I encourage ALL to read this section if you are concerned about raiding, but for those who what summary answers, here are a few points this FAQ section makes. There is a LOT more information in the actual FAQ section.
Will the best loot come only from raids?
Aradune Mithara: No. ... ...In a nutshell, we want the best items to be available through a variety of routes: raids, long contiguous adventures, broken up adventures, trade skills, diplomacy, etc. ... (please read the entire section for the complete answer)
Could you be more clear? Please elaborate.
Aradune Mithara: What's key here is that the best items should come from experiences where there was the greatest risk vs. reward and time commitment (plus, there's always luck -- being in the right place at the right time, etc.).
Some of the best items will come from conventional raiding (large groups of people participating in long contiguous adventures). Some will come from long adventures consisting of less people and more importantly, while a lot of time will have to be invested, the content will be such that all of that time doesn't have to be contiguous. ... (please read the entire section for the complete answer)
Please explain further that doesnt necessarily seem consistent.
Aradune Mithara: I think I was consistent, although perhaps not as clear as they could have been. Some of the best items will only be obtainable via raiding, other best items through grouping, and others through special casual areas, and others through the other spheres (harvesting/crafting and diplomacy).
Let me try to come up with a quick hypothetical example -- it's simplistic, but perhaps will make more sense:
1. The best all around helmet (say non-situational -- it has the best AC, or the best +STR attribute) for a warrior may come from a high level group zone
2. The best fire resistant vambraces may come from a raid zone
3. The best light armor boots may come from a challenging encounter that is made for casual/solo size groups (1-3).
4. The best AC armor (call it the Red Dragonscale Breastplate) may come from dragon scales collected in a difficult group dungeon, but then also require a high level harvester to actually collect the scales in the depths of a the dragon's lair, and then a high level crafter to be able to use it and other components to actually create the Red Dragonscale Breastplate
Were a person to absolutely insist on obtaining all 4 of these hypothetical items above, he would have to either a. engage in all 4 activities to some significant extent, as well as work with others in most of the examples or b. buy/trade for them, assuming they are items that are tradable.
I'll start my own SWG... with Black Jack... and Hookers!!!
Originally posted by Vanguarde 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.
If you play on a normal server and Anofayle plays on a non-raid server, how will the game be watered down for you? Why do you care what happens on another server?
The only argument would be that you do not wish the devs to have to spend any time at all on extra maintenance or design.
I doubt that having non-raid versions of encountes would take that much extra effort. And certainly just disabling raid content all together would be completely trivial.
I think its ridiculous that people think raids are hard and frankly all MMORPGs are watered down. They have no difficutly settings like single player games. They are made for some median players and are generally quite easy for good players. There is no point in fooling yourselves, MMORPGs are not hard. Any MMORPG that is actually hard will struggle to have subs. You can fool yourselves with time invested etc. but these games are not that hard.
But even if we were to stipulate, for arguments sake, that raids are somehow hard; so what, you wouldn't be playing on the same server as Anofayle. You act like he is somehow trying to harm or change your gaming experience, but no one has proposed anything that would alter normal servers. You can have your "core gamer" experience and Anofayle can have his non-core gamers expereince and everyone can be happy. Or maybe its just more fun when only the core-gamers are happy? There is only one true vision, I guess everyone else should just be burned at the stake?
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.
If you play on a normal server and Anofayle plays on a non-raid server, how will the game be watered down for you? Why do you care what happens on another server?
The only argument would be that you do not wish the devs to have to spend any time at all on extra maintenance or design.
I doubt that having non-raid versions of encountes would take that much extra effort. And certainly just disabling raid content all together would be completely trivial.
I think its ridiculous that people think raids are hard and frankly all MMORPGs are watered down. They have no difficutly settings like single player games. They are made for some median players and are generally quite easy for good players. There is no point in fooling yourselves, MMORPGs are not hard. Any MMORPG that is actually hard will struggle to have subs. You can fool yourselves with time invested etc. but these games are not that hard.
But even if we were to stipulate, for arguments sake, that raids are somehow hard; so what, you wouldn't be playing on the same server as Anofayle. You act like he is somehow trying to harm or change your gaming experience, but no one has proposed anything that would alter normal servers. You can have your "core gamer" experience and Anofayle can have his non-core gamers expereince and everyone can be happy. Or maybe its just more fun when only the core-gamers are happy? There is only one true vision, I guess everyone else should just be burned at the stake?
That is your opinion not mine. Sigil will not bow down to your stupid horrendous idea of different rulesets.
Originally posted by Vanguarde That is your opinion not mine. Sigil will not bow down to your stupid horrendous idea of different rulesets.
Raid-free serves are to be created based on peoples WANTING it. Not based on peoples who hate it, their opinion is irrelevant. The only thing that matter, is the peoples who WOULD PLAY the game with these.
There would be MORE players on raid-free servers than on all the remaining combined together. Yet, some folks are still arguing. Funny, really.
Brad didn't stop making PvE servers because gankers where crying. He made the PvE servers, regardless of the gankers opinion. He would make, or not, the Raid-free server, regardless of raiders opinions.
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
Originally posted by Vanguarde Originally posted by gestalt11 Originally posted by Vanguarde 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.
