Originally posted by MX13 Originally posted by Anofalye Originally posted by MX13 Originally posted by gurthgor
1) I HATE Raiding, and will not raid in VSoH.
2) I have no problem with a Raid free game, but I DO have a problem with redesigning large portions of the game to accomidate a no-raid system, especially when those efforts can be used to tune & tweak the game before launch.
3) Read up on the systems the Devs are considering to end the 1337 Raiders, most sound promising.
4) You could do high-end content for YEARS and never raid. There is PLEANTY of non-raid high-end content.
5) Non-Raid High-End items are equal to Raid items.
6) Raiders will NOT have enough time to get all of the non-raid loot. That is where the balance is, considering the Loot will be equal.
7) I may hate Raiding, but if it adds to game diversity, I support it completely. The more High-End content, the better.
Since you hate raiding and will not participate in it, I'm not sure how you arrive at number 7 since there is clearly high end content that you won't do and instead could have content you would use.
The only reason the diversity itself would help is to possibly bring in more subs. But otherwise you derive no benefit what so ever from that diversity and are in fact "harmed" since they are dividing their time.
Due to the raiding you are actually getting less high-end content than you could not more.
As a practical matter it would probably not be feasible for them to redesign their raid stuff to have a grouping setting since they are already well into Beta and have no use of scaled instances like CoX.
However I do not think that raiding is adding more high-end content as you are saying and the diversity helps you out none. It may not even garner more subs if they lose as many non-raiding people as they gain in raiders.
Like I said before it may be "safe" but there is no reason to believe that raiding is actually helping vanguard in any manner at all.
It is most likely it could be successful in the current climate of MMORPGs. But there is no reason to believe that having raids helps, hinders, or breaks even. It could do all that. It certainly won't make your playing experience any richer though.
But its all moot anyway. Sigil's only possible option is a raid-disabled server, if they were to do anything at all. Any other treatment of the already implemented raid stuff would be impractical and would almost certainly cause more harm than good.
A poorly put together game is far worse than a game that has raiding. Even if I won't play either one, no one wil play the former.l
What was I trying to win? I hoped that you were right. What I was trying to do was get you to offer some substantive information backing up your claim that LotRO will be a game in which non-raiders get just as good a deal as raiders. I acknowledge that I can be very combative in my quest for information but my combativeness comes out most strongly when someone is making unsupported claims. As in this case.
Lol what does LotRO have to do with anything.
You got wtfpwned.
Ok, if you say so. You can wtfpwn me all you want. I really don't care. I'm still waiting for you to support your claim. Why don't you wtfpwn my doubts with some solid information.
I SUPPORT MY CLAIM THAT THIS IS THE MOST STUPID POST! AND I'LL EVEN GIVE U A REASON!
#1 INTERNET TRASH! Dont we all just love internet drama?
My face is beyond saving.........still waiting for that information.
I am sorry I can't help with your face problem, I apologize that somethin is wrong with your face and beyond help, but I can give you whatever information you may want.
I'm bored with you and done with you now.
That's understandable. I'm getting a little tired of this too.
Since we're all tired of typing and talking about something so stupid, and fight like kids to get the last word, watch some Dr. Phil so we can work together and get through our problems. Better yet, i'll hook us up with the TV show and we can all go on Dr. Phil together.
Feel free to have the last word and talk trash.
In the process at this very moment......
We really need to see Dr. Phil! DONT WORRY GUYS! WE'LL WORK THROUGH THIS!
It's pointless trying to get you to actually acknowledge "the writing on the wall". Bottom line is if you refuse to acknowledge something, you won't. No matter how many times I give dev quotes and links to official dev statements
Don't you mean, "No matter how many times I repost that same dev quote which doesn't actually say anything to support my claim"?
Dev quote "At this very moment we are working on designing a giant squirrel and bunny mount, although this is very difficult, the squirrel has offered us a trade. The trade will be 2,000 nuts, and in exchange we will be able to use him as a design.....as for the bunny goes....it goes on and on and on and on....."
which validate and back my LoTRO claims you will only acknowledge them if you want to.
I acknowledge the quote. It just doesn't say what you want it to say.
I'll say what I say when I say how I say whatever I want to say when I want to say.
Your grasping-for-straws face-saving attempts are just making you look trollish and weakminded.
How I look is irrelevant........still waiting for you to support your claim.
I already told you I am sorry about your look, there is nothing more I can do for your face! I already supported my claim! DONT DENY THE TRUTH!
I will let you continue to talk alone and dig yourself into an increasingly deeper hole by yourself. You never know, If you dig deep enough nobody will notice you got pwned. Enjoy your face-saving campaign.
Again, whether I got pwned and whether or not I can save face is completely irrelevant.......still waiting for you to support your claim.
STOP TALKING ABOUT YOUR FACE! I DID EVERYTHING I COULD FOR YOU!
Wait? That's it? Ok, so we're at one meaningless dev quote and, "raiding will be fun"........
............and holding........
Same here....they put me on hold....still waiting for DR. Phil.... Well actually I like the thread because it raised my rank by 2 stars. The longer I go back and forth with others the longer I get to keep them. I too am waiting for Dr. Phil...
2) I have no problem with a Raid free game, but I DO have a problem with redesigning large portions of the game to accomidate a no-raid system, especially when those efforts can be used to tune & tweak the game before launch.
3) Read up on the systems the Devs are considering to end the 1337 Raiders, most sound promising.
4) You could do high-end content for YEARS and never raid. There is PLEANTY of non-raid high-end content.
5) Non-Raid High-End items are equal to Raid items.
6) Raiders will NOT have enough time to get all of the non-raid loot. That is where the balance is, considering the Loot will be equal.
7) I may hate Raiding, but if it adds to game diversity, I support it completely. The more High-End content, the better.
Since you hate raiding and will not participate in it, I'm not sure how you arrive at number 7 since there is clearly high end content that you won't do and instead could have content you would use.
The only reason the diversity itself would help is to possibly bring in more subs.EXACTLY, this will add health to the game. In PRe-CU SWG there were systems that I didn't use, but they added to the community and overall game.But otherwise you derive no benefit what so ever from that diversity and are in fact "harmed" since they are dividing their time. What's done is done... and if it helps to make a larger community, it was the right choice. SWG taught me one thing: Just because I don't like a part of a game doesn't mean it doesn't add to my overall enjoyment through others.
Due to the raiding you are actually getting less high-end content than you could not more. Am I? What if there is more content then I can do in the first place? Then the raiding content is giving to others when I need nothing more, which will make a healthier community.
