Re-tuned HAs

He's in EOK group gear.



I don't debuff mobs when doing parses like this; too difficult to get consistent data that way.

If you'd like a parse on a specific NPC, I encourage you to set up a test to get that data! It's kind of a PITA trying to get a "perfect" DI graph on a tank!

That being said, I went back to check level 106 npc's in a TBM HA, as these were done on mobs that were 105 and below. It seems the scaling does in fact kick in based on NPC level and not player level. I was hesitant to post that because I was trying to get confirmation first, but here's the data set - you can draw your own conclusions by comparing them with the 110 Warrior parse found earlier in this thread.

TBM HA (In Defense of Health) vs 105 Paladin

/GU A pestilent invader (Yellow con at 105) in 826s - AVG Hit: 8128 || Incoming NPC DPS: 10713

/GU Tanking summary for: Gotgnomes --- Total Melee --- Damage: 8664203 --- Avg hit: 8128 --- Attempts: 1511 --- Riposted: 41/1511 [2.71%] --- Parried: 42/1470 [2.86%] --- Dodged: 53/1428 [3.71%] --- Blocked: 76/1375 [5.53%] --- Defended: 212/1511 [14.03%] --- Missed: 233/1299 [17.94%] --- Hits: 1066/1511 [70.55%] --- Real Hits: 1066/1511 [70.55%]




This suggests that RoS-level scalings begin when an NPC is level 106 or higher. Note that if you're comparing this data to the 110 Warrior parses earlier in the thread, that poor little Gotgnomes takes a good bit more incoming DPS than Gotwarx does - making the incoming NPC DPS and average hits seem a lot closer together than they actually are.

Hint: Taking the money is preferable. Too bad DBG needs to be reminded.

I'm not so ruthless to suggest people quit, I understand the need for "casuals" or people who buy Kronos. Not even suggesting they should go to TLP, but it's an option. I'm suggesting you adapt and evolve with the game. Sure you can't 6 box the content you were doing before but so what. Use it as a chance to try something different. I totally understand the time thing as well. I had many guildies I wanted to group with all the time but they boxed because they had to take an uncertain amount of AFK's because of what ever was going on in their lives. I get it, but you're doing the same thing as all the people who are telling you to quit or go here or there. You're not considering options. You just simply say :make it my way or I'm gone and taking my money with me". That's not productive and that's not a discussion, that's a threat - a loose one but still. If you're going to expect people to consider your complaints you have to be open to compromise and solutions other than the one you designed yourself, which is make it the way it was or I'm done. Isn't that fair?

Bear in mind, SOE tried to "encourage players to adapt". It was called Underfoot, you know when they lost thousands and thousands of subs over a couple of months! Even an SOE exec, John Smedley the CEO if I recall right, who admitted they made a serious mistake and said he'd try to never make that mistake again. Just a fyi.

But the problem is many people won't adapt. They will quit. I am a raider, you know that Tigold we were in ncm together..

I see this as a problem. I need the subscriptions of the casuals to help pay for my new raids and expansions. This is what boggles my mind when raiders want to ignore the plight of the casuals. They pay for our toys.

I hang out in general, up until a few weeks ago i use to see lots of random people lfg for pugs. Its a friggin ghost town in /general. The disaperance of the casuals from general is a canary in the coalmine. We cannot ignore the warnings

I have invite some lower lvls to tag along with me in the last few weeks because I fell bad for them. They have a major method of advancement taken away.


I also want these people to gain levels because they may be future recruits. The recruitment pool for raiders keeps getting smaller and smaller.

Actually as the consumer I don't feel I should have to adapt to a product it's the products job to adapt to me as the customer. This is how businesses survive and prosper not the other way around. As the consumer I would like to continue progressing through content I have steady paid for with the same mechanics that were in place when I paid for said product. Making older content more time consuming just means either I have to skip that content and hope I can survive in the new content which I also purchased or be stuck doing that older content longer than desired and fall further behind. If I was the only customer who felt this way I would chalk it up to being my own problem and move on but clearly that's not the case here.

Shrug. Just repeated what I was told by a co worker about these scaling changes in a different MMO...

I already have parsed and posted with my own data.

Thank you for going back and showing there is an impact on pre 105. I only asked about Ralph and elle because on that mission the trash steps are relatively quick to get to the end fight. which really determines whether you win or lose that mission and those names are definitely over 106 to a 102.

With so much competition on the market to gather casuals up, I don't think this is something Daybreak needs to gamble with.

Other games have their impact on fluctuation, certainly. Again bringing up something that's not the question nor the point.
Point is: Do "bad changes" speed that process up or not?
Are we loosing players, are (currently active) players loosing interest in the game?
Is it good to ADD to the "base fluctuation" that you have anyways?
You seem to think it doesn't make a difference, i think it does much - this disenchanting players by doing "fixes" over something that wasn't regarded as "broken" in the first place.
(while, i might add, pushing live an expansion that has it's own flaws that could and should be fixed FIRST before going back to 5year old stuff - if you wanted to go back to changing 5year old stuff in the first place, which is hardly a good idea unless it's definitely "broken" like some missions (jared's or what that was called for example).

PERHAPS, just PERHAPS that has something to do with who is the cause of what i post on/against?
Ever thought about that?
As i said in another post - we don't know who's actually responsible for some specific decision/action such as the one we discuss in this thread. Therefore, "the Dev's" seems appropriate to me. It certainly wasn't "the players" now, was it fanboi?