If you play on a normal server and Anofayle plays on a non-raid server, how will the game be watered down for you? Why do you care what happens on another server?
The only argument would be that you do not wish the devs to have to spend any time at all on extra maintenance or design.
I doubt that having non-raid versions of encountes would take that much extra effort. And certainly just disabling raid content all together would be completely trivial.
I think its ridiculous that people think raids are hard and frankly all MMORPGs are watered down. They have no difficutly settings like single player games. They are made for some median players and are generally quite easy for good players. There is no point in fooling yourselves, MMORPGs are not hard. Any MMORPG that is actually hard will struggle to have subs. You can fool yourselves with time invested etc. but these games are not that hard.
But even if we were to stipulate, for arguments sake, that raids are somehow hard; so what, you wouldn't be playing on the same server as Anofayle. You act like he is somehow trying to harm or change your gaming experience, but no one has proposed anything that would alter normal servers. You can have your "core gamer" experience and Anofayle can have his non-core gamers expereince and everyone can be happy. Or maybe its just more fun when only the core-gamers are happy? There is only one true vision, I guess everyone else should just be burned at the stake? That is your opinion not mine. Sigil will not bow down to your stupid horrendous idea of different rulesets. I agree they won't ever do it. It will hurt their profits immensly and for no purpose since people like you can play on the vision-pure servers anyway.
Even the simple act of just removing content would actually make them money. This is not even different rule sets. It would merely be offering servers with a subset of content. Just like DAoC did with its classic servers.
Sigh. It should really frighten people that these companies could probably double their profits by offering alternate servers that just disable content. And it should frighten you even more that they don't do it.
Obviously that double their profits thing is off the cuff, but that is the sense of things I get from many different MMOs.
Since Vanguard balances group content with group equipment just disabling all raid stuff would not even require code changes and could all be handled via configuration files. And would require no extra testing since everything is already balanced without raid stuff in mind. The operational overhead would be virtually non-existant.
Anyone who asks for a server with disabled raid content is not asking for a different ruleset. And it would take no extra operational overhead. So why would you even care?
If you are a PvEer you should be far far more worried about PvP servers than raid-disabled servers. That requires an actual different ruleset and even worse a ruleset for which certain foundations of PvP are fundamentally unsound, ie. aggro etc.
I just don't get it. Why do people even care if some content is disabled on one server-type when the normal vision servers are also avaialbe? Maintenance or ruleset overhead is not an issue in that case, unless vanguard is incredibly poorly coded, which I highly doubt. And if it brings in more money for Sigil, isn't that good?
Originally posted by gestalt11 Originally posted by Vanguarde Originally posted by gestalt11 Originally posted by Vanguarde 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.
If you play on a normal server and Anofayle plays on a non-raid server, how will the game be watered down for you? Why do you care what happens on another server?
The only argument would be that you do not wish the devs to have to spend any time at all on extra maintenance or design.
I doubt that having non-raid versions of encountes would take that much extra effort. And certainly just disabling raid content all together would be completely trivial.
I think its ridiculous that people think raids are hard and frankly all MMORPGs are watered down. They have no difficutly settings like single player games. They are made for some median players and are generally quite easy for good players. There is no point in fooling yourselves, MMORPGs are not hard. Any MMORPG that is actually hard will struggle to have subs. You can fool yourselves with time invested etc. but these games are not that hard.
But even if we were to stipulate, for arguments sake, that raids are somehow hard; so what, you wouldn't be playing on the same server as Anofayle. You act like he is somehow trying to harm or change your gaming experience, but no one has proposed anything that would alter normal servers. You can have your "core gamer" experience and Anofayle can have his non-core gamers expereince and everyone can be happy. Or maybe its just more fun when only the core-gamers are happy? There is only one true vision, I guess everyone else should just be burned at the stake? That is your opinion not mine. Sigil will not bow down to your stupid horrendous idea of different rulesets. I agree they won't ever do it. It will hurt their profits immensly and for no purpose since people like you can play on the vision-pure servers anyway.
Even the simple act of just removing content would actually make them money. This is not even different rule sets. It would merely be offering servers with a subset of content. Just like DAoC did with its classic servers.
Sigh. It should really frighten people that these companies could probably double their profits by offering alternate servers that just disable content. And it should frighten you even more that they don't do it.
Absolutely. I couldn't agree more.
Obviously that double their profits thing is off the cuff, but that is the sense of things I get from many different MMOs.
Since Vanguard balances group content with group equipment just disabling all raid stuff would not even require code changes and could all be handled via configuration files. And would require no extra testing since everything is already balanced without raid stuff in mind. The operational overhead would be virtually non-existant.
Anyone who asks for a server with disabled raid content is not asking for a different ruleset. And it would take no extra operational overhead. So why would you even care?
If you are a PvEer you should be far far more worried about PvP servers than raid-disabled servers. That requires an actual different ruleset and even worse a ruleset for which certain foundations of PvP are fundamentally unsound, ie. aggro etc.