As a practical matter it would probably not be feasible for them to redesign their raid stuff to have a grouping setting since they are already well into Beta and have no use of scaled instances like CoX. Very True... and do support the DDO style of raiding, being instanced that is...
However I do not think that raiding is adding more high-end content as you are saying and the diversity helps you out none. It may not even garner more subs if they lose as many non-raiding people as they gain in raiders. Why would they loose non-raiders if there is MORE then enough content & equal rewards for them?
Like I said before it may be "safe" but there is no reason to believe that raiding is actually helping vanguard in any manner at all. Again, I would argue that it will bring & keep certian players, which will help Vanguard.
It is most likely it could be successful in the current climate of MMORPGs. But there is no reason to believe that having raids helps, hinders, or breaks even. It could do all that. It certainly won't make your playing experience any richer though. Who are we to determine this yet? In SWG, I wasn't an Entertainer of any type, and I never wanted to be one, but Entertainers became good friends, great guild members & added a great deal to my overall experience.
But its all moot anyway. Sigil's only possible option is a raid-disabled server, if they were to do anything at all. Any other treatment of the already implemented raid stuff would be impractical and would almost certainly cause more harm than good. It makes no sense to remove content, even if it isn't used.
A poorly put together game is far worse than a game that has raiding. Even if I won't play either one, no one wil play the former.l Well said. This is why I support them to continue to work on the game play, rather then redesigning large portions of it. Any experienced MMO player will tell you a Dev Company can NEVER have enough time to work on the play...
I'll start my own SWG... with Black Jack... and Hookers!!!
Since you hate raiding and will not participate in it, I'm not sure how you arrive at number 7 since there is clearly high end content that you won't do and instead could have content you would use.
The only reason the diversity itself would help is to possibly bring in more subs.EXACTLY, this will add health to the game. In PRe-CU SWG there were systems that I didn't use, but they added to the community and overall game.But otherwise you derive no benefit what so ever from that diversity and are in fact "harmed" since they are dividing their time. What's done is done... and if it helps to make a larger community, it was the right choice. SWG taught me one thing: Just because I don't like a part of a game doesn't mean it doesn't add to my overall enjoyment through others.
Due to the raiding you are actually getting less high-end content than you could not more. Am I? What if there is more content then I can do in the first place? Then the raiding content is giving to others when I need nothing more, which will make a healthier community.
Then they could spend that time on features or whatever else. Unless they have a glut of labor the time spent of raiding is essentialy a waste for you, if it doesn't bring in subs.
As a practical matter it would probably not be feasible for them to redesign their raid stuff to have a grouping setting since they are already well into Beta and have no use of scaled instances like CoX. Very True... and do support the DDO style of raiding, being instanced that is...
However I do not think that raiding is adding more high-end content as you are saying and the diversity helps you out none. It may not even garner more subs if they lose as many non-raiding people as they gain in raiders. Why would they loose non-raiders if there is MORE then enough content & equal rewards for them?
Because clearly there is a constituency of people for whom this is not good enough. Are they large enough to matter? I dunno. I think they are but I only have anecdotal reasons for that.
Like I said before it may be "safe" but there is no reason to believe that raiding is actually helping vanguard in any manner at all. Again, I would argue that it will bring & keep certian players, which will help Vanguard.
You can argue that all you like, but no one knows. It is a bad assumption. It could very easily be causing more harm than good. It is clearly driving some people away. Since it is doing this it should be of concern. Whether it is a net loss or a net gain, we simply do not know. But since there is some loss due to this factor we must acknowledge that it may in fact do more harm than good.
It is most likely it could be successful in the current climate of MMORPGs. But there is no reason to believe that having raids helps, hinders, or breaks even. It could do all that. It certainly won't make your playing experience any richer though. Who are we to determine this yet? In SWG, I wasn't an Entertainer of any type, and I never wanted to be one, but Entertainers became good friends, great guild members & added a great deal to my overall experience.
Raiding itself adds nothing that is not already part of grouping. It simply increases the size. Both traders/crafters and Diplomats in vangaurd ARE value added as they add other mechanics and other interesting bits like a trade economy, raiders add nothing extra beyond the individuals themselves. Everything a raider (in the abstract) can contribute can be contributed by a grouper since you would never actually go on the raid itself. Once the raider is outside his raid he is no different than a grouper other than a few different pieces of exclusive equipment, and that exclusivity is purely arbitrary and has nothing to do with raiding itself. A crafter is different. A diplomat is different. Just like an Entertainer was different.
But its all moot anyway. Sigil's only possible option is a raid-disabled server, if they were to do anything at all. Any other treatment of the already implemented raid stuff would be impractical and would almost certainly cause more harm than good. It makes no sense to remove content, even if it isn't used.
It makes sense if that content drives people away. Which it does. It is a fact that it deives some people away. The only question is how many? You think it is very small, I do not. And it makes even more sense if it isn't used. Since it is therefore less valued.
And since disabling content is easy as pie in a spawn based game its trivial.
A poorly put together game is far worse than a game that has raiding. Even if I won't play either one, no one wil play the former.l Well said. This is why I support them to continue to work on the game play, rather then redesigning large portions of it. Any experienced MMO player will tell you a Dev Company can NEVER have enough time to work on the play...
There is a fundamental fact here. Some people will not play Vanguard because of raids. There are also a large number of people in general who do not like raids.
There is no doubt that Vanguard will lose people because of this. It may only be two people. Me and Anofayle. In which case the loss is negligle numbers wise even if it is cataclysmic quality wise since I rule.
However it maybe thousands of people being lost in which case Vanguard could actually have a net loss by having raiding implemented as it is.
This is clearly a concern for BMQ. That is why there is the 80/20 thing. Perhaps that will mitigate this into a net gain instead of a net loss. I would hazard a guess that BMQ thinks that the WoW model actually results in a net loss and that is one reason he has adopted the 80/20 model. Perhaps he just wanted to ekk out a little more gain but if that was so why risk alienating powergamers of which I think most people can acknowledge raiders have a heavy population of. BMQ has stated he thinks a large majority of MMORPGers are very much groupers. I think he has come to the conclusion that grouping really is the heart of these games but that there is room for raiding as long as you give major support to grouping.
If BMQ is right and the 80/20 thing results in a net gain then your diversity may have helped some. But that is just a guess on BMQ's part he thinks its reasonable, but many people who have problems with raiding have seen it creep and mudflate out of control far too often and in rather disturbing ways. It is easily possible that he will still see the net loss he was trying to avoid.
BMQ is not the only one doing this. In my opinion AoC is doing a similar thing, although Vanguard method at least has some potential for parity. The only thing AoC promises is it won't get out of hand or hurt PvP too much.
