Be your worst when goods are contested or you won't get anything
Be your best when goods are free flowing so suckers will like you and share with you when goods are contested again.
Yay raiders!
TriteEnvile said: The most imprtant reason to go to instanced raids. Raiding sessions time obligation. Having raid instances allowed you to plan raids by time of the day, time of the week, so you could better control the activity of guild as a whole. You could say.. we will be raiding from 7pm to 11 pm on tues thurs and sat. Plan your raids accordingly. I can not think of any greater customization for a guild then that.
I agree. Due to the nature of... well, real life in general, my track record of being able to attend in-game activities that are determined entirely by the game itself is very low. However, with instanced raids, I can find a guild/group whose schedule matches my own, instead of futiley trying to force my schedule to match the game.
This thread really reinforces in my mind my belief that open-tagging is superior in the open world to closed-tagging (either first-hit or most-damage). I much prefer game experiences where everyone can work together, instead of being mean-spirited and selfish.
There is no good way to go about it, but if you want the raid target and you see another guild rolling in you simply pull him and hope your ready, I mean it sucks but honestly you just can't take the chance and the other guild pull in front of you and takes your target and than your guild gets upset becuase they didn't pull it earlier, it really a cappy feeling, which is why I think there needs to be a mechanic to prevent such behavior, FTE, could solve a out of it, but I believe some else need to be implemented to increase the chances of some of the more casual guilds having a chance to have a chance against said targets, before they absorb the other guilds and making having this discussion useless becuase their would only be 2 guild that raid
Kilsin said:Community Debate - Two guilds arrive at an overland raid mob, what are the unspoken rules in place as to who gets to go first? What would your guild do? #PRF #MMORPG #MMO #communitymatters
First off, unspoken rules are not enforceable rules. They are but a player construct loosely agreed upon only by those guilds who wish to agreed upon them in the first place. A 'hardcore' guild, one that strives to be the best on their server, strives to be completely self sufficient and to push the boundaries of what is possible, will never agree to any such conventions that limit their ability to engage in content. Like so many games before where guilds on a server create things like rotation calendars, the minute a guild feels they are not being treated fairly they will quickly abandon the agreement which then quickly dissolves as more and more guilds look at it and say "why should we be subject to these restrictions when those other guilds choose to ignore them".
So unless you implement mechanics like EQ2 where once someone engages a target it become un-attackable by anyone else or where you instance every raid so that each guild has their own private run at the boss, the only actually enforceable mechanic is 'Most Damage Done'. If you do 50%+1 of the damage, you win and the loot is yours. The only way any other approach will work is if a GM is present at every raid to make an official judgement call on who gets to go first.
Whatever guild I will be in will be a guild that takes the MDD approach.
Vandraad said:So unless you implement mechanics like EQ2 where once someone engages a target it become un-attackable by anyone else or where you instance every raid so that each guild has their own private run at the boss, the only actually enforceable mechanic is 'Most Damage Done'. If you do 50%+1 of the damage, you win and the loot is yours. The only way any other approach will work is if a GM is present at every raid to make an official judgement call on who gets to go first.Whatever guild I will be in will be a guild that takes the MDD approach.
If every group that contributed got credit, this wouldn't be an issue.
Depends.
If there are two unskilled guilds, then they probably train themselves and each other and just all die and point fingers at everything they can.
If there are two good guilds, who knows - if they're friendly they may work something out, if they're rivals they get to have some bragging rights - but even then there's typically compliments going around and a memorable experience that they'll be better prepared to handle the next time.
If there is a good guild and an unskilled gulid, then the good guild probably hangs back waiting for the unskilled guild to train/wipe themselves before killing the raid mob and rezzing the other guild. Then they get petitioned and called names on forums by the other guild about half the time.
If it's a mediocre guild involving any other guild, they may have at least one member try to train or do some other tactics because they can't quite play at a level that won't require such tactics.
If the guilds are on good relations or aren't on bad relations, they may work something out (this could include just competing).
If it's a top guild, they could ignore the other guild, wait for them to wipe, or give them a chance to go first.
If it's a low-end guild they could just go elsewhere looking for easier targets, just observe, or try to plea it out.
If it's 3+ guilds in a zone, alliances can form.
All of this sort of stuff, is what became the stuff of server legends and talk in-game. The elimination of this dynamic, is why we have sterile dead servers where people just get assigned to queues nowadays. LFR and don't talk to people zzz.