I just don't get it. Why do people even care if some content is disabled on one server-type when the normal vision servers are also avaialbe? Maintenance or ruleset overhead is not an issue in that case, unless vanguard is incredibly poorly coded, which I highly doubt. And if it brings in more money for Sigil, isn't that good? The poster Vanguarde is most likely an extremist. Extremism taken too far leads to fanaticism and fanaticism fulfilled leads to some very unsavory stuff. Somewhere along that line a person becomes unbalanced. If you look at s/he posts you see s/he thinks the coming of Vanguard: SOH is like the second coming of Christ and in another post calls the game his or her beloved and says how Brad will not bow to anyone that would suggest an alternate ruleset server with no raids, etc... sigh.
Raid-free serves are to be created based on peoples WANTING it. Not based on peoples who hate it, their opinion is irrelevant. The only thing that matter, is the peoples who WOULD PLAY the game with these.
There would be MORE players on raid-free servers than on all the remaining combined together. Yet, some folks are still arguing. Funny, really.
Brad didn't stop making PvE servers because gankers where crying. He made the PvE servers, regardless of the gankers opinion. He would make, or not, the Raid-free server, regardless of raiders opinions.
there you go again, taking your opinion witch is pure speculation and claiming it as fact. why anyone listens to your BS is beyond me....i have replied to you time and time again why i think you are wrong.
i have posted why i believe you are indeed in the minority with your extreme hatred for raiding and how you refuse to play a game with raiding.
we all know that casual players are the huge majority in gaming....we all know that is one of the main reasons why wow and GW is so popular.
the problem is, even if vanguard did have a non-raiding server it still would not attract these casual gamers because the core mechanics of the game still require far to much time.
you are crazy if you think there are all these hardcore anti-raiding gamers running around that absolutely refuse to raid, there simply isn't.
yes there are hardcore gamers that don't like to raid but nowhere near how many you suggest there are. the point is raiding or no raiding is not going to make any difference to a casual gamer trying to play a game like vanguard.
a casual gamer with limited time to play wont have time to group or raid, just remember Anofalye...just because you are a hardcore gamer that hates raiding and refuses to play a game unless there is a non-raiding server....does not mean the majority agrees with you, and it does not mean your opinion is a fact by any means.
until you can show me any game that has raiding but also a non-raiding server and that server having more people on it than all the other servers combined...then and only then will i consider your argument as more than far fetched speculation at best.
a non raiding server is not a server with no raiding (nesesarily(sp?)) it a server in which higher tier armour and weapons are open to players who do not have the time or do not wish to raid.
EQ2 player Ex - EVE Online addict played - SWG, EQ2, Vanguard, Planetside, Second Life, EVE-O and a few randoms
Originally posted by Neanderthal 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.
Honestly, I have no idea whether or not Brad has entertained the notion of a non-raiding server. What I do know is that our group content isn't balanced around raid gear, regardless of what some people think.
The defense for a non-raiding server by some people is a bit amusing. On one hand, they claim that raid gear trivializes group encounters for the players that raid and removes the skill needed for a well-balanced group encounter. Yet, on the other hand, they ask that that same raid gear be put on merchants or the same group encounters that they trivialize. Addition of raid gear to merchants or group content only accomplishes the exact same thing that the non-raiding proponents complain about: the trivialization of group encounters.
Granted, there's a few ways to balance it but the easiest thing is to just remove those items from the game entirely on a non-raiding server.
By the way. that's not to say that this idea doesn't intrigue me
Originally posted by CylusSigil The defense for a non-raiding server by some people is a bit amusing. On one hand, they claim that raid gear trivializes group encounters for the players that raid and removes the skill needed for a well-balanced group encounter. Yet, on the other hand, they ask that that same raid gear be put on merchants or the same group encounters that they trivialize. Addition of raid gear to merchants or group content only accomplishes the exact same thing that the non-raiding proponents complain about: the trivialization of group encounters. Granted, there's a few ways to balance it but the easiest thing is to just remove those items from the game entirely on a non-raiding server.
I agree. I don't want to see it on vendors for that very reason.
In fact, I don't want gear that trivilizes level appropriate content at all, be it though raid gear, twinking, or otherwise. But that's because I actually want a challenging game, as opposed to saying I do and in the same breath urging game mechanics that allow players to trivialize the encounters through overpowered gear (just so that certain players or groups of players can enjoy a hierarchical status over others and feel "uber").
The same folks who say they want a challenging game frequently also want twinking and oppose a trivial loot system. That is very telling. When they say they want a challenging game, what they mean is they want it to be challenging for others.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
Originally posted by Neanderthal 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.
Honestly, I have no idea whether or not Brad has entertained the notion of a non-raiding server. What I do know is that our group content isn't balanced around raid gear, regardless of what some people think.
The defense for a non-raiding server by some people is a bit amusing. On one hand, they claim that raid gear trivializes group encounters for the players that raid and removes the skill needed for a well-balanced group encounter. Yet, on the other hand, they ask that that same raid gear be put on merchants or the same group encounters that they trivialize. Addition of raid gear to merchants or group content only accomplishes the exact same thing that the non-raiding proponents complain about: the trivialization of group encounters.
Granted, there's a few ways to balance it but the easiest thing is to just remove those items from the game entirely on a non-raiding server.
By the way. that's not to say that this idea doesn't intrigue me
Cylus,
Thank you for your input, you hit the nail on the head about how to create a RAID-Free server, just turn it and all items from raiding off.