They all want to have their cake and eat too.
I understand BMQ wants a unifying theory just like Einstein searched in vane for, but I think he will wind up with the same result. Bupkiss and he will still get the net loss he was afraid of because there are actually many people who have decided that raiding is a slippery slope. There are a lot of people who tolerate raiding. There are also a lot of who have seen raiding slowly ruin game after game they used to love. Whether its EQ, DAoC, WoW, or even the uber loot updates of UO people align with raiding.
Whether or not the 80/20 is actually good, it doesn't matter because there are a lot of people who simply don't trust any of that anymore. Brad isn't going to change it, he thinks its good and therefore there should just be normal servers. But Sigil will lose people because of that decision, there is no question on that. The only question is how many.
Brad is betting on not many. I think its a bad bet myself. Fortunately for Brad it is probably a bet that will probably only hurt him a little. Maybe he is right. But either way I really doubt the net gains from raiding will be substantial in anyway. I seriously doubt it is even worth the time investment Vanguard will easily get 5 times the value out of group content it will out of raids.
Of course none of this is even touching on how many subs could Vanguard steal from unhapy WoWers with a non-raid server. We know that a large portion of WoWers dislike but tolerate WoW raiding. Something they will need to continue if they switch to Vanguard. But if Vanguard promised an option to alleviate that burden? Who knows, I have not a guess how much that would pick up. It would seem a safe assumption that a non-raid server would garner more than the normal 80/20 solution. Non-raid server proposals used to regularly break threads on the officaly WoW forums before they got deleted or locked.
Your just lucky that brad wanted to go for 80/20 i think that is really really generous enough for those who wants to solo, and going for those little grouping.
Our guild wanted 45% raid content originally, so let me ask you why are you guys complaining about 80% solo and small grouping content. Are you not satisfied with 20% end game content? And also isnt Brad generous for you guys who are branded as casual gamers? I'd like to know. Are you jealous because we raiders spend couple hours a night to raid and get the best items? I want to know that too. Raiders and CaSUAL GAMERS are not much different. It is just time spend on playing the game and having fun acquiring the best items. I am a raider myself, but I dont see a difference between casual and a raider player? Please clarify the difference between raider and non raider players? Why do they hat esmall raids like Brad proposed. It wont be 40 people raids, so why all the hate on raiding? Sure we spend time to raid, our guild raids because its FUN.
Oh, please Anofalye dont answer this post , because we all know you want to be spoon fed the raiding quality gears. I would appreciated if other players can help me understand Raider and non raiding players.
Originally posted by Vanguarde Your just lucky that brad wanted to go for 80/20 i think that is really really generous enough for those who wants to solo, and going for those little grouping. Our guild wanted 45% raid content originally, so let me ask you why are you guys complaining about 80% solo and small grouping content. Are you not satisfied with 20% end game content? And also isnt Brad generous for you guys who are branded as casual gamers? I'd like to know. Are you jealous because we raiders spend couple hours a night to raid and get the best items? I want to know that too. Raiders and CaSUAL GAMERS are not much different. It is just time spend on playing the game and having fun acquiring the best items. I am a raider myself, but I dont see a difference between casual and a raider player? Please clarify the difference between raider and non raider players? Why do they hate small raids like Brad proposed. It wont be 40 people raids, so why all the hate on raiding? Sure we spend time to raid, our guild raids because its FUN. Oh, please Anofalye dont answer this post , because we all know you want to be spoon fed the raiding quality gears. I would appreciated if other players can help me understand Raider and non raiding players.
Originally posted by Vanguarde Your just lucky that brad wanted to go for 80/20 i think that is really really generous enough for those who wants to solo, and going for those little grouping. Our guild wanted 45% raid content originally, so let me ask you why are you guys complaining about 80% solo and small grouping content. Are you not satisfied with 20% end game content? And also isnt Brad generous for you guys who are branded as casual gamers? I'd like to know. Are you jealous because we raiders spend couple hours a night to raid and get the best items? I want to know that too. Raiders and CaSUAL GAMERS are not much different. It is just time spend on playing the game and having fun acquiring the best items. I am a raider myself, but I dont see a difference between casual and a raider player? Please clarify the difference between raider and non raider players? Why do they hate small raids like Brad proposed. It wont be 40 people raids, so why all the hate on raiding? Sure we spend time to raid, our guild raids because its FUN. Oh, please Anofalye dont answer this post , because we all know you want to be spoon fed the raiding quality gears. I would appreciated if other players can help me understand Raider and non raiding players.
What is the fun in being tons of ppl and the leaders or high officers of guild get the best items first usually ? Are you a high officer or leader in your guild ?
Also i dont see any fun being part of a guild, cause guilds are boss oriented, like a corportation, bosses and officers rule your world, they decide what you are going to kill and if and when you are going to get what ubber items. I want to be a hero, have my adventures, not being part of a company with a boss.
I like guilds if they all are members, no leaders, but that never happened to me in any game in any guild
When a game is raid focused you NEED to be part of a guild or you cant do anything in game
For the ones that say that then mmorpgs are not for me cause its supposed i must play in a social way cause its online i say that cause its online doesnt mean i must be part of a guild. I want to have fun having my adventures and go with a team if i find friends in my way that like what i like, a online rpg is good cause you find ppl that is not npcs and can interact with them, just that, no need of having a boss at all. I dont see the point of being just a number in a guild, and not decide your own objetives.
Blade with whom i have lived, blade with whom I now die. Serve right and justice one last time. Seek one last heart of evil. Still one last life of pain. Cut well old friend. Then farewell!
Originally posted by z80paranoia Some of us have expressed interest in a non-raiding server. I was one of those people. I would love to see one in Vanguard. But honestly, it's far better to actually support a game that is being made from the ground up to support our playstyle. Why? Because then there will be no need for alternative rule servers and we will have more like-minded people to play the game with. Why? Because the main, and therefore, most populated servers will support our playstyle by default.
If you really want to show Vanguard how popular a game that was similar but didn't force raiding would be then start supporting a game that does just that. Support an mmo that does not deny one the ability to progress in small groups or solo. Support a game that doesn't implicitly regard groupers as second-class citizens. That game is The Lord Of The Rings Online. This game is for us. Sure, their classes are few and the armor looks kind of boring (compared to the flamboyant WoW and Guildwars armors) but other than that, it's right up our alley.
