Forgive me for not clarifying in my last post. When I mean molo I mean 2 player - 2 merc or 3 player - 3 merc combo which was clearer in my earlier post (average class combo + mercs plural about 3 posts back - not "moving the goal post"). Not trying to apply 1 player - 1 merc set up as that is obviously ridiculous. Hopefully that didn't throw you or Brogh off. Thanks for clarifying. To be clear on parameters on FTP/Silver experiment: 2 or 3 players (CoTF/TDS T1 gear) and 2 or 3 Apprentice T 2-5 mercs.
The implicit argument that content should be developed to be convenient (to wit: good - best? - full group exp within very short play session) for non-subscribers in half gear with half abilities and deliberately gimpy support (the A2 mercs) is a substantial departure from the thread's thrust. That's moving the goalposts. I don't even know what the players you're describing would do with the exp they grind out, since in their situation as you describe it, they can't earn or spend AA. No grind, just move to the level cap before engaging with non-exp pursuits.
Isn't "moving the goal posts" a logical fallacy referring to an individual who revises his position to force others into a vicious cycle of impossible positions or conclusions. Don't you first need a pattern of behavior to affirm that fallacy? I have made only ONE (a single specific) challenge (true FTP/Silver conditions) and have not " moved the goal posts" because I have not received a specific response to that challenge much less felt humiliated to alter my criterion. The thrust of the thread can't be deduced simply by the repeated observations ad nauseam from a handful of "short time" posters. (The forum itself is biased to raiders and veterans). Several others have made contradictory claims. I am merely advocating for a controlled experiment more reflective of casuals. How can you discount non-subscribers when they are an intrinsic part of the debate? Isn't that the problem here? No evidence has been produced under what I regard as true casual conditions. Players can revert boxed accounts between various subscription tiers to support roles for All Access xping on target box(es). For instance, formerly All Access level 105 box(es) provide a support role for a now All Access level 100 box. AA unlocks exist, while economically unviable, may cater to some.
Additionally, for the returning, newbie, or casual player (who smartly buys the expansion for level cap but not All Access) normal leveling from 85 to 105 is not a trivial pursuit. This shows your bias.
While I abhor Daybreak's policy of nerfing old content to force people to buy whatever unfinished new dreck it is they're selling, I also think it's ridiculous to say that content needs to be tuned around ftp players. Ftp is an intentionally limited trial period. You're not meant to level to 105 on ftp. Whether or not a crippled ftp player can handle HAs is irrelevant.
Discussing who or what can beat (or steamroll) DH HA's is not even the real point. Just the fact that they saw fit to screw with them yet again for this expansion, exposes a large degree of cluelessness. It seems they didn't take enough of a beating when TDS rolled out. -R
This. I think the bottom line is that they dont want FTP to have too much fun, and the fact is, CoTF in non-prestige and Apprentice mercs wouldn't be fun at all.
Because I know that you are a thoughtful and serious player, I considered your opinion for a couple of weeks before replying. IMO 1-6 group events that provide the best rewards for the least amount of effort have in the past been acknowledged to be bad for the game even when such content is confined to a single expansion. While an argument can be made that items that retain their value beyond the expansion where they first appear (eg PoTime) adds to the amount of relevant content the same can not be said of experience mills where players linger for years utilizing a tiny portion of the content that's available. The issue of players lingering in experience hamster wheels is made worse should such content scale and provide the best rewards for the least amount of effort for multiple expansions. You have gotten better at Gribbles(3278) is no better than standing at Orc 1 for 3 years. Finally, I suspect this is exactly what Endtimes EQ will look like - 4 events that scale up to level 150 with 5 levels added to max level once a year, stat augs that evolve every 5 levels so gear automatically gets better, and open ended achievements that bump every 100 victories. The Giant Hamster Wheel at the End of the Universe. Sure, EQ will someday be confined to bed with DNR written on its chart. BUT, I don't need to have the smell of hospital disinfectant snap my head back every time I log in until the very week the worst happens. DH HA's should have provided catchup exp up to level 100 at which point the mobs should be green.
I run 2 All Access boxes and have a couple of Silver/FTP boxes. Free and Silver are still potential customers and sources of revenue because they do buy expansions, consume Membership or Krono at various intervals, and make purchases on Marketplace (whether it's services, mounts, cosmetics, XP Pots, or LON gambit). This is especially true of casuals who don't purchase 1 year or so of All Access due to real life (family, work, deployments, breaks). You are making a hasty characterization of FTP as if they are entirely hardcore freeloaders when there is more complexity involved.
Who gives a poop if the f2p can advance. That isn't the problem. The problem is that I can pay for All Access and not the expansion and struggle to level and get AAs at a reasonable rate. This is not because the expansion offers a better content and more experience, it's because they nerfed the old content. It's as if DBG wants us to through money at them for no reason.
I don't think anyone's confused about what non-subscribers are, I think they're just not on your side about their being an appropriate target for balancing. They're not, after all, barred from this content, we're just talking about them taking a bit longer to roll through it.
Wait... so is the argument now that people who are F2P or didn't buy the expansion should be on equal footing with people who are All Access/bought newest content for upgrades? Seriously? The group vs raid argument was at least semi-legitimate although in this case paper thin; now we've gone to F2P... /boggle
Your missing the point. It takes significantly longer for PLAYERS WITH ALL ACCESS to get through the old content who didn't buy the new expansion. If they made a quality expansion I wouldn't mind throwing money at them. However, they gave us a half finished pile of poop.
15 min vs 25 is not significant for the rewards provided by outdated content. Move into TDS or do HA dailies if you want to see bigger rewards for your time.
Please explain to me WHY have to buy expansion that has nothing for me in it. Don't give me that recycled AA excuse.
You do realize that the HA's in TBM also scale all the way down to 75 as well don't you? Just saying that there really is stuff there for you even if all you want is HA's
I haven't maintained the Group vs. Raid gear dichotomy as others have. I have been responding to the contention that the norm is 10-20 minutes when they don't account for subscription tiers and mix-and-match set up (i.e. 1 or 2 All Access + 1 or 2 Silver boxes). I have been more concrete and less rhetorical by suggesting this experiment. I am not saying that FTP should be able to do HAs in 10-25 minutes. I am saying that, for a broader audience, HA nerf can increase their times dramatically (claims of 45-60+ minutes) and that, perhaps, the nerf can be discouraging for those potential customers. Obviously I have contended that most users of the forum are raiders/veteran biased including myself.
Woot, there are a few scalling HAs -I am going to rush and buy the new expansion! Oh wait a minute, there is still nothing for me to do. Seriously, Vanguard's free expansion, PoTA had more content than this expansion. Did I mention it was free with no strings attached and had plenty of content for casual players?