That is all that most posters have been asking for, I dont want a vendor who sells the raid items nor extra quests for the items, just turn it all off.
You have to realise that the reason some of us dislike (hate being too strong a work) raiding is just that it can have a very negative effect on end game guilds with DKP and infighting within a guild about who can go or not go on a guild raid etc.
If you do decide to make a raid-free server you might be very surprised about how many want to play on it.
Yes well we all know Brad wont tolerate such server ruleset as non raiding server. This game is not for the casual gamers. So all you casual gamers should move on to other mmorpg and take your non raiding server idea to that other mmorpg. The day Brad decides to insert a non raiding server ruleset is when pigs fly.
Originally posted by Vanguarde Yes well we all know Brad wont tolerate such server ruleset as non raiding server. This game is not for the casual gamers. So all you casual gamers should move on to other mmorpg and take your non raiding server idea to that other mmorpg. The day Brad decides to insert a non raiding server ruleset is when pigs fly.
and just to make you look stupid, Brad and Co. insert a non-raiding server into Vanguard. lol. that would be funny. i dont really want a non-raiding server either, but its not a game-breaker either. btw, take out all the casual gamers and all you have left is 12 yr old disrespectful raiders that talk in l33tspeak. not the greatest visual, in me thinking.
They wont alienate their intended core audience. Also you should note that Brad have given VIP treatment to many major experienced guilds into vanguard especially us.
If you cant talk the talk then dont walk the walk simple as that.This goes to the OP and the rest of so called casual gamers.
Originally posted by Vanguarde Yes well we all know Brad wont tolerate such server ruleset as non raiding server. This game is not for the casual gamers. So all you casual gamers should move on to other mmorpg and take your non raiding server idea to that other mmorpg. The day Brad decides to insert a non raiding server ruleset is when pigs fly.
Vanguarde,
I have never been nor have I ever been a casual player, when I play a MMORPG I play that game 30+ hours a week and I am usually in guilds with over 100 players.
You must be very strange if you think that makes me a casual player, many of us who have aked for a raid-free server are hard-core players with many years experience.
When Vanguard does start can you post what server you will be playing on because I have no wish to play on any server with people like yourself. You are the kind of player that could destroy Vanguard, well you would be happy then because you would have the vanguard server all to yourself and you guild.
I don't understand your problem, just because we want a different experience of Vanguard than you does that make us wrong? We do not want to effect your experience, you can have your very own raid server.
What about Raid Lite server? A server where "Boss" targets only take a max of 12 players to take down. Sort of like the old Efreeti raids in EQ 1 (when 50 was cap).
This would still leave a raiding element to the game and should allow smaller casual guilds (and players) success. If they had enough boss's with custom items it would also keep the power gamers busy trying to get all the "right" pieces for their class.
Just dont get it confused with the WoW 10 man's , they were WAY to easy/boring. Just because it takes 12 doesnt mean it should be easy.
Raid-free serves are to be created based on peoples WANTING it. Not based on peoples who hate it, their opinion is irrelevant. The only thing that matter, is the peoples who WOULD PLAY the game with these.
There would be MORE players on raid-free servers than on all the remaining combined together. Yet, some folks are still arguing. Funny, really.
Brad didn't stop making PvE servers because gankers where crying. He made the PvE servers, regardless of the gankers opinion. He would make, or not, the Raid-free server, regardless of raiders opinions.
there you go again, taking your opinion witch is pure speculation and claiming it as fact. why anyone listens to your BS is beyond me....i have replied to you time and time again why i think you are wrong.
i have posted why i believe you are indeed in the minority with your extreme hatred for raiding and how you refuse to play a game with raiding.
we all know that casual players are the huge majority in gaming....we all know that is one of the main reasons why wow and GW is so popular.
the problem is, even if vanguard did have a non-raiding server it still would not attract these casual gamers because the core mechanics of the game still require far to much time.
you are crazy if you think there are all these hardcore anti-raiding gamers running around that absolutely refuse to raid, there simply isn't.
yes there are hardcore gamers that don't like to raid but nowhere near how many you suggest there are. the point is raiding or no raiding is not going to make any difference to a casual gamer trying to play a game like vanguard.
a casual gamer with limited time to play wont have time to group or raid, just remember Anofalye...just because you are a hardcore gamer that hates raiding and refuses to play a game unless there is a non-raiding server....does not mean the majority agrees with you, and it does not mean your opinion is a fact by any means.
until you can show me any game that has raiding but also a non-raiding server and that server having more people on it than all the other servers combined...then and only then will i consider your argument as more than far fetched speculation at best.
Baphamet hit the nail dead on. His statement holds many facts, you should read his statements.
Originally posted by Amathe Originally posted by CylusSigilThe defense for a non-raiding server by some people is a bit amusing. On one hand, they claim that raid gear trivializes group encounters for the players that raid and removes the skill needed for a well-balanced group encounter. Yet, on the other hand, they ask that that same raid gear be put on merchants or the same group encounters that they trivialize. Addition of raid gear to merchants or group content only accomplishes the exact same thing that the non-raiding proponents complain about: the trivialization of group encounters.Granted, there's a few ways to balance it but the easiest thing is to just remove those items from the game entirely on a non-raiding server.