When people read about how we want to be as decked out as a soloer or grouper as a raider, the typical reply is "If you want to have group and solo epics, Vanguard is not for you". Those people are absolutely correct. Don't even bother trying to argue it. They are wrong sometimes when they sometimes say that soloers and groupers want "free epics". Something you worked hard for whether solo or in a group is not "free". Such statements presuppose that dezens if not hundreds of hours of raiding a single dungeon is the only possible valid form of "currency" for epic gear. That also presupposes that the work of a single individual or party is inherently inferior. That's all elitist garbage. Nevertheless, if the devs back them by supporting their playstyle the most, then that game is just not for us.
This post was not made to bash Vanguard. It will be a good game for those who agree with that style of advancement. I'm only saying that instead of complaining or petitioning and polling for changes that go against the developers intentions, support a different game. Other people have said this but I decided to dedicate an entire topic to it in my own words. Please try to understand it before flaming. This post was made to give those of us who hate raiding something to consider.
UPDATE EDIT:
Thanks to the informative posts of MX13, I no longer hold the belief that Vanguard will not offer top gear upgrades for hard working/playing non-raiders. In short he proved that Vanguard is for us.
How do I know LoTRO won't force raiding? Because LoTRO Content Designer Jared Hall-Dugas said "we are not forcing casual players to participate in raids", It doesn't get much plainer, simpler or obvious that that. It's all here at these sites linklinklink in case anyone else has any doubts...He also explains that non-raiders will be able to get statistically comparable gear that is on par with raid gear in the same article. All of that is irrefutably congruent with and backs by way of official statement, my claim that LoTRO "doesn't implicitly regard groupers (or non-raiders in general) as second-class citizens." I didn't make the claims up,Turbine said those things themselves and I'm just relaying their message.
I actually agree with some of the points made here. Vanguard might be the game for alot of people. Its not the game for me. Not necessarily because of raiding or not raiding though. IMO it has a couple new concepts... but not enough for it to be the one that I'm waiting for. In alot of ways ... its the same old thing in a different package.
Where I disagree with you is when you say LOTRO is the solution. For me that game is waay worse then Vanguard.
Originally posted by Vanguarde Your just lucky that brad wanted to go for 80/20 i think that is really really generous enough for those who wants to solo, and going for those little grouping. Our guild wanted 45% raid content originally, so let me ask you why are you guys complaining about 80% solo and small grouping content. Are you not satisfied with 20% end game content? And also isnt Brad generous for you guys who are branded as casual gamers? I'd like to know. Are you jealous because we raiders spend couple hours a night to raid and get the best items? I want to know that too. Raiders and CaSUAL GAMERS are not much different. It is just time spend on playing the game and having fun acquiring the best items. I am a raider myself, but I dont see a difference between casual and a raider player? Please clarify the difference between raider and non raider players? Why do they hat esmall raids like Brad proposed. It wont be 40 people raids, so why all the hate on raiding? Sure we spend time to raid, our guild raids because its FUN. Oh, please Anofalye dont answer this post , because we all know you want to be spoon fed the raiding quality gears. I would appreciated if other players can help me understand Raider and non raiding players.
Since my other discussion seems to have gasped it's last gasp I'll answer some of this. Speaking only for myself, of course, I can't speak for all non-raiders.
Am I jealous that raiders get the best items? Yes and no. I'm jealous, but not so much because you get a better item than me but because you have the oppurtunity to get a better item and because you get the end-game content to play through that leads to the better item. I don't raid so I don't even get a chance at the better item and I don't get the end-game content.
In my experience there comes a point in any mmorpg with raiding at which there simply isn't any solo/small group content left to do that leads to any rewards. This happens because raiders need a motivation to do raids and the motivation is better loot. The loot from non-raid content can't continue to get better and better without approaching the quality of raid loot....so non-raid content simply ceases at some point. I understand why this has to be to support the raiding side of the game but the end result is that for non-raiders these games really do have an end. End-game for a non-raider is just exactly what it sounds like. Hence my quest for a good game with no raiding at all or at the very least a non-raiding server.
As far as raid size, it's impossible to draw a line without being arbitrary. If I had to draw a line where it becomes to many people I would draw it between 10 and 11 people. Above 10 and it's too many people for it to be fun for me. But like I said that's arbitrary. In actuallity I would prefer something like 5-6 people but I could tolerate 10.
Giovanni, You seem familiar. I have spoken to members of Syndicate on another board. Cool people. I'm interested in your PoV about LoTRO being worse. I'm always open to the possibility of someone knowing something I don't know and learning from that.
Originally posted by z80paranoia Giovanni, You seem familiar. I have spoken to members of Syndicate on another board. Cool people. I'm interested in your PoV about LoTRO being worse. I'm always open to the possibility of someone knowing something I don't know and learning from that.
Yes.. I think I know you. The name I usually go by is "klepto". if this is the same z80 that I've seen on other boards. I dont always agree with you. But you usually make a damn good point.
I'm coming at this from the angle of ...being sick as hell of the same game over and over and over ...just coming in a different package and from a different company. We get it. Companies can make a fantasy game where you grind levels and maybe do a little pvp. Its time to break out of that mold.
LOTRO has several things working against it. Theres more then this ...this is off the top of my head:
#1 What does it offer that is REALLY different from the classic "fantasy-create-character-grind-level-pvp-or-not- concepts"? Its the same old thing. You create an elf... you pick a profession or class .. and you level. Its not really even doing that those things well...from what I can see. There arent many options as far as diversity goes.
#2 Turbine is a let down so far. They had one of the best oppurtunities to make a great mmorpg with the DDO license and screwed it up bigtime. Now they have another great oppurtunity with LOTRO and IMO ..it will be a letdown as well. They should have slowed down on the licenses and made ONE great game.
#3 Character creation: quote"Create a unique character: Adventure as a Man, Elf, Dwarf or Hobbit. After choosing where your character hails from, select region-appropriate color palettes for skin, hair, eye color, and more."
Whoopee!!
The character creation sucks in this game. It doesnt even come close to games that have been out for YEARS like swg or COV/COH. You have to improve on old concepts to be different and unique. In my opinion LOTRO hasnt.
I know there are probably alot of people that will like the game .. and thats fine... I respect that. I however will be waiting for the games that are willing to take a bit of a risk to be different ... improving on whats already been done ..and adding new concepts and different ideas...instead of the same old things.
Klepto, yes it's the same z80. Good seeing you here. I must say all of your points are true. I don't think they will make the game bad, well, for me, but you are still right.
Originally posted by MX13 AoC is another promising game...
AoC is gonna be so sweet that I will be raiding daily and will not ever complain. It's going to be...words cannot describe the greatness that will be AoC.
Originally posted by z80paranoia Klepto, yes it's the same z80. Good seeing you here. I must say all of your points are true. I don't think they will make the game bad, well, for me, but you are still right.
Originally posted by MX13 AoC is another promising game...