First said:All of this sort of stuff, is what became the stuff of server legends and talk in-game. The elimination of this dynamic, is why we have sterile dead servers where people just get assigned to queues nowadays. LFR and don't talk to people zzz.
.... Yeeeaah, I don't think letting everyone who contributes to a world boss kill get credit is the reason for "sterile dead servers where people just get assigned to queues". Cooperation in open world > fighting amongst one another any day.
Naunet said:Vandraad said:So unless you implement mechanics like EQ2 where once someone engages a target it become un-attackable by anyone else or where you instance every raid so that each guild has their own private run at the boss, the only actually enforceable mechanic is 'Most Damage Done'. If you do 50%+1 of the damage, you win and the loot is yours. The only way any other approach will work is if a GM is present at every raid to make an official judgement call on who gets to go first.Whatever guild I will be in will be a guild that takes the MDD approach.
If every group that contributed got credit, this wouldn't be an issue.
Credit in what way? Determined how? By the amount of damage done? What if your raid did only 1% of the total damage, do you honestly believe your raid is deserving of any of the loot that drops? Would your guild if you were the ones that did 99% of the damage be happy that another guilds who just did 1% should get some of the loot?
Vandraad said:Credit in what way? Determined how? By the amount of damage done? What if your raid did only 1% of the total damage, do you honestly believe your raid is deserving of any of the loot that drops? Would your guild if you were the ones that did 99% of the damage be happy that another guilds who just did 1% should get some of the loot?
Credit as in, the group could get XP and potentially receive loot. I personally wouldn't care either way as far as one group doing 99% and another doing 1%. But there could be an algorithm that looks at your group's % contribution, and you get more loot if you do a greater %. (I also think that damage done is not a good way to measure contribution, as it screws over tanks and healers and groups with tanks and healers; threat generation is a better way to measure contribution.)
Unspoken rules aren't worth the paper they are written on. If open world raid bosses are left to "unspoken rules" to avoid conflict, I probably won't be doing them.
Without decent mechanics and Play Nice Policies open world raid bosses have and will cause contention and conflict with ultimately the biggest guild winning, getting bigger and better and pushing out the others more and more. Other guilds will get the scraps that UberGuild is no longer interested in. Flame wars and toxic encounters galore.
VR have decades of experience playing and developing games and should be able to decide on a way to avoid unpleasantness. Leaving it up to the community sounds so cool, but never has worked and will not now.
The only fun competition is consensual competition. Something like when you tag yourself for PvP? Competitive servers where all encounters are free-for-all? Raid bosses where the mechanics and rules vary/rotate? Lock-outs? *shrug*
If there are no rules to ensure or even encourage fun and fair competition, what remains is Might Is Right bullying and content denial.
Not all old-school aspects of MMORPGs were good. This is one that needs some serious attention. If VR can somehow control unwanted conflict and make truly fun competition everyone wants, then that's great, but the idea that the way to make 'the ultimate' in challenging content is to add a squabble between players on top is greatly misguided.
I want to fight monsters *with* other players, not fight other players to even *get* to the most challenging monsters.
Naunet said:Vandraad said:Credit in what way? Determined how? By the amount of damage done? What if your raid did only 1% of the total damage, do you honestly believe your raid is deserving of any of the loot that drops? Would your guild if you were the ones that did 99% of the damage be happy that another guilds who just did 1% should get some of the loot?Credit as in, the group could get XP and potentially receive loot. I personally wouldn't care either way as far as one group doing 99% and another doing 1%. But there could be an algorithm that looks at your group's % contribution, and you get more loot if you do a greater %. (I also think that damage done is not a good way to measure contribution, as it screws over tanks and healers and groups with tanks and healers; threat generation is a better way to measure contribution.)
Yeah why not? There could be some quite nice mathematics to work out credit and if one guild gets 49% credit they get 49% of the XP and 49% chance at each loot item.
Totally fair.
I really doubt "competitive types" will like the idea though. For some people there *must be* one winner and everyone else losers or it's worthless. It's not about fairness, it's about "the glorious victory!" (even though 51% really isn't that glorious).
For some, Open World = Competition. For other Open World = Cooperation. They are hard to reconcile, especially when some don't want to reconcile...
All sorts of nastyness will occur unless both guilds happen to be freindly with each other!
As for FTE vs MDD. I really do not like either method why not include every class into the equation? other then dps or quickdraw puller.
First Guild to hit the mob plus 10 percent bonus to determining who did most damage.
Guilds tank which mitigated the most damage gains guild 15 percent bonus to determining who did most damage.