I agree. I don't want to see it on vendors for that very reason.
In fact, I don't want gear that trivilizes level appropriate content at all, be it though raid gear, twinking, or otherwise. But that's because I actually want a challenging game, as opposed to saying I do and in the same breath urging game mechanics that allow players to trivialize the encounters through overpowered gear (just so that certain players or groups of players can enjoy a hierarchical status over others and feel "uber").
The same folks who say they want a challenging game frequently also want twinking and oppose a trivial loot system. That is very telling. When they say they want a challenging game, what they mean is they want it to be challenging for others.
Originally posted by Vanguarde Also you should note that Brad has given VIP treatment to many major experienced guilds into vanguard especially us.
This is probably because you'd cry and make everyone in your guild vow to never play it if he didn't.
If no casual player played Vanguard, it would go under, period. Hardcore raiding is for the rich, the unemployed, bad parents and kids who still live with their parents. I have a full time job, a girlfriend and a life. I just don't have time to raid hardcore anymore nor do I want to. If you do I'm happy for you, but don't try and tell me or anyone else who can or can't play Vanguard.
I have been anticipating Vanguard for years and I will be playing it. The only reason I started this thread is because there is a huge audience that would love a non-raiding server. Look at the poll.
Also, people like me who aren't affiliated with any uber guild have been let into the beta too.
I too don't participate in raiding. I have no problems with raiding existing on any server though. I'd probably try out a "raid-free" server if it was done correctly though.
And just putting all the raid items on a vendor - IS NOT done correctly.
Removing 100% of the Raid-Content would be kinda harsh, but it's the only way to truly do a "raid-free" server realistically. It just simply wouldn't be worth the effort to re-do every quest, item, and NPC into a group equivalent.
I just don't see the logic behind the numbers to realistically hope for one. If someone could point to an example of a game where "raid-free" clearly made a difference; then sure I could see the logic. But in fact, the exact opposite would seem to be the case. We have the example of the 800 lb. gorilla (otherwise known as WoW) with obviously Raid only Servesr - and it's still going gang-busters.
So, if you were a business; making a MMO, and looking for a decent return on your investment. Wouldn't it make sense to include Raid in your Servers?
a casual gamer with limited time to play wont have time to group or raid, just remember Anofalye...just because you are a hardcore gamer that hates raiding and refuses to play a game unless there is a non-raiding server....does not mean the majority agrees with you, and it does not mean your opinion is a fact by any means. until you can show me any game that has raiding but also a non-raiding server and that server having more people on it than all the other servers combined...then and only then will i consider your argument as more than far fetched speculation at best.
Baphamet hit the nail dead on. His statement holds many facts, you should read his statements.
Well, a casual can DREAM of completing a grouping-game, where it is simply impossible to even DREAM when it is raiding.
DREAMING is very important, and a raid-free server allow casuals to DREAM and HOPE that maybe, they can complete it, in their own time. While raiding, remove all dream, all hope.
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
Comments
FYI...
I encourage ALL to read this section if you are concerned about raiding, but for those who what summary answers, here are a few points this FAQ section makes. There is a LOT more information in the actual FAQ section.
I'll start my own SWG... with Black Jack... and Hookers!!!
In fact, forget the SWG!!!!
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.
If you play on a normal server and Anofayle plays on a non-raid server, how will the game be watered down for you? Why do you care what happens on another server?
The only argument would be that you do not wish the devs to have to spend any time at all on extra maintenance or design.
I doubt that having non-raid versions of encountes would take that much extra effort. And certainly just disabling raid content all together would be completely trivial.
I think its ridiculous that people think raids are hard and frankly all MMORPGs are watered down. They have no difficutly settings like single player games. They are made for some median players and are generally quite easy for good players. There is no point in fooling yourselves, MMORPGs are not hard. Any MMORPG that is actually hard will struggle to have subs. You can fool yourselves with time invested etc. but these games are not that hard.
But even if we were to stipulate, for arguments sake, that raids are somehow hard; so what, you wouldn't be playing on the same server as Anofayle. You act like he is somehow trying to harm or change your gaming experience, but no one has proposed anything that would alter normal servers. You can have your "core gamer" experience and Anofayle can have his non-core gamers expereince and everyone can be happy. Or maybe its just more fun when only the core-gamers are happy? There is only one true vision, I guess everyone else should just be burned at the stake?
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.
If you play on a normal server and Anofayle plays on a non-raid server, how will the game be watered down for you? Why do you care what happens on another server?
The only argument would be that you do not wish the devs to have to spend any time at all on extra maintenance or design.
I doubt that having non-raid versions of encountes would take that much extra effort. And certainly just disabling raid content all together would be completely trivial.
I think its ridiculous that people think raids are hard and frankly all MMORPGs are watered down. They have no difficutly settings like single player games. They are made for some median players and are generally quite easy for good players. There is no point in fooling yourselves, MMORPGs are not hard. Any MMORPG that is actually hard will struggle to have subs. You can fool yourselves with time invested etc. but these games are not that hard.
