. Some zones "aren't" meant to be grouped...but...with the BEST gear, including raid-gear, peoples will group there. And it HAVE to be groupers, not raiders. Otherwise grouping is screwed before the game is even release.
See, in doubt favor grouping, no other gameplay. This is what Verant use to say. Well, full logic here, favor grouping, if it clash with raiding, you have to make a decision, and you better pick grouping otherwise you lose the majority of players.
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
see, this is what im talking about right here. you guys start a thread called, "Official "We want a non-raiding server" thread". and then you get people that havent read up on the game at all coming in here and stating that this is a raid only game and leaving without ever reading anything else.
besides, none of us have actually played the damn game (except the NDA breakers, and the ones that dont break the NDA are the ones that prolly are the most knowledgeable about the game anyway). but yet, some of you are arguing about the games mechanics as if you know something about them. you dont. get that through youre overly huge and thick heads, you dont.
im going to be laughing me ass off when open beta hits and you naysayers are ingame enjoying the game as much as the rest of us. i have a very good memory, and will more than likely call you out. i mean, come on, this is stupid and just speculation. besides, if the only reason you play a game is to be the uberest, there are already a number of games out that cater to you. and frankly, youre never going to enjoy a game more than 6 months anyway. no matter how they build it.
______________________________
What he is saying, since you seem to have not grasped it, is not that people with uber gear obtained from raids will not have an advantage in groups, but that people who do NOT have uber gear obtained from raids will not be gimped during group encounters because of it. Group encounters are going to be balanced based on group obtainable gear.
Jeez.
I know that is what he is saying. I specficially said that and stated that such a scheme is worthless. Because balancing around mediocrity is still medicore. These games have strong component of ambition and "progression". People don't want to play this game for a year and be doomed to perpetual mediocrity. Why even start if you are screwed before you begin?
Grouping encountes will be on the short bus balance track. Raids will be balanced for real. They are setting themselves up for failure by undermining one of the pillars of the game.
They think they are setting themselves up for success by using the elitism of raids to add extra incentive to those who are especially ambitious.
However they are wrong. There are many people who are ambitious but will not stoop to do an activity they hate.
Gimp doesn't mean unable to do stuff in the game. Gimp is about not being maximally effective. And that is what people want in a game like Vanguard. They set goals to reach the top. That is the whole point of these tiered itemcentric games with extrememly vertical level in which you get well defined feats in small little bits. They throw all kinds of progression carrots your way to give you treats. A majority of people play these games to put in the work so that they may achieve maximal power for the configuration they have decided to play.
But they aren't doing that. They are saying we won't stop you from being able to do group activities, but no you won't be allowed to be maximally effective. Only people who raid and group will be maximally effective fighters.
People put a lot of time into testing and reasearching skill and item builds. They spend a lot of time and energy obtaining the xp and items. They plan these things ahead of time and set their goals and are one of the major reasons they even continue playing these games that have so much grind in them. If you deny them the ability to fully realize their plans and dreams they will be pissed.
Yes fine when you play in the minor leagues (grouping) you won't need to worry about facing a major league pitcher. So what? Who wants to play in the minor leagues? Everyone who plays in the minor leagues in basball dreams of playing in the major leagues. And this is what they want to have happen in Vanguard, just like Rob Pardo intended WoW to work that way with the "core" of his donut.
The flaw with this thinking is that many group players hate raiding, and yet are still forced to play in the minor leagues even though they are usually the majority of the playerbase of almost every MMORPG.
My reading of BMQ's stuff indicates that he intends to change the the Pardo of vision of Raiders being completely uber in all ways to making Raiders have 1/5 of their items be better (assuming they group).
Well so what? Even if the group stuff doesn't need 1/5 of their items to be better to do group encounters they are still just minor leaguers. They can never fully realize the potential of their character unless they raid.
Every measure of power in this game will be completely arbitrary and imaginary. But people want to fully and completely realize the potential of their characters relative to whatever is existant in the system. People who only group will never be able to do so.
The 80%/20% model is flawed on a very basic model. It is still exclusive. Is it better than the WoW model? Yes. But people want to play in a manner that they enjoy and be able to fully realize the potential of their character and neither model allows this.