AoC is gonna be so sweet that I will be raiding daily and will not ever complain. It's going to be...words cannot describe the greatness that will be AoC.
That's IF they can pull it off... and that's a BIG if... it's ambitious to say the least...
If they can, it will DESTROY WoW...
I'll start my own SWG... with Black Jack... and Hookers!!!
Originally posted by Vanguarde Your just lucky that brad wanted to go for 80/20 i think that is really really generous enough for those who wants to solo, and going for those little grouping. Our guild wanted 45% raid content originally, so let me ask you why are you guys complaining about 80% solo and small grouping content. Are you not satisfied with 20% end game content? And also isnt Brad generous for you guys who are branded as casual gamers? I'd like to know. Are you jealous because we raiders spend couple hours a night to raid and get the best items? I want to know that too. Raiders and CaSUAL GAMERS are not much different. It is just time spend on playing the game and having fun acquiring the best items. I am a raider myself, but I dont see a difference between casual and a raider player? Please clarify the difference between raider and non raider players? Why do they hat esmall raids like Brad proposed. It wont be 40 people raids, so why all the hate on raiding? Sure we spend time to raid, our guild raids because its FUN. Oh, please Anofalye dont answer this post , because we all know you want to be spoon fed the raiding quality gears. I would appreciated if other players can help me understand Raider and non raiding players.
Since my other discussion seems to have gasped it's last gasp I'll answer some of this. Speaking only for myself, of course, I can't speak for all non-raiders.
Am I jealous that raiders get the best items? Yes and no. I'm jealous, but not so much because you get a better item than me but because you have the oppurtunity to get a better item and because you get the end-game content to play through that leads to the better item. I don't raid so I don't even get a chance at the better item and I don't get the end-game content.
In my experience there comes a point in any mmorpg with raiding at which there simply isn't any solo/small group content left to do that leads to any rewards. This happens because raiders need a motivation to do raids and the motivation is better loot. The loot from non-raid content can't continue to get better and better without approaching the quality of raid loot....so non-raid content simply ceases at some point. I understand why this has to be to support the raiding side of the game but the end result is that for non-raiders these games really do have an end. End-game for a non-raider is just exactly what it sounds like. Hence my quest for a good game with no raiding at all or at the very least a non-raiding server.
As far as raid size, it's impossible to draw a line without being arbitrary. If I had to draw a line where it becomes to many people I would draw it between 10 and 11 people. Above 10 and it's too many people for it to be fun for me. But like I said that's arbitrary. In actuallity I would prefer something like 5-6 people but I could tolerate 10.
I see much much better. You have excellent points there. You have valid concerns with the so called end game content. And most of the reason why people raid, its not only for the fun, challenge aspect of the so called end game content. But in many cases, as you said it yourself not many gamers will be able to see end game content this limits their ability to be in equally as powerful as those who are lucky enough to have a bunch of raid minded gamers. I see your points. You guys really have made some great points there, I myself have seen many casuals in everquest that could not hope to compare to those who spend many hours raiding in end content. I end up ignoring the casual players, and not knowing how you guys felt. And its not because they dont have the time, its because they dont have the opportunity to get those hard to get raid quality gears under most circumstances. With that said, after giving much thought to all your posts on MMORPG.COM/Vanguard forum i think then that a special set of server rules could work for gamers such as yourself. Thanks for all your input on this. I will try to help you guys put out word for you to the developers in Sigil, and see if Brad or Butler can really do something for you people. I will appologize for you people for being harsh on your comments about "No raid server rule set, but now i have seen the light.
Rest assured, that all your inputs from this forum will be forwarded to Sigil. I would think a server with no raiding gear would work with no raid content, much like the progression servers on everquest but minus raid gear quality sounds very fair.
Originally posted by Vanguarde I see much much better. You have excellent points there. You have valid concerns with the so called end game content. And most of the reason why people raid, its not only for the fun, challenge aspect of the so called end game content. But in many cases, as you said it yourself not many gamers will be able to see end game content this limits their ability to be in equally as powerful as those who are lucky enough to have a bunch of raid minded gamers. I see your points. You guys really have made some great points there, I myself have seen many casuals in everquest that could not hope to compare to those who spend many hours raiding in end content. I end up ignoring the casual players, and not knowing how you guys felt. And its not because they dont have the time, its because they dont have the opportunity to get those hard to get raid quality gears under most circumstances. With that said, after giving much thought to all your posts on MMORPG.COM/Vanguard forum i think then that a special set of server rules could work for gamers such as yourself. Thanks for all your input on this. I will try to help you guys put out word for you to the developers in Sigil, and see if Brad or Butler can really do something for you people. I will appologize for you people for being harsh on your comments about "No raid server rule set, but now i have seen the light. Rest assured, that all your inputs from this forum will be forwarded to Sigil. I would think a server with no raiding gear would work with no raid content, much like the progression servers on everquest but minus raid gear quality sounds very fair.
I am happy for them if it happen as that and it is good news enought to rejoice. However, like I said, me, myself, I wouldn't play if the raid-gear isn't there, in the grouping system, spoon-feeded or handed with challenges. I am sure they can live well without me on their server/game. Such servers would get MOST of the non-raiding crew, they may lack peoples like me, but I think that losing FoH or AL is never see as something negative anywhere, so since I am the group equivalent, it won't be negative in anyway to lose me or the like of me. I could start some drama about the need of hardcore folks to increase retention, but we all know better than to believe into THAT.
Warping to the next MMO. (This was my last input in the Vanguard forums, anywhere...I will also focus my reading on other MMOs, where it may be welcoming for the "uber-grouping-jerk" that I am)
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
3) Read up on the systems the Devs are considering to end the 1337 Raiders, most sound promising. See, if you want to be the BEST, you have to do everything, INCLUDING raiding. My problem is not only with L33T raiding, it is with raiding. Many casuals have the same problem, since it is a different gameplay, which we don't want to play. Nooooo! Its not true!
Vanguard is awsome!
FAQ 11.13
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
Originally posted by Vanguarde I see much much better. You have excellent points there. You have valid concerns with the so called end game content. And most of the reason why people raid, its not only for the fun, challenge aspect of the so called end game content. But in many cases, as you said it yourself not many gamers will be able to see end game content this limits their ability to be in equally as powerful as those who are lucky enough to have a bunch of raid minded gamers. I see your points. You guys really have made some great points there, I myself have seen many casuals in everquest that could not hope to compare to those who spend many hours raiding in end content. I end up ignoring the casual players, and not knowing how you guys felt. And its not because they dont have the time, its because they dont have the opportunity to get those hard to get raid quality gears under most circumstances. With that said, after giving much thought to all your posts on MMORPG.COM/Vanguard forum i think then that a special set of server rules could work for gamers such as yourself. Thanks for all your input on this. I will try to help you guys put out word for you to the developers in Sigil, and see if Brad or Butler can really do something for you people. I will appologize for you people for being harsh on your comments about "No raid server rule set, but now i have seen the light. Rest assured, that all your inputs from this forum will be forwarded to Sigil. I would think a server with no raiding gear would work with no raid content, much like the progression servers on everquest but minus raid gear quality sounds very fair.