Guild which healed most damage to their raid members gains guild 15 percent bonus to determining who did most damage
Then add modifiers above to damage dealt a winner is determined and all players contribute to the equation.
If one guild engaged kept agro and healed their raid they would add 40 percent to their total damage delt. Thus as long as they did at least 10.1 percent of the dps they would get credit for the raid boss!
disposalist said:Yeah why not? There could be some quite nice mathematics to work out credit and if one guild gets 49% credit they get 49% of the XP and 49% chance at each loot item.
Totally fair.
I really doubt "competitive types" will like the idea though. For some people there *must be* one winner and everyone else losers or it's worthless. It's not about fairness, it's about "the glorious victory!" (even though 51% really isn't that glorious).
For some, Open World = Competition. For other Open World = Cooperation. They are hard to reconcile, especially when some don't want to reconcile...
A 49% chance to each loot item does not guarantee that the guild only doing 49% of the damage earns only 49% of the loot. That isn't how percentages work. That guild doing 49% could very well earn 100% of the loot. This is why no guild with an ounce of competitiveness would accept or agree to such a mechanic.
Content in an open world is a zero-sum situation. One entity wins and the other loses. This isn't just applicable to raid targets but every single NPC in the game.
And you are right in that competition and cooperation are, for many, mutually exclusive and can be manipulated such that appearances of cooperation can quickly give way to competition.
Yet again I find myself wishing for raid triggers. Trigger items could come from drops off rare mobs, rare drops off regular mobs, harvestable items, craftable items, or something else, and could even be tradeable. People can compete for triggers if they wish or opt out if they wish, but they can come together and raid together.
The premise of this thread is effectively "how do you deal with the messiness of open world raiding?", but raiding is already a messy enough affair by its nature. It takes a lot of coordination and a real time commitment. Why not offload all the possible messiness to the other forms of play before the raid forms? If you avoid competition, wouldn't it be nice if your competitive guildmates could do that part for you?
Raids seem like the worst possible place for competition, yet it often is the first place where it is truly found. Keep the competition out of my raiding I say! Give me competition in group-level formats.
disposalist said:Yeah why not? There could be some quite nice mathematics to work out credit and if one guild gets 49% credit they get 49% of the XP and 49% chance at each loot item.Totally fair.
I really doubt "competitive types" will like the idea though. For some people there *must be* one winner and everyone else losers or it's worthless. It's not about fairness, it's about "the glorious victory!" (even though 51% really isn't that glorious).
For some, Open World = Competition. For other Open World = Cooperation. They are hard to reconcile, especially when some don't want to reconcile...
Yeah, I've met those types. I'm definitely not one of them. >_< I'm happier when everyone can get a slice of the pie.
Vandraad said:A 49% chance to each loot item does not guarantee that the guild only doing 49% of the damage earns only 49% of the loot. That isn't how percentages work. That guild doing 49% could very well earn 100% of the loot. This is why no guild with an ounce of competitiveness would accept or agree to such a mechanic.
No, that's not what I suggested.
Let's say that killing a boss yields 10 items as a reward. If your group did 50% of the contribution, your group would get 5 items.
It doesn't have to be a zero-sum situation.
Ainadak said:Yet again I find myself wishing for raid triggers. Trigger items could come from drops off rare mobs, rare drops off regular mobs, harvestable items, craftable items, or something else, and could even be tradeable. People can compete for triggers if they wish or opt out if they wish, but they can come together and raid together.The premise of this thread is effectively "how do you deal with the messiness of open world raiding?", but raiding is already a messy enough affair by its nature. It takes a lot of coordination and a real time commitment. Why not offload all the possible messiness to the other forms of play before the raid forms? If you avoid competition, wouldn't it be nice if your competitive guildmates could do that part for you?
Raids seem like the worst possible place for competition, yet it often is the first place where it is truly found. Keep the competition out of my raiding I say! Give me competition in group-level formats.
I like how world bosses are spawned in WildStar. Prime (basically, elite) mobs have a chance of dropping a Progenitor Access Particle (PAP), which is a currency that can be used to spawn world bosses are various locations. Spawning and killing these world bosses is an intrinsically community-oriented affair. Everyone works to collect PAPs and then bring them to one of the world boss spawn points. Usually people are pretty good about announcing their desire/intentions to spawn a boss, and provide updates on the number of PAPs collected in global chat, so that everyone who wants to contribute can. Sometimes you get some extra generous people who aren't interested in killing the boss, but they'll swing by and drop their spare PAPs in just to help out.
