Elite Relevancy Windows

My other thread about SM Relevancy Windows gave me this idea (that and other threads complaining about High CR players in low CR instances). Basically, it is scaling:

1.) Please create new versions of old content. Call these (Elite) instances. To play these Elite instances, players must use Replay Badges. This is solely to monetize the idea.

2.) Elite instances automatically assign you to a version designed for your CR Range (if you are CR 115 you go into a version of the instance designed for CR's 111-120, if you are CR 123 you go into a version designed for 121-130, etc.). Elite instances offer rewards appropriate to your CR (generally, this will mean Marks).

3.) You can always play the Default, non-Elite versions of instances for free. These offer the same rewards under the same system they currently do.

Yes, this would take some time to develop.
If the devs did one Elite version of an older instance each month, this impact should be minimal.

Yes, this would probably impact queue times - at least at first.
In the long run it should open older content back up for higher tiers, which will only improve on queue times.

The cost in Replay Badges is a necessary evil, as this system would otherwise reduce RB sales. This way doing this would bolster sales, instead.

This will also mean fewer players blowing through lower tiered, older content just for feats, and a chance for older content offer a challenge again. Older content will also offer character progression again and it will reduce the grind.

Thoughts?

For the sake of filling Elite Queues I'd say make them available to everyone, but just have them loot locked unless you spend replays.(This is more for ease of filling out groups and possibly selling even more replays by way of allowing you to unlock loot for your buddies too.) TLDR; Just have it loot locked by default with no resets save for those paid for with replay badges.(With the option of paying for your friends replay badges.)

This is more or less what I had in mind, but the distinction had not occurred to me. Thanks!

You lost me at more replay badges. I sub.

More replay badges? Nope.

More elite content, especially older content that has been buffed? Yes please.

I would also accept: run instances stat clamped and receive rewards.

I like the idea, but do not monetize it!

tell me how a system solely based on replay badges is better than just replaying wgat we have now?

Much rather they create a new game mode and monetize that. This however should be free and require no replay badges.

Well if it's free and doesn't require replays do you think it should be a viable path to end game?

This sounds kind of cool. I wouldn't argue with an elite version of FoS2 or Gates...

Elite version of old instances is fine. Respectfully, I just find it odd that players ask to be charged additional for something like this. If included, these type of things should be the core parts of the game. It's like Daybreak conditioned us to walk on egg shells. If we ask for anything (even if reasonable), they won't do unless it's monetized.

Okay. This is the reason for replay badges (It is not something I want):

As it is right now, when you run older content you do not earn Marks toward character progression.
This means, in order to earn Marks and move your character's CR up, you have to play only the newer content.
Playing only the newer content means you have to spend Replay Badges to play the same instance over and over again.
So, you are spending replays to play the same stuff over and over again any way.

If this system is not monetized with replay badges, there is no incentive for DBG to do it as it would cut into sales.
If this system is monetized, there is incentive, as it would boost sales.
But at least we can remove the grind of running the same two to three instances ad nauseum for Marks.

Unless the CR scaling is dynamic this will just become a problem again overtime. With that said if DBG had the tech to allow for dynamic CR scaling we'd have the features mentioned in passing the older SOE Live's. Specifically the ability to scale the content's difficulty to you upon queuing with a full group (dynamic CR scaling).

At the same time this wouldn't really change what is relevant to you in terms of marks. The reason being is that relevant content is not dependent on whether or not the content is difficult to complete. For example 2 players at CR 149 can still get marks from Rescue Recovery yet there is no doubt that completing that Duo as such is extremely easy to accomplish.

Content relevancy (minimum) is simply based on what can progress you gear-wise (3 Episodes; drops and R&D) + 3 Episodes back (to help with mark costs). It has NOTHING to do with difficulty. So even if you were to scale content to the user's CR they'd still not get marks (which is the case with the Iconic Anomalies and Iconic Visions as an example since you as a Legends are scaled with your targets).

To give you another example the lowest Suggested CR of someone at CR 152 is CR 129. The highest Suggested CR as of Episode 23 will be CR 159. That is a difference of 30 if you stayed at CR 152 through the end of Episode 23. You would have access to 9 Episode's worth of marks. 3 Episodes (15-17) should be fairly easy to you, 3 Episodes (18-20) should be medium to you and 3 Episodes (21-23) should be fairly hard for you. If you bump up by 1 CR you lose Episode 15 and gain Episode 24 even though Episode 15 should give you more or less the same difficulty at your CR compared to Episode 16 (your new lowest)

Simply being on par or hard to complete does not define content relevancy. Content relevancy (minimum) is simply based on what can progress you gear-wise (3 Episodes; drops and R&D) + 3 Episodes back (to help with mark costs).