I am happy for them if it happen as that and it is good news enought to rejoice. However, like I said, me, myself, I wouldn't play if the raid-gear isn't there, in the grouping system, spoon-feeded or handed with challenges. I am sure they can live well without me on their server/game. Such servers would get MOST of the non-raiding crew, they may lack peoples like me, but I think that losing FoH or AL is never see as something negative anywhere, so since I am the group equivalent, it won't be negative in anyway to lose me or the like of me. I could start some drama about the need of hardcore folks to increase retention, but we all know better than to believe into THAT.
Warping to the next MMO. (This was my last input in the Vanguard forums, anywhere...I will also focus my reading on other MMOs, where it may be welcoming for the "uber-grouping-jerk" that I am)
I heard LOTR has almost non of the raiding recently. Thats why i was referring you to that. You definately would love that game. The only downside i see in that game is that everything is instanced, I'm not sure if you would love instanced dungeons and such.
Comments
1) I HATE Raiding, and will not raid in VSoH.
2) I have no problem with a Raid free game, but I DO have a problem with redesigning large portions of the game to accomidate a no-raid system, especially when those efforts can be used to tune & tweak the game before launch.
3) Read up on the systems the Devs are considering to end the 1337 Raiders, most sound promising.
4) You could do high-end content for YEARS and never raid. There is PLEANTY of non-raid high-end content.
5) Non-Raid High-End items are equal to Raid items.
6) Raiders will NOT have enough time to get all of the non-raid loot. That is where the balance is, considering the Loot will be equal.
7) I may hate Raiding, but if it adds to game diversity, I support it completely. The more High-End content, the better.
Since you hate raiding and will not participate in it, I'm not sure how you arrive at number 7 since there is clearly high end content that you won't do and instead could have content you would use.
The only reason the diversity itself would help is to possibly bring in more subs. But otherwise you derive no benefit what so ever from that diversity and are in fact "harmed" since they are dividing their time.
Due to the raiding you are actually getting less high-end content than you could not more.
As a practical matter it would probably not be feasible for them to redesign their raid stuff to have a grouping setting since they are already well into Beta and have no use of scaled instances like CoX.
However I do not think that raiding is adding more high-end content as you are saying and the diversity helps you out none. It may not even garner more subs if they lose as many non-raiding people as they gain in raiders.
Like I said before it may be "safe" but there is no reason to believe that raiding is actually helping vanguard in any manner at all.
It is most likely it could be successful in the current climate of MMORPGs. But there is no reason to believe that having raids helps, hinders, or breaks even. It could do all that. It certainly won't make your playing experience any richer though.
But its all moot anyway. Sigil's only possible option is a raid-disabled server, if they were to do anything at all. Any other treatment of the already implemented raid stuff would be impractical and would almost certainly cause more harm than good.
A poorly put together game is far worse than a game that has raiding. Even if I won't play either one, no one wil play the former.l
Um, gee, I don't know. Maybe because it was the original topic of this thread and the entire subject of my discussion with Parnoia?
Well actually I like the thread because it raised my rank by 2 stars. The longer I go back and forth with others the longer I get to keep them. I too am waiting for Dr. Phil...
Guild Wars 2 is my religion
1) I HATE Raiding, and will not raid in VSoH.
2) I have no problem with a Raid free game, but I DO have a problem with redesigning large portions of the game to accomidate a no-raid system, especially when those efforts can be used to tune & tweak the game before launch.
3) Read up on the systems the Devs are considering to end the 1337 Raiders, most sound promising.
4) You could do high-end content for YEARS and never raid. There is PLEANTY of non-raid high-end content.
5) Non-Raid High-End items are equal to Raid items.
6) Raiders will NOT have enough time to get all of the non-raid loot. That is where the balance is, considering the Loot will be equal.
7) I may hate Raiding, but if it adds to game diversity, I support it completely. The more High-End content, the better.
Since you hate raiding and will not participate in it, I'm not sure how you arrive at number 7 since there is clearly high end content that you won't do and instead could have content you would use.
The only reason the diversity itself would help is to possibly bring in more subs. EXACTLY, this will add health to the game. In PRe-CU SWG there were systems that I didn't use, but they added to the community and overall game. But otherwise you derive no benefit what so ever from that diversity and are in fact "harmed" since they are dividing their time. What's done is done... and if it helps to make a larger community, it was the right choice. SWG taught me one thing: Just because I don't like a part of a game doesn't mean it doesn't add to my overall enjoyment through others.
Due to the raiding you are actually getting less high-end content than you could not more. Am I? What if there is more content then I can do in the first place? Then the raiding content is giving to others when I need nothing more, which will make a healthier community.
As a practical matter it would probably not be feasible for them to redesign their raid stuff to have a grouping setting since they are already well into Beta and have no use of scaled instances like CoX. Very True... and do support the DDO style of raiding, being instanced that is...
However I do not think that raiding is adding more high-end content as you are saying and the diversity helps you out none. It may not even garner more subs if they lose as many non-raiding people as they gain in raiders. Why would they loose non-raiders if there is MORE then enough content & equal rewards for them?
Like I said before it may be "safe" but there is no reason to believe that raiding is actually helping vanguard in any manner at all. Again, I would argue that it will bring & keep certian players, which will help Vanguard.
It is most likely it could be successful in the current climate of MMORPGs. But there is no reason to believe that having raids helps, hinders, or breaks even. It could do all that. It certainly won't make your playing experience any richer though. Who are we to determine this yet? In SWG, I wasn't an Entertainer of any type, and I never wanted to be one, but Entertainers became good friends, great guild members & added a great deal to my overall experience.
But its all moot anyway. Sigil's only possible option is a raid-disabled server, if they were to do anything at all. Any other treatment of the already implemented raid stuff would be impractical and would almost certainly cause more harm than good. It makes no sense to remove content, even if it isn't used.
A poorly put together game is far worse than a game that has raiding. Even if I won't play either one, no one wil play the former.l Well said. This is why I support them to continue to work on the game play, rather then redesigning large portions of it. Any experienced MMO player will tell you a Dev Company can NEVER have enough time to work on the play...