But even if we were to stipulate, for arguments sake, that raids are somehow hard; so what, you wouldn't be playing on the same server as Anofayle. You act like he is somehow trying to harm or change your gaming experience, but no one has proposed anything that would alter normal servers. You can have your "core gamer" experience and Anofayle can have his non-core gamers expereince and everyone can be happy. Or maybe its just more fun when only the core-gamers are happy? There is only one true vision, I guess everyone else should just be burned at the stake?
That is your opinion not mine. Sigil will not bow down to your stupid horrendous idea of different rulesets.
Raid-free serves are to be created based on peoples WANTING it. Not based on peoples who hate it, their opinion is irrelevant. The only thing that matter, is the peoples who WOULD PLAY the game with these.
There would be MORE players on raid-free servers than on all the remaining combined together. Yet, some folks are still arguing. Funny, really.
Brad didn't stop making PvE servers because gankers where crying. He made the PvE servers, regardless of the gankers opinion. He would make, or not, the Raid-free server, regardless of raiders opinions.
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
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.
If you play on a normal server and Anofayle plays on a non-raid server, how will the game be watered down for you? Why do you care what happens on another server?
The only argument would be that you do not wish the devs to have to spend any time at all on extra maintenance or design.
I doubt that having non-raid versions of encountes would take that much extra effort. And certainly just disabling raid content all together would be completely trivial.
I think its ridiculous that people think raids are hard and frankly all MMORPGs are watered down. They have no difficutly settings like single player games. They are made for some median players and are generally quite easy for good players. There is no point in fooling yourselves, MMORPGs are not hard. Any MMORPG that is actually hard will struggle to have subs. You can fool yourselves with time invested etc. but these games are not that hard.
But even if we were to stipulate, for arguments sake, that raids are somehow hard; so what, you wouldn't be playing on the same server as Anofayle. You act like he is somehow trying to harm or change your gaming experience, but no one has proposed anything that would alter normal servers. You can have your "core gamer" experience and Anofayle can have his non-core gamers expereince and everyone can be happy. Or maybe its just more fun when only the core-gamers are happy? There is only one true vision, I guess everyone else should just be burned at the stake?
That is your opinion not mine. Sigil will not bow down to your stupid horrendous idea of different rulesets.
I agree they won't ever do it. It will hurt their profits immensly and for no purpose since people like you can play on the vision-pure servers anyway.
Even the simple act of just removing content would actually make them money. This is not even different rule sets. It would merely be offering servers with a subset of content. Just like DAoC did with its classic servers.
Sigh. It should really frighten people that these companies could probably double their profits by offering alternate servers that just disable content. And it should frighten you even more that they don't do it.
Obviously that double their profits thing is off the cuff, but that is the sense of things I get from many different MMOs.
Since Vanguard balances group content with group equipment just disabling all raid stuff would not even require code changes and could all be handled via configuration files. And would require no extra testing since everything is already balanced without raid stuff in mind. The operational overhead would be virtually non-existant.
Anyone who asks for a server with disabled raid content is not asking for a different ruleset. And it would take no extra operational overhead. So why would you even care?
If you are a PvEer you should be far far more worried about PvP servers than raid-disabled servers. That requires an actual different ruleset and even worse a ruleset for which certain foundations of PvP are fundamentally unsound, ie. aggro etc.
I just don't get it. Why do people even care if some content is disabled on one server-type when the normal vision servers are also avaialbe? Maintenance or ruleset overhead is not an issue in that case, unless vanguard is incredibly poorly coded, which I highly doubt. And if it brings in more money for Sigil, isn't that good?
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.
If you play on a normal server and Anofayle plays on a non-raid server, how will the game be watered down for you? Why do you care what happens on another server?
The only argument would be that you do not wish the devs to have to spend any time at all on extra maintenance or design.
I doubt that having non-raid versions of encountes would take that much extra effort. And certainly just disabling raid content all together would be completely trivial.
I think its ridiculous that people think raids are hard and frankly all MMORPGs are watered down. They have no difficutly settings like single player games. They are made for some median players and are generally quite easy for good players. There is no point in fooling yourselves, MMORPGs are not hard. Any MMORPG that is actually hard will struggle to have subs. You can fool yourselves with time invested etc. but these games are not that hard.
But even if we were to stipulate, for arguments sake, that raids are somehow hard; so what, you wouldn't be playing on the same server as Anofayle. You act like he is somehow trying to harm or change your gaming experience, but no one has proposed anything that would alter normal servers. You can have your "core gamer" experience and Anofayle can have his non-core gamers expereince and everyone can be happy. Or maybe its just more fun when only the core-gamers are happy? There is only one true vision, I guess everyone else should just be burned at the stake?
That is your opinion not mine. Sigil will not bow down to your stupid horrendous idea of different rulesets.
I agree they won't ever do it. It will hurt their profits immensly and for no purpose since people like you can play on the vision-pure servers anyway.
Even the simple act of just removing content would actually make them money. This is not even different rule sets. It would merely be offering servers with a subset of content. Just like DAoC did with its classic servers.
Sigh. It should really frighten people that these companies could probably double their profits by offering alternate servers that just disable content. And it should frighten you even more that they don't do it.
Absolutely. I couldn't agree more.