Now that said I wouldn't be opposed to updating older instances with a new flare as part of an Episode. For example FFXIV does by releasing hard versions of older instances. They may slightly change the environment and/or add/inflate mechanics to existing bosses or introduce new bosses here and there. They would also explain by saying that the threat is back or a new threat has appeared at X location.

Doing that would make good use of older content with enough change to make it new, fresh and relevant in terms of marks.

This is my ...... piece of cake to be cut by a knife and be eaten by a kid and kid gets dirty.. (2 cents, 3 cents - 5 cents?).

This deserves indfinite likes. Our sub should be the one and only fee to play. Everything else should be a luxury purchase

ESO has instance scaling...making it pretty much impossible to solo alert type instances. In saying that, it was probably part of the game design from day 1, whereas DCUO would be trying to bolt it on well after the fact.



Honestly though, if scaled instances were possibly, and it was my decision to make....I'd adjust "relevancy" to limit the amount of marks that can be gained each week, rather than restrict which instances grant them. Then allow players to reset the mark lock with replays.

That way, people could run 50 challenges, 25 duos or 5 raids and still get 50 marks, and there shouldn't be any complaints about a lack of content or being forced to run stuff you don't like.

My figures could be wrong there though...I don't recall how many marks each instance type is worth.



Loot drops could be problematic though.

Well you can get upwards of 300-360 marks a week if you stay at the cusps of your relevancies with a minimum of about 200 marks a week if you stay at max obtainable CR (you will need to buy all Episodes of course). However again this is not what relevancy is meant to be. Think back to why symbols were introduced. They were introduced so that if you want X vendor gear DBG wanted you to run at least half of the content that pertains to that vendor gear and half of your content that doesn't pertain to your vendor gear but still within the same tier.

Now look at the minimum relevancy we have today. You have 12 unique pieces of content. Half of those instances directly relate to the highest vendor gear you can obtain and half of those do not but are still within your "tier."

The whole point is so that in order to progress you should have to play content that is new and current. You can't just play content that you have run for half a decade potentially.

Why should I have to play the latest content to progress? That's a serious question.

My view is that DBG want me to spend money...and they couldn't care about what I spend it on. Developers on the other hand most likely want their content to be run and appreciated.

I understood relevancy was introduced purely because of a unified mark - every instance rewards MoV, so to prevent people from simply running easy content (say T1 with a T7 character), rewarding content was restricted.

If the instances did dynamically scale (or more realistically, characters were scaled up / down), then I don't see any problem if I choose to run T1 or T7 duos. Having a cap on the amount of marks I could earn a week would prevent me from running everything and gearing up within a few hours. Allowing me to increase the weekly mark cap through replays would keep DBG earning money....and obviously I'd still need to have access to the latest episode(s) in order to get the best gear.

Because it keeps players in the content that is new and gives the progressive community (other players that like that newer content) someone to play with. It ensures that no matter what state the game is in the last 3-6 months worth of mainly 8-Man and 4-Man (due to their higher grouping demands) should always be populated at the very least.

At the same time having a minimum and maximum relevancy for older content ensures that players are populating new content as they progress. This ensures that players running older content are spread out and populating enough of the content groups so that other players can play as well.

Let's say in your system the majority of the community catches on that Trigon's Prison and Sunstone Matrix are the fastest 4-Man and 8-Man. Because they're the fastest they become the most popular. Thus the majority of the players are playing those instances to get to their weekly marks. In all other parts of the game players that actually like other instances are now struggling to find a group even if the Episode the instance is apart of came out yesterday. (You can apply this logic to any type of content and include as many instances as is needed in a given week, etc.)

The point of relevancy is to ensure that progression is smooth for every player not just you or some random player B. It not only ensures that a player will eventually need to experience something new but also ensures that the population is progressively spread out amongst the entire game regardless of gameplay mechanics, length or general difficulty.

Or it forces people to run content they have little interest in...

Fringe cases would have to be identified and addressed. People decide to short-cut by running quick and easy instances? Reduce the marks awarded, increase the difficulty.

While relevancy forces people to run specific content, opening up all content gives us more options...which shouldn't really be a bad thing.

For various reasons I don't raid very often....if at all. Relevancy restricts me (based on live content) to about two alerts. I'd be pretty happy if I could earn marks from the other alerts...and even more happy if I could cycle through them all, rather than running the same ones a few times a week.