I'll start my own SWG... with Black Jack... and Hookers!!!
In fact, forget the SWG!!!!
There is a fundamental fact here. Some people will not play Vanguard because of raids. There are also a large number of people in general who do not like raids.
There is no doubt that Vanguard will lose people because of this. It may only be two people. Me and Anofayle. In which case the loss is negligle numbers wise even if it is cataclysmic quality wise since I rule.
However it maybe thousands of people being lost in which case Vanguard could actually have a net loss by having raiding implemented as it is.
This is clearly a concern for BMQ. That is why there is the 80/20 thing. Perhaps that will mitigate this into a net gain instead of a net loss. I would hazard a guess that BMQ thinks that the WoW model actually results in a net loss and that is one reason he has adopted the 80/20 model. Perhaps he just wanted to ekk out a little more gain but if that was so why risk alienating powergamers of which I think most people can acknowledge raiders have a heavy population of. BMQ has stated he thinks a large majority of MMORPGers are very much groupers. I think he has come to the conclusion that grouping really is the heart of these games but that there is room for raiding as long as you give major support to grouping.
If BMQ is right and the 80/20 thing results in a net gain then your diversity may have helped some. But that is just a guess on BMQ's part he thinks its reasonable, but many people who have problems with raiding have seen it creep and mudflate out of control far too often and in rather disturbing ways. It is easily possible that he will still see the net loss he was trying to avoid.
BMQ is not the only one doing this. In my opinion AoC is doing a similar thing, although Vanguard method at least has some potential for parity. The only thing AoC promises is it won't get out of hand or hurt PvP too much.
They all want to have their cake and eat too.
I understand BMQ wants a unifying theory just like Einstein searched in vane for, but I think he will wind up with the same result. Bupkiss and he will still get the net loss he was afraid of because there are actually many people who have decided that raiding is a slippery slope. There are a lot of people who tolerate raiding. There are also a lot of who have seen raiding slowly ruin game after game they used to love. Whether its EQ, DAoC, WoW, or even the uber loot updates of UO people align with raiding.
Whether or not the 80/20 is actually good, it doesn't matter because there are a lot of people who simply don't trust any of that anymore. Brad isn't going to change it, he thinks its good and therefore there should just be normal servers. But Sigil will lose people because of that decision, there is no question on that. The only question is how many.
Brad is betting on not many. I think its a bad bet myself. Fortunately for Brad it is probably a bet that will probably only hurt him a little. Maybe he is right. But either way I really doubt the net gains from raiding will be substantial in anyway. I seriously doubt it is even worth the time investment Vanguard will easily get 5 times the value out of group content it will out of raids.
Of course none of this is even touching on how many subs could Vanguard steal from unhapy WoWers with a non-raid server. We know that a large portion of WoWers dislike but tolerate WoW raiding. Something they will need to continue if they switch to Vanguard. But if Vanguard promised an option to alleviate that burden? Who knows, I have not a guess how much that would pick up. It would seem a safe assumption that a non-raid server would garner more than the normal 80/20 solution. Non-raid server proposals used to regularly break threads on the officaly WoW forums before they got deleted or locked.
Your just lucky that brad wanted to go for 80/20 i think that is really really generous enough for those who wants to solo, and going for those little grouping.
Our guild wanted 45% raid content originally, so let me ask you why are you guys complaining about 80% solo and small grouping content. Are you not satisfied with 20% end game content? And also isnt Brad generous for you guys who are branded as casual gamers? I'd like to know. Are you jealous because we raiders spend couple hours a night to raid and get the best items? I want to know that too. Raiders and CaSUAL GAMERS are not much different. It is just time spend on playing the game and having fun acquiring the best items. I am a raider myself, but I dont see a difference between casual and a raider player? Please clarify the difference between raider and non raider players? Why do they hat esmall raids like Brad proposed. It wont be 40 people raids, so why all the hate on raiding? Sure we spend time to raid, our guild raids because its FUN.
Oh, please Anofalye dont answer this post , because we all know you want to be spoon fed the raiding quality gears. I would appreciated if other players can help me understand Raider and non raiding players.
What is the fun in being tons of ppl and the leaders or high officers of guild get the best items first usually ? Are you a high officer or leader in your guild ?
Also i dont see any fun being part of a guild, cause guilds are boss oriented, like a corportation, bosses and officers rule your world, they decide what you are going to kill and if and when you are going to get what ubber items. I want to be a hero, have my adventures, not being part of a company with a boss.
I like guilds if they all are members, no leaders, but that never happened to me in any game in any guild
When a game is raid focused you NEED to be part of a guild or you cant do anything in game
For the ones that say that then mmorpgs are not for me cause its supposed i must play in a social way cause its online i say that cause its online doesnt mean i must be part of a guild. I want to have fun having my adventures and go with a team if i find friends in my way that like what i like, a online rpg is good cause you find ppl that is not npcs and can interact with them, just that, no need of having a boss at all. I dont see the point of being just a number in a guild, and not decide your own objetives.
Blade with whom i have lived, blade with whom I now die. Serve right and justice one last time. Seek one last heart of evil. Still one last life of pain. Cut well old friend. Then farewell!
I actually agree with some of the points made here. Vanguard might be the game for alot of people. Its not the game for me. Not necessarily because of raiding or not raiding though. IMO it has a couple new concepts... but not enough for it to be the one that I'm waiting for. In alot of ways ... its the same old thing in a different package.
Where I disagree with you is when you say LOTRO is the solution. For me that game is waay worse then Vanguard.
Since my other discussion seems to have gasped it's last gasp I'll answer some of this. Speaking only for myself, of course, I can't speak for all non-raiders.
Am I jealous that raiders get the best items? Yes and no. I'm jealous, but not so much because you get a better item than me but because you have the oppurtunity to get a better item and because you get the end-game content to play through that leads to the better item. I don't raid so I don't even get a chance at the better item and I don't get the end-game content.
In my experience there comes a point in any mmorpg with raiding at which there simply isn't any solo/small group content left to do that leads to any rewards. This happens because raiders need a motivation to do raids and the motivation is better loot. The loot from non-raid content can't continue to get better and better without approaching the quality of raid loot....so non-raid content simply ceases at some point. I understand why this has to be to support the raiding side of the game but the end result is that for non-raiders these games really do have an end. End-game for a non-raider is just exactly what it sounds like. Hence my quest for a good game with no raiding at all or at the very least a non-raiding server.
As far as raid size, it's impossible to draw a line without being arbitrary. If I had to draw a line where it becomes to many people I would draw it between 10 and 11 people. Above 10 and it's too many people for it to be fun for me. But like I said that's arbitrary. In actuallity I would prefer something like 5-6 people but I could tolerate 10.