Obviously that double their profits thing is off the cuff, but that is the sense of things I get from many different MMOs.
Since Vanguard balances group content with group equipment just disabling all raid stuff would not even require code changes and could all be handled via configuration files. And would require no extra testing since everything is already balanced without raid stuff in mind. The operational overhead would be virtually non-existant.
Anyone who asks for a server with disabled raid content is not asking for a different ruleset. And it would take no extra operational overhead. So why would you even care?
If you are a PvEer you should be far far more worried about PvP servers than raid-disabled servers. That requires an actual different ruleset and even worse a ruleset for which certain foundations of PvP are fundamentally unsound, ie. aggro etc.
I just don't get it. Why do people even care if some content is disabled on one server-type when the normal vision servers are also avaialbe? Maintenance or ruleset overhead is not an issue in that case, unless vanguard is incredibly poorly coded, which I highly doubt. And if it brings in more money for Sigil, isn't that good?
The poster Vanguarde is most likely an extremist. Extremism taken too far leads to fanaticism and fanaticism fulfilled leads to some very unsavory stuff. Somewhere along that line a person becomes unbalanced. If you look at s/he posts you see s/he thinks the coming of Vanguard: SOH is like the second coming of Christ and in another post calls the game his or her beloved and says how Brad will not bow to anyone that would suggest an alternate ruleset server with no raids, etc... sigh.
Spiritglow
there you go again, taking your opinion witch is pure speculation and claiming it as fact. why anyone listens to your BS is beyond me....i have replied to you time and time again why i think you are wrong.
i have posted why i believe you are indeed in the minority with your extreme hatred for raiding and how you refuse to play a game with raiding.
we all know that casual players are the huge majority in gaming....we all know that is one of the main reasons why wow and GW is so popular.
the problem is, even if vanguard did have a non-raiding server it still would not attract these casual gamers because the core mechanics of the game still require far to much time.
you are crazy if you think there are all these hardcore anti-raiding gamers running around that absolutely refuse to raid, there simply isn't.
yes there are hardcore gamers that don't like to raid but nowhere near how many you suggest there are. the point is raiding or no raiding is not going to make any difference to a casual gamer trying to play a game like vanguard.
a casual gamer with limited time to play wont have time to group or raid, just remember Anofalye...just because you are a hardcore gamer that hates raiding and refuses to play a game unless there is a non-raiding server....does not mean the majority agrees with you, and it does not mean your opinion is a fact by any means.
until you can show me any game that has raiding but also a non-raiding server and that server having more people on it than all the other servers combined...then and only then will i consider your argument as more than far fetched speculation at best.
EQ2 player
Ex - EVE Online addict
played -
SWG, EQ2, Vanguard, Planetside, Second Life, EVE-O and a few randoms
Honestly, I have no idea whether or not Brad has entertained the notion of a non-raiding server. What I do know is that our group content isn't balanced around raid gear, regardless of what some people think.
The defense for a non-raiding server by some people is a bit amusing. On one hand, they claim that raid gear trivializes group encounters for the players that raid and removes the skill needed for a well-balanced group encounter. Yet, on the other hand, they ask that that same raid gear be put on merchants or the same group encounters that they trivialize. Addition of raid gear to merchants or group content only accomplishes the exact same thing that the non-raiding proponents complain about: the trivialization of group encounters.
Granted, there's a few ways to balance it but the easiest thing is to just remove those items from the game entirely on a non-raiding server.
By the way. that's not to say that this idea doesn't intrigue me
I agree. I don't want to see it on vendors for that very reason.
In fact, I don't want gear that trivilizes level appropriate content at all, be it though raid gear, twinking, or otherwise. But that's because I actually want a challenging game, as opposed to saying I do and in the same breath urging game mechanics that allow players to trivialize the encounters through overpowered gear (just so that certain players or groups of players can enjoy a hierarchical status over others and feel "uber").
The same folks who say they want a challenging game frequently also want twinking and oppose a trivial loot system. That is very telling. When they say they want a challenging game, what they mean is they want it to be challenging for others.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
Honestly, I have no idea whether or not Brad has entertained the notion of a non-raiding server. What I do know is that our group content isn't balanced around raid gear, regardless of what some people think.
The defense for a non-raiding server by some people is a bit amusing. On one hand, they claim that raid gear trivializes group encounters for the players that raid and removes the skill needed for a well-balanced group encounter. Yet, on the other hand, they ask that that same raid gear be put on merchants or the same group encounters that they trivialize. Addition of raid gear to merchants or group content only accomplishes the exact same thing that the non-raiding proponents complain about: the trivialization of group encounters.
Granted, there's a few ways to balance it but the easiest thing is to just remove those items from the game entirely on a non-raiding server.
By the way. that's not to say that this idea doesn't intrigue me
Cylus,
Thank you for your input, you hit the nail on the head about how to create a RAID-Free server, just turn it and all items from raiding off.
That is all that most posters have been asking for, I dont want a vendor who sells the raid items nor extra quests for the items, just turn it all off.
You have to realise that the reason some of us dislike (hate being too strong a work) raiding is just that it can have a very negative effect on end game guilds with DKP and infighting within a guild about who can go or not go on a guild raid etc.