Oh really now?
So it's "pushing" when i say that people should be able to play in the content they choose?
It's "pushing" when i say that i should perfeclly be able to "steamroll" 5year old content in full EoK raid gear?
And of course it's not pushing at all when you - and others like you - simply say "just go to RoS as you are supposed to", right?
Gosh you are some VERY backward guy!
But yes: i am granting you that IF Dev's were to feel "pushed", then i'd not mind that AT ALL!
I just doubt it - yet even so, "we the people" need to voice our dissatisfaction, else "the government" would think all were fine, which it certainly isn't - in my eyes, for many reasons!

Right. Of course i cannot prove otherwise. But Ancel Keys also claimed to be an "independent" scientist.
(and he lied in two ways, the independent part and the scientist part - much like you pretend to be something you can't be in my eyes)

Push them, silence them, anything of that nature.. hmm...
Let's see...
I am simply not BEING pushed around by the forum-bullies here, i resist - because resistance is NOT futile.
I do not ONLY base my posts on my opinions, and i certainly don't claim my opinion to BE fact.
I post "fact" when i can prove it - and i post "opinion" or "my view", "my experience" when it's such.
I post my opinion, regardless if you like it, against yours because i don't like yours and cannot leave your (or anyone's) intellectual barfing uncontested - call it a personality flaw.
So, if my resistance to being pushed around as you wish you could is viewed by you as me pushing you, then so be it. From my point of view i am not pushing anyone but simply standing my ground.
After all, *i* do not tell people the "just do this and that, toughen up and suck it up and generally do as i do, git better" that you post.
And even though i do not like to side-track threads as you do, i still TRY to take you seriously enough to answer such superfluous questions that you COULD have asked in a PM instead.
But ofc that'd been against your unstated goal of derailing a discussion and shifting attention away from Dev's bad decisions, wouldn't it?

Just did Goblins and Fools and it honestly did not seem bad. Several times we got way too many, had some deaths but never wiped. And this was with pet tanking.

The agro did seem funny. We sometimes opened up with ae mez in a room with 3 and next thing we had 7. Mez does not go thru walls afaik so wth?

TLP reuse is.. meh... who likes to be behind i guess. I certainly can not see myself playing on any of the "new" servers, ever - much less on any of the "locked somewhere" ones. But those that do - more power to them, i guess.

The interesting and comment-worthy part of the quote imo is the first two sentences.
I am all for "encouraging players". Sometimes i even do. (or, well, try)
Some, i found, have "it in them", and others don't. (and some just aren't "there" yet, AA-wise for example)
I have mentioned "leveling and building up confidence" in a post above as ONE reason why people were not in RoS but in "old stuff that they just should get out of anyways" as some others view it.
That "encouraging" is a player-to-player thing though.
Otherwise, we can only hope for someone to gather enough confidence to get out of HAs and into "the real world of static zones that are the current expansion".
From where i stand, "encouragement" can certainly NOT come in the form of "let's make HAs harder so the distance to current live content is less" - that is railroading, not encouragement.

"Hardcore Raider of <Ring of Valor>", of course it didn't seem that bad!

AFAIK, I was the only raid geared toon in the group. We had 1 rogue from another guild though so he may have been geared as well. TBH, it did seem like stuff died quick

Some birds force their chicks out of the nest to teach them to fly. What would you consider that?

A bad idea if the chick's were paying the mortgage!

An epic fail as a business model?

When this is true, that's a true "bug" right there, because it should scale with PC levels, shouldn't it?

But bug or no bug...
It's been reported that even for 105's, mobs hit harder than they used to.
(yes i don't really want to prove or disprove that myself as my 105 chars lack DPS now that i have leveled my DPS past 105, but it falls in line with what i have seen and been told by guildies)
Even if that "only" might means that they scale to EoK-difficulty now instead of TDS or whatever, when imo they still should only "scale" to their original expansion's difficulty. (as that is the only way we can eventually "outgrow" and "overpower" year-old content as - imo - it should be, even in a HA.)

What we really need to see, imo, is Dev's stating the original intent behind this "fix".
If it were meant to indeed make old content viable again, in lieu of "big enough" expansions in the future, then i could "live with it" - provided:
a) when requesting the HA you are given a choice - normal mode or hard mode
b) not only mob HPs/DPS and abilities/spells scale, but also the rewards (named loot, XP, currency...)
When given a CHOICE i could see the silver lining on this.
But currently i just don't, no matter that HAs are "still doable" (but take significantly longer) or where the "scaling" actually begins/changed.

Used my main Whulf, 110 warrior, bristlebane server, to get several HA's ..

Used the alts to go in an mess around on them. Set up was ..
105 warrior , 105 cleric merc
105 zerker , 105 wiz merc
105 ranger, 105 wiz merc

Upon zoning into the HA In defense of Health (TBM) took me 1hr, 45 min to complete. I had the version that had to kill the invaders.

They were not RoS level mobs not 1 of them were. So some one posted earlier, that it does not matter whos in the grp or who gets the HA's it only matters who "zones into" said HA.

a false statement.
Birds only FORCE sick offspring out of the nest.
Otherwise, even "Nestfluechter" are only encouraged by their parents to move out and make that jump.
But even if it were true: copying one example in nature and translating that into a game need not be a good idea, does it?
For every "Nestfluechter" you also have a "Nesthocker" too...

I think that we need to remember that this is a game, even if for some it has become - and many more might view it as - a job, or an integral part of life. As such, i think it's wrong - and quite against the game-genre too - to "force" anything onto the players. The carrot approach is fine, but if loot and the likes fail to draw people out, i am strongly against making "their" content harder to "encourage" them to do as i (or rather: Dev's again) want.