BMQ is on a track where only those who participate in all the playstyles and thus maximally use all content can fully realize their character. This is a mistake. Letting people play in any of those three ways and still fully realize their character is the best way to go. I would be willing to bet that 90% of all players dislike at least one of the playstyles. So only 10% of people can actually enjoy themselves full time and realize their goals? That's crazy. You want people to enjoy themselves and you want people to be striving for their goals. Even if they never actually reach those goals it is important for those goals to be possible or they will give up.
I like solo and I like grouping and I hate raiding. I will never fully realize my character in Vanguard and therefore I won't even bother to start. Afterall what is the point since i can never reach my goal? A non-raid server would allow me to fully realize my character becuase I like both solo and group and would do them. However it should be noted that a non-raid server will still not satisfy the exclusive grouper who never soloes (if we belive Brad that there is an Uber solo only item in the game).
The fact is that a non-raid server is just a hack. The real problem is BMQ's stubborn adherence to an exclusive item model.
Although it is a hack I could live with it. But in the end the ideal solution is to allow all playstyles to reward equally. But people won't stand for that because, after all raiders are the best and soloers are slack jawed morons who should be playing Oblivion.
But until you either get playstyle tailored server sets or a non-playstyle exclusive item reward model (such as a token system) there will be serious problem. Especially if you favor a minority playstyle like raiding.
Because once things are avaiable only to people who play a certain way and not to anyone else who plays a different way you have completely changed the potentials of the game and therefore you have changed people's goals and analysis of how they fit into the game. Why should I play 20 hours a week for a year just to get second best? or get something that is "good enough"? Does that really sound inspiring? Good enough? No its not inspiring. Its not even an issue whether or not I will get it, it is merely whether or not it is possible. Then you can dream.
But that is all Cylus has said. Although it was a question, it was really a statement. And it was "Don't worry, the stuff you will get will be 'good enough' to do your group encounters because they will be balanced on group only stuff."
Oh boy. Now that is progression. Good enough. Whoopee.
Now contrast that to "Be all you can be". Which is more inspiring? Which makes you want to spend a bunch of time developing your character?
"Be all you can be" vs. "Don't worry you will be good enough". And there is no doubt that if you do not raid you cannot "Be all you can be". You must solo, group, and raid to "Be all you can be". But I hate to raid and refuse to do so, all I can ever hope for is "good enough". Well I'm sorry that is not exciting and is contrary to one of the major motivations for a majority of people who play this game. They want to work towards excellence.
What he is saying, since you seem to have not grasped it, is not that people with uber gear obtained from raids will not have an advantage in groups, but that people who do NOT have uber gear obtained from raids will not be gimped during group encounters because of it. Group encounters are going to be balanced based on group obtainable gear.
Jeez.
I know that is what he is saying. I specficially said that and stated that such a scheme is worthless. Because balancing around mediocrity is still medicore. These games have strong component of ambition and "progression". People don't want to play this game for a year and be doomed to perpetual mediocrity. Why even start if you are screwed before you begin?
I hope you are wrong.
Because if you balance toward mediocrity, then grouping has no purpose whatsover, since peoples with superior gear (acquired in raids) storm through it and make it irrelevant, before you even start. So they actually destroy any achievement feeling anyone else might get from grouping, with their superior gear.
So when you balance, you have to take ALL gear into account...a raid free server would work extremely well if the end-grouping is balanced with raid-gear, as long as the raiding gear is distributed in a way or another within a grouping logic (be it free, merchant, loot, whatever).
Group is 60% of the game according to these devs, I certainly hope it isn't balanced toward mediocrity, which would kill it before peoples even play it. However, to avoid enforcing raiding, it pretty much make the raid-free server a necessity, isn't it?
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
If there is a raid-free server, I will be happy to be playing, no matter if you laugh at me or not. However, I will wait for release.
"Been uber" is not the main reason why I play a game, however, it is the driving goal. I play (and complete) NWN2...my toon was freaking uber in the end. Did I play NWN2 only for uberest? Nope I was far more uber in BG or Torment anyway. However, if you deny me this uberest for some lame reason that has nothing to do with the game I am playing, I will just not play that game. Working toward the uberness is important, EXTREMELY important. I won't settle for subpar stuff. The fact that I achieve it, or not, is irrelevant...however if the game ask me to raid (or to PvP), I play another game. I don't want to raid, I want to be the best grouper on the server; or work toward that goal...I will endure these diplomacy stings, these tradeskills, I will solo and all if you want me to, but I will not, no matter what, endure raiding. The peoples inside these uberguilds are worser than anything else, I rather bang myself into a wall than be into an elevator with raiders. I rather PvP than raid, and you honestly would consider my PvP-portfolio as desesperate, so we shall continue on the PvE and Raid-free focus...work on the positive from your players...and I know that MANY players will not bear raiding again.
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
If there is a raid-free server, I will be happy to be playing, no matter if you laugh at me or not. However, I will wait for release.
"Been uber" is not the main reason why I play a game, however, it is the driving goal. I play (and complete) NWN2...my toon was freaking uber in the end. Did I play NWN2 only for uberest? Nope I was far more uber in BG or Torment anyway. However, if you deny me this uberest for some lame reason that has nothing to do with the game I am playing, I will just not play that game. Working toward the uberness is important, EXTREMELY important. I won't settle for subpar stuff. The fact that I achieve it, or not, is irrelevant...however if the game ask me to raid (or to PvP), I play another game. I don't want to raid, I want to be the best grouper on the server; or work toward that goal...I will endure these diplomacy stings, these tradeskills, I will solo and all if you want me to, but I will not, no matter what, endure raiding. The peoples inside these uberguilds are worser than anything else, I rather bang myself into a wall than be into an elevator with raiders. I rather PvP than raid, and you honestly would consider my PvP-portfolio as desesperate, so we shall continue on the PvE and Raid-free focus...work on the positive from your players...and I know that MANY players will not bear raiding again.
Anofalye: i wasnt actually talking about you anyway. youve not been a naysayer. youve stated your opinion and i respect your opnion. youre not saying how the game is going to go to pot and how noone will play it because of this or that. those are the ones that im going to laugh at, if you want, you can laugh with me. i dont mind.
the difference here is that youve stated why you want the "non-raiding servers", i dont agree with you about it, but i can respect your opinion on the matter. what i dont like is the attitude of "if they dont do the game the way i think they should, then the game is gonna fail". thats just stupid. those are the people that im talking about.
______________________________
A non raiding server? Never on my beloved vanguard.
Why should Sigil listen to the likes of you anyway, its getting better and better, I dont see the need for this kind of ruleset. Besides, everyone in the vanguard forums agrees with what i say. Your in the wrong game forum pal.
People like Anofalye are just suggesting the game to be watered down easy mode, and so far Sigil is listening to us the core gamers and not lazy people like Anofalye. By the way, noone will miss you Anofalye for not playing Vanguard. On the contrary, we'd be glad people like you not playing vanguard.
Whatever happens I will be giving Vanguard a try and if they give me the option of playing on a PvP-Non Raiding server that will be my choice.
Raiding sucks the life and the comunity out of every MMORPG game that it has ever touched.
I have played in almost every MMORPG game since EQ and always Raiding has ruined the game for me.
WOW is an good example of how much raiding can damage a game, it has such a poor end game centred on Raiding that just ruins the whole MMORPG experience.
Don't get me wrong I don't dislike WOW, I took 4 characters to level 60 and another 8 to 40+, I mastered every crafting profession and even managed to get to Rank 10 in PvP.
I enjoyed 1.5 years playing WOW but in the end Raiding destroyed the game for me.
I would love for Vanguard to have non-raiding servers, in-fact sign me up for one :-)
My WOW experience is very much the same as yours, and I feel the same way about raiding. I had to laugh at the developer's explaination that in some extreme cases, 12 hour raids might be required, or ..broken up into "manageable" 3 and 4 hour blocks.
This might be acceptable if I only have to run the raid one time.....and get from the raid all of the items I need in one run. But if I have to run 3 and 4 hour mini raids over and over... I'm not going to be happy.
Raiding would be fine if you only had to do it one time to compete the objective..but repetitive raiding is the suck... and I'm hoping my next game doesn't depend on it.
After reading everything here, I'm still of the opinion that Vanguard will favor raiders over non-raiders...
And I really doubt they'll release a raid - free server, better to look for another game.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
It is people like you who will scare people off from playing Vanguard. It is YOU who are in the wrong gaming forum, sport. I have been waiting for this game since it was announced and I have been a member of the official forums for over 2 years. I did not say the game should be watered down to easy mode nor is that my intention. I simply think that a lot of people who will not play Vanguard WOULD play it if there were a server that did not have raiding.
I will be playing Vanguard no matter what, but I, unlike you, would like to play alongside people who despise raiding because I have a similar dislike of 4 hour raids. See you on the PVP server.