If you do decide to make a raid-free server you might be very surprised about how many want to play on it.
______________________________
Doubtful.
They wont alienate their intended core audience. Also you should note that Brad have given VIP treatment to many major experienced guilds into vanguard especially us.
If you cant talk the talk then dont walk the walk simple as that.This goes to the OP and the rest of so called casual gamers.
______________________________
Vanguarde,
I have never been nor have I ever been a casual player, when I play a MMORPG I play that game 30+ hours a week and I am usually in guilds with over 100 players.
You must be very strange if you think that makes me a casual player, many of us who have aked for a raid-free server are hard-core players with many years experience.
When Vanguard does start can you post what server you will be playing on because I have no wish to play on any server with people like yourself. You are the kind of player that could destroy Vanguard, well you would be happy then because you would have the vanguard server all to yourself and you guild.
I don't understand your problem, just because we want a different experience of Vanguard than you does that make us wrong? We do not want to effect your experience, you can have your very own raid server.
What about Raid Lite server? A server where "Boss" targets only take a max of 12 players to take down. Sort of like the old Efreeti raids in EQ 1 (when 50 was cap).
This would still leave a raiding element to the game and should allow smaller casual guilds (and players) success. If they had enough boss's with custom items it would also keep the power gamers busy trying to get all the "right" pieces for their class.
Just dont get it confused with the WoW 10 man's , they were WAY to easy/boring. Just because it takes 12 doesnt mean it should be easy.
I know this is a forum where you "discuss" your opinions but for the love of pete..You really think there will be a non-raid server. heh please..
there you go again, taking your opinion witch is pure speculation and claiming it as fact. why anyone listens to your BS is beyond me....i have replied to you time and time again why i think you are wrong.
i have posted why i believe you are indeed in the minority with your extreme hatred for raiding and how you refuse to play a game with raiding.
we all know that casual players are the huge majority in gaming....we all know that is one of the main reasons why wow and GW is so popular.
the problem is, even if vanguard did have a non-raiding server it still would not attract these casual gamers because the core mechanics of the game still require far to much time.
you are crazy if you think there are all these hardcore anti-raiding gamers running around that absolutely refuse to raid, there simply isn't.
yes there are hardcore gamers that don't like to raid but nowhere near how many you suggest there are. the point is raiding or no raiding is not going to make any difference to a casual gamer trying to play a game like vanguard.
a casual gamer with limited time to play wont have time to group or raid, just remember Anofalye...just because you are a hardcore gamer that hates raiding and refuses to play a game unless there is a non-raiding server....does not mean the majority agrees with you, and it does not mean your opinion is a fact by any means.
until you can show me any game that has raiding but also a non-raiding server and that server having more people on it than all the other servers combined...then and only then will i consider your argument as more than far fetched speculation at best.
Baphamet hit the nail dead on. His statement holds many facts, you should read his statements.
I agree. I don't want to see it on vendors for that very reason.
In fact, I don't want gear that trivilizes level appropriate content at all, be it though raid gear, twinking, or otherwise. But that's because I actually want a challenging game, as opposed to saying I do and in the same breath urging game mechanics that allow players to trivialize the encounters through overpowered gear (just so that certain players or groups of players can enjoy a hierarchical status over others and feel "uber").
The same folks who say they want a challenging game frequently also want twinking and oppose a trivial loot system. That is very telling. When they say they want a challenging game, what they mean is they want it to be challenging for others.
Well said Amathe!
This is probably because you'd cry and make everyone in your guild vow to never play it if he didn't.
If no casual player played Vanguard, it would go under, period. Hardcore raiding is for the rich, the unemployed, bad parents and kids who still live with their parents. I have a full time job, a girlfriend and a life. I just don't have time to raid hardcore anymore nor do I want to. If you do I'm happy for you, but don't try and tell me or anyone else who can or can't play Vanguard.
I have been anticipating Vanguard for years and I will be playing it. The only reason I started this thread is because there is a huge audience that would love a non-raiding server. Look at the poll.
Also, people like me who aren't affiliated with any uber guild have been let into the beta too.
I too don't participate in raiding. I have no problems with raiding existing on any server though. I'd probably try out a "raid-free" server if it was done correctly though.
And just putting all the raid items on a vendor - IS NOT done correctly.
Removing 100% of the Raid-Content would be kinda harsh, but it's the only way to truly do a "raid-free" server realistically. It just simply wouldn't be worth the effort to re-do every quest, item, and NPC into a group equivalent.
I just don't see the logic behind the numbers to realistically hope for one. If someone could point to an example of a game where "raid-free" clearly made a difference; then sure I could see the logic. But in fact, the exact opposite would seem to be the case. We have the example of the 800 lb. gorilla (otherwise known as WoW) with obviously Raid only Servesr - and it's still going gang-busters.
So, if you were a business; making a MMO, and looking for a decent return on your investment. Wouldn't it make sense to include Raid in your Servers?
Well, a casual can DREAM of completing a grouping-game, where it is simply impossible to even DREAM when it is raiding.
DREAMING is very important, and a raid-free server allow casuals to DREAM and HOPE that maybe, they can complete it, in their own time. While raiding, remove all dream, all hope.
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren