Feedback & Suggestions

suggestion

#453

Dungeons need a lot of stuff like mostly someone that understands math to rebalance them so bosses aren’t 1 shotting tanks with auto attacks, fights like Machine Tyrant aren’t so tight with 4 dps and a sustain tank and otherwise impossible, address threat, the fact that defense and evade glyphs are effectively worthless.


#455

There is the V button…not sure of it’S usefulness in MT but the function is there.


#456

Deflect glyphs? You mean defense glyphs?


#458

This person was geared for E10. They had E1, E2, E3, E4, E5, E6, E7, E8, and E9 to learn to play their role. They got this far by being carried and never being told “you need to get better.”

Rebalanced or not, they have to be balanced around the assumption you’ll do some particular amount of damage. The of this person couldn’t even do sufficient DPS for the E5 Machine Tyrant. At E10 gear.


#459

Then either retreat or kick them and then find someone who can. It’s not rocket science.


#460

So I kick them and maybe get a replacement. I vote to retreat and all the players besides them get penalized by wasting our time. I leave and all the player’s that aren’t them suffer because their tank just left. Yes, it makes perfect sense to penalize all the rest of the players in a group because one person can’t pull their weight?


#461

Ok, so what you’re saying is there aren’t enough dps players (lol) to replace that one guy who can’t pull his weight, so the solution is to reduce the number of dps players available? Makes perfect sense. :v:

Your problem seems to be that you seem to think somebody must be penalised if a group fails to clear a dungeon and yeah, if you look at it like that then I can see why it would seem unfair for it not to be the guy who couldn’t pull his weight. The thing is though, sometimes groups don’t clear dungeons and it’s not the end of the world. If you want a super efficient group that clears e10 flawlessly every time that’s fine but you’re very unlikely to find that using groupfinder and that’s not a flaw with groupfinder that needs to be fixed.


#462

[Feedback] Please stop favoring group content.

They don’t. They really, really don’t.


#463

There are enough DPS players. The question is whether the group finder feels like adding those players to an ongoing run. Anyone who has played dungeons for a while know the group finder works in mysterious ways. You may be missing a DPS, you may tell your friend to queue, yet even when your friend queues, the capricious group finder may decide to have your friend wait for a fresh full group instead of yours. While you just wait or continue with 4 people because the group finder blacklisted you? Nobody knows.

There’s a difference between the group not clearing the dungeon and one person not pulling their own weight. It also doesn’t have to be the end of the world for anyone to give feedback about the dungeon gating system being worthless in its current state. It’s not constructive to shoot down the feedback of others through irrelevant comparisons and logical extremes.

You also have a problem. You’re treating the IP thresholds as gospel. It’s just another gating method like the Gatekeeper and it’s just as flawed, if not more. Item Power is a rubbish gating mechanic. Even when we disregard player skill, it doesn’t account for passives, capstones, extraordinary effects, gear pips, agent bonuses, etc. IP doesn’t care for anything other than how much time and/or money you wasted on the IP grind. It’s just arbitrary numbers set by Funcom and they are open to all manner of feedback and adjustment.

Most of the time, inexperienced players queue for the highest tier they can. Not because they had to. Not because they enjoy it the most. Not because they want to push themselves to the limit. Not because they calculated the XP/time and thought it would be the best for progression. Simply because the finder allowed them.

So it really irks me when you refer to this situation as “somebody must be penalized”. The only reason that somebody can run E10 is because the finder told them they could. It’s not “penalizing” if the finder instead told them they can’t. It’s just a change in the gating ruleset.


#464

Well that certainly sounds like a problem but I’m afraid to say the solution isn’t “start banning players”. :v:

Fine, if it’s constructive you want: how about a “VIP queue” option that’s only available if you’ve beaten Gatekeeper?

Yeah, can’t imagine where I got that idea from.


#465

I’d go a step further and make one Gatekeeper encounter for every elite level (including 1) and role.
Those unlocks could then also be applied to NYR for its respective levels.


#466

Uh, in that quoted post Rose is saying that the rest of the group shouldn’t be penalized for getting rid of a player who isn’t geared.


#467

[Interface][Market]

  • A filter to show only Extraordinary items (probably same drop-down as Superior/Epic/Mythic etc)

And the obvious (and no doubt mentioned 50 times)… hover over your own item in AH should show listed price and time remaining, even if it is only in the same 3/2/1/0 day scale as other peoples items.


#468

Yes and my point is that nobody is being penalised by not completing a dungeon run and describing it as such is being melodramatic in an attempt to justify punishing other players for the high crime of wasting time in a video game.

None of which has any bearing on me using it as an example of why I used the term. :v:


#469

Willfully or not you keep disregarding the fact that different gating criteria isn’t “banning”. A player with 900 IP is not banned from E10. They simply do not qualify according to current gating criteria. Get 100 more IP and you’re in. You’re okay with that as far as your argument goes. How about “Deal 2000 more DPS and you’re in” instead? Not different in essence.

It’s not what I want, it’s how it should be according to the very first post in this thread. Ultimately all the suggestions here are for the developers to consider. We can expand on the suggestions of others and we can offer alternatives, but purely trying to break a suggestion down is pretty much against the idea of the thread.

The part you quoted has nothing to do with “thinking somebody must be penalized”. You’re taking a word out of context and trying to counter the whole idea by banking on it. I’ll just stop.


#470

I would like to add that memories about gatekeeper as a effective solution of this problem are only selected memories. :slight_smile: This has worked somehow for limited time only in TSW. Then efffective builds appeared on forums and moreover many dps used option for healer or tank. So the only point of gatekeeper check was about the ability to use recommended build for this encounter. Nothing more.

So the problem you discuss has been in TSW for all its existence. What about people who were not able to make dps check with towers during MFA tank fight?

Imho there will never be any solution. If you looking for competent guys, find friends and play only with them. Any group finder will never be about option to save you from people who are far worse than you or in your eyes somehow incompetent. You want something for group finder it is never about.

What would be actually helpful in SWL would be manageable friends list with ability to write some short info to each name to be able to easily find players you jhave good experience and bad experience.


#471

Ideally you would have to do each Gatekeeper challenge to sign up for the respective roles. As to looking up Gatekeeper builds on the forums, I’m pretty okay with that. It at least demonstrates an ability/interest in learning something.


#473

I do not play so much currently because of the lacking in attention to equal opportunity to earn rewards or discover items. Too much focus on group content for my enjoyment.

I do not find purchasing items as enjoyable as discovering/ being rewarded the item.

As always, the game producers will make what they believe will turn the greatest profit; the consumer will spend money on the games that produce the greatest enjoyment.


#475

Even with missing old TSW group content it’s good to say, in the end game solo player has serious disadvantage. He can buy items on AH, but as the drops from solo content are far cheaper on AH, it will take him more time or more likely he will have to spend some real money to buy aurum and change it for MoFs.

I think this is the problem a lot of solo players mention when writing about how SWL is solo player unfriendly. Not in story mode but in endgame or in a ability to keep player interested in gameplay when he finished the story. I know there will be an argument that most of MMOs have similar problem, but in SWL it’s quite paradoxical dichotomy. The game how it is designed in its first half is far more oriented on solo player, but in its second half after finishing story, its design is solo player totally unfriendly.


#477

I am afraid you miss whole point.

I think we all want to keep SWL alive. And it needs players who are interested in game and would stay in game. Despite amazing story, I think it is not enough. Especially if the game is f2p. Why loose players? I don’t think allow some more options to stay at least somehow more competetive with group content players in endgame for soloplayers would cause harm to game. Quite opposite.

ANd btw I am endgame group content player.