You seem familiar. I have spoken to members of Syndicate on another board. Cool people. I'm interested in your PoV about LoTRO being worse. I'm always open to the possibility of someone knowing something I don't know and learning from that.
Guild Wars 2 is my religion
I am the Cannon Fodder God
Yes.. I think I know you. The name I usually go by is "klepto". if this is the same z80 that I've seen on other boards. I dont always agree with you. But you usually make a damn good point.
I'm coming at this from the angle of ...being sick as hell of the same game over and over and over ...just coming in a different package and from a different company. We get it. Companies can make a fantasy game where you grind levels and maybe do a little pvp. Its time to break out of that mold.
LOTRO has several things working against it. Theres more then this ...this is off the top of my head:
#1 What does it offer that is REALLY different from the classic "fantasy-create-character-grind-level-pvp-or-not- concepts"? Its the same old thing. You create an elf... you pick a profession or class .. and you level. Its not really even doing that those things well...from what I can see. There arent many options as far as diversity goes.
#2 Turbine is a let down so far. They had one of the best oppurtunities to make a great mmorpg with the DDO license and screwed it up bigtime. Now they have another great oppurtunity with LOTRO and IMO ..it will be a letdown as well. They should have slowed down on the licenses and made ONE great game.
#3 Character creation: quote"Create a unique character: Adventure as a Man, Elf, Dwarf or Hobbit. After choosing where your character hails from, select region-appropriate color palettes for skin, hair, eye color, and more."
Whoopee!!
The character creation sucks in this game. It doesnt even come close to games that have been out for YEARS like swg or COV/COH. You have to improve on old concepts to be different and unique. In my opinion LOTRO hasnt.
I know there are probably alot of people that will like the game .. and thats fine... I respect that. I however will be waiting for the games that are willing to take a bit of a risk to be different ... improving on whats already been done ..and adding new concepts and different ideas...instead of the same old things.
I'll start my own SWG... with Black Jack... and Hookers!!!
In fact, forget the SWG!!!!
Good seeing you here.
I must say all of your points are true. I don't think they will make the game bad, well, for me, but you are still right.
Guild Wars 2 is my religion
Guild Wars 2 is my religion
That's IF they can pull it off... and that's a BIG if... it's ambitious to say the least...
If they can, it will DESTROY WoW...
I'll start my own SWG... with Black Jack... and Hookers!!!
In fact, forget the SWG!!!!
I am the Cannon Fodder God
Guild Wars 2 is my religion
Since my other discussion seems to have gasped it's last gasp I'll answer some of this. Speaking only for myself, of course, I can't speak for all non-raiders.
Am I jealous that raiders get the best items? Yes and no. I'm jealous, but not so much because you get a better item than me but because you have the oppurtunity to get a better item and because you get the end-game content to play through that leads to the better item. I don't raid so I don't even get a chance at the better item and I don't get the end-game content.
In my experience there comes a point in any mmorpg with raiding at which there simply isn't any solo/small group content left to do that leads to any rewards. This happens because raiders need a motivation to do raids and the motivation is better loot. The loot from non-raid content can't continue to get better and better without approaching the quality of raid loot....so non-raid content simply ceases at some point. I understand why this has to be to support the raiding side of the game but the end result is that for non-raiders these games really do have an end. End-game for a non-raider is just exactly what it sounds like. Hence my quest for a good game with no raiding at all or at the very least a non-raiding server.
As far as raid size, it's impossible to draw a line without being arbitrary. If I had to draw a line where it becomes to many people I would draw it between 10 and 11 people. Above 10 and it's too many people for it to be fun for me. But like I said that's arbitrary. In actuallity I would prefer something like 5-6 people but I could tolerate 10.
I see much much better. You have excellent points there. You have valid concerns with the so called end game content. And most of the reason why people raid, its not only for the fun, challenge aspect of the so called end game content. But in many cases, as you said it yourself not many gamers will be able to see end game content this limits their ability to be in equally as powerful as those who are lucky enough to have a bunch of raid minded gamers. I see your points. You guys really have made some great points there, I myself have seen many casuals in everquest that could not hope to compare to those who spend many hours raiding in end content. I end up ignoring the casual players, and not knowing how you guys felt. And its not because they dont have the time, its because they dont have the opportunity to get those hard to get raid quality gears under most circumstances. With that said, after giving much thought to all your posts on MMORPG.COM/Vanguard forum i think then that a special set of server rules could work for gamers such as yourself. Thanks for all your input on this. I will try to help you guys put out word for you to the developers in Sigil, and see if Brad or Butler can really do something for you people. I will appologize for you people for being harsh on your comments about "No raid server rule set, but now i have seen the light.
Rest assured, that all your inputs from this forum will be forwarded to Sigil. I would think a server with no raiding gear would work with no raid content, much like the progression servers on everquest but minus raid gear quality sounds very fair.
I am happy for them if it happen as that and it is good news enought to rejoice. However, like I said, me, myself, I wouldn't play if the raid-gear isn't there, in the grouping system, spoon-feeded or handed with challenges. I am sure they can live well without me on their server/game. Such servers would get MOST of the non-raiding crew, they may lack peoples like me, but I think that losing FoH or AL is never see as something negative anywhere, so since I am the group equivalent, it won't be negative in anyway to lose me or the like of me. I could start some drama about the need of hardcore folks to increase retention, but we all know better than to believe into THAT.
Warping to the next MMO. (This was my last input in the Vanguard forums, anywhere...I will also focus my reading on other MMOs, where it may be welcoming for the "uber-grouping-jerk" that I am)
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
Vanguard is awsome!
FAQ 11.13
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
I am happy for them if it happen as that and it is good news enought to rejoice. However, like I said, me, myself, I wouldn't play if the raid-gear isn't there, in the grouping system, spoon-feeded or handed with challenges. I am sure they can live well without me on their server/game. Such servers would get MOST of the non-raiding crew, they may lack peoples like me, but I think that losing FoH or AL is never see as something negative anywhere, so since I am the group equivalent, it won't be negative in anyway to lose me or the like of me. I could start some drama about the need of hardcore folks to increase retention, but we all know better than to believe into THAT.
Warping to the next MMO. (This was my last input in the Vanguard forums, anywhere...I will also focus my reading on other MMOs, where it may be welcoming for the "uber-grouping-jerk" that I am)
I heard LOTR has almost non of the raiding recently. Thats why i was referring you to that. You definately would love that game. The only downside i see in that game is that everything is instanced, I'm not sure if you would love instanced dungeons and such.