It's a very community-driven activity, fueled by cooperation instead of "I got mine, so screw you" competition.
Vandraad said:disposalist said:Yeah why not? There could be some quite nice mathematics to work out credit and if one guild gets 49% credit they get 49% of the XP and 49% chance at each loot item.
Totally fair.
I really doubt "competitive types" will like the idea though. For some people there *must be* one winner and everyone else losers or it's worthless. It's not about fairness, it's about "the glorious victory!" (even though 51% really isn't that glorious).
For some, Open World = Competition. For other Open World = Cooperation. They are hard to reconcile, especially when some don't want to reconcile...
A 49% chance to each loot item does not guarantee that the guild only doing 49% of the damage earns only 49% of the loot. That isn't how percentages work. That guild doing 49% could very well earn 100% of the loot. This is why no guild with an ounce of competitiveness would accept or agree to such a mechanic.
Content in an open world is a zero-sum situation. One entity wins and the other loses. This isn't just applicable to raid targets but every single NPC in the game.
And you are right in that competition and cooperation are, for many, mutually exclusive and can be manipulated such that appearances of cooperation can quickly give way to competition.
And there is that competitive logic.
Yes, the 49% guild could get all the loot if they are lucky. But the chance was fair given the effort expended. You really think that a 49/51 roll would somehow be 'unfair'? 51% credit = 100% loot *is* fair? Ah, but it's not about fairness, is it? We don't play MMORPGs to play *with* others and share the spoils! We want to *beat* other players and take everything!
I wonder if grouping would be more fun if you had a 6-way /duel for every piece of loot that drops rather than /random 100 rolling?
Vandraad said:Kilsin said:Community Debate - Two guilds arrive at an overland raid mob, what are the unspoken rules in place as to who gets to go first? What would your guild do? #PRF #MMORPG #MMO #communitymatters
First off, unspoken rules are not enforceable rules. They are but a player construct loosely agreed upon only by those guilds who wish to agreed upon them in the first place. A 'hardcore' guild, one that strives to be the best on their server, strives to be completely self sufficient and to push the boundaries of what is possible, will never agree to any such conventions that limit their ability to engage in content. Like so many games before where guilds on a server create things like rotation calendars, the minute a guild feels they are not being treated fairly they will quickly abandon the agreement which then quickly dissolves as more and more guilds look at it and say "why should we be subject to these restrictions when those other guilds choose to ignore them".
So unless you implement mechanics like EQ2 where once someone engages a target it become un-attackable by anyone else or where you instance every raid so that each guild has their own private run at the boss, the only actually enforceable mechanic is 'Most Damage Done'. If you do 50%+1 of the damage, you win and the loot is yours. The only way any other approach will work is if a GM is present at every raid to make an official judgement call on who gets to go first.
Whatever guild I will be in will be a guild that takes the MDD approach.
Lol yep! Pages and pages of flames still out there to read on various EQ server community forums. I've seen all manner of solutions, including many combinations thereof, that don't detract from the open-world vision, while working to level the playing field. I get the whole premise of not everyone can have everything, but it's also unfair to say that games like WoW 100% do this. Not everyone in WoW can just walk in and raid mythics. I don't mean to imply we need instancing, or any of that, but that you can still make content that requires a lot of time, dedication and skill without allowing guilds to just completely monopolize end-game content simply because they are willing to neglect their health. If it's designed well, the time commitment and skill should be primary gates and that alone will mean not every player can pass through.
I have no idea what motiviated this community debate, but my feeling is that they are probing, which makes me think they are still considering options. Yes, Chris Perkins did say that MDD is a thing, but he also said that it presents known challenges and that they are considering design solutions to these.
Anyway, I've stated my opinions in this and other threads and anything more will just be regurgitation at this point. All I can say is that while I'm very excited for the game overall, I'm very, very interested to see how end-game raiding pans out, because that is what will keep me playing for years instead of months.
Kalok said:Kilsin said:Community Debate - Two guilds arrive at an overland raid mob, what are the unspoken rules in place as to who gets to go first? What would your guild do? #PRF #MMORPG #MMO #communitymatters
I say /random for it or NBG....
If my guild and your guild show up to the same target and we say "we need this" but you think we're actually here for greed, how do you expect to resolve that? One person/guilds' opion on what determines greed (or need for that matter) will not be the same as another guild's opinion. Nobody will ever agree.